Questions about Muhammed

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jovian90
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Vox_Catholica said:
Muslims call him a prophet. My question is what is the prophecy of Muhammad? What did he predict?
Click to expand...
Muhammad performed for about 1000 miracles. Some of them are about prdict the future. Those are in Hadiths ofcourse if you believe!. And some are in Qur’an.

As being prophet all prophets are equal. Because all prophets or messengers were sent by God. But some prophets have high degrees and Muhammad is the most high.
 
Dan_Defender said:
Self-made false prophet. My opinion.
Click to expand...
A prophet who was sent by God. Nobody could establish a religion like Islam without revelation. Muhammad convinced people with miracles and verses. Verses are not something people could write or say. Yet Muhammad were never educated.

It is so comic and ridiculous claim that Muhammad had taken from previous revelation. Could a monk make a man the most pious and enlightened and holy on the world through for an short interview? Muhammad were a child when a monk talked to Him. And after revelation Muhammad were taken to priest to confirm the revelation. If Muhammad had been educated by priests so Pagans would know that very well. Because people knew the Muhammad with very details. Muhammad claimed to have a new revelation. So if ıt had been taken from others Pagans would be able to know that easily. Pagans invoked Jews to exam Muhammad about revelation. And Jews coult not reject Muhammad but they were surprised why the prophet did not emerged from them.
 
Vox_Catholica said:
Muslims call him a prophet. My question is what is the prophecy of Muhammad? What did he predict?
Click to expand...
Two words are used in the Qur’an to describe what translators call a ‘Messenger’ or a ‘Prophet’. These words are: Nabī (‘Prophet’) and Rasūl (‘Messenger’).

In the Islamic context, a Nabī is a man sent by Allāh (subḥānahu ūta’āla) to provide guidance, or give warning, to those who are already under the Law; whereas a Rasūl (‘Messenger’) is charged with delivering the Law in the first place – in the form of scripture (he is also required to provide guidance and give warning, of course). All Rasūl are considered to be Nabī; but not all Nabī were Rasūl.

Muhammad (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) was a Rasūl.

Prophets are not fortunetellers. Their statements are conditional; and their purpose is not to predict the future but to bring about a change of mind – a change of behavior – on the part of their listeners. For example:

‘Then the word of Yahweh came to me as follows: “House of Israel, can I not do to you what this potter does? Yahweh demands. Yes, like clay in the potter’s hand, so you are in mine, House of Israel. Sometimes I announce that I shall uproot, break down and destroy a certain nation or kingdom, but should the nation I have threatened abandon its wickedness, I then change my mind about the disaster which I had intended to inflict on it. Sometimes I announce that I shall build up and plant a certain nation or kingdom, but should that nation do what displeases me and refuse to listen to my voice, I then change my mind about the good which I was intending to confer on it. So now, say this to the people of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, “Yahweh says this: Listen, I am preparing a disaster for you, I am working out a plan against you. So now, each one of you, turn back from your evil ways, amend your conduct and actions.”’ (Jeremiah: 5-11).

As you can see, the Exalted may not send the predicted punishment if the people repent; or He may withhold a predicted blessing if they do evil in His sight.

Compare:

‘(This is) a Scripture whose verses are perfected, then set out clearly, from One who is all wise, all aware. (Say, Prophet), “Worship no one but Allāh. I am sent to you from Him to warn and to give good news. Ask your Lord for forgiveness, then turn back to Him. He will grant you wholesome enjoyment until an appointed time, and give His grace to everyone who has merit. But if you turn away, I fear you will have torment on a terrible Day: it is to Allāh that you will all return, and He has power over everything.”’ (Hud: 1-4).
 
Last edited:
Muhammed did not have “revelations” - the Church’s view is that they were not messages from God - otherwise that would make Islam the true religion.

Islam contains many elements of the Truth - just not the full truth.
 
Last edited:
That religion spread through violence. 280 Million people died during the Islamic expansion. There were many forced conversions. What prophecies came true?
 
Vox_Catholica said:
That religion spread through violence. 280 Million people died during the Islamic expansion. There were many forced conversions. What prophecies came true?
Click to expand...
Jesus had few believers and followers. They were tortured much. After Rome accepted Christianity the religion of Jesus spread through violence of Rome!

Muhammad was a weak and poor single man. He convinced thousands people for faith by non power. Not 280 million people died. Totaly 280 people not died during Muhammad. And Muslims established a state. That state made some wars but not millions died. People could the the truth of Islam so they accepted Islam. Otherwise they would convert very soon. Islam is now so weak as political and economical why do nbot people convert?
 
What’s your point? It doesn’t compare to 280 million people dying for not converting…
 
From @Vox_Catholica previous posted link: Tears of Jihad - Political Islam

"These figures are a rough estimate of the death of non-Muslims by the political act of jihad.

Africa
Thomas Sowell [Thomas Sowell, Race and Culture , BasicBooks, 1994, p. 188] estimates that 11 million slaves were shipped across the Atlantic and 14 million were sent to the Islamic nations of North Africa and the Middle East. For every slave captured many others died. Estimates of this collateral damage vary. The renowned missionary David Livingstone estimated that for every slave who reached a plantation, five others were killed in the initial raid or died of illness and privation on the forced march.[Woman’s Presbyterian Board of Missions, David Livingstone , p. 62, 1888] Those who were left behind were the very young, the weak, the sick and the old. These soon died since the main providers had been killed or enslaved. So, for 25 million slaves delivered to the market, we have an estimated death of about 120 million people. Islam ran the wholesale slave trade in Africa.
120 million Africans

Christians
The number of Christians martyred by Islam is 9 million [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200 , William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-10] . A rough estimate by Raphael Moore in History of Asia Minor is that another 50 million died in wars by jihad. So counting the million African Christians killed in the 20th century we have:
60 million Christians

Hindus
Koenard Elst in Negationism in India gives an estimate of 80 million Hindus killed in the total jihad against India. [Koenard Elst, Negationism in India , Voice of India, New Delhi, 2002, pg. 34.] The country of India today is only half the size of ancient India, due to jihad. The mountains near India are called the Hindu Kush, meaning the “funeral pyre of the Hindus.”
80 million Hindus

Buddhists
Buddhists do not keep up with the history of war. Keep in mind that in jihad only Christians and Jews were allowed to survive as dhimmis (servants to Islam) everyone else had to convert or die. Jihad killed the Buddhists in Turkey, Afghanistan, along the Silk Route, and in India. The total is roughly 10 million. [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200 , William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-1.] 10 million Buddhists

Jews
Oddly enough there were not enough Jews killed in jihad to significantly affect the totals of the Great Annihilation. The jihad in Arabia was 100 percent effective, but the numbers were in the thousands, not millions. After that, the Jews submitted and became the dhimmis (servants and second class citizens) of Islam and did not have geographic political power.

This gives a rough estimate of 270 million killed by jihad."

Sources are sourced in the article
 
Last edited:
In comparison to the Christian Crusades, around 1-3 Million people died, Christian and Muslim, between 1095 and 1291. Far less in comparison
 
And what research have you done to verify these claims? And where in the Qur’an are crimes such as these supported?
 
Last edited:
According to Islamic tradition, the Angel Gabriel dictated the Quran to Mohammed chapter by chapter over a long period of time. I’ve read the Quran. I can’t pretend to understand it.
 
Last edited:
I take the claims and sources as authentic. What research have you done to disprove these sources? Please present that
Quran gives support on killing those who disbelieve: “That is because those who disbelieve follow falsehood, and those who believe follow the truth from their Lord. Thus does Allah present to the people their comparisons. So when you meet those who disbelieve, strike necks until, when you have inflicted slaughter upon them, then secure their bonds, and either favor afterwards or ransom until the war lays down its burdens. That is the command. And if Allah had willed, He could have taken vengeance upon them, but to test some of you by means of others. And those who are killed in the cause of Allah - never will He waste their deeds.” (Quran 47:3-4) Text is clear in the Quran. Cut the heads off of those who disbelieve. Any other view is merely an interpretation of the text to try and make it say something else. And there are many more in the Quran about killing those who disbelieve, hence why there have been roughly 270 million people killed by Jihad. that many wars and killing to force conversion wouldn’t happen unless the central religious text required that and that’s how the early interpreters of Islam would have taught it. Any different argument now is to call into doubt the views of early Muslims and to denounce their actions.

So my question is: Do you denounce the actions of the Muslims who killed in Jihad roughly 270 million people? If you don’t agree with that number, then do you denounce the Muslims who murdered any number of people for Jihad?
 
SeekerOfTruth7 said:
I take the claims and sources as authentic. What research have you done to disprove these sources? Please present that
Click to expand...
Time is pressing at the moment. God willing I will address the remainder of your post soon.

The burden of proof is always on the one making a claim. You claim that these sources are authentic…by which (I presume) you mean trustworthy. Present your proofs.

I condemn - without reservation - any act of murder, no matter who the perpetrator happens to be. Let me be quite clear about that.
 
Niblo said:
I condemn - without reservation - any act of murder, no matter who the perpetrator happens to be. Let me be quite clear about that.
Click to expand...
So to be specific, you condemn the jihad of 270 million people who didn’t believe in Islam?
Niblo said:
The burden of proof is always on the one making a claim. You claim that these sources are authentic…by which (I presume) you mean trustworthy. Present your proofs.
Click to expand...
No need to present my proofs for I already have, I presented the sources. Now it is up to you and present your case for why they are wrong. A positive assertion such as “these sources are not true” needs evidence or at least reliable information on why they are not true. I say they are true and historically accurate due to what they say within. Please, read the sources and present a case of why they wrong, as you imply is what you believe.
A case would need to be made if I didn’t have sources, but each claim has a source. Now it is up to you to research the source and present why they are wrong.
 
Not a good reason to disregard his works. This is called the Genetic Fallacy defined as: “The genetic fallacy is a fallacy of irrelevance that is based solely on someone’s or something’s history, origin, or source rather than its current meaning or context.” It would be like you saying since I am Catholic and therefore against heresy, I can’t present facts about heresies in the past due to me being biased. Its a fallacious argument
 
It doesn’t matter if he is not objective, or better said, that he is biased. If you think his arguments are worth considering, then why say he is not objective?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top