Buchaille knows as well as anyone else that the name Haman is in the Book of Esther. He is trying to distinguish between the Haman there, who was a servant of Xerxes of Persia, not of any pharaoh of Egypt, from the references in the Quran, which erroneously places Haman in Egypt. Buchaille is trying in effect to claim that the imaginary Quranic Haman is not mentioned in the Bible, ie that there were two such people, one in each country. It's nonsense.
"it actually has no relevance to the current discussion."
Thanks. I hadn't noticed that.
I'm saying you're in no position to accuse others of placing their fingers in their ears, closing their eyes, and humming loudly to themselves unless you've objectively considered all other points of view. Have you really looked over the rebuttals to your claims with an open mind? Have you thought about why people might resist your attempts to proselytize on these forums? Has it ever occurred to you that people have legitimate reasons to reject the teachings of the Quran?
Did you miss the part about how all end-of-the-world claims are BS in the first place? That was the focal point of my argument. There's a reason why I linked you to the list of doomsday prophecies that failed. Regardless of what any holy book or religion says, the world just keeps on turning.
