• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Was Muhammad a Messenger of God?

Was Muhammad a Messenger of God?


  • Total voters
    57

stvdv

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
And suddenly, after the passing away of his first wife, he had the natural urge to marry several women? Is that psychologically even possible? A 50-year-old straight-laced man to suddenly have desires for multiple women?
Isn't it obvious there were other greater goals at work here? Like creating peace between warring tribes?

Women go through menopause, men maybe go through penopause
Having a 15 year old wife for 10 years might need to be balanced out by young wives
And really 50-year-young. You might be surprised if you do a poll on guys interested in:
1: Erotic Dancing Girls
2: Multiple partners
I have seen it all on RF; I am not easily surprised on this [most hold on to sex; few let go of sex]
Personal i agree, once you have a greater goal, it's easy to let go of young damsels
But generally most men are more into women than into God [they might try to do both though]

If they were into women till age 50, it's hard to break loose "sex attachment"
Some say "1 in a 1000" choose 100% for God
But then only "1 in a 1000" of these have the stamina to continue
Those who reach are even less in number

Makes sense if I look around me
 

KT Shamim

Ahmadiyya Muslim Community
Women go through menopause, men maybe go through penopause
Having a 15 year old wife for 10 years might need to be balanced out by young wives
And really 50-year-young. You might be surprised if you do a poll on guys interested in:
1: Erotic Dancing Girls
2: Multiple partners
I have seen it all on RF; I am not easily surprised on this [most hold on to sex; few let go of sex]
Personal i agree, once you have a greater goal, it's easy to let go of young damsels
But generally most men are more into women than into God [they might try to do both though]

If they were into women till age 50, it's hard to break loose "sex attachment"
Some say "1 in a 1000" choose 100% for God
But then only "1 in a 1000" of these have the stamina to continue
Those who reach are even less in number

Makes sense if I look around me
25 years of celibacy followed by 25 years of monogamy with a much older widow should remove any doubt that the Holy Prophet Muhammad ﷺ married multiple women for any selfish reasons.
It falls on those who disagree to show any documented examples of people who adopted 25 years of celibacy followed by 25 years of monogamy and then let themselves be devoured into carnal desires at the age of 50.
 

stvdv

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
1: Sure.

2: Sounds like you're making excuses for poor evidence.

3: If you can demonstrate a valid way to lrarn about the world that I don't currently accept, I'll change my mind and recognize your way as valid.

4: This is not how it works for things that actually exist.

5: As Philip K. Dick put it, "reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."

1: --
2: No [We have just different View, so let's agree to disagree]
3: Yes [But, I feel no need to demonstrate to you; I don't need you to change your mind]
4: Yes [Again we see things different, that is all IMO]
5: Yes [Fully agree with this highest Advaita teaching; realize;) this and you are enlightened]
 
Last edited:

stvdv

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
25 years of celibacy followed by 25 years of monogamy with a much older widow should remove any doubt that the Holy Prophet Muhammad ﷺ married multiple women for any selfish reasons.
It falls on those who disagree to show any documented examples of people who adopted 25 years of celibacy followed by 25 years of monogamy and then let themselves be devoured into carnal desires at the age of 50.

I think there is totally no need to proof anything about the Holy Prophet Muhammed
25 years celibacy does not say much to me; see some Christian Priest + Muslim Imaams
But I don't question: Shiva, Rama, Krishna, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammed, Bahá'u'lláh, Sai Baba
I follow good teachings, stay away from judging others; being aware 3 fingers pointing back
I do not judge other Religions; but they should not harm others; that's the key to me

"Hurt Never, Help Ever" is an easy way to distinguish
 
Last edited:

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
25 years of celibacy followed by 25 years of monogamy with a much older widow should remove any doubt that the Holy Prophet Muhammad ﷺ married multiple women for any selfish reasons.
It falls on those who disagree to show any documented examples of people who adopted 25 years of celibacy followed by 25 years of monogamy and then let themselves be devoured into carnal desires at the age of 50.
This sounds very defensive.

People are entitled to have their own opinions, you know.
 

Kelly of the Phoenix

Well-Known Member
There is absolutely no doubt that Muhammad** did not claim to be a god, he claimed to be only a prophet/messenger** of G-d*, and that he certainly was, else G-d* would have caught him from his neck and caused him to be killed. Right, please?
Muhammad was rather the last prophet/messenger of G-d* in status. Right, please?
Every prophet is the last prophet until the next one comes along.

Who were these many messengers you refer to who trained a nation or people, causing it to rise from the lowest depths of ignorance to the highest station of knowledge?
Anyone who took over or created a country. That's a pretty long list, even if you filter out all the countries that did NOT want their people to be raised out of ignorance.

What did they get for themselves besides persecution, tribulation and suffering?
Lots of people hanging onto their every word, even after death. People who are attention-seeking LOVE that kind of thing. Are you not expected to follow him despite the fact that over a century has passed and we need help NOW?

Why listen to dead prophets/messengers when there are tons of people trying to raise people out of ignorance NOW?

God does not leave us to ourselves but provides us with the guidance for the age we live in.
Then every generation would have at least one messenger, not one messenger per every few centuries or whatever.

This kind of thing happens when you place all of your eggs into a basket hundreds if not thousands of years old.

Desperately clinging to old texts for modern guidance is like thinking the world is going to end because some Mayans ran out of room drawing their calendar.

To close a canon is to invite slavery to ignorance. If God is everlasting, so too should be the messages.

"Some were guided by the Light of God, gained admittance into the court of His presence, and quaffed, from the hand of resignation, the waters of everlasting life, and were accounted of them that have truly recognized and believed in Him. Others rebelled against Him, and rejected the signs of God, the Most Powerful, the Almighty, the All-Wise.”

Whenever there is decay of righteousness, O Bharata,
And there is exaltation of unrighteousness, then I Myself come forth ;
For the protection of the good, for the destruction of evil-doers,
For the sake of firmly establishing righteousness, I am born from age to age.
And didn't Krishna get killed (eventually) and the entire kingdom fall because, as Gandhari noted, Krishna was manipulating the entire drama? I mean, sure, the people had obvious roles to play, but once Krishna enters the story, it's abundantly clear He was jerking their chains for "reasons". Now, I love Krishna and find Him to be a much better God-man than Jesus. However, He's not any less of a jerk sometimes.

Deception by whom, Muhammad? What would have been His motive?
An orphan without much place in society wanted out of that life? No, it cannot be! [/sarcasm]

We have all the power to become like Jesus and get Self Realized.
Indeed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Kohlberg's_stages_of_moral_development

So, as long as people enjoy and watch aggression on TV and films [these types are watched 100 times more than spiritual/nature films]
To be fair, the US has some (ahem) God-awful spiritual films. Plus, any set of movies based on the bible would be for mature audiences only, because a LOT of dark stuff happens in it.

Positive stories don't sell.
Given that positive stories can go viral as well, I'm calling BS on what the media uses as an excuse.

That is reality. Even reality TV loves to show fights, emotional upsets, naked women/men having sex, for all to watch. And adultery sells best on TV.
Which is also probably why religious texts are filled with it too.

Messenger: The Lord sayeth sex is bad.
Audience: All sex?
Messenger: Certain sex.
Audience: Can you describe? Like, in detail? Make sure not to miss anything.

:p

Good news "it lasts only 400.000 years". Bad news "5000 years have passed".
LOL. I think the only thing stopping me from being a Hindu is the need for absurdly large numbers :p

But Advaita teaches good news also. Everyone can attain Nirvana, Enlightenment NOW. No need to wait for Jesus to return or anyone else.
Yep. If Jesus can't be bothered to clock in, then the rest of us have to do the job ourselves.

I rather hear the truth. Sai Baba mostly sugar coats stuff also. Once in dream told me "You better start running". I was kind of lazy so said "you better explain why, else I won't". Next day dream "Major heart attack is coming plus explaining the working of the heart, that kidneys were the cause; quite in detail (was happy I asked for it)". Okay a little sugar coating might have been nice. But at least I knew what was coming. Went on a major fast for 30 days and calamity was just avoided. So I prefer mostly the truth.
I was once almost bumper to bumper with other cars on a sharp bend in the road. I had an overwhelming urge to move forward as much as possible. As soon as I did, BAM! A crash around the bend, one I could not have seen given the trees and hill and such, caused a chain reaction wreck but my car was unaffected because I had pulled up.

That is what advaita is teaching. "Real" meaning ever changing of course. Consciousness is never changing, hence real.
Funny you share the matrix. In India I visit cinema once in 3 years. The Matrix. Got big stomach pain. That was real. At least for 2 days or so
Well, to a Sim, their drama is real, even if they aren't from our perspective.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
It is probably not out of place to remind ourselves that there is no inherently well-delimited meaning to the expression "messenger of God".

It is legitimate to interpret it in a way such as to exclude literally all people ever from qualifying. Or to qualify only one person (real or legendary) or a very few people.

But it is just as easy and as legitimate to take slightly different premises and declare that literally all people are messengers of God. Including "unrepentant" kuffar such as yours truly who would never describe themselvers as such.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
1: --
2: No [We have just different View, so let's agree to disagree]
3: Yes [But, I feel no need to demonstrate to you; I don't need you to change your mind]
4: Yes [Again we see things different, that is all IMO]
5: Yes
Well, since I've found no reason to believe in any gods and you see no reason to change my mind, I'm not in a position to recognize anyone as a messenger of God.
 

KT Shamim

Ahmadiyya Muslim Community
I think there is totally no need to proof anything about the Holy Prophet Muhammed
25 years celibacy does not say much to me; see some Christian Priest + Muslim Imaams
But I don't question: Shiva, Rama, Krishna, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammed, Bahá'u'lláh, Sai Baba
I follow good teachings, stay away from judging others; being aware 3 fingers pointing back
I do not judge other Religions; but they should not harm others; that's the key to me

"Hurt Never, Help Ever" is an easy way to distinguish
Thank you for your replies.
 

stvdv

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
Thank you Kelly, for your wonderful sharp quotes full of insight. I enjoy them.

Every prophet is the last prophet until the next one comes along.
Creative. I have been sleeping. Indeed it is really that simple.

Why listen to dead prophets/messengers when there are tons of people trying to raise people out of ignorance NOW?
In Holland we have the proverb "Saint is not recognized in their own time/country" + "Don't speak bad about the Dead"
No coincidence these proberbs, they are made to brainwash people "Jesus is good". If not enough "All roads lead to Rome". Nasty one IMHO.

Then every generation would have at least one messenger, not one messenger per every few centuries or whatever.
That's why Christians would never recognize Jesus if He would return.

Video: Muslima, Christian, Atheist meet God. Atheist is the chosen one [4:50-13:20 nice message]

Thank you. Wonderful put in pictures what I tried telling for a long time.

Now, I love Krishna and find Him to be a much better God-man than Jesus. However, He's not any less of a jerk sometimes.
*** Understandable: You need a thorn to remove a thorn ***
Once Sai Baba said "I lie more than Krishna Avatar". Most people think it's just a dumb reply. Sai Baba always says "God is in all of you". So saying I lie more than Krishna Avatar means "more humans lie than 5000 years ago". And that is totally valid, because there are more humans now [and they have become better in lying also IMO]. So I don't believe verses in Bible and Koran blindly. Better be a bit creative, and read between the lines. Otherwise they might fool you. So reply was not only "not dumb", it was even correct. And I heard in all these year at least 50 of these I think.

I think the only thing stopping me from being a Hindu is the need for absurdly large numbers
Big Numbers are good to cure false hope "next year He will return". Priests in Holland say it at almost all gatherings "And Jesus will come soon"

I was once almost bumper to bumper with other cars on a sharp bend in the road. I had an overwhelming urge to move forward as much as possible. As soon as I did, BAM! A crash around the bend, one I could not have seen given the trees and hill and such, caused a chain reaction wreck but my car was unaffected because I had pulled up.
Thank you God. Otherwise we would have missed out on Kelly's nice insights.
 
Last edited:

England my lionheart

Rockerjahili Rebel
Premium Member
Muhammad claimed to be a Messenger from God and this claim is now accepted by over 1.5 billion Muslims world wide.

The Baha'i Faith arguably the newest Abrahamic Faith emerged out of Persia, now Iran during the nineteenth century. The Founder, Baha'u'llah claimed also to bring a new Revelation from God. This was well received by many in Persia. In nineteenth century Shi'ite Islam there was an intense Messianic expectation similar to Judaism during the time of Christ. The Bab, the forerunner to Baha'u'llah was seen by tens of thousands to fulfil the Madhi prophecy in Shi'ite Islam.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahdi#Bábí_and_Bahá'í_Faiths

Religious and governmental leaders viewed these developments with disdain and the Bab was excecuted by a militia of His own countrymen on 9th July 1850 along with many of His followers. Baha'u'llah was imprisoned and eventually exiled to Akka, the great fortress city of the Ottomon Empire. When Baha'u'llah passed away in 1892 His son Abdu'l-Baha became the leader of the Baha'i Faith. Eventually many Westerners embraced the Baha'i Faith and visited Abdu'l-Baha in Akka where he often remained a prisoner. During the early 20th century He educated the pilgrims about a wide variety of topics. During one of these talks he explained about the life of Muhammad and invited his audience to consider whether or not Muhammad was a Messenger of God. Most Westerners at the time knew little about Islam.

A copy of Abdu'l-Baha's talk is included for anyone to read and obviously presents the life of Muhammad in a favourable light.

http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/SAQ/saq-7.html

Is Abdu'l-Baha's commentary reasonable? Should Muhammad be considered a Messenger of God?

Comments and questions as you will.

I voted no, a claim to numbers doesn't make it true and looking at the places in the world where religion is held to be true theres little to think it is.

So let's look at Muhammeds claim, he heard voices in a cave that he said came from an angel, there is no proof of that it's only his word,the quran is the same as those who wrote the bible in that they were written by humans with power in mind and if you look at the history of Islam its power through war and warbooty.

So really Muhammed was a messenger of a god if you give credence to the claim and therefore a belief and not a fact Imo.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
I voted no, a claim to numbers doesn't make it true and looking at the places in the world where religion is held to be true theres little to think it is.
So let's look at Muhammeds claim, he heard voices in a cave that he said came from an angel, there is no proof of that it's only his word,the quran is the same as those who wrote the bible in that they were written by humans with power in mind and if you look at the history of Islam its power through war and warbooty.
So really Muhammed was a messenger of a god if you give credence to the claim and therefore a belief and not a fact Imo.

Please quote from Quran, the first and the foremost source of guidance of Islam/Muhammad whatever the denomination.

Regards
 

KT Shamim

Ahmadiyya Muslim Community
Every prophet is the last prophet until the next one comes along.
That is a mistake pointed out in the Qur'an as well:
[Qur'an 40:35] "... when he died, you said: ‘Allah will never raise up a Messenger after him.’ Thus does Allah adjudge as lost those who transgress, and are doubters"
[Qur'an 72:8] "'And indeed they thought, even as you think, that Allah would never raise any Messenger.'"

A common mistake.

The feel I get throughout this response of your ...
Why listen to dead prophets/messengers when there are tons of people trying to raise people out of ignorance NOW?
... is that most religions quote Prophets making extraordinary prophecies that come to be fulfilled but ...

Then every generation would have at least one messenger, not one messenger per every few centuries or whatever.
... while old stories have their place a true religion must be a living religion still having Divinely appointed representatives showing signs of truth ...

Desperately clinging to old texts for modern guidance is like thinking the world is going to end because some Mayans ran out of room drawing their calendar.
... for only a living religion is one whose texts, no matter how old, would be believed if God is still providing evidence of it being Divinely revealed and still applicable ...

To close a canon is to invite slavery to ignorance. If God is everlasting, so too should be the messages.
... for the God who used to speak still should speak and His sudden silence is so ... taking the life out of the religion.

Rejoice, for the good news is that the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community found through Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian (as) under Divine guidance exhibits that living relationship that is lacking in other religions.
 

England my lionheart

Rockerjahili Rebel
Premium Member
Please quote from Quran, the first and the foremost source of guidance of Islam/Muhammad whatever the denomination.

Regards

No its your source of guidance not mine, it's a source of belief not facts therefore it's of no use to reference a book of belief unless you have found any truth in it, it's mythology Imo, there's much older mythologies that had many believers that weren't shown to be true either.
 

siti

Well-Known Member
How about:

Whenever there is decay of righteousness, O Bharata,
And there is exaltation of unrighteousness, then I Myself come forth ;
For the protection of the good, for the destruction of evil-doers,
For the sake of firmly establishing righteousness, I am born from age to age.

Bhagavad Gita 4:7-8
In that case Baha'u'llah was a thousand years late! Even Muhammad's appearance was at least 300 years after Christianity began to dissolve into fractious sectarianism - and there was precious little "protection of good" in the Roman part of the Christendom - well until now - at least 18 centuries on from the beginning of the "decay of righteousness" in the pre-Islamic dispensation.
 

siti

Well-Known Member
Thanks @Tumah

The priesthood wasn't restricted to one branch of the Levite lineage after the destruction of the First Temple, it was always restricted to the Aaronic line.
Of course you are right - in fact the Zadokian line were the ones singled out specifically for temple duties in the prophetic vision of the rebuilt temple...but the other priestly families remained priests - I definitely got that wrong in my post

not all Priests were Sadducees, there were plenty among the Pharisees as well.
Thanks for the pointers on further information about the priesthood - and this too is obviously correct...thanks for clarifying another misleading statement on my part.

The priesthood predates the Temple, but not the Tabernacle
Really? I thought the temple/tabernacle service part was a special provision only given to the Aaronic line but the priestly status was inherited by Aaron through his lineage from Abraham (through Isaac, Jacob, Levi, Kohath and Aaron's father Amram). Abraham had acquired/inherited the priesthood from Melchizedek? (According to Jewish tradition). Have I got that wrong too?

The nation as a whole is meant to serve G-d by following His commandments and the actual priests were "even more" dedicated to serving G-d through Temple service... I don't think that the purpose of the priest was to teach people to distinguish between holy and profane.
Try Leviticus 10:8-11 and Ezekiel 44:23...and on the more general "priesthood" of the entire nation Exodus 19:6 and Isaiah 61:6...

And this is where it relates to the Baha'i messenger thing because in the Christian dispensation, this general priesthood privilege passes to ALL Christians (1 Peter 2:9, Revelation 20:6). And since they would have the "law" (which is really - at least in part - the distinction between the holy and the profane that the more exclusive priestly class that went before was commissioned to teach) "written on their hearts" (Jeremiah 31:33, Romans 2:15, Hebrews 10:16) what further need could their be of divine messengers? How could Muhammad possibly be accepted as a messenger of God based on either a Jewish or a Christian interpretation of previous divine revelations? It is - unsurprisingly to me and quite demonstrably - an incoherent theological idea (not that there are very many coherent theological ideas around) - but for Baha'is, it is a serious problem because they claim that their theology is inclusive of previous revelations and yet the content of their theology (almost unfailingly) constitutes a flat denial of key theological components of the previous revelations.
 
Last edited:

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
No its your source of guidance not mine, it's a source of belief not facts therefore it's of no use to reference a book of belief unless you have found any truth in it, it's mythology Imo, there's much older mythologies that had many believers that weren't shown to be true either.
then quote a source of Muhammad's time in support of one's statement, please. Right, please?
Regards
 
Top