(January 24, 2015 at 8:13 pm)Rayaan Wrote:(January 24, 2015 at 8:17 am)pocaracas Wrote: Indeed, there are abundant equal claims well after the implementation of the madrassas...
The "when" is not lending any credence to those claims. But if the claims are not credible, than why would they be made?
Develop the religion further? increase the basis for the belief? incorporate local notions into the religion?...
I keep having to guess these things, because nothing could be written about them, or the claims would be immediately debunked... as they weren't...
Well, just for argument's sake, even supposing that all those claims/hadiths were posterior fabrications, let's now see what your own argument is ...
(January 24, 2015 at 8:17 am)pocaracas Wrote: My new guess is that many of the muslim sayings (qur'an, hadiths) were initially fabricated for the purpose of bringing all these people into some form of lawfulness. Around the time of Abd-Al-Malik... remember, the when is important.
And how does the "when" of those claims make them any less or more credible to you if you believe that they were all fabricated?
(January 24, 2015 at 8:17 am)pocaracas Wrote: Trouble is, the earliest mentions of Muhamad present him solely as a tribal or army leader, no prophethood whatsoever is present there... and this is from the link you gave earlier.
You know you're lying because the link does mention his prophethood ... like over here:
Quote:One of the most interesting accounts of the early seventh century comes from Sebeos who was a bishop of the House of Bagratunis. From this chronicle, there are indications that he lived through many of the events he relates. He maintains that the account of Arab conquests derives from the fugitives who had been eyewitnesses thereof. He concludes with Mu‘awiya's ascendancy in the Arab civil war (656-61 CE), which suggests that he was writing soon after this date. Sebeos is the first non-Muslim author to present us with a theory for the rise of Islam that pays attention to what the Muslims themselves thought they were doing.[31] As for Muhammad, he has the following to say:
At that time a certain man from along those same sons of Ismael, whose name was Mahmet [i.e., Muḥammad], a merchant, as if by God's command appeared to them as a preacher [and] the path of truth. He taught them to recognize the God of Abraham, especially because he was learnt and informed in the history of Moses. Now because the command was from on high, at a single order they all came together in unity of religion. Abandoning their vain cults, they turned to the living God who had appeared to their father Abraham. So, Mahmet legislated for them: not to eat carrion, not to drink wine, not to speak falsely, and not to engage in fornication. He said: 'With an oath God promised this land to Abraham and his seed after him for ever. And he brought about as he promised during that time while he loved Ismael. But now you are the sons of Abraham and God is accomplishing his promise to Abraham and his seed for you. Love sincerely only the God of Abraham, and go and seize the land which God gave to your father Abraham. No one will be able to resist you in battle, because God is with you.
And over here:
Quote:
(January 24, 2015 at 8:17 am)pocaracas Wrote: Arabs seem to have had a history of untrustworthiness... do you think it's expectable that they became trustworthy within a hundred years of Mo's appearance in the scene?
Yes, because the people in Arabia were much different after Muhammad came to the scene. He changed almost everything that was negative about them - their politics, ethics, manners, religion, etc. - with his own great character.
And this has been attested by non-Muslim historians as well:
"If greatness of purpose, smallness of means, and astounding results are the three criteria of human genius, who could dare to compare any great man in modern history with Muhammad? The most famous men created arms, laws and empires only. They founded, if anything at all, no more than material powers, which often crumbled away before their eyes. This man moved not only armies, legislation, empires, peoples and dynasties, but millions of men in one-third of the then-inhabited world; and more than that he moved the altars, the gods, the religions, the ideas, the beliefs and souls." - Alphonse de Lamartine, Histoire de la Turquie (1854)
"His readiness to undergo persecutions for his beliefs, the high moral character of the men who believed in him and looked up to him as leader, and the greatness of his ultimate achievement - all argue his fundamental integrity. To suppose Muhammad an impostor raises more problems than it solves. Moreover, none of the great figures of history is so poorly appreciated in the West as Muhammad" - William Montgomery Watt, Muhammad at Mecca (1953)
You, like Christians and Jews and even prior polytheists in human history still miss what religion is at it's core. It is hero worship. It is merely humans projecting their own desire for order.
The motif of all three books of Abraham are the same, "I the God, or in combo with a man god or a prophet am going to clean up society and make it civil". The problem with this monotheistic idea in all three is that the social order the heros of the books instruct the followers to do sets up a social pecking order. It puts outside tribes at best as mere house guests, not equals. All three do this. That causes division in reality and all one has to do to know that is to turn on the news.
Now when you pine over Mo, I am sorry but it is just as absurd when fans of Jesus do the same. Both the Koran and bible contain very barbaric stories that pit humans against each other upon the gods wishes and or commands. And neither books ever treated girls or women as anything more than property like goats and baby factories and payments between families.
And not to mention the absurd idea that if you eat pork or wipe your ass with the wrong hand will make you evil.
Holy books do nothing but divide humans, they even divide humans within the same religion. Mo did not do anything but con himself into believing he was talking to a god AT BEST, but just like Jesus, (if he existed) merely would have been a mere man convincing others to buy his new product.
There is no such thing as a god or a prophet, there are simply desperate humans that make up religions as a gap answer to avoid facing their finite reality.