Zxzyx
Member
This is a continuation of a debate I placed in the wrong area of this site. The below is a response to a link offered proving Muhammads Prophethood. Anyone can chip in.
Firstly I must ask what your personal opinions are on anyone who insults anyone of a different opinion to their own at the outset of a paper they have written. To quote None but an infidel, who out of arrogance alone, could deny these signs. I think Sh. `Abdur Rahman `Abdul Khaliq has himself defined arrogance by this very statement. Also is he thinking in realistic terms when he hopes this piece of writing will reach ever ear, eye and heart? This shows the character and motives of the author which I think is important.
The author then goes on to mix conjecture with gross inaccuracies. Comments relating to Muhammads character I imagine are taken from biased source i.e. a people who would have had a lot to lose from saying bad things and equally much to gain from any good said. If he were known as being truthful and trustworthy among all his people then he would not have met with any opposition, which we know he did in his early years. I have heard it said that Muhammad spent a lot of time travelling around in his youth and would have very likely heard many stories from different religions along the way, which would put into doubt Muhammads complete lack of knowledge on religion prior to his revelation. Also Muhammad grew up in an area where there were all sorts of beliefs around him including Judaism and Christianity. How could he have possibly avoided hearing any of these over 40 years?
The author then goes on to claim This Koran mentioned most of the accounts found in the previous scriptures, telling us about these events in the greatest detail as if he witnessed them. The Quran is physically about one quarter of the size of the Bible so the first part of this claim is impossible. Secondly most of the Biblical stories mentioned in the Quran are sketchy and strangely similar to those told by sects that predate Muhammads time.
All this is only relating to the introduction and first point. My point of all this is to ask are we just to accept what this man says? He offers few Quranic references and even those are not given with sura and verse. My conclusion is that the author is a man a putting across his own point of view, claiming it as fact and dissuading anyone from refuting it with pre-emptive insults. I dont know who this works with but would he believe the same style of writing on a different religion?
Zyzyx
Firstly I must ask what your personal opinions are on anyone who insults anyone of a different opinion to their own at the outset of a paper they have written. To quote None but an infidel, who out of arrogance alone, could deny these signs. I think Sh. `Abdur Rahman `Abdul Khaliq has himself defined arrogance by this very statement. Also is he thinking in realistic terms when he hopes this piece of writing will reach ever ear, eye and heart? This shows the character and motives of the author which I think is important.
The author then goes on to mix conjecture with gross inaccuracies. Comments relating to Muhammads character I imagine are taken from biased source i.e. a people who would have had a lot to lose from saying bad things and equally much to gain from any good said. If he were known as being truthful and trustworthy among all his people then he would not have met with any opposition, which we know he did in his early years. I have heard it said that Muhammad spent a lot of time travelling around in his youth and would have very likely heard many stories from different religions along the way, which would put into doubt Muhammads complete lack of knowledge on religion prior to his revelation. Also Muhammad grew up in an area where there were all sorts of beliefs around him including Judaism and Christianity. How could he have possibly avoided hearing any of these over 40 years?
The author then goes on to claim This Koran mentioned most of the accounts found in the previous scriptures, telling us about these events in the greatest detail as if he witnessed them. The Quran is physically about one quarter of the size of the Bible so the first part of this claim is impossible. Secondly most of the Biblical stories mentioned in the Quran are sketchy and strangely similar to those told by sects that predate Muhammads time.
All this is only relating to the introduction and first point. My point of all this is to ask are we just to accept what this man says? He offers few Quranic references and even those are not given with sura and verse. My conclusion is that the author is a man a putting across his own point of view, claiming it as fact and dissuading anyone from refuting it with pre-emptive insults. I dont know who this works with but would he believe the same style of writing on a different religion?
Zyzyx
