Thursday, April 14, 2011

Italian Activist Vittorio Arrigoni Kidnapped and Beaten by Muslims

***UPDATE*** Vittorio Arrigoni has been murdered by Salafis.

An Italian pro-Palestinian activist has been found dead in the Hamas-governed Gaza Strip hours after being abducted.

Vittorio Arrigoni, 36, was seized on Thursday by a radical group that has been in conflict with Hamas and is seeking the release of its leader.

Police said he was found hanged in a Gaza City house after receiving a tip-off. Two people have been arrested.

Italy denounced the "barbaric murder", calling it an "act of vile and senseless violence".

Mr Arrigoni was the first foreigner kidnapped in Gaza since BBC journalist Alan Johnston was abducted in 2007.

Friends of the activist gathered outside the hospital where his body had been taken on Friday morning.

"He came from across the world, left his country and family and his entire life and came here to break the siege, and we kill him? Why?" asked one of his friends.

Vittorio Arrigoni was seized by Salafist radicals, an Islamist movement itself that considers Hamas as too moderate, BBC Gaza correspondent Jon Donnison says.

The Salafists had threatened to execute Mr Arrigoni by 1400 GMT on Friday unless several prisoners, including their leader, Sheikh Abu Walid al-Maqdasi, were released. Sheikh Maqdasi was arrested by Hamas police last month in Gaza City.

In a video posted on YouTube, Mr Arrigoni appeared to have been beaten and his eyes were covered with thick black tape.

A caption on the video read: "The Italian hostage entered our land only to spread corruption." The video called Italy "the infidel state".

It is not clear why Mr Arrigoni was killed before the given deadline, but the Hamas interior ministry said he had died soon after being abducted.

Ministry spokesman Ehab al-Ghussein said he was killed "in an awful way". (Read more.)


This story is a strange illustration of the division in the Muslim world. Vittorio Arrigoni is an Italian activist campaigning for a Palestinian state. Thus, he is loved by many Muslims. Yet a group of Salafis kidnapped and beat Vittorio, and are now holding him hostage. They released a video earlier today:

Some Muslims and other pro-Palestinian groups are so shocked at Vittorio's kidnapping, they're accusing Israel of framing Muslims for the kidnapping.

(SALEM / GAZA) - Possibly the strongest voice in the years-long struggle to free Palestine, 36-year old Vittorio Arrigoni, a journalist and activist with the International Solidarity Movement, was kidnapped in Gaza.

From what we understand, a Salafi Group in Gaza claims responsibility for the kidnapping. Later in the day, a youtube video surfaced showing Vittotio blind folded and beaten up.

Salafi Jehadis say they are asking Hamas government in Gaza to release Abu Al Waleed Al Maqdisi in 30 hours starting from 11:00 a.m. today or else they would kill him.

One person who knows the steadfast dedication of Vittorio 'Vic' Arrigoni is our writer Ken O'Keefe, also in Gaza, who stated the bottom line on this sad day.

"Who benefits? This is the question we must ask first when something like Vic Arrigoni being kidnapped happens. The answer is, Israel; nobody benefits more than Israel."

"So whether they are false-Muslims or agents of Israel, those that have Vic are serving Israel." (Read more.)


Anonymous said...

Youtube yanked the video, Was ut too graphic, Or did we Islam in action?

Kangaroo said...

The Validity of the Trinity Belief:

Trinity doctrine doesn't have basic in either NT nor in OT. They depend on human interpretation to form up this doctrine. It is totally pagan.

In the preface to Edward Gibbon's History of Christianity, we read: "If Paganism was conquered by Christianity, it is equally true that Christianity was corrupted by Paganism."

A Dictionary of Religious Knowledge notes that many say that the Trinity "is a corruption borrowed from the heathen religions, and engrafted on the Christian faith." And The Paganism in Our Christianity declares: "The origin of the [Trinity] is entirely pagan."

The Encyclopedia Americana comments: "Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching."

Many of the fundamental beliefs of Christianity which have been for many centuries taken on blind faith (those which differ from the beliefs of Muslims) are now beginning to be challenged by some of the foremost scholars and religious leaders of Christianity today.

An example of this can be found in the British newspaper the "Daily News" 25/6/84 under the heading "Shock survey of Anglican Bishops" We read that a British television pole of 31 of the 39 Anglican Bishops in England found 19 to believe that it is not necessary for Christians to believe that Jesus (peace be upon him) is God, but only "His supreme agent" (his messenger) as taught by Muslims for 1400 years now and testified to by John 17:3 "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you hast sent."

Kangaroo said...

Dr. Lobegott Friedrich Konstantin Von Tischendorf, one of the most adamant conservative Christian defenders of the Trinity and one of the Church's foremost scholars of the Bible was himself driven to admit that:

"[the New Testament had] in many passages undergone such serious modification of meaning as to leave us in painful uncertainty as to what the Apostles had actually written"

Mishpat lo tzodek said...

And they will blame Israel, crazy Muslims can't get enough from blood and death, that's their answer to everything kill - death blame others.

Art said...

You have claimed that neither the OT or the NT uphold trinitarian doctrine. However, both the OT and NT describe various attributes of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit that God is also described as having.

Here are some links to lists of verses that give these attributes. Each link provides a list of attributes, verses which describe God as having them and verses which describe either the Father, the Son or the Holy Spirit (depending on the link, one for each) have:

Art said...

If we are to consider the words of Dr. Lobegott Friedrich Konstantin Von Tischendorf, then we must also consider the empirical evidence (for the evidence of a scholar but an opinion, whereas empirical evidence is factual, though opinions and arguments are always based from this hard evidence).

Going off the New Testament alone (because the scholar who claims this is referring to the Apostles), we have various manuscripts whether whole or fragmentary (mostly letters between members of the church early on containing passages). There are over 5600 Greek manuscripts still in existence, including the following manuscripts:

* 125 A.D. The New Testament manuscript which dates most closely to the original autograph was copied around 125 A.D, within 35 years of the original. It is designated "p 52" and contains a small portion of John 18. (The "p" stands for papyrus.)
* 200 A.D. Bodmer p 66 a papyrus manuscript which contains a large part of the Gospel of John.
* 200 A.D. Chester Beatty Biblical papyrus p 46 contains the Pauline Epistles and Hebrews.
* 225 A.D. Bodmer Papyrus p 75 contains the Gospels of Luke and John.
* 250-300 A.D. Chester Beatty Biblical papyrus p 45 contains portions of the four Gospels and Acts.
* 350 A.D. Codex Sinaiticus contains the entire New Testament and almost the entire Old Testament in Greek. It was discovered by a German scholar Tisendorf in 1856 at an Orthodox monastery at Mt. Sinai.
* 350 A.D. Codex Vaticanus: {B} is an almost complete New Testament. It was cataloged as being in the Vatican Library since 1475.

The earliest of these found is within 35 years of the writing of the last book.

There are also very early translations:

* 180 A.D. Early translations of the New Testament from Greek into Latin, Syriac, and Coptic versions began about 180 A.D.
* 195 A.D. The name of the first translation of the Old and New Testaments into Latin was termed Old Latin, both Testaments having been translated from the Greek. Parts of the Old Latin were found in quotes by the church father Tertullian, who lived around 160-220 A.D. in north Africa and wrote treatises on theology.
* 300 A.D. The Old Syriac was a translation of the New Testament from the Greek into Syriac.
* 300 A.D. The Coptic Versions: Coptic was spoken in four dialects in Egypt. The Bible was translated into each of these four dialects.
* 380 A.D. The Latin Vulgate was translated by St. Jerome. He translated into Latin the Old Testament from the Hebrew and the New Testament from Greek. The Latin Vulgate became the Bible of the Western Church until the Protestant Reformation in the 1500's. It continues to be the authoritative translation of the Roman Catholic Church to this day. The Protestant Reformation saw an increase in translations of the Bible into the common languages of the people.
Other early translations of the Bible were in Armenian, Georgian, and Ethiopic, Slavic, and Gothic.

Translations are done from all of these texts and others. They can be compared to each other and do not differ other than grammar or spelling in some places.

Texts such as the "Illiad", Josephus's "The Jewish War" and "The Annals of Imperial Rome" are not questioned even though existing manuscripts are centuries after the event (e.g. "The Annals of Imperial Rome" was written around 116 AD but our only surviving manuscript is 850AD). Why should the Bible, which has numerous surviving manuscripts which are very close to the composition of the original autographs, be doubted any less, and whose early manuscripts and translations do not differ in the passages they contain, except for spelling and grammar, be considered any less?

Art said...

Furthermore, there are secular sources which indicate that early Christianity was trinitarian in nature.

Consider an exert from these writings from Pliny the Younger to the Emperor Trajan c.112 AD:

"They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so."
Pliny, Letters 10.96-97


Another, albeit later source from the 3rd century is an inscription inside an early Christian church in Meggido, Israel which states "Akeptous (a woman), the God-loving, offered this table for (the) god Jesus Christ, as a remembrance."


To say that the Trinity was introduced by paganism cannot be correct for the earliest time that happened would have been with Constantine's conversion during the 4th century, while these sources are from the 2nd and 3rd centuries.

ben malik said...

Kangaroo, what in the word does your comments have anything to do with this post? Why don't you crawl back to other thread where Anthony gave you and Muhammad a big spanking.

Unknown said...


The bottom line is that the NT clearly says that Jesus was worshipped. Jesus never said.."Don't do that." He allowed the worship. The apostles would not let anyone worship them.

Do you worship Allah or Muhammad? Why?

Christians worship Jesus. We worship the Father. We worship the Holy Spirit. Why? Because Jesus allowed others to worship..he prayed to the Father(worship)..and condemned blasphemy of the Spirit. You can only blaspheme that which is worthy of worship.

Now, you can choose not to believe the NT writings. That is your prerogative. But you cannot say that Jesus was not worshiped as God according to these writings. If you do then you are like a man who slaps himself and then denies he has hands.

Kangaroo said...

The following is a list of dying-rising gods.

Aboriginal mythology
Akkadian mythology
Arabian mythology
Aztec mythology
Xipe Totec
Celtic mythology
Christian mythology
Dacian mythology
Egyptian mythology
Etruscan mythology
Greek mythology
Hindu mythology
Khoikhoi mythology
Norse mythology
Persian mythology
Phrygian mythology
Roman mythology
Slavic mythology
Sumerian mythology

The above crucified saviors are personifications of the sun, or symbolizing the birth and death of vegetation. The Gospel story of Jesus is plagiarized from the pagan myths.

According to the Bible, Jesus died on a tree

The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. (Acts 5:30, 10:39)

Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed [is] every one that hangeth on a tree: (Galatians 3:13)

Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed. (1 Peter 2:24)

The scholar Arthur Weigall describes that Osiris was crucified upon a tree, like many previous ‘man-gods’, the cross was not unique, its pagan symbol. The Jehovah Witnesses believe that Jesus was crucified upon a ‘stake’.

The ‘tree story’ was indeed plagiarized from the story of Osiris and Isis.

The Popular and widespread religion of Osiris and Isis exercised considerable influence upon early Christianity, for these two great Egyptian deities, whose worship had passed into Europe were revered in Rome and in several other centres, where Christian communities were growing up. Osiris and Isis, so runs the legend, were brother and sister and also husband and wife; but Osiris was murdered, his coffined body being thrown into the Nile, and shortly afterwards the widowed and exiled Isis gave birth to a son, Horus. The coffin, meanwhile, was washed up on the Syrian coast, and became miraculously lodged in the trunk of a tree, so that Osiris, like other sacrificed gods, could be described as having been.' slain and hanged on a tree.' (The Paganism in Our Christianity, Arthur Weigall, 1928, p118)

Islam has destroyed the false charges against Jesus.

Christ the son of Mary was no more than an apostle; many were the apostles that passed away before him. His mother was a woman of truth. They had both to eat their (daily) food. See how Allah doth make His signs clear to them; yet see in what ways they are deluded away from the truth! (Al-Quran 5:75)

O people of the Book! There hath come to you our Messenger, revealing to you much that ye used to hide in the Book, and passing over much (that is now unnecessary). There hath come to you from Allah a (new) light and a perspicuous Book, Wherewith Allah guideth all who seek His good pleasure to ways of peace and safety, and leadeth them out of darkness, by His will, unto the light,- guideth them to a path that is straight. (Al-Quran 5:15-16)

[1] (Lloyd Graham, Deceptions and Myths of the Bible, p. 361)

Kangaroo said...

Very interesting article about the pagan origins of Christianity introduced by Paul and the others to follow. Creation worship, old news boys.

Radical Moderate said...


I formally withdraw my request to keep Kangaroo around. It appears he does not want to engage with any of the arguments, would just like to copy and paste Islamic propaganda, as well as insult people.

Radical Moderate said...

Wow they killed the Useful idiot. I got he was no longer useful to them.

Radical Moderate said...

Another Useful idiot has one the Darwin Award.

I'm sure Allah is very pleased

Anonymous said...


Again you are kying threw youy teeth. These so called deities were not raised they lived in the netherworld. In fact why did the Greeks laugh at Paul wehn he was on Mars Hills preaching the resurection? The last thing a Grek wanted was resurection of a physical body.

Youare aptly named for you Kangaroo Court metality.

Anonymous said...

Kanagaroo again you lie as dud Akkah and the worls's great criminal Mohammed. Both the Old and New Testament teach the doctrine of the Trinity.

GreekAsianPanda said...

Copying and pasting again, Kangaroo?

Anyway, I'm not a Trinitarian, but many attacks on the Trinity, such as yours and that of other Muslims, are not even good or informed. Just quoting a few people who say that the Trinity is pagan does not make it pagan. (The author of the article didn't even give page numbers.) The person cited must prove it.

Edward Gibbon wrote History of Christianity in 1883. See the book here. The quote appears on page xvi, and Gibbon does not prove his claim (unless you consider vague references to Egyptian religion as an argument). He also says that the first followers of Christ were deists, yet according to Islam, they were Muslims. Do you care to accept Gibbon's claims uncritically in this case, too?

Dictionary of Religious Knowledge was written in 1875 by a gentleman by the name of Abbott and can be found here. It has 1000+ pages, but I found the entry titled "Trinitarians" on page 944. The partial sentence quoted in the Muslim's article appears at the end of the entry. I will include the context.

"It is a curious fact that some traces of belief in the Trinity are to be found in most heathen nations. It is very marked in Hindooism [this was a common way of spelling "Hinduism" in the 19th century], and is discernible in Persian, Egyptian, Roman, Japanese, Indian, and the most ancient Grecian mythologies. From this fact the Trinitarians and their opponents derive, however, very opposite conclusions. The one sees in it an evidence that God has 'diffused and perpetuated the evidence of this doctrine throughout the successive periods of time,' while their opponents conclude that it is a corruption borrowed from the heathen religions, and ingrafted on the Christian faith." (bold mine)

Besides the fact that these so-called "traces" of the "Trinity" they speak of are just groups consisting of three gods--definitely not the Christian Trinitarian sense of the word at all--the quote is taken completely out the context. Abbott does not affirm as a fact that the Trinity was stolen, but says that the OPPONENTS of the Trinitarians say that. This, I'm afraid, is pure deception (or not reading carefully) on the part of whoever wrote the article Kangaroo copied and pasted here.

The Paganism in Our Christianity was written in the early 20th century by Arthur Weigall. He isn't even a Bible scholar, but an Egyptologist.

As for Encyclopedia Americana, there are so many volumes and editions of that thing that I could never go through them all to find the quote. It doesn't matter, anyway; it probably just makes the same mistake of comparing groups of three deities and the Trinity.

Why must you appeal to such old scholarship?

Anyway, I would like to find that article from the Daily News; I can't find it. Could you give me a link?

Anthony Rogers said...

The following is a list of false gods:

the Allah of Muhammad

The following is a list of false prophets and founders of false religions:

Simon Magus
Musailama al-Kazzab
David Koresh
Aswad al-Ansi
Tulayha son of Khwailid
David Berg
Mirza Ghulam Ahmed
Joseph Smith
Mahmud son of al-Faraj
Elijah Muhammad
Shabbatai Zevi
Bar Kochba

It is interesting to observe just how striking the similarities are between the character of Allah, the greatest deceiver, and these other gods, not to mention how striking the comparisons are between Muhammad, Islam's second god, and other false prophets. Many of these gods were known as tricksters and deceivers, and those who claimed to be their prophets used their prophetic status to secure all sorts of "perks" for themselves: money, women, etc.

Anthony Rogers said...

In fact, the pre-Islamic pagans thought of their Allah as a god full of guile and given to craftiness. For example, 'Abdu'l-Muttalib, the pagan grandfather of the later "prophet" of Islam, not to be confused with Abdulmutallab, the Christmas Day Bomber, said:

"When they left him, 'Abdu'l-Muttalib went back to Quraysh and having given them the news ordered them to withdraw from Mecca and take up defensive positions on the peaks and in the passes of the mountains for fear of the excesses of the soldiers. 'Abdu'l_Muttalib took hold of the metal knocker of the Ka'ba, and a number of Quraysh stood with him praying to God [Allah] and imploring his help against Abraha and his army. As he was holding the knocker of the temple door, 'Abdu'l-Muttalib said:

'O God [Allah], a man protects his dwelling so protect Thy dwellings. Let not their cross and their craft tomorrow overcome THY CRAFT.'"

Commenting on the use of the word translated "craft" above, Alfred Guillaume says the following:

"mihal here is said by C. and Abu Dharr to mean strength and power; BUT IT REALLY MEANS 'GUILE', 'STRATEGY ACCOMPANIED BY FORCE'. 'Craft', cf. Kraft, appears to be the best redndering. The passage is a reminiscence of Sura 13.14, and the idea may be found in the Quranic saying of God: Khayru l-makirin, 3:47...."

[The Life of Muhammad A Translation of Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, with introduction and notes by A. Guillaume, p. 26]

"But they (the Jews) were crafty, and God was crafty, for God is the best of crafty ones!" S. 3:54 Palmer

"And when those who misbelieve were crafty with thee to detain thee a prisoner, or kill thee, or drive thee forth; they were crafty, but God was crafty too, for God is the best of crafty ones!" S. 8:30 Palmer

"They are devising guile, and I am devising guile." S. 86:15-16

Kangaroo said...

Of course. We all would agree that God is the best of planners against the disbelievers and He foils their plans just like he saved Jesus (as) from dying on the cross, so because of that, they, from the evil deed that they intended to do, deceived themselves. That's how people contniously sin and sin without feleing regret become blinded by falsehood, just like the Jews trying to capture Jesus (as)

Traeh said...

The Italian has been killed.

Radical Moderate said...

Kangaroo said...

"Of course. We all would agree that God is the best of planners against the disbelievers and He foils their plans"

Evidently allah can not foil the plans of the Jews who are all knowing all wise, since they were able to put a spell on your prophet and make him impotent

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...


Now you appear completely unprofessional, the argument you utilize is that of the Jesus myth.

However, if you bother to do a proper research of the actual myths, you will find that the points raised by the Jesus myth proponents are completely absent from the sources.

There is actually a Christian website that refutes these pre-Jesus figures and their resemblence to Christ, point by point:

Since you are dependent upon Islamic polemics you are probably not aware of the difficulty this argument imposes upon the Islamic religion, for example (Muslims tend to pick and choose the details they can deploy in their attacks and those that pose a threat for reliability of Islam):

The points raised consist of a package identical to most Jesus figure myths, such as:

Virgin birth, disciples, healing, death on a cross, resurrection, ascension to heaven.

Here comes the difficulty, hardly any of these are identical to the pre-Jesus figures. Furthermore, if these were true, would you Kangaroo propose that Jesus' virgin birth, his use of disciples, his ability to heal and his ascension to heaven are all pre-Christian ideas that early Christian borrowed, how do you then account for the Qur'an, which includes these details.

Well we could say that the Qur'an even borrowed the resurrection scene, since at least a figure turned into Christ's likeness and died on a cross.

But this wouldn't bother you too much anyway Kangaroo, after all you don't believe the Qur'an, neither are you a Muslim!!!

Kangaroo said...

Again. How else do we learn without experience?

He lets things happen as He wishes.

Im sure your pagan God cant stop the Earth from shaking and thinks that the sun revolves around the Earth and that the vegetables grow without the need for sunlight....?

No need for insults, ty.

Kangaroo said...

You should know by now the Quran teaches no such thing.

Radical Moderate said...


I don't know why I'm bothering to show you how foolish you are. I think this will be my last comment to you.

You copied and pasted.

"The Encyclopedia Americana comments: "Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching."

Justin Martyr, who was martyrd in 165 AD (Thats 160 years before Nicea) Wrote in his "First Apology"

"Jesus Christ, who also was born for this purpose, and was crucified under Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judaea, in the times of Tiberius Caesar; and that we reasonably worship Him, having learned that He is the Son of the true God Himself, and holding Him in the second place, and the prophetic Spirit in the third,

So there you have Jesus, the Son of the true God, being worshiped in the second place, and the holy spirit in the third.

Polycarp who was martyrd in 155 AD writes in his letter to Philipians

"on our Lord and God Jesus Christ and on His Father that
raised him from the dead." Polycarp 12:2

So Polycarp calls Jesus and the Father GOD.

Ignatious who was martyrd somewhere between 98-117 AD wrote in his letter to the Ephisians

"There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first passible and then impassible even Jesus Christ our Lord.
(Ephisians 7)

So Jesus Christ is God existing in Flesh.

So as you can see, your copy and paste job, just wrong. Please take it back and issue a apology and swear that you will never ever repeat such nonsense again.

Radical Moderate said...

We often think of Kangaroo's as cute fuzzy and cuddly creatures. But to people in Australia, there nothing but Giant Rodents.

Sophie said...

How can a Muslim seriously criticise Christianity for being influenced by paganism?

1) Muslims pray at the times that Arab pagans prayed, not at the times that Jews (monotheists) prayed.

2) Muslims worship at a Kaaba, of which there were many, all dedicated to the worship of various gods and godesses.

3) Muslims pay tribute to a black stone, much in the same way as pagans including the Arab pagans (polytheists, animists, pantheists) pay tribute to natural objects.

4) Muslims go on pilgrimage to Mecca, in the same way that the Arab pagans went on pilgrimage to Mecca.

5) Islam claims to share the same theological heritage as Judaism yet the Islamic god claims the name of a god used by Arab pagans, Allah (from a polytheistic pantheon), not Yahweh, God of the Jews (monotheists).

6) Muslims use a symbol of the moon and a star. This symbol has no connection to Judaism (monotheism) but predates Islam by a long time and was used in the veneration of earlier gods and godesses. The use of this symbol as a symbol of Islam has generally been taken for granted by Muslims, not challenged as pagan.

7) The Qur'an is Arab poetry. It was an idea of the Arab polytheists, not the Jewish monotheists, that poets were supernaturally influenced.

8) The centre of Jewish monotheism was always Jerusalem. The centre of Arab pagan worship of many, many gods was Mecca. Muslims pray towards Mecca, not Jerusalem.

The only link Islam has to pre-Islamic monotheism rather than Arab paganism, therefore, is some unproven claim that Abraham built the Kaaba. Nowhere do we find this claim verified by other sources. It isn't and never has been part of Jewish tradition.

The most reasonable conclusion to draw is that a desert pagan claimed a link between his new monotheistic religion and Abrahamic monotheism to give his new religion credibility.

Sophie said...

An important modern Jewish scholar Jacob Neusner said that when he reads the gospels, "I want to say to this Jesus: 'Who do you think you are? God?'"

Jesus claimed the power to forgive sins and to drive out demons by His own authority, two abilities which Jews recognised as belonging to God only.

The Jews wanted to get rid of Jesus because He claimed divine authority as described above, and in doing so he challenged the authority of the religious leaders of His time.

GreekAsianPanda said...


That's actually a modified list taken from Wikipedia, with other names of gods added in and some omitted. Some of the names in your list aren't even of gods (for example, the Phoenix was a mythological bird that would burn and then be "re-born" out of the ashes, and "Trimurti" is not the name of a god but the word used for the triad of Hindu deities), and the ones that actually died and had a "re-birth" of any kind do not do so in a way that resembles Jesus' death. The example of Osiris is definitely not crucifixion; his remains (and his coffin, I think) were imbedded in a tree. That is not even close to crucifixion. The word "tree" is used in Acts, Galatians, and 1 Peter because the cross was made of wood. It's as simple as that. It's not ACTUALLY a tree. The birth-and-rebirth of vegetation deities can hardly be seen as having any connection at all with the death and resurrection of Jesus; as far as I know, there is no description of Jesus' resurrection that even hints at vegetation or anything from which there could have arisen a connection between vegetation deities and Jesus. In the case of some of the deities listed, they themselves do not die and be reborn, but they cause death and rebirth.

In addition to that, I'm fairly certain that Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva cannot die (unless I'm mistaken).

Kangaroo said...

1.)The Quran is not Arab poetry. I think that's such an obvious plain fact known to everyone especialyl by the masters of poetry, the pagans themselves back then. Thank you for showing me your ignorance.

2.)Abraham (as) built the Kaaba,that's why the pagans kept the tradition of worshipping there in the first place lol.

3.)Kissing the black stone was just a tradition by the Prophet Muhammad as it is a piece of stone from Paradise itself. I can kiss my mom everyday but my heart won't open to it in order for me to worship her? And there is a clear hadith about that by Umar (ra). That's why Christians carry a cross around their neck for "safety" and "grace"? Creation worship? As if worshipping a man isn't creation worship already.

4.)Again, Mecca, which has the Kaaba is to answer the call of Abraham to worship only ONE GOD.

5.)Very common knowledge that shows your ignorance. The beautiful name of Allah was and is used by Arab Jews, Christians, and Muslims alike before the finality of Islam and as well as today. Kinda funny....

6.)Moon and star? You serious? I bet you copy and pasting lol..That's the flag of Turkey/Ottoman Empire....Not the official flag of Islam which is a black banner with the words "There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is his Prophet and messenger"

Have a nice day =)

Kangaroo said...

I never knew a tree was mostly made of dead material and was shaped into a cross. Alright that's chill.

But anyways, how would you know Paul did't apply the killnig of godmen to save others and ressurrection theme from the previous pagan religions and apply it to Jesus, then twist the existing scripures to fit his desires. After all, there is no 100% certainty of who or where or when the gospels were written. Doubts can easily be found in the Bible's footnote commentary.
(Uhhhh..i think this gospel came from Mark but I'm not so sure? o.o)

Plus if you have seen the CNN article on Bible corruption. Entire sentences, verses and key words regarding the Resurrection were missing from today's modern Bible. I wonder what Paul did to them.

Kangaroo said...!/video/video.php?v=1647965366294&comments

Why don't you all visit this video and tell me something.
It's proven and admitted by Biblical scholars that there have been THOUSANDS of ALTERATIONS and books MISSING and ADDED throughout history due to desire and as well as by accident.

And you guys claim a a few verses from the Quran are missing...Which isn't even true.
That's why you go to the people of KNOWLEDGE aka the SCHOLARS of ISLAM and ask them about the hadiths and the preservation and see for yourself. Anyone can read a few hadiths and misunderstand many things easily.

Hence..the most MISUNDERSTOOD become the most UNDERSTOOD religion Allah willing.

Ty missionaries for spreading Islam. You get to spread it while we fix your mistakes and lies. =)

ned said...

Kangroo is trying to deviate the attention from the horrible teachings of allah which are displayed in the murder of Italian Activist Vittorio Arrigoni. It shows how ashamed he is that such acts are directly related to the commands by allah and how consistent are these with what mohammad did to jews. Today's muslims have advnaced this from jews to all non muslims especially christians. They do not slay hindus, budhists or others which shows how closely they are all related to each other(apology to bidhists and hindus).

Fernando said...

Kangaroo: ounce again: can't you really see thate all off your words denote totally delusion? don't you simply see thate you are making muslims look like a bunch off lunatics and ignorants? why are you doing such thingue? I really can't grasp your motifes...

ounce again: as I saide before: do choose a theme to debate here withe me without copy and paste and I'll try to make you realize thate realitty...

May our common God, the Holy Trinity, bless you and your family

Kangaroo said...

Ned. Personally i strongly condemn actions like this. I'm not sure the EXACT reason as to why they killed him but it is wrong.

GreekAsianPanda said...

No one said that Osiris' tree was shaped like a cross. The myth only says that he was imbedded into a tree. Are you seriously saying that this is in any way similar to crucifixion?

You're making these "what if" or "but how do you know..." statements when I have shown that your arguments don't have much substance. It's not enough to think up conspiracy theories about how Paul muddled everything. (Besides, since you make a vague appeal to "commentaries," those same "commentaries" say that the Gospels were written after Paul was dead. He couldn't have "twisted" them, in that case. Even if they did exist while he was alive, he would not be able to do it with every copy of each Gospel and it is unlikely that he would have gotten past the other Christians. And where's the motivation?)

You're relying on CNN to tell you about the Bible?? Sad.

You probably have no idea that most textual variants have virtually no significance. The variants that do have any significance can be cleared up using textual criticism. It's not like every time there's a variant, the scholars give up and conclude that we'll never know what the text said. (You do know that if a single letter is accidently omitted, it's considered a variant, right?)

Kangaroo said...

Which tells us how unreliable the Bible is considering addition/removal of books according to what churches want for themselves, whereas the Quran has been the same since Day 1.

BBC actually lol. The Bible was kept in the hands of the few elite priests.

You know how EASY it is to edit verses, especially if Paul was one of them......

WHy don;t you find me the original revelation of Jesus (as), and what he actually said, rather than what "self claimed apostles" say about him 100+ years after his departure?

Which is why Christianity requires blind faith in the scripture written by unknown men wheras the Quran is at least 10^1000^10000 times more authentic.

GreekAsianPanda said...

Kangaroo, I apologize; I misinterpreted the beginning of your post I last responded to ("I never knew a tree was mostly made of dead material and was shaped into a cross. Alright that's chill."). I thought you were saying that Osiris' tree was shaped like a cross. Let me try again.

The reason the NT writers were able to make the connection between the wooden cross and a tree was because early Christians associated Jesus' crucifixion with him "becoming a curse" for sinners (Galatians 3:13, which the article you copied cited without thinking much about it). This is evident in that Paul notes that according to Deuteronomy 21:23, the accursed are hung on trees. They could call Jesus' cross a tree because it was made of wood, like I said before. So as you can see, the reference to a tree is not taken from Egyptian mythology, but from the Hebrew Scriptures.

Kangaroo said...

Historical authenticity of the Quran:

GreekAsianPanda said...

Books were put in/kept out of the canon based on if they went back to the time of the apostles, not simply on the whims of priests. Just because books were kept out does not mean that they should have been kept in and were suppressed by evil conspirators. Besides some disputes regarding some of the more minor books, when the canon was officially formed, the books of the NT had already been widely used and recognized by most Christians.

I already explained to you why Paul couldn't have been "changing" the Gospels. Goodness, I think you suffer from a case of Paulophobia.

Jesus was never given a "revelation" (by this I assume you mean a book, right?). You're just assuming he must have because Islam says so. What he "actually said" was recorded by the early church (i.e. the Gospels). (100+ years? Gosh, not even the most skeptical scholars date the Gospels that late.)

Unfortunately, I don't know anything about the history of the Quran, so I can neither confirm nor deny anything you say about it. All I know is that some scholars disagree that it has been the same "from day one."

GreekAsianPanda said...

Here's an example of a non-Christian writer using the word "tree" to refer to a cross.

"Can anyone be found who would prefer wasting away in pain, dying limb by limb, or letting out his life drop by drop, rather than expiring once for all? Can any man be found willing to be fastened to the accursed tree, long sickly, already deformed, swelling with ugly tumours on chest and shoulders, and draw the breath of life amid long-drawn-out agony? I think he would have many excuses for dying even before mounting the cross!"
Seneca the Younger, Moral Letters to Lucilius 101:14

Seneca was a Roman stoic philosopher who lived from 4 B.C.E. to 65 C.E.

Moral Letters to Lucilius 101 can be found here: