Jump to content
Christianity

Why should I believe in Muhammad over others?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

@father,

When people have partial knowledge and someone (especially an affluent, respected, influential person) claims to have advanced knowledge, especially in a society where critical thinking and questioning of authorities are discouraged, and it can be easy to get them to comply.

There were plenty of Jews in Arabia, and there were heretical "christian" sects as well, so biblical and extra-biblical accounts would have been available but not necessarily clearly understood. Also, gnostic gospel writings had been imported with the "christian" sects, so their content (recognized as fraudulent by the churches further north around the Mediterranean) would have been in the mix as well. Voila, you've got a simple, rational context in which Muhammad could very reasonably have known incomplete biblical stories as well as falsehoods. He may not even have needed to twist them. 

By the way, no book can be a miracle in and of itself, because choosing and arranging words in any order is an ability that most humans have (and it doesn't matter that Muhammad was illiterate; Homer was blind, but he composed The Iliad and the Odyssey.)

Also, even if you say that the content of the words in the Qur'an couldn't have been disclosed by a human, you are missing the fact that its content borrows from earlier sources. If this content was revealed by a miracle, the miracle was for the earlier authors, not Muhammad. Certainly not exclusive to him. But like I said, a book isn't a miracle anyway. People can arrange words in any order, regardless of the language. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/15/2017 at 7:48 AM, Christianity said:

And if Christ had not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins.(1 Corinthians 15:16-17).

That is a false statement.

Totally false, illogical and unacceptable.

Firstly, Jesus' teachings would be just as worthy even if he had not resurrected.

And as for people being in their sins, they still are.

Bad people abound everywhere in the world and  always have.

The premise that the sins of some people have been washed away by the Resurrection is just that - a premise.

And a very illogical and unproven one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, thegoodman81 said:

There were plenty of Jews in Arabia, and there were heretical "christian" sects as well, so biblical and extra-biblical accounts would have been available but not necessarily clearly understood. Also, gnostic gospel writings had been imported with the "christian" sects, so their content (recognized as fraudulent by the churches further north around the Mediterranean) would have been in the mix as well. Voila, you've got a simple, rational context in which Muhammad could very reasonably have known incomplete biblical stories as well as falsehoods. He may not even have needed to twist them. 

By the way, no book can be a miracle in and of itself, because choosing and arranging words in any order is an ability that most humans have (and it doesn't matter that Muhammad was illiterate; Homer was blind, but he composed The Iliad and the Odyssey.)

Also, even if you say that the content of the words in the Qur'an couldn't have been disclosed by a human, you are missing the fact that its content borrows from earlier sources. If this content was revealed by a miracle, the miracle was for the earlier authors, not Muhammad. Certainly not exclusive to him. But like I said, a book isn't a miracle anyway. People can arrange words in any order, regardless of the language. 

I have preety much answered everything, you should read my earlier posts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, thegoodman81 said:

There were plenty of Jews in Arabia, and there were heretical "christian" sects as well, so biblical and extra-biblical accounts would have been available but not necessarily clearly understood. Also, gnostic gospel writings had been imported with the "christian" sects, so their content (recognized as fraudulent by the churches further north around the Mediterranean) would have been in the mix as well. Voila, you've got a simple, rational context in which Muhammad could very reasonably have known incomplete biblical stories as well as falsehoods. He may not even have needed to twist them. 

and what about jesus why did he say, you were told to this but now I am telling you to do this, this must have been some changes that is why he told some new things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-11-07 at 5:00 PM, Jin Jin said:

and what about jesus why did he say, you were told to this but now I am telling you to do this, this must have been some changes that is why he told some new things.

Not only Jesus changes the religion. The Bible also tell that the religion of the old  Israelites is not exactly the same as the religion of the Jews that followed. Religion changes. Islam has also developed into Shias, Sunnies, Alawites. Only one can be identical with the original. Probably none of the many are. The Quran say (2:106):

"We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent?" 

Abrogations or improved revelations in the Quran were made during a timespan of a few decades only.The Bible was written during a timespan of 1.000 years!. Having this difference in mind, I find it hard to understand why Muslims wonder why some of the teachings of the Bible has changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×