Prophecy

Ron Webb wrote: I never said that descendants of herdsmen is okay.� I said that even if we assume that's what he meant (which I don't), then the prophecy becomes trivial.� There are descendants of herdsmen all over the world building tall buildings, and have been for thousands of years.� Predicting that descendants of herdsment will build tall buildings is like predicting that the sun will rise tomorrow.� It's not remarkable, it's obvious.

It is quite easy to give some generic unverifiable statement like descendants of herdsmen have been in the tall building business for ages. We have a very prominent example of descendants of herdsmen building tall building in the current middle east billionaires. If descendants of herdsmen have been building tall building all through human history, there should be some other prominent examples too, and some from the olden days immediately after prophet Muhammed (pbuh) should have been more prominent even with the surprise element as they would have been more of herdsmen and less of billionaires.

Ron Webb wrote: The prophecy said tall buildings because that would be surprising and remarkable.� There is nothing remarkable about herdsmen building statues, going trekking, etc.

You mean building tall building is the only surprising and remarkable thing? what about going to mars?

Ron Webb wrote: They are oil billionaires, not herdsmen.� There are no examples of herdsment building tall buildings, never have been and never will be.

We have already seen it's not logical to look for a literal fit to this prophecy and have also seen so far the oil billionaires of middle east provides the best fit to this prophecy, much better than your suggestion of Pharaohs.

Ron Webb wrote: Simply to show that if we assume he meant descendants (which let me emphasize that I don't), then Muhammad was "predicting" something that had already happened.� You're right, it would not be much of a prediction, which is why I don't think that's what he meant.

Like any other issue related to religion, here also you have the choice to accept or reject this prophecy. For a believer, the prophecy has come to pass with such glaring reality and as we have seen there is no logical reason to look for excuses to deny it.

Ron Webb wrote: No, I have not accepted that. I am simply saying for the argument, that if we assume that "herdsmen" includes descendents of herdsmen, then the prophecy changes from being extremely unlikely to extremely trivial and boring.

So why don�t you first make up your mind and be firm on something. You started arguing it has to be strictly herdsmen, then changed to descendants of herdsmen is okay and argued pyramids and Pharaohs fits the explanation better. Now when you see the folly in all these arguments, you again start changing your words.

Whereas we have been saying only one thing - that the current oil billionaires of the middle east fits this explanation perfectly as they satisfy all the three criteria in the prophecy � herdsmen, tall buildings and competition. The surprise element has no significance in this prophecy as it is being prophesied as the sign of something bigger to come i.e. the judgement day - so where is the question of unlikely, trivial and boring etc?

Ron Webb wrote: The pyramids were just an example off the top of my head, to show that people were competing in building tall buildings thousands of years before Muhammad. I'm sure a historian could come up with lots more examples, both before and after him. Given that herding was such a common means of subsistence in ancient times, it is safe to assume that at least some of these builders were descendants of herdsmen. Thus the "prophecy" becomes trivially easy, almost inevitable.

You must be kidding! Why should the prophecy say herdsmen will build tall buildings, they could have done thousands of other things, they could have built their statues, they could have gone fishing, they could have gone trekking, they could have played golf, they could have gone to mars and so on. When something doesn't fit to your idea, you just close your eyes and say it is dark.

Now, if you think you have a better example than the oil billionaires of the middle east, just give it, who is stopping you? But it has to be something in existence now, not from the past as we all know a prophecy is always futuristic.

Ron Webb wrote: Probably both. The ancestors of the Pharaohs presumably lived in Egypt, another desert country where a nomadic lifestyle was common.

But the Pharaohs not even come in the picture as they lived prior to prophet Muhammad (pbuh) made this statement and I am not aware of any Pharaohs living now building pyramids to compete each other. When you are arguing there has to be some frame of reference, when it is about prophecy, you don�t have to confuse yourself with things of past.

Ron Webb wrote: If the prophecy does not predict a surprising event or circumstance, then why should we be surprised or impressed when it comes true?

I don�t know why you are breaking your head for a surprise element here. As I already explained the prophecy is all about a sign of something bigger to come - the judgement day. However, when the last day happens, it will be all of a sudden and it will be the most surprising event beyond anyone�s imagination, but then nobody will have the time to marvel at its surprise:

Abasa: 80:33-37: But when the Shout cometh (33) On the day when a man fleeth from his brother (34) And his mother and his father (35) And his wife and his children, (36) Every man that day will have concern enough to make him heedless (of others). (37)

Alhamdulillah, shukran Islamispeace.

True, but ultimately they have to as truth always prevails.

Jazakallah khair.

Ron Webb wrote: Well, not exactly -- there is no reason why these herdsmen had to be alive in the time of Muhammad.� But the whole point of a prophecy is that it must predict something unlikely or surprising.� There is no challenge in predicting that rich people will build tall buildings.� The prediction that herdsmen, specifically, would be building tall buildings is surprising, precisely because herdsmen would not normally have the resources for it, let alone the need for it.� Why would herdsmen even need tall buildings?The Egyptian pyramids would qualify as tall buildings, and there did seem to be some competition among the pharaohs to see whose could be highest.�� Now all we have to show is that the pharaohs were descendants of herdsmen (which seems quite likely to me), and the prediction is fulfilled, perhaps thousands of years before Muhammad.� See what I mean?� This is easy. [IMG]smileys/smiley2.gif" align="absmiddle" alt="Wink" />

Ok, so you have come so far to accept it can be descendants of herdsmen, not literally herdsmen, and have no problems to accept Pharaohs and pyramids to fit in to the explanation.

But the whole point about a prophecy is it is always a futuristic statement and never referring to something in the past - so we can altogether eliminate the pyramids here.

Now, who is more apt to be called descendants of herdsmen - the Pharaohs or the current oil billionaires in the middle east who literally were herdsmen till the oil riches started in the 20th century? an impartial analysis will tell that the current oil billionaires fits this title more precisely and just have a look at cities like Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Riyadh and Doha and you won't need to look for further explanation on the competition to build taller buildings.

And to conclude, the building of tall buildings by herdsmen in itself is not being prophesied as a surprising event, but it is being predicted as a sign of the end of days - that is more significant because there is no human source who can predict the end of days precisely. So when these signs unfold in front of your eyes with such reality, you just can't stop thinking about the magnificence of the ultimate creator and be in awe of his magnificence.