How do we know a Prophet is a Prophet and sent by God?

[TagliatelliMonster]

But with no one yet able to describe God how do billions of people believe in Them?

For the same reasons people can believe in alien abduction, big foot, reincarnation, astrology, séance readings, crystal healings, tarrot readings, voodoo, etc.

Those reasons are plenty and very varried. Yet, they all have one thing in common... none are the result of objective analysis / a proper valid methodology that allows to distinguish truth from fiction.

Instead, they all rely on emotional arguments, "gut feelings", comfort, hope, failed reasoning (like arguments from ignorance / awe / incredulity / special pleading / popularity / etc ), self-delusion, etc etc.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

What made Their legacies last for centuries right down to modern times?

Believers who kept it alive.

Do humans have an ability to know if someone was sent by God?

The ability of humans to know anything is valid reasoning.
So first you'ld require a set of objective independently testable criteria.
From there, you could test to see if someone was sent by god(s).

The problem is that no such set exists. And considering how god(s) is/are defined, we also have no way to come up with such criteria.

So really, what makes someone a "prophet" is very simply other people believing it to be so. That's it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Obviously not. If they had, there would be only one religion.

..or none at all. ;-)

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So you are claiming that the majority of humanity are delusional?

It's a strong word, but in essence: yes.

More then that actually. I'ld say that ALL humans are prone to cognitive failures, simply because ALL humans share the same psychological weaknesses that makes humans prone to such failures.

Atheists, including myself, aren't immune to it, you know....
At best, if you are aware of them, you have "some" protection against them, as it might allow you to spot them when you engage in them yourself.

But in principle: if you are human, then you have these psychological weaknesses and you will engage in the cognitive failures that are trigged by them sooner or later, in one way or another.

But also is the question that after the passing of the Prophet, their influence extended over many centuries.

So? Many people's influence extended over many centuries. It's not that special.

So Muhammad died in 632AD and now it’s 2022 yet His influence is felt over billions and also many governments. Can you or I achieve this? Can we replicate it?

Plenty of people have done it before you. I see no reason why you, or I, couldn't achieve the same. The potential is certainly present. Off course, you won't be remembered for sitting in your couch all day.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Why can we have beliefs and not animals?

What makes you think that?

Almost all animals, especially those that are the favorite lunch of some predator, have a tendency of engaging in superstitious beliefs. It all boils down to them also being prone to certain cognition errors. The false positive in particular.

 

[Bathos Logos]

So you are claiming that the majority of humanity are delusional?

Not delusional, per se. More like very possibly fleeced. Tricked, in other words. It doesn't take much. Just consider how long probably nearly everyone on Earth believed the Earth was flat. And in that scenario, no one even considered themselves a trickster, nor thought they were being tricked! It was just "fact" - for everyone. By your attempted argument here, you would say something like "How could so many people be wrong?" to the person who was first proposing that the Earth was round.

But also is the question that after the passing of the Prophet, their influence extended over many centuries.

The influence of Hitler will likely also extend over many centuries. What does this serve as evidence for, do you think?

So Muhammad died in 632AD and now it’s 2022 yet His influence is felt over billions and also many governments. Can you or I achieve this? Can we replicate it?

This does not matter in the slightest. If anything is proven on this point by history, it is that someone, some day, will achieve it. Someone, some day, will replicate it. Probably not until we have lost our global communication networks and have to live more simply, and therefore can't individually know as much about the rest of the world. Then we might find ourselves yet again gullible enough to fawn over the no-better-than fictions of a select few.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

There's a lot in what you say. Billions simply agree on one Figure. I want to know why? They weren’t rich or powerful but highly unpopular and anyone who followed Them were endangering their own lives.

Billions agreed on one figure? Most people are born into the religions they follow.

These prophets started out with a small group of followers and subsequent military expansions helped grow them.

There was never a case where a billion people simply agreed to follow someone.

Who do some prophets gain more followers? The logic is the same as Hollywood celebrities. There are several good actors, but only a few become high paid celebrities.

 

[firedragon]

For a lot of people (at least many that I have spoken to) the fact that they risked their lives is one big reason people believe in them. "Why else would they do this?" is the (paraphrased) question usually posed.

The reality is, there are any number of reasons - for example, maybe they believed their own stories, maybe they were delusional, maybe they enjoyed the notoriety, maybe they felt that what they were doing would put them in the good graces of the deity they, themselves, believed in, maybe they felt that the good that they were doing (by their own standards, in disseminating their own beliefs and principles) outweighed any fibs they might tell along the way.

Can we really, truly rule out all of those other possibilities? Do we, in our relative places and times, have the evidence it might require to discern such? And if we don't, the most unfortunate bit of all this is that the "God sent them" piece certainly requires the most outlandish reaches of imagination over any of the other possibilities I posed. The "God sent them" hypothesis is actually more closely related to something like "an alien race was puppeteering the messenger to say and do the things he/she was doing during that time."

It's fair for you to say all of this because your premise is that this is all B.S. But none of this is researched and studied, but just assertions based on your premise which you have established due to your own "belief".

 

[firedragon]

To answer the last point first - I think we have to look at the lives of the people at the time when any prophets were seen as such or as to being seen as such later. The people then were mostly ignorant about so much.

Good God. Do you know how many prophet claimants are walking around today? Just yesterday I was speaking to a guy who claims his father who passed away a few years ago was the prophet John, wrote a book with 130 plus chapters which supposedly was delivered by the angel Gabriel, and the son's name is Jesus.

There are many prophets today. there are Gods today. Many. Around the world. Western, eastern, developed, underdeveloped, all kinds of countries and societies.

And if you actually study this a tad, the prophet claimants "those days" were much more credible and made sense than the one's today.

 

[Bathos Logos]

It's fair for you to say all of this because your premise is that this is all B.S. But none of this is researched and studied, but just assertions based on your premise which you have established due to your own "belief".

I say this because, based on the quality and quantity of the evidence that has been (and can be) presented currently, what is unfair is ruling out all those other possibilities. All those other things I listed are not incompatible with the evidence. Unless you can demonstrate otherwise? Can you?

Basically - I am not stating that any of those other things is "true" or "what happened." All I am saying is that it is unfair to simply select one among many propositions that fit the available evidence without further verification that it is the correct proposition to be selecting as true. Doing so, is, most certainly, just an "assertion based on your premise which you have established due to your own belief".

 

[firedragon]

I say this because, based on the quality and quantity of the evidence that has been (and can be) presented currently

What are the "evidences" you had analysed? Can you spell them out because you are making a hard claim. It will be interesting to know.

 

[firedragon]

Obviously not. If they had, there would be only one religion.

What if there is only one religion?

 

[Bathos Logos]

What are the "evidences" you had analysed? Can you spell them out because you are making a hard claim. It will be interesting to know.

Books written by human beings, and the spoken words of human beings - including myriad arguments (again, words alone) attempting to serve as evidence of the existence of God (which must necessarily be the starting point of a claim that a messenger was sent by God, let's remember) that do nothing more than run in circles, holding their own tail and claiming that it is profound to be doing so. Is there another form of evidence you think I need to bear witness to before deciding to withhold my belief in the particular propositions that include God? I am entirely interested to hear of it, if so. Something tangible, perhaps? Something more than an assertion that one must simply pray upon this or that and await an answer? Something with a measurable or quantifiable aspect that is demonstrably portion of this otherworldly administration that goes about the business of selecting messengers, giving them messages and so forth?

 

[firedragon]

Books written by human beings, and the spoken words of human beings - including myriad arguments (again, words alone) attempting to serve as evidence of the existence of God (which must necessarily be the starting point of a claim that a messenger was sent by God, let's remember) that do nothing more than run in circles, holding their own tail and claiming that it is profound to be doing so. Is there another form of evidence you think I need to bear witness to before deciding to withhold my belief in the particular propositions that include God? I am entirely interested to hear of it, if so. Something tangible, perhaps? Something more than an assertion that one must simply pray upon this or that and await an answer? Something with a measurable or quantifiable aspect that is demonstrably portion of this otherworldly administration that goes about the business of selecting messengers, giving them messages and so forth?

So nothing specific?

 

[firedragon]

Not delusional, per se. More like very possibly fleeced. Tricked, in other words. It doesn't take much.

What if you are also "fleeced, tricked"? What if someone threw the same words at you and your whole worldview?

Do you think this kind of premises work? Unless you have hard evidence that people were indeed "fleeced, tricked" which would take some serious qualitative research, these are all just baseless words thrown at "the other".

 

[Bathos Logos]

So nothing specific?

I have stated, specifically: words. That's all I really have to go on, isn't it? Again - if there is something more, please, by all means, present it!

 

[Bathos Logos]

What if you are also "fleeced, tricked"? What if someone threw the same words at you and your whole worldview?

Do you think this kind of premises work? Unless you have hard evidence that people were indeed "fleeced, tricked" which would take some serious qualitative research, these are all just baseless words thrown at "the other".

That was said specifically in light of the (again, very real) possibility that any of my proposed alternatives to the "God sent messengers" narrative could represent the realities behind the evidence as it is accepted. Again - you can't rule any of those out and simply select "God sent Messengers" as the truth without being irrational, unless you have some better form of evidence that clearly points to the "God sent Messengers" claim. Again - I am waiting on this. I obviously have ZERO evidence for the other possibilities I outlined... I only brought them up (again, multiples - as in, a bunch of them, which clearly demonstrates that I do not favor one over any other!) because it is entirely unfair to simply choose one of them and hold it up as "truth" based on the state of current evidence. Which, again, I would state is nothing but words. Please - feel free to correct me if I am wrong on that score.

 

[firedragon]

I have stated, specifically: words. That's all I really have to go on, isn't it? Again - if there is something more, please, by all means, present it!

You have not given any information on any evidences provided to you by anyone though you seem to claim you had analysed a lot of so called "evidences".

I think you are just making assertions based on your already built in premise and had not actually analysed anything properly. So these are all just words like you said. Just words.

Ciao.

 

[firedragon]

Again - you can't rule any of those out and simply select "God sent Messengers" as the truth without being irrational,

So you have already made up your premise that "others" simply have to be irrational, and that is not based on any research.

See, to make such claims with no data behind it, it is you who is being unscientific and irrational. Both. No empirical information, or rational arguments. Just a portrayal of a bias. Thats it.

I understand.

 

[Bathos Logos]

You have not given any information on any evidences provided to you by anyone though you seem to claim you had analysed a lot of so called "evidences".

I think you are just making assertions based on your already built in premise and had not actually analysed anything properly. So these are all just words like you said. Just words.

Ciao.

You don't seem to want to admit that the evidence all boils down to "words." I have read large portions of The Bible, and admittedly much smaller amounts from The Quran. I have spoken to a great many theists of all stripes, attended church for a relatively long span of time (upwards of 10 years), and have been prey to my fair share of proselytizers who were keen on trying to get me to accept their spoken/written offerings.

That is what I have perused in the form of evidence. Now your turn. Do you have something more than words?