Page 32 of 32 FirstFirst ... 22303132
Results 311 to 313 of 313

Thread: Gregg Gutfeld Says He Plans to Open Gay Bar Next to Mosque

  1. #311
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: Gregg Gutfeld Says He Plans to Open Gay Bar Next to Mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by Degreez View Post
    Source for this assertion?
    He had to have been because he did not live in the same area as Mohammad, wrote the text 30 years after Mohammad supposedly died, and his story matches the Muslim narrative which according to you he didn't write until he came into contact with the Muslims after their Imperialist Expansionist war in which they conquered Armenia.


    Most historians have suggested 661 AD.
    That's 3 decades after Mohammads supposed death thus it is not even a contemporary source let alone a primary source.

    Do you have any evidence you would like to provide that Sebeos was told "stories" by Muslims? Otherwise, your assertions are baseless.
    He never lived in the ****ing Arabian penninsula, he wrote the text 30 years after Mohammad supposedly died, and his is the Muslim narrative which he wrote after the Muslims conquered Armenia where he lived.

    You have absolutely 0 evidence for the nonexistence of Muhammad.
    I'm not the one making the positive claim.

    So? We don't have paintains made of numerous historical figures.
    Really, which famous historical figures do we not have some sort of visual record of?

    That doesn't mean they didn't exist. What asinine reasoning.
    I'm still trying to think of an important historical figure who we don't have some sort of contemporary visual record of.

    Why don't you accept Muslim primary sources? Or do you have selective source bias?
    I don't accept Muslim primary sources because they have a clear bias. I don't accept Greek sources for the existence of Achilles. Achilles like Mohammad is a mythical not a historical figure. If Mohammad existed then there would have been a contemporary record of him by the Sassanids and/or the Byzantines. It is asserted that a biography was written about him nearly a century after his death and no copies exist and coins with his name on them weren't struck until 6 decades after his death.


    In case you forgot, you were the one who asserted that Muhammad did not exist. The burden of proof on proving that is on you.
    Are you out of your bloody mind, it is you and all Muslims who claim that Mohammad existed, it is up to the person making the positive claim to prove it.
    Last edited by Agent Ferris; 08-14-10 at 10:04 AM.

  2. #312
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    01-26-14 @ 01:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,216

    Re: Gregg Gutfeld Says He Plans to Open Gay Bar Next to Mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    He had to have been because he did not live in the same area as Mohammad, wrote the text 30 years after Mohammad supposedly died, and his story matches the Muslim narrative which according to you he didn't write until he came into contact with the Muslims after their Imperialist Expansionist war in which they conquered Armenia.
    You could have said you had no source for your asinine assertion and that all you had was your own speculative opinions. Lucky that doesn't mean crap when discussing historicity.
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    That's 3 decades after Mohammads supposed death thus it is not even a contemporary source let alone a primary source.
    Are you that obtuse? Anything written after a person's death is a contemporary source. Stop being disingenuous and try to have an honest debate for once.
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    He never lived in the ****ing Arabian penninsula, he wrote the text 30 years after Mohammad supposedly died, and his is the Muslim narrative which he wrote after the Muslims conquered Armenia where he lived.
    You could have said you had no source for your asinine assertion and that all you had was your own speculative opinions. Lucky that doesn't mean crap when discussing historicity.
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    I'm not the one making the positive claim.
    No, you're the only one making ANY type of claim. I BELIEVE Muhammad existed. You CLAIM he did not (and provided no evidence to substantiate the absurd claim). YOU were the one who brought up Muhammad's nonexistence in this thread. The burden of proof lies on you.
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Really, which famous historical figures do we not have some sort of visual record of?
    There's plenty. The one off the top of my head is the Socratic problem. All we have are Plato's and Xenophon's writings to confirm that he existed. The general consensus is that Socrates was a historical figure who existed. The only visual record of Socrates came centuries after his "supposed" death.

    Your suspicion of disbelief is not a valid proof that none of these people existed. It is merely doubt in a mind that still needs education.
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    I'm still trying to think of an important historical figure who we don't have some sort of contemporary visual record of.
    Read above.
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    I don't accept Muslim primary sources because they have a clear bias.
    Identify that bias? To prove that Muhammad ACTUALLY did exist? I'm sure the companions of Muhammad had insight that ignorant people wouldn't believe he was a real person.
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    I don't accept Greek sources for the existence of Achilles. Achilles like Mohammad is a mythical not a historical figure.
    Substantiate your assertions. Otherwise it remains as baseless drivel.
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    If Mohammad existed then there would have been a contemporary record of him by the Sassanids and/or the Byzantines.
    Logical fallacy. Not to mention this: Muqawqis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Are you out of your bloody mind, it is you and all Muslims who claim that Mohammad existed, it is up to the person making the positive claim to prove it.
    No, we BELIEVE he existed. That is part of our religion. You are a militant atheist who came into this thread and asserted that Muhammad did not exist. The burden of proof lies on the person making the assertion. The person who needs to prove their unsubstantiated words is you.

    Until you actually back up your claims, your points will remain baseless and meaningless.

  3. #313
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: Gregg Gutfeld Says He Plans to Open Gay Bar Next to Mosque

    Quote Originally Posted by Degreez View Post
    You could have said you had no source for your asinine assertion and that all you had was your own speculative opinions. Lucky that doesn't mean crap when discussing historicity.
    You have no primary/contemporary non-Muslim source demonstrating the existence of Mohammad. It is plainly obvious that he is not a primary source because he never lived in Arabia and wrote the article 3 decades after Mohammad died.

    Are you that obtuse? Anything written after a person's death is a contemporary source. Stop being disingenuous and try to have an honest debate for once.
    OMFG you are really that obtuse. Contemporary as in a contemporary of the time in which Mohammad lived, when people say a contemporary source they mean a source occurring in the same period of time.

    You could have said you had no source for your asinine assertion and that all you had was your own speculative opinions. Lucky that doesn't mean crap when discussing historicity.
    You have no primary/contemporary non-Muslim source demonstrating the existence of Mohammad. It is plainly obvious that he is not a primary source because he never lived in Arabia and wrote the article 3 decades after Mohammad died.

    No, you're the only one making ANY type of claim. I BELIEVE Muhammad existed. You CLAIM he did not (and provided no evidence to substantiate the absurd claim). YOU were the one who brought up Muhammad's nonexistence in this thread. The burden of proof lies on you.
    I am claiming that there is no evidence that he should be considered anything more than a mythical rather than a historical figure along the lines of Achilles.

    There's plenty. The one off the top of my head is the Socratic problem. All we have are Plato's and Xenophon's writings to confirm that he existed. The general consensus is that Socrates was a historical figure who existed. The only visual record of Socrates came centuries after his "supposed" death.
    Really then who's this:

    socrates - Google Search

    Your suspicion of disbelief is not a valid proof that none of these people existed. It is merely doubt in a mind that still needs education.
    Then provide evidence from non-Muslim contemporary sources.

    Read above.

    Identify that bias?
    It would be like stating that Achilles was a historical figures based solely on the word of a Greek historian. Like Mohammad there is no reason to believe that Achilles is anything more than a mythical figure.

    To prove that Muhammad ACTUALLY did exist? I'm sure the companions of Muhammad had insight that ignorant people wouldn't believe he was a real person.
    It's simply untenable to suggest that such an important figure would not have been recorded by any of the neighboring empires at the time.

    Substantiate your assertions. Otherwise it remains as baseless drivel.
    There is as much evidence for the existence of Mohammad as there is for the existence of Achilles.

    Logical fallacy.
    No it's common sense.

    lol it states quite clearly that it says "according to Muslim historians," well what about the Sassanid or Byzantine historians why did they not record this account of one of their own? This is nothing more than a story used by the Muslims to bolster their claims to be following the one true prophet.

    No, we BELIEVE he existed. That is part of our religion. You are a militant atheist who came into this thread and asserted that Muhammad did not exist. The burden of proof lies on the person making the assertion. The person who needs to prove their unsubstantiated words is you.

    Until you actually back up your claims, your points will remain baseless and meaningless.
    I asserted that I doubt he exists, it is Muslims who claim that he existed, so the burden of proof is on you.

Page 32 of 32 FirstFirst ... 22303132

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •