To say there can be no true Messengers because there are false messengers is illogical.
The fact that some
messengers were false does not prove all
messengers were false. That is the fallacy of hasty generalization, unless and until one has actually considered all the variables.
is an informal fallacy
of faulty generalization
by reaching an inductive generalization
based on insufficient evidence
—essentially making a hasty conclusion without considering all of the variables.
Hasty generalization - Wikipedia
Hasty generalization usually shows this pattern:
- messenger a was not a true messenger of God
- messenger b was not a true messenger of God
- messenger c was not a true messenger of God
- messenger d was not a true messenger of God
Therefore, messenger d was not a true messenger of God.
It is true that the world is full of men who claimed to speak for God, but logically speaking that does not mean that there were not one or more Messengers who did speak for God.
Many years ago, I used to post to this atheist man on another forum, and he insisted that God would never use Messengers:
He said: Also, every imaginary god ever believed in did as well as to have at least one alleged messenger. These messengers also had their gullible followers who thought their messenger was the real deal, and also fantasized that they had evidence of their messenger being the real deal. So a god having a messenger thought to be the real deal doesn't mean ####.
A God having a Messenger thought to be the real deal does mean something if He was really a Messenger of God, but you will never know that because you assume without even looking at the Messenger that He cannot represent a real God.
That is also true, and I believe that God has kept all His promises.