Requirements of Prophethood and recognising true Revelation

[STT]

You would have to decide that. Jesus Christ is the Good Shepherd, so those that recognize his voice are his sheep (disciples).

I think it is matter of believing rather than deciding based on facts.

 

[Vico]

Vico:

You would have to decide that. Jesus Christ is the Good Shepherd, so those that recognize his voice are his sheep (disciples).

I think it is matter of believing rather than deciding based on facts.

You said: So you are telling me that I am not a sheep.
I am answering you that you would have to decide if you were a sheep (disciple). So you are saying that you decide if you are a sheep by belief. However not all that believe continue in holiness, so each person would decide if they were in a holy state (sanctifying grace).

 

[fhansen]

This thread is for people (preferably Christians) who already agree that the intellect alone can attain the knowledge of God’s existence and His general attributes, or similar. Likewise, this is for people who agree that divine revelation is a necessity for humanity.

I have discussed this topic on other threads. Due to the fact that in the Bible there exists narratives which tell us how numerous people considered to be Prophets or divinely inspired or instruments in salvation history, have fallen into sin and even apostasy, Christians often have said to me that God may commission whomever He wills for the aforementioned roles. I agree that God may commission whomever He wills, in fact, if He willed, He would not give us any divine revelation, because divine revelation is a necessity for humanity, and not necessary for God. But, if He did give us divine revelation, although it would not be for His own gain, all of His actions are according to His wisdom. So the question is NOT, who He could and could not commission to Prophethood, rather the question is how would we recognise true divine revelation and a true Prophet?

I maintain that even prior to being commissioned to Prophethood, and receiving divine revelation, the would be Prophet must be known among his people for his truthful and upright character, and must be protected by God from lying and disobeying God especially after being commissioned to Prophethood.

God would not give anyone a valid reason to object to the truth, because there is no valid reason to object to the truth; that’s why it is the truth, and this is His wisdom. If the Prophet was a liar, he would be untrustworthy, if he was of general bad character even after being commissioned to Prophethood, (i) the people may object that his being commissioned by God is of no efficacy, and (ii) the people would be required to obey the Prophet in sinning. Finally, if God does not protect the Prophet, nor does God commission one of worthy character, then Satan may intervene at any time, never allowing for trust or certainty.

Prophets were generally stoned-not accepted or heeded in any case in their day.

 

[Kei]

Hohoho, I have never, ever heard the claim that Mohammed did thousands of miracles.
In fact, the only “miracle” I see is that he lived long enough after ingesting a small amount of poison (which is easily explained by it affecting internal organs, leading to eventual organ failure) and how poetic the Qur’an is.

 

[SalamKhan]

That is, how would you know if the “candidate prophet” really has “truthful and upright character”?

For example, how do you know Muhammed had “truthful and upright character”? If you already have an assumption that he was a prophet, the conclusion does follow, but it is not useful in that case.

But if you do not have the assumption “Muhammed is a prophet.” yet, how do you reach conclusion “Muhammed had truthful and upright character.”?

Historical-witness data.

You may have missed it, but I also said:

“There are two positions from the orthodox schools of theology in Islam. The Asharis say that prior to being commissioned to Prophethood, it is possible for the would be Prophet to commit both major and minor sin, because obligation comes solely from revelation, but nonetheless he must have an upright character among his own people, so in the case of would be Prophets among the children of Israel, they must observe the Torah even prior to being commissioned to Prophethood. However, after being commissioned to Prophethood, it is not possible for a Prophet to commit a major sin, but it is possible for him to commit a minor sin out of heedlessness, except a minor sin for a Prophet wouldn’t be a sin for us, the Prophets are simply held to a higher standard of morality; so the Asharis would say that Prophet Yunus (A) committed a minor sin out of heedlessness, and repented immediately. The second opinion is that of the Maturidi school, they take the position of Imam Abu Hanifa that a Prophet may not commit major and minor sin, both before and after being commissioned to Prophethood, but it is possible for a Prophet to make a minor mistake out of heedlessness.”

 

[SalamKhan]

In fact, the only “miracle” I see is that he lived long enough after ingesting a small amount of poison (which is easily explained by it affecting internal organs, leading to eventual organ failure) and how poetic the Qur’an is.

With all due respect, but you must be really uninformed Islam. Nevermind some of his most famous miracles, such as splitting the moon, there are hundreds of reports which narrate his miracles.

It’s worth noting Imam Fakhr ad Din Razi’s comments on 3:61 of the Qur’an:

“When I was in Khwarazim, I was told a Christian had come there who claimed to have deep knowledge of Christianity. I went to him and a debate started between us. He demanded proof of the prophethood of Muhammad. I said that we have received authentic reports with regard to the miracles performed by the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, just like the reports we have received with regard to the miracles performed by the Prophets Musa (Moses) and Isa (Jesus) peace be on them. Now if we deny the authentic reports, or we accept them but deny the fact that miracles prove the truth of the prophets, this would necessarily deny the prophethood of all the Prophets of Allah. On the other hand if we accept the truth of the reports and also believe that miracles are sure sign of the truth of the Prophets, and both of these arguments are proved to be true for the Holy Prophet Muhammad, the truth of his prophethood would be essentially proved…”

 

[mhmtas63]

The same applies to Muslim. Are you aware of Tafsir or interpretation?

Quran is there with pure revelation.

 

[Kei]

Such as…
Simply saying there are many miracles without any actually specifics is suspicious at least, deceptive at most.

You actually believe that Mohammed split the moon? I mean…the moon isn’t split. It’s like saying I’m so fast you didn’t see me run around the world just now. I know of no one who says the moon actually split except followers of Mohammed.
Some do not think it is even claimed to have happened but something that will happen in Judgement day…

Do you have any specifics of the miracles Mohammed did, that may be slightly more credible? Thanks

 

[Gorgias]

, well, mentioning that a temple will be destroyed without mentioning exactly when is not prophecy

Lol!

I’ll be sure to let God know of your ‘rules’ for prophecy…

In any case, Jesus prophesied this exact thing: “there will come a day…”, and guess what? It happened! Not 40 years later!

 

[SalamKhan]

I’m sorry, but what kind of objection is that? The splitting of the moon took place on a single night. So how did you jump to the conclusion that we say the moon is perpetually split? It would be similar to objecting that the ‘star of David’ ever descended down to Bethlehem on the night of Jesus’ (A) birth because we no longer see it there today. It’s nothing short of foolish.

See this for example:

Sahih al-Bukhari 169 - Ablutions (Wudu') - Sunnah.com - Sayings and Teachings of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم)

Narrated Anas bin Malik: saw Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) when the `Asr prayer was due and the people searched for water to perform ablution but they could not find it. Later on (a pot full of) water for ablution was brought to Allah's Apostle . He put his hand in that pot and ordered the people to p

sunnah.com

This incident is mutawatir (mass transmitted) like the splitting of the moon, meaning the number of eye-witness testimony is far too numerous for there to be any fabrication or interpolation, in other words it is authentic without any doubt.

 

[Elf01]

Jesus also predicted Peter’s denial and Judas’ betrayal.

 

[Kei]

The star guided them to the baby, not descended down like that.

You say it was seen by many. What is the source for this claim? All I see for it is Islamic sources.

Like. I could easily say,
Last night I split the sun in half.
I fixed it back, though, so don’t bother expecting it to actually be split, of course not, that’s silly, I fixed it already.

I simply don’t find it very credible from the sources I have seen.

This water thing you just linked is almost more impressive, because it produces an actual result.

The claim that there were thousands of miracles just seems more and more less true since you’ve given precisely two that don’t strike as though they’d be the first ones to name if there were tons as they seem rather among the less impressively true among them.

 

[SalamKhan]

So the whole of Arabia (vast majority of whom were illiterate prior to Islam) converted to Islam by the end of the Prophet’s (S) life, so all that remained were Muslim witnesses, and we can’t trust Muslim witnesses, can we? Nice cop out and nice attempt at damage control…

I’m sure we have non-Christian sources for the what’s mentioned in Matthew 2:16-18.

You asked for another example, not hundreds, I’m sure a quick Google search could have helped you on that one. But, here is another example:

Sahih al-Bukhari 1013 - Invoking Allah for Rain (Istisqaa) - Sunnah.com - Sayings and Teachings of Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم)

Narrated Sharik bin `Abdullah bin Abi Namir: I heard Anas bin Malik saying, "On a Friday a person entered the main Mosque through the gate facing the pulpit while Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) was delivering the Khutba. The man stood in front of Allah's Apostle and said, 'O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! Th

sunnah.com

At the moment, I’m only mentioning mutawatir (mass transmitted) reports, rather than any report deemed authentic, since only mutawatir reports impart absolute (in this case historical) certainty, whereas ahad (linguistically meaning single transmitted) reports are too numerous to count in this topic.

 

[Kei]

No, I am not saying Muslim reports are not valid.
I am saying I do not know of any source that actually says it happened that did not follow Mohammed already. Do you have any sources from within a hundred years of Mohammed’s life about these things?

How many wars did Mohammed go through to bring the conversion of Arabia? It was not done through miracles which is what it almost sounds like you are saying, like the conversion of Rome. It was done by various victories, as Mohammed was tactically very smart.

I would prefer more or less actual accounts than legends which come about later. There are many instances of pious legends of our saints, for instance, that are not historically factual.
Do you have any writings within a hundred years of Mohammed concerning these things? It would be nice if Qur’an had them, but the “split of the moon” would only be ambiguous in the Qur’an if that is what it means, and indeed I could see the idea of the moon being split coming from a changing idea of what Qur’an says about it, which implies something towards the end of time rather than an event that occurred to Mohammed.
Rather, Qur’an seems to imply that Allah does not show signs for Mohammed because when shown signs before, the people did not take it.

So I suppose I will ask for accounts within a hundred or so years of his dying, or otherwise something that is not merely pious legend.

 

[SalamKhan]

It’s not a legend, as I keep saying many times over, the event is mutawatir (mass transmitted). Mutawatir evidence leaves no doubt in a narrated report. If 60 witnesses for example, heard one man saying “my favourite colour is black” and everyone without exception heard him make this statement, it is absurd to assert that not only did all of them mishear what the man actually said, but even more absurd to assert that they each heard the exact same thing from the moment they misheard the statement. The same would apply if a mass number of people witnessed one man doing something, and their testimonies of this man’s action are in agreement. There is an entire science in Islam, which investigates the authenticity of traditions. Mutawatir reports were already known to be authentic by the masses since the earliest generation of Muslims, the entire Qur’an for example is mutawatir.

 

[SalamKhan]

Like. I could easily say,

Last night I split the sun in half.

I fixed it back, though, so don’t bother expecting it to actually be split, of course not, that’s silly, I fixed it already.

I simply don’t find it very credible from the sources I have seen.

Are you really going to degenerate the discussion like this? The analogy isn’t even the same, because there were many witnesses to the miracle in question. This analogy applies more to the virgin birth of Isa ibn Maryam (A), yet both you and I believe in it; she gave birth, and what virgin gives birth?

 

[Kei]

So you are saying that it was believed by all people when Mohammed was alive within a certain area, or…?
Saying many people believe something is not the same as saying many people were eye witness, especially if the many believers are long after the event occurred.

So, are you saying that many claimed to be eye witnesses to the event all across the land (ie around the area of effect wherein people would see it. I am assuming if this happened it was an illusion made to look like the moon splitting and not the actual moon splitting, I get this possibility from Muslims, though I understand it may just be the increasing secularization to insist upon de miracle-izing everything), or that it was widely held belief some fair amount of time after the event occurred?
If it was some amount of time after, was it within the time before legendary accounts make up the beliefs of others or after? Such are important questions.

I appreciate the time to answer my questions. Are there more substantive miracles ie miracles that accomplish things.

The Virgin birth accomplishes many things and is a given, it is not at all similar. And, in those days, it was believed virginity could be checked. And her Son did more than enough to demonstrate it.

 

[SalamKhan]

So, are you saying that many claimed to be eye witnesses to the event all across the land (ie around the area of effect wherein people would see it.

Yes.

Are there more substantive miracles ie miracles that accomplish things.

Yes, there’s a famous classical work dedicated to this topic:

Ash Shifa Arabic English Scanned : Qadi Iyadh Maaliki : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

One of the best classical biographies of RasoolAllah sal Allahu alaihi wasalam written by Qadi Iyadh Maaliki

archive.org

it is not at all similar

"Last night I gave birth to a son.

I’m a virgin, though, so don’t accuse me of adultery, of course not, that’s silly, You’ve never witnessed me committing adultery."

And, in those days, it was believed virginity could be checked

How, and was she checked? Because the Jews still insulted her (as you can find in the Talmud), and some ‘Judaizers’ didn’t believe she was a virgin.

 

[Kei]

If you don’t know how someone was checked for virginity I’m not going to go into it.
But if she was a consecrated virgin you could be sure there’d be quite a few who wouldn’t believe it.

And then her husband Joseph totally believed her after getting visions from an angel, and then her cousin upon her visit had, well, you know what happen.
And then her Son quite clearly showed that He was the Messiah.

And if you’ll notice the name of the one the Talmud (long after the events took place) name the one she supposedly had relations with, it’s actually a play on words, and meant to belittle and make fun of the claims of her virginity and the claims of Christians.

It really isn’t comparable.

Thanks for the links, I’ll try to check them out. Should be at least useful for seeing the scope of the præternatural.

 

[Kei]

Ah yes, this is much more what I was looking for, thanks~