For StephenC

If someone claims to be a prophet from God it is their responsiblity to prove it with verifiable facts and unbiased witnesses.

Any written or oral statements must be allowed to be examined freely without any added editorals or clarifications.  Any differences shall be examined in detail.

If their prophecy contradicts older documents then the older documents will be given greater creditability unless the prophet can provide indepentently verifiable evidence that the older document was false.

Since there are Angels and devils (Satan, evil spirits) any claimed visitation (especially unwitnessed encounters) must be accompanied with how the visitee knew that the Angel was not the deceiver-Satan or an evil spirit.  Mere unhumanlike abilities or appearances do not prove identification.

If two people claim the same type of encounter, but have different revelations, the differences should be investigated in detail.

There seems to be many more "false prophets" then actual prophets.  Looking at their history/background can give insight into the validity of their revelations.

For example, Moses, the former Prince of Egypt gave up his worldly goods and positions for the sake of his revelations.

Be especially wary of those prophets who gain materially from their revelations and use their position for sexual gains.

Does that help?

StephenC wrote: If someone claims to be a prophet from God it is their responsiblity to prove it with verifiable facts and unbiased witnesses.

This is simply a general repeat you have already expressed and does not give my confused friend a criteria. Your statement is self obvious.

Any written or oral statements must be allowed to be examined freely without any added editorals or clarifications.  Any differences shall be examined in detail.

So which prophet do you believe existed and what oral statements did you examine? What written statements did you examine? What editorials have obfuscated your investigation?

Please, you are simply rehashing your general ideas of questioning someone who claims to be a prophet.

If their prophecy contradicts older documents then the older documents will be given greater creditability unless the prophet can provide indepentently verifiable evidence that the older document was false.

So which person was a prophet who's prophecies did not contradict?

Since there are Angels and devils (Satan, evil spirits) any claimed visitation (especially unwitnessed encounters) must be accompanied with how the visitee knew that the Angel was not the deceiver-Satan or an evil spirit.  Mere unhumanlike abilities or appearances do not prove identification.

You have already said this.

So was Daniel visited by an angel or not? And if so, how do you know it was not the devil?

If two people claim the same type of encounter, but have different revelations, the differences should be investigated in detail.

Irrelevant.

Another repeat, and irrelevant.

We are trying to establish a criteria for my friend who is confused. Establish the ability to choose a prophet, not between two people you already do not believe to be prophets.

Friend, you are trying to play it safe, and intellectually dishonest.

Here is how: You do not want to divulge who you think is a prophet, or your particualt beliefs. So you produce a false dichotomy of sorts, with a built in safe guard for you.

You chose two people with some similar claims (similar claims you can find throughout the bible and the Talmud), and the bonus is that you do not believe either are prophets. The two have followers with theological ideas completely at odds, and the bonus for you is: Your personal ideas remain untouched by any criticsm in the debate, you just sit back and watch Mormons and Muslims tear at each other.

Your continued insistence of trying to stick the two men together under the guise of trying to determing who a prophets is, is a bit suspect.

There seems to be many more "false prophets" then actual prophets.  Looking at their history/background can give insight into the validity of their revelations.

You have, more or less, stated this already.

For example, Moses, the former Prince of Egypt gave up his worldly goods and positions for the sake of his revelations.

Actually he did not. He was forced into exhile after murdering a guard.

He had not recieved revelation at the point of his exhile.

Furthermore, what evidence do you have to examine that he was a prophet. (I know, you will reply that you did not actually say you believe he was a prophet, fine, I will play your charade)

Be especially wary of those prophets who gain materially from their revelations and use their position for sexual gains.

Like Solomon? Or David? How about Daniel? Please give examples?

Does that help?

No. You did not provide a criteria. My friend cannot possibly use your general views as a criteria to determine a prophet, and he still would like you to provide an example of a prophet so he may understand the application of your investigational criteria?

Thanks 

A good investigator eliminates his/her personal beliefs/biases from the investigation.  Otherwise the investigation is worthless.  Does your friend truly was to know how to tell who is and who isn't a prophet of God?

Who was the first prophet?  I recall someone claiming that it was Adam.  I personally disagree and professionally do not see how Adam could be a prophet.  The first questions would be "What did Adam prophecy and to whom?"

Yes, God spoke to Adam, Eva, and the kids.  Who why would Adam be a prophet?

Using the Investigative techniques that I posted, applying them to Adam does support or discredit a claim that he was a prophet?

First of all, I do not see any claim by Adam that he was a prophet.  Where is that written in ANY religious text?

So dear friend, it is my personal and professional opinion that Adam was not a prophet, but he did have a personal relation with God that included conversation.

Which is the next Prophet that you would like to discuss?

StephenC wrote: A good investigator eliminates his/her personal beliefs/biases from the investigation.  Otherwise the investigation is worthless.  Does your friend truly was to know how to tell who is and who isn't a prophet of God? Who was the first prophet?  I recall someone claiming that it was Adam.  I personally disagree and professionally do not see how Adam could be a prophet.  The first questions would be "What did Adam prophecy and to whom?"

There are group of muslims that stated Adam was not a prophet but messenger. He was not the only one they said as a non prophet but few others. Prophet in Arabic is "Nabii" with duty to pass on the "Naba". Naba means news, tidings. So the Gospel which is known as the Good news is actually the Naba that passed on by Nabi.

So the question should be, to whom Adam passed on the Naba, the Gospel?

But as Angela said above that tags had come along with Nabi tag. Messengers in the Qur'an must be Nabi first. Nabi were not necessarily messenger but all messengers were Prophets.

In the Qur'an Adam was a Khalifah, so too Dawud (David), and Dawud was a prophet.