V
Valke2
Guest
You are misreading the paragraph. It does not say the theory was “confirmed”. It says it was “confounded”. That means it was disproven.
- Status
A
Angelos
Guest
Those scientists never claim to have found the Pharaoh mentioned in that Koran verse
Mohammed’s scripture forgets to give clues about the content of that so-called sign, compelling Muslims to tamper with words so as to work out something reasonable and interesting from that vague sentence!
V
Valke2
Guest
The article clearly states, that the mummy was NOT that of pharoah of Exodus
M
Montalban
Guest
No, they don’t say this
It says
“In the 19th century, this apparently added to the speculation about him being the Pharaoh of the Exodus”
That means that they are not sure, and in fact the ‘speculation’ has been widened, not confined, because of this discovery.
And, in fact they’re saying that this speculation, of him being the Pharaoh, was only in the 19th century, perhaps because now they realise that he isn’t. But in the 1800s they *did *indeed think that he might be.
You’ve translated
“Some archaeologists in the 1800s believed this guy to be the Exodus king”
to
“Archaeologists are now convinced that this guy is THE Exodus king”
Perhaps you have evidence to support your claim, but the evidence you provide here does not agree with your own interpretation. I find this odd that you’d provide evidence that doesn’t agree with you.
M
Montalban
Guest
However in the 1800s some believed that he *might *have been.
He’s confused this with a more positive statement
H
hamba2han
Guest
Read the article again please!
The article is not expounding on what is written in the Qur’an.
The ‘theory’ that it is referring to is the belief that the body of the Pharaoh of the Exodus would have probably been washed away in the Red Sea.
It is this ‘theory’ which has been disproven by the discovery of the mummy of the said Pharoah in 1898, NOT the truth of the Qur’anic verses in question.
R
rbarcia
Guest
Ezekiel predicted when Israel would be re-established
Bible passage: Ezekiel 4:3-6
Written: between 593-571 BC
Fulfilled: 1948
In Ezekiel 4:3-6, the prophet said the Jews, who had lost control of their homeland, would be punished for 430 years. This prophecy, according to Bible scholar Grant Jeffrey, p(name removed by moderator)ointed the 1948 rebirth of Israel. Here’s a summary of Jeffrey’s theory:
(In this Bible passage, Ezekiel is asked by God to symbolically act out the 430 years of punishment)
… Then take an iron pan, place it as an iron wall between you and the city and turn your face toward it. It will be under siege, and you shall besiege it. This will be a sign to the house of Israel. "Then lie on your left side and put the sin of the house of Israel upon yourself. You are to bear their sin for the number of days you lie on your side. I have assigned you the same number of days as the years of their sin. So for 390 days you will bear the sin of the house of Israel. "After you have finished this, lie down again, this time on your right side, and bear the sin of the house of Judah. I have assigned you 40 days, a day for each year.
Bible passage: Ezekiel 4:3-6
Written: between 593-571 BC
Fulfilled: 1948
In Ezekiel 4:3-6, the prophet said the Jews, who had lost control of their homeland, would be punished for 430 years. This prophecy, according to Bible scholar Grant Jeffrey, p(name removed by moderator)ointed the 1948 rebirth of Israel. Here’s a summary of Jeffrey’s theory:
- Ezekiel said the Jews were to be punished for 430 years because they had turned away from God. As part of the punishment, the Jews lost control of their homeland to Babylon. Many Jews were taken as captives to Babylon.
- Babylon was later conquered by Cyrus in 539 BC. Cyrus allowed the Jews to leave Babylon and to return to their homeland. But, only a small number returned. The return had taken place sometime around 536 BC, about 70 years after Judah lost independence to Babylon.
- Because most of the exiles chose to stay in pagan Babylon rather than return to the Holy Land, the remaining 360 years of their punishment was multiplied by 7. The reason is explained in Bible’s book of Leviticus. (Leviticus 26:18, 26:21, 26:24 and 26:28). In Leviticus, it says that if the people did not repent while being punished, the punishment would be multiplied by 7. And, by staying in pagan Babylon, most exiles were refusing to repent.
- So, if you take the remaining 360 years of punishment and multiply by 7, you get 2,520 years. But, those years are based on an ancient 360-day lunar calendar. If those years are adjusted to the modern solar calendar, the result is 2,484 years.
- And, there were exactly 2,484 years from 536 BC to 1948, which is the year that Israel regained independence.
(In this Bible passage, Ezekiel is asked by God to symbolically act out the 430 years of punishment)
… Then take an iron pan, place it as an iron wall between you and the city and turn your face toward it. It will be under siege, and you shall besiege it. This will be a sign to the house of Israel. "Then lie on your left side and put the sin of the house of Israel upon yourself. You are to bear their sin for the number of days you lie on your side. I have assigned you the same number of days as the years of their sin. So for 390 days you will bear the sin of the house of Israel. "After you have finished this, lie down again, this time on your right side, and bear the sin of the house of Judah. I have assigned you 40 days, a day for each year.
C
cestusdei
Guest
Muslims enjoy fabricating things from the quran. It reminds me of how fundamentalists misconstrue the Bible. They make it say whatever they want. Muhammed was no prophet.
M
Montalban
Guest
That’s sound advice.
You’ve mis-read it.
Note also, you’re quoting from a tourist web-site, by the way.
That’s not the point. The point is that the Egyptian dude is not whom you wish him to be.
M
Montalban
Guest
Don’t demons have the power of prediction as well?
V
Valke2
Guest
No. Because that pharoah’s tomb was empty when originally discovered, it was thought by some that it was the pharoah of Exodus, since there would be no body. But the mummy was discovered, making it highly unlikely that the pharoah was the one from Exodus.
The only reason they thought he might have been the one in the first place was because there was no body.
THere is absolutely nothing – not one fact – set forth in the article that supports the prophecy you speak of.
M
Montalban
Guest
And the article’s from a tourist site. They’re not about ‘facts’ (in a strict sense) but things that might interest tourists to come along and see them
H
hamba2han
Guest
Below is an excerpt from a website:
**Dr. Maurice Bucaille, after a thorough research proved that although Ramses II was known to have persecuted the Israelites in the Bible, he died whilst Moses (pbuh) was taking refuge in Midian.
Ramses II’s son Merneptah succeeded him as Pharaoh. It was Merneptah who drowned during the exodus. In 1898 the mummified body of Merneptah was found in the valley of Kings, in Egypt.
In 1975, Dr. Maurice Bucaille with other doctors received permission to examine the mummy of Merneptah, the findings of which proved that Merneptah probably died from drowning or a violent shock which immediately preceded the moment of drowning.
Thus the Qur’anic verse, that “we shall save his body as a sign”, has been fulfilled by the pharaoh’s body being kept at the Royal Mummies’ room in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.**
And from another:
In 1898 the tombs of various pharaohs were discovered in the Valley of the Kings, in Egypt. In 1975 Dr. Maurice Bucaille, an eminent French surgeon was allowed to examine the mummified bodies of Rameses II and the pharaoh who had pursued Moses - Merneptah. Dr Bucaille discovered that Merneptah had received very violent blows to several parts of his body and had suffered a massive heart attack. Amazingly, these are the results which occur when someone dies from drowning! Thus Allah had saved the body of the transgressing pharaoh as a sign for all humanity.
**Dr. Maurice Bucaille, after a thorough research proved that although Ramses II was known to have persecuted the Israelites in the Bible, he died whilst Moses (pbuh) was taking refuge in Midian.
Ramses II’s son Merneptah succeeded him as Pharaoh. It was Merneptah who drowned during the exodus. In 1898 the mummified body of Merneptah was found in the valley of Kings, in Egypt.
In 1975, Dr. Maurice Bucaille with other doctors received permission to examine the mummy of Merneptah, the findings of which proved that Merneptah probably died from drowning or a violent shock which immediately preceded the moment of drowning.
Thus the Qur’anic verse, that “we shall save his body as a sign”, has been fulfilled by the pharaoh’s body being kept at the Royal Mummies’ room in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.**
And from another:
In 1898 the tombs of various pharaohs were discovered in the Valley of the Kings, in Egypt. In 1975 Dr. Maurice Bucaille, an eminent French surgeon was allowed to examine the mummified bodies of Rameses II and the pharaoh who had pursued Moses - Merneptah. Dr Bucaille discovered that Merneptah had received very violent blows to several parts of his body and had suffered a massive heart attack. Amazingly, these are the results which occur when someone dies from drowning! Thus Allah had saved the body of the transgressing pharaoh as a sign for all humanity.
A
Angelos
Guest
Objections:
1) You must be reading another Koran version (unique Koran devised to endorse the so-called scientific reality of some Muslim scholars!) in which the verse reads “We shall save His body as a sign” because all the Koran versions I have checked so far reiterate the verse “We shall save YOU** IN** your body”. Thus, the Korans I have do not even imply the preservation of the Pharaoh’s body! Something wrong with your translation then: does this mean the Koran is being deliberately distorted by some Muslim scholars and/or doctors?
2) How come no scientist is aware of Dr. Maurice Bucaille’s proven theories? Isn’t it a bit strange that no non-Muslim scientist seems to have confidence in Bucaille’s findings?
3) Dr. Maurice Bucaille’s supposed evidence is ironically against the historic data recorded in the Koran since it is only the book of Exodus (TORAH) that says the Pharaoh of the Exodus was different from the Pharaoh persecuting the Israelites at the time of Moses’ birth. Mohammed’s scripture, however, denies this and claims that there was only ONE Pharaoh during Moses’ lifetime. (I suggest Dr. Bucaille read surah 28 & 26 again and compare them with the data in the second book of the OT)
4) Why does only ONE verse in the Koran talk of this alleged sign? Why is that* prophetic* verse missing from all the other surahs relating Pharaoh’s death with his army? What’s so special about surah 10 in your scripture? (If you ponder over these questions and comprehend why the chapter was named after Yunus (Jonah), you might realize that no concrete sign about Pharaoh is given in that chapter)
Peace to all,
Angelos N.
H
hamba2han
Guest
The problem here is that you are relying way too much on the English translation of the Qur’an and not considering the verses in the way that it should be understood i.e. in it’s original Arabic.
There is actually a somewhat different interpretation of what the verses really mean and this as an excerpt from one such website.
It is clear for any Arabic speaker that the special mention of “in the body” (i.e. bibadanika) means clearly that it is the lifeless body of Pharaoh that was saved and not Pharaoh himself. This is confirmed by the use of the verb drown (i.e., aghraqa) in the verses as the drowned are dead (even in English).
For those who wish to read the article in full, kindly go here:
islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/Internal/qi025.html
There is actually a somewhat different interpretation of what the verses really mean and this as an excerpt from one such website.
It is clear for any Arabic speaker that the special mention of “in the body” (i.e. bibadanika) means clearly that it is the lifeless body of Pharaoh that was saved and not Pharaoh himself. This is confirmed by the use of the verb drown (i.e., aghraqa) in the verses as the drowned are dead (even in English).
For those who wish to read the article in full, kindly go here:
islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/Internal/qi025.html
J
jack_hawkins
Guest
excellent tactic!
if in doubt claim it’s all “clearer” in the original Arabic (which sounds unlikely in most cases considering the difficulties there seem to be in translation)
in other words, treat the infidels like mushrooms
(keep them in the dark and feed them manure)
if in doubt claim it’s all “clearer” in the original Arabic (which sounds unlikely in most cases considering the difficulties there seem to be in translation)
in other words, treat the infidels like mushrooms
(keep them in the dark and feed them manure)
M
mark_a
Guest
What’sthe deal with this?
H
hamba2han
Guest
The “infidels” do indeed have a CHOICE.excellent tactic!
if in doubt claim it’s all “clearer” in the original Arabic (which sounds unlikely in most cases considering the difficulties there seem to be in translation)
in other words, treat the infidels like mushrooms
(keep them in the dark and feed them manure)
The can choose to learn Arabic and then read the Qur’an in order to understand it a whole lot better without the need to ask Muslims about the translation.
J
jack_hawkins
Guest
Yes, and I usually find the Muslim response is to say tom such people “oh but you’re not a native Arab speaker”
the translators all know Arabic, so are you really saying all the translations are ropey and unscholarly?
the translators all know Arabic, so are you really saying all the translations are ropey and unscholarly?
H
hamba2han
Guest
The Qur’an is only helpful to those who want to be guided.
Even if one is a native Arab speaker, the Qur’an will not do much good to him if his heart simply does not want to accept what is found within it.
There is after all none so blind as those who choose not to see.
Even if one is a native Arab speaker, the Qur’an will not do much good to him if his heart simply does not want to accept what is found within it.
There is after all none so blind as those who choose not to see.
- Status