R
robwar
Guest
seriously, since seems to be an issue for you why don’t you start a thread about this topic over standards. Maybe you should contact History channel since they are the one’s that gave this guy a platform.
- Status
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
Hey, I’m not the one dismissing arguments without addressing them and claiming that professional standards among academics are a liberal conspiracy. Since you wish to argue that Mohammad never existed, why don’t link some actual academic articles by actual academics; or actually defend your position against my points.
B
BrotherA
Guest
I agree!
This leave new scholars to be approved by ‘existing’ scholars according to their own standard.
For those who seek truth, only objectivity is most important. That’s why people choose to follow Jesus rather than the ‘doctors’ of the law…
All we need is to approach every scripture with objectivity and be humble enough to listen to anyone who has something to say. Truth can not be destroyed by critics.
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
Define objectivity. Now prove your definition as being more valid than my definition (for argument sake assume my definition is the exact opposite of yours) without involving any sort of peer review. You can’t. You can’t because in order to prove your definition is more valid you would have to engage in peer review. Welcome to the world of the Truth being relative.
B
BrotherA
Guest
peer review is not always necessary.
We should perhaps say ‘truth’ review. This is what I would call objectivity.
Objectivity is in relation to truth, the absolute Truth, not to peer reviews.
I think it is peer reviews who make truth relative. If truth has to depend on someone else in order to be believed rather that its own strength, then it is not absolute but relative.
R
robwar
Guest
Thank-you! If someone questions what Robert Spencer and others have written and researched, they should read the books and references themselves and follow through on the sources that he and others are using. One has to realize that questioning Mohammed brings death threats and fatwas against the people who are looking into this. One of the main Muslim sources Robert Spencer used left Islam do to his research and he was working at an Islamic University. It is also difficult to go in Saudi Arabia and do archeology at Mecca and Medina. The Government wouldn’t allow it. To bring up some “standard” of research is just another excuse to shut down anything you really don’t want to honestly look at because it doesn’t fit someone’s PC world. To compare Robert Spencer to some kook on history channel how thinks there have been ancient aliens and now has a platform on history channel is blowing smoke at the real issue at hand here.
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
I’m sorry, why is the Ancient Alien guy a “kook?” He meets the same standards that you have set for Mr. Spencer. His work hasn’t been peer reviewed and he doesn’t have a professional education in the field (Mr. Spencer does not hold any degrees involving Islam or the Arabic people).
As for “the real issue at hand,” that would be your desire for us to totally agree with you and not bother to think. You’ve basically ignored every argument I’ve put forth concerning the invalidity of Mr. Spencer’s work. Instead, you’ve decided that the only reason Mr. Spencer isn’t taken seriously and the only reason someone would not “buy what he is selling” is because of those evil liberal academics and evil liberal media pushing a PC agenda.
Let me tell you a little secret. That big nasty peer review that is supposedly being used to suppress the Truth. Yeah, the concept behind it and its use originated from the Church. You know why Arianism is a heresy? It’s because the Church theologians used peer review and determined it to be false.
Remove peer review and you end up with anyone who thinks he knows the Truth going out and starting up his own church down the road from the one he used to go to because the old church refuses to accept his Truth as the real Truth.
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
You’ve defined it, but you haven’t proven it to be more valid. You won’t be able to, because in order to determine the validity of your definition and mine (once again, for the sake of argument the exact opposite of your definition), you’re going to have to engage in peer review.
R
robwar
Guest
I think you are off topic here. I didn’t ask anyone to agree with robert spencer or not but to read and look at what he has researched and written. I just didn’t find evidence you proposed about Napolean as being relevant. If you want to start a thread over peer review and academic standards or research standards, you should do so and we can carry the conversation there. You are the one that brought up ancient aliens not me and the picture of the maniac the believes promotes that stuff was what you were trying to compare to Robert Spencer and his research into the origin of Islam. One is trying to look at evidence and come up with an unprovable theory, the other is looking into the origin of Mohammed and trying to find out what is true and not true. The later is closer to the Santa Claus/St. Nicholas point I had. St. Nicholas was a real Bishop, Santa Claus is the morphed myth not based on a real Bishop.
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
Yes, me showing that one can disprove the existence of an individual for which there is overwhelming evidence proving he existed is completely off the topic of Mr. Spencer proving Muhammad didn’t exist because there is not enough historical evidence. /sarcasm
I find it odd that you have no issue with peer review being used to determine that Arianism was false, but do object to it’s use in regards to Mr. Spencer’s work. You aren’t Mr. Spencer secretly trying to sell copies of his books are you? “Rob” is a nickname for Robert, your views on Islam agree with his, you keep pushing the idea we need to read his book, you, like Mr. Spencer see a vast liberal conspiracy as being the reason he isn’t taken seriously, and you both use the internet. Hmmm…it’s not like you could disprove my theory. To do so, you’d have to engage in peer review (or be an alien).
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
Rob,
I wrote post 83 while rather upset and angry about something totally not related to what we are discussing and on review of the post now that I’ve calmed down I find it to be outside of what I would consider polite or friendly. I apologize for that.
On Mr. Spencer and his work, we aren’t going to agree. You view him as a valid source and his argument as valid, I don’t. Instead of trying to convince each other that the other is wrong, can you provide a source (or sources) that I would consider valid (scholarly works by professionals in the field that have been peer reviewed) that mirror his argument and conclusions? If so, link or cite them and I will review them.
I wrote post 83 while rather upset and angry about something totally not related to what we are discussing and on review of the post now that I’ve calmed down I find it to be outside of what I would consider polite or friendly. I apologize for that.
On Mr. Spencer and his work, we aren’t going to agree. You view him as a valid source and his argument as valid, I don’t. Instead of trying to convince each other that the other is wrong, can you provide a source (or sources) that I would consider valid (scholarly works by professionals in the field that have been peer reviewed) that mirror his argument and conclusions? If so, link or cite them and I will review them.
R
robwar
Guest
No apology necessary, I did not take offense.
I am looking at Robert Spencer’s book right now on my Kindle. Now this might not be up to your standards, but for further reading and references, he lists 28 different authors and some of them have more than one book or article. Some of note are David Powers, “Muhammad is not the Father of Any of Your Men: The Making of the Last Prophet” published in 2009. Karl-Heinz Ohlig, The Hidden Origins of Islam" published 2010. and Warraq Ibn, “The Origins of the Koran” 1998. The last one was a Muslim and left teaching at an Islamic University because he came to the conclusion after his studies that Mohammad never existed. Warraq books are available on Amazon, I am waiting for the Kindle versions. I think that we can agree to disagree. I understand what you are trying to say but you have to consider that any type of research into the origin or authenticity of the Islamic story of Mohammed will bring on death threats by Islamic sources. Any archeology digs at Mecca or Medina would again be blocked by SA government since any non-Muslim is prevented from going into those places. Any scientific study of the so called relics of Mohammed would be blocked for the same reasons. The peer review you are looking for might not exactly be there because this is such a hot potato issue with big consequences. I am just looking at the above mentioned books for further study myself.
peace
- Status