Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Mahomet (Play)

2008-03-25T03:35:54Z

Asteroid:

'''''Mahomet''''' (''Le fanatisme, ou Mahomet'') aka "Fanaticism, or [[Muhammad|Mahomet]]" is a play in five acts written in 1736 by [[French]] [[playwright]] and [[philosopher]] [[Voltaire]] with its debut performance at [[Lille]] on 25 April [[1741]].

The play is a study of [[religious fanaticism]] and self-serving [[manipulation]] based on the traditional biography of Muhammad in which he orders the murder of his critics <ref>Voltaire, Mahomet the Prophet or Fanaticism: A Tragedy in Five Acts, trans. Robert L. Myers, ( New York: Frederick Ungar, 1964)</ref> and which Voltaire described as "written in opposition to the founder of a false and barbarous sect to whom could I with more propriety inscribe a satire on the cruelty and errors of a false prophet" <ref>Voltaire Letter to Benedict XIV written in Paris on August 17,1745 AD ''Your holiness will pardon the liberty taken by one of the lowest of the faithful, though a zealous admirer of virtue, of submitting to the head of the true religion this performance, written in opposition to the founder of a false and barbarous sect. To whom could I with more propriety inscribe a satire on the cruelty and errors of a false prophet, than to the vicar and representative of a God of truth and mercy? Your holiness will therefore give me leave to lay at your feet both the piece and the author of it, and humbly to request your protection of the one, and your benediction upon the other; in hopes of which, with the profoundest reverence, I kiss your sacred feet.''</ref>

Some writters have argued that the play uses the Islamic figure of [[Muhammad]] to indict not only Islam but all monotheistic religions.<ref>François Busnel, "Voltaire, le retour," Lire (juillet 2004 / août 2004) http://www.lire.fr/critique.asp/idC=47034/idTC=3/idR=213/idG=8 ''Le fanatisme ou Mahomet le prophète is a charge against Islam and more widely against all monotheistic religions''</ref>

==Cast of principal Characters ==
The characters of the play are actual historical characters
*'''Mahomet''': Founder of Islam , known today as [[Muhammad]]
*'''Zopir''': Leader of [[Mecca]], of whom Mahomet has killed his wife and his brother and enslaved his children. Zopir is defiant of the tyranny and subjection which Mahomet is trying to impose.
*'''Omar''' : General and second in command to Mahomet. A reference to ([[Umar ibn al-Khattāb]])
*'''Seid''' : Zopir's son abducted and enslaved by Mahomet since childhood but unaware that he is Zopir's son and Pamilra's brother. An allusion to ([[Zayd ibn Harithah]])
*'''Palmira''': Zopir's daughter , abducted and enslaved by Mahomet since childhood but unaware that she is Zopir's daughter and Seid's sister. An allusion to [[Zaynab bint Jahsh]]
*'''Phanor''': Senator of Mecca.
*Meccan tribes.
*Mahomet's followers

==Plot ==
The story of "Mahomet" unfolds during Muhammad's post exile siege of Mecca in 630 AD where the opposing forces are under a short term [[truce]] that has been called so that the both sides may discuss the terms and course of the war.

In the first act we are introduced to the leader of the [[Mecca]]ns, Zopir, an ardent and defiant advocate of [[free will]] and [[liberty]] who rejects the [[tyranny]] that his opponent Mahomet is seeking to impose. Mahomet is presented through his conversations with his second in command Omar and with his opponent Zopir and with two of Zopir's long lost children (Seid and Palmira) whom unbeknownst to Zopir, Mahomet had abducted and enslaved since infancy fifteen years earlier.

The now young and beautiful captive Palmira has become the object of Mahomet's desires and jealousy. Having observed a growing affection between Palmira's and Seid, Mahomet devises a plan to steer Seid away from her heart by indoctrinating young Seid in religious fanaticism and sending him on a [[suicide attack]] to assassinate Zopir in Mecca, an event which he hopes will would rid him both of Zopir and Seid and free Palmira's affections for his own conquest.<ref>Mahomet Act IV Scene I Mahomet speaking ''We must work in secret, the dark shades of death must hide our purpose—while we shed old Zopir's blood, be sure you keep Palmira in deepest ignorance; she must not know the secret of her birth: her bliss and mine depend upon it''</ref> Mahomet invokes divine authority to justify his conduct .

Seid still respectful of Zopir's nobility of character, hesitates at first about carrying out his assignment, but eventually his fanatical loyalty to Mahomet overtakes him <ref>Mahomet Act IV scene IV Seid speaking ''To serve my God, to please and merit thee, This sword, devoted to the cause of heaven, Is drawn, and shall destroy its deadliest foe '' </ref> and he slays Zopir. Phanor arrives and reveals to Seid and Palmira to their disbelief that Zopir was their father. Omar arrives and deceptively orders Seid arrested for Zopir's murder despite knowing that it was Mahomet who had ordered the assassination. Mahomet decides to cover up the whole event so as to not be seen for what he is , a deceitful impostor and tyrant.

Having now uncovered Mahomet's "vile" deception<ref>Mahomet Act V scene II: Palmira speaking to Mahomet "What joys, what blessings, or what happiness can I expect from thee, thou vile impostor? thou bloody savage! This alone was wanting this cruel insult to complete my woes: eternal father, look upon this king,this "holy prophet", this all-powerful god whom i adored: thou monster, to betray two guiltless hearts into the crying sin of parricide; thou infamous seducer of my unguarded youth, how darest thou think,stained as thou art with my dear father's blood, to gain palmira's heart? But know, proud tyrant, thou are not yet invincible: the veil is off that hid thee."</ref> Palmira , renounces Mahomet's god <ref>Mahomet Act V scene V: Palmira speaking to Mahomet "I die: and dying hope a God more just than thine has yet in store a state of happiness for injured innocence "</ref>and commits suicides rather than to fall into the clutches of the murderous Mahomet.

==Analysis==

Voltaire indicated that the play was not historical, but rather a representation of fanaticism.<ref>Letter to FRÉDÉRIC II, King of Prussia written by Voltaire in 1740 Je sais que Mahomet n’a pas tramé précisément l’espèce de trahison qui fait le sujet de cette tragédie... Je n’ai pas prétendu mettre seulement une action vraie sur la scène, mais des moeurs vraies; faire penser les hommes comme ils pensent dans les circonstances où ils se trouvent, et représenter enfin ce que la fourberie peut inventer de plus atroce, et ce que le fanatisme peut exécuter de plus horrible. Mahomet n’est ici autre chose que Tartuffe les armes à la main. .</ref> The play is a direct assault on the moral character of [[Muhammad]]. The characters of Seid and Palmira representing Muhammad's adopted son [[Zayd ibn Harithah]] and his wife [[Zaynab bint Jahsh]] over whom Muhammad's [[lechery]] prompted him to invent a commandment from [[Allah]] stating that Allah ordered Zeid to divorce Zaynab and that is was divinely allowed for Muhammad to marry his daughter-in-law.<ref>Letter to FRÉDÉRIC II, King of Prussia written by Voltaire in 1740</ref>
:''Recall that you said to the one who was blessed by Allah, and blessed by you, "Keep your wife and reverence to Allah," and you hid inside yourself what Allah wished to proclaim. Thus, you feared the people, when you were supposed to fear only Allah. When [[Zayd ibn Harithah|Zayd]] was completely through with his wife, we had you marry her, in order to establish the precedent that a man may marry the divorced wife of his adopted son. Allah's commands shall be done.'' Qur'an Sura 33:37

==Reception==

At first the play was poorly received by its audiences when it first debuted for its strong religious attitudes.<ref>Ronald W. Tobin, "The Sources of Voltaire's "Mahomet"," The French Review, 34 (Feb. 1961). 372.</ref> Voltaire, under pressure from the state stopped productions of the play until [[1751]]. <ref>Paul M. Bondois, "Le procureur-général Joly de Fleury et le Mahomet de Voltaire,"
Revue d'Histoire Littéraire, XXXVI (1929). 246-259.</ref> The ban on the play was not lifted until [[Pope Benedict XIV]] gave his approval.<ref>Voltaire Letter to Benedict XIV written in Paris on August 17,1745 AD</ref><ref>Ronald W. Tobin, "The Sources of Voltaire's "Mahomet"," The French Review, 34 (Feb. 1961). 372-373.</ref> Voltaire, in this letter, clarified that his play was directed only at Mahomet"<ref>Voltaire Letter to Benedict XIV written in Paris on August 17,1745 AD</ref>

In 2005, a production of the play in [[Saint-Genis-Pouilly]], [[Ain]], [[France]], resulted in Islamic demands for cancellation and street disturbances outside the performance itself. [http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06065/666058.stm]

François Busnel indicated that the play was not to be interpreted historically bur rather as a tragedy and satire.<ref>, "Voltaire, le retour," Lire (juillet 2004 / août 2004) http://www.lire.fr/critique.asp/idC=47034/idTC=3/idR=213/idG=8</ref>.
[[Rebecca Joubin]], has stated that the play 's focus functions as a surrogate for Jesus.
.<ref>Rebecca Joubin, "Islam and Arabs through the Eyes of the Encyclopedie: The "Other" as a Case of French Cultural Self-Criticism," International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 32, No. 2. (May, 2000). 198.</ref>.
==Reference ==
<references/>
== External links ==
*[http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Mahomet Mahomet full text in English at Wikisource]
*[http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Le_fanatisme,_ou_Mahomet_le_proph%C3%A8te Le Fanatisme ou Mahomet (French)]
*[http://books.google.com/books?id=IzcLAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA79&dq=mahomet+voltaire+Hercides,#PPA21,M1 Mahomet as a downloadable ebook as part of "The Works of M. de Voltaire. By Voltaire" at Google books]
*[http://www.voltaire-integral.com/17/alcoran.htm Voltaire essay on the Qur'an in the DICTIONNAIRE PHILOSOPHIQUE (French)]
* [http://perso.wanadoo.fr/dboudin/VOLTAIRE/35/1740/1389.html Letter from Voltaire to Frédéric II, King of Prussia on the subject of his play ''Mahomet ou le fanatisme'' (French)]
* [http://perso.orange.fr/dboudin/VOLTAIRE/Letcivil.htm Letter from Voltaire of the subject of ''Mahomet'' (1760) (French)]

[[Category:French plays]]
[[Category:Voltaire]]

[[de:Mahomet der Prophet]]
[[fr:Le Fanatisme ou Mahomet]]
[[it:Maometto ossia il fanatismo]]

Talk:Mahomet (Play)

2008-03-25T03:33:56Z

Asteroid: notice

{{copied from|user=Asteroid|site user=CltFn}}.

Mahomet (Play)

2008-03-25T03:33:30Z

Asteroid: new article

'''''Mahomet''''' (''Le fanatisme, ou Mahomet'') aka "Fanaticism, or [[Muhammad|Mahomet]]" is a play in five acts written in 1736 by [[French]] [[playwright]] and [[philosopher]] [[Voltaire]] with its debut performance at [[Lille]] on 25 April [[1741]].

The play is a study of [[religious fanaticism]] and self-serving [[manipulation]] based on the traditional biography of Muhammad in which he orders the murder of his critics <ref>Voltaire, Mahomet the Prophet or Fanaticism: A Tragedy in Five Acts, trans. Robert L. Myers, ( New York: Frederick Ungar, 1964)</ref> and which Voltaire described as "written in opposition to the founder of a false and barbarous sect to whom could I with more propriety inscribe a satire on the cruelty and errors of a false prophet" <ref>Voltaire Letter to Benedict XIV written in Paris on August 17,1745 AD ''Your holiness will pardon the liberty taken by one of the lowest of the faithful, though a zealous admirer of virtue, of submitting to the head of the true religion this performance, written in opposition to the founder of a false and barbarous sect. To whom could I with more propriety inscribe a satire on the cruelty and errors of a false prophet, than to the vicar and representative of a God of truth and mercy? Your holiness will therefore give me leave to lay at your feet both the piece and the author of it, and humbly to request your protection of the one, and your benediction upon the other; in hopes of which, with the profoundest reverence, I kiss your sacred feet.''</ref>

Some writters have argued that the play uses the Islamic figure of [[Muhammad]] to indict not only Islam but all monotheistic religions.<ref>François Busnel, "Voltaire, le retour," Lire (juillet 2004 / août 2004) http://www.lire.fr/critique.asp/idC=47034/idTC=3/idR=213/idG=8 ''Le fanatisme ou Mahomet le prophète is a charge against Islam and more widely against all monotheistic religions''</ref>

==Cast of principal Characters ==
The characters of the play are actual historical characters
*'''Mahomet''': Founder of Islam , known today as [[Muhammad]]
*'''Zopir''': Leader of [[Mecca]], of whom Mahomet has killed his wife and his brother and enslaved his children. Zopir is defiant of the tyranny and subjection which Mahomet is trying to impose.
*'''Omar''' : General and second in command to Mahomet. A reference to ([[Umar ibn al-Khattāb]])
*'''Seid''' : Zopir's son abducted and enslaved by Mahomet since childhood but unaware that he is Zopir's son and Pamilra's brother. An allusion to ([[Zayd ibn Harithah]])
*'''Palmira''': Zopir's daughter , abducted and enslaved by Mahomet since childhood but unaware that she is Zopir's daughter and Seid's sister. An allusion to [[Zaynab bint Jahsh]]
*'''Phanor''': Senator of Mecca.
*Meccan tribes.
*Mahomet's followers

==Plot ==
The story of "Mahomet" unfolds during Muhammad's post exile siege of Mecca in 630 AD where the opposing forces are under a short term [[truce]] that has been called so that the both sides may discuss the terms and course of the war.

In the first act we are introduced to the leader of the [[Mecca]]ns, Zopir, an ardent and defiant advocate of [[free will]] and [[liberty]] who rejects the [[tyranny]] that his opponent Mahomet is seeking to impose. Mahomet is presented through his conversations with his second in command Omar and with his opponent Zopir and with two of Zopir's long lost children (Seid and Palmira) whom unbeknownst to Zopir, Mahomet had abducted and enslaved since infancy fifteen years earlier.

The now young and beautiful captive Palmira has become the object of Mahomet's desires and jealousy. Having observed a growing affection between Palmira's and Seid, Mahomet devises a plan to steer Seid away from her heart by indoctrinating young Seid in religious fanaticism and sending him on a [[suicide attack]] to assassinate Zopir in Mecca, an event which he hopes will would rid him both of Zopir and Seid and free Palmira's affections for his own conquest.<ref>Mahomet Act IV Scene I Mahomet speaking ''We must work in secret, the dark shades of death must hide our purpose—while we shed old Zopir's blood, be sure you keep Palmira in deepest ignorance; she must not know the secret of her birth: her bliss and mine depend upon it''</ref> Mahomet invokes divine authority to justify his conduct .

Seid still respectful of Zopir's nobility of character, hesitates at first about carrying out his assignment, but eventually his fanatical loyalty to Mahomet overtakes him <ref>Mahomet Act IV scene IV Seid speaking ''To serve my God, to please and merit thee, This sword, devoted to the cause of heaven, Is drawn, and shall destroy its deadliest foe '' </ref> and he slays Zopir. Phanor arrives and reveals to Seid and Palmira to their disbelief that Zopir was their father. Omar arrives and deceptively orders Seid arrested for Zopir's murder despite knowing that it was Mahomet who had ordered the assassination. Mahomet decides to cover up the whole event so as to not be seen for what he is , a deceitful impostor and tyrant.

Having now uncovered Mahomet's "vile" deception<ref>Mahomet Act V scene II: Palmira speaking to Mahomet "What joys, what blessings, or what happiness can I expect from thee, thou vile impostor? thou bloody savage! This alone was wanting this cruel insult to complete my woes: eternal father, look upon this king,this "holy prophet", this all-powerful god whom i adored: thou monster, to betray two guiltless hearts into the crying sin of parricide; thou infamous seducer of my unguarded youth, how darest thou think,stained as thou art with my dear father's blood, to gain palmira's heart? But know, proud tyrant, thou are not yet invincible: the veil is off that hid thee."</ref> Palmira , renounces Mahomet's god <ref>Mahomet Act V scene V: Palmira speaking to Mahomet "I die: and dying hope a God more just than thine has yet in store a state of happiness for injured innocence "</ref>and commits suicides rather than to fall into the clutches of the murderous Mahomet.

==Analysis==

Voltaire indicated that the play was not historical, but rather a representation of fanaticism.<ref>Letter to FRÉDÉRIC II, King of Prussia written by Voltaire in 1740 Je sais que Mahomet n’a pas tramé précisément l’espèce de trahison qui fait le sujet de cette tragédie... Je n’ai pas prétendu mettre seulement une action vraie sur la scène, mais des moeurs vraies; faire penser les hommes comme ils pensent dans les circonstances où ils se trouvent, et représenter enfin ce que la fourberie peut inventer de plus atroce, et ce que le fanatisme peut exécuter de plus horrible. Mahomet n’est ici autre chose que Tartuffe les armes à la main. .</ref> The play is a direct assault on the moral character of [[Muhammad]]. The characters of Seid and Palmira representing Muhammad's adopted son [[Zayd ibn Harithah]] and his wife [[Zaynab bint Jahsh]] over whom Muhammad's [[lechery]] prompted him to invent a commandment from [[Allah]] stating that Allah ordered Zeid to divorce Zaynab and that is was divinely allowed for Muhammad to marry his daughter-in-law.<ref>Letter to FRÉDÉRIC II, King of Prussia written by Voltaire in 1740</ref>
:''Recall that you said to the one who was blessed by Allah, and blessed by you, "Keep your wife and reverence to Allah," and you hid inside yourself what Allah wished to proclaim. Thus, you feared the people, when you were supposed to fear only Allah. When [[Zayd ibn Harithah|Zayd]] was completely through with his wife, we had you marry her, in order to establish the precedent that a man may marry the divorced wife of his adopted son. Allah's commands shall be done.'' Qur'an Sura 33:37

==Reception==

At first the play was poorly received by its audiences when it first debuted for its strong religious attitudes.<ref>Ronald W. Tobin, "The Sources of Voltaire's "Mahomet"," The French Review, 34 (Feb. 1961). 372.</ref> Voltaire, under pressure from the state stopped productions of the play until [[1751]]. <ref>Paul M. Bondois, "Le procureur-général Joly de Fleury et le Mahomet de Voltaire,"
Revue d'Histoire Littéraire, XXXVI (1929). 246-259.</ref> The ban on the play was not lifted until [[Pope Benedict XIV]] gave his approval.<ref>Voltaire Letter to Benedict XIV written in Paris on August 17,1745 AD</ref><ref>Ronald W. Tobin, "The Sources of Voltaire's "Mahomet"," The French Review, 34 (Feb. 1961). 372-373.</ref> Voltaire, in this letter, clarified that his play was directed only at Mahomet"<ref>Voltaire Letter to Benedict XIV written in Paris on August 17,1745 AD</ref>

In 2005, a production of the play in [[Saint-Genis-Pouilly]], [[Ain]], [[France]], resulted in Islamic demands for cancellation and street disturbances outside the performance itself. [http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06065/666058.stm]

François Busnel indicated that the play was not to be interpreted historically bur rather as a tragedy and satire.<ref>, "Voltaire, le retour," Lire (juillet 2004 / août 2004) http://www.lire.fr/critique.asp/idC=47034/idTC=3/idR=213/idG=8</ref>.
[[Rebecca Joubin]], has stated that the play 's focus functions as a surrogate for Jesus.
.<ref>Rebecca Joubin, "Islam and Arabs through the Eyes of the Encyclopedie: The "Other" as a Case of French Cultural Self-Criticism," International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 32, No. 2. (May, 2000). 198.</ref>.
==Reference ==
<references/>
== External links ==
*[http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Mahomet Mahomet full text in English at Wikisource]
*[http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Le_fanatisme,_ou_Mahomet_le_proph%C3%A8te Le Fanatisme ou Mahomet (French)]
*[http://books.google.com/books?id=IzcLAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA79&dq=mahomet+voltaire+Hercides,#PPA21,M1 Mahomet as a downloadable ebook as part of "The Works of M. de Voltaire. By Voltaire" at Google books]
*[http://www.voltaire-integral.com/17/alcoran.htm Voltaire essay on the Qur'an in the DICTIONNAIRE PHILOSOPHIQUE (French)]
* [http://perso.wanadoo.fr/dboudin/VOLTAIRE/35/1740/1389.html Letter from Voltaire to Frédéric II, King of Prussia on the subject of his play ''Mahomet ou le fanatisme'' (French)]
* [http://perso.orange.fr/dboudin/VOLTAIRE/Letcivil.htm Letter from Voltaire of the subject of ''Mahomet'' (1760) (French)]

{{play-stub}}
[[Category:French plays]]
[[Category:Voltaire]]
[[Category:Books_critical_of_Islam]]

[[de:Mahomet der Prophet]]
[[fr:Le Fanatisme ou Mahomet]]
[[it:Maometto ossia il fanatismo]]

User talk:Asteroid

2008-03-25T03:28:47Z

Asteroid: responses

{{welcome}} [[User:DanH|DanH]] 01:21, 22 March 2008 (EDT)

Please don't copy and paste pages from Wikipedia. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 01:14, 22 March 2008 (EDT)

:What's your WP name? Both articles have been edited by many authors... [[User:DanH|DanH]] 01:17, 22 March 2008 (EDT)

::Copy and paste only those parts you write, and leave a note in the edit summary. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 01:20, 22 March 2008 (EDT)
::: Sorry Asteroid, a note in the edit summary is not the correct way (although there's nothing wrong with that). Use the {{tl|copied from}} template on the talk page of the article. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 02:19, 22 March 2008 (EDT)
Yo forgot to use {{tl|copied from}} for the talk pages of
#Secular Study of Early Islam
#Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies Against America
#Seeing Islam as Others Saw It
:: I put the notices up on the last 2 , but not on Secular Study of Early Islam , because I never published that article in the public space , it was only a draft in my namespace.--[[User:Asteroid|Asteroid]] 23:28, 24 March 2008 (EDT)
Also thank you for transfering these articles to Conservapedia [[User:Deborah|Deborah]] 22:29, 23 March 2008 (EDT)
::You are welcome--[[User:Asteroid|Asteroid]] 23:28, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

: Something about the way that you've been putting the {{tl|copied from}} notice on some pages hasn't been working properly. I've fixed ones I've seen. All you need to do is put {{tt|<nowiki>{{copied from|user=Asteroid|site user=CltFn}}</nowiki>}}. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:51, 23 March 2008 (EDT)
::Ok that works now.--[[User:Asteroid|Asteroid]] 23:28, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

Talk:Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies Against America

2008-03-25T03:26:32Z

Asteroid: notice

Talk:Seeing Islam as Others Saw It

2008-03-25T03:25:59Z

Asteroid: notice

Secular Study of Early Islam

2008-03-23T21:09:31Z

Asteroid: new article

The study of the origins and development of early Islam can be said to fall into two major schools of thought. The first view is the [[traditionalist]] [[Muslim]] [[pious]] view which argues that the Islam is unquestionably a work of divine origins revealed by the [[Islamic]] deity [[Allah]] to a 7th century [[Arab]] trader [[Muhammad]]. The other view is a [[secular]] scholastic view which seeks examine evidence and primary sources and apply the [[historical method]] to the study of the early origins and development of [[Middle Eastern]] religions.

This article will examine the secular scholastic aaproach to the study of early development of the Islamic religion leaving the traditionalist religious point of view to other articles.

==The Challenges of historiography of Islam==

Islamic chronicles and literary sources starting in the 8th century present a vast collection of anecdotal material from which pious religionist authors have drawn from in order to forge a storyline for early Islam.<ref>The New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia "Mohammed and Mohammedanism
"The sources of Mohammed's biography are numerous, but on the whole untrustworthy, being crowded with fictitious details, legends, and stories. None of his biographies were compiled during his lifetime, and the earliest was written a century and a half after his death. The Koran is perhaps the only reliable source for the leading events in his career. His earliest and chief biographers are Ibn Ishaq (A.H. 151=A.D. 768), Wakidi (207=822), Ibn Hisham (213=828), Ibn Sa'd (230=845), Tirmidhi (279=892), Tabari (310-929), the "Lives of the Companions of Mohammed", the numerous Koranic commentators [especially Tabari, quoted above, Zamakhshari 538=1144), and Baidawi (691=1292)], the "Musnad", or collection of traditions of Ahmad ibn Hanbal (241=855), the collections of Bokhari (256=870), the "Isabah", or "Dictionary of Persons who knew Mohammed", by Ibn Hajar, etc. All these collections and biographies are based on the so-called Hadiths, or "traditions", the historical value of which is more than doubtful. </ref> Secular scholars at first received traditionalist narratives at face value but more recently in the last centuries they have begun apply [[historical method|historical methodology]] to the history of the [[Middle East]] and have begun the task of separating fact from fiction from traditional accounts.

The task of recovery of verifiable historical events has been made difficult by a general unwillingness of the Islamic theological community to subject its accounts to historical methodology and scrutiny. In response to the examination of its cultural roots by non traditionalistic scholars, Muslim [[polemic]]ists have in many cases adopted an [[adversarial]] position aimed at discrediting and refuting any and all research that challenges traditional Islamic narration.<ref>Ibn Warraq The Need for Qur’anic Criticism "In recent years, Saudi Arabia and other Islamic countries (for example, Brunei) have established chairs of Islamic Studies in prestigious Western universities, which are encouraged to present a favorable image of Islam. Scientific research, leading to objective truth, no longer seems to be the goal. Critical examination of the sources or the Qur’an is discouraged. Scholars such as Daniel Easterman have even lost their posts for not teaching about Islam in the way approved by Saudi Arabia."</ref>

==Problems of early Islamic sources ==

The dates given for Mohammed's life are 570-632 AD. [[Ibn Ishaq]] who wrote the first biography of Mohammed was born about 717 and died in 767 . He thus wrote his acount over 100 years after Mohammed lived, making it impossible to have gained any information from eyewitnesses to the Sira as they would have all died themselves in the intervening century. Furthermore, no copies exist of Ibn Ishaq's work. All that survives are quotations of it in the History of [[al-Tabari]], who himself lived over two centuries after Ibn Ishaq (he died in 992). Thus the earliest biography of Mohammed of which copies still exist was written some 350 years after Mohammed lived.

While much credence is granted to [[Ibn Ishaq]] and ([[al-Tabari]] 's accounts of the life of Muhammad by Islamic traditionalist scholars , secular scholars have argued that their late placement on the Islamic historical timeline fails to corroborate any of the early events of the nascent religion and instead can only attest to the narrative that was adopted centuries later by [[Arabian]] transmitters. <ref>The Formation of Islam: Religion and Society in the Near East, 600-1800 By Jonathan Porter Berkey Published 2003 Cambridge University Press p59 The earliest surviving Muslim sources are comparatively late, and so reflect less what happened than what later Muslims wanted to remember as having happened. This is a point which has been a staple of at least Western scholarship since lgnai Goldzihcr’s pioneering study of hadish (i.e., the “traditions” which purport to record the deeds and words of Muhammad and his companions), in which he demonstrated that many hadith were later fabrications, although the degree of the material’s unreliability has always been a matter of some debate. The point may be illustrated by a later and more precise, although more limited, discussion of one particular aspect of the narrative of Islamic origins. in which Crone pointed out how much of that narrative was a product of traditions which served to explain Koranic verses which, to later Muslim audiences, seemed opaque. In other words, the Koran and the exegetical problems it poses in some sense generated the stories that were used to explain them</ref> .

Furthermore as the earliest Islamic sources are dated between one hundred and fifty to three hundred years after the events which they purport to describe, legitimate questions can be raised as to their [[veracity]] and accuracy. <ref>[[Yehuda D. Nevo]] "Towards a Prehistory of Islam," Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, vol.17, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1994 p.108</ref> <ref>[[John Wansbrough]] The Sectarian Milieu: Content and Composition of Islamic Salvation History, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1978 p,119</ref><ref>[[Patricia Crone]] Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam, Princeton University Press, 1987 p.204</ref>

Another problem with the traditional narratives is that not only are they dated centuries after the fact, they are not supported by any archeological evidence. For instance secular scholars have argued that despite its momentous place in Islamic history no copies of the Qur'an dated from within the first century in which it was claimed to have been compiled has even been discovered. Earlier than 750 A.D. (thus for more than 100 years after Muhammad's death) there exists no verifiable [[Islamic]] documents to [[corroborate]] the origins of the Islam.
<ref>[[John Wansbrough]] The Sectarian Milieu: Content and Composition of Islamic Salvation History, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1978 p,58-59</ref><ref>[[Francis Edwards Peters]] "Methodological Approaches to Islamic Studies" ''Since external evidence is necessary to [[corroborate]] a view derived solely from the [[Muslim]] literary account, lack of such corroboration is an important argument against that account's [[historicity]]. This approach is therefore more open than the 'traditional' to acceptance of an [[argument from silence|argumentum e silentio]]. For if we are ready to discount an uncorroborated report of an event, we must accept that there may be nothing with which to replace it: that the event simply did not happen. That there is no evidence for it outside of the "traditional account" thus becomes positive evidence in support of the [[hypothesis]] that it did not happen. A striking example is the lack of evidence, outside the Muslim literature, for the view that the Arabs were Muslim at the time of the Conquest.'' </ref>

As to the question of how were the stories transmitted , Muslim scholars posit that the foundational stories of early Islam would have been transmitted orally by storytellers allegedly over more than a century. Secular researchers argue that the oral method of transmission from storyteller to storyteller is problematic as such a medium can be reasonably expected to have been colored with local prejudices and tailored to the moods, needs, and expectations of their audiences.
<ref>Patricia Crone, Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam ''The sound historical tradition to which they are supposed to have added their fables simply did not exist''</ref> Patricia Crone's notes that the traditions have been reshaped by a progression of storytellers over hundreds of years <ref>Patricia Crone, Slaves on Horses, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1980 pg 3</ref>

== Skepticism about authorship of the Qur'an==

One of the more contentious findings of secular scholars is that historical evidence suggests that the Qur'an as it exists today differs significantly from the text that was in existence in the late seventh century, the evidence suggesting that the text was a work still in progress over the eighth and ninth centuries <ref>John Wansbrough, Quranic Studies: Sources and Methods of Scriptural Interpretation, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1977 pg.160-163</ref> , for instance one of the early [[Arab]] observers in the late 7th century Ummayad court [[John of Damascus]] commented in his writings on sections of the Qur'an that existed during the age of the [[Umayyad]] caliphate which have vanished in modern versions.<ref>John of Damascus "Concerning Heresy" (peri aireseon) – (Chapter 101) On the Heresy of the Ishmaelites. Circa 720 AD ''Then there is the book of The Camel of God. [112] About this camel he says that there was a camel from God and that she drank the whole river and could not pass through two mountains, because there was not room enough. There were people in that place, he says, and they used to drink the water on one day, while the camel would drink it on the next. Moreover, by drinking the water she furnished them with nourishment, because she supplied them with milk instead of water. Then, because these men were evil, they rose up, he says, and killed the camel. However, she had an offspring, a little camel, which, he says, when the mother had been done away with, called upon God and God took it to Himself. Then we say to them: ‘Where did that camel come from?’ And they say that it was from God. Then we say: ‘Was there another camel coupled with this one?’ And they say: ‘No.’ ‘Then how,’ we say, ‘was it begotten? For we see that your camel is without father and without mother and without genealogy, and that the one that begot it suffered evil. Neither is it evident who bred her. And also, this little camel was taken up. So why did not your prophet, with whom, according to what you say, God spoke, find out about the camel—where it grazed, and who got milk by milking it? Or did she possibly, like her mother, meet with evil people and get destroyed? Or did she enter into paradise before you, so that you might have the river of milk that you so foolishly talk about? For you say that you have three rivers flowing in paradise—one of water, one of wine, and one of milk. If your forerunner the camel is outside of paradise, it is obvious that she has dried up from hunger and thirst, or that others have the benefit of her milk—and so your prophet is boasting idly of having conversed with God, because God did not reveal to him the mystery of the camel. But if she is in paradise, she is drinking water still, and you for lack of water will dry up in the midst of the paradise of delight. And if, there being no water, because the camel will have drunk it all up, you thirst for wine from the river of wine that is flowing by, you will become intoxicated from drinking pure wine and collapse under the influence of the strong drink and fall asleep. Then, suffering from a heavy head after sleeping and being sick from the wine, you will miss the pleasures of paradise. How, then, did it not enter into the mind of your prophet that this might happen to you in the paradise of delight? He never had any idea of what the camel is leading to now, yet you did not even ask him, when he held forth to you with his dreams on the subject of the three rivers. We plainly assure you that this wonderful camel of yours has preceded you into the souls of asses, where you, too, like beasts are destined to go. And there is the exterior darkness and everlasting punishment, roaring fire''</ref>

Secular scholars, such as [[John Wansbrough]], [[Michael Cook (historian)|Michael Cook]] and [[Patricia Crone]], have challenged traditionalistic notions that the text of the Qur'an would have been collected under Uthman per traditional accounts, since the earliest surviving copies of the complete Qur'an are centuries later than Uthman. (The oldest existing copy of the full text is from the ninth century.<ref>[http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/texts/quran_1.shtml The Qur'an], ''bbc.co.uk'', retrieved [[February 17]], [[2007]]</ref>)

Crone and Cook co-authored a book called ''[[Hagarism]]'' (1980), which was extremely controversial at the time, as it challenged not only Muslim orthodoxy, but the prevailing attitudes among secular Islamicists. They alleged that Islam was formed slowly, over the centuries after the Muslim conquests, as the Islamic conquerors elaborated their beliefs in response to Jewish and Christian challenges..<ref>P. Crone and M. Cook, ''Hagarism: The Making Of The Islamic World'', 1977, Cambridge University Press </ref>

Thus the general consensus is that the Qur'an was could not have been revealed to just one individual, but rather was a compilation of later redactions formulated by a group of authors, over the course of a few hundred years<ref>[[Andrew Rippin]] , "Literary Analysis of Qur'an, Tafsir, and Sira, the Methodologies of John Wansbrough", Approaches to Islam in Religious Studies, Richard C. Martin (ed.), Tucson, University of Arizona Press, 1985 pg 155 </ref>
<ref> Andrew Rippin Muslims, Their Religious Beliefs and Practices, vol. 1, London, Routledge, 1990 Pg 60</ref> <ref>John Wansbrough, Quranic Studies: Sources and Methods of Scriptural Interpretation, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1977 pg 160-163</ref>
== Evolutionary hypothesis ==
In 1972, during the restoration of the Great Mosque of [[San'a]], in [[Yemen]], laborers stumbled upon a "paper grave" containing tens of thousands of fragments of parchment on which verses of the Qur'an were written. Some of these fragments were believed to be the oldest Quranic texts yet found.

The European scholar [[Gerd R. Puin]] has studied these fragments and published some preliminary findings:
: "My idea is that the Koran is a kind of cocktail of texts that were not all understood even at the time of Muhammad. Many of them may even be a hundred years older than Islam itself. Even within the Islamic traditions there is a huge body of contradictory information, including a significant Christian substrate; one can derive a whole Islamic anti-history from them if one wants. The Qur’an claims for itself that it is ‘mubeen,’ or clear, but if you look at it, you will notice that every fifth sentence or so simply doesn’t make sense. Many Muslims will tell you otherwise, of course, but the fact is that a fifth of the Qur’anic text is just incomprehensible. This is what has caused the traditional anxiety regarding translation. If the Qur’an is not comprehensible, if it can’t even be understood in Arabic, then it’s not translatable into any language. That is why Muslims are afraid. Since the Qur’an claims repeatedly to be clear but is not—there is an obvious and serious contradiction. Something else must be going on.” <ref>Atlantic Monthly 1999 What is the Koran "My idea is that the Koran is a kind of cocktail of texts that were not all understood even at the time of Muhammad. Many of them may even be a hundred years older than Islam itself. Even within the Islamic traditions there is a huge body of contradictory information, including a significant Christian substrate; one can derive a whole Islamic anti-history from them if one wants. The Qur’an claims for itself that it is ‘mubeen,’ or clear, but if you look at it, you will notice that every fifth sentence or so simply doesn’t make sense. Many Muslims will tell you otherwise, of course, but the fact is that a fifth of the Qur’anic text is just incomprehensible. This is what has caused the traditional anxiety regarding translation. If the Qur’an is not comprehensible, if it can’t even be understood in Arabic, then it’s not translatable into any language. That is why Muslims are afraid. Since the Qur’an claims repeatedly to be clear but is not—there is an obvious and serious contradiction. Something else must be going on.” [http://cremesti.com/amalid/Islam/Yemeni_Ancient_Koranic_Texts.htm]</ref>

The variations from the received text that he found seemed to match minor variations in sequence reported by some Islamic scholars, in their descriptions of the variant Qur'ans once held by Abdallah Ibn Masud, Ubay Ibn Ka'b, and [[Ali ibn Abi Talib|Ali]], and suppressed by Uthman's order.<ref>''Observations on Early Qur'an Manuscripts in San'a''</ref><ref>''The Qur'an as Text'', ed. Wild, Brill, 1996 ISBN 90-04-10344-9</ref>

==Birth of the Islamic identity ==

Secular scholars pinpoint the actual beginnings of the classical Islamic identity to the ninth century, thus the formative stage of Islam, was not within the lifetime of Muhammad but evolved over a period of two to three centuries <ref>R. Stephen Humphreys Islamic History, a framework for Enquiry, Princeton, 1991 pg.83-89</ref>.

== The Dome of the Rock ==

It was built by Abd al-Malik in 691 and still is an imposing structure even by nowadays standard. First, we have to notice that the Dome of the Rock is not a mosque since it hasn't any prayer's direction, suggesting it was built as an octagon with eight pillars to walk around.

Muslims contend that it was erected to commemorate the night when Muhammad went up to the heaven to speak with Moses and Allah concerning the number of prayers required for the believers. But, according to the researches made by Van Berchem and Yehuda Nevo, the inscriptions found there say nothing about the Mi'raj but rather attest the messianic status of Jesus, the acceptance of the prophets, Muhammad's receipt of revelation, and the use of the terms Islam and Muslim. Why, if it was erected to commemorate the Mi'raj does it say nothing about it ? This imposing structure built so early suggests that this and not Mecca became the first sanctuary and the center of nascent Islam until at least the late 7th century.

According to Islamic tradition, the caliph Suleyman, who reigned as late as 715-717, went to Mecca to ask about the HAJJ. He was not satisfied with the response he received there, and so chose to follow Abd al-Malik (i.e. travelling to the Dome of the Rock). This fact alone, points out Dr. Hawting, indicates that there was still some confusion as where the sanctuary was to be located as late as the early 8th century. One can understand why, according to the tradition, WALID I, who reigned as Caliph between 705 and 715 wrote to all regions ordering the demolition and enlargement of the mosques. Could it be that at this time the Qiblas were then aligned towards Mecca ? If so it points to a glaring contradiction in the Quran.

The Dr. John Wansbrough, an absolute authority on early Islamic tradition, found interesting observances as to this man Muhammad was. The best non-Muslim sources on this period which we have are those provided by the Arabic rock inscriptions scattered all over the Syro-Jordanian deserts and the Peninsula , especially the Negev desert. The late Yehuda Nevo, from the University of Jerusalem, made extensive research and published his results in 1994 book Toward a Prehistory of Islam, which I'll refer.

Nevo has found in the Arab religious texts, dating from the first century and a half of Arab rule (7th to 8th century) a monotheist creed demonstrably not Islam, but a creed from which Islam could have developed.

He also found in all Arab religious institutions during the SUFYANI period (661-684) a complete absence of reference to Muhammad or any Mohammedans formulae that he is the prophet of God. This is true, until around 691, whether the main purpose of the inscription is religious or simply commemorative, such as the inscription at the dam near Ta'if, built by the Caliph Muâwiya in the 660's. How come that Muhammad's name is absent on all early inscriptions, is significant.

The first occurrence of the phrase Muhammad rasul Allah (Muhammad is the prophet of Allah) is found on an Arab-Sassanian coin of Xalib ben Abdallah from the year 690, which was struck in Damascus . The Triple Confession of Faith, including the Tawhid (God is one), the phrase setting that Muhammad is His prophet and the human nature of Jesus (rasul Allah wa-abduhu) is found in Abd al-Malik's inscription in the Dome of the Rock, dated 691. BEFORE THIS, THE MUSLIM CONFESSION OF FAITH CANNOT BE ATTESTED AT ALL. After that, through the MAARWANID dynasty (until 750), Muhammad's name usually occurs whenever religious formulae are used, such as coins, milestones and papyrus protocols. Yet, the first Arabic papyrus, an Egyptian receipt for taxes paid, dated 642, written in both Greek and Arabic is headed by the BASMALA, yet it is neither Christian nor Muslim in character.

Rock inscriptions, though bearing religious texts, never mention the prophet or the Mohammedan's formulae, a full 30-60 years and more after the death of Muhammad, though they contained a monotheist form of belief developed with a Judaeo-Christian literary style. What's more, when the formulae is introduced during the MARWANID period (after 684) it is carried almost overnight. Suddenly, it became the state's only form of official religious declaration. Then again, they were not accepted by the public so promptly.

According to Y. Nevo, the Mohammedan's formulae only began to be used in popular inscriptions sometime during the reign of Caliph Hisham (724-743). EVEN THESE, THOUGH THEY ARE MOHAMMEDANS, ARE NOT MUSLIM. For that, Nevo believes, we must wait until the beginning of the 9th century (around 822), coinciding with the first written Quran, as well as the first traditional Muslim accounts. It thus seems that it was not during his lifetime that Muhammad was elevated to the position of a universal prophet and, EVEN THEN, THE FORMULAE WHICH WAS INTRODUCED WAS STILL NOT EQUIVALENT WITH THAT WHICH WE HAVE TODAY

==Missing first century evidence ==
Crone, Wansbrough and Nevo argue that all the primary sources which exist are from 150-300 years after the events which they describe, and thus are chronologically far removed from those events <ref>[[Yehuda D. Nevo]] "Towards a Prehistory of Islam," Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, vol.17, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1994 p.108</ref> <ref>[[John Wansbrough]] The Sectarian Milieu: Content and Composition of Islamic Salvation History, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1978 p,119</ref><ref>[[Patricia Crone]] Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam, Princeton University Press, 1987 p.204</ref>

The absence of any Islamic corroborating material for the first century of the alleged time line of Islam has raised numerous questions as to the authenticity of the material provided by traditionalist sources. Secular scholars point out that the earliest account of Mohammad's life by [[Ibn Ishaq]] was written more than a century after Muhammad died and all later narratives by Islamic biographers contain far more details and embellishments about events which are entirely lacking in Ibn Ishaq's text.
<ref>Patricia Crone, [[Meccan Trade And The Rise Of Islam]], pp. 203-30), where she argues that much of the classical Muslim understanding of the Koran rests on the work of storytellers and that this work is of very dubious historical value. These storytellers contributed to the tradition on the rise of Islam, and this is evident in the steady growth of information: "If one storyteller should happen to mention a raid, the next storyteller would know the date of this raid, while the third would know everything that an audience might wish to hear about it." 53 Then, comparing the accounts of the raid of Kharrar by Ibn Ishaq and al-Waqidi, Crone shows that al-Waqidi, influenced by and in the manner of the storytellers, "will always give precise dates, locations, names, where Ibn Ishaq has none, accounts of what triggered the expedition, miscellaneous information to lend color to the event, as well as reasons why, as was usually the case, no fighting took place. No wonder that scholars are fond of al-Waqidi: where else does one find such wonderfully precise information about everything one wishes to know? But given that this information was all unknown to Ibn Ishaq, its value is doubtful in the extreme. And if spurious information accumulated at this rate in the two generations between Ibn Ishaq and al-Waqidi, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that even more must have accumulated in the three generations between the Prophet and Ibn Ishaq." </ref>
==Examination of Non Muslim sources ==
Another school of secular study of the origins of the Qur'an has focused on the examination of the vast body of the [[Greek]], [[Armenian]], [[Hebrew]], [[Aramaic]], [[Syriac]] and [[Coptic]] accounts of non-Muslim neighbors the 7th and 8th centuries which in many cases contradict the traditional Islamic narratives. Historian Patricia Crone for instances argues that the consistency of the non-Muslim sources spread over a large geographic area would tend to rule out a non-Muslim anti-Islamic motive to these sources.<ref>[[Patricia Crone]], [[Slaves on Horses]], pp. 15-16. ''All the while that Islamic historians have been struggling with their inert tradition, they have had available to them the Greek, Armenian, Hebrew, Aramaic, Syriac and Coptic literatures of non-Muslim neighbors and subjects of the Arab conquerors, to a large extent edited and translated at the end of the last century and the beginning of the present, and left to collect dust in the libraries ever since. It is a striking testimony to the suppression of the non-Islamic Middle East from the Muslim sources that not only have these literatures been ignored for questions other than the chronology of the conquests and the transmission of Greek philosophy and science, but they have also been felt to be rightly ignored. Of course these sources are hostile, and from a classical Islamic view they have simply got everything wrong; but unless we are willing entertain the notion of an all-pervading literary conspiracy between the non-Muslim peoples of the Middle East, the crucial point remains that they have got things wrong on very much the same points. That might not, it is true, have impressed the medieval Muslims who held the Jews and Christians capable of having maliciously deleted from their scriptures precisely the same passages relating to the coming of Islam; but as the Jews and Christians retorted, given their wide geographical and social distribution, they could scarcely have vented their anti-Muslim feelings with such uniform results. It is because there is agreement between the independent and contemporary witnesses of the non-Muslim world that their testimony must be considered; and it can hardly be claimed that they do not help: whichever way one chooses to interpret them, they leave no doubt that Islam was like other religions the product of a religious evolution.'' </ref>
:Of course these sources are hostile, and from a classical Islamic view they have simply got everything wrong; but unless we are willing entertain the notion of an all-pervading literary conspiracy between the non-Muslim peoples of the Middle East, the crucial point remains that they have got things wrong on very much the same points. That might not, it is true, have impressed the medieval Muslims who held the Jews and Christians capable of having maliciously deleted from their scriptures precisely the same passages relating to the coming of Islam; but as the Jews and Christians retorted, given their wide geographical and social distribution, they could scarcely have vented their anti-Muslim feelings with such uniform results. It is because there is agreement between the independent and contemporary witnesses of the non-Muslim world that their testimony must be considered; and it can hardly be claimed that they do not help: whichever way one chooses to interpret them, they leave no doubt that Islam was like other religions the product of a religious evolution..<ref>[[Patricia Crone]], [[Slaves on Horses]], pp. 15-16</ref>
The anti-traditionalist banner dropped by Crone and Cook has been taken up by scholars such as [[Christoph Luxenberg]], who supports claims for a late composition of the Qur'an, and traces much of it to [[The Syro-Aramaic Reading Of The Koran|sources other than Muhammad]]. Luxenberg in particular is well-known for his claims that the Qur'an is merely a re-working of an earlier Christian text, a [[Syriac language|Syriac]] [[lectionary]]. See also [[Gerd R. Puin]].<ref>The Syro-Aramaic Reading Of The Qur'an 2007 English edition</ref>

[[Fred Donner]] has argued for an early date for the collection of the Qur'an, based on his reading of the text itself. He points out that if the Qur'an had been collected over the tumultuous early centuries of Islam, with their vast conquests and expansion and bloody incidents between rivals for the caliphate, there would have been some evidence of this history in the text. However, there is nothing in the Qur'an that does not reflect what is known of the earliest Muslim community.<ref>''Narratives of Islamic Origins: The Beginnings of Islamic Historical Writing'', Donner, Darwin Press, 1998, p. 60., ISBN 0-87850-127-4</ref>

== Early influence on the Qur'an ==
According to the [[Catholic Encyclopedia]],<ref>[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08692a.htm Koran], by Gabriel Oussani, ''The Catholic Encyclopedia'', retrieved [[April 13]], [[2006]]</ref> and modern secular scholars <ref>Martin Bright The great Koran con trick ''The new Statesment Dec 2001
With no contemporary Muslim sources to refer to, a group of young historians working under the brilliant linguist Professor John Wansbrough at the University of London's School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) in the Seventies developed new scholarly techniques, drawing heavily on earlier biblical scholarship. Following Wansbrough's lead, they decided to look at the Koran as a literary text, to compare it to other devotional writings of the period and to look at internal clues to its origin. They found that it owed much to Judaism, especially the Talmud, a collection of commentaries and interpretations of the Hebrew Bible''</ref>the text in the Qu'ran is traced to six sources:

*The [[Old Testament]] [[canonical]] and [[apocryphal]] and the hybrid [[Judaism]] of the late rabbinical schools. During Muhammad's time the [[Jew]]s were numerous in many parts of [[Arabia]], especially around [[Medina]]. Later Judaism and [[Rabbinism]] are equally well represented. [[Geiger]] finds parallels between parts of the Koran and Jewish [[Agada|Agadot]] including Medrashim such as the Medrash Tanchuma. He posits that some of the other parts of the Koran may come from Medrashim that were lost. He cites stylistic connections between the Medrashim and the Koran <ref>Geiger, "Was hat Mohammed aus dem Judenthum aufgenommen?", Wiesbaden, 1833; tr. Judaism and Islam, Madras, 1898</ref><ref>''[[What the Koran Really Says]]: Language, Text, and Commentary'', edited and translated by, Ibn Warraq, Prometheus Books, 2002, 600 pages, ISBN 1-57392-945-X</ref>

*The [[New Testament]] (canonical and apocryphal). On his journeys between [[Syria]], [[Hijaz]], and [[Yemen]], [[Muhammad]] had opportunity to come in close touch with [[Yemenite]], [[Abyssinian]], [[Ghassanite]], and [[Syrian]] [[Christians]], especially heretic.{{Fact|date=September 2007}}

*[[Sabaism]], a combination of [[Judaism]], [[Manicheism]], and [[Babylonian]] [[polytheism]].{{Fact|date=September 2007}}

*[[Zoroastrianism]]. One suggestion of Zoroastrian influence on Islam is based on the conclusion by the Jewish orientalist, [[Ignaz Goldziher]], in his book "''Islamisme et Parsisme''",<ref>I. Goldziher, "Islamisme et Parsisme", ''Revue De L'Histoire Des Religions'', 1901, Volume XLIII, pp. 1-29.</ref> that the incident of [[Isra and Mi'raj|Isra]] and [[Mai'raj]] in Islam (Muhammad's ascension to the heavens) resembles the Iranian "[[Divina Commedia]]" called ''[[Arda Wiraz Namag]]''. [[Ibn Warraq]] quoted the Christian missionary, [[William St. Clair Tisdall|Tisdall]], on this, claiming that the book Arda Wiraz Namag was composed 400 years after Muhammad.

:However, in this regard, [[Encyclopaedia Iranica]] states that: "''The [[Arda Wiraz-namag]], like many of the Zoroastrian works, underwent successive redactions. It assumed its definitive form in the 9th-10th centuries AD''".<ref>"Arda Wiraz", ''Encyclopaedia Iranica'', 1987, Volume II, Routledge & Kegan Paul: London & New York, p. 357.</ref> [[Gignoux]] says the following about the same: "''It is known that the whole of the [[Pahlavi]] literature was written tardily, roughly speaking after the Muslim conquest, and that it however transmitted extremely old traditions to us, from [[Sassanide]] and even pre-Sassanide times''".<ref>P. Gignoux, "Notes Sur La Redaction De L'Arday Viraz Namag: L'Emploi De Hamê Et De Bê", ''Zeitschrift Der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft'', 1969, Supplementa I, Teil 3, pp. 998-999</ref>

*[[Hanifism]], the adherents of which, called [[Hanif|Hanīf]]s, must have been considerable in number and influence, as it is known from contemporary Arabian sources that twelve of Mohammed's followers were members of this sect.{{Fact|date=September 2007}}
:
*Native ancient and contemporary Arabian polytheistic beliefs and practices. [[Wellhausen]] has collected in his "Reste des arabischen Heidentums" (Berlin, 1897) all that is known of pre-Islamic Arabian religious belief, traditions, customs, and superstitions, many of which are either alluded to or accepted and incorporated in the Qu'ran. From the various sects and creeds, and [[Abul Fida Ismail Ibn Hamwi|Abul-Fida]], the well-known historian and geographer of the thirteenth century, it is clear that religious beliefs and practices of the Arabs of Mohammed's day form one of the many sources of Islam. From this source Islam derived the practices of polygamy and slavery, which Mohammed sanctioned by adopting them.{{Fact|date=September 2007}}
=== Similarities to the Bible ===
{{main|Similarities between the Bible and the Qur'an}}
Skeptical scholars account for the many similarities between the Qur'an and the Jewish and Hebrew scriptures by saying that Muhammad was teaching what he believed a universal history, as he had heard it from the Jews and Christians he had encountered in Arabia and on his travels. These scholars also disagree with the Islamic belief that the whole of the Qur'an is addressed by God to humankind. They note that there are numerous passages where God is directly addressed, or mentioned in the third person, or where the narrator swears by various entities, including God.

=== Textual Evidence ===

The Qur'an has much common theology, narratives, and commands as the [[Bible]] as well as non-canonical Jewish and Christian documents that have no historical validity. (See [[Legends and the Qur'an]].) Critics write that Muhammad did not know these documents were faulty and used them. Because they are not historically accurate, the Qur'an cannot be historically accurate.

==Oldest copy known today==
Several manuscripts, including the [[Samarkand manuscript]], are claimed to be the original copies sent out by Uthman<ref>[http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Mss The Qur'anic Manuscripts], ''islamic-awareness.org'', retrieved [[April 02]], [[2006]]</ref> in the 7th century CE. Some non-Muslim scholars, however, doubt that any of the Uthmanic originals remain.

Having studied early Quran manuscripts [[John Gilchrist (Islamic Studies)|John Gilchrist]] states: "The oldest manuscripts of the Quran still in existence date from not earlier than about one hundred years after Muhammad's death." ("Jam' Al-Qur'an", page 153) He comes to this conclusion because two of the oldest manuscripts, the Samarqand and Topkapi codices are both written in the [[Kufic|Kufic script]]. It "can generally be dated from the late eight century depending on the extent of development in the character of the script in each case." (Ibid. page 146)

As for the copies that were destroyed, Islamic traditions say that [[Abdallah Ibn Masud]], [[Ubay Ibn Ka'b]], and [[Ali ibn Abi Talib|Ali]], Muhammad's son-in-law, had preserved versions that differed in some ways from the Uthmanic text. Muslim scholars record certain of the differences between the versions; those recorded consist almost entirely of orthographical and lexical variants, or different verse counts. All three (Ibn Masud, Ubay Ibn Ka'b, and Ali) are recorded as having accepted the Uthmanic text as authoritative.

Uthman's version was written in an older Arabic script that left out most vowel markings; thus the script could be interpreted and read in various ways. This basic Uthmanic script is called the [[rasm]]; it is the basis of several traditions of oral recitation, differing in minor points.The Quran is always written in the Uthmanic [[Rasm]](Rasm al Uthman). In order to fix these oral recitations and prevent any mistakes, scribes and scholars began annotating the Uthmanic rasm with various [[Diacritic|diacritical marks]] indicating how the word was to be pronounced. It is believed that this process of annotation began around 700 CE, soon after Uthman's compilation, and finished by approximately 900 CE. The Quran text most widely used today is based on the [[Rasm Uthmani]](Uthmanic way of writing the Quran) and in the Hafs tradition of recitation, as approved by [[Al-Azhar University]] in Cairo in 1922. (For more information regarding traditions of recitations, see ''Quranic recitation'', below.)

== References ==
{{reflist}}

== Sources ==
{{sourcesstart}}
* ''[[Quest for the Historical Muhammed]]'', edited and translated by Ibn Warraq, Prometheus Books, 2000, hardcover, 554 pages, ISBN 1-57392-787-2
* ''[[Origins of the Koran]]: Classic Essays on Islam's Holy Book'', edited by Ibn Warraq, Prometheus Books, 1998, hardcover, 420 pages, ISBN 1-57392-198-X
* ''[[Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World]]'', Patricia Crone (1980)
* M. M. Azami, ''The History of the Qur'anic Text from Revelation to Compilation: A Comparative Study with the Old and New Testaments'', UK Islamic Academy, 2003 pp. 12
* ''What is the origin of man?: The answers of science and the Holy Scriptures'', by Dr. Maurice Bucaille, Publisher: A.S. Noordeen, ISBN B0007-C9WF-A
{{sourcesend}}

== External links ==
*[http://www.consider.net/forum_new.php3?Action=Display&newDisplayURN=200112100017 "The great Qu'ran con trick"], by Martin Bright, ''consider.net'', [[December 10]], [[2001]], retrieved [[April 08]], [[2006]]
*[http://www.sunnipath.com/library/QuranHome.aspx?leftNavID=2 A number of works on the Qur'an, including vonDenffer's Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur'an - at SunniPath.com]
*[http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/ Examining the Qur'an] - from Islamic-Awareness.org
*[http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/sacredtexts/sacredthemesionly.html Several early Qur'ans: information, zoomable images] British Library website

[[Category:Qur'an]]

[[de:Geschichte des Korantexts]]

Talk:Doctrina Iacobi

2008-03-23T21:07:04Z

Asteroid: coied from

{{template|This article or part thereof was copied from {{{site|Wikipedia}}} but the copied text was originally written by me, {{{[[User:Asteroid|Asteroid]]}}}, (under the {{#if:{{{CltFn}}}|name {{{CltFn}}}|same name}}) and does not include alterations made by others on that site.|background=#aff|category=Copied Articles}}

Doctrina Iacobi

2008-03-23T21:03:00Z

Asteroid: new article

The '''Doctrina Iacobi''' is a 7th century [[Greek]] tract written in the [[Middle East]] between 634 and 640 A.D. The manuscript provides one of the earliest external accounts of the origins of Islam, presenting a significantly different Islamic historiography than found in traditional Islamic texts.

It records Muhammed as a Judeo-Arab preacher proclaiming the advent of a [[Jewish]] [[Messiah]] and that the Jews and Arabs were allies against the [[Byzantine]] contradicting accounts in the [[Qur'an]].

*What is significant here is the possibility that Jews and Arabs (Saracens) seem to be allied together during the time of the conquest of Palestine and even for a short time after ([[Patricia Crone]]-Michael Cook 1976).

*This document is plausibly one of the most archaic elements of the Islamic tradition, its agreement with the earliest external accounts of the origins of Islam is highly significant ([[Patricia Crone]]-Michael Cook 1977).

Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies Against America

2008-03-23T20:55:28Z

Asteroid: didn't write that sentence

'''''Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies Against America''''' is a book by [[Middle East]] expert and scholar [[Walid Phares]].

In this book Walid Phares presents his analysis of the Jihadist movement and the strategies it employs in its war against [[United States|America]] and Western governments.

==Defining Jihad ==

In the [[Arab]] world, the author points out, the definition of the word [[Jihad]] is clear and unequivocal. It means a call to action on behalf of [[Islamic]] [[hegemony]]. The concept of Jihad is often defined to [[Western world|western]] audiences as simply a personal inner struggle or as a morally justified call to Muslims for the defense of their faith, but historically, Jihad has overwhelmingly been used in the sense of a call for [[violent]] military [[aggression]] against non-believers for the expansion of Islam. <ref>Future Jihad Walid Phares, chapter 1 The Historical Roots of Jihad</ref>

In the Western world, the author notes, many high profile [[John Esposito|academics]] , journalists and [[CAIR|activists]] are actively engaged in [[Public Relations]] and linguistical campaigns to convince audiences of a benign character of Jihad. But according to Phares, this a clear misrepresentation of the actual intent of the Jihadist movement.

:Jihad is not benign, and the West’s denial of that fact was terribly ironic. By instinct and as a result of my personal and professional background, I realized the enormity of what was happening: The [[United States]] was paving the way for its own defeat, by blurring its vision, confusing its mind, and moderating its reactions to the early danger signs, not to mention the terrorist strikes to come...."<ref>Walid Phares, Future Jihad, pp. 18</ref>

== Background of the Jihadist movement ==
''Future Jihad'' begins by pointing out that in the post [[9/11]] world the question that one should be asking is not "Why do they hate us?" but rather who are the ''they'' in that question. The ''they'', in the question, is identified by the author as the militant branches of modern day Islam, the [[radical Islamic]] [[Salafis]] and [[Wahhabis]] who draw their ideological roots from the 12th century Islamic ideologue [[Ibn Taymiyyah]] and [[Muhammad ibn Abd-al-Wahhab]], the 18th century founder of Wahhabism in [[Arabia]]. Phares notes that these movements have been active long before the [[cold war]] and they are not modern day responses to US foreign policy. These radical Islamic movements are carrying out their long term strategic plans aimed at bringing about an Islamic fundamentalist domination of the world. A third Jihadist group that has emerged in the later part of the 20th century, is the [[Shiite]] "khumaini" fundamentalists who draw their ideological roots from [[Ayatollah Khomeini]] and who are active in the [[Islamic Republic of Iran]] and associated groups such as [[Hezbullah]] and other Iraqi groups. <ref>Future Jihad Walid Phares, chapter 2 Who Are the Jihadists?</ref>
==Objectives of the Jihadists ==
The Jihadists are seeking to reverse what they conceive to be the demise of the [[Islamic]] state at the hands of the non-Muslims which began in the late [[Middle Ages]] and to establish Islamic [[hegemony]] over the world through conquest ([[Fatah]]). They attribute their defeat to having strayed from the purist rendition of Islamic ideology that they believe existed at the peak of Islamic conquest. Thus the remedy, in their eyes, is a return to the puristic, albeit, intolerant Islam.

The objectives of the Jihadists can thus be summarized into 3 steps:

# Liberation (Tahrir) of all land that fell at any time to Islamic conquest and which was at one time included in the [[Caliphate]] but which have since reverted back to the control of its non-Muslims inhabitants. These territories include, [[Kashmir]], [[Chechnya]], [[Spain]] , [[Israel]], [[Bosnia and Herzegovina|Bosnia]] and all territory that was ever under the dominion of Islam throughout history.
# Unification ([[Tawheed]]): The dismantling of all the [[Greater Middle East]] Arab nation state entities and borders and the unification of that territory under one common Islamic [[superstate]].
# Re-establishment of the Caliphate [[Caliphate|Khilafa]] and resumption of the external Jihad of conquest ([[Fatah]]) against the non-muslim world [[Dar al-Harb]].

==Methodology of the Jihadists ==
The methodology of the Jihadists to achieve conquest ([[Fatah]]) is divided into 2 phases, the first is the Jihad which is waged when there is a tactical advantage on the side of the Islamists. When the advantage goes to their opponents, the Jihadists adopt a momentary peace, called [[Sulh]]. Sulh is characterized by offered treaties and peace agreements and is implemented in order to give weak islamic forces time to regroup and restrengthen. When the Islamist forces are strong enough then Sulh is abandoned and Jihad is resumed.

==US blindness to the Jihadist movement ==
Since the early 90s, the [[US government]] has demonstrably been unaware that a war is being waged against it. Government analysts and diplomats appear to be blind and unresponsive to evidence of Jihadist activity that takes place right in front them. Phares posits that the reason for this is because they are collectively being mis-educated in the history, ideology, literature and intentions of the Jihadist movement. The author further explains that the reason for this is because Middle Eastern studies in US Academia has been effectively co-opted by the Wahabbi lobby by infusions of large amounts of money to educational instutions to put in place a pro-Wahabbi and pro-Islamic curriculum targeting the students who will become the future analysts and diplomats of the US government. This includes injecting a legion of Wahhabi funded academics like [[Edward Said]], [[John Esposito]] and numerous others that are used by Islamic activists to refute criticism of the Jihadist ideology and to discredit those authors who provide useful analysis in the middle eastern studies.

==Views towards the Jewish State of Israel ==
To the Jihadists, the existence of the Jewish State of Israel provides a clear refutation to the concept of the supremacy of Allah on Earth. Thus, the re-establishment of the Jewish state of Israel in 1947 was a tremendous set back for the Jihadists. This was followed by another blow to the Jihadist psyche, the recognition by the [[United Nations]] of the state of Israel. Finally the 1967 victories of Israel over the secular Arab armies brought the Jihadist movement to a very low point. These events along with the many historical defeats suffered by the Caliphate since the late Middle Ages, re-inforced the notion that those who had wavered from the strictest and purist forms of Islam would not be able to achieve victory over the non-Muslim world.

In their eyes it is inconceivable that Jews would come to have self determination and control of Jewish land, as the only acceptable condition for Jews in the eyes of Islamists is that of a subservient [[Dhimmitude|dhimmi]]s under the domination of Islam.

==Strategies against America ==
The author lists 6 areas being targeted by the Jihadist movement against the US.

#Economic jihad or oil as a weapon
#Ideological jihad through the co-optation of the entire U.S. Middle Eastern studies establishment funded by the Saudis
#Political jihad or mollification of the public
#Intelligence jihad, infiltrating not just American neighborhoods but providing the translators and interpreters that the [[FBI]] and [[CIA]] and [[DIA]] rely on
#Subversive jihad within the country, using groups like [[CAIR]] which they fund and the [[ACLU]] to silence and disable critics.
#Diplomatic jihad, controlling U.S. foreign policy and in particular using [[Saudi]] influence to dissuade the administrations from taking action against Wahabbi interests.

==What will defeat the Jihadists ==
The author discusses several anti-[[Islamist terrorism|Jihadist]] strategies.

By propping up dictatorships in the Muslim world, the US government has unwittingly done the Jihadist's bidding for them. This occurred because the dictatorship we so propped up effectively eradicated all opposition which could provide an alternative choice to the Jihadist movement. To effectively make the Jihadist movement redundant we would need to reverse the process we have had in place so that civil societies in the Muslim world are not continuously being destroyed or eradicated.

The historical re-establishment of the [[State of Israel]] and its perception by the Jihadi movement provides an indication as to what would constitute defeat in the Jihadists'eyes: the de-islamization of territory. Thus the establishment of free, multi-culturalist societies in the Middle East is the surest way of defeating the Jihadist movements.

==Video==
*[http://www.intelligencesummit.org/news/WalidPhares/Phares120205-3.wmv C-SPAN: Walid Phares synopsis of Future Jihad Terrorist Strategies against America]
*[http://multimedia.heritage.org/content/Lehrman-120205.ram Heritage Foundation: Walid Phares discusses Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies Against America]

==See also==
*[http://www.futurejihad.com/ Future Jihad Website]
*[http://hsc.house.gov/files/TestimonyPhares.pdf Sept 2006 Professor Walid Phares testimony to US House of Representatives and Department of Homeland Security]
*[http://www.internationalrelations.house.gov/109/pha090706.pdf Sept 2006 Professor Walid Phares testimony to Subcommittee on International Terrorism and Nonproliferation]
*[http://www.reportingwar.com/phares100906.shtml World Defense Review: The Continued Misunderstanding of the Salafi Jihad Threat]
*[http://www.futurejihad.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=102&Itemid=1 A patient enemy]

==References==
{{reflist}}

==Further reading==
*[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52601 Georgetown gets $20 million from prince promoting Islam]
*[http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/daily/2005/12/13-islamic_gift.html Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal donates $20 million to support the Harvard University Islamic Studies Program]

[[Category:Books about Islamism|Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies Against America]]

Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies Against America

2008-03-23T20:52:45Z

Asteroid: new article

'''''Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies Against America''''' is a book by [[Middle East]] expert and scholar [[Walid Phares]].

In this book Walid Phares presents his analysis of the Jihadist movement and the strategies it employs in its war against [[United States|America]] and Western governments. (Please note that the views expressed in this article are only the [[opinions]] of the author, and therefore are not undeniably factual. Look at related articles for more information.)

==Defining Jihad ==

In the [[Arab]] world, the author points out, the definition of the word [[Jihad]] is clear and unequivocal. It means a call to action on behalf of [[Islamic]] [[hegemony]]. The concept of Jihad is often defined to [[Western world|western]] audiences as simply a personal inner struggle or as a morally justified call to Muslims for the defense of their faith, but historically, Jihad has overwhelmingly been used in the sense of a call for [[violent]] military [[aggression]] against non-believers for the expansion of Islam. <ref>Future Jihad Walid Phares, chapter 1 The Historical Roots of Jihad</ref>

In the Western world, the author notes, many high profile [[John Esposito|academics]] , journalists and [[CAIR|activists]] are actively engaged in [[Public Relations]] and linguistical campaigns to convince audiences of a benign character of Jihad. But according to Phares, this a clear misrepresentation of the actual intent of the Jihadist movement.

:Jihad is not benign, and the West’s denial of that fact was terribly ironic. By instinct and as a result of my personal and professional background, I realized the enormity of what was happening: The [[United States]] was paving the way for its own defeat, by blurring its vision, confusing its mind, and moderating its reactions to the early danger signs, not to mention the terrorist strikes to come...."<ref>Walid Phares, Future Jihad, pp. 18</ref>

== Background of the Jihadist movement ==
''Future Jihad'' begins by pointing out that in the post [[9/11]] world the question that one should be asking is not "Why do they hate us?" but rather who are the ''they'' in that question. The ''they'', in the question, is identified by the author as the militant branches of modern day Islam, the [[radical Islamic]] [[Salafis]] and [[Wahhabis]] who draw their ideological roots from the 12th century Islamic ideologue [[Ibn Taymiyyah]] and [[Muhammad ibn Abd-al-Wahhab]], the 18th century founder of Wahhabism in [[Arabia]]. Phares notes that these movements have been active long before the [[cold war]] and they are not modern day responses to US foreign policy. These radical Islamic movements are carrying out their long term strategic plans aimed at bringing about an Islamic fundamentalist domination of the world. A third Jihadist group that has emerged in the later part of the 20th century, is the [[Shiite]] "khumaini" fundamentalists who draw their ideological roots from [[Ayatollah Khomeini]] and who are active in the [[Islamic Republic of Iran]] and associated groups such as [[Hezbullah]] and other Iraqi groups. <ref>Future Jihad Walid Phares, chapter 2 Who Are the Jihadists?</ref>
==Objectives of the Jihadists ==
The Jihadists are seeking to reverse what they conceive to be the demise of the [[Islamic]] state at the hands of the non-Muslims which began in the late [[Middle Ages]] and to establish Islamic [[hegemony]] over the world through conquest ([[Fatah]]). They attribute their defeat to having strayed from the purist rendition of Islamic ideology that they believe existed at the peak of Islamic conquest. Thus the remedy, in their eyes, is a return to the puristic, albeit, intolerant Islam.

The objectives of the Jihadists can thus be summarized into 3 steps:

# Liberation (Tahrir) of all land that fell at any time to Islamic conquest and which was at one time included in the [[Caliphate]] but which have since reverted back to the control of its non-Muslims inhabitants. These territories include, [[Kashmir]], [[Chechnya]], [[Spain]] , [[Israel]], [[Bosnia and Herzegovina|Bosnia]] and all territory that was ever under the dominion of Islam throughout history.
# Unification ([[Tawheed]]): The dismantling of all the [[Greater Middle East]] Arab nation state entities and borders and the unification of that territory under one common Islamic [[superstate]].
# Re-establishment of the Caliphate [[Caliphate|Khilafa]] and resumption of the external Jihad of conquest ([[Fatah]]) against the non-muslim world [[Dar al-Harb]].

==Methodology of the Jihadists ==
The methodology of the Jihadists to achieve conquest ([[Fatah]]) is divided into 2 phases, the first is the Jihad which is waged when there is a tactical advantage on the side of the Islamists. When the advantage goes to their opponents, the Jihadists adopt a momentary peace, called [[Sulh]]. Sulh is characterized by offered treaties and peace agreements and is implemented in order to give weak islamic forces time to regroup and restrengthen. When the Islamist forces are strong enough then Sulh is abandoned and Jihad is resumed.

==US blindness to the Jihadist movement ==
Since the early 90s, the [[US government]] has demonstrably been unaware that a war is being waged against it. Government analysts and diplomats appear to be blind and unresponsive to evidence of Jihadist activity that takes place right in front them. Phares posits that the reason for this is because they are collectively being mis-educated in the history, ideology, literature and intentions of the Jihadist movement. The author further explains that the reason for this is because Middle Eastern studies in US Academia has been effectively co-opted by the Wahabbi lobby by infusions of large amounts of money to educational instutions to put in place a pro-Wahabbi and pro-Islamic curriculum targeting the students who will become the future analysts and diplomats of the US government. This includes injecting a legion of Wahhabi funded academics like [[Edward Said]], [[John Esposito]] and numerous others that are used by Islamic activists to refute criticism of the Jihadist ideology and to discredit those authors who provide useful analysis in the middle eastern studies.

==Views towards the Jewish State of Israel ==
To the Jihadists, the existence of the Jewish State of Israel provides a clear refutation to the concept of the supremacy of Allah on Earth. Thus, the re-establishment of the Jewish state of Israel in 1947 was a tremendous set back for the Jihadists. This was followed by another blow to the Jihadist psyche, the recognition by the [[United Nations]] of the state of Israel. Finally the 1967 victories of Israel over the secular Arab armies brought the Jihadist movement to a very low point. These events along with the many historical defeats suffered by the Caliphate since the late Middle Ages, re-inforced the notion that those who had wavered from the strictest and purist forms of Islam would not be able to achieve victory over the non-Muslim world.

In their eyes it is inconceivable that Jews would come to have self determination and control of Jewish land, as the only acceptable condition for Jews in the eyes of Islamists is that of a subservient [[Dhimmitude|dhimmi]]s under the domination of Islam.

==Strategies against America ==
The author lists 6 areas being targeted by the Jihadist movement against the US.

#Economic jihad or oil as a weapon
#Ideological jihad through the co-optation of the entire U.S. Middle Eastern studies establishment funded by the Saudis
#Political jihad or mollification of the public
#Intelligence jihad, infiltrating not just American neighborhoods but providing the translators and interpreters that the [[FBI]] and [[CIA]] and [[DIA]] rely on
#Subversive jihad within the country, using groups like [[CAIR]] which they fund and the [[ACLU]] to silence and disable critics.
#Diplomatic jihad, controlling U.S. foreign policy and in particular using [[Saudi]] influence to dissuade the administrations from taking action against Wahabbi interests.

==What will defeat the Jihadists ==
The author discusses several anti-[[Islamist terrorism|Jihadist]] strategies.

By propping up dictatorships in the Muslim world, the US government has unwittingly done the Jihadist's bidding for them. This occurred because the dictatorship we so propped up effectively eradicated all opposition which could provide an alternative choice to the Jihadist movement. To effectively make the Jihadist movement redundant we would need to reverse the process we have had in place so that civil societies in the Muslim world are not continuously being destroyed or eradicated.

The historical re-establishment of the [[State of Israel]] and its perception by the Jihadi movement provides an indication as to what would constitute defeat in the Jihadists'eyes: the de-islamization of territory. Thus the establishment of free, multi-culturalist societies in the Middle East is the surest way of defeating the Jihadist movements.

==Video==
*[http://www.intelligencesummit.org/news/WalidPhares/Phares120205-3.wmv C-SPAN: Walid Phares synopsis of Future Jihad Terrorist Strategies against America]
*[http://multimedia.heritage.org/content/Lehrman-120205.ram Heritage Foundation: Walid Phares discusses Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies Against America]

==See also==
*[http://www.futurejihad.com/ Future Jihad Website]
*[http://hsc.house.gov/files/TestimonyPhares.pdf Sept 2006 Professor Walid Phares testimony to US House of Representatives and Department of Homeland Security]
*[http://www.internationalrelations.house.gov/109/pha090706.pdf Sept 2006 Professor Walid Phares testimony to Subcommittee on International Terrorism and Nonproliferation]
*[http://www.reportingwar.com/phares100906.shtml World Defense Review: The Continued Misunderstanding of the Salafi Jihad Threat]
*[http://www.futurejihad.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=102&Itemid=1 A patient enemy]

==References==
{{reflist}}

==Further reading==
*[http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52601 Georgetown gets $20 million from prince promoting Islam]
*[http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/daily/2005/12/13-islamic_gift.html Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal donates $20 million to support the Harvard University Islamic Studies Program]

[[Category:Books about Islamism|Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies Against America]]

Seeing Islam as Others Saw It

2008-03-23T20:50:09Z

Asteroid: new article

'''''Seeing Islam As Others Saw It: A Survey and Evaluation of Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian Writings on Early Islam (Studies in Late Antiquity and Early Islam)''''' is a book by scholar of the Middle East [[Robert G. Hoyland]].

The book contains an extensive collection of [[Greek]], [[Syrian]], [[Coptic]], [[Armenian]] [[Latin]], [[Jewish]], [[Iran|Persian]], and [[China|Chinese]] primary sources written betweeen 620 and 780 AD in the middle east which provides a survery of eye witness accounts of historical events duting the formative period of Islam

The book presents the evidenciary text of over 120 seventh century manuscripts, some of which, such as the [[Doctrina Jacobi]] and [[The Maronite Chronicles]] are at variance with traditional Islamic accounts of the origins of Islam, for example [[Thomas the Presbyter]] describes events taking place two years after the traditional date for the death of Muhammad:
:In the year 945, indiction 7, on Friday 7 February (634) at the ninth hour, there was a battle between the Romans and the Arabs of Muhammad (tayyaye d-Mhmt) in Palestine twelve miles east of Gaza. The Romans fled, leaving behind the patrician bryrdn, whom the Arabs killed. Some 4000 poor villagers of Palestine were killed there, Christians, Jews and Samaritans. The Arabs ravaged the whole region.

== References ==
<references/>

==See also==
* [http://www.christianorigins.com/islamrefs.html External References to Islam].

User:Asteroid

2008-03-23T20:43:38Z

Asteroid: namespace

<blockquote style='border: 1px solid blue; padding: 2em;'>
[[George Orwell]] said this.

*'''Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two makes four.''' If that is granted, all else follows. from [[1984]]

*'''During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.'''

*Sometimes the first duty of intelligent men is the restatement of the obvious.

</blockquote>
<blockquote style='border: 1px solid green; padding: 2em;'>
[[Noam Chomsky]] said this:
*If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don't like. Goebbels was in favor of freedom of speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you're in favor of freedom of speech, that means you're in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise.(Manufacturing Consent: [[Noam Chomsky]] and the Media, 1992)

*It's extremely important to preserve freedom of speech, and not to grant the state the right to determine what is or isn't said. A sometimes conflicting right is privacy and protection against verbal or other forms of violence. Once the state is granted the right to prevent speech (writing, songs, etc.) that it claims might precipitate harm, we're on a very dangerous slope. ([[Noam Chomsky]] ZNet forum reply, August 7, 2005) [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Emailuser/CltFn link]
</blockquote>

==Public domain cheat sheet==
*[http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/training/Hirtle_Public_Domain.htm How can I tell if a work is in the public domain?]

Talk:Fragment on the Arab Conquests

2008-03-23T20:41:06Z

Asteroid: copied from

Fragment on the Arab Conquests

2008-03-23T20:33:56Z

Asteroid: new article

'''Fragment on the Arab Conquests''' are fragmentary notes that were written around the year 636 AD on the front blank pages of a sixth-century [[Syriac]] [[Christian]] [[Gospel]] manuscript which depict events from the early seventh century conflict between the [[Arabs]] of [[Muhammad]] and the [[Byzantines]] and particularly of the [[battle of Yarmouk]]. <ref>[[Robert Hoyland ]] [[Seeing Islam as Others Saw It]] p 116 "On the front fly-leaf of a sixth-century Syriac manuscript containing the Gospel according to Matthew and the Gospel according to Mark are scribbled a few lines aobut the Arab conquest, now very faint."</ref>

==Fragments ==

:''In January the people of Hims took the word for their lives and many villages were ravaged by the killing of the Arabs of [[Muhammad]] (Muhmd) and many people were slain and taken prisoner from [[Galilee]] as far as [[Beth]]. . . .''

:''On the twenty-sixth of May the [[Sakellarios|Saqilara]] went . . . from the vicinity of [[Homs|Hims]] and the [[Romans]] chased them . . ..''
:''On the tenth of August the Romans fled from the vicinity of [[Damascus]] and there were killed many people, some ten thousand. And at the turn of the year the Romans came. On the twentieth of August in the year nine hundred and forty-seven there gathered in [[Yarmuk|Gabitha]] a multitude of the Romans, and many people of the Romans were killed, some fifty thousand.''<ref>[[Robert Hoyland ]] [[Seeing Islam as Others Saw It]] p 116 </ref>

==Analysis==
The fragments are believed to be contemporary to the events of the Arab conquest of the early 7th century <ref>[[Robert Hoyland ]] [[Seeing Islam as Others Saw It]] p 117 ''Wright, the first to draw attention to the fragment, wrote that 'it seems to be a nearly contemporary notice,' a view to which Nöldeke also subscribed.''</ref> They also provide one of the earlier date for the battle of Yarmuk as having taken place on 20 August 636, assuming Yarmouk is to be identified with the "battle of Gabitha" mentioned in the fragments. <ref>[[Robert Hoyland ]] [[Seeing Islam as Others Saw It]] p 117 ''It is of some significance that the fragment accords with one of the dates given in Arabic sources for the battle at Gabitha (assuming this is to be identified with Yarmuk), namely 20 August AG 947/12 Rajab AH 15 (636)''</ref> According to Cook and Crone in "''[[Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World]]''", the fragments contradict the Muslim accounts of date of death of [[Muhammad]], alluding to him still being alive in 636 AD at the battle of Yarmouk.<ref>[[Patricia Crone]], [[Michael Cook]] [[Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World]]</ref>

==References ==

<references/>

[[Category:Christian texts]]

Talk:Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World

2008-03-23T20:31:21Z

Asteroid: copied from

{{template|This article or part thereof was copied from {{{site|Wikipedia}}} but the copied text was originally written by me, {{{[[User:Asteroid|Asteroid]]}}}, (under the {{#if:{{{site user|}}}|name {{{site user}}}|same name}}) and does not include alterations made by others on that site.|background=#aff|category=Copied Articles}}

Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World

2008-03-23T20:29:17Z

Asteroid: new article

'''''Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World''''' (1977) is a controversial book on the early history of [[Islam]] written by the historians [[Patricia Crone]] and [[Michael Cook (historian)|Michael Cook]].

Drawing on [[archaeological]] evidence and contemporary documents in [[Arabic language|Arabic]], [[Armenian language|Armenian]], [[Coptic language|Coptic]], [[Greek language|Greek]], [[Hebrew language|Hebrew]], [[Aramaic language|Aramaic]], [[Latin]] and [[Syriac language|Syriac]], ''Hagarism'' depicts an early Islam very different from the traditionally-accepted version derived from Muslim historical accounts..<ref>[[Daniel Pipes]]. "[http://www.meforum.org/article/480 Lessons from the Prophet Muhammad's Diplomacy]". ''The Middle East Quarterly''. September 1999. Volume VI: Number 3. ''Hagarism, a 1977 study by Patricia Crone and Michael Cook, the authors completely exclude the Arabic literary sources and reconstruct the early history of Islam only from the information to be found in Arabic papyri, coins, and inscriptions as well as non-Arabic literary sources in a wide array of languages (Aramaic, Armenian, Coptic, Greek, Hebrew, Latin, and Syriac).''</ref><ref>[[Oleg Grabar]]. Speculum, Vol. 53, No. 4. (Oct., 1978), pp. 795-799. ''What we know as Islam, the authors claim, was a Jewish messianic movement known, primarily in Syriac (but also reflected in Armenian and Hebrew) sources, as Hagarism, which moved into the Fertile Crescent, was heavily influenced by the Samaritans and by Babylonian Judaism, and at a certain point (presumably at the time of Abd al-Malik, ca. 690) shed its Judaicizing identity to become Arab Islam. This first change required the recasting of whatever memories or records existed of the movement’s birth into a more or less coherent form, a process which occupied much of the following century.''</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thedailystar.net/2006/04/28/d60428020635.htm|title=Hagarism: The Story of a Book Written by Infidels for Infidels|accessdate=2006-06-12|author=Liaquat Ali Khan}}''The book titled "Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World," questions just about everything Muslims believe as historical truths. It challenges the common belief that the Quran was revealed to Prophet Muhammad over a period of 22 years (610-632) in Mecca and Medina. Instead, the book contends that the Quran was composed, possibly in Syria or Iraq, more than fifty years after the Prophet's death, projected back in time, and attributed to the Prophet. ''</ref>

According to ''Hagarism'', the [[Arab]] conquests and the formation of the [[caliphate]] were a peninsular Arab movement inspired by [[Jewish]] [[messianism]], which, in alliance with [[Jews]], attempted to reclaim the [[Promised Land]] from the [[Byzantine Empire]]. The [[Qur'an]] would then be the product of 8th-century edits of various materials drawn from a variety of [[Judeo-Christian]] and [[Middle-Eastern]] sources, and [[Muhammad]] the herald of [[Umar]] "the redeemer", a [[Jew|Judaic]] messiah.<ref>The Origins of The Koran: Classic Essays on Islam’s Holy Book, 1998 [[Ibn Warraq]] ''A group of scholars influenced by Wansbrough took an even more radical approach; they rejected wholesale the entire Islamic version of early Islamic history. Michael Cook, Patricia Crone, and Martin Hinds writing between 1977 and 1987 regard the whole established version of Islamic history down at least to the time of Abd al-Malik (685-705) as a later fabrication, and reconstruct the Arab Conquests and the formation of the Caliphate as a movement of peninsular Arabs who had been inspired by Jewish messianism to try to reclaim the Promised Land. In this interpretation, Islam emerged as an autonomous religion and culture only within the process of a long struggle for identity among the disparate peoples yoked together by the Conquests: Jacobite Syrians, Nestorian Aramaeans in Iraq, Copts, Jews, and (finally) peninsular Arabs.''</ref>

== Synopsis ==
''Hagarism'' begins with the premise that [[Western world|Western]] historical scholarship on the beginnings of [[Islam]] should only be based on historical, [[archaeological]] and [[philological]] data rather than Islamic traditions which it finds to be dogmatically-based, historically irreconcilable and [[anachronistic]] accounts of the community's past, and of no historic value. Thus, relying exclusively on historical, archaeological and [[philological]] evidence, the authors attempt to reconstruct and present what they argue is a more historically accurate account of Islam's origins. In summary:
<blockquote>Virtually all accounts of the early development of Islam take it as axiomatic that it is possible to elicit at least the outlines of the process from the Islamic sources. It is however well-known that these sources are not demonstrably early. There is no hard evidence for the existence of the Koran in any form before the last decade of the seventh century, and the tradition which places this rather opaque revelation in its historical context is not attested before the middle of the eighth. The historicity of the Islamic tradition is thus to some degree problematic: while there are no cogent internal grounds for rejecting it, there are equally no cogent external grounds for accepting it. In the circumstances it is not unreasonable to proceed in the usual fashion by presenting a sensibly edited version of the tradition as historical fact. But equally, it makes some sense to regard the tradition as without determinate historical content, and to insist that what purport to be accounts of religious events in the seventh century are utilizable only for the study of religious ideas in the eighth. The Islamic sources provide plenty of scope for the implementation of these different approaches, but offer little that can be used in any decisive way to arbitrate between them. The only way out of the dilemma is thus to step outside the Islamic tradition altogether and start again.<ref>P. Crone and M. Cook, ''Hagarism: The Making Of The Islamic World'', 1977, Cambridge University Press, p. 3</ref></blockquote>

According to the authors, Hagarism was a heretical branch of Judaism followed by the [[Hagarenes]] or [[Arabs]] in the early part of the 7th century. To the authors, the surviving records of the period describe the followers of [[Muhammad]] as Hagarenes, because of the way Muhammad invoked the Jewish god in order to introduce an alien [[monotheism|monotheistic]] faith to the [[Arab]]s. He is reported as doing this by claiming biological descent from [[Abraham]] through his slave wife [[Hagar (biblical)|Hagar]] for the Arabs in the same way as the Jews who claimed descent from Abraham through [[Sarah]] and thus as their ancestral faith. During this early period the Jews and the Hagarenes united, into a faith the authors loosely describe as Judeo-Hagarism, in order to recover the [[holy land]] from the [[Christian]] [[Byzantines]]. In their analysis, the early manuscripts from eye witnesses suggest that Muhammad was the leader of a military expedition to conquer Jerusalem, and that the original [[Hijra (Islam)|hijra]] actually referred to a journey from northern Arabia to that city.

As time went on, the Hagarenes concluded that the adoption of [[Judaism]] and [[Messianism|Christian Messianism]] did not provide them with the unique religious identity that they aspired for. They also feared that leaning on [[Judaism]] too much, might result in outright conversion and assimilation. Thus the hagarenes contrived to create a religion of their own and decided to splinter off from their [[Judaic]] practices and beliefs. Driven by a quest for theological legitimacy they devised a version of [[Abraham]]ic [[monotheism]], that evolved from a blend of [[Judaism]], [[Samaritanism]] and [[Christianity]], which became what is now Islam. The authors propose that Islam was thus born and fashioned from Judaic mythology and symbology, that is; the creation of a sacred scripture similar to the Jewish [[Torah]] - (the [[Qur’an]]), and a [[Moses]] like prophet; along with a sacred city of [[Mecca]] modeled on the Jewish holy city of [[Jerusalem]] adjacent to a holy mountain.

While the full assertions of the book were controversial, the attempts to deconstruct early Islamic history have made this a groundbreaking and important work on early Islamic history.

== Sources==
The authors document their thesis that Muhammad was preaching a heretical form of Judaism around 634 and was proclaiming the advent of a Jewish [[Messiah]] by drawing upon early non-Muslim sources such as the [[Doctrina Iacobi]] (AD 634) and others listed in the table below.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
| 634 [[Doctrina Iacobi]]
| 650 [[Fredegar]]
| 676 The Synod of 676
| 692 Syriac [[Apocalypse of Pseudo-Ephraem]]
| 717 The Vision of [[Enoch the Just]]
|-
| 636 [[Fragment on the Arab Conquests]]
| 655 Pope [[Martin I]]
| 680 [[George of Resh'aina]]
| 697 Anti-Jewish Polemicists
| 717 A Monk of Beth Hale and an Arab Notable
|-
| 639 [[Sophronius]], Patriarch of Jerusalem
| 659 [[Isho'yahb III of Adiabene]]
| 680 [[The Secrets of Rabbi Simon ben Yohai]]
| 700 [[Anastasius of Sinai]]
| 720 Greek Interpolation of the Syriac Apocalypse of Pseudo-Methodius
|-
| 640 [[Thomas the Presbyter]]
| 660 [[Sebeos]], Bishop of the Bagratunis
| 680 [[Bundahishn]]
| 700 [[Hnanisho' the Exegete]]
| 720 [[Willibald]]
|-
| 640 Homily on the Child Saints of Babylon
| 660 A Chronicler of Khuzistan
| 681 [[Trophies of Damascus]]
| 705 Ad Annum 705
| 730 [[Patriarch Germanos I of Constantinople|Patriarch Germanus]]
|-
| 640 [[John of Nikiu]]
| 662 [[Maximus the Confessor]]
| 687 [[Athanasius of Balad]], Patriarch of Antioch
| 708 [[Jacob of Edessa]]
| 730 [[John of Damascus]]
|-
| 644 Coptic Apocalypse of Pseudo-Shenute
| 665 [[Pope Benjamin of Alexandria|Benjamin I]]
| 687 [[John bar Penkaye]]
| 715 Coptic [[Apocalpyse of Pseudo-Athanasius]]
| 770 A Maronite Chronicler
|-
| 648 Life of [[Gabriel of Qartmin]]
| 670 [[Arculf]], a Pilgrim
| 690 Syriac [[Apocalypse of Pseudo-Methodius]]
| 717 [[Greek Daniel]],First Vision
| 780 [[Isho'bokh]]t, Metropolitan of Fars
|-
| 785 [[Stephen of Alexandria]]
| 785 [[Theophilus of Edessa]]
| 801 [[T'ung tien]]
|
|
|-
|}

==Impact==
Hagarism is widely cited by many modern historians of early Islam, including [[Bernard Lewis]],<ref>Bernard Lewis, ''The Jews of Islam'', Princeton University Press, p.203,p. 231</ref> [[Robert G. Hoyland]],<ref>Robert G. Hoyland, ''Seeing Islam as Others Saw It: A Survey and Evaluation of Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian Writings on Early Islam'' (Studies in Late Antiquity and Early Islam), Darwin Press, 1998</ref> [[Reza Aslan]],<ref>Reza Aslan, ''No god but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam'', Random House, 2005</ref> [[G. R. Hawting]],<ref>G. R. Hawting, ''The First Dynasty of Islam'', Southern Illinois Univ Press, pp.19, 44, 71, 121, 132, 133, 140</ref><ref>G. R. Hawting, ''The Idea of Idolatry and the Emergence of Islam: From Polemic to History From Polemic to History''</ref> [[Herbert Berg]],<ref>Herbert Berg, ''Method and Theory in the Study of Islamic Origins'', Brill, Leiden and Boston, 2003, pp. 114, 126, 133, 288, 297, 374, 391</ref> [[Francis Edwards Peters]],<ref>F. E. Peters, ''Muhammad and the Origins of Islam'', State University of New York Press </ref> [[S. N. Eisenstadt]],<ref>S. N. Eisenstadt, ''Jewish Civilization: The Jewish Historical Experience in a Comparative Perspective'', State University of New York Press, 1992</ref> [[Ziauddin Sardar]],<ref>Ziauddin Sardar, ''Orientalism'', Open University Press, 1999</ref> [[Malise Ruthven]],<ref>Malise Ruthven, ''Islam in the World'', Oxford University Press, 2000</ref> [[Richard Landes]],<ref>Richard Landes, ''The Apocalyptic Year 1000: Religious Expectation and Social Change, 950–1050''</ref> and [[John Wansbrough]],<ref>J. Wansbrough,  ''Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies'', University of London, '''41''':1:155-156 (1978)</ref>[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=Hagarism&num=100&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=any&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_allsubj=all&hl=en&lr=] as well as critics (like [[Ibn Warraq]]<ref>Ibn Warraq, ''The Quest for the Historical Muhammad'', Prometheus Books, 2000</ref>). It is on the suggested reading list of the [[School of Oriental and African Studies]] of London [http://www.soas.ac.uk/Centres/IslamicLaw/ReadingList.html] and other various major universities' Middle East studies reading lists [http://humanities.uchicago.edu/depts/nelc/programs/civreadinglist.htm][http://www.unc.edu/~elg/Islamic_studies_syllabus.html].

In 1995, [[Michael Lecker]] proposed much more conservative theories of early Jewish/Islamic relations in ''The conversion of Himyar to Judaism and the Jewish Banu Hadl of Medina''<ref>Michael Lecker, ''The conversion of Himyar to Judaism and the Jewish Banu Hadl of Medina'', Die Welt des Orients 26, Gottingen, 1995</ref>, and ''Judaism among Kinda and the'' ridda ''of Kinda''<ref>Michael Lecker, ''Judaism among Kind and the'' ridda ''of Kinda'', Journal of the American Oriental Society 115, New Haven, 1995</ref> and ''Zayd b. Thabit, 'a Jew with two sidelocks': Judaism and literacy in pre-Islamic Medina (Yatrib)''.<ref>Michael Lecker, ''Zayd b. Thabit, 'a Jew with two sidelocks': Judaism and literacy in pre-Islamic Medina (Yatrib)'', Journal of Near Eastern Studies 56, Chicago, 1997.</ref>

In 1997, [[Robert G. Hoyland]] described the legacy of ''Hagarism'' this way: "Almost two decades ago Patricia Crone and Michael Cook followed [French historian Claude Cahen's] advice in their reconstruction of the rise of Islam, which they attempted to write on the basis of testimony external to Islamic tradition. Yet, with a few notable exceptions [Conrad and Morony for example] this line line of inquiry has not been pursued. This is unfortunate ... surely if one wishes to gain a proper understanding of the events and developments of this age, one must elicit the opinions of all those who participated in them... It is this belief and the example of the aforementioned scholars [referring to Crone & Cook] that have inspired this book ["Seeing Islam as others saw it"]"<ref>Robert G. Hoyland, ''Seeing Islam as Others Saw It: A Survey and Evaluation of Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian Writings on Early Islam'' (Studies in Late Antiquity and Early; Darwin Press, 1998; p. 2-3</ref> He characterizes ''hagarism'' as evolving into wider inter-disciplinary and promiscuous literary approach, and goes on to say that further studies will emerge in the [http://www.darwinpress.com/Darwin%20SLAEI%20Series/SLAEI.html ''Studies in Late Antiquity and Early'' series] in which his book appears. Since then the "SUNY Series in Near Eastern Studies"<ref>(SUNY Series in Near Eastern Studies). Albany, NY, U.S.A.: State University of New York Press</ref> has also collected a selection of authors who are continuing in a modified form of this theory.

In 2002, [[David Cook]] in discussing the A'maq Cycle of historical apocalypses says that this genre of Islamic literature "could in fact be based on some historical kernel, since ... the Muslims shared with the Jews the desire to build the Third Temple"<ref>David Cook, ''Studies in Muslim apocalyptic'', (Studies in Late Antiquity and Early; Darwin Press, 2002</ref>

In 2005, [[John C. Reeves]] says that ''Hagarism'' needs to do much basic research before it can propose bold theories. It "is an important area of research that as been largely uncultivated by modern Western scholars, and hence a comparative study across the religious boundaries of the confessional corpora remains very much in its infancy. One of the more important tasks ... involves the systematic identification, collation, and publication of the massive number of late antique and early medieval apocalyptic texts lurking in the manuscript collections of libraries and research institutes around the world."<ref>John C. Reeves. ''Trajectories in Near Eastern Apocalyptic'', Society of Biblical Literature, 2005; p.24</ref>

== References ==
{{reflist|3}}

== See also ==
* [[Historiography of early Islam]]

==External links==
* [http://www.opendemocracy.net/faith-europe_islam/mohammed_3866.jsp Crone, Patricia. "What do we actually know about Mohammed?"]. ''openDemocracy''

User talk:DanH

2008-03-22T05:19:37Z

Asteroid: /* Why not copy from Wikipedia? */

'''Archives:'''

[[User talk:MountainDew]]

[[User talk:DanHarchive1]]

[[User talk:DanHarchive2]]

[[User talk:DanHarchive3]]

[[User talk:DanHarchive4]]

==Blocked User NW==

Sorry about that, I didn't know he was blocked yet. [[User:Lukecorlando|Lukecorlando]] 23:21, 21 October 2007 (EDT)

==Evidence of evolution==
What's with the moving my friend? It's intended to be an encyclopedic article about the subject, not an personal essay of some sort. [[User:Honestyandtruth|Honestyandtruth]] 00:00, 27 October 2007 (EDT)

== I have sent you an important email about communists and the gay conspiracy! ==

I sent one also to Rob. --[[User:TK|şyŝoρ-₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Ṣρёаќǃ]] 01:11, 30 October 2007 (EDT)

== Funny ==

I enjoyed [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User:ChavezFan&diff=324719&oldid=324649 this], and thought I'd let you know. [[User:GregLarson | Greg]] 16:09, 30 October 2007 (EDT)

==Endorse block==
I endorse to block on [[User:Maestro]] [http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/Maestro contribs]; we may have to review all these edits and consider other actions. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 17:32, 4 November 2007 (EST)

Hey, thanks for unblocking me. Never thought I'd say this to a Jayhawker, but you're okay. After that whupping your football team dished out last week, you might even get this Mizzou grad to cheer for KU. [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 23:50, 6 November 2007 (EST)

Anything to keep my mind of the Rams. Jeez...BTW, any chance on getting my user page unblocked when my probation expires? [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 08:55, 8 November 2007 (EST)

:If he is on probation he should have the opportunity to prove his quality having his talk page open to work. Is it truth? --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 15:37, 8 November 2007 (EST)

*Joaquin, whenever any editor is restored, their pages should be unlocked and/or re-created. If that does not happen, it is usually just a mistake. --[[User:TK|şyŝoρ-₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Ṣρёаќǃ]] 10:08, 9 November 2007 (EST)

== Wes Clarke. ==

My bad on the spelling. Sorry. [[User:Dewey|Dewey]] 21:50, 4 November 2007 (EST)

==[[User:Oi]]==

What, no warning? I thought you took the pledge. ;-) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:46, 7 November 2007 (EST)

:All the pledge says is I won't block for no reason. :) Also, I think "Oi" is a term associated with skinhead culture. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 17:47, 7 November 2007 (EST)

::Jolly good. And here's an early Christmas present for you: [[Image:Dewtree.jpg|right|thumb|For Christmas time]] --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 18:00, 7 November 2007 (EST)

Thank you! That should last me through the season. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 18:06, 7 November 2007 (EST)

*Ed is like Father Christmas! How magical...a tree made from Mountain Dew cans! :P --[[User:TK|şyŝoρ-₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Ṣρёаќǃ]] 18:18, 7 November 2007 (EST)
==Contest==
Hey Dan! So one of the first questions for our team is what our team name should be. If you have any ideas just get word out to TK, thanks! (Oh, and remember: we're using a Machiavellian policy towards this contest, we must win - no matter what. lol, good luck!)--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]]23:59, 9 November 2007 (EST)

==Vandal==

Block this vandal please, thanks. [[User:Lukecorlando|Luke]]

== Go, go, go ==

42 +++++++++++++++++ a lot more... gooooooooo --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 01:29, 13 November 2007 (EST)

== Unblock Article ==

Hi Dan, could you please unblock [[Fascism]]? Thanks [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 15:53, 13 November 2007 (EST)

== Kentucky ==

Hi, Dan, I just wanted to leave you a note about your edit to [[Kentucky]]. While Governor Fletcher lost the recent election, he still is governor. I have re-listed him as such, as his term does not end until next month. Thanks, [[User:GregLarson | Greg]] 21:50, 13 November 2007 (EST)

:That sounds accurate. We just have to remember to change it on December 11! [[User:DanH|DanH]] 21:50, 13 November 2007 (EST)

::Will do! [[User:GregLarson | Greg]] 21:50, 13 November 2007 (EST)

:::Just thought I'd remind you of the Governor's expiration of term tomorrow, as I do not expect to be on Conservapedia much in the coming weeks. [[User:GregLarson | Greg]] 20:25, 10 December 2007 (EST)

== See also ==

I am sorry, but I '''do not''' agree in what you are doing in Salma and Elvis. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 16:24, 19 November 2007 (EST)

:Thank you for your reply. Salmas' links were discussed with TK at it's time. Elvis' are quite related as they send you to rock music. But, if you think it is better to change them let me know and I will find some ones more appropriated. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 08:59, 20 November 2007 (EST)

:*Joaquín, the issue was discussed with Mr.Schlafly, and the "See Also" should be as specific as possible. I think you would agree that "Rock Music" is breathtakingly broad, eh? Perhaps you could make sure they are more specific? Thank you for your patience, my friend! --[[User:TK|şyŝoρ-₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Ṣρёаќǃ]] 11:22, 20 November 2007 (EST)

::OK. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 18:33, 20 November 2007 (EST)

==Westboro Baptist Church==
Dan, Do you mind if we unlock [[Westboro Baptist Church]] to allow for adding some content? Thanks. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 12:46, 24 November 2007 (EST)

:Fine with me! [[User:DanH|DanH]] 12:48, 24 November 2007 (EST)

==MU vs. KU==

That's gotta hurt. Were you there? [[User:Maestro|Maestro]] 02:01, 25 November 2007 (EST)

:Yep. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 02:14, 25 November 2007 (EST)

== MASS REMOVAL??? ==

Where exactly did I "mass remove" information as you allege on my page? All I have done has been to copyedit and work on clarity and presentation. [[User:PaulH|PaulH]] 00:27, 28 November 2007 (EST)

Check the edit history - that was someone else - the paragraph in question was not there when I edited. [[User:PaulH|PaulH]] 00:29, 28 November 2007 (EST)

== Page Move ==

Dan, could you please move [[Meningoenephalitis]] to [[Meningoencephalitis]]? The reference used to find the definition has a mispelling (it's missing a "c"). Thanks [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 14:41, 9 December 2007 (EST)
:Thanks. BTW your recent block comment was hilarious. Chuck Norris can slam a revolving door, you know. And divide by 0. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 14:51, 9 December 2007 (EST)

==Vandal Pages==
Howdy--You might want to boot these: http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/Hamidp--[[User:RossC|RossC]] 21:12, 12 December 2007 (EST)
:Done. Thanks. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 21:14, 12 December 2007 (EST)

== Superb blocks ==

Superb blocks, Dan! The break will arrive soon. :-) --[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:03, 13 December 2007 (EST)

== Protect ==

Hi Dan, can you protect [[genocide]] until a concensus can be reached? Thanks [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 03:05, 13 December 2007 (EST)

==Genocide==

This seems a fairly straightforward issue to me. I have seen no definition of genocide outside of this site's article that requires that genocide be carried out by a government. The UN has not defined genocide this way, and the State Department states explicitly that genocide occurred in Bosnia. [http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2868.htm] Based on these facts, I think the definition in the article should be corrected, and the Srebrenica massacre should be reinserted as an example of genocide. What are your thoughts? [[User:SSchultz|SSchultz]] 21:42, 13 December 2007 (EST)

== Thank you ==

Thank you for protecting the image of Frida Kahlo :) I appreciate your assistance -- [[User:Taj|Taj]] 01:33, 18 December 2007 (EST)

:Thanks for all your hard work! [[User:DanH|DanH]] 01:35, 18 December 2007 (EST)

== User "Awesome" ==

DOH! You beat me to it... well, I don't have admin access either, so the best I could do was send a threating letter to him. :( I'm glad to see that someone is watching out though. --[[User:Puellanivis|Puellanivis]] 22:01, 18 December 2007 (EST)

:Is there a way that I could raise these people to your attention faster? Like a template or something? It would likely save admins/sysops some time. --[[User:Puellanivis|Puellanivis]] 00:38, 19 December 2007 (EST)

I think what you did is sufficient enough :) Thanks for your help. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 00:41, 19 December 2007 (EST)

== Delete Article ==

Hi Dan,

Can you please delete [[hososcope]]. Someone made a spelling error in its creation. (I already created the appropriate article.)

Thanks,

[[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 01:48, 19 December 2007 (EST)

:Let's add [[December 2]] in there as well. Thanks [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 02:04, 19 December 2007 (EST)

Thanks for all your hard work! [[User:DanH|DanH]] 02:05, 19 December 2007 (EST)

:Thanks Dan. I've noticed you are still quite the workhorse yourself. ;-) How about if we add one more for deletion and prevent recreation [[Lulz]]. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 03:07, 27 December 2007 (EST)

::Could you also please delete article [[Transvestitism]]. I'm not sure if we want to prevent recreation or not. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 03:11, 27 December 2007 (EST)

== Thanks ==

Thank you Dan. I am checking at this moment all his contribuitions. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 18:52, 20 December 2007 (EST)

: THANK YOU AGAIN. I did a little mistake, now [[Barney]] is ok.

::: Hi, I have 3 questions if you please: Could a deleted article be recovered?, could an "Image" be used to link to a CP article? and, at the tall page, what means the red color and the green bars? Thank you for your time. Have a HAPPY NEW YEAR! --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 09:10, 28 December 2007 (EST)

== Dude, why did you block me? ==

Please unblock [[user:FightPerniciousSwarm]]. You took a pledge, and then you blocked me for not using my "real" name. Dude, do you want help here or not? [[User:MichaelHunt|MichaelHunt]] 18:39, 27 December 2007 (EST)
:I kind of agree, I mean, [[User:Karajou]], [[User:CollegeRepublican]], and heaps more. --[[user:mssb57|m s s b 5 7]] // [[user talk:mssb57|blah !]] // [[special:contributions/mssb57|this was my fault]] 18:55, 27 December 2007 (EST)
::When you sign up, it clearly says '''frivolous''' user names will be blocked. "FightPerniciousSwarm" is frivolous. So is Michael Hunt, probably. I'm not stupid... I know what happens when you abbreviate it. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 18:57, 27 December 2007 (EST)
:::I'd rather get the "FightPerniciousSwarm" account back. It is far from frivolous. Fighting the pernicious liberal swarm is what I do. [[User:MichaelHunt|MichaelHunt]] 19:06, 27 December 2007 (EST)

== Please delete all of my contributions to the template space. They did not work out. ==

Please delete all of my contributions to the template space. They did not work out. I think you might need to update the wiki software for the templates to work. [[User:MichaelHunt|MichaelHunt]] 19:05, 27 December 2007 (EST)
:Thanks, I see you're deleting them. I'd like to come back as my first user name if possible. [[User:MichaelHunt|MichaelHunt]] 19:08, 27 December 2007 (EST)
I don't know, after all... if you ever visit a University campus, you have probably noticed that freshmen guppy up during the first weeks on campus. Okay. I'll unblock it. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 19:09, 27 December 2007 (EST)
::Yes, they do. Thank you sir. [[User:FightPerniciousSwarm|FightPerniciousSwarm]] 19:12, 27 December 2007 (EST)

== Category ==

Hi Dan,

I'm trying to move the entries from Basketball players to Basketball Players (in line with the manual of style). I usually create the category at the end when I've done them all. Please don't fix them. ;-) [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 03:15, 28 December 2007 (EST)

Okay, thanks! [[User:DanH|DanH]] 03:19, 28 December 2007 (EST)

==[[Liberal]]==

Okay to unprotect for PhineasBogg? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 19:03, 29 December 2007 (EST)

==Big vocabulary==

Inauspicious? Eschew obfuscation! ;-) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:37, 30 December 2007 (EST)

== Great block ==

Great block this afternoon, Dan!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:14, 6 January 2008 (EST)

== Thanks!!! ==

Thanks so much for the second chance: I have already started trying to make valuable contribution to your web site.

Thanks again very much so!

== curses! ==

But that was only a test run. Maybe, say, 100 might be in order. From each of us at Ebaumsworld. --[[User:HPearce|HPearce]] 15:24, 8 January 2008 (EST)

== Thank you! ==

For catching the vandal! The username was a dead giveaway. I wish I could banhammer him... he even got my page...-[[User:MexMax|MexMax]] 18:04, 16 January 2008 (EST)

== Question ==

Dan, if you get a chance would you mind shooting me an IM? Thanks. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 14:33, 17 January 2008 (EST)
==Just FYI==
Hey Dan, I thought I'd figured out what happened to the Harry Truman page, and just to let you know: the problem was the user inserted <nowiki>{{user:Iekl}}</nowiki> in a ref tag (if your interested - see the section "Selection for Vice Presedency" http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Harry_Truman&oldid=356407&action=edit ). Nice job fixing it so quickly!--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 22:00, 17 January 2008 (EST)
:Thanks! This will be helpful. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 22:12, 17 January 2008 (EST)

== Christianity ==

You locked [[Christianity]] back in May. There's been a bit of activity there lately, with sysops having to add suggestions made by others. Do you think it's worth unlocking the article and seeing how it would go? It could always be locked again if necessary, of course. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 02:58, 18 January 2008 (EST)
:Let's give it a shot. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 08:09, 18 January 2008 (EST)
==I feel bad==
Dan, the warning you just gave to Luther Bifteck is my fault - not his. He removed information correctly, and I wasn't thinking, so I re-added it, but then reverted myself - he removed (again, correctly) the statement that "in God we trust" is in the pledge - I (and probably you too) was thinking "under God" - so yeah, that's my bad.--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 19:29, 20 January 2008 (EST)

:Thanks. I caught that soon after I did it, and was kind of embarrassed. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 19:30, 20 January 2008 (EST)

:: Don't be too hard on yourself, who among us does not make a mistake every now and then? To your credit you quickly noticed and remedied. :) [[User:Taj|Taj]] 19:48, 20 January 2008 (EST)

== Vote ==

Click on the link to vote in my poll. --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim (CPAdmin1)]][[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]] [[User:CPAdmin1/Election08|Vote for President]] 23:05, 23 January 2008 (EST)
==For Deletion==
Thanks for deleting all those articles!--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 16:56, 26 January 2008 (EST)

Wow... they were all from a vandal? --[[User:Liam Spencer|''' L.S. ''']] 17:04, 26 January 2008 (EST)

== Blocking Barikada ==

I am not sure why you have blocked one of this sites most prolific editors. I have been unable to find the "crude sexual reference" in question. --[[User:GDewey|GDewey]] 16:25, 27 January 2008 (EST)
:Was due to [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Video_game_controversy&diff=prev&oldid=381634 this] talk page edit - and the use of the word "t*t"? [[User:Feebasfactor|Feebasfactor]] 16:28, 27 January 2008 (EST)
::Yes. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 16:31, 27 January 2008 (EST)

:::Interesting. He appears to be making a legitimate point however, so the usage was not just gratuitous. Perhaps he should have used the word "breast". I assume that there is an acceptable word that wouldn't get an editor banned.

:::I find the offence taken at the use of some words and the various ways that people use to avoid it a bit curious. I note, for example, that Feebas has used "t*t". We all know what the "*" in "t*t" stands for. Why is that in any way better than using the whole word? Surely it is the use of the word we are worried about, not just the actual appearance of the letters together. --[[User:GDewey|GDewey]] 16:37, 27 January 2008 (EST)

::::Then again why is "br**st" any better than "t*t"? Or "h**ter" perhaps? A word represents a thing. Are we offended by the thing or the word? Curiouser and curiouser. --[[User:GDewey|GDewey]] 16:44, 27 January 2008 (EST)

:Anybody who gets a one hour block on Conservapedia is usually rather lucky. I would agree that meaning is generally important, but the use of coarse language generally expedites the course of desensitization. Plus, let's be honest, this is a family website. There's no reason to use that word here. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 16:46, 27 January 2008 (EST)

::I understand the conventions. I guess I am just interested in the psychology behind them, although I suppose that this is probably not the appropriate page to air all of that. Perhaps it might be worth an essay page some time. --[[User:GDewey|GDewey]] 16:50, 27 January 2008 (EST)

... I was blocked? I didn't even notice. :/ I don't consider the word to be all that crude, though. I can think of several worse ways to say it. [[User:Barikada|Barikada]] 23:47, 31 January 2008 (EST)

: HE SAID IT AGAIN!!! --[[User:GDewey|GDewey]] 23:54, 31 January 2008 (EST)

::Kids, if I have to tell you to behave one more time I'm turning this car around and then ''nobody's'' going to Disney Land. Got it?
::Barikada: thinking of worse ways to say it in no way means that your way is ok. I managed to rephrase it in a way which got the point across while remaining clean. This encyclopedia is used by ''kids'', is it really going to pain you that much to search a little harder in your word bank? If you are just looking to get banned, please by all means ask; it will save everyone sime time. (Sorry for intruding Dan...) [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 10:11, 1 February 2008 (EST)

:::The first use was incidental. It wasn't meant to be vulgar, nor was it especially so. This one is slightly more vulgar, however, without resorting to awkward "the word that must not be said" dialogue, it is impossible to say why I was banned. [[User:Barikada|Barikada]] 18:18, 1 February 2008 (EST)

== Great work ==

Great work on the blocking ... and unblocking. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:33, 28 January 2008 (EST)
==Hey==
Hey Dan, I don't know if your on now or not - but I'll be here for a while, so if you get a chance anytime within the next hour or so to get online I'd appreciate it - I need your input on a temp--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 14:55, 2 February 2008 (EST)

:I'm actually heading over to watch the Kansas basketball game right now... I'll be on later tonight, though. Sorry about the timing! [[User:DanH|DanH]] 14:56, 2 February 2008 (EST)

== Bloomberg edits ==

What was wrong with my edits to the Michael Bloomberg article? [[User:Dadsnagem2|Dadsnagem2]] 10:08, 5 February 2008 (EST)

==KU==

Hah! Did you catch the MU/KU basketball game? [[User:Mizzourah|Mizzourah]] 14:22, 9 February 2008 (EST)

:I was there in one of the front rows. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 23:11, 9 February 2008 (EST)

== Curious about your stance on Israel ==
I was just surfing the internets when I came upon your page and was wondering that when you say you support Israel do you mean that you believe that a Jewish state has the right to exist or that you support its recent and current actions.--[[User:ElliottRosewater|ElliottRosewater]] 00:16, 17 February 2008 (EST)

== Great blocks and redirects ==

Great blocks and redirects. Well done!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:20, 21 February 2008 (EST)

== Your recent redirect ==

Should I assume that mentioning that site, even without an insult to the site, is cause to block?-[[User:MexMax|MexMax]] 21:22, 21 February 2008 (EST)

:Generally speaking, yes. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 21:23, 21 February 2008 (EST)

== Edit ==

Great additions to [[liberal tricks]]!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:59, 23 February 2008 (EST)

== Protection ==

Wow, that was a smart move protecting that FAQ page!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:34, 28 February 2008 (EST)

== New username ==

Excuse me, but I was wondering what was wrong with my old username? Also, is this new name acceptable? [[User:Kingston|Kingston]] 19:39, 3 March 2008 (EST)

:Yes. The vast majority of users who use l33tspeak in their usernames end up vandalizing. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 19:40, 3 March 2008 (EST)

== Jazz values ==

...not meant as a parody - every word is true. [[User:AliceBG|AliceBG]] 23:43, 5 March 2008 (EST)

:Bob Jones University is not a standard conservative litmus test. They also ban contemporary Christian music and used to ban black students from enrolling. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 23:44, 5 March 2008 (EST)
::Then edit out the BJU bit - but don't kill the whole article! [[User:AliceBG|AliceBG]] 23:47, 5 March 2008 (EST)
::It was pretty obviously meant as a parody of [[Hollywood values]]. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 23:48, 5 March 2008 (EST)
:::Not at all - more of a complimentary piece: can't you tell parody from real commentary? [[User:AliceBG|AliceBG]] 23:49, 5 March 2008 (EST)
::::Not on a site where Poe's law is so heavily in effect. [[User:Absentismens|Absentismens]] 00:26, 6 March 2008 (EST)
:It's not my fault that some people think that Landover Baptist Church is real. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 00:30, 6 March 2008 (EST)

Pardon me, sir; I fear the organization is known as the World Islamic Front Against Jews and Crusaders. -VoteGOP21

:Thanks for the clarification. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 22:18, 6 March 2008 (EST)

== Your Reversion of Left Behind ==

First of all, I did not provide a link, so 'my link' cannot vindicate Jinxmchue. I asked you to look at the links, plural, in the article. If you only looked at one, singular, link, you cannot verify or deny what Jinxmchue said, as this requires looking at what several reviews said and comparing that with the patchnotes. Secondly, this is the list of complaints in the various reviews in the article:
#Lousy Controls
#Too much micromanagement
#Bad AI
#Poor graphics and art design
#Lack of single-player skirmish mode
#Slow multiplayer
#Watered-down storyline
#All the units look the same
#Repetitive gameplay
#Misogynistic 50s-style sexism
#Borderline racism (quite a number of the 'bad guys' have Arab, Indian, African, etc, names and appearances, but mysteriously lose this when they're 'recruited' and become Caucasian)
#Bad level design (sections of the city blocked off for no good reason, for example)
#Frequent crashes and lock-ups
#Seems to give a mixed message (the subject matter and tone of the game is very righteous, but then lets you play as the Antichrist in multiplayer)
#Poor quality of voice-acting
#Too much advertising in the game

This is the list of these complaints addressed in the patches:

#Too much micromanagement (eased but not fully addressed)
#Bad AI (unclear whether all isuues were addressed or not)
#Poor graphics and art design (partially addressed by improving the shadows on 'high end systems')
#Slow multiplayer
#Frequent crashes and lock-ups (not clear whether completely fixed)

This is the list of these complaints remaining unaddressed:

#Lousy controls
#Lack of single-player skirmish mode
#Watered-down storyline
#All the units look the same
#Repetitive gameplay
#Misogynistic 50s-style sexism
#Borderline racism
#Bad level design
#Seems to give a mixed message
#Poor quality of voice-acting
#Too much advertising in the game

This is the list of issues fixed in the patches NOT mentioned in the reviews:

#Multiplayer Chat tab enabled. You can now chat with players online before you join a game.
#Female Recruiters added.
#Mission 2 - Teddy can now visit the finish zone at any time without issues.
#Mission 4 - Teddy can now speak to Mary.
#Mission 6 - The first 7 friends can be trained and the mission will now end upon bringing the final 10 friends to the Chapel (provided they are still all on your side).
#Mission 8 - An extra building is available to be acquired.
#Demons can withstand heavy physical attacks. Attack them with good spiritual warfare.
#Various playbalancing and fixes including sound transitions and multiplayer server list.
#Multiplayer Buddy List enabled.
#Enhanced join server screen with game parameters listed.
#GameSpy profile integration. Create a profile or use an existing one to create your buddy list.
#3 New Multiplayer Maps including upgraded units at the start of the game for quick skirmish action.
#Vocal Warnings for events.
#Improved Sound System compatibility and sound playback.
#Improved LGBHelp system for better support to our users, including an auto-config based on system specs.
#Various mission playbalancing and fixes.
#When logged in with a GameSpy Profile ID, Gold and Silver users will have auto buddy list requests and their buddy’s multiplayer games will be listed first.
#Buddy List graphical enhancements.
#Winning point limit (if applicable) is shown during a multiplayer game.
#Improved navigation for multiplayer game creation.
#Demons are now displayed in a dark grey color.
#4X4 Skirmish map timer fixed.
#Improved support for multiplayer hosting – UPnP support added.
#Chat filter implemented.
#Added more stats to the end of a multiplayer game, including an overall summary of all players.
#Allied units display as such when clicked in multiplayer.
#Multiplayer skirmish maps are easier to find on the map selection screen.
#Voice of God and Angels implemented for evil actions.
#Mission 4 - The Chapel is pinged when Mary is active.
#Mission 19 - Defending time shortened.
#Mission 23 - Phantom enemy vehicles removed.
#Mission 32 – Buck can get his disguise upon mission start.
#Mission 36 - Defending time shortened.
#Mission 37 – GCP Camp now pinged.
#Many other text revisions and mission improvements
#AUTO recruit improved even further – Evil units that turn neutral are now auto recruited as well.
#Building Icons added to the game screen for easier ID of user’s buildings.
#Right mouse to follow a friendly unit implemented (Alt-Right Click still works too).
#Multiple Helicopter spawning issue fixed.
#Replay Load VO overlap fixed.
#The Scroll description has been revised.
#Spiritual influence now does two times damage to demons.
#Alt-Tab Camera issue fixed.
#No longer able to attempt to follow enemy or neutral vehicles.
#Event noise modified.
#Menu enhancements providing more intuitive feedback to the user.
#A military unit must be in a military vehicle in order for the vehicle to fire.
#Sat-Com special ability has been enhanced, now a triangle will display in the minimap and H will display the type of building in the main screen.
#Firearm range increased slightly.
#Maximum number of items in inventory for each type is now 2.
#Minor gameplay tweaks and unit balances.
#Tutorial 2 - Allows for different combination of units to make the camp available.
#Tutorial 3 - Fixed intermittant crash after Musician was trained.
#Fixed crash on start occurring with the mutltiplayer enhancement pack version for some older machines.
#Tutorial 2 – Auto recruit is taught instead of manual recruit taking advantage of the auto recruit improvements for ease of use.
#Additional auto-configuration based on system specs for Intel based graphic adapters (Note: these adapters are not officially supported, but may work).
#Forfeit button added for multiplayer games.
#Gamespy buddy authorization pop-up reminder added.
#Multiplayer hints describing functionality of each menu button including expanded buddy list explanations.
#Minimap building filters. Icons are now on the minimap that will ping the type of building when activated. Make finding types of building much easier.
#Owned buildings now display in the players color at all times for easy recognition.
#Evil Hero revision to Enigma Leader.
#Chat window multiple selection from menu fixed.
#Gamespy creation or login will display a not valid warning if it has a space in the name.
#Password protected multiplayer games are now displayed with a lock on the join screen.
#Version number of server’s game is now displayed on the join screen when a game is selected.
#Multiplayer skirmish maps have been rebalanced to be even at the start of the game. Evil used to have 1 extra unit.
#New clue music.
#Incorrect VO not playing anymore on level 4 load screen.
#Mouse handedness is taken from system mouse settings and is no longer clickable from options menu. If you want to change it, use the Windows Control Panel/Mouse.
#Gamespy profile file no longer displays password for added protection.
#Screen flickering fixed when leaving a multiplayer game someone quit out of early.
#Lengthy email address truncating fixed on Gamespy create window.
#Point limit and time limit now display on multiplayer replays.
#Correct message now appears to the server when the client quits the game early in a 2 player game.
#VO pauses when the pause key is pressed.
#Gamespy Voice Chat muting options. Players can be muted in the game lobby and with the Chat options screen from the in-game menu. Note: Enemy players will be muted upon starting the game. Note: Port 31322 UDP must be opened to enjoy voice chatting.
#Microphone Volume control and testing capability within the Audio tab of the Options window.
#Major UI overhaul - new graphical enhancements and improvements.
#Collision improvements between neutral units and vehicles.
#Multiplayer hint toggle is now in the Game tab of the Options window.
#Minimap unit filters. Icons are now on the minimap that will ping the type of unit when activated. It makes finding a type of unit much easier.
#Unit and Building selection icons. One click selection of a unit type and one click goto building type functionality added to the interface.
#Units inside building displayed. When you mouse over a building with units inside, the unit icons will display on screen.
#Recruiting fix for fast walking neutrals - the unit will now stop to be recruited.
#To/From voice chat options included. Now you have the ability to choose who hears your voice chat.
#Text chat muting. You can now mute text chat from specific players in game.
#Fixed loud noise upon start on some machines.
#Various mission scripting enhancements for additional audio sequences.
#Revised Tutorial 1 by adding a neutral unit and an evil unit as visual aids.
#Revised Left Handed VO and text in the tutorials to be more clear.
#Revised missions 22, 31, and 35 to decrease difficulty.
#National and International Banks now have sound when clicked.
#A Friend was added to the start of Mission 27.
#Revised missions 17, 20, 23, and 30 to decrease difficulty.

Given the above lists, can you please then explain how that makes this statement inaccurate:
{{quotebox|Left Behind Games subsequently issued several patches to address dozens of issues, including some of the complaints in the reviews.}}
And makes this one accurate:
{{quotebox|Left Behind Games subsequently issued several patches to address dozens of issues raised by the complaints.}}
[[User:Urushnor|Urushnor]] 10:39, 9 March 2008 (EDT)

:You personal opinion on the updates is moot. I have added a source which provides the fact that "Eternal Forces" is now "fully patched." [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 15:42, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

Further to this, despite me providing much evidence that 'fully patched' does not mean what Jinx onbviously thinks it means on the Talk page, Jinx is arbitrarily reinserting his version back into the article, and point blank refusing to discuss it further on the talk page. Also, despite direct requests for evidence of his claims, has failed to provide any, and simply asserts that he is correct. [[User:Urushnor|Urushnor]] 15:18, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

:I feel stupid in admitting this, but I've tried my best to figure out the differences between the two versions, and can't. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 18:09, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

::In my version, there are still issues left to be addressed. According to Jinx, however, any and every issue raised by the reviews has been addressed by patches as, according to him, the phrase 'fully patched' means any and all issues of any kind have been dealt with, which is wrong - it simply means that all available patches have been applied to the software, irrespective of whether this fixes all issues with the software or not. [[User:Urushnor|Urushnor]] 18:40, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

==Email==

I sent you an email four days ago, but haven't received a reply, please check your email. If your Conservapedia enabled email is one of the ones you lost the password to (as you suggested the day before yesterday over AIM) then could you please set up a new email and send me one so that I can reply with my original message. Thanks [[User:TheGySom|TheGySom]] 01:02, 13 March 2008 (EDT)

:It didn't deserve a reply. You were just talking about how cool your vandalism was. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 01:54, 13 March 2008 (EDT)

==Ampersand==
Thanks for deleting all those pages. It looks like there's some other kind of problem with the pages with the & in the title. They've returned from the dead! I guess it's not a big deal that they're hanging out out there in the ether, but it could be confusing for someone else who, like myself, tries to clean up the Dead-end Pages list. Not sure what the problem is, or how to fix it though. -[[User:DrSandstone|DrSandstone]] 14:25, 13 March 2008 (EDT)
: Could you explain this in more detail please? I may be able to help. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:33, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

== Marx, Wilde et al. on Homeschooling page ==

the list is entitled "prominent people who were homeschooled." It seems these people are all prominent, and were as homeschooled as anyone else on the list....why remove their names? [[User:AliceBG|AliceBG]] 15:45, 14 March 2008 (EDT)

== IRC ==

Does Conservapedia have an official or unofficial IRC channel? - Hak

:I'm not sure. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 20:54, 15 March 2008 (EDT)

== Leptospirosis ==

Just saw that an article named Leptospirosis was deleted. wonder why? can I re-create it?

thanks--[[User:JBuscombe|JBuscombe]] 15:49, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

== Martin ==

Why? There is nothing wrong with those links. On the contrary, It can give us more traffic. Do you have a proof that Google would not like it? --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 22:05, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

:I talked with Andy about it awhile back. Also, I've discussed search engines with User:Conservative. Google does not like it when links are placed at random without a clear correlation. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 22:06, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

:: Ok. Let them be until Andy say the last word. They are not without correlation. They are actors all of them. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 22:10, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

:::He is already in the Actors category, which links to all other actors anyway. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 22:11, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

:::: For us it is better to have more traffic and that is a better way than in the Category place. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 22:13, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

==Animals A etc.==
Can you move [[Animals A]] to [[Animal Terms A]]
[[Animals C]] to [[Animal Terms C]]
[[Animals G]] to [[Animal Terms G]]
[[Animals P]] to [[Animal Terms P]]
[[Animals V]] to [[Animal Terms V]]
[[Animals W]] to [[Animal Terms W]]
[[Animals Y]] to [[Animal Terms Y]]
[[Animals Z]] to [[Animal Terms Z]]
? --[[User:Qweki2|Qweki2]] 22:22, 16 March 2008 (EDT)

==Possible Bans?==
What is the highest possible block time? (besides infinite). Also, can you make a ban of [[User:Liberal9188]] and [[User:HHSFake]].. so I'm not tempted to use either of those accounts again.
:I have one final request.. could you ban me for 3 years, 1 month, and 4 days? Or 5 years if you don't want to type all that in. The reason can be: "request by user". Thanks. -^_^- [[User:Kektklik|Fuzzy]] 09:44, 20 March 2008 (EDT)
::I once copped a fourteen year stretch. I think the sysop must have been bored. [[User:HarryWharton|HarryWharton]] 10:43, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

== So, what's the policy ==

The reason JM unfairly banned me was because I was removing the nonsensical see-also links on various pages. My reason for doing so was because it isn't encyclopedic. I began doing it ''en masse'' when I saw what you wrote to JM that it wasn't our policy. His response: It'll boost our google rankings. (VERY encyclopedic).

So, what's the policy now? I don't want another ban. [[User:DLerner|ד.לערנער]] 22:43, 17 March 2008 (EDT)

:Tread lightly when working with Sysops showing them the respect they are due. If you are going to be making changes to their work, then talk with them first and make sure there is a common understanding. This should be followed for all people, but of course Sysops can also ban you for it. Unless there is a specific written policy saying all 'See Also' sections should be removed, then it is unwise to attempt to remove them ''en masse'' on your own. Talk page discussions between sysops, especially before a specific resolution has been reached, do not count. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 15:59, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

==Thanks==
Thank you. [[User:Feuerstein|Feuerstein]] 00:14, 21 March 2008 (EDT)
==Why not copy from Wikipedia? ==

I wrote those articles on Wikipedia , Asteroid.--[[User:Asteroid|Asteroid]] 01:15, 22 March 2008 (EDT)
CLtFn--[[User:Asteroid|Asteroid]] 01:19, 22 March 2008 (EDT)

User talk:DanH

2008-03-22T05:15:18Z

Asteroid: /* Thanks */