Lets say, for the sake of argument, that I have this friend next to me and he is lost and not sure about who to believe when it comes to prophethood.

Please tell him who a prophet is and how you determined this? 

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 

Angela wrote: StephenC wrote: If someone claims to be a prophet from God it is their responsiblity to prove it with verifiable facts and unbiased witnesses. Verifiable facts are often elusive in the context of real prophets.  Show me "proof" that Moses existed other than written accounts.  As for Unbiased witnesses, there is no such thing in the world of religion.  Either people believe the Prophet or Not, there is no inbetween. 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. Correct, accounts should be judged and examined in detail.  But, not just the first statement, all statements made by said witnesses until their deaths.  This should be checked for any recantation of the original witnesses.  However, the spin put on them by outsiders should be discounted as in any form, pro or against is a form of editorial or clarification. 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. In doing this though, you miss on of the fundementals of the continuation of Prophets.  Prophets are sent to lead the people, this includes returning them to the path that they have lost.  Documents can become corrupted over time and lost.  There several issues in regards to giving older texts preference.  Look at Noah and Moses.  Noah was given 7 laws, Moses 10 laws, Jesus gave only 1. 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. Many traditions speak of ways to tell an Angel from a Devil.  First off, in many traditions, Angel's are accompanied with a brilliant light that radiates with the power of God.  This is something said to be unable to be faked by devils.  Secondly, in many traditions Angel's feet never touch the ground.  In Islam, Angel's have no face, only a brilliant white light.  In some traditions an Angel cannot touch you since you are still mortal.  Therefore, ask to shake his hand.  An Angel will say no and why.  A Devil cannot resist but to continue to deceive and will try to shake your hand.  Again, there are commonalities in most faiths on the difference between the two.  Also, its said that the Faithful are protected and can tell the difference. If two people claim the same type of encounter, but have different revelations, the differences should be investigated in detail. Similarities should also be considered.  Each Prophet is given a portion of the Truth according to the Will and Desire of the Almighty.  Each group is taught according to what they are ready to receive and able to follow.  Therefore, the teachings of Prophets may be different but not necessarily wrong.  Again, we are dealing with a Supreme Being with a plan greater than our understanding. 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. God gave us instructions on how to tell the difference in Matthew 7.   16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?   17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.   18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.   19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.   20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. 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. Moses gave up his wealth as an Egyptian Prince but not heir to the Throne.  He became the defacto Ruler of an entire nation through his actions.  David became King.  Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines.  Blessings are given to the Prophets and hardships.  You seem to be looking at things with a Modern/Western morality and not necessarily with the eye on what is allowed in the Scriptures and what is acceptable by the God.  One responsibility of a Prophet is to see to the security and welfare of his people.  Economical stability for the people is important, however, you have false Prophets like Warren Jeffs who are wealthy beyond belief and encourages his people to give him all their worldly possessions and live in poverty.  One should look at the condition of the followers compared to that of the Prophet when judging gain. Does that help?

Wow Angela. You rock!

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?

The Prophets of this world have been so varied in their callings that it is nearly impossible to set up a definitive criteria.  All have similarities, but they also have vast differences.  Some were the witnesses of Great Miracles, others simply brought messages.  Some were disobedient. (Look at Jonah)  Others were faithful unto death.  The mantle of Prophet is not something carried lightly by any man, but we must remember, as perfect or imperfect as the may be/have been, they are just men.  It is the Power of the Almighty God that raises them up or places them low. 

That is want of the reasons I love that Muhammed stressed that he was a servant/slave/messanger.  He made it clear that he served God and not himself.

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.

Personal history of subject of investigation.

As I stated above, the history/background of the subject has a bearing on the investigation.

Shall we discuss Muhammad's background/history?  With your permission, I will use the IslamiCity.com history to eliminate any claims of anti-Islam bias.

Muhammad's father used the arabic word for God (Allah) in his name.  This was a time when the people of the area were pagans.

Muhammad's father died just before he was born.

Muhammad's mother used a tradition where the infant "wet nursed."  (note: this was not in the IslamiCity.com history and presently I do not recall where I read this and the story about how even as a baby Muhammad would only take milk from one tit so that the "wet nurse's" natural child would have something to eat.  If this is baseless legend or if my failure to properly cite it is offensive, please disregard.)

Muhammad's mother died when he was 6 years old and he was sent away to live with a non-relative family.

The orphan child was raised by the grandfather.  The substitute father figure died and the child was passed over to an uncle.

The orphan child from a wealthy family was eventually turned over to a rural family to work as a herdsman.

(Investigator's note - did the circumstances of the child's early years have an effect on his ability to form relationships due to the difficulty of the baby bonding with an absent mother?)

When in his twenties, Muhammad entered into the service of a wealthy widow.

(Investigator's note - In a male dominated society, it must have been difficult for the son of a weathly family to work as an employee/servant of another, especially a woman.  Information from uncited works claim that the woman/boss made sexual advances towards the employee/servant)

And they eventually married.  However Muhammad, utilizing the custom of the time found a second wife to marry and they had two sons, both who died young.

Muhammad traveled a great deal.

In his forties while in a cave alone, Muhammad claimed to have an encounter with a being's voice of unknown origin, who commanded him to recite a statement

"Recite: In the name of thy Lord who created, Created man from a clot of blood."

(Investigator's note - the resulting Qur'an which was said to be a revelation from God through this voice and later encounters claims God created man from dust.)

Muhammad refused, but after repeated demands, he finally did as he was ordered.

Muhammad is said to have relayed this encounter to his wife and close friends.

(Investigator's note - other uncited statements say that there was a three year period between the first encounter and the second.  Also due to the extensive time between the encounter and the present, no evidence has been found at the cave to support or discredit the claimed encounter.)

Muhammad later stated that his later learned the being was the Angel Grabriel, however, no explanation of how this identification was given.

Summary: Muhammad had what would be considered a rough childhood.  Anyone he bonded with as a child died.  He did not know his father and was apparently passed around as a child finally ending up with a rural non-related foster family where he had to work.  There is no indication that he inherited his family's weath.  He had to work for a woman who, under today's standards, could have been accused of the sexual harassment of an employee.  While still married, Muhammad (lawfully) married a second wife.  This marriage resulted in two sons.  Muhammad suffered additional "abandonment" by the death of these sons.  In a cave a voice forced him to recite verses.  There was a difference between the verse as recited and the late written book.

End part one.

Any problems or inaccuracies with the initial background/history of the subject of the investigation?

StephenC wrote: And they eventually married.  However Muhammad, utilizing the custom of the time found a second wife to marry and they had two sons, both who died young.

Muhammed was never married to anyone but Khadija during their marriage.  His other ways were taken after her death.

http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6582&PN=1 - http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6582& ;PN=1

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?" 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?

You should investigate the idea of "prophet" in the context of Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. They differ.

Perhaps I will comment further if time avails. Due to Ramadan, my time is very limited.

StephenC wrote: Personal history of subject of investigation. As I stated above, the history/background of the subject has a bearing on the investigation. Shall we discuss Muhammad's background/history?  With your permission, I will use the IslamiCity.com history to eliminate any claims of anti-Islam bias. Muhammad's father used the arabic word for God (Allah) in his name.  This was a time when the people of the area were pagans.

Open ended nonsense. This bges the questions: So what? and what is your point?

Muhammad's father died just before he was born. Muhammad's mother used a tradition where the infant "wet nursed."  (note: this was not in the IslamiCity.com history and presently I do not recall where I read this and the story about how even as a baby Muhammad would only take milk from one tit so that the "wet nurse's" natural child would have something to eat.  If this is baseless legend or if my failure to properly cite it is offensive, please disregard.)

It was a custom for noble families to send their young to live with bedouins and to be suckled with members of these tribes.

Muhammad's mother died when he was 6 years old and he was sent away to live with a non-relative family. The orphan child was raised by the grandfather.  The substitute father figure died and the child was passed over to an uncle. The orphan child from a wealthy family was eventually turned over to a rural family to work as a herdsman. (Investigator's note - did the circumstances of the child's early years have an effect on his ability to form relationships due to the difficulty of the baby bonding with an absent mother?)

irrelevant and supositional

The topic is not about how, in general, were his relationahips.

If you feel that some particular event effected some particular relationship and such a causal effect is relevant to an investigation of prophethood, then please state in these terms.

When in his twenties, Muhammad entered into the service of a wealthy widow. (Investigator's note - In a male dominated society, it must have been difficult for the son of a weathly family to work as an employee/servant of another, especially a woman.  Information from uncited works claim that the woman/boss made sexual advances towards the employee/servant)

conjecture, specualtion, and irrelevant.

Please state the particual point being made in terms of an investigation into his claim of prophethood.

And they eventually married.  However Muhammad, utilizing the custom of the time found a second wife to marry and they had two sons, both who died young.

false

Muhammad traveled a great deal.

what do you mean "a great deal" and what does it mean?

In his forties while in a cave alone, Muhammad claimed to have an encounter with a being's voice of unknown origin, who commanded him to recite a statement "Recite: In the name of thy Lord who created, Created man from a clot of blood." (Investigator's note - the resulting Qur'an which was said to be a revelation from God through this voice and later encounters claims God created man from dust.)

this begs the question: So what?

Please make a point?

Muhammad refused, but after repeated demands, he finally did as he was ordered.

Another vague, general statement.

Clarify "refused", and make a point that is in the context of an investigation.

Muhammad is said to have relayed this encounter to his wife and close friends. (Investigator's note - other uncited statements say that there was a three year period between the first encounter and the second.  Also due to the extensive time between the encounter and the present, no evidence has been found at the cave to support or discredit the claimed encounter.)

First part: You beg the question: so what? Please make a point.

Second Part: You also begged the question: So what?

What was supposed to be found in the cave to show the Gariel was there, and why must Gabriel leave something in the cave?

Muhammad later stated that his later learned the being was the Angel Grabriel, however, no explanation of how this identification was given.

How did Moses know Gd spoke to him? There is no explanation given, so Moses did not talk to Gd.

Very juvenile.

Summary: Muhammad had what would be considered a rough childhood.  Anyone he bonded with as a child died.  He did not know his father and was apparently passed around as a child finally ending up with a rural non-related foster family where he had to work.  There is no indication that he inherited his family's weath.

Are you going to make a solid point sometime this century? Seriously.

You beg the question: So what.

He had to work for a woman who, under today's standards, could have been accused of the sexual harassment of an employee.

Suppositional nonsense.

"he had to" is your conjecture. Accusation of "sexual harassament" is also more of your juvenile conjecture. And then you top it all of by using the phrase, "by todays standards".

So far, your investigation is a poorly written, sophomoric piece that is void of any real critical thinking. You meander on without making any points, throwing out vague ideas that are so implicit that only a missionary would use. There is nothing in this softball peice that even begins to truly argue for the case of prophethood.

While still married, Muhammad (lawfully) married a second wife.  This marriage resulted in two sons.

False.

Muhammad suffered additional "abandonment" by the death of these sons.  In a cave a voice forced him to recite verses.  There was a difference between the verse as recited and the late written book. End part one.

More rubbish. Someone dying is not an abandonment. You are trying to embellish.

He recited in a cave, and other places afterward. So what?

A voice did not force him, Gd compelled him.

What differences exist?

Any problems or inaccuracies with the initial background/history of the subject of the investigation?

Yes.

You fail to make a point. I would hardly call this an investigation of someone who is as scholarly as you claim to be.

Also, embellishing, and conjecture, and supposition are not tools for an investigation. This has striking similarities to the work of an evangelical.

I am still waiting for you to reveal who you consider to be a true prophet.

So much secrecy!

You don't seem to add anything to the discussion other than to attempt to wave off my statements without any contrary facts.

Tell your friend that there is absolutely NO PROOF at all that Muhammad was a true prophet from God.  The only thing we have is that he apparently claimed to be one.  There is no more proof of his prophethood then there is for "alien abductions."

As for all the other claimed prophets, the same holds for them.  There is no proof.

Now if your friend wants to believe that Muhammad was a prophet, that is fine and dandy for him.  Me, God gave me a mind and the ability to reason.

All my professional career I have dealt with people who made unsubstantuated claims.  Most I have disproven.  Using the talents God gave me and my training and experiences, I can not say that Muhammad was a true prophet from God.  Nor can I say he was not.  I disagree with some of his revelations and I agree with some of his revelations.

I can point out how the Quran has verses that contradict itself.  I've pointed out a few of these (i.e. God made man from a clot of blood and God made mad from dust).

The Quran has been edited and re-edited.  The third Cailph set up a committe because he was concerned about all the conflicting versions.

If we looked at Muhammad's life before the alleged encounter with the voice, he find that he had what we would call today a "disfunctional childhood."  Many people overcome such adversities, many don't.

If we look at the situation of the first "voice" we find questionable aspects of it.

For example, since Muhammad came from a paganistic area/family, what was he meditating on?

One thing for sure is that there are more legends and myths then there are facts about Muhammad.

But back to your friend, for the majority of the people, their religion is that of their family.  If he/she is happy with that religion, stick with it.  If not, seek out one you like.

Me, I'm "John the Baptist" religion type of guy.

My revelation from God is that God is the one we should worship and pray to, not anyone born of a woman.  If you want to pray to God in some one's name.  That is fine.

We all know what is right and what is wrong.  We don't need any man to tell us otherwise.

Andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: Personal history of subject of investigation. As I stated above, the history/background of the subject has a bearing on the investigation. Shall we discuss Muhammad's background/history?  With your permission, I will use the IslamiCity.com history to eliminate any claims of anti-Islam bias. Muhammad's father used the arabic word for God (Allah) in his name.  This was a time when the people of the area were pagans. Open ended nonsense. This bges the questions: So what? and what is your point?   I find it amusing that you seem to think of yourself as some kind of teacher grading student papers where you post your remarks without any basis. An investigator's "job" is to find and report the facts.  The facts according to all undisputed accounts is that Muhammad had a bad childhood.  It is the jury's job to decide the revelance.  As for your comment that it is open ended nonsense.  I find that rather disrepectful (and I am shocked) that you would say that about the Muhammad's childhood!    Muhammad's father died just before he was born. Muhammad's mother used a tradition where the infant "wet nursed."  (note: this was not in the IslamiCity.com history and presently I do not recall where I read this and the story about how even as a baby Muhammad would only take milk from one tit so that the "wet nurse's" natural child would have something to eat.  If this is baseless legend or if my failure to properly cite it is offensive, please disregard.) - stephenc >>It was a custom for noble families to send their young to live with bedouins and to be suckled with members of these tribes.<< And what would a infant development specialist say about such a customs?  Not a good one in my opinion. [quote] Muhammad's mother died when he was 6 years old and he was sent away to live with a non-relative family. The orphan child was raised by the grandfather.  The substitute father figure died and the child was passed over to an uncle. The orphan child from a wealthy family was eventually turned over to a rural family to work as a herdsman. (Investigator's note - did the circumstances of the child's early years have an effect on his ability to form relationships due to the difficulty of the baby bonding with an absent mother?) irrelevant and supositional The topic is not about how, in general, were his relationahips. If you feel that some particular event effected some particular relationship and such a causal effect is relevant to an investigation of prophethood, then please state in these terms. [quote] Again, I am shocked that you would say that Muhammad's childhood was irrelevant and supositional!  How are we to learn of Muhammad the man if we know nothing of Muhammad's childhood?  Or are you saying that IslamiCity.com has irrelevant and supositional information about Muhammad? When in his twenties, Muhammad entered into the service of a wealthy widow. (Investigator's note - In a male dominated society, it must have been difficult for the son of a weathly family to work as an employee/servant of another, especially a woman.  Information from uncited works claim that the woman/boss made sexual advances towards the employee/servant)

conjecture, specualtion, and irrelevant.

Please state the particual point being made in terms of an investigation into his claim of prophethood.

[quote]

Again this investigation into whether Muhammad was a prophet for God or not is looking at what we know about Muhammad.  Is there a reason we should not take into consideration the type of person he was?

>>And they eventually married.  However Muhammad, utilizing the custom of the time found a second wife to marry and they had two sons, both who died young.<<

"false"

What are you claiming is false?  That they eventually married?  I thought that was an undisputed fact.  Or are you saying that he did not marry a second wife (since there is dispute as to whether he had two wives at the same time or not I wrote this so it was accurate regardless of circumstances).  Or is that you are saying that it is false that:

"Sometime later Muhammad married Khadijah, by whom he had two sons - who did not survive - and four daughters." IslamiCity.com Islamic History.

>>In his forties while in a cave alone, Muhammad claimed to have an encounter with a being's voice of unknown origin, who commanded him to recite a statement

"Recite: In the name of thy Lord who created, Created man from a clot of blood."

(Investigator's note - the resulting Qur'an which was said to be a revelation from God through this voice and later encounters claims God created man from dust.)<<stephenc

"this begs the question: So what?

Please make a point?" Andalus

My point is the revelation that Muhammad claims that the unidentified (at that time) voice made him recite ("Recite: In the name of thy Lord who created, Created man from a clot of blood.")

And what was written in the Quran (at least in it's lastest rewrite) in "Al-Imran (The Family of Imran)  3:59 Verily, in the sight of God, the nature of Jesus is as the nature of Adam, whom He created out of dust and then said unto him, "Be" - and he is." contradict each other.  Or in Arabic is "clot of blood" the same as "dust?"

In investigations, it is attention to detail that proves or disproves a statement.

If the many different committees (or editors) can not get that right, I wonder what else did they get wrong?  Maybe the whole thing or a substantial part of it?

Can you find such an obvious contradiction in the "New Testament?"  And this is not the only contradiction that I find in the Quran!

Yes.

You fail to make a point. I would hardly call this an investigation of someone who is as scholarly as you claim to be.

Also, embellishing, and conjecture, and supposition are not tools for an investigation. This has striking similarities to the work of an evangelical.

I am still waiting for you to reveal who you consider to be a true prophet.

So much secrecy!<<

An investigation is not a "point" it is a collection of facts.  What did I post that was in error, an embellishing, or a conjecture?

How about a simple answer to a simple question?:

Where did I claim to be "scholarly?'

It appears that it is solely YOU who are in ERROR and not me since you seem to be making things up about me and my investigation!

>>A voice did not force him, Gd compelled him.<<

I challenge your statement and demand proof!

What if I said that God compelled me to write that about you, what would your response be?

Some people may believe that the voice was the Angel Gabriel.  Others may believe it was Satan's voice.  And still others may believe that people who have difficult childhoods and then hear voices need help.

I don't think anyone has any proof to support or discredit any of the three.  All that remains is blind faith.

StephenC wrote: You don't seem to add anything to the discussion other than to attempt to wave off my statements without any contrary facts.

Irrational.

The observations I made were about your irrelevant embellishments to events you listed as part of your investigation. So there would be no contrary facts to give when the dispute was your irrelevant embellishments.

The observations I made were, indeed, facts.

Tell your friend that there is absolutely NO PROOF at all that Muhammad was a true prophet from God.  The only thing we have is that he apparently claimed to be one.  There is no more proof of his prophethood then there is for "alien abductions."

Thats a very interesting deflection Steph. Unfortunately, your reply to my friend is irrelevant, given that my friend is confused and has never claimed anyone to be a prophet, nor have I relayed any claim to you about him.

As for all the other claimed prophets, the same holds for them.  There is no proof.   Now if your friend wants to believe that Muhammad was a prophet, that is fine and dandy for him.  Me, God gave me a mind and the ability to reason.

Interesting Steph. You keep telling me what an investigator you are, and how rational you are, yet my friend has not made any claims on anyone as to who or who is not a prophet, and you continue to reply as if such a claim was made.

So please, I ask you now, for the 4th or 5th time, please provide my friend with your criteria to judge a prophet and give us an example of a prophet?

All my professional career I have dealt with people who made unsubstantuated claims.  Most I have disproven.

The skeptics argument is easy Steph. Any child can produce a skeptical argument. And a skeptical argument can be used to place doubt on any belief. Not everything can be disproven as it depends on what the thing is, and to what extent it could be proven (varying degrees of "provability"). I wish you could put your skills you have bragged about so much here to real use and give an example of a prophet? Of Gd? The book you learned about Gd from? Something? Instead of hiding behind skeptical arguments, why not show us how things really work?

Using the talents God gave me and my training and experiences, I can not say that Muhammad was a true prophet from God.  Nor can I say he was not.  I disagree with some of his revelations and I agree with some of his revelations.

What bases are you able to agree or disagree?

I can point out how the Quran has verses that contradict itself.  I've pointed out a few of these (i.e. God made man from a clot of blood and God made mad from dust).

Thats not a contradiction. A contradiction is two propositions that cannot both be true.

We are made from both. I was created from a clot of blood and my base material is from the same substance that is found in the earth and burned out suns. No one ever believed we were clay men.

The Quran has been edited and re-edited.  The third Cailph set up a committe because he was concerned about all the conflicting versions.

I am not aware of various editions? Perhaps you could back your claim?

1) variants (errors) did crop up, due to the spread of Islam into other lands. This does not conclude, or establish any error in the Quran.

2) You are trying to imply that because the Muslims formed a committe to establish the authritative written form, that there is in error in the Quran. You just complained because there were variant readings, now you complain because men who actually feared their Creator wanted to place piouse and exceptional men in charge of stopping the mistakes that had cropped up amongst individuals due to geographical contexts.

3) The Quran was memorized, long before the Muslims put forth their authrotiative written work. The Quran had already been written in a book form before the time of Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him).

So, I am not sure what you are complaining about. The Christians took centuries to try and form a commitie using sources that had already been damaged, and even into the 20th century, textual criticism is still trying to firgure out just what a Christian NT is.

The Jews were using the sanhedrin to decide their bible.

If we looked at Muhammad's life before the alleged encounter with the voice, he find that he had what we would call today a "disfunctional childhood."  Many people overcome such adversities, many don't.

Yes, you said this already, and you deflected and ignored my "valid" point about it. Let me rehash:

It is

1) irrelevant

2) without any point, due to that fact that you have yet to demonstrate how his childhood had an effect on an action that disproves his claim of prophethood.

Many do , many don't.......it is simply pointless blithering, and that's all it is unless you can show how it makes your case. Seriously. I am not being difficult in asking you to make a point.

If we look at the situation of the first "voice" we find questionable aspects of it. For example, since Muhammad came from a paganistic area/family, what was he meditating on?

Gd.

Since Moses came from a paganistic family and area, what did he contermplate on?

Your question is really silly. The speculation you are trying to use, fuled by your obvious prejudice, provides much less confidence than what we do know.

One thing for sure is that there are more legends and myths then there are facts about Muhammad.

Assertion. Proof by assertion is not proof. After 30 years of being an investigator, I question your sloppy critical thinking skills about this topic.

But back to your friend, for the majority of the people, their religion is that of their family.  If he/she is happy with that religion, stick with it.  If not, seek out one you like. Me, I'm "John the Baptist" religion type of guy. My revelation from God is that God is the one we should worship and pray to, not anyone born of a woman.  If you want to pray to God in some one's name.  That is fine.

How do you know there Gd exists and how do you know how to worship Him?

We all know what is right and what is wrong.  We don't need any man to tell us otherwise.

How do you know what is right and what is wrong?

And how do you know Gd feels it is right and wrong?

StephenC wrote: >>A voice did not force him, Gd compelled him.<< I challenge your statement and demand proof!

You cannot prove or disprove an event, only show confidence in it.

Evidence: The Prophet (saw) refused because he was unable, unlike the case of Moses, who did refuse his mission. The Prophet did not refuse his mission, but he felt that he was unable to fulfill the task of reciting because he was unlearned.

What if I said that God compelled me to write that about you, what would your response be?

I would say that I am happy for you.

Some people may believe that the voice was the Angel Gabriel.  Others may believe it was Satan's voice.  And still others may believe that people who have difficult childhoods and then hear voices need help.

So Daniel did not hear or see an angel, but instead, saw the tradgedy he had experienced come to life in his imagination through a psychosis.

So you cannot be JOhn the Baptist Like given that Daniel interpreted the days of exhile based upon his psychosis which means John the Baptist would also be false.

I don't think anyone has any proof to support or discredit any of the three.  All that remains is blind faith.

You cannot prove or disprove events.

And the evidence suggests it was not Satan.

StephenC wrote: >>In his forties while in a cave alone, Muhammad claimed to have an encounter with a being's voice of unknown origin, who commanded him to recite a statement "Recite: In the name of thy Lord who created, Created man from a clot of blood." (Investigator's note - the resulting Qur'an which was said to be a revelation from God through this voice and later encounters claims God created man from dust.)<<stephenc "this begs the question: So what? Please make a point?" Andalus My point is the revelation that Muhammad claims that the unidentified (at that time) voice made him recite ("Recite: In the name of thy Lord who created, Created man from a clot of blood.") And what was written in the Quran (at least in it's lastest rewrite) in "Al-Imran (The Family of Imran)  3:59 Verily, in the sight of God, the nature of Jesus is as the nature of Adam, whom He created out of dust and then said unto him, "Be" - and he is." contradict each other.  Or in Arabic is "clot of blood" the same as "dust?" In investigations, it is attention to detail that proves or disproves a statement. If the many different committees (or editors) can not get that right, I wonder what else did they get wrong?  Maybe the whole thing or a substantial part of it?

There are no editions, and there were no editors. In this case, the mistake is not with the QUran, but with your critical thinking skills and lack of expereince wtih the Quran. That's ok. A common error amongst detractors.

The first huge mistake you are making is your reliance on translations.

The second mistake you are making is trying to equate the creation of Adam to that of his progeny.

Al-Sajadah 32: 7 - 8

Who made excellent everything that He created. He began the creation of man from clay, then made his offspring from a drop of humble fluid.

So not only is your investigation sloppy (how you missed this verse tells me you have studied polemical trash sites for your "intell"), and cursory, but your commnad of the Quran and how to read it are less than novice.

Can you find such an obvious contradiction in the "New Testament?"  And this is not the only contradiction that I find in the Quran!

Your NT has been torn apart by your own scholars who admit defects, variants, and the question of what is a NT.

Your NT is a troubled book, with a troubled past.

StephenC wrote: Quote: Any problems or inaccuracies with the initial background/history of the subject of the investigation?   Yes. You fail to make a point. I would hardly call this an investigation of someone who is as scholarly as you claim to be. Also, embellishing, and conjecture, and supposition are not tools for an investigation. This has striking similarities to the work of an evangelical. I am still waiting for you to reveal who you consider to be a true prophet. So much secrecy!<< An investigation is not a "point" it is a collection of facts.  What did I post that was in error, an embellishing, or a conjecture? How about a simple answer to a simple question?: Where did I claim to be "scholarly?' It appears that it is solely YOU who are in ERROR and not me since you seem to be making things up about me and my investigation!

You did not give an investigation, only an editorial of your feelings and opinions. Hardly an investigation. Sloppy.

Your embellishments and conjecture take place throughout your contribution, which I pointed out, and you now want me to explain it again.

Your comments on sexual harassment, his feelings about working for a woman, the issue of a person having a difficult life and the outcome it has on their live...all strictly conjecture. Opinionated rubbish.

None of it was argued by you to show their validity and their outcome on your conclusion.

StephenC wrote: Andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: Personal history of subject of investigation. As I stated above, the history/background of the subject has a bearing on the investigation. Shall we discuss Muhammad's background/history?  With your permission, I will use the IslamiCity.com history to eliminate any claims of anti-Islam bias. Muhammad's father used the arabic word for God (Allah) in his name.  This was a time when the people of the area were pagans. Open ended nonsense. This bges the questions: So what? and what is your point?   I find it amusing that you seem to think of yourself as some kind of teacher grading student papers where you post your remarks without any basis. I find it amusing that you claim to be an investigator and I have to point our your critical thinking problems. My bases is "Logic". The common rules of rhetoric. You begged the question. What more can I say? An investigator's "job" is to find and report the facts.  The facts according to all undisputed accounts is that Muhammad had a bad childhood.  It is the jury's job to decide the revelance.  As for your comment that it is open ended nonsense.  I find that rather disrepectful (and I am shocked) that you would say that about the Muhammad's childhood!  Unfortunately, your claim to report facts is under its real guise of subterfuge. 1) An investigation lists "relevant" facts, and then uses them to make a point "relevant" to the purpose of the investigation. You list facts, presented in the from of your personal interpretation, and then you fall short of trying to make a point with them. 2) You embellish your "facts" with opinionated fluff. An investigation does not include a distortion. 3) You further your obfuscation and subterfuge with an apparent dodge of my comment that points out that your comment was open ended nonsense, as you try to play "ignorant" and pretend I must have been talking about the childhood of Prophet Muhammad (saw). Your mixing of events with you silly questions that are not factual and not used to make a point are the open ended nonsense. Muhammad's father died just before he was born. Muhammad's mother used a tradition where the infant "wet nursed."  (note: this was not in the IslamiCity.com history and presently I do not recall where I read this and the story about how even as a baby Muhammad would only take milk from one tit so that the "wet nurse's" natural child would have something to eat.  If this is baseless legend or if my failure to properly cite it is offensive, please disregard.) - stephenc >>It was a custom for noble families to send their young to live with bedouins and to be suckled with members of these tribes.<< And what would a infant development specialist say about such a customs?  Not a good one in my opinion. Supposition. 1) You beg the question: What would a 20th century, western trained child pschologist say that is relevant to the practice? 2) Your opinion does not count as fact. As I have said, your skills are sloppy. Muhammad's mother died when he was 6 years old and he was sent away to live with a non-relative family. The orphan child was raised by the grandfather.  The substitute father figure died and the child was passed over to an uncle. The orphan child from a wealthy family was eventually turned over to a rural family to work as a herdsman. (Investigator's note - did the circumstances of the child's early years have an effect on his ability to form relationships due to the difficulty of the baby bonding with an absent mother?)   irrelevant and supositional The topic is not about how, in general, were his relationahips. If you feel that some particular event effected some particular relationship and such a causal effect is relevant to an investigation of prophethood, then please state in these terms. Again, I am shocked that you would say that Muhammad's childhood was irrelevant and supositional!  How are we to learn of Muhammad the man if we know nothing of Muhammad's childhood?  Or are you saying that IslamiCity.com has irrelevant and supositional information about Muhammad? I did not say that his (saw) childhood was suppositional. I said that you comments about it are suppositional. And then you continue your intellectual dishonesty in the form of a strawman. Your embellishments within the statements you are using that refer to his childhood are the problem. But you know that. Your attempted dodging my comments speak volumes of your credibility.  [quote] When in his twenties, Muhammad entered into the service of a wealthy widow. (Investigator's note - In a male dominated society, it must have been difficult for the son of a weathly family to work as an employee/servant of another, especially a woman.  Information from uncited works claim that the woman/boss made sexual advances towards the employee/servant) conjecture, specualtion, and irrelevant. Please state the particual point being made in terms of an investigation into his claim of prophethood.   Again this investigation into whether Muhammad was a prophet for God or not is looking at what we know about Muhammad.  Is there a reason we should not take into consideration the type of person he was? Strawman. I never stated that his life cannot be examined. You embellished an event, once again, dealing with his employment to Kadija. You have no way of knowing how anyone felt or what people felt about him, nor is your opinion relevant. You failed to make an observation and then apply it to your conclusion. Once again.  The topic is not about how some men felt about working for women in the 7th century, or how the Prophet (saw) felt (which was not negative given their relaitonshio and his love for her). Your observations are entirely irrelevant to your point. If you cannot list observations relevant to your point, then this thread ends. You will not turn it into a game, and try and make a game out of the Prophet Muhammad's (saw) relationship with Kadija. If you make a charge then I want evidence. Your opinion, personal belief, dreams, assertions, etc, do not count as evidence. Either make your case, or not. [quote] >>And they eventually married.  However Muhammad, utilizing the custom of the time found a second wife to marry and they had two sons, both who died young.<< "false" What are you claiming is false?  That they eventually married?  I thought that was an undisputed fact.  Or are you saying that he did not marry a second wife (since there is dispute as to whether he had two wives at the same time or not I wrote this so it was accurate regardless of circumstances).  Or is that you are saying that it is false that: "Sometime later Muhammad married Khadijah, by whom he had two sons - who did not survive - and four daughters." IslamiCity.com Islamic History.

false: He did not take a second wife while with his first wife.

Please learn the proper way to format your replies, sometimes your replies are a mess to reply to.

>>So please, I ask you now, for the 4th or 5th time, please provide my friend with your criteria to judge a prophet and give us an example of a prophet?<<

I'll try again for your friend.  Please pay close attention:

Anyone can claim to be a prophet from God, but it is up to you to decide whether they truly are providing revelations from God.

One way is to look at the claimed prophet's background.  Did they have a stable childhood, did they have difficulties in relationships.  A person's childhood has influence on a person's adult behavior.  For example, if a child was an orphan and was deprived of attention and bonding, then they might do things to gain that attention and get approval for their family, friends, and peers.

Does the prophet claim encounters with God and Angels that is not verifiable?

Another way is to examine in detail what the claimed prophet said/wrote.  For example, if there are verses that are contradictory, then it is less likely to be truly from God.

Be aware of revelations that are written by committees or has been rewritten or editorialized.  For example, if a claimed revelation from God needs to be clarified by third parties, then it probably isn't from God.

Does the prophet gain from the revelations?  For example, the prophet of the Church Universal Triumpant (CUT) gains monetarily from her followers.  Is she a true prophet?  Her last name is legally prophet.

Did Jim Bakker gain monetarily from his revelants?  Yes, and he gained a prison term.

Does the revelation encompass discrimination and exclusion of persons or people?

Are some people not allowed full participation in religious activities because of non-optional characteristics?

If the answers to the above questions is "no", then the answer to the question as to whether the prophet is from God is probably "No" also.

Having a few "no's" is not necessarily totally ecluding of the prophet.  A lot of times, a person will have a revelation from God but will change it (or the editors will change it) for non-Godly reasons.

Does that help?

StephenC wrote:

"What are you claiming is false?  That they eventually married?  I thought that was an undisputed fact.  Or are you saying that he did not marry a second wife (since there is dispute as to whether he had two wives at the same time or not I wrote this so it was accurate regardless of circumstances).  Or is that you are saying that it is false that:

"Sometime later Muhammad married Khadijah, by whom he had two sons - who did not survive - and four daughters." IslamiCity.com Islamic History.

Andalus wrote:

"false: He did not take a second wife while with his first wife."

Where did I say Muhammad took a second wife while with his first wife??!!  I explained that and quoted where I got the information.  Are you claiming that IslamiCity.com is putting out false information?!?!

Andalus wrote:
>>There are no editions, and there were no editors. In this case, the mistake is not with the QUran, but with your critical thinking skills and lack of expereince wtih the Quran. That's ok. A common error amongst detractors.

The first huge mistake you are making is your reliance on translations.

The second mistake you are making is trying to equate the creation of Adam to that of his progeny.

Al-Sajadah 32: 7 - 8

Who made excellent everything that He created. He began the creation of man from clay, then made his offspring from a drop of humble fluid.

So not only is your investigation sloppy (how you missed this verse tells me you have studied polemical trash sites for your "intell"), and cursory, but your commnad of the Quran and how to read it are less than novice.<<

Is IslamiCity.com putting out "polemical trash"?  As I explained near the beginning of my discussion, unless I cite otherwise, I am getting the majority of my information from IslamiCity.com.  The quote is from IslamiCity.com's History of Islam and its Quran search.

I am beginning to think that instead of an honest debate, you are not really interested in discussion.

Andalus wrote:

"Your NT has been torn apart by your own scholars who admit defects, variants, and the question of what is a NT.

Your NT is a troubled book, with a troubled past."

My NT!  I do not hold a copyright on the New Testament.  So why do you claim it is my NT?

Did I say that the New Testament is perfect?  I don't recall that and it would be against my earlier position about worshipping someone born of a woman.

Aren't you paying attention?

Why not engage in honest debate?  Instead of one or two vague word responses, honestly discuss the issues.

Do you think Muhammad is a true Prophet from God?  If so, why?

StephenC

Your question: "Do you think Muhammad is a true Prophet from God?  If so, why?"

Yes, Muhammad is a true Prophet from God.

Before I answer the second part of your question, I think it would be better to define what a Prophet is, so that we can remain at the same frequency to hear each other.

A prophet can be regarded as:

1. A teacher or interpreter of the Will of God.

2. A person who could foretell events or prophesise.

3. A person who speaks and coveys the message of God.

In case of Muhammad, he conveyed the same message which was given to Moses and Jesus, i.e., "There is no God beside Me", "You shall not worship any other beside me."

The crux of the message is "You will worship only your Lord Almighty with all your hearts, all your minds and all your souls."

When I read Qur'aan, the message given to him, I find that message remains constant and consistent with not an iota changed.

For example, I would not consider Paul an apostle or a prophet, for he changed the messages of his master. 

Another example: Muhammad's message talks only about The Lord Almighty. Ther is no self-praise by him. In fact, his name appears in Qur'aan only four times. A Prophet of God will always talk about God and remain humble to God.

That is what makes Muhammad different from many of the biblical and a few self-appointed prophets or apostles. Muhammad even did not declare that he was a Prophet until quite some time, are you aware of that?

Stephenc wrote:

Andalus responded with:

"You cannot prove or disprove events.

And the evidence suggests it was not Satan."

Please show me the evidence!!!!!

bmzsp wrote: StephenC Your question: "Do you think Muhammad is a true Prophet from God?  If so, why?" Yes, Muhammad is a true Prophet from God. Before I answer the second part of your question, I think it would be better to define what a Prophet is, so that we can remain at the same frequency to hear each other. A prophet can be regarded as: 1. A teacher or interpreter of the Will of God. 2. A person who could foretell events or prophesise. 3. A person who speaks and coveys the message of God. In case of Muhammad, he conveyed the same message which was given to Moses and Jesus, i.e., "There is no God beside Me", "You shall not worship any other beside me." The crux of the message is "You will worship only your Lord Almighty with all your hearts, all your minds and all your souls." When I read Qur'aan, the message given to him, I find that message remains constant and consistent with not an iota changed. For example, I would not consider Paul an apostle or a prophet, for he changed the messages of his master.  Another example: Muhammad's message talks only about The Lord Almighty. Ther is no self-praise by him. In fact, his name appears in Qur'aan only four times. A Prophet of God will always talk about God and remain humble to God. That is what makes Muhammad different from many of the biblical and a few self-appointed prophets or apostles. Muhammad even did not declare that he was a Prophet until quite some time, are you aware of that?

I don't think anyone disputes that there is one God and only one God.

The question is whether Muhammad was just another man (who had a bad childhood and was going through midlife crisis) who felt that people had strayed from God's Word.

Under your definition of a prophet, just about anyone can claim to be a prophet.  This includes Muhammad, Joseph Smith, Clara Prophet (Church Universal Triumpant), Jim and Tammy Bakker, Joel Obsteen (Lakewood Church), and a host of other self appointed prophets. 
Even I could fit under that definition.

But does that make their (and my) revelations from God?  I am suspect of anyone who claims, without proof, of being the one (or last) prophet of God.

Hesitation from running from one "prophet" to another "prophet" is not a bad thing.

Do we really need these self appointed people telling us what to do, what to wear, what to eat, etc.?  We know that there is one God and we know that there are things that we should not do (murder, adultery, selling, etc.)

What did Muhammad bring that was not already known?

*pulls out her lawyer suit and little horns, then sets out the sign "Devil's Advocate"*

StephenC,

Prove to me that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and our Savior.  I want PROOF. 

Angela wrote: *pulls out her lawyer suit and little horns, then sets out the sign "Devil's Advocate"* StephenC, Prove to me that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and our Savior.  I want PROOF.

I will gladly do as you request the moment you show where I have made that claim!!!

Remember, the only comment that I made about my religious beliefs was that there is only one God, we should not worship those born of women, and that I am a "John the Baptist" type person (Where did John claim that Jesus Christ was the Son of God and our Savior?).

I am not disputing that Jesus was or wasn't.  That could be the subject of another discussion (remember what happened when I compared Smith with Muhammad!!!?).

With your lawyer suit on, you should realize that this investigation is on Muhammad, not the others!

StephenC wrote: What did Muhammad bring that was not already known?

StephenC,

You miss one major aspect of Muhammed.  He was sent to a Pagan People to return them to the one true God.  The people he was sent to had risen up Idols, they were burying their daughters alive in the sand and they were practicing all sorts of evil things. 

Muhammed was sent to restore Monotheism and the worship of Gd, Yahweh, Jehovah, Allah to the people who had strayed from God's Truth.

Each Prophet has a task.  Some are to return the people to the right path.  You must look at the mission with the revelation.

StephenC wrote: Angela wrote: *pulls out her lawyer suit and little horns, then sets out the sign "Devil's Advocate"* StephenC, Prove to me that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and our Savior.  I want PROOF.  I will gladly do as you request the moment you show where I have made that claim!!! Remember, the only comment that I made about my religious beliefs was that there is only one God, we should not worship those born of women, and that I am a "John the Baptist" type person (Where did John claim that Jesus Christ was the Son of God and our Savior?). I am not disputing that Jesus was or wasn't.  That could be the subject of another discussion (remember what happened when I compared Smith with Muhammad!!!?). With your lawyer suit on, you should realize that this investigation is on Muhammad, not the others!

What I'm saying is that anyone could demand proof from any religion.  The very nature of religion is belief and faith, not proof.  If there were unquestionable proofs, then we would all be one religion.  There would be no divide.

bmzsp wrote:

"Another example: Muhammad's message talks only about The Lord Almighty. Ther is no self-praise by him. In fact, his name appears in Qur'aan only four times. A Prophet of God will always talk about God and remain humble to God.

That is what makes Muhammad different from many of the biblical and a few self-appointed prophets or apostles. Muhammad even did not declare that he was a Prophet until quite some time, are you aware of that?"

stephenc response:

Al-Imran (The Family of Imran)

3:144 AND muhammad is only an apostle; all the [other] apostles have passed away before him: if, then, he dies or is slain, will you turn about on your heels? <>Asad(3,104)   But he that turns about on his heels can in no wise harm God - whereas God will requite all who are grateful [to Him]. from IslamiCity.com Quran search using 'Muhammad'

So he is "only an apostle" not a prophet, not the "LAST" prophet?

Angela wrote:

"What I'm saying is that anyone could demand proof from any religion.  The very nature of religion is belief and faith, not proof.  If there were unquestionable proofs, then we would all be one religion.  There would be no divide."

I totally agree with you about belief and faith, not proof.  That applies to Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, Smith Clara Prophet, Jim Bakker, David Kresh, and all the others.  I'm not saying these are or are not true prophets of God.  I just point out to my friends and associates, that they should question in detail any and everyone who makes such a claim as being a special prophet from God.

Looking at the writings of the different religions, I find no errors or contradictions in Moses.

However, I question the writings about Christ, Muhammad, Smith Clara Prophet, Jim Bakker, and David Kresh.

I suspect that in about 100 years or so, there will be an increase in Branch Davidians!

Angela wrote: StephenC wrote: What did Muhammad bring that was not already known? StephenC, You miss one major aspect of Muhammed.  He was sent to a Pagan People to return them to the one true God.  The people he was sent to had risen up Idols, they were burying their daughters alive in the sand and they were practicing all sorts of evil things.  Muhammed was sent to restore Monotheism and the worship of Gd, Yahweh, Jehovah, Allah to the people who had strayed from God's Truth. Each Prophet has a task.  Some are to return the people to the right path.  You must look at the mission with the revelation.

It appears that some Muslims today are doing similiar or even worse things in the name of Allah (not the pagan Allah).  So was Muhammad successful?

(Please don't use the lame excuse that others are doing the same thing.  I realize the evilness of man regardless of the religion)

StephenC wrote: It appears that some Muslims today are doing similiar or even worse things in the name of Allah (not the pagan Allah).  So was Muhammad successful? (Please don't use the lame excuse that others are doing the same thing.  I realize the evilness of man regardless of the religion)

Okay, but you're talking such a small amount.  At its height, AQ was considered to have 40,000 operatives.  There are 1.5 Billion Muslims.  Even if there were 150,000 terrorists.  You are talking 0.0001% of Muslims are committing these heinous acts and of those most of them are political in nature and not religious in nature.  They just get all the bad press.  So, I would say, given the number.  Yes, Muhammed did his job if only 1/100,000th of the population are crazed maniacs.

StephenC wrote: Stephenc wrote: Quote: I don't think anyone has any proof to support or discredit any of the three.  All that remains is blind faith. Andalus responded with: "You cannot prove or disprove events. And the evidence suggests it was not Satan." Please show me the evidence!!!!!

The theological message of the Quran and Sunnah is anti-thetical to satan, who is the archrival of man.

StephenC wrote: Is "suggests" sufficient a reason to base one's life on something?

If the confidence is high, yes. Since nothing in this world in the domain of human reason is absolute, your question is rhetorical nonsense.

StephenC wrote: >>So please, I ask you now, for the 4th or 5th time, please provide my friend with your criteria to judge a prophet and give us an example of a prophet?<< I'll try again for your friend.  Please pay close attention: Anyone can claim to be a prophet from God, but it is up to you to decide whether they truly are providing revelations from God.

Rhetorical "rubbish". It is not a matter of my paying attention, but it is a matter of you being unable to provide anything substantial. So far, you can only provide a series of "skeptical" playing cards which is not imrpessive. Any lout can play the skeptics card. The real intellect provides reason and thought.

Your above explanation does not provide anything of substance or meaning. We all know that it is up to ourselves to choose and pick a faith. Your complaints have been the skeptical "playing card", as yout ry to hide your bankrupt position behind a charade of reason. The truth is, you only seem to come off as "intellectual" and "of reason" when you are in the position of playing skeptic, beyond that you cannot provide anything else.

From this statement, I already know this reply will not offer my confused friend anything of value. You do not believe Prophet Muhammad (saw) was a prophet, based upon your "investigation", yet you do not have a criteria to prove that someone is a prophet. If you cannot figure out of someone is a prophet, then you have no way of figuring out if someone is not. It is that simple, and your attempts at claiming to be an investigator is intellectually bankrupt.

One way is to look at the claimed prophet's background.  Did they have a stable childhood, did they have difficulties in relationships.  A person's childhood has influence on a person's adult behavior.  For example, if a child was an orphan and was deprived of attention and bonding, then they might do things to gain that attention and get approval for their family, friends, and peers.

yaaawn. You are repeating yourself. Again, it is not a matter of the reader's attention span, but it is a matter of your repeating the same mantra about history, and relaitonships, and the rest of your cheap sophistry.

You can try and repeat yoruself over and over, but in the end, you are unable to make your position work, either for determing a prophet, or disclaiming a prophet.

Does the prophet claim encounters with God and Angels that is not verifiable? Another way is to examine in detail what the claimed prophet said/wrote.  For example, if there are verses that are contradictory, then it is less likely to be truly from God. Be aware of revelations that are written by committees or has been rewritten or editorialized.  For example, if a claimed revelation from God needs to be clarified by third parties, then it probably isn't from God. Does the prophet gain from the revelations?  For example, the prophet of the Church Universal Triumpant (CUT) gains monetarily from her followers.  Is she a true prophet?  Her last name is legally prophet. Did Jim Bakker gain monetarily from his revelants?  Yes, and he gained a prison term. Does the revelation encompass discrimination and exclusion of persons or people? Are some people not allowed full participation in religious activities because of non-optional characteristics? If the answers to the above questions is "no", then the answer to the question as to whether the prophet is from God is probably "No" also. Having a few "no's" is not necessarily totally ecluding of the prophet.  A lot of times, a person will have a revelation from God but will change it (or the editors will change it) for non-Godly reasons. Does that help?

Far from helping, It is simply another heaping helping of the same thing you posted in your first attenpt at my question.

You cannot give a way to determine a prophet that is a working criteria. You are unable to give an example of a prophet. You are unable to disprove someone as a prophet. If you are truly an investigator, then your sceme would include these three points. Instead, you give a general idea of making an inquiry, which is not worth a nickle in the real world, and fails to provide anything helpful.

Hiding behind skeptical inquiry guised as trying to find the truth is unappealing, and insincere.

Hope this helps? 

StephenC wrote: What have I presented (other than that clearly marked as "investigator's note" or "uncited) that is untrue?

This was already covered. The context of what you term unture, and the thread. I will not rehash it. If you are unsatisfied with this reply, then I invite you to study the thread.

StephenC wrote: StephenC wrote: "What are you claiming is false?  That they eventually married?  I thought that was an undisputed fact.  Or are you saying that he did not marry a second wife (since there is dispute as to whether he had two wives at the same time or not I wrote this so it was accurate regardless of circumstances).  Or is that you are saying that it is false that: "Sometime later Muhammad married Khadijah, by whom he had two sons - who did not survive - and four daughters." IslamiCity.com Islamic History. Andalus wrote: "false: He did not take a second wife while with his first wife." Where did I say Muhammad took a second wife while with his first wife??!!  I explained that and quoted where I got the information.  Are you claiming that IslamiCity.com is putting out false information?!?!

More subterfuge.

I am claiming that your writings had false information, which angela also pointed out. You implied that the Prophet (saw) took another wife while with Kadija. You explicitly claimed this in your first "investigation" (I use this word loosely, expltremely loosley when refering to your work).

StephenC wrote: Andalus wrote: >>There are no editions, and there were no editors. In this case, the mistake is not with the QUran, but with your critical thinking skills and lack of expereince wtih the Quran. That's ok. A common error amongst detractors. The first huge mistake you are making is your reliance on translations. The second mistake you are making is trying to equate the creation of Adam to that of his progeny. Al-Sajadah 32: 7 - 8 Who made excellent everything that He created. He began the creation of man from clay, then made his offspring from a drop of humble fluid. So not only is your investigation sloppy (how you missed this verse tells me you have studied polemical trash sites for your "intell"), and cursory, but your commnad of the Quran and how to read it are less than novice.<< Is IslamiCity.com putting out "polemical trash"?  As I explained near the beginning of my discussion, unless I cite otherwise, I am getting the majority of my information from IslamiCity.com.  The quote is from IslamiCity.com's History of Islam and its Quran search. I am beginning to think that instead of an honest debate, you are not really interested in discussion.

More sophistry.

I did not refer to Islamcity.org. I refered to your position and conclusion. You know this. Instead of replying directly to your error, and the correction I gave you, you attempt to make an issue out of a non issue. This speaks volumes about your character.

Do not speak of honest debate, as so far you have been less than honest. 

StephenC wrote: Andalus wrote: "Your NT has been torn apart by your own scholars who admit defects, variants, and the question of what is a NT. Your NT is a troubled book, with a troubled past." My NT!  I do not hold a copyright on the New Testament.  So why do you claim it is my NT? Did I say that the New Testament is perfect?  I don't recall that and it would be against my earlier position about worshipping someone born of a woman. Aren't you paying attention?

The key point is that you have been less than honest about what you do believe, hiding behind your skeptical game.

Furthermore, in case you have not payed attention to the history of religion, not everyone who has an NT worshipped someone who was birthed from a woman.

StephenC wrote: Why not engage in honest debate?  Instead of one or two vague word responses, honestly discuss the issues. Do you think Muhammad is a true Prophet from God?  If so, why?

Why not? You made the claim that he was not.

Instead of pretending to really be investigating, why not stop with all of the silly skeptical questions and come out with your position and argue your case?

Thats what a debate is. You want to interrogate.

There is a difference.

Angela wrote: StephenC wrote: It appears that some Muslims today are doing similiar or even worse things in the name of Allah (not the pagan Allah).  So was Muhammad successful? (Please don't use the lame excuse that others are doing the same thing.  I realize the evilness of man regardless of the religion) Okay, but you're talking such a small amount.  At its height, AQ was considered to have 40,000 operatives.  There are 1.5 Billion Muslims.  Even if there were 150,000 terrorists.  You are talking 0.0001% of Muslims are committing these heinous acts and of those most of them are political in nature and not religious in nature.  They just get all the bad press.  So, I would say, given the number.  Yes, Muhammed did his job if only 1/100,000th of the population are crazed maniacs.

How many pagans were in Mecca at the time of Muhammad?

And I am not just talking about the terrorists.  what about "honor killings" stonings, rapes, etc.?

Are they Muslim Family Values?

Andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: Stephenc wrote: Quote: I don't think anyone has any proof to support or discredit any of the three.  All that remains is blind faith. Andalus responded with: "You cannot prove or disprove events. And the evidence suggests it was not Satan." Please show me the evidence!!!!! The theological message of the Quran and Sunnah is anti-thetical to satan, who is the archrival of man.

I'm looking for specifics not generalities.  Do you have anything specific?  I thought Muslims believe Satan is merely a jinn and Muhammad was for people and jinn.  did I get that wrong?

Remember my car salesman example?  If I want lie about something, I tell you a lot of true and throw in the lie or two.  Could that be what the "voice" was doing?  Also I still can not find anything about how Muhammad figured out that the unidentified "voice" was Angel Gabriel.

Andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: Is "suggests" sufficient a reason to base one's life on something? If the confidence is high, yes. Since nothing in this world in the domain of human reason is absolute, your question is rhetorical nonsense.

Okay, why is your confidence high about a "revelantion" that "suggests" it is from God (and not from Satan or man)?

Andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: What have I presented (other than that clearly marked as "investigator's note" or "uncited) that is untrue? This was already covered. The context of what you term unture, and the thread. I will not rehash it. If you are unsatisfied with this reply, then I invite you to study the thread.

So in other words you can not give even ONE example where I posted something that is not true or in error!!!

That means I have a better "batting average" than the Quran!

Did Angela take off the lawyer suit or did you realize that I have never made any such claim about Jesus Christ?

StephenC wrote: Andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: Stephenc wrote: Quote: I don't think anyone has any proof to support or discredit any of the three.  All that remains is blind faith. Andalus responded with: "You cannot prove or disprove events. And the evidence suggests it was not Satan." Please show me the evidence!!!!! The theological message of the Quran and Sunnah is anti-thetical to satan, who is the archrival of man. I'm looking for specifics not generalities.  Do you have anything specific?  I thought Muslims believe Satan is merely a jinn and Muhammad was for people and jinn.  did I get that wrong?

And what difference does that have on what I stated?

Please explain the problem you are implying.

The theolgical antithesis to Shaytan is inherent in the outcomes of Islam:

1) tauheed (the oneness of Gd without implicitness)

2) the develpment of civilization

3) development of society

4) development of family

4) the Quran and Sunnah

Remember my car salesman example?  If I want lie about something, I tell you a lot of true and throw in the lie or two.  Could that be what the "voice" was doing?  Also I still can not find anything about how Muhammad figured out that the unidentified "voice" was Angel Gabriel.

And remember my point and explanation that it was a false analogy. This is what usually happens when you ignore my points. You can then continue to recycle them as if the are valid.

I already covered it as a false analogy. Now you can pretend it was never mentioned and demand a rehash from me, and if I refuse, you can claim a victory.

You are not as clever as you think you are.

StephenC wrote: Andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: Is "suggests" sufficient a reason to base one's life on something? If the confidence is high, yes. Since nothing in this world in the domain of human reason is absolute, your question is rhetorical nonsense. Okay, why is your confidence high about a "revelantion" that "suggests" it is from God (and not from Satan or man)?

1) The Quran did not suggest, it clearly stated.

2) You may open a thread on the Quran, specifically the Quran, and debate it.

3) If this thread begins, I will end it if you only add contributions with silly skeptical questions. Skeptical questions do no find truth, only seek to place doubt or uncertainty on a subject. This is this the trick of skeptical arguments, and I will not let you turn any threads into a circus.

Feel free to start the thread.

StephenC wrote: Andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: What have I presented (other than that clearly marked as "investigator's note" or "uncited) that is untrue? This was already covered. The context of what you term unture, and the thread. I will not rehash it. If you are unsatisfied with this reply, then I invite you to study the thread. So in other words you can not give even ONE example where I posted something that is not true or in error!!! That means I have a better "batting average" than the Quran!

I listed them in a reply to your contribution. You asked me to clarify. So I did. This is your third attempt to ask yet again, without a single reply to what I gave you. You simply wasting the forum's time, and mine. 

Read them. Recall them. If you have trouble with them, then bring up your specific problems. You have your reply to this. Do not ask again unless it contains my previous comments to them.

This is it.

StephenC wrote: Did Angela take off the lawyer suit or did you realize that I have never made any such claim about Jesus Christ?

To whom are you referring to and what about Jesus are you talking about?

StephenC wrote: Angela wrote: StephenC wrote: It appears that some Muslims today are doing similiar or even worse things in the name of Allah (not the pagan Allah).  So was Muhammad successful? (Please don't use the lame excuse that others are doing the same thing.  I realize the evilness of man regardless of the religion) Okay, but you're talking such a small amount.  At its height, AQ was considered to have 40,000 operatives.  There are 1.5 Billion Muslims.  Even if there were 150,000 terrorists.  You are talking 0.0001% of Muslims are committing these heinous acts and of those most of them are political in nature and not religious in nature.  They just get all the bad press.  So, I would say, given the number.  Yes, Muhammed did his job if only 1/100,000th of the population are crazed maniacs. How many pagans were in Mecca at the time of Muhammad? And I am not just talking about the terrorists.  what about "honor killings" stonings, rapes, etc.? Are they Muslim Family Values?

The Prophet Muhammad (saw) was successful in his role as prophet. The first generation accomplished more in less than a hundred years what the previous people (children of Israel) could not do in a thousand years, and what has taken Christians centuries.

Stoning in the case of some cases of adultery is a prescribed punishment.

Honor killings is contrary to the teachings of Islam

Terrorism is a concept developed and invented in the west during the Reagen administrations notion of "containment (of communism) at all costs". Political movements that are run my some who claim to be Muslim are simply imitating what the west has mastered.

andalus wrote:

"And remember my point and explanation that it was a false analogy. This is what usually happens when you ignore my points. You can then continue to recycle them as if the are valid.

I already covered it as a false analogy. Now you can pretend it was never mentioned and demand a rehash from me, and if I refuse, you can claim a victory.

You are not as clever as you think you are."

I don't remember a valid rebutal from you.  Normally, you just make your pronouncements from your position on high of "false" "invalid" without any explanations.

andalus wrote:

"And what difference does that have on what I stated?

Please explain the problem you are implying."

The problem is that you can NOT give any concrete proof that Muhammad was merely a man giving his own opinion on what he thought God wants.

Here is your chance to educate all the unbeliever readers on Muhammad.  Give me something other than "suggests."

I'm not saying that some of Muhammad's opinions were not good ideas.  I am merely saying that there is NO evidence that he got his revelation from a voice that he later claimed to be the Angel Gabriel.

Please give a specific proof.  Otherwise I will think it is just blind faith.

The Quran did not suggest, it clearly stated.

An example would be appreciated!

Andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: Andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: What have I presented (other than that clearly marked as "investigator's note" or "uncited) that is untrue? This was already covered. The context of what you term unture, and the thread. I will not rehash it. If you are unsatisfied with this reply, then I invite you to study the thread. So in other words you can not give even ONE example where I posted something that is not true or in error!!! That means I have a better "batting average" than the Quran! I listed them in a reply to your contribution. You asked me to clarify. So I did. This is your third attempt to ask yet again, without a single reply to what I gave you. You simply wasting the forum's time, and mine.  Read them. Recall them. If you have trouble with them, then bring up your specific problems. You have your reply to this. Do not ask again unless it contains my previous comments to them. This is it.

I have re-read my posts and your replies and my replies to your superficial remarks.  I can not find where you  posted anything that I said that was untrue or in error.  The closest is where I quoted IslamiCity.com's online Quran where the "angel" is claimed to have Muhammad recite about man being made from a "clot of blood" and you provided another translation that added "dust".  That is not an example of my posting something wrong or in error.  That is merely my getting you to support my contention that the Quran has been written, rewrittened, and edited so much that there are significant problems with knowing what is from Muhammad and what is from others.

You spend a lot of time and energy avoiding facts!

Amgela wrote:

"The Kaabah had been transformed into a house of Idols and was the site of some of the largest Pagan festivals.  There were only a few Jews and Christians in the area, the majority (the vast majority) were pagan."

stephenc responds:

With all the places on the earth, I can not understand why Islam "recycles" a pagan temple to the pagan god "allah" into a Holy Place for God (called Allah by Islam).  I personally think God deserves better.

stephenc asked: "Are they Muslim Family Values?"

Angela responded: "Muslim family values are far superior to western family values.  I state that emphatically.  A woman is to be cared for by the men in her life, all her needs are to be provided to her by her husband so that she can focus on providing a stable homelife for her children.  If a Muslim man take more than one wife, he is commanded to treat them all equally.  If he cannot, then he's forbidden to take more than one wife.  Children are to respect and care for their parents."

stephenc responds:

I respect your opinion, but westerns believe their values are far superior to Islamic values.  Westerns tend to believe in equality (not just spiritually) in both sexes.  Slaves in the South had their needs met at the cost of personal liberties and rights.  I believe it should be the person's choice.  While I have no problems with men having more than one wife at a time, I think equality would demand that women have the same rights (if they want) to have more than one husband at a time.

Angela wrote:

"The failing is not in the Prophet Muhammed.  The failing is in those that have strayed from his message.  Any good Muslim will tell you that." 

stephenc responds:

Followers strayed from Moses while he was still on the mountain, so God sent additional prophets.  We read how God sent prophets after Moses.  Christ's followers have allegedly edited, rewritten, and added to Christ's revelants.  However, Muhammad's followers apparently claim that he is the "last prophet of God."  If this is so, then the ones following him are false prophets and there are none to do as past prophets have done - brought the strayed back to the flock.

Angela wrote:

"I'm pretty sure you're not here to really "investigate" whether or not Muhammed is a Prophet of God.  You seem to have no concrete beliefs of your own."

stephenc responds:

I have studied the Quran since 1978 when I received one as a gift from college room mates.  It is next to my bed as is my Bible.

I am no expert by any means.  However, using the talents God gave me, I have not seen any proof that Muhammad was anything other than just a man who gave his opinions (which have been edited, re written, and translated many times) of what he thought God wanted.

If Islam is another "Blind Faith" religion, I can accept that.  But before I change my beliefs, I want something substantual.

As for my beliefs, I will repeat them here for you.

I believe that there is one God and only one God and that is the God of Abraham, Moses, and Jesus Christ.

I believe that God does send messengers to us and that Satan also continues to deceive the unwary just as he did with Adam and Eve.

I believe that it is the responsiblity of each person to "investigate in detail" any claim to be a revelation from God.

I believe that God will send signs to us if we pray with an open and unbiased heart.  I believe that if one took a copy of the Quran, the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and a Webster's Dictionary and soaked them in kerosene and prayed to God that he protect the one true book of his revelations, all would burn (when ignited) and what would be left would be mostly ashes, but some preserved verses.  In otherwords, all have some Godly verses, but none are completely of God.

Angela wrote: "In the end, the difference between people of faith and people without faith isn't really a matter of proof."

stephenc agrees:

I agree that established religions are solely based on faith without proof.  The problem appears to be that people of the various faiths do not realize that?

StephenC,

From you: "Should we start a new discussion on the errors in the Quran?"

Yes, please go ahead and go slow but keep in mind that during this fasting month, we might be slow in response and might occasionally lose our patience due to slow metabolism!  Speak out your own mind and do not quote from Polemics. I am bored of that stuff.

From you: "So he is "only an apostle" not a prophet, not the "LAST" prophet?"

Personally, I dislike using the word 'apostle' for my dear Prophet. Apostle in my opinion should be used for the twelve disciples of Jesus in Christianity. It is also used for Paul, the self-appointed apostle. I am aware that apostle can also be a messenger.

Muhammad is the last Prophet according to Qur'aan. Since we believe in every word of Qur'aan and that Qur'aan was given to Muhammad by Lord Almighty, we acknowledge that statement in Qur'aan. The term Khataman-Nabi-yin means the final stamp or the cessation of Nabis (Prophets). That word Khatam does not mean Last. It simply means that there would be no more prophet after him.

From you: "What did Muhammad bring that was not already known?"

Muhammad did not bring anything new. He did not bring anything that was not known. He did not come with a "quadrinity".   He came to remind and the message is the Reminder.

From you: "Under your definition of a prophet, just about anyone can claim to be a prophet.  This includes Muhammad, Joseph Smith, Clara Prophet (Church Universal Triumpant), Jim and Tammy Bakker, Joel Obsteen (Lakewood Church), and a host of other self appointed prophets. Even I could fit under that definition."

Firstly I am unaware of American prophets and prophetesses. In the region that I live, we don't have Joseph Smiths and Claras. The nearest is 5,000 kilometres away and is a Mooney. Under my definition, you do not fit in at all. A Prophet stands out among the crowd, you would not. . You can have people blabbering or chanting but that does not mean they are prophets.

Regarding Muhammad's young days and childhood, please read about him in the Islamic literature/history, not the crap by Ali Sina and Warraq, answering-Islamdotcoms and so many so-called ex-Muslims.

I will only comment as and when necessary since I am not good at  Intellectual Masturbation.

Thanks, StephenC

BMZ

StephenC wrote: Andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: Andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: What have I presented (other than that clearly marked as "investigator's note" or "uncited) that is untrue? This was already covered. The context of what you term unture, and the thread. I will not rehash it. If you are unsatisfied with this reply, then I invite you to study the thread. So in other words you can not give even ONE example where I posted something that is not true or in error!!! That means I have a better "batting average" than the Quran! I listed them in a reply to your contribution. You asked me to clarify. So I did. This is your third attempt to ask yet again, without a single reply to what I gave you. You simply wasting the forum's time, and mine.  Read them. Recall them. If you have trouble with them, then bring up your specific problems. You have your reply to this. Do not ask again unless it contains my previous comments to them. This is it. I have re-read my posts and your replies and my replies to your superficial remarks.  I can not find where you  posted anything that I said that was untrue or in error.  The closest is where I quoted IslamiCity.com's online Quran where the "angel" is claimed to have Muhammad recite about man being made from a "clot of blood" and you provided another translation that added "dust".  That is not an example of my posting something wrong or in error.  That is merely my getting you to support my contention that the Quran has been written, rewrittened, and edited so much that there are significant problems with knowing what is from Muhammad and what is from others. You spend a lot of time and energy avoiding facts!

This was the first reply to your "investigation".

I listed the problems, and clearly noted the fallacy or problem. Since then, you have clearly tried to distort this reply to your hypothetical nonsense.

1) embellishment of historical events with your opinions and conjecture is an error

2) not making a point, nor bringing up events that lead to any specific point is an error

3) the Prophet (saw) did not take a second wife during his marriage to Khadija

4) The Prophet (saw) did not have any children with any other woman during his marriage with Kadijah

5) not making a coherent, relevant point with your observations is...well..a waste of time for us all

Open ended nonsense. This bges the questions: So what? and what is your point?

It was a custom for noble families to send their young to live with bedouins and to be suckled with members of these tribes.

irrelevant and supositional

The topic is not about how, in general, were his relationahips.

If you feel that some particular event effected some particular relationship and such a causal effect is relevant to an investigation of prophethood, then please state in these terms.

conjecture, specualtion, and irrelevant.

Please state the particual point being made in terms of an investigation into his claim of prophethood.

false

what do you mean "a great deal" and what does it mean?

this begs the question: So what?

Please make a point?

Another vague, general statement.

Clarify "refused", and make a point that is in the context of an investigation.

First part: You beg the question: so what? Please make a point.

Second Part: You also begged the question: So what?

What was supposed to be found in the cave to show the Gariel was there, and why must Gabriel leave something in the cave?

How did Moses know Gd spoke to him? There is no explanation given, so Moses did not talk to Gd.

Very juvenile.

Are you going to make a solid point sometime this century? Seriously.

You beg the question: So what.

Suppositional nonsense.

"he had to" is your conjecture. Accusation of "sexual harassament" is also more of your juvenile conjecture. And then you top it all of by using the phrase, "by todays standards".

So far, your investigation is a poorly written, sophomoric piece that is void of any real critical thinking. You meander on without making any points, throwing out vague ideas that are so implicit that only a missionary would use. There is nothing in this softball peice that even begins to truly argue for the case of prophethood.

False.

More rubbish. Someone dying is not an abandonment. You are trying to embellish.

He recited in a cave, and other places afterward. So what?

A voice did not force him, Gd compelled him.

What differences exist?

Yes.

You fail to make a point. I would hardly call this an investigation of someone who is as scholarly as you claim to be.

Also, embellishing, and conjecture, and supposition are not tools for an investigation. This has striking similarities to the work of an evangelical.

I am still waiting for you to reveal who you consider to be a true prophet.

So much secrecy!

StephenC wrote: andalus wrote: "And remember my point and explanation that it was a false analogy. This is what usually happens when you ignore my points. You can then continue to recycle them as if the are valid. I already covered it as a false analogy. Now you can pretend it was never mentioned and demand a rehash from me, and if I refuse, you can claim a victory. You are not as clever as you think you are." I don't remember a valid rebutal from you.  Normally, you just make your pronouncements from your position on high of "false" "invalid" without any explanations.

Play obtuse if you wish.

I clearly showed it was a false analogy, and why. You never replied to that point. You only reply to trivial things which have no real merit.

StephenC wrote: andalus wrote: "And what difference does that have on what I stated? Please explain the problem you are implying."

Please give the context of my quote. I have no idea what this is about and my time is limited.

note: I came acorss the context, and as usual, you left out the point and deflected.

You stated: I thought Muslims believe Satan is merely a jinn and Muhammad was for people and jinn.  did I get that wrong?

And my reply to this was, "And what difference does that have on what I stated? Please explain the problem you are implying."

You then gave something completely irrelevant, as usual.

The problem is that you can NOT give any concrete proof that Muhammad was merely a man giving his own opinion on what he thought God wants.

This is a skeptics game.

Since you have avoided telling us how you can determine a prophet (though you feel you can disprove one, though even that scheme is unclear at this moment), perhaps you might tell us what you mean, exactly, as "concrete"? What would satisfy you?

I ask this because I suspect you will be a waste of time if given any serious, and time consuming response.

You can play the skeptics game all day long and in that case, nothing in this world is sacred and will have some doubt.

Here is your chance to educate all the unbeliever readers on Muhammad.  Give me something other than "suggests."

Here is your chance to show us that you have more to offer than cheap skeptical questions. So far, you refuse to define yourself.

I'm not saying that some of Muhammad's opinions were not good ideas.  I am merely saying that there is NO evidence that he got his revelation from a voice that he later claimed to be the Angel Gabriel.

What is your requirrement for proof?

Please give a specific proof.  Otherwise I will think it is just blind faith.

The ball is in your court. It does not matter if we are looking at EInstein's theories, evolution theory, US History, one only need to play the skeptic to place doubt on all of it.

If you are only here to play skeptic, then your intentions are not worthy a serious debate.

I want to know what you require for proof.

Because in the end, if you go to bed at night and accept many of the truths that the average person holds dear, then your intention here with your application of rhetorical tricks to my religion is void of any real intention to learn or debate.

Thank you BMZ for the response.  I appreciate the effort you put into it especially during this special month.  I will try your advise.  The primary islamdotcom source that I use is this one (islamicity.com).

Anyway, some of my concerns which makes it difficult to fully believe that Muhammad was who Islam claims he was is as follows:

I can not find any established prophet that made the "there is no more prophets after me" statement.  I realize that some contemporary ones do make similiar claims, I easily see that they are imposters.

Moses did not make such a claim.  Neither did Christ.

I see a society today that is in serious need of some revelations from God!

I have serious problems with the "recycling" of pagan temples into temples to God.  Maybe it is because I was from a large poor family and received "hand me downs."  I believe that this earth was made by God and is still God's.  God deserves better than "used" temples and I find the worship of the rock/meteor/whatever it is to border on paganism similiar to the worship of Saints and graven images in some Christian religions.

I personally do not need a physical item to "stand in for" God.

I also believe that Satan exists and that he deceived Adam and Eve and continues to deceive people today.  (That could explain Paris Hilton, Madonna, and others :)

When Satan deceived Eve and Adam, he used mostly truth, but mixed in a little lies.  That is an effective method.  That is why I am so detailed in my investigation of claims of revelations from God.

For example, if anything Jesus Christ said was shown to be wrong, then I would question everything he said.

The Quran has errors and descrepancies.  These may be attributed to the companion's committee modifying the revelations of Muhammad or the many interpretations, editing, or rewrites. 

An example is if you had a beautiful steel hulled ship sailing across the water.  But then one of ten thousand rivets fails.  What happens?  Rust and the slow deterioration of the hull and the eventual loss of the ship.

Go down to any sea port.  You will see rusty ships.  At one time these were the pride of someone.  But failing rivets and no maintence causes them to become "rust buckets."

If my concerns about problems with the Quran are not resolved, then it is like a failing rivet and soon the it is lost.

Andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: Andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: Andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: What have I presented (other than that clearly marked as "investigator's note" or "uncited) that is untrue? This was already covered. The context of what you term unture, and the thread. I will not rehash it. If you are unsatisfied with this reply, then I invite you to study the thread. So in other words you can not give even ONE example where I posted something that is not true or in error!!! That means I have a better "batting average" than the Quran! I listed them in a reply to your contribution. You asked me to clarify. So I did. This is your third attempt to ask yet again, without a single reply to what I gave you. You simply wasting the forum's time, and mine.  Read them. Recall them. If you have trouble with them, then bring up your specific problems. You have your reply to this. Do not ask again unless it contains my previous comments to them. This is it. I have re-read my posts and your replies and my replies to your superficial remarks.  I can not find where you  posted anything that I said that was untrue or in error.  The closest is where I quoted IslamiCity.com's online Quran where the "angel" is claimed to have Muhammad recite about man being made from a "clot of blood" and you provided another translation that added "dust".  That is not an example of my posting something wrong or in error.  That is merely my getting you to support my contention that the Quran has been written, rewrittened, and edited so much that there are significant problems with knowing what is from Muhammad and what is from others. You spend a lot of time and energy avoiding facts! This was the first reply to your "investigation". I listed the problems, and clearly noted the fallacy or problem. Since then, you have clearly tried to distort this reply to your hypothetical nonsense. 1) embellishment of historical events with your opinions and conjecture is an error An example of an embellishment of historical events is...? Where did I insert my opinions and conjecture that was not so declared? 2) not making a point, nor bringing up events that lead to any specific point is an error The background of the subject is just that, there is no "point" to the history of Muhammad, it merely is the documenting a reference point for the investigation.  Have you ever written a report of investigation or even read one?  If so, did it not give some background information such as " a white man, 40 years old, employed as a sales clerk"?  This gives the reader a point of reference.  Find an investigator and ask whether this is not true. 3) the Prophet (saw) did not take a second wife during his marriage to Khadija I did not say that the prophet took a second wife DURING his marriage to Khadija.  I even quoted islamicity.com's history and gave an explanation.  Go to the home page and then click on Islam History.  4) The Prophet (saw) did not have any children with any other woman during his marriage with Kadijah Again see the answer to point 3. 5) not making a coherent, relevant point with your observations is...well..a waste of time for us all I'm sorry your arm hurts, I didn't realize I was twisting anyone's arm.... StephenC wrote: Personal history of subject of investigation. As I stated above, the history/background of the subject has a bearing on the investigation. Shall we discuss Muhammad's background/history?  With your permission, I will use the IslamiCity.com history to eliminate any claims of anti-Islam bias. Muhammad's father used the arabic word for God (Allah) in his name.  This was a time when the people of the area were pagans. Open ended nonsense. This bges the questions: So what? and what is your point? See above. Quote:   Muhammad's father died just before he was born. Muhammad's mother used a tradition where the infant "wet nursed."  (note: this was not in the IslamiCity.com history and presently I do not recall where I read this and the story about how even as a baby Muhammad would only take milk from one tit so that the "wet nurse's" natural child would have something to eat.  If this is baseless legend or if my failure to properly cite it is offensive, please disregard.) It was a custom for noble families to send their young to live with bedouins and to be suckled with members of these tribes. I realize that and I realize that it could have negative affects on children when they don't bond with their parents and it affects them later in life. Quote: Muhammad's mother died when he was 6 years old and he was sent away to live with a non-relative family. The orphan child was raised by the grandfather.  The substitute father figure died and the child was passed over to an uncle. The orphan child from a wealthy family was eventually turned over to a rural family to work as a herdsman. (Investigator's note - did the circumstances of the child's early years have an effect on his ability to form relationships due to the difficulty of the baby bonding with an absent mother?) irrelevant and supositional Even though that is merely your opinion without any expressed basis, I still would not disrespect your opinions and observations (no matter how wrong they are) with such incomplete sentences. The topic is not about how, in general, were his relationahips. I thought the topic is about Muhammad and the Quran.  Do you really believe that a person's childhood has no effect on adulthood? If you feel that some particular event effected some particular relationship and such a causal effect is relevant to an investigation of prophethood, then please state in these terms. I have stated that Muhammad had a bad childhood and was in middle age (a time when many men have a crisis as to the purpose of their life) when he had the claimed revelations from a voice. Quote: When in his twenties, Muhammad entered into the service of a wealthy widow. (Investigator's note - In a male dominated society, it must have been difficult for the son of a weathly family to work as an employee/servant of another, especially a woman.  Information from uncited works claim that the woman/boss made sexual advances towards the employee/servant) conjecture, specualtion, and irrelevant. More baseless remarks with nothing but opinions. Please state the particual point being made in terms of an investigation into his claim of prophethood. Please see above about the history/background of a subject of an investigation.  Is there some reason we should NOT look into Muhammad's personal life. Quote: And they eventually married.  However Muhammad, utilizing the custom of the time found a second wife to marry and they had two sons, both who died young. false Another baseless incomplete sentence.  The exact quote from IslamiCity.com is: "About the year 590, Muhammad, then in his twenties, entered the service of a widow named Khadijah as a merchant actively engaged with trading caravans to the north. Sometime later Muhammad married Khadijah, by whom he had two sons - who did not survive - and four daughters." Did I quote it wrong?  Something more than one or two words would be helpful. Quote: Muhammad traveled a great deal. what do you mean "a great deal" and what does it mean? "During this period of his life Muhammad traveled widely" islamicity.com  Are they wrong?  Isn't "Traveled widely" pretty much the same as "a great deal" in that time period?   Quote:   In his forties while in a cave alone, Muhammad claimed to have an encounter with a being's voice of unknown origin, who commanded him to recite a statement "Recite: In the name of thy Lord who created, Created man from a clot of blood." (Investigator's note - the resulting Qur'an which was said to be a revelation from God through this voice and later encounters claims God created man from dust.) this begs the question: So what? Please make a point? Please see the above on the background/history of a subject.  No "point" is made or expected in this part of the report of investigation. Quote: Muhammad refused, but after repeated demands, he finally did as he was ordered.   Another vague, general statement. But it is fact according to Islamicity.com Clarify "refused", and make a point that is in the context of an investigation. "Three times Muhammad pleaded his inability to do so, but each time the command was repeated." islamicity.com   Quote:   Muhammad is said to have relayed this encounter to his wife and close friends. (Investigator's note - other uncited statements say that there was a three year period between the first encounter and the second.  Also due to the extensive time between the encounter and the present, no evidence has been found at the cave to support or discredit the claimed encounter.) First part: You beg the question: so what? Please make a point. Second Part: You also begged the question: So what? Please see above about history/background of subject.  Is this really such a hard concept for you to understand? What was supposed to be found in the cave to show the Gariel was there, and why must Gabriel leave something in the cave? Who knows what "residue" a voice leaves in a cave?  How did Muhammad later figure out that the voice was the Angel Gabriel?   I can not find anything that really explains that. Quote: Muhammad later stated that his later learned the being was the Angel Grabriel, however, no explanation of how this identification was given. How did Moses know Gd spoke to him? There is no explanation given, so Moses did not talk to Gd. The Scripture (Exodus 3:6) say that God said to Moses: "I am the God of they father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob..." That is clear enough for me! Very juvenile. I know, but I won't hold your personal attacks against me, against you.  I realize that when someone has "blind faith" and it is shaken by facts, it is difficult to handle. Quote: Summary: Muhammad had what would be considered a rough childhood.  Anyone he bonded with as a child died.  He did not know his father and was apparently passed around as a child finally ending up with a rural non-related foster family where he had to work.  There is no indication that he inherited his family's weath.  Are you going to make a solid point sometime this century? Seriously. You beg the question: So what. Please see above about history/background of subject. Quote:  He had to work for a woman who, under today's standards, could have been accused of the sexual harassment of an employee. Suppositional nonsense. "he had to" is your conjecture. Accusation of "sexual harassament" is also more of your juvenile conjecture. And then you top it all of by using the phrase, "by todays standards". What would you call it when a younger man who is an orphan goes to work for a (older?) woman who eventually has sexual relations with him.  I clearly clarified it by using "todays standards" as you pointed out. So far, your investigation is a poorly written, sophomoric piece that is void of any real critical thinking. You meander on without making any points, throwing out vague ideas that are so implicit that only a missionary would use. There is nothing in this softball peice that even begins to truly argue for the case of prophethood. As I have REPEATEDLY said the background/history is the basis for the reader to understand the subject.  The actual facts pro or con for prophethood will come later if he can finally grasp the basic concept. Quote:   While still married, Muhammad (lawfully) married a second wife.  This marriage resulted in two sons.  False. You are correct that in the summary, I miswrote.  I am sorry if I mislead you.  However, in the body of the post (see first page of this discussion Posted: 22 September 2006 at 10:43am) "And they eventually married.  However Muhammad, utilizing the custom of the time found a second wife to marry and they had two sons, both who died young."   Quote:  Muhammad suffered additional "abandonment" by the death of these sons.  In a cave a voice forced him to recite verses.  There was a difference between the verse as recited and the late written book. End part one. More rubbish. Someone dying is not an abandonment. You are trying to embellish. dictionary.com's 1st definition of abandon is "to leave completely and finally;" Sounds like a good expression of death! He recited in a cave, and other places afterward. So what? Again, see background/history of subject. A voice did not force him, Gd compelled him. "One day, as he sat in the cave, he heard a voice, later identified as that of the Angel Gabriel, which ordered him to: Recite: In the name of thy Lord who created, Created man from a clot of blood. Three times Muhammad pleaded his inability to do so, but each time the command was repeated. Finally, Muhammad recited the words..." Islamicity.com HIstory What differences exist? Quote: Any problems or inaccuracies with the initial background/history of the subject of the investigation?   Yes. You fail to make a point. I would hardly call this an investigation of someone who is as scholarly as you claim to be. Also, embellishing, and conjecture, and supposition are not tools for an investigation. This has striking similarities to the work of an evangelical. I am still waiting for you to reveal who you consider to be a true prophet. So much secrecy!

Again, where did I claim to be a scholar?

Andalus wrote: StephenC wrote: andalus wrote: "And remember my point and explanation that it was a false analogy. This is what usually happens when you ignore my points. You can then continue to recycle them as if the are valid. I already covered it as a false analogy. Now you can pretend it was never mentioned and demand a rehash from me, and if I refuse, you can claim a victory. You are not as clever as you think you are." I don't remember a valid rebutal from you.  Normally, you just make your pronouncements from your position on high of "false" "invalid" without any explanations. Play obtuse if you wish. I clearly showed it was a false analogy, and why. You never replied to that point. You only reply to trivial things which have no real merit.

I'm not sure whether you are pretending not to understand or whether you are pretending to avoid addressing the issues.

You may have expressed your opinion, but about the analogy in one or two words, but you have not "clearly showed" anything!

I have addressed the issue.  If you want to "sell a lie" then hide it among a lot of truth!

Is that not clear to you?  I have tried to keep it in one sentence so it is easier to understand.

If you need further clarification, please let me know.

As for avoidance of issues, may I repeat my request for some proof (not myth or legend) that Muhammad was a prophet from God. 

We know that Muhammad claimed he was just an apostle (see Al-Imran (The Family of Imran) and other verses

3:144 AND muhammad is only an apostle; all the [other] apostles have passed away before him: if, then, he dies or is slain, will you turn about on your heels? <>Asad(3,104) But he that turns about on his heels can in no wise harm God - whereas God will requite all who are grateful [to Him].

See also the definition of apostle from http://www.dictionary.com - www.dictionary.com :

2.	(sometimes initial capital letter) any of the original 12 disciples called by Jesus to preach the gospel: Simon Peter, the brothers James and John, Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James the son of Alpheus, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot, Judas Iscariot.

Clearly Muhammad was not 1-7 or 9.  Possibly 8 might apply.  But where in the Quran does Muhammad claim to be the last prophet?

Without using terms within brackets "[ ]" please find a verse where Muhammad claims to be the last prophet and it will help satisfy my desire for knowledge of Muhammad!  And please don't claim that dictionary.com is anti-islamic!

It appears that others claim he was the last prophet and not Muhammad himself!

StephenC wrote: Clearly Muhammad was not 1-7 or 9.  Possibly 8 might apply.  But where in the Quran does Muhammad claim to be the last prophet? Without using terms within brackets "[ ]" please find a verse where Muhammad claims to be the last prophet and it will help satisfy my desire for knowledge of Muhammad!  And please don't claim that dictionary.com is anti-islamic! It appears that others claim he was the last prophet and not Muhammad himself!

Bismillah

THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD'S LAST SERMON

(This Sermon was delivered on the Ninth Day of Dhul Hijjah 10 A.H in the Uranah Valley of mount Arafat ) Note: Found on the Net, but without source or copyright information. Please contact [email protected] if you have information

"O People, lend me an attentive ear, for I don't know whether, after this year, I shall ever be amongst you again. Therefore listen to what I am saying to you carefully and TAKE THIS WORDS TO THOSE WHO COULD NOT BE PRESENT HERE TODAY.

O People, just as you regard this month, this day, this city as Sacred, so regard the life and property of every Muslim as a sacred trust. Return the goods entrusted to you to their rightful owners. Hurt no one so that no one may hurt you. Remember that you will indeed meet your LORD, and that HE will indeed reckon your deeds. ALLAH has forbidden you to take usury (Interest), therefore all interest obligation shall henceforth be waived...

Beware of Satan, for your safety of your religion. He has lost all hope that he will ever be able to lead you astray in big things, so beware of following him in small things.

O People, it is true that you have certain rights with regard to your women, but they also have right over you. If they abide by your right then to them belongs the right to be fed and clothed in kindness. Do treat your women well and be kind to them for they are your partners and comitted helpers. And it is your right that they do not make friends with any one of whom you do not approve, as well as never to commit adultery.

O People, listen to me in earnest, whorship ALLAH, say your five daily prayers (Salah), fast during the month of Ramadhan, and give your wealth in Zakat. Perform Hajj if you can afford to. You know that every Muslim is the brother of another Muslim. YOU ARE ALL EQUAL. NOBODY HAS SUPERIORITY OVER OTHER EXCEPT BY PIETY AND GOOD ACTION.

Remember, one day you will appear before ALLAH and answer for your deeds. So beware, do not astray from the path of righteousness after I am gone.

O People, NO PROPHET OR APOSTLE WILL COME AFTER ME AND NO NEW FAITH WILL BE BORN. Reason well, therefore, O People, and understand my words which I convey to you. I leave behind me two things, the QUR'AN and my example, the SUNNAH and if you follow these you will never go astray.

All those who listen to me shall pass on my words to others and those to others again; and may the last ones understand my words better than those who listen to me direcly. BE MY WITNESS O ALLAH THAT I HAVE CONVEYED YOUR MESSAGE TO YOUR PEOPLE."

Muhammed told his people he was the last prophet in his final address to them.  Its not in the Quran. 

stephenc requested:

"Please give a specific proof.  Otherwise I will think it is just blind faith."

[/QUOTE]

The ball is in your court. It does not matter if we are looking at EInstein's theories, evolution theory, US History, one only need to play the skeptic to place doubt on all of it.

If you are only here to play skeptic, then your intentions are not worthy a serious debate.

I want to know what you require for proof.

Because in the end, if you go to bed at night and accept many of the truths that the average person holds dear, then your intention here with your application of rhetorical tricks to my religion is void of any real intention to learn or debate.

[/QUOTE]

As for proof that Muhammad heard a voice in a cave that was later determined to be the angel Gabriel that gave him the last revelation from God, how about ANYTHING other than Muhammad said so?

The theory of Relativity is clearly stated as a theory, however some of it can be mathematically proven.

Can anything dealing with Muhammad's claim be proven?  If you referred to it as the Theory of Muhammad's Revelations, then I can understand it.  Even if Muhammad's claim was that he had a revelation from God, I could more readily accept that than for his alleged claim that he is "the last prophet from God."

There are two many inconsistencies, too many editiors, and too many rewrites for me to accept it as "a perfect revelation from God."

Angela wrote:

"It seems that any organization in religion disturbs you greatly.  Is its possible you don't have a problem with religions, you just have a problem having authority dictate to you the nature of God?"

My problem is when a person or group of persons claims to be a prophet from God and tries to dictate to other people what God wants and doesn't want when it is really just the ego of the person or personal gain.

If I were to accept Muhammad solely on his say so, then I would have to accept Smith solely on his say so, and so on and so forth.

If members of religious organizations would accept that there is no proof, just blind faith then there wouldn't be all this conflict.

See the hostility I get just because I point out problems with Muhammad's claim!  Is Islam unable to take questioning?

Muhammad said about Satan in his last sermon:

"He has lost all hope that he will ever be able to lead you astray in big things, so beware of following him in small things. "

How much different is what Muhammad said and what I said about if you want to sell a lie, hide it among a lot of truth?

Angela wrote:

"

I have a hard time believing you have studied Islam for 28 years and still have such a lack of understanding of its basic tenents, the life of the Prophet and the reality of its people.  I have studied it for only a year and 3 months and my understanding of Islam is better than yours.  You talked about prayer with an unbiased heart, but I sincerely doubt that you've ever done that in your entire life.  I was raised Russian Orthodox Catholic and Methodist (split family), I witnessed first hand the wickedness that can be present in any religion.  I left the mainstream church and wandered from religion to religion, searching for the truth, none of them felt right.  Then one day, I did pray sincerely and I was lead to my faith.  Until that time, I had bias in my heart against all faiths."

stephenc responds:

That is rather judgemental of you, more than usual. :( How can you say that you sincerely doubt whether I have prayed with an unbiased heart?  I have not condemned anyone living or dead.  Have I lied?  Just because I question what men claim is from God, I am somehow bad?  Have I belittled or ridiculed anyone on this forum.  While I have not held Muhammad as a deity, I have not lied about him or his followers.  Have I said anything negative about him or his followers that was not true (I did misstate about Muhammad's marriages in a summary, but I apolized for that error)?  I have tried using Islamic websites and the Quran for my statements.

Yes, I've read the Quran and other religious texts and attended different churches/temples like you claim.  However, I have no bias in my heart towards any religion or beliefs.  Before I commit to the most important thing in this life (and the afterlife) I want to be positive.

The hostility against those who question claims about Muhammad makes me question whether his revelation is true to God's desires.

But this is not unique to Islam.  Most religious cults are hostile to questioning.

You claim to better understand Islam than me, so tell me how you rationalize Muhammad's denial of Mormonism?

Okay, Stephen.

Lets talk proofs.  What would you consider proof?  We an illiterate man who composed a nearly perfect piece of Arabic Prose that is 114 chapters and 6236 verses of perfect arabic grammar.  Angels have never given out business cards to those they have visited.  Often Prophets have only had their voice and presence to give law to their words.  Do you really think anyone believed Moses spoke to a burning bush?  They disobeyed him even after witnessing the miracles of the 10 plagues and the parting of the Red Sea.  The people saw him preform these awesome miracles and then the minute he went up the mountain, they built a golden calf and started worshipping it.

Now here was a people that had proof of Prophethood and still waxed in disbelief.  

But, not all Prophets had proof.  Look at Jacob and his wrestling with the Angel.  Do we have proof he wrestled with an Angel or God?  No. 

Look at Joshua...do we have proof that the sounding of the horns brought down the walls of Jericho.  Perhaps he just got lucky and there was an earthquake. 

Islam is a religion based on individual belief.  There is no clergy.  Scholars of Islam are educated men and even though their works are respected, in the end, they are just the opinions of those scholars.

All any person needs in Islam is the Quran and their prayers.  They need no one else. 

However, I don't understand your claim to editors and rewrites.  Even the Yemeni scripts which show differences, show more grammatical differences than anything else.

So did Muhammad think that the Quran was incomplete in that since it did not aware him the honor of being the "Last Prophet," he had to add to it?

Didn't the Quran say that he was "only an apostle?"

Was this his ego or another "revelation" from the "Voice?"

After hearing God's Word, Moses let his own emotions get the best of him when he threw down the Commandments given to him by God.  Wasn't his punishment banishment from the Promise Land?

StephenC wrote: You claim to better understand Islam than me, so tell me how you rationalize Muhammad's denial of Mormonism?

Its actually pretty easy.  First off, there is the fact that Muhammed prepared the way like other reformers including Martin Luther.  There is also the fact that all Prophets are given a portion of the Truth, but the truth is only revealed to what is needed for the people. 

Secondly, Muhammed expressed his corrections of the apostacies in ways, that as a Mormon, I believe that even he didn't understand.  Muhammed was surrounded by Gnostic Christians after the great apostacy. 

But, in the end, I'll leave it up to good old Hugh Nibley to answer your questions.

http://emp.byui.edu/andersenj/default_files/Supplemental%20R eadings/Islam_and_Mormonism.pdf#search=%22Islam%20and%20Morm onism%22 - http://emp.byui.edu/andersenj/default_files/Supplemental%20R eadings/Islam_and_Mormonism.pdf#search=%22Islam%20and%20Morm onism%22

http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/2000.htm/ensign%20august%202000.htm/a%20latterday%20saint%20perspective%20on%20muhammad.htm?fn=document-frame.htm$f=templates$3.0 - http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/2000 .htm/ensign%20august%202000.htm/a%20latterday%20saint%20pers pective%20on%20muhammad.htm?fn=document-frame.htm$f=template s$3.0

StephenC wrote: So did Muhammad think that the Quran was incomplete in that since it did not aware him the honor of being the "Last Prophet," he had to add to it? Didn't the Quran say that he was "only an apostle?" Was this his ego or another "revelation" from the "Voice?" After hearing God's Word, Moses let his own emotions get the best of him when he threw down the Commandments given to him by God.  Wasn't his punishment banishment from the Promise Land?

Andalus will have to find it, but I do know that there was a time where Muhammed forgot to say Bismallah before something and he had to be not so gently reminded.

Prophets are men they are fallible.  Every last one of them.  Prophets are not perfect, they are human.  Only god is Perfect.  Even Jesus had his moment of doubt.

Angela wrote: Okay, Stephen. Lets talk proofs.  What would you consider proof?  We an illiterate man who composed a nearly perfect piece of Arabic Prose that is 114 chapters and 6236 verses of perfect arabic grammar.  Angels have never given out business cards to those they have visited.  Often Prophets have only had their voice and presence to give law to their words.  Do you really think anyone believed Moses spoke to a burning bush?  They disobeyed him even after witnessing the miracles of the 10 plagues and the parting of the Red Sea.  The people saw him preform these awesome miracles and then the minute he went up the mountain, they built a golden calf and started worshipping it.

Is the claim that he was illiterate a fact or a legend?

According to Islamicity.com Islamic History, Muhammad traveled widely and he gave his "revelations" to his followers orally so that they could memorize them.

Note: if it is "nearly perfect" is that an indication that it is not from God since God is perfect?

From Islamicity.com:

"The text of the Quran was delivered orally by the Prophet Muhammad to his followers as it was revealed to him. The first verses were revealed to him in or about 610, and the last revelation dates from the last year of his life, 632. His followers at first committed the Quran to memory and then, as instructed by him, to writing. Although the entire contents of the Quran, the placement of its verses, and the arrangement of its chapters date back to the Prophet, as long as he lived he continued to receive revelations. Consequently, the Holy Text could only be collected as a single corpus - "between the two covers" - after the death of Muhammad. This is exactly what happened. After the battle of al-Yamamah in 633, 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, later to become the second caliph, suggested to Abu Bakr, the first caliph, that because of the grievous loss of life in that battle, there was a very real danger of losing the Quran, enshrined as it was in the memories of the faithful and in uncollated fragments. Abu Bakr recognized the danger and entrusted the task of gathering the revelations to Zayd ibn Thabit, who as the chief scribe of the Prophet was the person to whom Muhammad frequently dictated the revelations in his lifetime. With great difficulty, the task was carried out and the first complete manuscript compiled from "bits of parchment, thin white stones - ostracae - leafless palm branches, and the memories of men." Later, during the time of 'Uthman, the third caliph, a final, authorized text was prepared and completed in 651, and this has remained the text in use ever since."

Was the "perfect arabic" from Muhammad or the "authorized text that was completed in 651" almost 20 years after his death?

From Islamicity.com:

"Non-Muslims are often struck by the range of styles found in the Quran."

Different styles normally indicate different writers.

Is anyone saying that Muhammad is the one that wrote the Quran or do we all  agree (regardless of the source) he had other people do it?

Angela writes "Now here was a people that had proof of Prophethood and still waxed in disbelief.  

But, not all Prophets had proof.  Look at Jacob and his wrestling with the Angel.  Do we have proof he wrestled with an Angel or God?  No. 

Look at Joshua...do we have proof that the sounding of the horns brought down the walls of Jericho.  Perhaps he just got lucky and there was an earthquake. 

Islam is a religion based on individual belief.  There is no clergy.  Scholars of Islam are educated men and even though their works are respected, in the end, they are just the opinions of those scholars.

All any person needs in Islam is the Quran and their prayers.  They need no one else. 

However, I don't understand your claim to editors and rewrites.  Even the Yemeni scripts which show differences, show more grammatical differences than anything else."

Didn't some of Mohammad's own family not believe him?

"Not everyone accepted God's message transmitted through Muhammad. Even in his own clan there were those who rejected his teachings, and many merchants actively opposed the message." Islamicity.com Islamic History

If those who knew him did not believe him, isn't that more reasons for us to question his "revelations?"

As for the other Prophets, is there anyone that disputes them?  Am I the only one that questions Muhammad's revelations?  Apparently, not.

I would agree with you that "Scholars of Islam are educated men and even though their works are respected, in the end, they are just the opinions of those scholars."  It seems that Muhammad's revelations produced more opinions than answers!

Angela wrote" "Andalus will have to find it, but I do know that there was a time where Muhammed forgot to say Bismallah before something and he had to be not so gently reminded."

If people really believed Muhammad had revelations from God, who had the audacity to rebuke him?!

Angela wrote: "Prophets are men they are fallible.  Every last one of them.  Prophets are not perfect, they are human.  Only god is Perfect.  Even Jesus had his moment of doubt."

Yes prophets are men and men are fallible.  And some men falsely claim to be prophets.  Only God is perfect.

When did Jesus have his moment of doubt?

StephenC, Angela said on another thread that she is not even a Muslim but a Mormon.

That's why she says things like Quran is "nearly perfect". She does not represenet Islam or Muslims.

As for Jesus' moment of doubt, I think she may be referring to the "crucifiction" when according to the Bible Jesus said "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me."

Now that we have the background/childhood of Muhammad (do you want me to repeat it?) let us go on with the "investigation."

First there appears to be two main courses of action.  Either Muhammad heard a voice in the cave or he did not.

If he did not heard the voice, then his whole revelation is based on a lie.  Is that agreeable (I'm not trying to trick you into saying there was no voice)?

Going on the assumption that he did hear a voice, the options* are either the voice was from someone (something) else or it was due to a "(auditory hallucinations) which is a condition that affects 70% of patients with schizophrenia and 15% of patients with mood disorders such as mania or depression."

"Hallucinated voices are also known to occur during states of religious or creative inspiration. Joan of Arc described hearing the voices of saints telling her to free her country from the English. Rainer Maria Rilke heard the voice of a �terrible angel� amidst the sound of a crashing sea after living alone in a castle for two months. This experience prompted his writing the Duino Elegies."

"The second idea is that deprivation of social interaction�namely human conversation�makes the brain more likely to produce hallucinated conversations."

"Hearing what others can�t hear" September 27, 2003 Ralph Hoffman Professor of Psychiatry at Yale University

Investigator's note:  Could Muhammad's bad childhood and not having a father, the death of his mother, the foster family, the death of his first wife, the death of his two sons, and a possible midlife crisis caused him to be depressed.  And could the isolation of the cave add to a non supernatural auditory hallucinations?

* I am not considering that it could have been some one playing a trick on Muhammad.  I do not think that should even be considered.

We don't know if Muhammad's "revelations" were auditory hallucinations or a "supernatural experience."

So assuming that it was not an auditory hallacination then there appears to be two possible options.  One that the voice was that of Satan (or one of his followers) trying to deceive Muhammad as he did Adam and Eve, and his attempting to deceive Jesus Christ.  In both cases (and others) Satan used a lot of truth to sell a little lie.

There is no proof positive that the voice did or did not belong to Satan.

So assuming that it was from God through the Angel Gabriel *, the two options are that the Quran is an accurate written account of God's Revelations or it is not an accurate written account of God's Revelations.

*Where did Muhammad claim to come to the realization that the voice belonged to Gabriel?  Did the voice make the claim or did Muhammad assume it?

What we know or is undisputed is that Muhammad did not do the actual writing of the Quran.

According to islamicity.com:

"At first Muhammad divulged his experience only to his wife and his immediate circle. But as more revelations enjoined him to proclaim the oneness of God universally, his following grew, at first among the poor and the slaves, but later also among the most prominent men of Mecca."

"His followers at first committed the Quran to memory and then, as instructed by him, to writing. Although the entire contents of the Quran, the placement of its verses, and the arrangement of its chapters date back to the Prophet, as long as he lived he continued to receive revelations. Consequently, the Holy Text could only be collected as a single corpus - "between the two covers" - after the death of Muhammad. This is exactly what happened. After the battle of al-Yamamah in 633, 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, later to become the second caliph, suggested to Abu Bakr, the first caliph, that because of the grievous loss of life in that battle, there was a very real danger of losing the Quran, enshrined as it was in the memories of the faithful and in uncollated fragments. Abu Bakr recognized the danger and entrusted the task of gathering the revelations to Zayd ibn Thabit, who as the chief scribe of the Prophet was the person to whom Muhammad frequently dictated the revelations in his lifetime. With great difficulty, the task was carried out and the first complete manuscript compiled from "bits of parchment, thin white stones - ostracae - leafless palm branches, and the memories of men." Later, during the time of 'Uthman, the third caliph, a final, authorized text was prepared and completed in 651, and this has remained the text in use ever since."

I do not dispute that approximately 20 years after Muhammad's death, was the first time that the whole Quran was written down in one "book."

Islamicity.com has a photo of a Quran with the caption:

Photo: This eighth century manuscript from Mecca or Medina is one of the two oldest known existing copies of the Quran.

Apparently, the claim of the oldest copy of the Quran is the Othman Quran, but it is only a partial copy with only one third (approximately 250 pages) remaining. 

So the oldest known complete copy of the Quran is one that was written over 100 years after Muhammad's death.

There is disputes as to the validity of these claims, but I don't intend to discuss them here.

To summarize so far:

Either Muhammad heard a voice in the cave or he did not.  If he did not then his revelations are based on a lie.  If he did hear the voice it could have been either an auditory hallucinations or it was a supernatural experience.  If it was a supernatural experience, then it could be either Satan or an angel of God.  If it was from an angel of God, the question is whether the Quran of today is an accurate recording of the "revelations" given to Muhammad.  There is no known copy of the Quran contemporary to Muhammad's life.  The oldest claimed copy is from a different century then when Muhammad lived.  The "revelations" were first memorized by the poor and slaves.  Later, after Muhammad's death (approximately 20 years) the first composite Quran was written.

Working on the assumption that the Quran of today is the same as the Quran orally given by Muhammad over 1300 years ago, is it perfect?

Every copy that I have seen in person or online has "clarifications."  For example, my copy is translated by Abdullah Yusuf Ali first edition 1934 states that "The need for an explanation of the verses of the Qur'an arose quite early.  Even before the whole Qur'an was revealed, people used to ask the Apostle all sorts of questions as to the meaning of certain words in the verses revealed....." Commentaries on the Qur'an

The "Companions" (as-hab) would memories the Apostle's comments and later write them down.  Later Tabi in wrote what they had learned from the Companions.  From them came the Hadith or "Traditions." 

"In the evolution of the science of the Hadith, it became clear that even among the Companions certain persons had better memories than others, or better opportunities of becoming really acquainted with the Apostle's true meanings, or in other ways, a better title to called true expositors, and the number of such persons came to be limited to ten only." Abdullah Yusuf Ali

So the committee or editors were politically restricted to ten.

That is why there are "clarifications" in the copies of the Qur'an.  Apparently, someone other than Muhammad felt that his "revelations" were not sufficiently clear or complete.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: StephenC, Angela said on another thread that she is not even a Muslim but a Mormon. That's why she says things like Quran is "nearly perfect". She does not represenet Islam or Muslims. As for Jesus' moment of doubt, I think she may be referring to the "crucifiction" when according to the Bible Jesus said "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me."

Not to get off topic, but that is the first line of the 22 Psalm.  Could you read it and then tell me where Jesus had a moment of doubt or was telling us that everything is God's will and everything will be alright.

Assuming for the sake of argument that the voice was really that of Satan, how would Satan benefit from Muhammad's revelations which for the most part is good advice?

Some might believe that the lie hidden among the volumes of truth is the denial that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who died on the Cross for everyone's sins.

Interesting article on Khou.com.  Any similiarities to the discussion?

"He says he is Christ -- and he lives here

He makes a remarkable claim: that he is the second coming of Jesus Christ.

KHOU-TV

Dr. Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda

Perhaps  equally remarkable, the number of people who believe him.

Now this man could be your neighbor and who says he�s Christ, has moved to Houston.

When members of Creciendo en Gracia had a worldwide meeting in Miami this weekend it had a Latin beat.

And when Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda entered the room with a security detail clearing his way, it could have been a rock star or a politician.  His style is a bit of both.

�I am the second coming of Christ, that messiah that they�ve been waiting for,� said Dr. Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda.

But he claims to be something much more.

A self-confessed heroin addict at 14, in jail at 21, Dr. Miranda said angels visited him, then Christ himself.

�He came and he disappeared in me.  He integrates in me.  Since then I�ve been teaching mysteries in the Bible,� Dr. Miranda said.

What is undeniably true is that people, he claims millions of them, believe him.

He began in a non-descript Miami warehouse. He now spreads his message by way of DVDs and owns his own 24-hours-a-day satellite channel.

He is Puerto Rican but has followers throughout Latin America and increasingly in the U.S. where he has learning centers in New York and now, alongside other non-denominational churches, he has one in Houston.

�He is God,� said one follower.

Followers hear there is no devil, no sin, that Jesus took it away.

�We are so tired of the lies of so-called Christians today because if they call you a sinner, we feel hurt that someone would call you a sinner because if Jesus died for sins it�s very contradictory that someone call you a sinner.  Now I�m misrespecting Jesus,� said Dr. Miranda.

Most of all he seems to tell them they are worthy of being cared about.

�Some people tell me, you know, that it looks like the devil.  If that is true I want to be with the devil because he make me so happy,� said Claudia Salazar, Creciendio en Gracia follower

One person termed Dr. Miranda�s message �seductive.�

�You�re getting something that you get similar to what you get over at Joel Osteen�s place except Joel would not claim to be Jesus Christ,� said theology expert Lynn Mitchell.

After watching the video, Mitchell made the interesting observation that it was joyous and the growth of Creciendo en Gracia is due at least in part to conventional Christian churches.

�I think it represents a very heavy failure of Christian churches because Christian churches have not really conveyed their message for decades now.  So people think of the Christian church as being a downer as always talking about people being sinners and so forth,� said Mitchell, U of H Resident Scholar Religious Studies.

The danger, Mitchell warns, is that with such devout followers this could become a cult, especially since Dr. Miranda also envisions a world government, with him at its head.

�They don�t understand it.  They call it a cult.  If I�m a cult, I�m the best one.  I love to direct this beautiful cult,� said Dr. Miranda.

And he will be directing Creciendo in Gracia from Houston.

He says he was recognized everywhere in Miami.

So he will now run his worldwide organization from a home in the suburbs. "

Stephen,

He can't be a messiah or the messiah or Jesus for the simple reason that he was born in Puerto Rico, lives in Miami and is most likely an American. Messiah was never supposed to be an American.

The Messiah is supposed to come back with angels, sitting on clouds, don't know how he can sit on clouds, and has to land in Israel.

We can therefore safely discard him.

Stephen,

For Muhammad's contact with Gabriel, please read Surah Najam 53. You may ignore all stories narrated.

BMZ

Sawtul.  There is that and the moment in the garden when he asked the Lord that if it was in his will to pass this cup from him.  But in the end, he did as God willed.

Stephen, who dared rebuke Muhammed....God of course.  And Sawtul is correct, as a non muslim when I say nearly perfect, I am influenced by my own beliefs.  I am also, as a linguist, influenced by the changing grammar and colloquial nature of language.  Arabic today is much different than the Arabic of the Quran.  Therefore, its hard to determine perfect grammar when things have changed over time.  This could be as much our failing. 

However, you continue to challenge the angelical visitation and demand proof of whether or not it was Gabriel or Satan.

Tell me.  If an angel visited you, how would you determine if it was an angel or a demon (or Jinn)?

Perhaps we should come up with some criteria as to determining Angel from Demon and then apply them to the visitations made by Angels to various prophets.

Angela wrote: Sawtul.  There is that and the moment in the garden when he asked the Lord that if it was in his will to pass this cup from him.  But in the end, he did as God willed.

Asking if it could be God's will to pass the cup from him is not doubt, but complete acceptance of God's Will in my opinon.

Angela wrote: Stephen, who dared rebuke Muhammed....God of course.

I have searched for such an example and Andulas has not posted anything about this incident.   Could you give me a little more information about it?

Angela wrote: However, you continue to challenge the angelical visitation and demand proof of whether or not it was Gabriel or Satan. Tell me.  If an angel visited you, how would you determine if it was an angel or a demon (or Jinn)? Perhaps we should come up with some criteria as to determining Angel from Demon and then apply them to the visitations made by Angels to various prophets.

�I am the second coming of Christ, that messiah that they�ve been waiting for,� said Dr. Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda.

But he claims to be something much more.

A self-confessed heroin addict at 14, in jail at 21, Dr. Miranda said angels visited him, then Christ himself.

�He came and he disappeared in me.  He integrates in me.  Since then I�ve been teaching mysteries in the Bible,� Dr. Miranda said.

What is undeniably true is that people, he claims millions of them, believe him." From the Khou.com article I posted about Dr. Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda who claims to be the second coming of Jesus Christ.  Do you believe him?  Why not?  What criteria do you have to evaluate him (and all those who before and after him claim to have been given revelations from God)?

Was Joan of Arc a "real prophet from God?"

You want me to accept Muhammad without question, yet not accept everyone else who makes similiar claims!  Do you have a double standard?

As for my personal actions when I encounter a "supernatural being" is to ask the being to join me in a prayer to God.  And in that prayer, I rebuke Satan and his followers and a request for severe punishment for those who would mislead God's believers .  If the being refuses to pray to God, then I dismiss the being as not being from God.

It also sometimes works on telemarketers! :)

Continuing on with the "investigation":

Let us look Muhammad mathematically.

There is approximately 6,000,000,000 people in the World today.  Since it is impossible to have a census of the total number of people who have been alive in the past, let us assign 6,000,000,000 (if you have a better estimate please share it).

That would make Muhammad ito be 1 person out of 12,000,000,000.  Are we good so far?

Since we discussed (and it has not been disputed so far) that there is two initial possibilities of whether the voice actually did appear to Muhammad or he just made it up.  Let us calculate using the positive.  50/50

Say it did so we double the 12,000,000,000 so that Muhammad is 1 out of 24,000,000,000 possibilities.

We discussed the possibility that the voice was an audio halluciation or a real "supernatural being."  Again, thinking positive let's go with that it was a real "supernatural being" 50/50

So that makes Muhammad's revelation as 1 in 48,000,000,000.

Do the same with the Satan verses Gabriel question- go positive 50/50 making Muhammad's revelations 1 in 96,000,000,000.

Do the same with whether, given all the writing, re-writing, editing, clarifying, and translating, the Qur'an is an accurate text of Muhammad's revelation - go positive 50/50.  That would make it 1 in 1,920,000,000,000 that the Qur'an is the true revelation of God.

Now of course using 50/50 is not really an accurate figure since of the 12,000,000,000 people who are living or have lived, there are only about 7 undisputed prophets so to be more accurate we should have used 5.83E10 instead, but I wanted to error on the side of Muhammad.

So 1 in 1,920,000,000,000,000 is what I calculate is the figure that the Qur'an is the true revelations of God.  But then again, math has never been my strong point!

Apply the same formula to Dr. Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda (the most recent claimant to be Christ or have revelations from God-see post above) and you get the same figure!

What are the differences?

Air_One wrote:

"Regarding the apostle issue, it states in 3:144 the arabic word 'rasul' which can be translated into messenger. Translations can be wrong since they are the work of men.

As for the last prophet issue: -

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/prophet/finalprophet.html - http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/prophet/finalprophe t.html

Quran 33:40 "Muhammad (SAW) is not the father of any man among you, but he is the Messenger of Allah and the last (end) of the Prophets. And Allah is Ever AllAware of everything"

Stephenc replies:

I stand corrected it appears that Muhammad cloaked himself with that title (last prophet even though the Qur'an states he is "only an apostle.")

Is there a complete Qur'an in existence that has not been translated?