Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Random Science Posts
Today at 01:47 PM

Nostalgia, nostalgia...
Today at 12:04 PM

What music are you listen...
Today at 11:54 AM

Qur'anic studies today
Today at 01:29 AM

NayaPakistan...New Pakist...
Yesterday at 12:24 PM

Pakistan: The Nation.....
Yesterday at 12:20 PM

Coronavirus crisis
March 26, 2020, 05:23 PM

مدهش----- لماذا؟؟؟؟
by akay
March 26, 2020, 08:37 AM

Excellence and uniqueness
March 24, 2020, 01:34 PM

The means of rumor making...
March 24, 2020, 01:52 AM

Shit Muslims Say To Ex-Mu...
March 22, 2020, 11:51 AM

Apostasy Alternative
March 22, 2020, 10:17 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Who is "Al-Samiri"?

 (Read 11157 times)
  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     OP - December 23, 2014, 03:58 PM

    so, in the Quran it says that when musa was away when he went to meet allah, a man referred to as "al samiri" tempted the bani israil to worship the golden calf, and he was the one who made it animate. then when musa returned, he was angry, and told al samiri that his punishment would be that he would say "touch me not".

    so looking at the translations, it seems that some translate it as Samaritan, and some don't. and among those who don't, for example, rodwell and palmer, writes in the footnotes that it means Samaritan.

    as Jeffery writes: there can be no doubt that the Muslim authorities are right in saying that it means "The Samaritan"... A confirmation of this is found in the words of v. 97, giving the punishment of the Samiri, where the " touch me not" doubtless refers to the ritual purifications of the Samaritans."

    As a non-Arabic speaker I used the tool most convenient at my disposal, google translate, and it too refers to the meaning "Samaritan" for al samiri.

    what I was wondering is that whether there's any proof that the word "al samiri" pre-Quran would be understood as Samaritans? or is it a novel use by the Quran, and then adopted as the word to refer to Samaritans?

    "we stand firm calling to allah all the time,
    we let them know - bang! bang! - coz it's dawah time!"
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #1 - December 23, 2014, 05:14 PM

    The more obvious etymology derives from "watchman" or "shepherd". 

    The use of Samaritan in a Mosaic context makes absolutely no sense at all.
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #2 - December 23, 2014, 06:35 PM

    A very interesting subject which shows the typical Qur'anic distortion of Biblical narratives to exonerate Allah's prophets from any wrongdoing.  The Exodus narrative blames Aaron for the golden calf, with the dueling Biblical narratives reflecting the conflict between Aaronite and Levite priestly factions who were drafting the competing narratives.  But the Qur'an does not tolerate any of God's prophets counseling any form of idolatry.  So it brings in and blames an outsider, al Samari, for the idolatry.  The Qur'an frequently presents this type of 'cleaned up and moralized' retelling of Biblical narratives.

    I have no idea what the name al Samari means or where it comes from -- it is historically nonsense to be referring to Samaritans back in the time of Moses, long before the Hebrews (mythically) came to Israel and the Torah was written.  But that doesn't mean the Qur'an may not be using the term Samaritan!  It just means the author(s) of the Qur'an did not have an excellent grasp of ancient Canaanite history and its chronology, which is entirely understandable -- how could they have?

    Answering Islam has a very interesting discussion on this issue, and its use of the parallel Biblical citations to Samaritans allegedly worshiping calves as idols is fairly decisive for me -- that Biblical tradition of alleged Samaritan calf idolatry is plainly the most obvious source for this Qur'anic reference, and the fact that the Qur'an is using the later Judaic 'calf idolaters' slander against the Samaritans and importing it into the Mosaic context via al Samari is very likely.

    http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/qbhc01.html
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #3 - December 23, 2014, 11:04 PM

    It does look suspiciously like the story of Moses returning from the mountain and the references to Samaritans worshiping calves were conflated in the Qur'an.
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #4 - December 24, 2014, 05:18 AM

    ok, so here's from Lane's lexicon. Lane, under the entry "Saamiriyyun", tells us that saamiriyy is the "rel n" (?) of saamiratun, that is, the Samaritans. he also cites "Zj" (?) that the Samaritans remained in Syria, and are known as "alSaamiriyyun".


    here's Palmer's footnote:
    Quote
    I.e. the Samaritan; some take it to mean a proper name, in order to avoid the anachronism.


    Rodwell's footnote:
    Quote
    That is, the Samaritan. This rendering, which is probably the true explanation of the word Samiri, involves a grievous ignorance of history on the part of Muhammad. Selden (de diis Syr. Syn. i. ch. 4) supposes that Samiri is Aaron himself, the Shomeer, or keeper of Israel during the absence of Moses. Many Arabians identify him with the Micha of Judges xvii. who is said to have assisted in making the calf (Raschi, Sanhedr. 102, 2 Hottinger Hist. Orient. p. 84). Geiger suggests that Samiri may be a corruption of Samael. See next note. But it is probable that the name and its application in the present instance, is to be traced to the old national feud between the Jews and Samaritans. See De Sacy, Chrestom. i. p. 189, who quotes Abu Rihan Muhammad as stating that the Samaritans were called Al-limsahsit, the people who say, "Touch me not" (v. 97, below), and Juynboll Chron. Sam. (Leid. 1848) p. 113. Sale also mentions a similar circumstance of a tribe of Samaritan Jews dwelling on one of the islands in the Red Sea.


    "we stand firm calling to allah all the time,
    we let them know - bang! bang! - coz it's dawah time!"
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #5 - December 24, 2014, 11:36 AM

    Answering Islam has a very interesting discussion on this issue, and its use of the parallel Biblical citations to Samaritans allegedly worshiping calves as idols is fairly decisive for me -- that Biblical tradition of alleged Samaritan calf idolatry is plainly the most obvious source for this Qur'anic reference, and the fact that the Qur'an is using the later Judaic 'calf idolaters' slander against the Samaritans and importing it into the Mosaic context via al Samari is very likely.

    http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/qbhc01.html

    Jeffery also cites the Hosea 8 story as a possible influence, but he also cites fraenkel's opinion that it probably came from a late jewish midrash that blames the lapses of faith the jewish people onto the Samaritans. perhaps it's bit of both? or maybe hosea 8 influences the midrash, which in turn influences the Quran?

    anyway the other clue regarding the identity of the Samiri is his punishment: "la misaasa". Jeffery wrote that it "doubtless refers to the ritual purifications of the Samaritans". Goldziher wrote a paper on this "punishment" and how it refers to Samaritan purification laws which say that contact with those not of their stock as impurity. the paper can be read here, but it's in French, which I can't read. maybe anyone here who is fluent in French can check it out?

    "we stand firm calling to allah all the time,
    we let them know - bang! bang! - coz it's dawah time!"
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #6 - January 25, 2015, 06:23 PM

    The use of Samaritan in a Mosaic context makes absolutely no sense at all.


    But in a post-Mosaic Torah context the use of a stand-in for Samaria makes a lot of sense. The Northern Kingdom had set up, exactly, golden-calf shrines at Bethel and (I dimly recall) Dan. The Torah is foreshadowing this historical event in its Exodus narrative. Leaving aside the whole Documentary Hypothesis mess; any or all of the sources would have attacked Samaria for this idolatry.
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #7 - January 25, 2015, 06:43 PM

    This just shows redaction of previous texts with a more modern term, of the time, thus is anachronistic. It also shows a detachment from the modern believer, of the time, and their knowledge of their religion if anachronism is required to make a point about a core foundation of their religion. It can not be foreshadowing if based on a redaction using anachronism.
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #8 - January 25, 2015, 06:48 PM

    so, in the Quran it says that when musa was away when he went to meet allah, a man referred to as "al samiri" tempted the bani israil to worship the golden calf,.....................

    All musa isa stories of Islam are bogus and they were selling old stories to brain wash Mideastern folks of that time.. ....

    All these verses beow  are related to that story of  Samiri ., The simple reason fr that  is nothing but Snake oil stories selling and trying to reinforce silly belief that Islam is another Abrahmic religion  in line with Judaism and Christianity.
    Quote
    020.085: He said: So surely We have tried your people after you, and the Samiri has led them astray.

    020.086: So Musa returned to his people wrathful, sorrowing. Said he: O my people! did not your Lord promise you a goodly promise: did then the time seem long to you, or did you wish that displeasure from your Lord should be due to you, so that you broke (your) promise to me?

    020.087: They said: We did not break (our) promise to you of our own accord, but we were made to bear the burdens of the ornaments of the people, then we made a casting of them, and thus did the Samiri suggest.

    020.088: So he brought forth for them a calf, a (mere) body, which had a mooing sound, so they said: This is your god and the god of Musa, but he forgot.

    020.089: What! could they not see that it did not return to them a reply, and (that) it did not control any harm or benefit for them?

    020.090: And certainly Haroun had said to them before: O my people! you are only tried by it, and surely your Lord is the Beneficent Allah, therefore follow me and obey my order.

    020.091: They said: We will by no means cease to keep to its worship until Musa returns to us.

    020.092: (Musa) said: O Haroun! what prevented you, when you saw them going astray,

    020.093: So that you did not follow me? Did you then disobey my order?

    020.094: He said: O son of my mother! seize me not by my beard nor by my head; surely I was afraid lest you should say: You have caused a division among the children of Israel and not waited for my word.

    020.095: He said: What was then your object, O Samiri?

    020.096: He said: I saw (Jibreel) what they did not see, so I took a handful (of the dust) from the footsteps of the messenger, then I threw it in the casting; thus did my soul commend to me

    In fact I would consider that all that I said, he said nonsense is added  in to Quran at much later time for no good reason but just to couple Islam to earlier Abrahamic religions..

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #9 - January 26, 2015, 12:39 AM


    how fuck works without shit??


    Let's Play Chess!

    harakaat, friend, RIP
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #10 - January 26, 2015, 01:29 AM


    hello asbie .. that actor is no last samurai of AMRIKA... stupid actor whose wife could not stand his cult

    Here is the real  samurai of AMRIKA... watch what he says... god bless AMRIKA if he gets in that position .. could be worse than what Hush did.. but Thank to world wide web.. hope it will not happen..

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #11 - January 26, 2015, 01:52 AM

    But in a post-Mosaic Torah context the use of a stand-in for Samaria makes a lot of sense. The Northern Kingdom had set up, exactly, golden-calf shrines at Bethel and (I dimly recall) Dan. The Torah is foreshadowing this historical event in its Exodus narrative. Leaving aside the whole Documentary Hypothesis mess; any or all of the sources would have attacked Samaria for this idolatry.


    Ironically I was just reading Friedman's "Who Wrote the Bible" this morning and he discusses this issue in the context of the documentary hypothesis of Biblical origins.  It seems that the 'golden calves' may have been propaganda against Northern Yahweh worshipers by a competing Judean priestly faction, who accused the Northern faction of worshiping golden calves.  Almost certainly there was no such actual worship of idols, but what may have been the case is that the golden calves were used as the 'throne' of El/Yahweh in the Northern shrine, just as the cherubs were used as the 'throne' of El/Yahweh in the Jerusalem temple -- but were not themselves worshiped.



    This North/South rivalry is explicitly stated in the other Biblical mention of the golden calf, actually calves, from 1 Kings:

    "Jeroboam thought to himself, "The kingdom will now likely revert to the house of David. If these people go up to offer sacrifices at the temple of the LORD in Jerusalem, they will again give their allegiance to their lord, Rehoboam king of Judah. They will kill me and return to King Rehoboam." After seeking advice, the king made two golden calves. He said to the people, "It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem. Here are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt." One he set up in Bethel, and the other in Dan. And this thing became a sin; the people came to worship the one at Bethel and went as far as Dan to worship the other."

    Could hardly be more explicit about what is going on with the golden calves -- this is the Deuteronomist's account of why they were made and used, basically a Northern Israelite King's (Jeroboam's) illegitimate weapon against the Jerusalem temple worship and the House of David.  The subtext of the two calves, by the way, is that Yahweh would have been invoked over all the land between Bethel and Dan, just as Yahweh would have been invoked over the cherubs in the competing Jerusalem temple.

    Probably the later Samaritans, who were likewise competing Northern Yahweh worshipers, just inherited this continuing trope of Judah criticism against the Northern religious factions.
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #12 - January 26, 2015, 02:00 AM

    Also considering the how the kingdom divided it is not unexpected to see demonization of the majority by the minority. Add in archaeologist evidence of a polytheistic foundation of the religion the divide is more solid than the redacted tale in the Torah.
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #13 - January 26, 2015, 02:12 AM

    Btw Friedman's discussion of the Exodus version of the story is pretty amazing ... really shows the power of the documentary hypothesis to explain these baffling narratives.  He argues that the golden calves are blasted because they symbolize the exclusion of the Levite priesthood from the Northern Israelite worship of Yahweh.  But likewise they blast the Aaronite faction of priests in Jerusalem; likely this Elohist account in Exodus was written by a marginalized community of Levite priests in Judah, who traced their ancestry back to Moses, but resentful of the Aaronite priest privileges in connection with the Jerusalem temple.  This is why the Elohist accounts are always glorifying Moses and putting Aaron in his place.

    He also explains several very baffling details of the Elohist account in Exodus.  For example, why does Aaron make the golden calf and then say "A holiday to Yahweh tomorrow!" when he presents it?  If the people are worshiping it instead of Yahweh, then why is there a holiday to Yahweh in connection with it? Why does he say "these are your gods (plural)" to the Israelites, when there is only one calf?  Why does Moses then smash all of the tablets in a rage?

    A:  it's not about idol worship, it's about the golden calves and their use in a *rival* Northern cult of Yahweh, as referenced in 1 Kings.  And secondarily, about exalting the Moses tradition over the Aaronic upstarts.
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #14 - January 26, 2015, 10:33 AM

    The Temple would have undermined the authority and prominence of other sacred holy sites established in the previous books of the bible. These sites, if following the biblical narrative, would have caused tension between the emerging central authority of Aaronites and Levites outside Jerusalem. However I think this points out the emergence of a family oriented religious caste system or divide rather than a tribe of Levites as per the narrative. Consider in the Bible there are contradicting information regarding the Tribes of Israeli. The Joseph Tribe is parts considered one tribe, in other parts it is divided between Manasseh and Ephraim. The Tribe of Joseph is counted as two when the Levi, Levites, are excluded as one of the 12 tribes. In earlier texts, biblical chronology not historical, Levi is counted as a member of the 6 tribes. Simon is treated as a tribe after it's absorption into Judah. Manasseh is not given the blessing of Jacob in Genesis yet becomes a tribe during the conquest. This clearly establishes a shifting view regarding the Levites and a continuity error. I believe this is a redaction of the later emerging Babylonian Captives. Now if the Levites are counted as a Tribe rather than a profession they would have picked a side when the kingdom divided. Yet we clearly have no record of this, any mentioned of the tribe would push the number of tribes to 13. Yet 12 tribes are named making Levite a non-tribe association. Yet before this account we have Levites treated as a tribe during the division of land during the conquest narrative in which the tribe was give the cities and sacred sites yet could not be land-owners. So clearly we have a contradiction in which over a short period of time we see an emergence of a new tribe.

    There is the golden calf cult, there are other forms of polytheism throughout the bible in which Israelites go against God. I will make post about this as well. It getting late.
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #15 - January 26, 2015, 12:37 PM

    Quote
    Ironically I was just reading Friedman's "Who Wrote the Bible" this morning ..............

     and says
    Btw Friedman's discussion of the Exodus version of the story is pretty amazing ... really shows the power of the documentary hypothesis to explain these baffling narratives.  ..............


    So many  Friedmans and so many hard working  Friedmans write so much., it is hard to read  t keep in track of them  across different fields ..Anyways that Dr. Richard Elliott Friedman's book "Who Wrote the Bible" is so important., I say every one who is interested in origins of religions and religious manuscripts should read it....

    So let me give the reader's FREE PDF LINK OF THAT BOOK..  http://dictionnaire.narod.ru/Friedman-2011-eng.pdf   download quickly  all 300 pages book before it disappears from web..  Hi Zaotar ., I wonder whether you consider Friedman religious guy., secular religious guy or a secular humanist?  Some time back I read his interview in that beliefnet.com.. You may be interested in scanning through it....

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #16 - January 26, 2015, 06:20 PM

    That all sounds very likely to me Bogart.  From what I can tell, despite writing on the documentary hypothesis, Friedman is extraordinarily conservative in his acceptance of the veracity of traditional Biblical history.  The 'twelve tribes' stuff has always seemed like myth to me.  And Friedman buys into a lot of things that strike me as pretty silly -- example, he talks about how Solomon married an Egyptian princess, and so he must have been extraordinarily powerful because otherwise it is unknown for the Egyptians to marry their princess to a foreigner, so by doing so Solomon was unique and special.

    As opposed to drawing the obvious critical inference from this incongruity, which is that Solomon never married any such princess, and this was an error made by somebody who was trying to aggrandize the glorious ancient king by regaling people with his mythical power and might.

    Still, it is kind of depressing to see how far ahead the critical mindset is in Biblical studies.  Islamic studies are pretty much 150-200 years behind the curve.  Friedman goes over the steady historical collapse of the traditional view of the Torah's authorship, and it's rather amazing how closely it parallels the present situation with the Qur'an's authorship.  For many centuries, Moses was considered the sole author of the Torah, with increasingly unconvincing explanations being used to justify that traditional viewpoint.  You see the exact same thing with the Qur'an, where people make extraordinary efforts to try to jam its authorship into the life of a single prophet despite (like the Torah) the fact that the text in no way even begins to resemble something that looks like a single author produced it.

    One should approach it from exactly the opposite perspective, which is of asking *who wrote the Qur'an*, and then entertaining various hypotheses about that question.  Not beginning with a default dogma, imposing a 'burden of proof,' and readily accepting hypotheses that, no matter how contrived, are at least arguably consistent with the default dogma.
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #17 - January 26, 2015, 08:35 PM

    so, in the Quran it says that when musa was away when he went to meet allah, a man referred to as "al samiri" tempted the bani israil to worship the golden calf, and he was the one who made it animate. then when musa returned, he was angry, and told al samiri that his punishment would be that he would say "touch me not".

    Interestingly enough, that name has always come up as "alsamira'i" "السامرائي" or "the sumerian" in the stories I've come across while growing up. Maybe this sheds new light that you guys have not seen before? either way, I don't know which one is the correct one, It's all made up anyways.

    "Ours is the age which is proud of machines that think and suspicious of men who try to."
    هذا من فضل جدي
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #18 - January 27, 2015, 08:26 AM

    That all sounds very likely to me Bogart.  From what I can tell, despite writing on the documentary hypothesis, Friedman is extraordinarily conservative in his acceptance of the veracity of traditional Biblical history.  The 'twelve tribes' stuff has always seemed like myth to me.  And Friedman buys into a lot of things that strike me as pretty silly -- example, he talks about how Solomon married an Egyptian princess, and so he must have been extraordinarily powerful because otherwise it is unknown for the Egyptians to marry their princess to a foreigner, so by doing so Solomon was unique and special.

    As opposed to drawing the obvious critical inference from this incongruity, which is that Solomon never married any such princess, and this was an error made by somebody who was trying to aggrandize the glorious ancient king by regaling people with his mythical power and might.

    Still, it is kind of depressing to see how far ahead the critical mindset is in Biblical studies.  Islamic studies are pretty much 150-200 years behind the curve.  Friedman goes over the steady historical collapse of the traditional view of the Torah's authorship, and it's rather amazing how closely it parallels the present situation with the Qur'an's authorship.  For many centuries, Moses was considered the sole author of the Torah, with increasingly unconvincing explanations being used to justify that traditional viewpoint.  You see the exact same thing with the Qur'an, where people make extraordinary efforts to try to jam its authorship into the life of a single prophet despite (like the Torah) the fact that the text in no way even begins to resemble something that looks like a single author produced it.

    One should approach it from exactly the opposite perspective, which is of asking *who wrote the Qur'an*, and then entertaining various hypotheses about that question.  Not beginning with a default dogma, imposing a 'burden of proof,' and readily accepting hypotheses that, no matter how contrived, are at least arguably consistent with the default dogma.


    "Hezekiah assigned  the priests and Levites to divisions — each of them according to their duties as priests or Levites 2 Chronicles 31:2 We have another contradiction of what or who the Levites were. If following the biblical narrative Levites are the priest so one can not divide between priest and Levite when they are one and the same. Levites are again a tribe pushing the number to 13, in this the Tribe of Simon not longer exists. I still maintain that the Priesthood is a profession only later turned into a narrative tribe.

    A lot of Solomon mirrors Amenhotep III. Massive construction works, fortification of cities inside and outside of Egypt particularly in Canaan, royal marriages with foreigners to the King.  This is also the dynasty which established control of Canaanite was established. However is it very hard to identify links between Egypt, Canaan and Solomon. A lot of it is speculation which I not sure is relevant to the thread. It is more related to the tribal organization of Canaanites and Hebrews using the base number of 12. Hence 12 and 6 tribes. Which does give a little credit to the idea that tribal organization was based on the number 12 and redacted into the texts as genealogy. This causes a conflict with base number system of Egypt which was 10. With Joseph as viceroy of Egypt and Moses raised by royalty he would have been educated in the base system of 10, not 12 of Babylon. While the Canaanites vassals still maintained their number system as Egypt never colonized only garrisoned the region.

    An issue with the Golden Calf is that it was also an Canaanite icon for Moloch according to the Biblical narrative. Bull worship is later linked with Sidon, the Phoenicians and later Carthage. El and Baal are depicted with horns. The verses covering the Calf contradict the previous narrative. God a short time prior unleashed the 12 plagues, base number of 12 not 10, on Egypt. We have the Red Sea crossing followed by the destruction of Pharaoh's army. We have the burning bush leading the people through the desert. We have repeated examples of Moses' one God. Why would Aaron suddenly revert to a Calf association with God? Many point out Apis as a source. However this makes no sense in light of the narrative. Beside Apis is a popular but rather minor messenger god. Apis has the function equivalent to an angel as a intermediary between humans and the supreme god. So association of a known messenger god with a supreme god? There are also two other bull gods, Mnevis and Buchis. None of the three god really fit a pre-exile Hebrew as slaves which work on the monuments of the pharaohs. None are associated with a trade or craft skill. There is also Ptah which during the enslavement, exodus, conquests of Canaan all the way to the conquest of Egypt by the Roman is becoming increasingly dominate. First a patron deity of a city, then region, then Lower Egypt followed as the supreme God. Ptah is associated with crafts skills. Unless Ptah was also the God of the bible it still makes no sense to associate these icons with the Hebrew God. Also given the use of Semitic systems rather than Egyptian rises doubt with connect between the Calf and a different God especially of a foreign one. If an idol of God why the Calf? As slaves there is little documentation of Hebrews living as a pastoral slave people. I will cover more later.

    Why Sumerian? Sumerians were a dead culture for centuries before the enslavement. How could an outsider, regardless of culture, gain so much influence after the exodus to convince a people to give him their gold in order to construct an idol. More so how does a supposed slave people have enough gold to construct an idol at all. Exodus makes no sense when it comes to getting gold from the Egyptians. First off Exodus places the plunder before any mention of it's use. We shift God shifting between material wealth being good, not good, then good then we have Jesus with his needle. Why does God need bling for his house? More so God compels people to give their gold to the Hebrews yet never did this with the rest of the Exodus narrative. If God can compel, force, people to give up their gold why not just do the same for releasing of slaves. The verses about gold seems to hint at a raider plundering an area than anything else. It does not fit the narrative at the time only the narrative of Solomon centuries after Exodus in which the house of God is built. Why was Aaron not executed? He built the calf, he was the one that accepted the demands of the people yet he is spared.

    Thrones are a more modern icon. God's in antiquity did not have thrones, they had animals. Animals were the icon which thrones are now. The Calf was not an idol but a "throne" animal of God, aka El.

  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #19 - February 08, 2015, 02:41 PM

    Link for the book Zao and I are talking about

    https://archive.org/stream/WhoWroteTheBible2ndEdition/Who%20Wrote%20the%20Bible%20%282nd%20Edition%29#page/n73/mode/2up
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #20 - February 08, 2015, 03:03 PM


    hmmm............

    The folder is about "Who is "Al-Samiri"  in Quran ? and bogart book link talks about "Who wrote Bible"..

    I don't care who wrote those books., when, why and how., I don't care about the origins these books,  But I am very certain.. very very certain..  "THAT  NONE OF THESE BOOKS  WERE WRITTEN BY ALLAH/GOD whatever  and none of those words in these books were inspired or came   indirectly  as mouth piece of allah/god.."

    And..and

    "Any one on this earth who considers that any of these  books of  past/present or .future are from god., I would consider them  as Fools or nut cases at best or ..or....outright cunning criminals at worst that use allah/god name for  their  ulterior motives and criminal activities "

    And that goes to all so-called " religions , prophets/messengers/preachers  of this earth"

    anyway going  back to the thread with this tube on that "Al-Samiri"  in Quran"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7DLeYzK4C4

    Brainless IDIOTS & HIGH SCHOOL DROPOUTS  preach religious rubbish to  brainwash children with stupid cock bull stories of past in 21st century.   I am so worried about the lives those children in this 21st century who come out of such religious schools..  

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIF0PHuGiuA

    FUCKING IDIOTS.. they ruined their lives and now they ruin lives of 1000s of children in east and west.. I hate  them..

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #21 - February 09, 2015, 12:26 PM

    I was just linking Feidman's book since it was discussed by Zaotar and I. I thought a link would help those interested.
  • Who is "Al-Samiri"?
     Reply #22 - February 09, 2015, 12:40 PM

    I was just linking Feidman's book since it was discussed by Zaotar and I. I thought a link would help those interested.

    Indeed that book is very important book bogart., so let me put whole PDF file of that book  here



    Those who want to download/read it please click the picture...


    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »