For StephenC

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

I challenge your statement and demand proof!

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

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

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

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

Irrational.

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

The observations I made were, indeed, facts.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What bases are you able to agree or disagree?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Jews were using the sanhedrin to decide their bible.

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

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

It is

1) irrelevant

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

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

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

Gd.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Al-Sajadah 32: 7 - 8

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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