so we have a moon God. Probably the same one that has been staring down here all these years. I am glad I have nothing to do with all of this ancient scriptures of uneducated souls that have passed uneducated words down for centuries.

Rest and be restive there are better things to think of.

I thought we already had this discussion, runner.

<<Allah of course derives from the moon god many arabs worship.>>

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=7741#238090

‘Allah’ is simply ‘god’ in Arabic. So, of course the Pagan and Abrahamic gods are going to have the same label.

From the Qur’an:

“Say ye, “We believe in … what was revealed to Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the Patriarchs; and in what was given to Moses and Jesus; and in what was given to the prophets - from their Lord.” (Surah 2:87)

“And when his Lord tested Abraham with certain words, and he fulfilled them. He said, “I am making you a leader of humanity.”” (Sura 2:124)

“The Angels said, “O Mary, Allah gives you good news of a Word from Him. His name is the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, well-esteemed in this world and the next, and one of the nearest.” (Sura 3:45)

“When Jesus sensed disbelief on their part, he said, “Who are my allies towards Allah?” The disciples said, “We are Allah’s allies; we have believed in Allah, and bear witness that we submit.”” (Sura 3:52)

There are literally hundreds more mentions of Jesus and Abraham in the Qur’an. We can go through the rest of them if you’d like?

Allah’s not looking like much of a Pagan moon-god to me, though. Indeeed, he's looking entirely Abrahamic. The Qur'an even says so.

<<Might be hilarious to you Toni however a billion or so muslims would stone you for declaring Jehovah or Yahweh the One true God.>>

Yes, they're probably as ignorant as you. You mob have a lot more in common than just your god, after all.

It’s not a “billion or so”, though. According to multiple polls taken around the world, less than 15% would.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/articles/opinion-polls.aspx

(That domain name is sarcastic, too, before you get your knickers in a twist.)

Hi Joe and o sung wu, I was unaware that the existence of massacres had been questioned and I don't know what forensic evidence could survive several decades. However, the British arrived, they were determined to have the land and they used violence to get their way. That can accurately be called an invasion. However, there have also been several attempts to deal fairly with aboriginal people and these should also be mentioned.

Hi Benk,

The problem with forensic evidence not surviving is that, if there isn't any, how do you know ? But the good news is that, it may well have survived. All anybody has to do is follow up on some site that is notorious for massacres and start digging.

Somewhere, anywhere, that would be a start. It would be valuable to be able to say for certain, about each claimed site, that yes or no, there was or there doesn't appear to have been, a massacre on this site.

Definition: any killing of more than three people ? Would that count as a massacre ?

Then there would be the issue of differentiating natural deaths from a massacre: individual and isolated burial, perhaps signs of disease of old age, proper burial and no signs of violence ?

Or signs of violence ? The next issue would be to differentiate between inter-Aboriginal massacres and massacres of Aboriginal people by non-Aboriginal people: how todo that ?

Well, if the bones had signs of bullet-holes or sabre-cuts, that would be pretty conclusive. But if they had skull crushing, or spear-wounds, then probably not. Did such things happen ? Well, there was one such massacre near Mt Eba here in South Australia in about 1872: men in the group exterminated by neighbouring groups had married wrong.

More than likely, in inter-Aboriginal massacres, bodies would not have been buried, the bones would be above ground, and scattered by dogs. But if bodies had been hastily buried or burnt, the culprits would most likely be whitefellas. If they were burnt, the massacre could be dated to within a few years by Carbon 14 testing of the charred remains.

If DNA could be extracted, it might even be possible to identify which group the murdered people cam from. I don't understand why nobody has ever done such a full study, there would be so much to learn from just one proper forensic investigation. .

Cheers,

Joe