How Muslims believed earth was spherical long before anybody mentions it.

[JuliaL]

Your chosen reference specifically refutes what you said:

It's the bald claim the Quran presented that nobody ever said or believed in for a fact ; which is "Earth is a spherical shaped ball".

My bolding.

My point was proved, actually. This discussion was over, when this wikipedia said what I said :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth

The Flat Earth model is an archaic belief that the Earth's shape is a plane or disk. Many ancient cultures have had conceptions of a flat Earth, including Greece until the classical period, the Bronze Age and Iron Age civilizations of the Near East until the Hellenistic period, India until the Gupta period (early centuries AD) and China until the 17th century. It was also typically held in the aboriginal cultures of the Americas, and a flat Earth domed by the firmament in the shape of an inverted bowl is common in pre-scientific societies.[1]

My bolding.

Your claim that no one believed that the earth was spherical before the Quran was multiply refuted.
Your backup position that a spherical earth was a minority position in classical Greece was not supported.

I see you are following the same strategy as the Americans did in their withdrawal from Vietnam: Declare victory and leave the field.

I can understand your leaving. Goodbye.

[ReptilianPeon]

Thank you Mr AtlasS2. I appreciated our discussion too. I hope wasn't coming across as forceful. I try my best not to be bigoted. Getting angry will get me nowhere - and I'm sure that sentiment is mutual. I think it's very important to understand everyone's opinions - hence I've been putting aside time to read the Quran (though I must admit I've lapsed recently). In fact, I even make an effort to listen to the likes of Yusuf Estes and Zakir Naik even though I hate them for their constant lying.

[WinterHold]

Irrational

There was no honest discussion from the beginning on your side. You're not interested in facts. Simple.

I swear there was. But Irrational, mainly in discussions, this happens. It is very rare to see an atheist/religious discussion where both sides agree on the same point .

How do you think I reached my current Muslim faith -which is obvious that it differs dramatically than most Muslims ? - it was via reading discussions, discussing matters myself.

Above all, why do you think I'm on this forum ? maybe I like the people here ? though how, when I'm a stubborn fuck ? I don't let the discussion get into me, I mean I don't make it control how I view people on a personal level and judge them too.

JuliaL


Okay you kicked my ass in some points, and corrected my grammar, that's awesome.
Didn't I change my point of view ?

But come on, comparing me to Vietnam is just not fair !.there's another point that is still valid : historical sources didn't reference the Quranic verse as another reference of a spherical earth. I mean I didn't use agent orange/napalm like arguments -there exists in discussions, biological arguments and WMD arguments too-.

And btw I'm still here. and revise my history on this forum, I did in many times agree that I was wrong, that maybe stupid in some of my points.

But actually this is how you learn new stuff. Engage in discussions, discuss, and above all don't give up your point unless a decisive evidence was provided. Come on JuliaL , cut me some slack.

Anyhow, you can't blame me for trusting my "bold" brain, because isn't it what all independent humans do ?

eventually, JuliaL, what do you get when you mix holly water with castor oil ?

---

A : A religious movement.

---

MrNoMorePropaganda


You're welcome, friend. No it wasn't, believe me, and thank you too for correcting some of my points.

Yes staying of bigotry is the best solution, I always thought that the ultimate solution to end any argument is discussing it in friendly environment.

I truly enjoyed my talk with you ^_^

[Smaug]

I've noticed something. As soon as science makes a new discovery and as long as it doesn't contradict the scriptures in an undesired way religious people are there to claim that "it was all fortold" or "it had been in the Scriptures long before the scientists came up with a discovery" or "the scientists have just taken it out of the Scriptures". Without hesitation they try to claim that some of the researchers had experienced a divine revelation and were in fact members of their religion. They also meddle in History and try to claim that every other major scientist was a memder of their faith. Every time they try to pull such thing they display unfathomable ignorance of the subject be it Astronomy, Quantum Physics or inventing the Wheel.

[jesus_wept]

I've noticed something. As soon as science makes a new discovery and as long as it doesn't contradict the scriptures in an undesired way religious people are there to claim that "it was all fortold" or "it had been in the Scriptures long before the scientists came up with a discovery" or "the scientists have just taken it out of the Scriptures".

[WinterHold]

I want to comment to this since it slipped away yesterday.

To perform a successful goalpost move, you have to shovel harder than this.

Adherents to Islam have tried to show divine inspiration for their pet religious texts by claiming perfections not available to mortals. For instance claims of "beauty" of the text, unprovable without an objective definition of beauty.

First of all the text is beautiful. I mean omg, even on beauty, you need an an objective definition ? who's america now ?
Well, there is indeed an independent code of beauty to each person and each has their own definition of what is beautiful or what is not ; but there are major beliefs that beautiful is what makes you happy ; give that stray look and in silence you wonder : how beautiful, as goose pumps invade your body and strayed you stand and wonder.

Scientific discoveries gain acceptance as truths by most cultures because of their usefulness. Apologists have tried to combine these strategies by claiming prior discovery in their religious texts of scientific truths. The 'clot of blood' which Hamza Tzortzis tried to claim predicted discoveries in embryology (and his getting bitch slapped by PZ Myers, an actual biologist) is one example of this.

I'm not an Apologists, first of all, I observe and report. I didn't claim that the Quran is a scientific book neither an astronomy book. As for this one, you can blame my historical background, and stop putting lots of pressure on me for many reasons :

1)As a mixup, I traveled. I studied school in a shitty country, under a salafi/wahabi minister. They taught us for example that Darwin is a liar for his evolution. Guess what made me believe in evolution ? Duuh reading discussions like this and NOT BEING AN APOLOGIST !!

2)My native is Arabic, yet I learned English via self study since school books were shit, so if you studied history when you were 6, I started studying history for real when I was 16.

Now that AtlasS2 has been repeatedly shown that a spherical model of the earth existed in ancient cultures throughout the world long pre-dating Islam he has changed his tune.

Yes because I'm not an apologist.

No longer is it that the alledgedly inspired text of the Quran interpreted to indicate a spherical earth pre-dated that discovery by ancient astronomers. Now his claim is that the Quran spread the concept widely through religious education and indoctrination, kind of an early PR campaign for a spherical earth.

This is the reality. Even Columbus believe it was flat ; though.
The Quranic verse "DID" change the mentality of a whole region, by that transferring the world dramatically.

His second post contradicts this change as it did not indicate that he was referring to the culture or a majority of citizens. Then and subsequently, a reasonable assumption is that he was referring to his "coin like" earth as a concept shared by all Greeks.

How ? if we spoke about the society, then the society is out of measurement unless you actually live within it, or its in the same time-frame as you.

For example : how would I judge that the ancients had foot fetish ? I can't, even if some statues and drawings indicated that. Since I didn't live in that era, I can't pierce in through to see how each person felt that fetish.

The same goes with spherical earth : what is reported, JuliaL, is that even between scholars, the spherical earth theory wasn't the fashion. Society wise, neither me nor you can judge ; though I quoted wikipedia on that it wasn't the major belief !!

Yet in Islamic countries, it was a matter of "faith", that if a scholar is a Muslim, they should acknowledge it.

Ancient greek believed earth was coin-shaped, not spherical with hollow interior (despite what fills the interior ; today we know it's lava & molten metals ; and btw the Quran also shows what interior of earth actually is with a direct reference to gravity).

Ancient greek believed the interior was "the underworld", another hellish dimension. Also believed in the "end of the world" theory, that at the end of the coin, there are no locations to go to.

Saying earth is spherical is a totally different thing. The verse -if you read the topic- says "yokawer = shapes in a spherical/round manner", this is totally not the "coin-like" earth that the greeks believed in.

<sarcasm>Perhaps his use of the singular (greek) rather than using a plural (Greeks) was meant to mean that only one Greek person did believe in the "coin like" earth leaving the actual proportion of the culture that believed in a spherical earth unstated.</sarcasm> His later use of the plural (which should have been capitalized if used properly) denies this hypothesis.

compile error ; it seems.

I'm I using auto-correction in my browser ! ENGLISH ISN'T MY NATIVE LANGUAGE, you might argue that it also isn't yours, then in that case, excuse me for not being as smart as you, and excuse my terrible, bad, devastating, destructive, ugly, shameful ignorance ! ! Oh come on I want to see you write in Arabic -if you're an arab, then...let me see you write in a language that isn't your native one !-

Further on he restates his claim with some creative interpretation or perhaps translations:

Mybold in quotations throughout.

Either way, he has consistently ignored evidence that a spherical earth was at least an accepted truth among the educated in Greek, Roman, Indian, Celt, Chinese culture and certainly appeared to claim divine inspiration and primacy for its appearance in the Quran.

It wasn't the major belief and my source said that.
Despite
what the bright scientists from all these cultures said.

He subsequently used a Wikipedia reference to a flat-earth article apparently as explanation or rebuttal to my characterization of his prior argument in the OP and subsequently.

Yes, to show you that the major belief wasn't in a spherical earth, and that nobody knows when this theory first surfaced.

I'm not sure that article has "it all," but it does have some interesting points:

Aristotle accepted the spherical shape of the Earth on empirical grounds around 330 BC, and knowledge of the spherical Earth gradually began to spread beyond the Hellenistic world from then on.

The late Norse Konungs skuggsjá, on the other hand, states that:

From this you may infer that the earth-circle is round like a ball and not equally near the sun at every point.

Thank you for quoting this it's very useful for me, and as many other members also mentioned Aristotle's contribution. But if that theory was so spread, why did Columbus assume a flat earth along with almost most of old societies ?? your theory has a huge hole in the middle

Many ancient cultures have had conceptions of a flat Earth, including <snip>India until the Gupta period (early centuries AD)

Thank you. Proving my point even more.

The model of an egg was often used by Chinese astronomers like Zhang Heng (78-139 AD) to describe the heavens as spherical:
The heavens are like a hen's egg and as round as a crossbow bullet; the earth is like the yolk of the egg, and lies in the centre.[54]

The topic is spherical earth not spherical sky. The sky for any person does look like a dome & everybody can see that.

During the early Church period, with some exceptions, most held a spherical view, for instance, Augustine, Jerome, and Ambrose to name a few.

Most ? spherical ?
Actually they should write "round view", which we discussed earlier, that it differs so much from "spherical".


Quoting magellan himself.

Did he actually read his own reference?

Some points of it, yes.

Having backed away from the claim of prior discovery for the Quran, he is left with the weaker, "But Moslems spread it around."

Oh woo fuckin hoo !

It was certainly not spread throughout Northeast Asia by religious fiat. So even this lesser claim fails.
Non-believers I know do not consider everything in the Quran to be a fairy tale. We realize that Mecca exists. It is the self serving claims of the supernatural, the miracles and unquestionable divine intervention that we consider stories for children who should really grow up.

I can't judge how every person sees the Quran, though what I know is that the book is being highly ignored even as an archeological object of an age of 1400 years.
Though, you guys lack imagination, and believe only in physical stuff, and materialism is not good for the brain. It makes you miss lots of theories even if they made total sense.

He might be able to support a claim that: by religious edict, for some time, within the territory held by Islamic states, the Quran could have been, and possibly was interpreted to indicate a spherical earth. The claim that this knowledge was divinely inspired rather than borrowed from the other cultures proven to possess it prior to the founding of Islam has always been and still is unproven (or more colloquially, bullshit.)

I will be materialistic and borrow me some atheist argument mentality to go kick some "theist" ass !
What is your evidence that Mohammed peace be upon him borrowed it ? You actually have none.

I'm sure he didn't, because the ancient society wasn't like today's..or wait. Do you think the ancients had internet ???

Actually, AtlasS2 reminds me of Chekov, no, not Anton, Pavel, navigator of the Starship Enterprise.

And now I'm a startrek character with a weird hairstyle ?

---

I've noticed something. As soon as science makes a new discovery and as long as it doesn't contradict the scriptures in an undesired way religious people are there to claim that "it was all fortold" or "it had been in the Scriptures long before the scientists came up with a discovery" or "the scientists have just taken it out of the Scriptures". Without hesitation they try to claim that some of the researchers had experienced a divine revelation and were in fact members of their religion. They also meddle in History and try to claim that every other major scientist was a memder of their faith. Every time they try to pull such thing they display unfathomable ignorance of the subject be it Astronomy, Quantum Physics or inventing the Wheel.

I didn't do that, my dear dragon.
Actually, in a comment here I mentioned how I believe god taught humans everything and gave them the brains to find out.

If you proved me wrong, then fine, what am I, but another scholar ? though still, I wasn't proven wrong totally : history does ignore the religious claims of a spherical earth in the Quran, and we all know the reason. Why do you think the church prosecuted people, who practiced Muslim science ?
It's again a case, where politics invade the scientific field.

I was saddened by your fast fall at the intro of the hobbit 3.

[WinterHold]

Rhythm

S

ome did, some didn't. Different cultures had different models (and competing models existing within these cultures). Erathostenos had, as is most likely already mentioned, managed to measure the circumference of the earth by 200bc. Amusing story to that, when you really consider it, the manner in which he did this (or, to his mind did this) leaves no room for doubt that the earth is spherical (course, no one would have a ready means to determine whether he was right or not for a long time - and he may not have realized it himself...who can say all these years later, eh?). So, while the jury in the ancient world was out as to whether earth was this or that (and it's hard to blame them, they had limited means) - measurements were being made with the assumptions. Again, co-option and incorporation are to be expected. It would happen whether it was a desired outcome or not, but also, knowledge is beneficial to society - and it's been the business of empires to promote that sort of thing, particularly when they can use it to further their own interests. These two things, imo, account for both driving motives and over-riding circumstances. They had use, it was available, someone needed to steward the works, it furthered the interests of the state, it furthered the interests of people within the state - and there were more of "those people" with "that knowledge" than there were of the expansionary caste. So here we are, or, rather...there we were. I don;t think that there are any examples of a civilization such as that -not- having done the same. Hell, Rome was brilliant at this - they pretty much took everything, down to the paintings on the walls...and worked it in.

What an awesome alternative path that you created our of your own creation. And by that I mean, the path of the "competing" models. Actually, in every civilization I see scientists (pretty rare ones) appear from within the certain empire, to find out awesome things, just so the whole knowledge gets lost in wars and plunder, for your information it was burnt, rather than learnt from, take the mongol invasions to both Muslim and European lands, or check the crusaders. Matter in fact, the books and knowledge came from spain, not the Catholic invasions ; because the crusaders did view the Muslim science as evil and "unholy", check that history a little more. Though science theft mainly, took place when spain fell under the inquisitions.

Check the chinese crossbow & ancient rockets, then see how ideas actually do travel on a very, very, very low velocity.
Check the huge difference now, between superpowers & developing countries, see the huge gap that is there.

Imagine a world, where internet didn't exist, half of the world isn't even discovered, history proved that the only competition was in war equipment.

So the competition thing, in some ages yes, requiring some types of sciences yes (like medicine & chemistry), but you know for certain that comparing models & this "university atmosphere" didn't actually exist in the ancient world until very late stages.

Conquistadors? I think you're getting your genocides mixed up. I wouldn;t know what stories were told to the children of conquistadors...you'll have to ask them. We're not talking about "my story" -which is much smaller and further along in time..in any case - we're talking about the story of the formation of islam and the early islamic state - and also it's subsequent interactions with other states, I didn't choose the path that history took.

So.........?

Matter in fact, no. I truly feel away & far from that history to even bother. Well, the son doesn't carry the sin of his father, that's my concept about it.

So, that story is not actually their property or marvels creation. One of the evilest ideas humans can think about, is expansion using war. Well, they never learn. Heck even ancient Egyptians tried it, I mean weren't that the same story, every stupid race walked this earth told ?

Eventually, Rhythm I talk above race. I think you shall also understand me in that context.

Successful conquerors who incorporated the useful bits of the cultures they assimilated. I suppose you could call it theft if you like, hrugs:

Seems, to me, like muslims are taking care of burning other muslims at the stake, at present. The quran didn't really need any more help than the bible has in that regard. Both are less and less relevant for their followers as time passes. The books burn themselves.

Actually, you still think in this mentality. That's why you can't understand me.
The Middle East's mess has nothing to do with religion, everybody knows it comes down to cash & nationalism ; every person knows it. The Middle East is witnessing a fight between many newly-spawning nationalities, it's enough that the Libyan flag actually changed, ISIS is trying to form a state, In Yemen the Huthies are also on their way to form a new nationality...etc.

That's the main reason you see people getting bombed. Hey check the history of world war 2, which was a conflict between arising nationalities -despite the kingdom of japan being an empire it didn't matter-, I guess you'll change your mind at that time, from Europe to Japan itself passing by Egypt where the British actually fought Ze Germans.

If there's some issue you have, with europeans.....you probably ought to take that up with a european...any of which would be happy to explain to you, that I'm not one of them, lol. Terrible things have befallen muslim communities and states. Terrible things have befallen all communities and states. I don't know that I could really determine which of the various methods of execution and torture that have been traditionally used by human communities and states is the worst - I wouldn't wager as to who had it worst, or that this could even be quantified. Most of all....I see absolutely no relevance to our discussion. Enlighten me?

Sadly, the context required it.

Believe me in my head, I see it as human x & human y . Maybe that's a thought you had beforehand ?

The relevance was the context, and a small reminder. As I remind with such a crime, I do also talk about Muslim crimes Though, all of it because I have a concept that people here (especially like you) must know : as a Muslim, I must get over myself and rise above categorizing into this and that, I'm not god to judge who's good and who's evil, though I can only refer to the wrongs I see.
So yes, I sometimes mention stuff with stinky details. But sadly it's how our planet is.

But the way you formed your words, mmmm no I don't agree.

I'm not really sure, after having read your remarks....what you took issue with in my response....other than "Europeans!". Maybe I missed it? Medeival europeans did shitty things to muslims, is that it? Agreed, it was their stock and trade, they did shitty things to each other and themselves, they did other things as well...this is all part of that same story - you aren't opening any eyes with this. So? What does that have to do with how and why we might find a claim of a spherical earth (hey...any measurements, by chance, like Eros all those centuries earlier..that would be a bonus)?

(if you wanna do some euro bashing I;m totally down..we can make a thread!)

Because the context required that, dear Rhythm. Let me give you an example :

When the Umayyads started to get weaker, the Abassid order started to rise. As the Umayyads committed massacres, and became so corrupted, the Abassid order actually did wage a counter campaign, slaughtering thousands of the Umayyads and their supporter...etc.

Do you see a common theme up there ? The word Umayyad for example ? or Abassid ?

That's, they call context. Read it now :

When the started to get weaker, the order started to rise. As the committed massacres, and became so corrupted, the order actually did wage a counter campaign, slaughtering thousands of the and their supporter...etc.

Do you see ?
I hope you saw..

[Chas]

As much as I wanted to keep commenting, actually what I expected did take place : everything turned & got evaluated to grammar corrections, under-the belt punches like straightforwardly accuse the author of being stupid,...etc. The typical nerd complex, that you would find in any cheap youtube comment section.

My point was proved, actually. This discussion was over, when this wikipedia said what I said :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth

---

The Flat Earth model is an archaic belief that the Earth's shape is a plane or disk. Many ancient cultures have had conceptions of a flat Earth, including Greece until the classical period, the Bronze Age and Iron Age civilizations of the Near East until the Hellenistic period, India until the Gupta period (early centuries AD) and China until the 17th century. It was also typically held in the aboriginal cultures of the Americas, and a flat Earth domed by the firmament in the shape of an inverted bowl is common in pre-scientific societies.[1]
The modern misconception that educated Europeans at the time of Columbus believed in a flat Earth, and that his voyages refuted that belief, has been referred to as the myth of the flat Earth.[6]

Proving my point that this was not the major belief in the world -despite the contribution of many fine scholars and their discoveries-, except in the Muslim world, since the constitution of every citizen was mainly the Quran, which stated this clearly as a matter of faith. -------> Claiming that you didn't get this line, or calling me stupid for forming it, does actually indeed make me question your IQ.

With that, my point is through. You either change the wikipedia articles, or my point is valid. The Quran is the only thing that made this theory famous, and largely adopted.

As for the typical "missionary complex" which many of the comments also had (without naming) ; so when I go against you in thought, I'm stupid, idiot, less smart than you thought I am ? that is a form of social terrorism to be honest with you, especially when you make the opposing side feels more inferior by picturing him as a clown -I didn't savor the effort to look like one ; though ; check my PP -. It's a defacto social terrorism, I've been here for 2 years, I totally know that once the crowd brings on the insult bag, opening up the sewer, it starts to smell funny and the discussion is actually over..

Ah humanity if you were more mature..

---

Can you not actually read? The Wikipedia article says:

After the Greek philosophers Pythagoras, in the 6th century BC, and Parmenides, in the 5th, recognized that the Earth is spherical, the spherical view spread rapidly in the Greek world. Around 330 BC, Aristotle maintained on the basis of physical theory and observational evidence that the Earth was spherical. The Earth's circumference was first determined around 240 BC by Eratosthenes

Your ignorant pigheadedness has been noted by all and your credibility irreparably lost.

[FatAndFaithless]

Also, calling ridiculous, unfounded, dishonest assertions of belief "idiotic" or "absurd" isn't "Social terrorism" (good lord what a term...). It's just being honest. Ridiculous notions are deserving of ridicule by definition.

[The Grand Nudger]

Actually, in every civilization I see scientists (pretty rare ones) appear from within the certain empire, to find out awesome things, just so the whole knowledge gets lost in wars and plunder, for your information it was burnt, rather than learnt from, take the mongol invasions to both Muslim and European lands, or check the crusaders.

How would you know what knowledge was gained if it were lost? I think you need to rigorously investigate the mechanics of that statement. If the overarching comment is that invaders burn this or that - I agree, they do. They don't seem to have managed to burn everything, either by accident or by design. If they had, we wouldn't know that they did. That knowledge both of the earths general shape (and even some very accurate measurements) existed in 200bc is, apparently, not something that we lost, because here we are discussing it, eh?

Matter in fact, the books and knowledge came from spain, not the Catholic invasions ; because the crusaders did view the Muslim science as evil and "unholy", check that history a little more. Though science theft mainly, took place when spain fell under the inquisitions.

Are we talking the ren? Of course they came from spain, they were latin translations of arabic translations of greek works. As I mentioned a few posts ago. It's amusing isn't it, how translating something from one language to another can seperate people on two sides of a line? Here we are, talking about the translations made of works on the periphery of what we now call geography (terms we use today were actually invented by Eros, btw)- and you find yourself standing on the arabic side of that line...vociferously defending it;s integrity for absolutely no reason whatsoever......given that you and I don't seem to have any disagreement on the subject at hand.

Check the chinese crossbow & ancient rockets,

Cho-ko-nu..fun fact, I got a bug one day to build one. So I went to the lowes and got what I'd need to do so, at least a modern version. The action is brilliant, but the strength of the draw is pathetic (as noted in the source material I had, mentioning that the smaller darts carried less force but were poison tipped and fielded against mass cavalry). Some portion of that device is myth - I've held one in my hands made of superior materials to a level of craftsmanship that those who built them then couldn't possibly have attained (due, if nothing else, to the tools and materials available to me, now). It's an oddity, they were capable of constructing it, for reasons I could expound upon at length - it never became mainline equipment for the chinese. I want to build a mangonel, full size...someday - but it would cost so much. But, ultimately, what do cho-ko-nus have to do with the discussion we were having?

then see how ideas actually do travel on a very, very, very low velocity.
Check the huge difference now, between superpowers & developing countries, see the huge gap that is there.

The cho ko nu was an idea ahead of it's time that didn't travel at all, it didn't even take within the empire that conceived of it. Rockets did travel, fast and hard - and man did it have an impact. Didn't "travel" by conquest though.

Imagine a world, where internet didn't exist, half of the world isn't even discovered, history proved that the only competition was in war equipment.

I think you put too much truck in the gear, and not enough in the logistics backbone. Rome (again to use a prominent example) wasn;t actually all that innovative in warfighting equipment (as noted..they were unabashed coopters) - what they were good at was the logistics of supporting the people who used the equipment. Still..this all seems diversionary.

So the competition thing, in some ages yes, requiring some types of sciences yes (like medicine & chemistry), but you know for certain that comparing models & this "university atmosphere" didn't actually exist in the ancient world until very late stages.

What "university atmosphere" are you talking about? I explained to you why we find greek in arabic, and arabic in latin (and then of course latin in all of the works that came from it and are now part of "the west"). It's not an issue of any university, or even competition really. The works were translated, for whatever reason. I could expound upon all of the reasons why they might have wanted to do it, mentioned that it would have happened even if they didn''t, and show no end of examples as to this happening everywhere, everywhen...-but ultimatel that;s speculation. All that I can say I know, is that the works were translated and transported. Why do you have a problem with this?

Matter in fact, no. I truly feel away & far from that history to even bother. Well, the son doesn't carry the sin of his father, that's my concept about it.

Matter of fact no...what?

So, that story is not actually their property or marvels creation. One of the evilest ideas humans can think about, is expansion using war. Well, they never learn. Heck even ancient Egyptians tried it, I mean weren't that the same story, every stupid race walked this earth told ?

Eventually, Rhythm I talk above race. I think you shall also understand me in that context.

That may be one of "the evilist ideas", I would (and have) avoided any such declarations in that vein myself because I feel that they are unproductive to the discussion. Perhaps the expansion of the arabic state and their interactions during this expansion was evil....I don't know, I don't think so....but if that's how you choose to view it, okay. I'm not sure how race got in, the umma wasn't a monolithic ethnic block?

Actually, you still think in this mentality. That's why you can't understand me.

I have an alternative explanation for that. We speak different first languages, and you're a bit of a loon.

The Middle East's mess has nothing to do with religion,

Oh come now........nothing? But so what...you are all over the fucking place man. I've been trying to have a conversation with you about why it's unsurprising to find that the people who wrote the quran might have believed that the earth was a sphere. It's also possible, of course, that they thought it up themselves. The influence of greek works on the quran though...seems to suggest the former, rather than the latter. We don;t actually know what the pre-umma beliefs regarding the shape of the earth were......that was all destroyed. Their own pagan sources, I suppose, might have been seen as more of a threat to the emergent state religion than some foreign mishmash (which happened to contain some good guesses about some quasi-scientific stuff)?

everybody knows it comes down to cash & nationalism ; every person knows it.

Tell that to the religious extremists?

The Middle East is witnessing a fight between many newly-spawning nationalities, it's enough that the Libyan flag actually changed, ISIS is trying to form a state, In Yemen the Huthies are also on their way to form a new nationality...etc.

Yeah, nothing to do with religion in any of that..............

That's the main reason you see people getting bombed. Hey check the history of world war 2, which was a conflict between arising nationalities -despite the kingdom of japan being an empire it didn't matter-, I guess you'll change your mind at that time, from Europe to Japan itself passing by Egypt where the British actually fought Ze Germans.

I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be changing my mind too? Neither the US, nor Germany, nor Japan were doing any emerging with WW2. (Japan had done it's "emerging" a bit earlier, and they were the johhny come lately's, in a western pov).

Sadly, the context required it.

Believe me in my head, I see it as human x & human y . Maybe that's a thought you had beforehand ?


The relevance was the context, and a small reminder. As I remind with such a crime, I do also talk about Muslim crimes Though, all of it because I have a concept that people here (especially like you) must know : as a Muslim, I must get over myself and rise above categorizing into this and that, I'm not god to judge who's good and who's evil, though I can only refer to the wrongs I see.
So yes, I sometimes mention stuff with stinky details. But sadly it's how our planet is.

It's not that the details are stinky...it's that you seem to have flown off to some other duscussion (or many) when you failed to defend your claims regarding the quran, some bullshit historical narrative you think the west is foisting (or believes in) and the origins of spherical earth claims (or their accuracy). That's what smells like shit, to me.

But the way you formed your words, mmmm no I don't agree.

With....what?

Because the context required that, dear Rhythm. Let me give you an example :

When the Umayyads started to get weaker, the Abassid order started to rise. As the Umayyads committed massacres, and became so corrupted, the Abassid order actually did wage a counter campaign, slaughtering thousands of the Umayyads and their supporter...etc.

Do you see a common theme up there ? The word Umayyad for example ? or Abassid ?

That's, they call context. Read it now :

When the started to get weaker, the order started to rise. As the committed massacres, and became so corrupted, the order actually did wage a counter campaign, slaughtering thousands of the and their supporter...etc.

Do you see ?
I hope you saw..

What should I see there, whats the relevance to the discussion we were having - or, if you prefer...tell me what discussion we are having now..if not that one?