... wrote: NOTE from Thomas Paine on the Bible and the Quran I believe in the equality of man; and I believe that religious duties consistMessage 1 of 1 , May 1, 2010View Source--- In TalkNigeria@yahoogroups.com, Lil Joe <liljoe.radical@...> wrote:NOTE from Thomas Paine on the Bible and the Quran
I believe in the equality of man; and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our fellow-creatures happy.
But, lest it should be supposed that I believe in many other things in addition to these, I shall, in the progress of this work, declare the things I do not believe, and my reasons for not believing them.
I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit. ...
Every national church or religion has established itself by pretending some special mission from God, communicated to certain individuals. The Jews have their Moses; the Christians their Jesus Christ, their apostles and saints; and the Turks their Mahomet, as if the way to God was not open to every man alike.
Each of those churches show certain books, which they call revelation, or the word of God. The Jews say, that their word of God was given by God to Moses, face to face; the Christians say, that their word of God came by divine inspiration: and the Turks say, that their word of God (the Koran) was brought by an angel from Heaven. Each of those churches accuse the other of unbelief; and for my own part, I disbelieve them all.
As it is necessary to affix right ideas to words, I will, before I proceed further into the subject, offer some other observations on the word revelation. Revelation, when applied to religion, means something communicated immediately from God to man.
No one will deny or dispute the power of the Almighty to make such a communication, if he pleases. But admitting, for the sake of a case, that something has been revealed to a certain person, and not revealed to any other person, it is revelation to that person only. When he tells it to a second person, a second to a third, a third to a fourth, and so on, it ceases to be a revelation to all those persons. It is revelation to the first person only, and hearsay to every other, and consequently they are not obliged to believe it.
It is a contradiction in terms and ideas, to call anything a revelation that comes to us at second-hand, either verbally or in writing. Revelation is necessarily limited to the first communication — after this, it is only an account of something which that person says was a revelation made to him; and though he may find himself obliged to believe it, it cannot be incumbent on me to believe it in the same manner; for it was not a revelation made to me, and I have only his word for it that it was made to him. http://www.ushistory.org/Paine/reason/reason1.htm
MUHAMMAD AND THE ANGEL GABRIEL
A MUSLIM STORY OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE QUR’AN WAS FIRST REVEALED TO MUHAMMAD.
Key Ideas: Islam, obedience, awe and wonder
Muhammad was a busy merchant in the city of Mecca. From time to time he liked to leave the city and walk into the hills where he could be alone and think clearly. He would spend time in the hills of Hira fasting, praying and pondering, trying to find answers to his questions about life. While he was there, his wife Khadija, would send him food.
It was on a day towards the end of the month of Ramadan that Muhammad set off for the hills, and spent his time fasting and praying in his usual place. He was so involved with his thoughts, he did not notice the time passing. At the darkest time of the night, just before the dawn, he heard a voice. The voice grew louder and louder, it seemed to come from all directions. It filled the cave where he was sitting, but it also came from somewhere outside in the night - and from inside Muhammad himself.
Muhammad looked around. Suddenly before him there was an angel, holding a cloth of green brocade. Some writing was embroidered on it.
“Read,” said the angel.
Muhammad was stunned. “I cannot read!”
The angel squeezed Muhammad, and then released him. “Read” he commanded.
“I cannot read” Muhammad said, a little louder this time.
The angel squeezed him again, tighter than before. “Read.
“I cannot read?” Muhammad said, even louder. He was now rather afraid of being squeezed again.
“Read” said the angel “in the name of thy Lord who created man from a drop of blood: read in the name of the Almighty God who taught man the use of the pen and taught him what he knew not before...”
Muhammad recited the verse after the angel, until he knew it perfectly, word for word.
Then Muhammad looked afraid, and he was alone. The angel and the writing had gone. But the words stayed in his memory, and there was a strange sensation of having been squeezed very hard.
Suddenly Muhammad felt worried. He began to panic. Was the cave haunted? Was he ill? Trembling, he stood up, left the cave, and began to walk, shakily, down the mountain path. He was very confused. Then a voice, the same voice, called to him:
“Oh Muhammad! Truly you are the messenger of God.
And I am his angel, Gabriel.”
Muhammad looked up, and he saw the angel, like a human, but so enormous that his two feet straddled the horizon. For a moment, Muhammad was awe-struck. Then he tried to escape, but no matter which way he turned, the angel was there, filling the sky. Muhammad could go neither forwards nor back until Gabriel had disappeared from the sky as suddenly as he had appeared. Only then, slowly and just as dawn was breaking, did Muhammad make his way down the path, through the hills and back to his home in Mecca. http://www.sln.org.uk/storyboard/stories/i5.htmIbn ar-Rawandi (c.910?)
A highly enigmatic and controversial figure in the history of Islamic thought, Ibn ar-Rawandi wavered between a number of Islamic sects and then abandoned all of them in favour of atheism. As an atheist, he used reason to destroy religious beliefs, especially those of Islam. He compared prophets to unnecessary magicians, God to a human being in terms of knowledge and emotion, and the Qur'an to an ordinary book. Contrary to Islamic belief, he advocated that the world is without a beginning and that heaven is nothing special.
Medieval biographical dictionaries agree that Ibn al-Husain Ahmad ibn Yahya ibn Ishaq ar-Rawandi lived in Baghdad, but differ as to the form of his name and the date of his death, and indicate that he was intellectually unstable and that very little was known about his real thought. While he is best known as ar-Rawandi, he is also referred to as ar-Rindi, ar-Rawindi and ar-Riwindi. Also he is said to have died at a number of different dates, ranging from ah 243 to ah 301. The most accepted view is that he died about ah 245/ad 910 at the age of forty.Ibn ar-Rawandi's real thought remained somewhat unknown primarily because in the Middle Ages the authorities discouraged the reading of his books and banned their circulation. Most of the one hundred and fourteen books he wrote have been lost. Only parts of three of his works are extant. Fadihat al-mu'tazila (The Scandal of the Mu'tazilites) was preserved almost in its entirety and responded to by al-Khayyat (d. ah 300/ad 912) in Kitab al-intisar (The Book of Victory). Fadihat al-mu'tazila is a response to Fadilat al-mu'tazila (The Virtue of the Mu'tazilites), a work by al-Jahiz (d. ah 254/ad 868), in which the latter pointed out the vices of their opponents in addition to the virtues of the Mu'tazilites themselves.Following the heyday of the Mu'tazilite movement during the early Abbasid rule of al-Ma'mun, al-Mu'tasim and al-Wathiq (see Ash'ariyya and Mu'tazila), the movement felt the need to defend itself against attacks by various opponents; al-Jahiz was one of its defenders. In Fadihat al-mu'tazila , Ibn ar-Rawandi presents the views of all the major Mu'tazilite thinkers and tries to show that they suffered from inconsistencies. Many fragments of ad-Damigh (A Refutation), another work of Ibn ar-Rawandi, are extant in Ibn al-Jawzi's al-Muntazam fi at-tarikh (Organization in History). In ad-Damigh, Ibn ar-Rawandi attacks the Qur'an. Finally, parts of az-Zumurrud (Diamond) are also extant in the Majalis (Councils) of al-Mu'ayyad fi al-Din (d. ah 369/ad 979). In az-Zumurrud, Ibn ar-Rawandi focuses on proving the falsehood of prophets and prophecy, which he rejects in Islam and in general.
Ibn ar-Rawandi's tremendous courage in pursuing a rational path in religious debates forced him to reach conclusions not accepted by mainstream Islam. Thus he was attacked severely by the major Muslim thinkers as early as the fourth century ah (tenth century ad), including al-Kindi , al-Khayyat, Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari, Abu 'Ali al-Jubba'i and al-Farabi.
In most of his later works, Ibn ar-Rawandi advocated rejection of religious doctrines, which he considered unacceptable to reason. Thus, he attacked the prophets and certain traditional interpretations and concepts of the Qur'an. Among his teachings were the ideas that prophets make the same kind of claims that magicians make, and that the world is eternal and its events do not prove that they have a first cause. The Qur'an, in his view, is not the eternal word of God, nor is its language miraculous; some human beings, such as al-Aktham ibn Saifi, made better statements than some of those found in the Qur'an. God was without knowledge until he created his knowledge: God is like an angry enemy who can remedy things only by imposing punishment on others and who is capable of wrongdoing. Since he can do these things directly, he needs no holy book and no prophet. However, a God who treats his creatures in this way is not wise. His lack of wisdom is also revealed in his requiring his creatures to obey him when he knows that they will not do so, and in placing them in hell for eternity if they disobey him. Heaven, as described in the Qur'an, has nothing desirable. http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ip/rep/H035.htmAr-Razi, another great physician wrote more than 200 books of which one half of them are about medicine and rest in physics, mathematics and astronomy. Like Ibn Sina, Ar-Razi's works had set milestones in medical science. The most controversial book "On Prophecy" has not survived for an obvious reason. Most likely embarrassed Muslims could not swallow the contents that humiliated the prophet of Islam. Somehow, a part of his second book slipped through the hand of ignorant.
Ar-Razi quipped -"These billy goats (Prophets) pretend to come with a message from God, all the while exhausting themselves in spouting their lies, and imposing on the masses blind obedience to the "words of the master."
Abu 'L-ala Ahmad b. Abdallah al-Ma'arri (973-1057)"Hanifs (Muslims) are stumbling, Christians all astray
Jews wildered, Magians far on error's way.
We mortals are composed of two great schools:
Enlightened knaves or else religious fools....."
Re: [panafricanistforum] Re: Koran an Science, the dialectical materialist view. Gerald Ali/ Northllaw wtote:
>>>>>>.But also the Koran is not based on a 'flat earth theory', as is the Bible, real physics not theology, the real structure of the Koran is dialectical materialist, without a clear defintion of dialectics it becomes hard to read and understand, as its base is completely in the material, physical world. >>>>>Lil Joe's Response:The consideration of whether or not the 'Earth' was 'flat', as was believed in Mesapotomia and environ thousands of years ago is not an issue of reason based philosophical cosmology or sensuous based rationaciation, the work of empirical scientific methodology based astronomy.The Ionians began together with the rise of skepticism engendered philosophical materialism arose cosmology and observation of nature and the universe, astronomy. Prior to this there was nothing but cosmogonic myths [Read: http://www.magictails.com/creationlinks.html]It was not a 'theory'."As used in science, a theory is an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena. Any scientific theory must be based on a careful and rational examination of the facts. A clear distinction needs to be made between facts (things which can be observed and/or measured) and theories (explanations which correlate and interpret the facts. A fact is something that is supported by unmistakeable evidence." http://www.fsteiger.com/theory.htmlThe books of Genesis and of Joshua were written thousands of years prior to the Quran. By the time the Quran was written the physicists at Alexandria had centuries prior proved that the Earth was not flat but a sphere, and turned on its axis as it circled the sun. Aristarchus for instance.
Pythagoras (c. 580 - 500 BC) is credited with postulating a spherical Earth and with realising that Phosphoros, the morning star and Hesperos, the evening star were in fact the same object, the planet Venus. He and his followers believed in the concept of cosmos, a well-ordered, harmonious Universe. They placed great importance on the power and aesthetics of geometry and mathematics rather than experiments. Regular geometrical solids, especially the sphere, were revered and they sought to find harmonies and ratios in the natural world.
Herakleides, a student of Plato and Aristotle but heavily influenced by Pythagorean ideas refined an earlier model by Philolaus to develop one that had a spherical Earth rotating on it axis. It also had Mercury and Venus revolving around the Sun whilst the Sun and other planets revolved around the Earth. Stars again were fixed on a revolving crystalline sphere. Models that had the Earth at the centre of the Universe are termed geocentric or earth-centered.
Interestingly whilst most classical models were variations on geocentric models, one of the Pythagoreans, Aristarchus of Samos (c. 310 - 230 BC) proposed a model that placed the Sun at the centre, that is a heliocentric Universe. His model would be familiar to us today as a reasonable description of the solar system. All the planets, including the earth, revolved around a fixed Sun in circular orbits. The Earth rotated once a day on its axis and the Moon revolved about the Earth.Credit: R. Hollow, CSIROFigure 1.3 In Aristarchus' heliocentric model all the planets orbit the Sun along circular paths. The Moon orbits the Earth which in turn spins on its axis.
There are several reasons why Aristarchus' model did not gain wide acceptance and was in effect lost for 18 centuries until Copernicus redeveloped it. Firstly his original writings were lost in the destruction of the Great Library of Alexandria in AD 415. Secondly his concept of a moving Earth defies common sense. We do not feel the Earth spinning or moving through space. His idea contradicted the prevailing view of motion as espoused by Aristotle. The final key objection to his model was the failure of observers to detect any stellar parallax. Under Aristarchus' model, the closer stars should show a periodic shift in position to and fro against more distant stars over the course of a year as the Earth orbited the Sun. In fact this was not detected until 1838 following careful telescopic observations. Aristarchus had underestimated the distance of the earth from the Sun thus the size of possible parallax was overestimated.Credit: R. Hollow, CSIROFigure 1.4 In a heliocentric model, closer stars should show an apparent shift in position relative to background stars due to parallax. This diagram greatly exaggerates the effect and is not to scale. http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://outreach.atnf.csiro.au/education/senior/cosmicengine/images/cosmoimg/aristarchus.gif&imgrefurl=http: //outreach.atnf.csiro.au/education/senior/cosmicengine/classicalastronomy.html&h=285&w=272&sz=10&tbnid=onqRuNnbJHHPaM:&tbnh=115&tbnw=110&prev=/images%3Fq%3Daristarchus%2Bheliocentric% model&hl=en&usg=__zEBaW_iNdW3ChSJ1aR_6iJsAPc0=&ei=03aJS_CCA4iEswPO6fWEAw&sa=X&oi=i mage_result&resnum=4&ct=image&ved=0CBQQ9QEwAwThere is no such discussion in the Quran, no scientific analysis whatsoever. Still, it was not necessary for Allah to reveal this theory to Muhammad, but even so this does not constitute an argument that the Quran is a scientific book based on the empirical method, and there is no physics in it. Where does the Quran provide knowledge of particle physics, quarks, neutrinos, Z particles, string theory, M-theory, multiverses and quantum mechanics? It does not follow that just because the authors of the Quran were familiar with Aristarchus' experiments that one can learn anything about physics by reading it.Moreover, contrary to his assertion of the necessity to do so, Gerald Ali does not provide a 'clear definition' of dialectics', nor of materialism or sience! This is what he has to do first, and then show that the Koran is a scientific text, concerning physics, cosmology, relativity, quantum mechanics, chemistry e.g. the Periodic Table, geology, plate tectonics, biology and so on.Dialectics is a method of logical reasoning:Position, opposition, compositionAffirmation, negation, negation of negationThesis, anti-thesis, synthesisMaterialism is that the material universe is all there is, ever was and ever will be, that organic matter arises naturally from inorganic, life arise from organic compounds. As an epistemology, it bases knowledge as derived from sensations, observation, analysis, all by human reason. Materialism rejects the existence of Gods and Angels, and rejects claims that knowledge of the material world is derived from revelation by angels.Science is an empirical method of analysis of the material and social world:Awareness and definition of a problemCollection and synthesis of relevant data,Analysis of dataFormulation of hypothesisTesting of hypothesis by empirical instrumentsJudgement, if valid then presented to colleagues for peer reviewTheory>>>>>>There is much supposition as to how the Koran originated, so it helps if people understand the science within it, then it becomes easier to grasp that it is in fact, not a 'religious' writing, in the sense of theology. >>>>>>>There is no 'supposition as to how the Koran originated'. Rather the contrary, the Quran itself states that it is revealed information from an Angel, Gabriel to a man, Muhammad, in a cave and elsewhere. There is presented no empirical in the Quran that angels actually exist and that Muhammad actually talked to one, rather than hallucinations or plagiarizing stories in the Bible.The tradition of Islam claims that in the year 610, Muhammad, while on a retreat to Mount Hira for meditation during the month of Ramadan, received his first revelation from the Archangel Gabriel. Gabriel said to Muhammad: "Iqraa," meaning "read" or "recite." He replied, "I cannot read." Gabriel embraced Muhammad and after releasing him repeated: "Iqraa." Muhammad's answer was the same as before. Gabriel repeated the embrace, asking Muhammad to repeat after him and said: "Recite in the name of your Lord who created! He created man from that which clings. Recite; and thy Lord is most Bountiful, He who has taught by the pen , taught man what he knew not."
The Angel Gabriel visited the Muhammad many times over a period of twenty-three years. Gabriel taught Muhammad the verses and he instructed his scribes to record them. All the revealed verses are compiled in the Qur'an. The Prophet's sayings and actions are recorded separately in collections known as Hadith. Muslims believe that Muhammad was a messenger of Allah (Arabic for The One and Only God) and last of the prophets sent by Allah to guide man to the right path.
The Prophet's mission was to restore the worship of the One True God, the creator and sustainer of the universe, as taught by Prophet Abraham and all Prophets of God, and to demonstrate the laws of moral, ethical, legal, and social conduct. Islam means peace by submission and obedience to the Will and Commandments of God. Those who accept Islam are called Muslims, meaning those who have accepted the message of peace by submission to God. http://www.lucidcafe.com/library/95dec/muhammad.html
Those who believe the Quran do so by faith, which is the opposite of science. Thomas Paine, of the Enlightenment wrote in The Age of Reason:"Every national church or religion has established itself by pretending some special mission from God, communicated to certain individuals. The Jews have their Moses; the Christians their Jesus Christ, their apostles and saints; and the Turks their Mahomet; as if the way to God was not open to every man alike."Each of those churches shows certain books, which they call revelation, or the Word of God. The Jews say that their Word of God was given by God to Moses face to face; the Christians say, that their Word of God came by divine inspiration; and the Turks say, that their Word of God (the Koran) was brought by an angel from heaven. Each of those churches accuses the other of unbelief; and, for my own part, I disbelieve them all."As it is necessary to affix right ideas to words, I will, before I proceed further into the subject, offer some observations on the word 'revelation.' Revelation when applied to religion, means something communicated immediately from God to man."No one will deny or dispute the power of the Almighty to make such a communication if he pleases. But admitting, for the sake of a case, that something has been revealed to a certain person, and not revealed to any other person, it is revelation to that person only. When he tells it to a second person, a second to a third, a third to a fourth, and so on, it ceases to be a revelation to all those persons. It is revelation to the first person only, and hearsay to every other, and, consequently, they are not obliged to believe it."It is a contradiction in terms and ideas to call anything a revelation that comes to us at second hand, either verbally or in writing. Revelation is necessarily limited to the first communication. After this, it is only an account of something which that person says was a revelation made to him; and though he may find himself obliged to believe it, it cannot be incumbent on me to believe it in the same manner, for it was not a revelation made to me, and I have only his word for it that it was made to him."When Moses told the children of Israel that he received the two tables of the commandments from the hand of God, they were not obliged to believe him, because they had no other authority for it than his telling them so; and I have no other authority for it than some historian telling me so, the commandments carrying no internal evidence of divinity with them. They contain some good moral precepts such as any man qualified to be a lawgiver or a legislator could produce himself, without having recourse to supernatural intervention. [NOTE: It is, however, necessary to except the declamation which says that God 'visits the sins of the fathers upon the children'. This is contrary to every principle of moral justice.--Author.]"When I am told that the Koran was written in Heaven, and brought to Muhammad by an angel, the account comes to near the same kind of hearsay evidence and second hand authority as the former. I did not see the angel myself, and therefore I have a right not to believe it."When also I am told that a woman, called the Virgin Mary, said, or gave out, that she was with child without any cohabitation with a man, and that her betrothed husband, Joseph, said that an angel told him so, I have a right to believe them or not: such a circumstance required a much stronger evidence than their bare word for it: but we have not even this; for neither Joseph nor Mary wrote any such matter themselves. It is only reported by others that they said so. It is hearsay upon hearsay, and I do not chose to rest my belief upon such evidence. http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/thomas_paine/age_of_reason/part1.html#2The Quran is not a science text book and is neither dialectical nor is it materialist in its reason and epistemology.The Quran does not propose the use of empirical method, is not based on observation of analysis, and does not provide knowledge of physics, relativity, the four forces nuclear forces, electromagnetic, gravity) atoms, particle physics, quantum mechanics, there is no Periodic Table presented or discussed by the 'angel' Gabriel and Muhammad in the cave, or any discussion of what it was prior to and engendered the 'big bang'. There is no discussion in the Quran of the superdense phenomenon inhering in and identical with the super force that combined the four forces of what became nuclear forces, electromagnetic force and gravity.In other words the Angel Gabriel, as it is said to exist and revealed information to Muhammad didn't tell the latter how to make scientific instruments for research, and didn't provide any detailed knowledge of the empirical universe, only fantastic fables and commandments. In the Quran there is no science whatsoever.>>>>>> Strange as it may seem to people who have heard of a ''Muslim religion', which itself is only propaganda of peopel who have opposed it for centuries, the Old World Muslim, said that Islam was a ''way of life''. >>>>>This is not true. Islam does not mean "way of life". It means submission to the will of Allah - the God of the Hebrew fables: Adam and Eve, Able, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Ismael, Moses, the prophets, Jesus ... It is a religion based on Bedouin culture and the Bible.Muhammad's father, Abdallah, died several weeks before his birth and his mother, Aminah, died when he was six years old. He was raised by his paternal grandfather, 'Abd al Muttalib, until the age of eight, and after his grandfather's death by Abu Talib, his paternal uncle. Under the guardianship of Abu Talib, Muhammad began to earn a living as a businessman and a trader. http://www.lucidcafe.com/library/95dec/muhammad.html
- Hide quoted text -- Hide quoted text -Muhammad married a rich merchant, and that was his business. This division of labor and the 'way of life' of merchants was articulated by Engels, in The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State:"The upper stage of barbarism brings us the further division of labor between agriculture and handicrafts, hence the production of a continually increasing portion of the products of labor directly for exchange, so that exchange between individual producers assumes the importance of a vital social function. Civilization consolidates and intensifies all these existing divisions of labor, particularly by sharpening the opposition between town and country (the town may economically dominate the country, as in antiquity, or the country the town, as in the middle ages), and it adds a third division of labor, peculiar to itself and of decisive importance: it creates a class which no longer concerns itself with production, but only with the exchange of the products - the merchants. Hitherto whenever classes had begun to form, it had always been exclusively in the field of production; the persons engaged in production were separated into those who directed and those who executed, or else into large-scale and small-scale producers. Now for the first time a class appears which, without in any way participating in production, captures the direction of production as a whole and economically subjugates the producers; which makes itself into an indispensable middleman between any two producers and exploits them both. Under the pretext that they save the producers the trouble and risk of exchange, extend the sale of their products to distant markets and are therefore the most useful class of the population, a class of parasites comes into being, "genuine social icbneumons," who, as a reward for their actually very insignificant services, skim all the cream off production at home and abroad, rapidly amass enormous wealth and correspondingly social influence, and for that reason receive under civilization ever higher honors and ever greater control of production, until at last they also bring forth a product of their own - the periodical trade crises.
"At our stage of development, however, the young merchants had not even begun to dream of the great destiny awaiting them. But they were growing and making themselves indispensable, which was quite sufficient. And with the formation of the merchant class came also the development of metallic money, the minted coin, a new instrument for the domination of the non-producer over the producer and his production. The commodity of commodities had been discovered, that which holds all other commodities hidden in itself, the magic power which can change at will into everything desirable and desired. The man who had it ruled the world of production - and who had more of it than anybody else? The merchant. The worship of money was safe in his hands. He took good care to make it clear that, in face of money, all commodities, and hence all producers of commodities, must prostrate themselves in adoration grovel in the dust. http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1884/origin-family/ch09.htmMuhammad was a rich merchant, as was Abraham, thus the continuity of their 'way of life'. Although the Quran is not a materialist epistemological theory, the materialist method explains the ideology contained in it.Marx and Engels wrote in The [Critique of] German Ideology:"The premises from which we begin are not arbitrary ones, not dogmas, but real premises from which abstraction can only be made in the imagination. They are the real individuals, their activity and the material conditions under which they live, both those which they find already existing and those produced by their activity. These premises can thus be verified in a purely empirical way."The first premise of all human history is, of course, the existence of living human individuals. Thus the first fact to be established is the physical organisation of these individuals and their consequent relation to the rest of nature. Of course, we cannot here go either into the actual physical nature of man, or into the natural conditions in which man finds himself – geological, hydrographical, climatic and so on. The writing of history must always set out from these natural bases and their modification in the course of history through the action of men. ..."The fact is, therefore, that definite individuals who are productively active in a definite way enter into these definite social and political relations. Empirical observation must in each separate instance bring out empirically, and without any mystification and speculation, the connection of the social and political structure with production. The social structure and the State are continually evolving out of the life-process of definite individuals, but of individuals, not as they may appear in their own or other people’s imagination, but as they really are; i.e. as they operate, produce materially, and hence as they work under definite material limits, presuppositions and conditions independent of their will."The production of ideas, of conceptions, of consciousness, is at first directly interwoven with the material activity and the material intercourse of men, the language of real life. Conceiving, thinking, the mental intercourse of men, appear at this stage as the direct efflux of their material behaviour. The same applies to mental production as expressed in the language of politics, laws, morality, religion, metaphysics, etc., of a people. Men are the producers of their conceptions, ideas, etc. – real, active men, as they are conditioned by a definite development of their productive forces and of the intercourse corresponding to these, up to its furthest forms. Consciousness can never be anything else than conscious existence, and the existence of men is their actual life-process. ..."That is to say, we do not set out from what men say, imagine, conceive, nor from men as narrated, thought of, imagined, conceived, in order to arrive at men in the flesh. We set out from real, active men, and on the basis of their real life-process we demonstrate the development of the ideological reflexes and echoes of this life-process. The phantoms formed in the human brain are also, necessarily, sublimates of their material life-process, which is empirically verifiable and bound to material premises. Morality, religion, metaphysics, all the rest of ideology and their corresponding forms of consciousness, thus no longer retain the semblance of independence. They have no history, no development; but men, developing their material production and their material intercourse, alter, along with this their real existence, their thinking and the products of their thinking. Life is not determined by consciousness, but consciousness by life. http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01a.htm#a2Based on materialist methodology we do not explain the Bedouin and merchants or Arabian ruling class dominated society from the Quran, but the Quran from the material premises of life itself:Marx and Engels wrote in The [Critique of] German Ideology:"The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has control at the same time over the means of mental production, so that thereby, generally speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of mental production are subject to it. The ruling ideas are nothing more than the ideal expression of the dominant material relationships, the dominant material relationships grasped as ideas; hence of the relationships which make the one class the ruling one, therefore, the ideas of its dominance. The individuals composing the ruling class possess among other things consciousness, and therefore think. Insofar, therefore, as they rule as a class and determine the extent and compass of an epoch, it is self-evident that they do this in its whole range, hence among other things rule also as thinkers, as producers of ideas, and regulate the production and distribution of the ideas of their age: thus their ideas are the ruling ideas of the epoch. http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01b.htm#b3In contrast to Christianity, which arose among proletarians, peasants and slaves, the exploited and oppressed classes, to centuries later be appropriated by the ruling classes through the State, the official religion of the Roman Empire - Islam, on the contrary is a religion that from the start had originated among the wealthy and in a generation had become the religion of an Empire.>>>> The Catholic world, the revisionist christians, considered that 'way of life and religion' meant the same, as such they were interchangable, but not so with real Muslims, who only had one phrase for each thing, and they were not interchangable, as it is now throughout science, each thing has its own name, no two things hold the same name. >>>>What Gerald Ali calls 'revisionist christianity' of the Catholic world is in part what Islamic theology is based on, together with the cosmology and fables in the Bible - Creation, Adam and Eve, Garden of Eden, Temptation and Expulsion, Cain and Able, Noah and the Deluge, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Ismael, David and Solomon and so on. There is no empirical evidence to support the claim that these events or persons ever actually occured or existed.Quranic and Islamic cultural demonology are mixed with this - Iblis becomes Shaitan, the same as prior and in Judaism Satan became the Devil, Serpent that was appropriated from Persian Mazdaism, Ahriman or angro Mainyu and Jehovah took the characteristics of Ahura Mazda, thus Islam's Allah is so derived from this version of Jehovah as the monothesitic god, pure goodness, light, and judgment.The Muslims believe that the 'correct' version of Biblical cosmology and 'history' is stated in the Quran. This is not based on empirical sciences, e.g. astronomy based on empirical method of telescopic observation or radio astronomy, physics, geology, biology and zoology or primatology. Rather, this is accepted by Muslims on the basis of faith because they believe this cosmology and Biblical 'history' was 'revealed' to Muhammad from God by the Angel Gabriel.There is no empirical evidence to support the claims that the cosmology in the Quran is the same as modern cosmology, or theoritical physics and anthropology. There is no physical evidence to support the claim that there exist a metaphysical region called heaven, that is populated by spirit beings and dead human souls.There is no evidence to support the existence of God or Allah and angels or that Muhammad talked to Gabriel. Moreover, there is no geological or paleontological evidence, no forensic anthropological or genetic data, no archeological evidence whatsoever, and no empirical evidence supporting any of the persons and events discribed in the Quran. Rather, the only sources for the bulk of these claimed revelations by Gabriel to Muhammad are in the Bible, some in the myths of the Sumarians and Arab culture that are fused with the stories in the Old Testament and in the Gospels. These facts suggest that the Quran is based on the Bible. The Quran is the revisionist version of these Jewish stories.From Gerald Ali's plagerized cut and paste:>>>>>>The Koran gives an accurate visual description of the Big Bang theory of the creation of the universe. In the 21st chapter, verse 30 (21:30), the Koran states:"Do not the rejecters see that the heavens and earth were a unit joined together then we split them apart (21:30).">>>>This is not "Big Bang theory", it is a religious assertion that is predicated upon the existence of God and that the angel Gabriel is telling this to Muhammad. What he is saying isn't science, either. The Big Bang theory is the autogenesis of the universe from itself, the claim that Gods "split' the heavens from the earth is both not science but theology, rejecting autogenesis of matter from itself.There is no mention, let alone any explication of the origin and nature of matter and anti-matter in the first formations and their clashes, and no lectures by Gabriel to Muhammad on the first moments after the big bang of inflation and the formation of hydrogen and helium atoms. There is not presented in the Quran any evidence to prove that Angel Gabriel and Muhammad discussed the cooling of the universe and accretion of helium and from it hydrogen into nuclear powered Suns - stars- and the formation of heavy elements in stars as they resist gravitational collapse, no discussion of novae, supernovae, black holes and galaxies with super massive black holes at their centers, clusters of galaxies, galaxies flaying apart, dark matter and dark energy in this universe and their relation to the visible universe.But, more significantly, the Quran is wrong astronomy and geology. The heavens were not 'seperated from the earth' 6000 years ago! The universe was in existence eight billion years prior to the formation of our solar system five billion years ago, the materials of which were from earlier star formations that went supernovae and formed nebulea that were intersteller nurseries.>>>>>> The Koran mentions that the universe originated, at a stage, from a "gaseous material." (Koran 41:11). It uses the Arabic word Dukhan, which stands for smoke. A perfect analogy for gas and particles in suspension and the gasses being hot. ... Scientists have only very recently confirmed that the universe did indeed originate from a gaseous mass composed of hydrogen and helium, a big mass of hot gasses, a mass over 300,000 times that of the earth. That mass then fragmented to form galaxies. Muhammad, who had no schooling of any kind and was illiterate before the revelation of the Koran, could not have possibly known this. >>>>>>If this was scientific knowledge, the angel Gabriel would have presented the data to Muhammad by empirical method of investagation - telescopes, radio , infrared and so on to show Muhammad the evidence for this. More importantly, the Quran stating that there was first created smoke does not claim or explain hydrogen or helium atoms. That is just a bald assertion without documentation.Muhammad did not write anything about a superdense material that contained all the materials that would explode into existence, it does not explain inflation or the formation of matter and anti-matter, atoms and the acretion into stars, or how within stars the elements form, to once these stars go navae those elements are spewed into space, to become planets, and eventiually living matter. The assertion that all this science was intinated in the belief that the first thing 'created by Allah' was smoke, is without proof.The Quran does not mention the natural forces, inflation and the formation of matter and anti-matter, dark matter and dark energy, star formation and explosions, galaxies and clusters of galaxies flying apart, it does not speak of light or photons, bacground radiation or relativity theory. Talking about God creating smoke does not address any of this, and none of this was discussed by Muslim scholars.>>>>> "The Koran mentions that all life originated from water (Koran 21:30) and that man himself is "created" of water and so are all the animals on earth (Koran 25:54, and 24:45). Now these statements to an Arab would have sounded atrocious in that day and age. Even today such statements in the Koran might cause you to wonder if scientific facts about them are unknown. The fact that all life originated in water is well established by the scientific community today. They have evidence to support the fact that the first living beings were algae, and they existed in water. The fact that human beings and animals are created of water is also well established since cytoplasm the basic component of "life" in any animal cell is over 80% water.">>>>>The ancient Babylonians believed that the pre-world was water, and the Book of Genesis says that the first world was covered by water, and it says that God also called for life to evolve from the warter and from the earth - "let the waters bring forth living creatures, the earth bring forth living creatures.Moreover both the Book of Genesis and the Quran also say that Man was a special creation from the dust of the ground, and is a living soul. This is theology. The Quran doesn't even associate humans with primates, not even with apes.
The Quran may have accepted Aristarchus on the sphere theory of earth, but it rejected Thales who said all things came naturally from water, and Anaximander who wrote on the basis of fossil evidence that animals emerged from the seas and mutated into subsequent species, earlier ones becoming extinct, by natural selection.
(Message over 64 KB, truncated)