Was Muhammad a Messenger of God?

[Trailblazer]

If you’re playing a numbers game, it’s important to remember that the vast majority of people believe that Muhammad is not a messenger of God... many times more than who believe he is one.

No, I am not playing a numbers game... It is not only that so many people believe that Muhammad is a Messenger of God, it is what they do with that belief, how they worship. It makes no sense that so many people would believe in and worship a mere man, including following His teachings and Laws. Do you know any mere men that 22% of the world population believe in and are willing to follow and sacrifice their personal desires for?

Of course, they could all be deluded, and were it not for the other Messengers of God like Moses and Jesus I might be more inclined to think that is possible. However, it is the preponderance of evidence that matters... There are simply too many Messengers and religions to say that all their followers throughout all of history are deluded. So what makes most logical sense is that there were a lot of Messengers of God who were sent by God throughout the ages and all of them brought different messages from God that were pertinent to the times in which they appeared.

 

[Trailblazer]

Every prophet is the last prophet until the next one comes along.

That is a true statement.

“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.

But did they cause that country to rise from the lowest depths of ignorance to the highest station of knowledge, which is the knowledge of God?

“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.

One has to look at the few followers they had compared to the vast majority that either ignored them, rejected them, or outright persecuted them. It makes no sense that what they did was to get personal attention for themselves. What they did they did for God, period. Nothing else makes any sense.

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?

We need help now and what Baha’u’llah wrote is from God so it is the help we need. His Revelation is what humanity needs for at least the next 1000 years, until God sends another Messenger. We can also listen to other people who are on the same page as Baha’u’llah and are trying to raise people out of ignorance.

adrian009 said: 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.

God is All-Knowing so God decides when we need a new Messenger. We do not need a Messenger for every generation.

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.

I fully agree with that. That is why people should stop clinging to the Bible and look at the Revelation of Baha’u’llah.

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

God does not change but humans change. Humans evolve spiritually over time and the world humans live in changes over time so humans need new message from God in every new age.

 

[Trailblazer]

I don't know about that!

Look at the stats on the chart.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_of_religion

 

[siti]

Look at the stats on the chart.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_of_religion

Yes I know - never mind!

About the charts though - these figures are based on census records and other official government data sources and compiled by the researchers. It is useful to look at general trends but you have to bear in mind that the data is skewed massively for some of these religions. Many conscientiously atheist and agnostic people might, for example, identify themselves as religiously affiliated - especially in countries with non-secular governments, but also in countries/societies where many/most people are religious - I am absolutely certain that the figures for the UK and other European countries reflect the number of cultural Christians rather than conscientious Christians. And this would have been even more of an obstacle to accuracy in the past e.g. in the middle of the twentieth century conscientiously religious people would have been counted as cultural atheists in communist Europe or China. Some of the former Soviet Republics for example, probably swung from almost exclusively atheist to almost exclusively Muslim at some point after 1990 (depending on when they took the counts). Do you seriously imagine that this reflected any genuine changes of religious belief?

So these charts and trends are mildly interesting but I reckon we still live in a world that makes identifying as an atheist socially disadvantageous and unless one is pressed or particularly keen to so identify, the majority of de facto atheists probably tick the Christian or Muslim boxes in countries where it is just easier to that.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes I know - never mind!

About the charts though - these figures are based on census records and other official government data sources and compiled by the researchers. It is useful to look at general trends but you have to bear in mind that the data is skewed massively for some of these religions. Many conscientiously atheist and agnostic people might, for example, identify themselves as religiously affiliated - especially in countries with non-secular governments, but also in countries/societies where many/most people are religious - I am absolutely certain that the figures for the UK and other European countries reflect the number of cultural Christians rather than conscientious Christians. And this would have been even more of an obstacle to accuracy in the past e.g. in the middle of the twentieth century conscientiously religious people would have been counted as cultural atheists in communist Europe or China. Some of the former Soviet Republics for example, probably swung from almost exclusively atheist to almost exclusively Muslim at some point after 1990 (depending on when they took the counts). Do you seriously imagine that this reflected any genuine changes of religious belief?

So these charts and trends are mildly interesting but I reckon we still live in a world that makes identifying as an atheist socially disadvantageous and unless one is pressed or particularly keen to so identify, the majority of de facto atheists probably tick the Christian or Muslim boxes in countries where it is just easier to that.

That is no doubt true, and of all the people who say they believe in God, I doubt most of them really believe in God, judging by their behavior. Most just want the benefits without the sacrifices God requires. God would just as well dispense with those people.

 

[siti]

God would just as well dispense with those people.

And he wonders why people can't get on with each other?

 

[Trailblazer]

And he wonders why people can't get on with each other?

How is that God fault?

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Do you know any mere men that 22% of the world population believe in and are willing to follow and sacrifice their personal desires for?

I dunno, but Jedi seem to be growing.

But did they cause that country to rise from the lowest depths of ignorance to the highest station of knowledge, which is the knowledge of God?

Since they likely claim God is unknowable, hardly any of them apply.

One has to look at the few followers they had compared to the vast majority that either ignored them, rejected them, or outright persecuted them.

That means nothing, since most people on the planet have been ignored and rejected and persecuted.

What they did they did for God, period.

At best, they THINK they did.

We need help now and what Baha’u’llah wrote is from God so it is the help we need.

It could be said that listening to people alive today is what's needed, but you're not interested.

We can also listen to other people who are on the same page as Baha’u’llah and are trying to raise people out of ignorance.

And yet ...

God is All-Knowing so God decides when we need a new Messenger.

Arbitrary decisions have nothing to do with knowing things. A person knowing what a fish is has nothing to do with deciding whether or not to eat it.

That is why people should stop clinging to the Bible and look at the Revelation of Baha’u’llah.

And people can easily claim you are clinging to an old text. I would rather have a messenger with a pulse.

in every new age

What is an age and what is the evidence we should view life in this way?

 

[siti]

Do you know any mere men that 22% of the world population believe in and are willing to follow and sacrifice their personal desires for?

What about Chairman Mao?

 

[siti]

How is that God fault?

Are you serious? You post a comment stating that God would gladly "dispense with" people who do not want to yield "the sacrifices" he requires and then you suggest that it is not God's fault that people behave in a similarly self-centered manner? Of course it isn't really God that demands sacrifices at all - but that is the concept of God you are presenting - an egotistical megalomaniac who tolerates neither dissent nor rivalry - on pain of summary execution - at least in a spiritual sense. There is no empathy or understanding of human diversity or "frailty" in that description. And the saddest part of all is that it is an incredibly apt description of the very God you claim well over half of the humans on the face of this planet believe in - and "imitate". How is it not God's fault?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

No, I am not playing a numbers game... It is not only that so many people believe that Muhammad is a Messenger of God, it is what they do with that belief, how they worship. It makes no sense that so many people would believe in and worship a mere man, including following His teachings and Laws.

Why do you think it doesn’t make sense?

I don’t find your personal incredulity to be particularly convincing.

Do you know any mere men that 22% of the world population believe in and are willing to follow and sacrifice their personal desires for?

Sure. At different times in history:

- the King of England
- Stalin
- Xerxes

Of course, they could all be deluded,

There’s no need for the vast majority of Muslims to be deluded. Almost all of them had no contact with Muhammad whatsoever.

and were it not for the other Messengers of God like Moses and Jesus I might be more inclined to think that is possible.

I don’t find any of those other “messengers” compelling either. My money is on Moses not even existing as a historical figure.

However, it is the preponderance of evidence that matters...

What evidence?

There are simply too many Messengers and religions to say that all their followers throughout all of history are deluded. So what makes most logical sense is that there were a lot of Messengers of God who were sent by God throughout the ages and all of them brought different messages from God that were pertinent to the times in which they appeared.

If it’s quantity you care about more than quality... how many fantastic claims would I have to make up before you decide that there are “simply too many” and abandon the Baha’i faith for a religion I invent?

 

[siti]

it is the preponderance of evidence that matters...

Does pre-ponder-ance mean thinking about something you haven't got yet? Evidence in this case?

 

[Trailblazer]

Trailblazer said: One has to look at the few followers they had compared to the vast majority that either ignored them, rejected them, or outright persecuted them.
That means nothing, since most people on the planet have been ignored and rejected and persecuted.

No, not most people, and certainly not as ignored and rejected and persecuted as the Messengers were.

Trailblazer said: What they did they did for God, period.
At best, they THINK they did.

At best, they actually did... Does anybody care?

Trailblazer said: We need help now and what Baha’u’llah wrote is from God so it is the help we need.
It could be said that listening to people alive today is what's needed, but you're not interested.

Who are those people and why does it matter if they are alive today? Books will suffice to get the information we need.

Trailblazer said: God is All-Knowing so God decides when we need a new Messenger.
Arbitrary decisions have nothing to do with knowing things. A person knowing what a fish is has nothing to do with deciding whether or not to eat it.

God is not a person. God knows and decides. God is All-Knowing and All-Wise so God’s decisions are not arbitrary.

Trailblazer said: That is why people should stop clinging to the Bible and look at the Revelation of Baha’u’llah.
And people can easily claim you are clinging to an old text. I would rather have a messenger with a pulse.

It is a lot new than the Bible or even the Qur’an. God is not coming any more often than that, sorry. I could care less about a live Messenger. I have what He wrote.

Trailblazer said: in every new age
What is an age and what is the evidence we should view life in this way?

An age is a time period in history... In every age of history, mankind needs a new message from God. A Prophet is a Divine Physician. He knows the disease and He administers the remedy. No man can know as much as a Prophet of God.

“The Prophets of God should be regarded as physicians whose task is to foster the well-being of the world and its peoples, that, through the spirit of oneness, they may heal the sickness of a divided humanity. To none is given the right to question their words or disparage their conduct, for they are the only ones who can claim to have understood the patient and to have correctly diagnosed its ailments. No man, however acute his perception, can ever hope to reach the heights which the wisdom and understanding of the Divine Physician have attained. Little wonder, then, if the treatment prescribed by the physician in this day should not be found to be identical with that which he prescribed before. How could it be otherwise when the ills affecting the sufferer necessitate at every stage of his sickness a special remedy? In like manner, every time the Prophets of God have illumined the world with the resplendent radiance of the Day Star of Divine knowledge, they have invariably summoned its peoples to embrace the light of God through such means as best befitted the exigencies of the age in which they appeared.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 80

 

[Trailblazer]

What about Chairman Mao?

You have a point.
But how did that work out?

 

[siti]

You have a point.
But how did that work out?

You also have a point - socially not much better than Christianity and Islam, numerically (in its time) way superior to everything other than Christianity and Islam.

 

[Trailblazer]

Are you serious? You post a comment stating that God would gladly "dispense with" people who do not want to yield "the sacrifices" he requires and then you suggest that it is not God's fault that people behave in a similarly self-centered manner? Of course it isn't really God that demands sacrifices at all - but that is the concept of God you are presenting - an egotistical megalomaniac who tolerates neither dissent nor rivalry - on pain of summary execution - at least in a spiritual sense. There is no empathy or understanding of human diversity or "frailty" in that description. And the saddest part of all is that it is an incredibly apt description of the very God you claim well over half of the humans on the face of this planet believe in - and "imitate". How is it not God's fault?

I should not speak for God and you misconstrued what I meant. I meant that God does not need the belief of anyone because God is fully self-sufficient. So, since God is All-Powerful, God could dispense with humans if God did not love them.

Are you kidding? God cannot be self-centered because God is not a human being. Only humans can be self-centered. God does not have a self. God just is.

God does understand the differences among humans and takes them into account. There is no execution for atheists or agnostics. It is as simple as someone said on another forum. Those who follow Baha'u'llah will simply be better prepared to take up residence in the spiritual world after they die. God gives us a choice, get prepared or go without preparation. We all go to the same place.

God can be kind of overbearing but it is for our own good, kind of like a good parent who disciplines his child because he wants to mold his character. We cannot see the end result now so we have to take His Word for it until we die and see the Light.

"How ignorant therefore the thought that God who created man, educated and nurtured him, surrounded him with all blessings, made the sun and all phenomenal existence for his benefit, bestowed upon him tenderness and kindness, and then did not love him. This is palpable ignorance, for no matter to what religion a man belongs even though he be an atheist or materialist nevertheless God nurtures him, bestows His kindness and sheds upon him His light." ('Abdu'l-Baha, Star of the West, Vol. 8, issue 7, p. 78)

 

[Trailblazer]

Does pre-ponder-ance mean thinking about something you haven't got yet? Evidence in this case?

It means looking at ALL the evidence from ALL the religions. It is something we have.

 

[siti]

Are you kidding? God cannot be self-centered because God is not a human being. Only humans can be self-centered. God does not have a self. God just is

I agree with this as far as it goes - if you just add "n't" at the end we'll be in 100% agreement.

God gives us a choice, get prepared or go without preparation. We all go to the same place.

I'm prepared - I already told my kids where to dig the hole.

 

[Trailblazer]

Why do you think it doesn’t make sense?
I don’t find your personal incredulity to be particularly convincing.

It does not make sense to me because I look at motives for human behavior, since psychology is my other hat and one I wore a lot longer than my religion hat. Their belief and worship does not prove that Muhammad was a Messenger of God but it strongly indicates that He was.

Sure. At different times in history:
- the King of England
- Stalin
- Xerxes

True, but do you want to know the hundred-dollar difference? People do not still follow these people 1400 years after they came to earth. Also, what personal desires did they sacrifice? Did they give up premarital sex and alcohol?

There’s no need for the vast majority of Muslims to be deluded. Almost all of them had no contact with Muhammad whatsoever.

Why would they need contact with Muhammad? Do you know that those who were closest to Baha’u’llah and knew Him personally were the ones who betrayed Him? They knew of His greatness and they were jealous and tried to bring Him down. Their attempts were totally foiled because God brought them down one by one.

and were it not for the other Messengers of God like Moses and Jesus I might be more inclined to think that is possible.

I don’t find any of those other “messengers” compelling either. My money is on Moses not even existing as a historical figure.

You do not think that Jesus did anything for humankind? Or are you talking about whether He and existed? I believe in Moses and Jesus existed because Baha'u'llah wrote about them.

What evidence?

All the Messengers of God that ever existed and the religions they established.

If it’s quantity you care about more than quality... how many fantastic claims would I have to make up before you decide that there are “simply too many” and abandon the Baha’i faith for a religion I invent?

You would have to make claims that made logical sense to me. You would have to have evidence that you were a Messenger of God to back up your claims...

 

[Trailblazer]

I agree with this as far as it goes - if you just add "n't" at the end we'll be in 100% agreement.

Logically speaking, God either exists or not. It could be either one.
I know God exists, but I am not always happy about that. I am sure God knows that.

I'm prepared - I already told my kids where to dig the hole.

That will take care of your body but it won't help your soul.