An inscription and a Greek account fix Muhammad's birth in 552, not 570. Muhammad's career took place not in Mecca but hundreds of kilometers to the north. Yehuda Nevo. The classical Arabic language was developed not in today's Saudi Arabia but in the Levant.

Long before Islam came in to existence, Kaaba, in Mecca in Saudi Arabia was a pilgrimage site. The word Kaaba might have come from the Tamil Language which originated around 1700BC. In Tamil Nadu Kabaalishwaran temple is Lord Shiva’s temple and Kabaali refers to Lord Shiva. The black stone at Kaaba is held sacred and holy in Islam and is called "Hajre Aswad" from the Sanskrit word Sanghey Ashweta or Non-white stone. The Shiva Lingam is also called Sanghey Ashweta. So what is in Kaaba could be the same what Hindus worship.

The pedestal Maqam-E-Ibrahim at the centre of the Kaaba is octagonal in shape. In Hinduism, the pedestal of Brahma the creator is also octagonal in shape. Muslim pilgrims visiting the Kaaba temple go around it seven times. In no other mosque does the circumambulation prevail. Hindus invariably circumambulate or Pradakshina, around their deities. This is yet another proof that the Kaaba shrine is a pre-Islamic. In Shiva temples Hindus always practice circumambulation or Pradakshina. Just as in Hinduism, the custom of circumambulation by muslim pilgrims around the entire Kaaba building seven times shows that the claim that in Islam they don’t worship stones is not true.

Allah was one of the deities in Kaaba long before Islam was founded. It might come as a stunning revelation to many that the word ‘ALLAH’ itself is Sanskrit. In Sanskrit language Allah, Akka and Amba are synonyms. They signify a goddess or mother. The term ‘ALLAH’ forms part of Sanskrit chants invoking goddess Durga, also known as Bhavani, Chandi and Mahishasurmardini. The Islamic word for God is., therefore, not an innovation but the ancient Sanskrit appellation retained and continued by Islam. Allah means mother or goddess and mother goddess.

The King Vikramaditya inscription was found on a gold dish hung inside the Kaaba shrine in Mecca, proving beyond doubt that the Arabian Peninsula formed a part of his Indian Empire. (Ref: page 315 of a volume known as ‘Sayar-ul-Okul’ treasured in the Makhtab-e-Sultania library in Istanbul, Turkey). King Vikrama’s preachers had succeeded in spreading the Vedic Hindu sacred scriptures in Arabia and Arabs were once followers of the Indian Vedic way of life. The annual fair known as OKAJ which used to be held every year around the Kaaba temple in Mecca and the present annual hajj of the Muslims to the Kaaba is of earlier pre-Islamic congregation. . Even to this day ancient Siva emblems can be seen. It is the Shankara (Siva) stone that Muslim pilgrims reverently touch and kiss in the Kaaba.

Muslims shave their head and beard and don special sacred attire that consists of two seamless sheets of white cloth. One is to be worn round the waist and the other over the shoulders. Both these rites are remnants of the old Vedic practice of entering Hindu temples clean and with holy seamless white sheets. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, the Kaaba has 360 idols. Traditional accounts mention that one of the deities among the 360 destroyed when the place was stormed was that of Saturn; another was of the Moon and yet another was one called Allah. That shows that in the Kaaba the Arabs worshipped the nine planets in pre-Islamic days. In India the practice of ‘Navagraha’ puja, that is worship of the nine planets, is still in vogue. Two of these nine are Saturn and Moon. In India the crescent moon is always painted across the forehead of the Siva symbol. Since that symbol was associated with the Siva emblem in Kaaba it came to be grafted on the flag of Islam.

The Hindu Vedic letter in Sanskrit "OM" if seen in a mirror one can see the Arabic numbers 786 and this is the most sacred number for Muslims and copies of the Arabic Koran have the mysterious figure 786 imprinted on them. In their ignorance simply they do not realize that this special number is nothing more than the holiest of Vedic symbols misread and none of the Arabic scholar has been able to determine how they chose 786 as the sacred for them. In short muslims are also going around Siva Lingam at Kaaba, seven times as Hindus go around it seven times.

A few miles away from Mecca are a big signboard which bars the entry of any non-Muslim into the area. This is a reminder of the days when the Kaaba was stormed and captured solely for the newly established faith of Islam. The object in barring entry of non-Muslims was obviously to prevent its recapture. Kaaba is clothed in a black shroud. This custom also originated from the days when it was thought necessary to discourage its recapture by camouflaging it.

Another Hindu tradition associated with the Kaaba is that of the sacred stream Ganga (sacred waters of the Ganges river). According to the Hindu tradition Ganga is also inseparable from the Shiva emblem as the crescent moon. Wherever there is a Siva emblem, Ganga must co-exist. True to that association a sacred fount exists near the Kaaba. Its water is held sacred because it has been traditionally regarded as Ganga since pre-Islamic times (Zam-Zam water).

Is this a chapter from your book?

Is this a chapter from your book?
No its not, just discarded research!:D

The Kaaba is not a shrine

The Kaaba is not a shrine

No its a giant bowling ball!

No its a giant bowling ball!

Its not even a rock.;)

Its not even a rock.;)

It's traditionally believed Abraham and Ishmael moved a stone in there probably a giant meteorite packed with lithium and minerals!

How would you explain it, I know you been around that box a couple times!

It's traditionally believed Abraham and Ishmael moved a stone in there probably a giant meteorite packed with lithium and minerals!

How would you explain it, I know you been around that box a couple times!

Its a room with a door in it.:p

http://img.search.com/0/0e/Kaaba_plan.jpg

Its a room with a door in it.:p

http://img.search.com/0/0e/Kaaba_plan.jpg

Oh wow!, The king's private lounge perhaps!

Could you please be more precise in your descriptions!!!
It is quite clear nobody is allowed to have a peek inside,..they are only allowed to stick their heads inside!!!

Is the fact that it's a shrine or not a shrine realllly that important? :D

Is the fact that it's a shrine or not a shrine realllly that important? :D
Thats exactly what I would like to know from our resident fundamentalist!

I checked out the Kaaba on wiki and it did mention the "Well of Zamzam". Now you say that zamzam water is something in the Hindu religion: ganga? What is ganga?

Also the Ganges originates in Gangotri, which is a Hindu pilgrimage site, so your zamzam theory is complete nonsense.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gangotri

Is the fact that it's a shrine or not a shrine realllly that important? :D

Only if you're using skewed facts to present your theories. A meteorite is very different from a construction.
PS the Sanskrit parallel to Allah is Advaita.

What is ganga?

Marijuana flowers.

Marijuana flowers.

Thats ganja :D

Ganga is the river Ganges

Only if you're using skewed facts to present your theories. A meteorite is very different from a construction.

Lookie me: so angry I got two responses!

Anyway, how is that relevant? Why does it matter if it's just a meteorite or just a shrine? I thought the issue was about the Hindu derivation of islam? I'd always thought it was a selective reading of Judaic and Christian works, not Hindu.

Lookie me: so angry I got two responses!

Anyway, how is that relevant? Why does it matter if it's just a meteorite or just a shrine? I thought the issue was about the Hindu derivation of islam? I'd always thought it was a selective reading of Judaic and Christian works, not Hindu.

Not angry, reading bits and pieces in a boring seminar :p

And yes, if you are attributing a history to it, you should at least know what you are referring to.

Well, I knew it was a building and a stone, so there we are. How exactly is it different than a shrine, though?

This is what you mean vega, the meteorite at the kabaa?

http://www.sacred-destinations.com/saudi-arabia/images/mecca/album/black-stone-cc-toursaudiarabia-200h.jpg

one link (http://www.crystalinks.com/blackstone.html)

That kinda reminds me of something.

Well, I knew it was a building and a stone, so there we are. How exactly is it different than a shrine, though?

A shrine is a container for an image dedicated to a saint or a deity.

The Kabah is the qibla or the focus for Muslims to pray to, the original Qibla was Jerusalem, but Mohammed changed it when he moved to Mecca.

The word Kabah or Kaaba comes from the Arabic mukaab, which means cube, since its a cuboidal structure. The original Kaaba was said to be built by Abraham and hence the place has historical significance (the whole purpose of Hajj is to keep the history of Islam fresh through rituals that echo an incident in the past).

You can have a shrine just for a shrine. You don't need an image. Vikings used to have little shrines all over the place.

I know about the Kaaba being purportedly built by Abraham, but again: isn't this still a shrine?

Another link (http://www.geocities.com/khola_mon/myth/Blackstone.html)

You can have a shrine just for a shrine. You don't need an image. Vikings used to have little shrines all over the place.

I know about the Kaaba being purportedly built by Abraham, but again: isn't this still a shrine?

I suppose you could, but you'd have to consider it as a dwelling place of a deity or a saint.

The Kaaba is an equivalent of the wailing wall of the Jews. Is that considered a shrine?

I suppose you could, but you'd have to consider it as a dwelling place of a deity or a saint.

or a rock? :shrug:

I suppose you could, but you'd have to consider it as a dwelling place of a deity or a saint.

The Kaaba is an equivalent of the wailing wall of the Jews. Is that considered a shrine?

I think so. But are you saying the Kaaba is a dwelling place of Allah?

or a rock? :shrug:

How is a man made construction a rock?

I think so. But are you saying the Kaaba is a dwelling place of Allah?

No thats what you are saying. Thats what a shrine is.

No thats what you are saying. Thats what a shrine is.

No, that's what you're saying. Nyah. Nyah nyah nyah.

No, seriously, I've actually never heard a shrine described that way. I always thought shrines were just places of particular devotion to be offered up, etc.

Sometimes a shrine could be referred to an idol!
I am sure sammy would be very careful how to interpret this one as there are other jihadists,Imans etc keeping an eye on her comments on this topic!

No, that's what you're saying. Nyah. Nyah nyah nyah.

No, seriously, I've actually never heard a shrine described that way. I always thought shrines were just places of particular devotion to be offered up, etc.

As far as I know (and I have been known to be wrong on occasion :p ), a shrine is a place where offerings are made to a deity or a saint (or a loved one who has passed on)

Sometimes a shrine could be referred to an idol!
I am sure sammy would be very careful how to interpret this one as there are other jihadists,Imans etc keeping an eye on her comments on this topic!

A shrine would refer to the dwelling place of an idol, not the idol itself.

Literally, Kaaba in Arabic means a high place with respect and prestige. The word Kaba may also be derivative of a word meaning a cube.

Some of these other names include:
Bait ul Ateeq - which means, according to one meaning, the earliest and ancient. According to the second meaning, it means independent and liberating. Both meanings could be taken

Bayt ul Haram - the honorable house


The Kaaba has been reconstructed up to 12 times Scholars and historians say that the Kaba has been reconstructed between five to 12 times.

Also Abraham and Ismael rebuilt the Kaaba. The measurements of the Kaaba's Ibrahimic foundation are as follows: the eastern wall was 48 feet and 6 inches the Hatim side wall was 33 feet the side between the black stone and the Yemeni corner was 30 feet the Western side was 46.5 feet.

Following this, there were several constructions before the Prophet Muhammad's time.

On Rajab 28 1377, One historian counted the total stones of the Kaba and they were 1,614. These stones are of different shapes. But the stones which are inside the outer wall which is visible are not counted in there.

There were 360 idols in Kaaba. Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] and Ali destroyed all the idols in Kaaba. Some times each tribe has his own idol. These idols and names of them were imaginary most of the times. It is also said that pagans of Arab had also also made idol of Allah by imagination and it was believed and worshipped as moon god.
There was a big idol named Hubal who had three daughters [goddesses] Lat, Azza or Uzza and Manat.

The sacred nature of the site predates Islam: tradition says that the Kaaba was built by Adam and rebuilt by Abraham and the descendants of Noah. Also known as the House of God, it is the center of the circumambulations performed during the hajj, and it is toward the Kaaba that Muslims face in their prayers. Pre-Islamic Meccans used it as a central shrine housing their many idols.

The Black Stone, possibly of meteoric origin, is located at one of its outside corners. Also dating from pre-Islamic times as a heavenly relic, this stone is venerated and ritually kissed. Worn hollow by the centuries of veneration, the stone is held together by a wide silver band.

Around the Kaaba is a restricted area, haram, extending in some directions as far as 12 mi, into which only Muslims may enter.

Very mysterious!!!

Not mysterious at all, mostly a hijack of a lucrative place by the Sauds.

Not mysterious at all, mostly a hijack of a lucrative place by the Sauds.

Thats why the royal family needs a icon like that to keep them and the rest of the muslim world together!
Quite explains muhammads political agenda's!

Thats why the royal family needs a icon like that to keep them and the rest of the muslim world together!
Quite explains muhammads political agenda's!

Hardly, all Muslims see the Sauds for what they are, including the people under them

As far as I know (and I have been known to be wrong on occasion :p ), a shrine is a place where offerings are made to a deity or a saint (or a loved one who has passed on)

But I don't think that means the god lives there. It's just a locale of significance to them.

But I don't think that means the god lives there. It's just a locale of significance to them.

All shrines I have seen have an idol or a photo in them. With flowers or other offerings.

http://re-xs.ucsm.ac.uk/re/places/sh-room.htm
http://cache.gizmodo.com/gadgets/ipod-god-shrine-5.jpg

Lookie me: so angry I got two responses!

Anyway, how is that relevant? Why does it matter if it's just a meteorite or just a shrine? I thought the issue was about the Hindu derivation of islam? I'd always thought it was a selective reading of Judaic and Christian works, not Hindu.Why wouldn't people living in that area copy the religous symbolism from one of their nearest trading partners?

They live adjacent to three of the five oldest civilizations - it's certainly reasonable that after thousands of years of contact that many religious themes would be copied. The Hindus are the one of the, or the, oldest and most developed - so it makes sense their's is one that would be copied.

Anyway, no one, not even Sam, disagrees that many of Islamic practices pre-date Islam, such as the religous significance of the square, the god Allah, the walking around the Kaaba, the moon symbol, etc....

So the questions is:

1) Did the Arabs develop their religious ideas totally indepednant of their continue contract and trade with the advanced Hindu civilization?

-OR-

2) Did the Arabs copy their religious ideas and symbolism from their millennial old trading partners and much more advanced civilizations right adjacent to them?


Which seems the more reasonable.


Walking through the millennial old Buddhist temples way over on the island nation of Japan demonstrates the distance religious ideas can travel. All the way from India and in such a relatively short period.

Michael

PS:
Also, I think this is the most rational answer to the question: Where did that moon symbol that stands above almost all Mosques come from? I always ask that and always get a blank stare. Like Why do you ask? Does it really matter? It's tradition. Stop asking stupid questions!

PPS:
Also, on that note, we all have seen the Jesus fish bumper sticker. We now of course that this is the geometric ratio 153, exactly the number of fish pulled from the sea in the Bible, of two interlocking circles and was known throughout the Hellenic world as the measure of the fish. A testament of the degree to which symbols, such as the moon, or the Jesus fish can persist while even their meanings diverge in differing societies.


Great post Vega!

The moon symbol is because Muslims follow the lunar month. Our months are dated by the moon. That is why we need to see the moon to know when Ramadan is over.

Historically it was the symbol adopted by the Ottomans (for their flag, I think) and since they dominated for over 600 years the symbol became associated with Islam, probably following the Crusades.

The moon symbol is because Muslims follow the lunar month. Our months are dated by the moon. That is why we need to see the moon to know when Ramadan is over.

Historically it was the symbol adopted by the Ottomans (for their flag, I think) and since they dominated for over 600 years the symbol became associated with Islam, probably following the Crusades.Do you have a reference?

This is an odd assertion given that many people used a moon based calendars. The Romans, the Chinese, etc... Why elevate the moon to the most high position if it was simply recognized as a part of a lunar calender? Not to mention the fact that the people of the ME have worshiped moon gods since 2100 BCE. Wasn't "Allah" of the Kabaal a moon God before being associated with the Jewish God.

:bugeye:


From the ancient times of the Sumerians, Babylonian and Assyrian, moon Gods have played center stage in most of Semitic religions. A practice that was prevalent of the contemporaries of Mohammad. Obviously so. Not simply the Arabs but all over the ME. It seem very odd that Mohammadians would elevate the moon to the utmost position on a place of worship simply to remind themselves of the lunar calender. Given that those same people had been worshiping moon Gods for nearly 3000 years.


But, then again, I once said to a wall that the Jesus fish was really a geometric symbol well knows as the measure of fish and that the 153 fish in the Bible was really a powerful ratio known to the Greeks and in use for centuries. the Wall said: Nu-ah. And that's usually the way it goes.


Michael


note:

"The Sumerians, in the first literate civilization, left thousands of clay tablets describing their religious beliefs. As demonstrated by Sjöberg and Hall, the ancient Sumerians worshipped a moon-god who was called by many different names. The most popular names were Nanna, Suen, and Asimbabbar" (Mark Hall, A Study of the Sumerian Moon-god, Sin, PhD., 1985, University of Pennsylvania).

"His symbol was the crescent moon. Given the amount of artifacts concerning the worship of this moon-god, it is clear that this was the dominant religion in Sumeria. The cult of the moon-god was the most popular religion throughout ancient Mesopotamia. The Assyrians, Babylonians, and Arkkadians took the word Suen and transformed it into the word Sîn as their favourite name for this deity." (Austin Potts, The Hymns and Prayers to the Moon-god, Sin, PhD., 1971, Dropsie College, p.2).

"Sîn is a name essentially Sumerian in origin which had been borrowed by the Semites" (Austin Potts, The Hymns and Prayers to the Moon-god, Sin, PhD., 1971, Dropsie College, p 4)



A reminder of the Lunar calendar for Ramadan??? ... come on Sam... :p anyway, that reference?

All shrines I have seen have an idol or a photo in them. With flowers or other offerings.

http://re-xs.ucsm.ac.uk/re/places/sh-room.htm
http://cache.gizmodo.com/gadgets/ipod-god-shrine-5.jpg

Well, I've never seen anyone interpret a god as living there. Certainly not in the Judeo-Christian area, anyway.

Just to add to the "moon" was something I read on wiki


The crescent was the symbol of the Sassanian Empire of Persia (Iran) and is prominently displayed on the crowns of its rulers. After the Arab conquest of that empire in 651 CE, it was gradually adopted by later caliphates and Muslim rulers as an established and recognized symbol of power in Western Asia.

So the real question is why was the moon a symbol of the Sassanian Empire?

The Nazis used the swastika, do you think they were secretly Hindus? :D

The Nazis used the swastika, do you think they were secretly Hindus? :D

So what you are saying is that you don't care what the kaaba is or stands for as long as it represents the muslim world!

So what you are saying is that you don't care what the kaaba is or stands for as long as it represents the muslim world!

A symbol is what it stands for in the minds of people. The moon may have had some special significance for other people as did the Kaaba.

However, it does not alter the fact that if you see the moon on a flag TODAY, you know its probably a Muslim flag. And if anyone sees the Kaaba and does NOT think of Muslims, I would be very surprised.

PS Nice to have you back.

Well, I've never seen anyone interpret a god as living there. Certainly not in the Judeo-Christian area, anyway.

Hmm ever wonder what an altar is?

Do you have a reference?

This is an odd assertion given that many people used a moon based calendars. The Romans, the Chinese, etc... Why elevate the moon to the most high position if it was simply recognized as a part of a lunar calender? Not to mention the fact that the people of the ME have worshiped moon gods since 2100 BCE. Wasn't "Allah" of the Kabaal a moon God before being associated with the Jewish God.

:bugeye:

A reminder of the Lunar calendar for Ramadan??? ... come on Sam... :p anyway, that reference?

Thats the association I had.

Its not universally a religious symbol, or even accepted as a symbol of Islam by all Muslims

http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_451_500/crescent_moon.htm

A symbol is what it stands for in the minds of people. The moon may have had some special significance for other people as did the Kaaba.

However, it does not alter the fact that if you see the moon on a flag TODAY, you know its probably a Muslim flag. And if anyone sees the Kaaba and does NOT think of Muslims, I would be very surprised.

PS Nice to have you back.
Well I do have a life you know!!...I'm not 24/7 on this forum like the others
I will be here a short while then will return back to the abyss where I came from...Thought I create a bit of choas while I'm still here:D

Well I do have a life you know!!...I'm not 24/7 on this forum like the others
I will be here a short while then will return back to the abyss where I came from...Thought I create a bit of choas while I'm still here:D

As long as we see you from time to time.:p

As Muhammed "set the record straight" about what the Old Testament "really" says, and as Arabs were supposedly "people of the Book" for centuries before Muhammed came along, then why did they worship 360 gods, one of which was Allah, through those centuries leading up to Muhammed's life?

As Muhammed "set the record straight" about what the Old Testament "really" says, and as Arabs were supposedly "people of the Book" for centuries before Muhammed came along, then why did they worship 360 gods, one of which was Allah, through those centuries leading up to Muhammed's life?

your hand is already tipped in that you speak against islam on every occassion you get.
your input is flawed from conception.

Where is the logic of your statement?

Thats because Islam has been stitched up with a mixture of judaism and paganism!
http://www.menorah.org/allahtrc.html

Thats because Islam has been stitched up with a mixture of judaism and paganism!
http://www.menorah.org/allahtrc.html

all religions started as Islam

Yes, would Allah have ever said "let us make man in our image?"

all religions started as Islam
Muslims don't bother to question their doctrinal origins unlike other faiths!
It's considered "haram" to even doubt or to investigate their own religous texts!
Therefore they can't explain alot of their own stuff!!!

Muslims don't bother to question their doctrinal origins unlike other faiths!
It's considered "haram" to even doubt or to investigate their own religous texts!
Therefore they can't explain alot of their own stuff!!!

Well there's lots of non Muslims willing and able to educate us, so its not like we're losing out.:cool:

Good point sam.

Well I can see you have very little interest on this subject , as it could only be due to your lack of knowledge about the Kaaba stone itself!

Here is a little eductation for all you fundamentalists out there:

"Hadschar al Aswad" is the sacred "black stone" which moslems pay homage on their "Hadsch", their pilgrimage to Mecca.

The Hadsch is a rather strange ritual since Islam prohibits the worship and veneration of objects, but it seems that this tradition is much older than Islam itself. The Hadschar might be a true betyl, a real meteorite, since it is said to have a black crust and a light-gray interior.

However, it might also represent a rather large Wabar pearl, a meteorite related impact glass that is found in central Saudi Arabia, not that far from Mecca. It's a pity that scientists haven't solved the mystery surrounding this sacred stone, but for normal religious reasons it has not been allowed.

Wouldn't it be great to know that there is at least one ancient betyl left, and that it is still venerated after more than perhaps 2,000 years?

If I was gonna go around in circles dressed in a white robe around a covered box , at least I would like to know whats inside?

The Nazis used the swastika, do you think they were secretly Hindus? :DThey may not have secretly been Hindus but the symbol was appropriated from the Hindus. They acknowledge this.

So? About that moon given the utmost position above all else on the Muslim place of worship? You simply think it was to "remind" people they use the lunar calender? The lunar calendar that was in use from China to Rome? The lunar calender that all of the civilized people in the ME used. It's just one big fat coincidence that Allah was a moon God, that moon Gods were worshiped all over the ME and that the Persians took the crescent as a symbol of their authority and power.

One big coincidence.

Well, I suppose you really do believe that the voices Mohammad heard in his head were from a God so you'd probably believe it was to remind people that they use a lunar based calendar. Hey people in the ME worshiped Alexander for a thousands years, it really doesn't surprise me.


I was still interested in a secular archaeological reference though,

Michael

Thats the association I had.

Its not universally a religious symbol, or even accepted as a symbol of Islam by all Muslims

http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_451_500/crescent_moon.htm

Well this will do :)

Thanks
Michael

Thats because Islam has been stitched up with a mixture of judaism and paganism!
http://www.menorah.org/allahtrc.htmlThe second poster on this web page made an interesting point about the name of God.

In short the poster is saying: If Allah is not the name of God and is just the word "God" then why not translate the word as God and not retain Allah (say in the Qur'an)? The reason obviously is because Allah is the name of the God in the Qur'an. The question is, is it a Jewish God or an Arab God? Well, the name is only ever mentioned pre-Islam in Arab polytheism. Allah is the polytheistic-Arabs God not the Jew's Gods. Also, the Jews have a name for their desert God, a couple actually, these names are specific, yet they are not given to the Arabs God named Allah. Well obviously we talking about two different Gods.

It's painfully obvious the word Allah is the name of a specific Arab God appropriated by Muslims as they rewrote the Judaic mythos.


bla bla bla bla....
Michael

The second poster on this web page made an interesting point about the name of God.

In short the poster is saying: If Allah is not the name of God and is just the word "God" then why not translate the word as God and not retain Allah (say in the Qur'an)? The reason obviously is because Allah is the name of the God in the Qur'an. The question is, is it a Jewish God or an Arab God? Well, the name is only ever mentioned pre-Islam in Arab polytheism. Allah is the polytheistic-Arabs God not the Jew's Gods. Also, the Jews have a name for their desert God, a couple actually, these names are specific, yet they are not given to the Arabs God named Allah. Well obviously we talking about two different Gods.

It's painfully obvious the word Allah is the name of a specific Arab God appropriated by Muslims as they rewrote the Judaic mythos.


bla bla bla bla....
Michael


Mohammed's father's name was Abdullah (Servant of God).

Wasn't one of his relatives named Allah?

Wasn't one of his relatives named Allah?

Is that so?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah


Various theories are proposed regarding the etymology of the word "Allah". One is that the word Allāh (الله) is derived from a contraction of the Arabic words al- (the) and ʾilāh (deity, masculine form) — al-ilāh meaning "the God", which is the most likely. Another theory traces the etymology of the word to the Aramaic Alāhā.[3]

Cognates of the name "Allāh" exist in other Semitic languages, including Hebrew and Aramaic.[4]

Muslim and non-Muslim scholars often translate "Allāh" directly into English as "God"; and Arabic-speaking Jews and Christians refer to God using the Arabic word Allah. However, some Muslim scholars feel that "Allāh" should not be translated, because they perceive the Arabic word to express the uniqueness of "Allāh" more accurately than the word "god" for two reasons:

* The word "god" can take a plural form "gods", whereas the word "Allāh" has no plural form.
* The word "god" can have gender as male god or female god (called goddess) whereas the word "Allāh" does not have gender.[5]

This is a significant issue in translation of the Qur'an.

The word "Allāh" had been used in the Arabic tongue in the pre-Islamic period, which Muslims call Jāhilīyah; it occurs in Arabic classical poetry and was also used by Jews in certain regions (for cognate Hebrew Elōah).

I'll take that as a yes.

I'll take that as a yes.

I sort of guessed you might. :p

double post

* The word "god" can take a plural form "gods", whereas the word "Allāh" has no plural form.
* The word "god" can have gender as male god or female god (called goddess) whereas the word "Allāh" does not have gender.[5]
How about in Hindi? In Japanese it's translated as the direct pronunciation of the name Allah (アラー）、Whay about Mandarin? Korean, Russian, German, or the thousands of other languages? Many languages have their own specific word that has this meaning. But, when the Qur'an is translated into any of the other thousands of languages the translators use the word "Allah" because, much like "Michael", "Allah" is a name. The name of the Arabian God.




Look it really doesn't matter; all you need to know is that when Mohammad heard voices in his head it really was the voice of other worldly beings. Any evidence that suggests otherwise is the work of the devil trying to trick you. Continue to pray towards the Arabian peninsula and be safe in the knowledge you will live after your death.

IAC, That Jesus fish was a secret symbol used so that two Christians could identify themselves without getting caught and persecuted. Any evidence that suggests otherwise is the work of the devil trying to trick you. Continue to pray to Jesus be safe in the knowledge you will live after your death.



Michael

How about in Hindi? In Japanese it's translated as the direct pronunciation of the name Allah (アラー）、Whay about Mandarin? Korean, Russian, German, or the thousands of other languages? Many languages have their own specific word that has this meaning. But, when the Qur'an is translated into any of the other thousands of languages the translators use the word "Allah" because, much like "Michael", "Allah" is a name. The name of the Arabian God.



Well its good that you can tell the Muslims about Arabic and their notion of God. What would they ever do otherwise?:rolleyes:


Look it really doesn't matter; all you need to know is that when Mohammad heard voices in his head it really was the voice of other worldly beings. Any evidence that suggests otherwise is the work of the devil trying to trick you. Continue to pray towards the Arabian peninsula and be safe in the knowledge you will live after your death.


See previous comment.

Well its good that you can tell the Muslims about Arabic and their notion of God. What would they ever do otherwise?:rolleyes:



See previous comment.Sam, I am not telling "Muslims" anything.

I am having a debate on a Sciforums board. This debate seems to me to be relatively futile.

We are coming from this question at two different angles.

Me, I'm an atheist, I have no beleif in any of the God(s) and I think there should be a rational scientifically based answer.
You are a theist, you have a beleif in the Muslim God and maintain all other Gods are delusional. You are also a scientist and therefor think there should be a rational scientifically based answer.

However, without a double blind experiment our prejudices cloud the manner in which we interpret the archaeological data.


For example. You really think that the Qur'an is somehow the words of God that were put into Mohammad's head and came out of his mouth like a microphone. Me, I think the Qur'an, because it is 70% identical to an adjacent Middle Eastern tribe's book, it is simply a copy of that work blended with Arab myths.



This is a summary of how I seem to see things. Maybe I am wrong? Maybe I am stressed from working and it just seems this way but this is how it seems to me.

I said Slavery is wrong - you said it's fine if they are POWs.
I said war of aggression is wrong - you said it is justified.
I said murder is wrong and asked if Mohammad personally killed anyone, I didn't get an answer.
I asked: If the Qur'an really is so special then what's so novel and special?I didn't get an answer. (actually I got called an hypocritical hate monger prejudiced ass hole by one person - all for asking)
I asked when was the Qur'an written? I didn't get an answer.
I asked who were the people that wrote the Qur'an? I didn't get an answer.
I asked which parts where written by whom? I didn't get an answer.
I asked why the oldest Qur'an found are different than the modern Qur'an. I didn't get an answer.
I asked what happened to the Jewish tribes that were in KSA? I didn't get an answer although I think they were all converted by the sword or killed.

We also discussed our opinions on polygamy. I said it's sick. You seemed to agree. But, then religion kicked in and you said well Mohammad is different so it is actually OK.

To imagine how that poor young girl was married to a 50+ year old man who hears voices in his head, I said freaks me out, like a sick feeling and shutter, I said he could have adopted her you said it's fine he took her as another wife.

In an attempt to measure novelty and philosophy I compared the massive changes brought about by the Communist manifesto with those brought about by Mohammadism. Communism in a VERY short period of time eliminated polygamy, made slavery illegal and elevated women to the equal legal status of a man. In Mohammadism Slavery was institutionalized and practiced for 1400 years, polygamy is rife and women are not legally the same as a man in many, if not most, Islamic countries. To you this says nothing about the two life philosophies?

These debates roll like water off the back of a duck. The reasons are there is no reasoning. Your underlying premise is there is a God and he used a human named Mohammad as a loud speaker and that is that and mine is there is no God and Mohammad, if he even hear a voice, got someone to copy the nearby peoples religous beliefs and blend it with theres and that is that.


For now we are prejudiced and so some of these debates seem futile ..

I see things like this:

The Babylonians copied myths from the Sumerians.
The Jews copied myths from the Babylonians (ex Gilgamesh).
The Greeks copied myths from the Egyptians.
The Xians copied myths from the Greek Jews.
The Romans copied myths from the Greeks.
The Muslims copied myths from the Jews.
The Baha'i' copied myths from the Muslims.
The Buddhist copied myths from the Hindu.
The Zoroastrians copied myths from the Hindu.

You'd probably agree with everything except that the Muslims did not copy their myths. Mohammad heard a voice from an angle relaying a message from a God and this message was special because it cleared up all these copying mistakes and then somehow at sometime by whomever it became the perfect book and therefor I am not going to die but I get to live after I die.

:bugeye:

Well, sometimes it's just seems we are going no where and I am probably pissing you off so I'd rather just say screw it than conitnue to make you peeved.


Michael


Lastly, for what it's worth - these are the answers I got from some ex-Muslim friends that are inclined to talk about religion and history.

Did Mohammad personally killed anyone? My buddy says yes he most definitely killed many people.

Is there anything at all that is novel in the Qur'an? My buddy said outside of saying Mohammad is the Last messenger no, it's copies of Zoroastrian, Xian, Jewish and Arabian myths - many parts of the Qur'an are older than the Qur'an.

When was the Qur'an written? My buddy said different parts where written by different people at different times.

Who wrote the Qur'an? My buddy said that most of it was written by a Persian Zoroastrian and Ethiopian Xian priest.

Which parts where written by whom? My buddy said that the classic Zoroastrians parts, such as the sun setting in a muddy spring, where copiled by the Persian while the Jewish and Christian parts where compiled by the Ethiopian though the different parts were written by different people are folk stories. They would ask Mohammad to memorize over and over specific passages and together all three would pretend it was a "revelation". Sometimes Mohammad would have to have a new revelation because he forgot a bit or they decided it would be better to say it a different way.

Why are the oldest Qur'an different than the modern Qur'an? My buddy said it is because the Qur'an has changed over time and thus are different but not by very mucyh. He mentioned that even modern Qur'an have a few different Arabic words depending on the country you buy it in (ex: Morocco versus Indonesia).


What happened to the Jewish tribes that were in KSA? My buddy said Mohammad led an army and killed them and he even took a Jews woman whose husband had just been murdered for sex. Kind of sad and sick to me, but I'm sure it's fine and I'm just weird like that.


Michael

Since your buddy is such an irrefutable source, its unclear why you even need another one.

Your buddy of course, bases all his opinions on factual evidence and an unbiased study of history and religion.

Since your buddy is such an irrefutable source, its unclear why you even need another one.

Your buddy of course, bases all his opinions on factual evidence and an unbiased study of history and religion.

True sam, nowadays, many non-muslim experts of Islam told muslims (and the world) what Islam really is. And seems they are treated as more reliable and trustable sources instead of muslims (Islam practicians) themselves.

Like relying the technique of flying on other sources instead of birds. Even worse, those sources give lectures to birds on how to fly!

True sam, nowadays, many non-muslim experts of Islam told muslims (and the world) what Islam really is. And seems they are treated as more reliable and trustable sources instead of muslims (Islam practicians) themselves.

Like relying the technique of flying on other sources instead of birds. Even worse, those sources give lectures to birds on how to fly!

I've learned that education is no substitute for an open mind.

Since your buddy is such an irrefutable source, its unclear why you even need another one.

Your buddy of course, bases all his opinions on factual evidence and an unbiased study of history and religion.Sam, I didn't say anything about irrefutable anything. Please feel free to answer those questions. I think they are even sitting on your Islam website.

Anyway, surely you'd agree a person who was Muslim and is not Muslim is in a unique position in regards to this material? The answers make sense. Don't you think?

If not then please feel free to answer them for me. Provide some secular archaeological based references and I will be happy to read them.

Michael


PS: Totally off topic but because this thread is dead I'll ask here.
In regards to your wiki website. Was it easy to create? I want to make something similar for studying some other stuff that has nothing to do with religion or politics or anything that Sciforums topics.

I'm not all that great at programing. I took fortran 10 years ago for 6 months and almost failed - if that says anything! But I thought if the software was more user friendly maybe I could do it now?!?

Provide some secular archaeological based references and I will be happy to read them.

Michael

I'm curious, did your "buddy" ever get asked this?

As for the wiki, you need to ask Plazma, its his wiki not mine.:p

True sam, nowadays, many non-muslim experts of Islam told muslims (and the world) what Islam really is. And seems they are treated as more reliable and trustable sources instead of muslims (Islam practicians) themselves.

Like relying the technique of flying on other sources instead of birds. Even worse, those sources give lectures to birds on how to fly!You know, many Xians are God-smacked I could even suggest, little own advocate, that Jesus is pure allegory. That Jesus never ever lived. Yet, that's exactly what archeology suggests as well as what >50% of the earliest Christian communities then believed. Before they were cleansed by the Church for heresy.

The majority of people 1000 years ago thought the world was flat. To suggest anything other than this was "crazy" - like teaching a bird to fly. Everyone could see that the earth was flat. Nevermind was some Egyptian achedemic had to say about it! Similarly, Muslims teaching that Jesus was not the incarnation of God. Yet, any self-respecting Christian would think that's crazy bullshit and that Muslims obviously have no idea what their going on about. Their reasoning would go something like this:

many Muslim experts on Jesus told Xians (and the world) who Jesus really is. And seems they are treated as more reliable and trustable sources instead of Xians (Xian practicians) themselves.

Like relying the technique of flying on other sources instead of birds. Even worse, those sources give lectures to birds on how to fly!


Can you see the logical fallacy now?
Maybe?
Probably not,

Whatever, lets end this circle here LiveInFaith, feel free to specifically answer those questions. They are VERY straight foreword and you should therefor have no difficulties giving me very straightforward answerers just as my ex-Muslim buddies. If not then concede the point or your silence will admit you have no idea what you are talking about and that you really don't care to learn.

Going in circles with no answers is tiring to say the least.

As they say. put up or shut up.

Cheers,
Michael

I'm curious, did your "buddy" ever get asked this?pYes, he provided me the book which I have already posted. The Author is consider by many to be genius BUT I would also like to note - the author is a practicing Muslim!

One with apparently a very very open mind! So those answers are in part given from the Farsi reading of that Authors work.

I've learned that education is no substitute for an open mind.
OK, I'll bite.

1) Sam, is there a chance that Mohammad was just a man with schizophrenia and never had any conversations with any angels and the stories were simply plagiarized and blended?

2) Sam, is it possible that there is no God?

3) Sam, is it possible that the polytheistic Arab Gods were the true Gods and not the one God you worship?

4) Sam, is it possible that fundamental Christians are correct and you, along we me, will be in hell after we die?

5) Sam, is it possible that the 1 million million Shinto Gods of Japan are real?

6) Is it possible you are absolutely correct in all your religous beliefs?


How open is your mind?

I'll go first:
1) Yes
2) Yes
3) Yes
4) Yes
5) Yes
6) Yes

Cheers,
Michael

As for the wiki, you need to ask Plazma, its his wiki not mine.:pThanks I will :)

Is it possible to have a mind so open that your brains fall out?

Apparently, yes! :D

The Jewish foundation of Islam (http://www.truthnet.org/islam/Jewish/Arabia/)

PS could you post the link to the book again? I forgot the name.

Is it possible to have a mind so open that your brains fall out?

Apparently, yes! :D

The Jewish foundation of Islam (http://www.truthnet.org/islam/Jewish/Arabia/)

PS could you post the link to the book again? I forgot the name.Sam Sam Sam .. now now dear, I answered those 6 question in 6 seconds. Surely you can do me the favor - just this once (for now :P

Seriously, these are not far fetched as each question relates to a notion that hundreds of thousands of people either presently do, or at one time did, seriously believe.

So they are fair enough questions.

Michael

Ooopps a lecture is starting in 5 min!!!

Sam Sam Sam .. now now dear, I answered those 6 question in 6 seconds. Surely you can do me the favor - just this once (for now :P

Seriously, these are not far fetched as each question relates to a notion that hundreds of thousands of people either presently do, or at one time did, seriously believe.

So they are fair enough questions.

Michael

Ooopps a lecture is starting in 5 min!!!

If you can answer all of them yes and mean it, you need to refine your thinking.

Either that or you are the most indecisive person in the world!

I read artcle One of Four. I'll have to read the other later.

Here are some points I found interesting:
_________________

The general knowledge of certain Christian doctrines, and of specific Christian terms, was much more widespread in Arabia in the prophet's time than the scholars of a former generation realized. New evidence has been collected, as will appear. The most of the catchwords and other characteristic properties which muhammad Mohammed has been credited with introducing to his fellow-countrymen are now seen to have been well known to them before his day.
_____________________

Yet we have to account for a number of Jewish tribes, and at least one Jewish city. No succession of mere trading ventures could possibly explain what we see. Hence arises the question of proselyting; whether it is likely to have been undertaken on a large scale by Jewish traders in Arabia, and whether from its probable result could be explained the condition which we find. The hypothesis of native clans converted through propaganda has played a foremost part in some recent discussions, as a way of accounting for the origin and the apparent character of the nominally Israelite population. The discussion of this question may be reserved for the present: whether it can reasonably be held that these undeniably large and influential Jewish settlements consisted mainly of native Arab tribes which had been converted to a more or less superficial Judaism.
_________________

Ahrens sees reason for believing that muhammad Mohammed received his teaching, now from Arians (pp. 154 f.), now from Nestorians (18, 173), and again from Gnostics and Manichaeans (15, 18, 167). Christian hermits, presumably in the Hijaz, told him what to say (186). His slaves, doubtless from Abyssinia and Syria (these of course Monophysite), gave him the continuous instruction which he needed (187 f.). muhammad Mohammed's New Testament material, he decides, is taken from nearly every part of the Christian scriptures: Gospels, Acts, Pauline Epistles, and the Book of Revelation (172 f.).

Certainly to many students of the quran Koran this equipment of the Arabian prophet will seem excessive, and the supposed course of training a bit bewildering. I shall endeavor to show, in subsequent lectures, that in the quran Koran itself there is no clear evidence that muhammad Mohammed had ever received instruction from a Christian teacher, while many facts testify emphatically to the contrary; and that, on the other hand, the evidence that he gained his Christian material either from Jews in Mekka, or from what was well known and handed about in the Arabian cities, is clear, consistent, and convincing.
________________

The fact of the Israelite city of Khaibar, "the richest city of the Hijaz," is one very significant item among many. Such a civilization is not produced in a short time. Native Arab tribes "converted" in the manner supposed would have been certain, we should imagine, to welcome and accept the prophet of their own number who promised them a truly Arabian continuation of Judaism adapted to their own special needs, while based squarely on the Hebrew scriptures. But the Jews of Mekka, Medina, and the rest of the Hijaz knew better, and would not yield an inch.
____________

Margoliouth will have it that muhammad Mohammed had small respect for the Israelites of Mekka and Medina, saying (p. 81), "In relation to the native Arabs he thought of them as an inferior caste." I cannot imagine how this saying could be justified from the quran Koran, unless it means (as its context might possibly be held to imply) that the unbelieving Jews were destined for an especially deep-down compartment in the infernal regions.

_________________

It is a familiar fact that the Mishna takes account of Arabian Israelites. Shabb. 6, 6 notes that "the Arabian Jewesses go out wrapped in a veil, so that only their eyes are seen." Ohaloth 18, 10, speaking of the various places where dwellings in which pagans have lodged may be occupied by Jews without the contraction of ceremonial uncleanness, names "the tents of the Arabs." [I was of the mind the scarf was Byzantine - perhaps this extreme covering was Jewish?]
_________________

If you can answer all of them yes and mean it, you need to refine your thinking.

Either that or you are the most indecisive person in the world!No I am simply admitting that these are things I am willing to consider possibilities. That is, I am open minded enough to entertain that yes these beliefs may be true. That is different than saying that I believe them - only that I am open to the notion that they are possible.

Here I'll post them again. I would appreciate if you could answer honestly a Yes or No. As I said, I am of the mind to answer Yes on all accounts. All are a possibility.

1) Sam, is there a chance that Mohammad was just a man with schizophrenia and never had any conversations with any angels and the stories were simply plagiarized and blended?

2) Sam, is it possible that there is no God?

3) Sam, is it possible that the polytheistic Arab Gods were the true Gods and not the one God you worship?

4) Sam, is it possible that fundamental Christians are correct and you, along we me, will be in hell after we die?

5) Sam, is it possible that the 1 million million Shinto Gods of Japan are real?

6) Is it possible you are absolutely correct in all your religous beliefs?


Michael

PS: That seminar/lecture was a Webinar. Pretty cool. When way over my head because I've never done microarrays and have almost no experience in molecular biology. But the Webinar itself was pretty cool.

How about you? Do you do molecular biology?

1. No, there is no evidence to support that possibility
2. Yes it is possible there is no God, in the same way that it is possible the universe was not created from nothing.
3. The Arabs did not have Gods they had demons, so that premise makes no sense.
4. Since Hell is an undefined concept, I would have to say I don't know.
5. The Shinto gods are sacred spirits which reside in natural elements, they are personifications of qualities of nature same as in Hinduism. Shinto is like Dharma, a way of the Gods rather than gods so it does not cover the concept of God as I know it.
6.Since they are always being built upon, eventually I hope so.

6.Since they are always being built upon, eventually I hope so..
:D

1. No, there is no evidence to support that possibilityOK, just to make sure, if you could indulge me here.

1) Is it possible there are five Gods?

2) Is it possible Mohammad was not a Prophet?

3) Is it possible I am God?

Thanks
:)
Michael


PS: You didn't say about the MB?
Also, did you read the website you sent me? What did you think? I'm on assay three. It kind supports what I had though from before - although I think it does downplay the impact Xianity had. But, maybe not?

PSS: My buddy Reza is here right now printing CD labels for his Zen teacher. Is there anything you would like me to ask him? (I have to run to the lab I'll be back in 15). If so fire away!

No Samantha :(

OK - off I go to get some beer and pizza and watch Lost and pray to the Western Blot Gods that mine works (It is possible there are Western Blot Gods :p)

Michael

OK, just to make sure, if you could indulge me here.

1) Is it possible there are five Gods?

I think our concept of God is different, you tend to personalise God, so you assign numeric value, while my concept of God is formless and universal, so numbers make no sense.

2) Is it possible Mohammad was not a Prophet?

You mean accidental Prophet? Or deliberate deception? Or madness?

Its western hubris to consider other peoples as ignorant, I know, but really, the reverse is generally truer :D
; he'd have to be exceptionally talented to fool so many people over so many years.
3) Is it possible I am God?


Aren't all Americans? :confused:



PS: You didn't say about the MB?

I haven't done microarrays, but I know people who do, my lab is involved in custom designing a cancer chip now. I do clinical work with animals, mostly tissue effects of nutrition interventions, some quantitaive PCR, immunoblotting. I'm hoping to pick up some experience in transgenics, cloning and mutation.


Also, did you read the website you sent me? What did you think? I'm on assay three. It kind supports what I had though from before - although I think it does downplay the impact Xianity had. But, maybe not?

That was a test; did you notice something interesting about the stuff written on it? Anything that seemed a little, shall we say, puzzling?

PSS: My buddy Reza is here right now printing CD labels for his Zen teacher. Is there anything you would like me to ask him? (I have to run to the lab I'll be back in 15). If so fire away!

I stopped talking to invisible friends some time ago.:p

No Samantha :(

OK - off I go to get some beer and pizza and watch Lost and pray to the Western Blot Gods that mine works (It is possible there are Western Blot Gods :p)

Michael

The trick to a good blot is optimisation.:p

And good good washing.

Children please this subject was about a meteorite inside a black box!!!!

,,,,Or maybe you both need to get a room!:D

Children please this subject was about a meteorite inside a black box!!!!

,,,,Or maybe you both need to get a room!:D

You must be new to sciforums. :p

You know, many Xians are God-smacked I could even suggest, little own advocate, that Jesus is pure allegory. That Jesus never ever lived. Yet, that's exactly what archeology suggests as well as what >50% of the earliest Christian communities then believed. Before they were cleansed by the Church for heresy.

The majority of people 1000 years ago thought the world was flat. To suggest anything other than this was "crazy" - like teaching a bird to fly. Everyone could see that the earth was flat. Nevermind was some Egyptian achedemic had to say about it!



Cheers,
Michael

REALLY?? It is called rewriting history. Cut this from an article about flat eathers in UK: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth_Society

Although there is a popular misconception that the belief in a flat earth was widespread in the Middle Ages, the idea that the earth is spherical originated in ancient times, was popularized by Pythagoras and Aristotle, and was accepted by virtually all educated people by the time of Ptolemy in the 2nd century AD[citation needed]. In fact, Eratosthenes had calculated the circumference of the earth around the 2nd century BC to within about 2% of the currently accepted value. Although a few early Christian writers had some theological objections[citation needed], by the early Middle Ages all mainstream Christian groups espoused the idea of a round earth. The myth that Christopher Columbus finally convinced Europeans that the earth is round by his voyage to America is a fiction invented by the writer Washington Irving and has absolutely no basis in fact, given that Columbus never circumnavigated the globe: the real issue at the time was the size of the Earth rather than its roundness


I thought this was common knowledge/:D

Another Vega thread ruined by trollers!:(

Would you rather no one posted in your thread, and why did you wait for my post to make that statement?

OK back to Kaaba.

Would you rather no one posted in your thread, and why did you wait for my post to make that statement?

OK back to that rock.

Didn;t see you sneak in there that fast Johnny!:D

oh, man you had me upset there. er...sorry

So now I can offically put this thread to rest by concluding that the Kabaa rock was most probably a meteorite in origin as there was no moslem with any supportive evidence to challenge my claims!

Sam,Michael I thank you for your irrelevant input on this subject , and john i'm sorry but we are closing now!!!!

Peace everybody........:D

I think our concept of God is different, you tend to personalise God, so you assign numeric value, while my concept of God is formless and universal, so numbers make no sense. Yes, I know – I’m not asking if you believe in your idea of God; of course you do and of course it makes sense to you.

I’m asking if it is possible for someone else’s ideas to be true instead of only your idea. Some people have believed there are more than one God. I am asking: Is it possible there are five Gods? Yes, this makes the assumption that you will not think about your version of God and entertain the notion that there are 5 Gods.

Again: Is it possible there are five Gods?

You mean accidental Prophet? Or deliberate deception? Or madness? The question is very straight forward: Is it possible Mohammad was not a Prophet?

Its western hubris to consider other peoples as ignorant, I know, but really, the reverse is generally truer :D
; he'd have to be exceptionally talented to fool so many people over so many years. The same could said for Shinto beliefs. They are much older than Islam and billions of people believed. I know MANY Japanese that still do. As a matter of fact, almost all Japanese have, what I would yes consider superstitious, beliefs. Even people I would have thought otherwise.

Anyway, your argument could be made for Buddhism, Hinduism, African nature worship, Christianity, Zeus, Jupiter, Thor, etc…

The same rational could also be used for the Baha’i (who also claim Mohammad was a Prophet – just not the last). As evidence they would show that the oldest Qur’an are different than the modern and thus it has been corrupted and then point to how most Islamic countries are crap and lots of Muslims have many superstitious beliefs and all this is evidence that Islam is corrupt and as such a new prophet was needed bla bla bla. (In your own religious teaching this fits rather well. Yet I am sure you are not Baha’i.)

Is it possible that Mohammad was NOT the last Prophet and that Bahá'u'lláh was the Last Prophet?

Also note:
Alexander was worshiped as a God for nearly the same length of time that Mohammadism has been around.

So I’ll ask again:
Is it possible Mohammad was not a Prophet?

(note: there is certainly no Hubris is asking a question. People were considered Hubris and executed by the church for suggesting the Earth orbited the Sun and was not the center of the Universe. Such Hubris!!!)

Aren't all Americans? :confused: Hubris? Not all – some. Many when they get overseas act in a manner they’d surely not act at home. I think it’s some sort of defense mechanism? Hubris is not my character, but in a debate - I will debate the point. I realize that many, probably most, of my ideas are wrong.

Actually, I wish Sciforums had a sub-forum specifically for “debate” and that during debate each person who enters agreed to answer each question posited to them by ticking a box and that if they didn't answer the question they conceded the point. That would make things quicker.

That was a test; did you notice something interesting about the stuff written on it? Anything that seemed a little, shall we say, puzzling? I was reading very quickly. I have said many times before that I think Mahammedism initiated from conservative Jews that adopted the ways of Arabs. I said before that I thought Mohammad was Jewish-ish :)
IMHO anyway.

So I naturally agreed with the writer's over arching assertion that all of the Jewish parts of the Qur’an (70%) were plagiarized from Judaism. It’s either that or an Angle whispered in Mohammad’s ear. I’m going with plagiarism. However, I also, as I posted in this thread, said that the I was told an Ethiopian Christian provided the Christian literature and a Persian Zoroastrian the Zoroastrian literature. And obviously the Arab practices would have come from Mohammad’s own back ground.

Anyway, yes it was weird the the name Mohammad was duplicated and so was the word Qur'an. Or at least I thought it was weird to me.

As to Reza, he might get a little mad but I will send you his MySpace page when I get it. Maybe today?

I thought this was common knowledge/:DYes, that is common knowledge. But many people still thought the Earth was flat. Eratosthenes was famous but not to the majority of people who were illiterate. They probably thought the earth was flat and many thought it was flat and rested on the back of turtle!

So now I can offically put this thread to rest by concluding that the Kabaa rock was most probably a meteorite in origin as there was no moslem with any supportive evidence to challenge my claims!I don't think anyone disagreed that the rock was a meteorite???

Here I'll add something: meteorites are most easily found in the desert sands and in the snow. coincidence one was found in the deserts of Arabia? probably not!


Michael

Yes, I know – I’m not asking if you believe in your idea of God; of course you do and of course it makes sense to you.

I’m asking if it is possible for someone else’s ideas to be true instead of only your idea. Some people have believed there are more than one God. I am asking: Is it possible there are five Gods? Yes, this makes the assumption that you will not think about your version of God and entertain the notion that there are 5 Gods.

Again: Is it possible there are five Gods?

The question is very straight forward: Is it possible Mohammad was not a Prophet?

The same could said for Shinto beliefs. They are much older than Islam and billions of people believed. I know MANY Japanese that still do. As a matter of fact, almost all Japanese have, what I would yes consider superstitious, beliefs. Even people I would have thought otherwise.

Anyway, your argument could be made for Buddhism, Hinduism, African nature worship, Christianity, Zeus, Jupiter, Thor, etc…

The same rational could also be used for the Baha’i (who also claim Mohammad was a Prophet – just not the last). As evidence they would show that the oldest Qur’an are different than the modern and thus it has been corrupted and then point to how most Islamic countries are crap and lots of Muslims have many superstitious beliefs and all this is evidence that Islam is corrupt and as such a new prophet was needed bla bla bla. (In your own religious teaching this fits rather well. Yet I am sure you are not Baha’i.)

Is it possible that Mohammad was NOT the last Prophet and that Bahá'u'lláh was the Last Prophet?

Also note:
Alexander was worshiped as a God for nearly the same length of time that Mohammadism has been around.

So I’ll ask again:
Is it possible Mohammad was not a Prophet?

(note: there is certainly no Hubris is asking a question. People were considered Hubris and executed by the church for suggesting the Earth orbited the Sun and was not the center of the Universe. Such Hubris!!!)

Hubris? Not all – some. Many when they get overseas act in a manner they’d surely not act at home. I think it’s some sort of defense mechanism? Hubris is not my character, but in a debate - I will debate the point. I realize that many, probably most, of my ideas are wrong.

Actually, I wish Sciforums had a sub-forum specifically for “debate” and that during debate each person who enters agreed to answer each question posited to them by ticking a box and that if they didn't answer the question they conceded the point. That would make things quicker.

I was reading very quickly. I have said many times before that I think Mahammedism initiated from conservative Jews that adopted the ways of Arabs. I said before that I thought Mohammad was Jewish-ish :)
IMHO anyway.

So I naturally agreed with the writer's over arching assertion that all of the Jewish parts of the Qur’an (70%) were plagiarized from Judaism. It’s either that or an Angle whispered in Mohammad’s ear. I’m going with plagiarism. However, I also, as I posted in this thread, said that the I was told an Ethiopian Christian provided the Christian literature and a Persian Zoroastrian the Zoroastrian literature. And obviously the Arab practices would have come from Mohammad’s own back ground.

Anyway, yes it was weird the the name Mohammad was duplicated and so was the word Qur'an. Or at least I thought it was weird to me.

As to Reza, he might get a little mad but I will send you his MySpace page when I get it. Maybe today?

What is this, mental masturbation? :confused:

Your questions are utterly pointless.

And no, the puzzling part had to do with a logical dissonance not a fruitless repetition.

I don't think anyone disagreed that the rock was a meteorite???



Not denying the rock is a meteorite confirms it is? :p

Here I'll add something: meteorites are most easily found in the desert sands and in the snow. coincidence one was found in the deserts of Arabia? probably not!


Michael

Wow?:shrug:

What is this, mental masturbation? :confused:

Your questions are utterly pointless.

And no, the puzzling part had to do with a logical dissonance not a fruitless repetition.I simply asked a couple questions:


1) Is it possible there are five Gods?
2) Is it possible Mohammad was not a Prophet?

There is no "mental" masturbation in asking those questions and I'm not trying to be a jerk, I am asking the question in all seriousness.


Michael

I simply asked a couple questions:


1) Is it possible there are five Gods?
2) Is it possible Mohammad was not a Prophet?

There is no "mental" masturbation in asking those questions and I'm not trying to be a jerk, I am asking the question in all seriousness.


Michael

I've already answered them, I'm sorry if they don't meet your idea of what the answers should be.

Do you think its possible that all people don't think like you?:rolleyes:

Not denying the rock is a meteorite confirms it is? No

Wow?:shrug:NASA hires people to hunt meteorites and to them it's probably was a wow when they first realized that. There is a large number of armature people who search deserts and tundra for meteorites.


I really don't get the shrug?

Michael

No

NASA hires people to hunt meteorites and to them it's probably was a wow when they first realized that. There is a large number of armature people who search deserts and tundra for meteorites.


I really don't get the shrug?

Michael

you're a victim of inductive speculation. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction)

You're too enthralled with your conclusions to look at the facts.

I've already answered them, I'm sorry if they don't meet your idea of what the answers should be.I did not read a yes or a no or I don't know answer Sam.

Either answer so or if you do not want to answer then just say I don't want to give an answer.

But don't be a jerk because you have a problem answering the questions.

Do you think its possible that all people don't think like you?:rolleyes:Yes, which is why I asked very specific questions.

1) Is it possible there are five Gods?
2) Is it possible Mohammad was not a Prophet?


Pretty reasonable questions really, why the big feet drag?

Michael

PS: I have never in the months we have debated ever implied you were dull, dimwitted or that any of your questions were utterly pointless. I have read the links you have posted and I have offered my opinion and asked a question. This is a debate forum isn't it?

you're a victim of inductive speculation. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction)

You're too enthralled with your conclusions to look at the facts.I have not even made a conclusion.

Here we are:

Is it possible there is a God - Yes.
Is it possible I could burn in hell - Yes.
Is it possible Mohammad was the last Prophet - Yes.


See, very easy,
Michael

I have not even made a conclusion.

Here we are:

Is it possible there is a God - Yes.
Is it possible I could burn in hell - Yes.
Is it possible Mohammad was the last Prophet - Yes.


See, very easy,
Michael

Yes you have, which is why you are dissatisfied with my answers.:p

You have expectations of what they should be.
edit: oooh this is priceless!

I did not read a yes or a no or I don't know answer Sam.

Either answer so or if you do not want to answer then just say I don't want to give an answer.

But don't be a jerk because you have a problem answering the questions.

Yes, which is why I asked very specific questions.

Sam, dearest, please restate you answers. I am a a bit simple and dimwhitted and can not seem to find nor discern any meaning from them.

Could you please do me the kind favor or re-replying.

With many thanks and best wishes,
Michael

Sam, dearest, please restate you answers. I am a a bit simple and dimwhitted and can not seem to find nor discern any meaning from them.

Could you please do me the kind favor or re-replying.

With many thanks and best wishes,
Michael

Oh do get out of your pre-programmed mindset.

Not all answers are yes or no or I don't know.

Some of them are: this is what I think of when I hear this question.:)

If you need conclusions, that is your problem, not mine. ;)

I prefer not to speculate.

Also, RE The problem of induction is the philosophical issue involved in deciding the place of induction in determining empirical truth. . . . .

Again, I a bit thick headed. I see no reason how asking a couple questions regarding your personal opinion make me a victim of inductive speculation?

Oh do get out of your pre-programmed mindset.

Not all answers are yes or no or I don't know.

Some of them are: this is what I think of when I hear this question.:)Sam, difficult, difficult is a serious understatement here: You are being difficult!

OK, then, again please, what was it you thought when you heard those questions?

Sam, difficult, difficult is a serious understatement here: You are being difficult!

OK, then, again please, what was it you thought when you heard those questions?

sigh
1) Is it possible there are five Gods?
2) Is it possible Mohammad was not a Prophet?

1. My concept of God does not allow for quantification.

If you say, by the X concept of gods, is it possible that there are 5 or 500 gods, then, its very likely yes, since the X concept of god is unlike mine.

2. No, because a Prophet is one who carries a message of God which according to me, he did.:p

Also, RE The problem of induction is the philosophical issue involved in deciding the place of induction in determining empirical truth. . . . .

Again, I a bit thick headed. I see no reason how asking a couple questions regarding your personal opinion make me a victim of inductive speculation?

Because you have pre-formed ideas of the conclusion before even getting my opinion, i.e. you have already decided what it would mean.:)

See that was much easier than you thought it was going to be :)
painless really.

See that was much easier than you thought it was going to be :)
painless really.

It was also already asked and answered.:p

Because you have pre-formed ideas of the conclusion before even getting my opinion, i.e. you have already decided what it would mean.:)Well, maybe, but now I am so exhausted I can't conclude my way out of a wet-paper-bag.

So, on that note, thank you for answering those questions and I am going for a beer maybe... .... ...

Take care,
Michael

PS: Friday I have 6 hours of teaching Med Ss (actually PBL - problem based learning). My last group had a real arse hole that made it a major major major major pain. These two new groups are fantastic!!! I actually almost get a little buzz off it when it goes so well.. .. .. .. just great!

It was also already asked and answered.:p
Well, do take care Sam :)

Well, maybe, but now I am so exhausted I can't conclude my way out of a wet-paper-bag.

I frequently have that effect on people.:D

So, on that note, thank you for answering those questions and I am going for a beer maybe... .... ...

Take care,
Michael

PS: Friday I have 6 hours of teaching Med Ss (actually PNL - problem based learning). My last group had a real arse hole that made it a major major major major pain. These two new groups are fantastic!!! I actually almost get a little buzz off it when it goes so well.. .. .. .. just great!

If you are teaching PNL, you really should read up on inductive, deductive and abductive reasoning and a little bit on the problems associated with each.

All the best!:)

:)

I have a system that seems to work OK, but really, I only have so much time and research has to take priority in this case :( Although I wish that were not so. But alas - it is.

have a nice weekend,
:)
Michael

(PS: Sorry I meant to type PBL...)

I have a system that seems to work OK, but really, I only have so much time and research has to take priority in this case :( Although I wish that were not so. But alas - it is.

have a nice weekend,
:)
Michael

(PS: Sorry I meant to type PBL...)

You gotta learn to think before you research!:p

You have a nice weekend too.

I have a poster presentation tomorrow. So I'm off. Bye!

You gotta learn to think before you research!:p That is a fair comment. I would have put it in the third person as in: One must learn to think using the Scientific Method to do Scientific based Research.

Surely you do not mean I should believe in fairy creatures, Gods or a flying winged horse-like beast that carry Prophets around hot spots in the ME???


Even so, I find the best research is usually based on good timing, diligence, being at an intersection of multiple disciplines, keeping an open mind - thinking outside of accepted dogma and then just plain getting lucky. I am looking forward to this last experiment I am running. I think that this paper should be very nice. Maybe something I can spend the rest of my career studying.

For PBL I use the Socratic Method. When it works it works very well. When there is a bad apple then it just gives mediocre results. The chain is a strong as it’s weakest link.

Last week Friday. I started two new classes. One student who said they were not happy with the program, at the end of the lesion, said they were, I quote “flying high!” They were very happy. That gives me a buzz and why I like teaching those PBLs. These two groups will do very well.


Anyway, I asked: Is it possible there are five Gods?
You replied:
1. My concept of God does not allow for quantification.This was followed by:
Because you have pre-formed ideas of ……

Who has the pre-formed ideas?
My concept of God does not allow for .......


I asked is it possible that Mohammad was not a Prophet. You stated that even the possibility can not exist.
2. No, because a Prophet is one who carries a message of God which according to me, he did.:pWell, I am able to entertain the possibility that Mohammad was a Prophet, that Islam could be correct in all manner and that I could burn in hell for my infidelity, you on the other hand say there is no possibility that Mohammad was not a Prophet. Well, Sam, here are a few ideas. * As there is nothing new, Mohammad could have coped the message. That's one way the possibility exists. * Mohammad could have been told what to say by other people. That's another way the possibility exists. * You may just plain be totally mistaken and there is no wonderful message. That's another way the possibility exists. etc... etc... etc...

If your mind where truly open you'd see there are many ways that the possibility exists.

And by making your statement you of course imply that at some level:
* Buddhists beliefs are inherently flawed.
* Hindu beliefs are inherently flawed.
* Christian beliefs are inherently flawed.
* Jewish beliefs are inherently flawed.
* Shinto beliefs are inherently flawed.
* John Frumian beliefs are inherently flawed.
* Baha’i’ beliefs are inherently flawed.
* Mormon beliefs are inherently flawed…
…etc.................


and this is not a case of you havening a Preformed idea? It really appears that it is your pre-formed idea that Mohammad is a Prophet that has led you to the conclusion that Mohammad is a Prophet.


* I was very explicable in my assertion that aggressive war was wrong. You said it can be justified by the ends. Then you suggested that the Islamic Golden Age (maybe Persian Golden Age would be more apt) was a fine example of these “ends”. That would be like saying the Chinese Golden Age, which followed the Mongolian invasions, justified their wholesale slaughter by the tens of millions? This makes no sense and I morally disagree.
* I stated that any form of Slavery was evil. You said it can be justified by the times and even go so far as to say that institutionalized Slavery is morally just. I will just have to disagree purely on moral grounds – Slavery is ALWAYS in ALL FORMS heinous.
* I stated that Islam, just like Communism, did not achieve any of its lofty goals [Slavery was Institutionalized and rife, Women are not equal, Religious minorities are not treated with equality, demagoguery is rife; this is but to name a few] You said Islam is not at fault but the fault lies at the feet of the people and their leaders. This is the EXACT same line Communist use and makes equally as much sense.
* I asked what was novel and enlightening from Islam. You said nothing.
* You stated that the European Renaissance could not have occurred without Islam, yet when I pressed why, you then suggested the reason why Islamic inspirations were needed was because they persevered pre-Islamic European literature. This makes absolutely no sense. If it could occur before Islam then it could of course occur again without Islam. Why draw any other conclusion?




Again, who has the preformed ideas? I am able to entertain the possibility that there is a God. As an agnostic atheist I do not believe so. But, yes, I may be wrong. You though are a theist, not an agnostic theist, just a theist. You say it is not possible there is no God. Add to that you are a Muslim. You say it is not possible that Mohammad was not a Prophet.


Oh, one of us has preformed ideas, that is for sure.

Michael

Both of You Get a Room Quick!!!

Both of You Get a Room Quick!!!Hows this!

http://www.sidbhatia.com/blog_assets/kaaba.jpg

:p
MII

That is a fair comment. I would have put it in the third person as in: One must learn to think using the Scientific Method to do Scientific based Research.

So what is the scientific method?:p

And as for the rest, I recall reading somewhere that you supported the war on Afghanistan. That was a war of aggression.


And for other people's beliefs being inherently flawed, that would assume that we are all puppets, incapable of independent thought. Not even all Muslims think the same way about Islam, so what can one say about people who have other ideas about religion? Whats to say one of them is not more right than another? Like I said, since my beliefs are being built upon, hopefully eventually I shall get it right.

As for God and Mohammed, I could perhaps expand my concepts to include those of other people, but that would be a dishonest interpretation. Regardless of the motives you ascribe to me, I can only define a concept as I see it. One thing you don't seem to understand is that it does not matter whether Muhammed got the message directly or from others. It is still a message, it is still about a way of life that I consider ideal. Others may disagree and are free to make their own choices.

As for your remarks o slavery, etc; as I said before, you have a tendency to inductive speculation, so you only see answers you expect to see. That is not something I can do about.

And isn't the Socratic method better applied to moral philosophy than scientific inquiry? How do you use it? edit: never mind, I see how you use it.

So what is the scientific method?:p from somewhere on the net:
1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena.
2. Formulation of a hypothesis to explain the phenomena.
3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations.
4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent and properly performed experiments.
And as for the rest, I recall reading somewhere that you supported the war on Afghanistan. That was a war of aggression. The people who organized a military attack on the USA were operating within and supported by the Afghanistan government. That war was in retaliation to an unprovoked attack and was sanctioned by the UN. That is, members from all over the World, from places as diverse as China and France agreed that such was the case. A UN member had been illegally attacked and thus had a legal and moral right to retaliate.

Does this mean the USA has a right to occupy Afghanistan. Not in my opinion - no.

And for other people's beliefs being inherently flawed, that would assume that we are all puppets, incapable of independent thought. Not even all Muslims think the same way about Islam, so what can one say about people who have other ideas about religion? Whats to say one of them is not more right than another? Like I said, since my beliefs are being built upon, hopefully eventually I shall get it right.

As for God and Mohammed, I could perhaps expand my concepts to include those of other people, but that would be a dishonest interpretation. Regardless of the motives you ascribe to me, I can only define a concept as I see it. One thing you don't seem to understand is that it does not matter whether Muhammed got the message directly or from others. It is still a message, it is still about a way of life that I consider ideal. Others may disagree and are free to make their own choices.That’s fine and perhaps you are 100% correct in your belief.

But you are saying that it is not even a possibility that Mohammad can not be a Prophet. Not even a possibility.
The possibility can not exist.
The logical implications of this line of reasoning are, among others, that there must be a God, that there can only be one God, that there can not be another Prophet, that any belief that in disagreement with this axiom is dead wrong.

Wiki: Socratic method (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method)
It is a form of philosophical inquiry. A Socratic Dialogue can happen at any time between [two people] when they seek to answer a question [about something] answerable by their own effort of reflection and thinking [starting] from the concrete [asking] all sorts of questions [until] the details of the example are fleshed out [as] a kind of platform for reaching more general judgments". The practice involves asking a series of questions surrounding a central issue, and answering questions of the others involved. Generally this involves the defense of one point of view against another and is oppositional. The best way to 'win' is to make the opponent contradict themselves in some way that proves the inquirer's own point. Socratic Questioning is used to describe the kind of questioning, with which an original question was responded to as though it were an answer. This in turn forces the first questioner to reformulate a new question in the light of the progress of the discourse.


Seems reasonable enough,

Michael


As for PBL I generally just never give an answer. Perhaps it’s not the same but that’s how I think of it. Because of time constants I do summarize a field briefly and ask students to research it themselves if it is outside of the discussion (ie: medical case). If I don’t know I just say so. EX: in a case on primary hyperthyroidism, depression may be a clinical symptom. I may briefly mention what I know of neurogenesis within the limbic system as a root of clinical depression if the Ss have diverged a little into depression but facilitate the PBL by directing the focus back towards an endocrine cause.

Somehow I think questions and answers are more reflective of opinion than facts. The answers are simple enough but the right questions are difficult to ask. One would do better to look at all the facts and see what hypotheses are generated from them, no?

As for Afghanistan, you do know that the reason the Taliban did not hand over Osama is because he had sought refuge with them and inspite of constant demands, the US provided NO EVIDENCE of his involvement in 9/11? If the situation were reversed, what would the US position be?

http://english.people.com.cn/english/200109/21/eng20010921_80761.html

http://www.tufts.edu/communications/stories/100501ShouldTalibanSeeEvidence.htm

Somehow I think questions and answers are more reflective of opinion than facts. The answers are simple enough but the right questions are difficult to ask. One would do better to look at all the facts and see what hypotheses are generated from them, no?I see no reason not to do both? Also, in the case of some things, like Gods, Goblins, Ghosts, Flying Horses and Prophets, where no scientific evidence exists, it makes gathering evidence a little hard.

I wonder if the real reason you don't think it is even possible that Mohammad was not a Prophet is because you are afraid to think those sorts of thoughts? It seems if you were to be reasonable you'd say, yes, it is possible Mohammad was not a Prophet and it is possible that there is no God and while I accept that such may be a possibility I do not think so for these reasons....

So, for me, I asked those questions because they are the right questions to ask. Any questions you are interested in I will answer as best I can.

As for Afghanistan, you do know that the reason the Taliban did not hand over Osama is because he had sought refuge with them and inspite of constant demands, the US provided NO EVIDENCE of his involvement in 9/11? If the situation were reversed, what would the US position be?

http://english.people.com.cn/english/200109/21/eng20010921_80761.html

http://www.tufts.edu/communications/stories/100501ShouldTalibanSeeEvidence.htm
That may well be the case. But the simplest explanation seems to me, to be that a small group of dedicated people living in Afghanistan were motivated to organize the attack. It really doesn't take much brains to pull off a little stunt like that. So they did. Who knows, as the USA is losing both Wars maybe things are still going exactly according to plan?

Michael

I see no reason not to do both? Also, in the case of some things, like Gods, Goblins, Ghosts, Flying Horses and Prophets, where no scientific evidence exists, it makes gathering evidence a little hard.

I wonder if the real reason you don't think it is even possible that Mohammad was not a Prophet is because you are afraid to think those sorts of thoughts? It seems if you were to be reasonable you'd say, yes, it is possible Mohammad was not a Prophet and it is possible that there is no God and while I accept that such may be a possibility I do not think so for these reasons....

So, for me, I asked those questions because they are the right questions to ask. Any questions you are interested in I will answer as best I can.


That may well be the case. But the simplest explanation seems to me, to be that a small group of dedicated people living in Afghanistan were motivated to organize the attack. It really doesn't take much brains to pull off a little stunt like that. So they did. Who knows, as the USA is losing both Wars maybe things are still going exactly according to plan?

Michael


I see you tend to follow the same line of thought that your questions bring to your mind. :)

So be it.

I see you tend to follow the same line of thought that your questions bring to your mind. :)

So be it.What's that?

What I think can be changed in an instant. I do not need to keep thinking the same way. For example. If you were to type. Yes, the possibility exists that Mohammad was not a Prophet and yes there may not be a God. Well then, my line of thought would change in a second.

Seems simple enough?
Michael II

What's that?

What I think can be changed in an instant. I do not need to keep thinking the same way. For example. If you were to type. Yes, the possibility exists that Mohammad was not a Prophet and yes there may not be a God. Well then, my line of thought would change in a second.

Seems simple enough?
Michael II

Yes, so your answers are dependent on the questions asked. Mine are based on the facts as I see them. Its a different way of thinking I guess.

That may be the case.

However, it seems that we should be able to come to an agreement on what we are thinking.

You are stating in absolute terms that according to your thinking it is not even a possibility that Mohammad was not a Prophet.
Not possible.
Ergo, would you agree, according to your manner of thinking, that as it is not possible that Mohammad was not a Prophet then the logical implications of this line of reasoning are that there must be a God, that there can only be one God, that there can not be another Prophet after Mohammad and that any belief in disagreement with this axiom is dead wrong?


Michael

That may be the case.

However, it seems that we should be able to come to an agreement on what we are thinking.

You are stating in absolute terms that according to your thinking it is not even a possibility that Mohammad was not a Prophet.
Not possible.
Ergo, would you agree, according to your manner of thinking, that as it is not possible that Mohammad was not a Prophet then the logical implications of this line of reasoning are that there must be a God, that there can only be one God, that there can not be another Prophet after Mohammad and that any belief that in disagreement with this axiom is dead wrong?


Michael

Of course, because you asked me what I thought. My thoughts are based on my analysis of the facts as I see them. I don't take responsibility for how others perceive the same facts.

Your questions are designed for generic answers, so you are dissatisfied with specific answers, but if you are open to all possibilities, why are you so closed to specific points of view? Doesn't that defeat your purpose?:)

This is what I mean about questions and answers vs "best fit of relevant facts". Inspite of your presumed openmindedness, your generic view makes all other viewpoints redundant, but my specific viewpoint allows for others.

Perhaps I am not explaining clearly?

Perhaps I am not explaining clearly?Yes, I am completely lost here.

Take the question:
Does the possibility exist that Mohammad was not a Prophet?

Yes, I am completely lost here.

Take the question:
Does the possibility exist that Mohammad was not a Prophet?

No, because the facts do not support that possibility.:p

No, because the facts do not support that possibility.:pWhat facts?
Please explain in full detail.

Thanks!
Michael

What facts?
Please explain in full detail.

Thanks!
Michael

The fact that he did pass on the message of Islam, of course. That makes him a Prophet.

The fact that he did pass on the message of Islam, of course. That makes him a Prophet.Oh that's rich!

Mohammad is a Prophet because the Qur'an is Prophetic.
The Qur'an is Prophetic because it was written by a Prophet.

:roflmao:

Is this the type of logical thinking you were referring to?
:bugeye:

Seriously, I would have thought you'd have really provided something here but I guess not.

Michael

Oh that's rich!

Mohammad is a Prophet because the Qur'an is Prophetic.
The Qur'an is Prophetic because it was written by a Prophet.

:roflmao:

Is this the type of logical thinking you were referring to?
:bugeye:

Seriously, I would have thought you'd have really provided something here but I guess not.

Michael

Mohammed is a Prophet because he passed on the message of Islam, he did not claim to be the first or to give an original message, nor did he claim there was anything different about his message from that given before him. In fact most verses about him in the Quran reiterate that he is only a man