Basic Islamic Questions

Stephen,

There is one thing that people miss.  Proof is nothing without belief.  You keep asking for Proof.  I could ask (even though I believe it) for you to PROVE Jesus Christ was our Savior.   What is your PROOF?

You don't have any...you have faith and belief and love.

That is the same with Muslims.  The proof is in the Quran and Sunnah.  The proof is in the actions of the Prophet.  But what one can see is proof, others can question.  They can do this because they don't have belief.

Joseph and Muhammed are similar, but they are different.  But, in the end, Faith and Belief are what define Mormons and Muslims, not proofs.

Consider what Jesus asked Martha.

And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

He asked her to believe before she had proof.  Its is because of her belief that she was blessed to see her and brought forth Lazarus.  Her proof came after belief.  If you have proof, then you do not need faith.  Faith is a test Stephen.  If you miss that, then you're belief is empty.

StephenC wrote: I have not said anyone is NOT a prophet.  I have merely said we should ask for some kind of proof that a person is a true prophet from God and not some Jim Bakker (of Jim and Tammy Bakker) type of prophet.  There have been many false prophets claiming to be speaking from God.

Then could you provide the criteria you use to determine a true prophet?

I have pointed out that Smith and Muhammad both claim the same thing and are believed by millions to be a prophet from God, yet some of their statements are contradictary.

The two men did not claim the same thing. Their theologies are extremely different.

If I claimed to be a prophet from God would you accept that or would you demand proof?

demand evidence

I was told it was not blind faith.  Ok, why do you think that Muhammad is the last prophet from God?  Is it just because he said so?

Muhammad ('alaihi 's-salam) not only proclaimed he was a Prophet but displayed mujizas to prove his word. This is a fact which has been transmitted to this present time with "tawatur" (unanimity such that it would be impossible for someone to get every person to lie). 

Not only did he perform miracles, but those who experienced his prophethood transmitted what they saw and experienced.

His character was beyond exception, morally, theologically, etc, etc.

The Quran is a work that has not been matched. From a man who was known to be uneducated, the Quran has stood on its own and has never been found with a single mistake, and its transmission has reflected part of the miracle of its completeness without alteration into deviation.

You, Muhammad, and millions of others claim he was the last prophet of God.  There are millions more that claim he was not.  Do we take a worldwide vote on it?

No, you ca only look at the facts, and then come to yoru own conclusion.

Like the criteria you use to determine true guidance. This must be some special criteria given the secrecy you have shown with it.

I just want a verifiable fact that he is the Last Prophet.  That is no word game.  I do find problems with the history of Muhammad as published by IslamiCity.com.  But I am trying to be opened minded about it. One thing other than 'he said he was' is all I am asking.  Is Islam so weak that such a question is so difficult?

The main point is that he produced mujiza.

This is an explanation of a mujiza as taken from the writing of a scholar.

To us, a mujiza is the thing proved the truthfulness of a person who said he was a Prophet. There were conditions for a mujiza:

1. Allahu ta'ala made it in the absence of ordinary means, and in this way He would help His Prophet be confirmed.

2. It had to be extraordinary. Ordinary things, such as the sun's rising in the East every day or flowers blooming in the spring, could not be mujizas.

3. Others had to be incapable of doing it.

4. It had to happen whenever the person who announced his prophethood wished it to.

5. It had to agree with his wish. For example, if he said that he would enliven a certain dead person and if some other marvel took place, for example, if a mountain was broken into two, it would not be a mujiza.

6. The mujiza happening upon his wish should not belie him. For example, while he was miraculously talking with a certain beast, if the beast said, "This man is a liar," it would not be a mujiza.

7. The mujiza should not happen before he said he was a Prophet. Wonders that happened before [the announcement of his prophethood], such as 'Isa's[1] ('alaihi 's-salam) talking when he was in a cradle, his being handed dates when he asked for dates from a withered-up tree, and in Muhammad's (alaihi 's-salam) childhood, the cleavage of his chest and his heart being cleansed by washing, there being a cloud over his head continuously and his being greeted by trees and stones were not mujizas, but karamas. They are called irhasat (preparatory signs of a prophet). They emphasized prophethood. It is possible for such karamas to happen through awliya' as well. Before Prophets were informed of their prophethood, their status was not lower than that of the awliya'. Karamas were seen from them. A mujiza could happen immediately after a Prophet is informed of his prophethood. For example, if he had said that such and such an event would take place a month later, the event would become a mujiza when it took place. But it would not be necessary to believe in his prophethood before it took place.

A mujiza demonstrating that a Prophet is telling the truth is not only a requirement of the intellect. That is, it is unlike the case of some work denoting the existence of its agent. For the intellect's realizing that something is the proof of something else requires some relationship between the two things. When the proof is seen, the existence of the related thing, not the existence of something else, is realized. The case is not so with a mujiza. For example, heavens being broken into pieces, stars being scattered and mountains being pulverized will take place when the end of the world comes, at the time of Doomsday. This will not be the time for the coming of a Prophet. These are the mujizas foretold by every Prophet. But, it is not necessary for those who hear about them to know that they are mujizas. So is the case with a wali's karama being the mujiza of a Prophet, though it does not have any connection with that Prophet. What we have stated so far is explained in detail in the book Sharh-i mawaqif by Sayyid Sharif al-Jurjani.

StephenC wrote: I guess the mind set of an investigator is different than other people. Here are some of my observations that I have learned from my professional experiences: When two people claim the same experience, and there are conflicting aspects to the two accounts, it is a proper investigative function to review the claims in more detail.   If a written account contains conflicting statements, it is a proper investigative function to review the statements in more detail. Eyewitnesses account observed solely by family, friends, and/or followers, are all suspect as being biased. A subject of an investigation�s personal history can provide insight into whether the person�s statements are factual. Heresay in statements and writings lose creditability in each retelling or writing.   Edited writings cease to be the original writing of the author as they contain the thoughts of both the author and the editor.   Delays in reporting incidents, without logical reasons, makes the report less creditable and more prone to errors. The doctrine of Ancient Documents holds that the older and longer accepted a document is, the more creditable it has unless there is provable evidence to the contrary. If a person makes an abnormal claim, it is the responsibility of the claimant to provide evidence to support the claim. Are any of these unreasonable? By the way, do not jump to conclusions.  I do not recall saying that anyone was or was not a prophet. Just because I am seeking the truth, it does not mean that I am an enemy of any person or religion.

http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6904& ;PN=1

enlighten us with your investigational skills

Angela

"We believe Muhammed was sent to his people to lead them from Paganism.  He was given a portion of the Truth (as all prophets have) and was intrumental in bringing the Ummah away from the False Gods of their forefathers.  Now we do not believe him to be the last Prophet period, but its possible he was the last Prophet specifically for that people."

Maybe he was sent to lead his people from Paganism.  And maybe he was given a portion of the Truth and was instrumental in bringing the Ummah away from the False Gods of their forefathers.  I have not disputed ANY of that.

I have disputed that he was "the last prophet period."  If he said that he was and that is not true.  Then he lied.

If he really was "the last prophet period" then Joseph Smith is a false prophet.  I can see it no other way.

By the way, I am in the Salt Lake City area this week.  I know that not all Mormons live here, but it is a beautiful area of the country.  Driving here, I could not help but to be impressed with the pilgrimage of the early Mormons who made the trip before Interstate 80 was built!  I think that was equal to any trip to Makkah!