My Beliefs might be absolutely wrong, they might seem crazy to others. No one can absolutely sure that these swords might have been the property of their alleged owners, but why not? I mean we do not have evidence that they aren't Mohammed's. Their style is identical to the swords of Arabia at the time of Mohammed. Also, the Arabian prophet isn't THAT old, he was around only 1400 years ago. With King Davids case, yes, it might be ridiculous, but why Mohammeds, his property is very sacred to all muslims, so they probably will take great care in keeping them and preserving them for future generations to see. Even King Davids property is probably very sacred to muslims, living in an arabian country, I have many muslim friends, and all of them highly praise ALL the prophets before their own prophet. Even the property of the Messiah, the only reason to what Saladin did to the true cross was that the muslims do not believe that Christ was crucified, they believe that he was sent up to the heavens by god, and another man who looked identical to him was sent down by god to replace him and be crucified, so what they think is that preserving the true cross is ridiculous because it didnt even exist, thats what they think, but lets not go into religion here, please.
|