(January 21, 2013 at 12:55 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: ...and glossing over just how the followers of Jesus decided only a few short years later to disregard all they knew regarding an obvious recent history of their leader only to invent a mythical Son of God that bore little resemblance to the man they were following?

How are you defining prophet here? If we're talking about Jesus as someone who saw into the future he was a crashing failure because he didn't predict what happened after his death.

I'm just defining Jesus as a messenger. When I was working in an office I was often asked to pass a message on to someone. If they received the message I had to pass on I was a successful messenger even if it was only to say "The coffee's ready. Go and get a cup while there's still some left."

Quote:Islam has a total different POV on the situation. Christianity is the religion that follows the Confirmation bias, Islam doesn't.

Every theistic asshole thinks HIS religion is right and all others are wrong.

(January 21, 2013 at 1:17 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:Islam has a total different POV on the situation. Christianity is the religion that follows the Confirmation bias, Islam doesn't.

Every theistic asshole thinks HIS religion is right and all others are wrong.

Atheists also think that their believe is right, it's chaos. I guess there is no way to make sure until death arrives. But hey, give it a shot, islam is different somehow.

(January 21, 2013 at 1:03 pm)Confused Ape Wrote: I'm just defining Jesus as a messenger. When I was working in an office I was often asked to pass a message on to someone. If they received the message I had to pass on I was a successful messenger even if it was only to say "The coffee's ready. Go and get a cup while there's still some left."

And as I said, fair enough but then what the heck does "great" mean in this context?

A "great" sales rep isn't just someone who knocks on doors and tries to sell. Anyone can do that. A "great sales rep" is someone who actually sells the product. The adjective "great" is typically only applied where a job is done with such excellence that not just anyone could easily duplicate.

Now if all that's in the job description is "deliver the message", then there's nothing potentially "great" about the job performance. Either you do or you don't.

Imagine a construction worker who's only job is to hold a "slow down" sign for on coming traffic. If his supervisor came by and said "You're doing a great job holding that sign!", it might be thought a sarcastic insult. As in, "oh yeah, you're saying this is all I'm fit to do and it's an effort for me to do just this."

(January 21, 2013 at 2:05 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: And as I said, fair enough but then what the heck does "great" mean in this context?

I'm waiting to hear what Muslims say about that. I was just trying to figure out what question Muslims are supposed to be answering because there are two meanings for the word, prophet.

(January 21, 2013 at 2:10 pm)Confused Ape Wrote:

(January 21, 2013 at 2:05 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: And as I said, fair enough but then what the heck does "great" mean in this context?

I'm waiting to hear what Muslims say about that. I was just trying to figure out what question Muslims are supposed to be answering because there are two meanings for the word, prophet.

A great prophet is a prophet that transfers the word of god without any editing, and keeps his faith.

Prophet itself is a one word, it doesn't have two meanings (unless you mean the "rasool" & "nabee" debate).

A prophet receives, he then tells.

But prophets are two kinds, you have the "messenger prophet", and the "prophet".

Messenger = new stuff (like mohammad & jesus).
prophet only = renewal of old stuff.

(January 21, 2013 at 12:59 pm)AtlasS Wrote: As I understand the "Confirmation Bias", it's more like "act a fool" policy, that is pretty pathetic, if a person thought in such way, and made his/her logic based on that.

In this context, I mean "looking for reasons to believe what you already do."

You find this kind of thinking not just in religion but astrology horoscopes, interpretation of Nostradamus quatrains, wacky political conspiracy theories, etc.

Specifically, looking back on events that happened and trying to find patterns in these events that validate your sacred beliefs is poor logic, especially when dealing with unseen supernatural forces where cause, effect and motive are impossible to be confirm.

To provide an alternate religious example, some Christians in America expressed the belief after hurricane Katrina that God was upset with all the "immorality" going on in New Orleans. Evidently, the fact that we fully understand how hurricanes happen and no divine hand is required doesn't stop the pious from speculating on supernatural causes or overlook the effects of natural causes like global warming. Neither does anyone who believes in such expressions of divine wrath ever question why God's methods of communication these days is indistinguishable from natural events.

But even assuming that a divine hand is at work in events that require no supernatural explanation, why assume one motive and not another? Maybe God was upset that George W. Bush was just re-elected and sought to hit America right in the middle of the reddest states? One attributed motive seems as good as any other.

And such reasoning, as I stated, is selectively used. Conservative Christians were quick to see a divine hand in Katrina but not in the droughts that plagued conservative, Christian Texas in recent years. Odd that the day of prayer called for by Gov Perry was of no help in ending the drought. Only the atheist convention finally brought the needed rain. Or was there a connection?

Taking this same logic to Islam, why is the fall of the Roman Empire a sign of Allah's displeasure? 400 years later? Hard to see much cause and effect there. And if the Dark Ages of Europe juxtaposed by the enlightened times of the Arab world at the same time in history are confirmation of Islam, what do we make of the fact that now the tables are turned?

Oh, but wait, I forgot, it doesn't count when events don't confirm what you already believe.

That's what confirmation bias is.

---

(January 21, 2013 at 2:16 pm)AtlasS Wrote: A prophet receives, he then tells.

But prophets are two kinds, you have the "messenger prophet", and the "prophet".

Messenger = new stuff (like mohammad & jesus).
prophet only = renewal of old stuff.

What did Jesus teach? The Muslim Jesus, that is.

(January 21, 2013 at 2:35 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote:

(January 21, 2013 at 12:59 pm)AtlasS Wrote: As I understand the "Confirmation Bias", it's more like "act a fool" policy, that is pretty pathetic, if a person thought in such way, and made his/her logic based on that.

In this context, I mean "looking for reasons to believe what you already do."

You find this kind of thinking not just in religion but astrology horoscopes, interpretation of Nostradamus quatrains, wacky political conspiracy theories, etc.

Specifically, looking back on events that happened and trying to find patterns in these events that validate your sacred beliefs is poor logic, especially when dealing with unseen supernatural forces where cause, effect and motive are impossible to be confirm.

To provide an alternate religious example, some Christians in America expressed the belief after hurricane Katrina that God was upset with all the "immorality" going on in New Orleans. Evidently, the fact that we fully understand how hurricanes happen and no divine hand is required doesn't stop the pious from speculating on supernatural causes or overlook the effects of natural causes like global warming. Neither does anyone who believes in such expressions of divine wrath ever question why God's methods of communication these days is indistinguishable from natural events.

But even assuming that a divine hand is at work in events that require no supernatural explanation, why assume one motive and not another? Maybe God was upset that George W. Bush was just re-elected and sought to hit America right in the middle of the reddest states? One attributed motive seems as good as any other.

And such reasoning, as I stated, is selectively used. Conservative Christians were quick to see a divine hand in Katrina but not in the droughts that plagued conservative, Christian Texas in recent years. Odd that the day of prayer called for by Gov Perry was of no help in ending the drought. Only the atheist convention finally brought the needed rain. Or was there a connection?

Taking this same logic to Islam, why is the fall of the Roman Empire a sign of Allah's displeasure? 400 years later? Hard to see much cause and effect there. And if the Dark Ages of Europe juxtaposed by the enlightened times of the Arab world at the same time in history are confirmation of Islam, what do we make of the fact that now the tables are turned?

Oh, but wait, I forgot, it doesn't count when events don't confirm what you already believe.

That's what confirmation bias is.

---

(January 21, 2013 at 2:16 pm)AtlasS Wrote: A prophet receives, he then tells.

But prophets are two kinds, you have the "messenger prophet", and the "prophet".

Messenger = new stuff (like mohammad & jesus).
prophet only = renewal of old stuff.

What did Jesus teach? The Muslim Jesus, that is.

The basic message that all prophets were teaching, is the perfection of god, nobody else is to be worshipped, anything but god is unworthy of worshipping. About the other teachings, nobody knows exactly. Some famous muslim scholars (like Ahmed deedat), claimed that jesus didn't even complete the rest of the teachings due to the political & social situation at that time, that's why mohammad was sent just after 500 years of jesus birth.

(January 21, 2013 at 2:16 pm)AtlasS Wrote: A great prophet is a prophet that transfers the word of god without any editing, and keeps his faith.

Prophet itself is a one word, it doesn't have two meanings

It does in the English language because it can mean someone who makes prophecies of the future like Nostradamus. (Not that any of his prophecies have come true.) This was why I found the opening post a bit confusing.

(January 21, 2013 at 2:16 pm)AtlasS Wrote: (unless you mean the "rasool" & "nabee" debate)

Messenger = new stuff (like mohammad & jesus).
prophet only = renewal of old stuff.

Thanks for the help because I needed to know what the word means in Islam before reading replies from Muslims.

(January 21, 2013 at 2:57 pm)Confused Ape Wrote:

(January 21, 2013 at 2:16 pm)AtlasS Wrote: A great prophet is a prophet that transfers the word of god without any editing, and keeps his faith.

Prophet itself is a one word, it doesn't have two meanings

It does in the English language because it can mean someone who makes prophecies of the future like Nostradamus. (Not that any of his prophecies have come true.) This was why I found the opening post a bit confusing.

(January 21, 2013 at 2:16 pm)AtlasS Wrote: (unless you mean the "rasool" & "nabee" debate)

Messenger = new stuff (like mohammad & jesus).
prophet only = renewal of old stuff.

Thanks for the help because I needed to know what the word means in Islam before reading replies from Muslims.

You are welcome. Just for the record, I wanted to add that any muslims who believes in the hadith totally, also believes that mohammad had his share of prophecies, despite the fact that god says in the quran that mohammad doesn't know anything but what god told him (and god promised that nobody would never know the future or predict future events).

There are arabic forums (you'll find the regular stereotypical arab sunni muslims in them), they believe that the prophet left prophecies about the end of times, they're studying it.

http://alfetn.com/vb3/index.php?

http://www.najahmenalfetan.com/vb/

those are the most famous two. I had to register there to know if it's right or not(got kicked out and banned).

Of course, you see a great contradiction in here, between what quran says, and what the muslim scholars said.