(February 2, 2015 at 6:09 pm)Rayaan Wrote: Well, I guess it's not worth my time to explain any of this to you since you seem to be fiercely biased to believe that the whole thing is a myth.

Nothing can really convince such people.

I'm sure the irony of your statement escaped you completely. It's why I told you before that I get it. You have been brain-washed by professionals and you are not ready to even consider the possibility that you have been bullshitted for your whole life.

I still love ya, man. You're the best theist on these boards...which granted isn't much of a compliment but its the best I can do at the moment.

(February 2, 2015 at 6:23 pm)Minimalist Wrote: I'm sure the irony of your statement escaped you completely. It's why I told you before that I get it. You have been brain-washed by professionals and you are not ready to even consider the possibility that you have been bullshitted for your whole life.

Pfft. Obviously you would think that. Your own worldview is superior and correct without a shadow of doubt.

(February 2, 2015 at 6:11 pm)pocaracas Wrote: Rumor... maybe...
Did you see the list on my second post? That gives you all the info you need.

Yes, but those are very general statements about liars. None of that answers the specific questions that I asked before which are:

1. The problem with that is, how could that person make a supernatural claim about some dead guy without first convincing people that he has divine and/or psychic abilities? How else can he claim to know such things that no one else knows?

2. If he is so trustworthy that no one would even question him, what prevented him from claiming himself to be a prophet?

(February 2, 2015 at 6:11 pm)pocaracas Wrote: You really want an honest answer?
Yes, it does seem to refer to a god. But let's look at what comes before that expression, shall we?...
"as if by God's command", which is the main lead to assigning god to that "command from on high".
It's almost "as if" this was not a certain thing.... "as if" the story was not entirely believed... "as if" the story was made up after Mehmet's death and spread until it arrived at Sebeos' place, still in its infancy... "as if" the people telling the story weren't sure.

If Sebeos was a Christian, then would he acknowledge Muhammad as an actual Prophet? Of course not. That's why the "as if" makes sense in that regards.

A lot of people perceived Muhammad as preaching under God's command, but maybe Sebeos didn't accept his Prophethood, therefore the "as if by God's command."

And the "command from on high" must be referring to that same "as if" command above - i.e. God's command.

(February 2, 2015 at 6:11 pm)pocaracas Wrote: The man was so believable to all arabs, but lowly christians couldn't believe him?...
Double standard... -.-'

Wrong. He was almost equally disbelieved by Arabs.

For years he was mocked, insulted, challenged, pushed out of Mecca, his companions were beaten, abused, and even killed, he was spit on, he was beaten so severely that there was blood dripping from his face, the Quraish rejoiced at the fact that all of his sons died so early, they boycotted his followers, and so on and so forth, and yet he was praying for guidance and forgiveness for the same people who were hurting him. He was seen as an enemy even by his own tribe after he started the mission of preaching Islam.

(February 2, 2015 at 6:11 pm)pocaracas Wrote: About Sebeos, "He maintains that the account of Arab conquests derives from the fugitives who had been eyewitnesses thereof."

So what?

Just because it's a second hand account somehow implies that all of that started off as a rumor?

(February 3, 2015 at 6:40 am)Rayaan Wrote:

(February 2, 2015 at 6:11 pm)pocaracas Wrote: Rumor... maybe...
Did you see the list on my second post? That gives you all the info you need.

Yes, but those are very general statements about liars. None of that answers the specific questions that I asked before which are:

1. The problem with that is, how could that person make a supernatural claim about some dead guy without first convincing people that he has divine and/or psychic abilities? How else can he claim to know such things that no one else knows?

2. If he is so trustworthy that no one would even question him, what prevented him from claiming himself to be a prophet?

Can I start with 2, first?
Liars claim things about other people. Typically, liars refrain from attributing anything to themselves... it's one of the rules.

1. If Mo was the legendary leader people hailed him to be (in those two notes about him predating Sebeos), then such tales of divine inspiration could easily surface. Like I said before, these tales may have been just people jesting, or suggesting... but others may have picked it up as truth and passed it on... that's why I called it a rumor.

(February 3, 2015 at 6:40 am)Rayaan Wrote:

(February 2, 2015 at 6:11 pm)pocaracas Wrote: You really want an honest answer?
Yes, it does seem to refer to a god. But let's look at what comes before that expression, shall we?...
"as if by God's command", which is the main lead to assigning god to that "command from on high".
It's almost "as if" this was not a certain thing.... "as if" the story was not entirely believed... "as if" the story was made up after Mehmet's death and spread until it arrived at Sebeos' place, still in its infancy... "as if" the people telling the story weren't sure.

If Sebeos was a Christian, then would he acknowledge Muhammad as an actual Prophet? Of course not. That's why the "as if" makes sense in that regards.

A lot of people perceived Muhammad as preaching under God's command, but maybe Sebeos didn't accept his Prophethood, therefore the "as if by God's command."

And the "command from on high" must be referring to that same "as if" command above - i.e. God's command.

Or maybe the tale came to him with the requirement of a few grains of salt... maybe the tale came to him from some hearsay merchant, some hearsay fugitive. Fugitive? from where? these fugitives would be fleeing Mehmet's arabs? Then they were the enemy... odd.

Anyway... Hearsay, rumor... human nature.
Why do you keep dismissing these as unlikely players in the tale?

(February 3, 2015 at 6:40 am)Rayaan Wrote:

(February 2, 2015 at 6:11 pm)pocaracas Wrote: The man was so believable to all arabs, but lowly christians couldn't believe him?...
Double standard... -.-'

Wrong. He was almost equally disbelieved by Arabs.

For years he was mocked, insulted, challenged, pushed out of Mecca, his companions were beaten, abused, and even killed, he was spit on, he was beaten so severely that there was blood dripping from his face, the Quraish rejoiced at the fact that all of his sons died so early, they boycotted his followers, and so on and so forth, and yet he was praying for guidance and forgiveness for the same people who were hurting him. He was seen as an enemy even by his own tribe after he started the mission of preaching Islam.

Damn.... it's almost the same tale as Jesus' disciples, huh?
Are you sure that's not a play repeating a previously successful theme?

(February 3, 2015 at 6:40 am)Rayaan Wrote:

(February 2, 2015 at 6:11 pm)pocaracas Wrote: About Sebeos, "He maintains that the account of Arab conquests derives from the fugitives who had been eyewitnesses thereof."

So what?

Just because it's a second hand account somehow implies that all of that started off as a rumor?

No, it doesn't imply that.
But that is one option of how things came to be.

(February 3, 2015 at 7:03 am)pocaracas Wrote: Can I start with 2, first?
Liars claim things about other people. Typically, liars refrain from attributing anything to themselves... it's one of the rules.

But liars typically do not make supernatural claims about dead people, especially since it's obvious that they (just like everyone else) have no way of even knowing such things ... unless they received them via divine revelations.

If they claim to know such (unknowable) things, then they've automatically ascribed supernatural abilities to their own selves.

(February 3, 2015 at 7:03 am)pocaracas Wrote: 1. If Mo was the legendary leader people hailed him to be (in those two notes about him predating Sebeos), then such tales of divine inspiration could easily surface. Like I said before, these tales may have been just people jesting, or suggesting... but others may have picked it up as truth and passed it on... that's why I called it a rumor.

They do surface - all found in the oral traditions recorded in the hadiths.

And your answer still evades the question, which is:
How can a person (i.e. the rumor starter) make a supernatural claim about some dead guy without first convincing people that he has divine and/or psychic abilities? How else can he claim to know such things that no one else knows?

(February 3, 2015 at 7:03 am)pocaracas Wrote: Or maybe the tale came to him with the requirement of a few grains of salt... maybe the tale came to him from some hearsay merchant, some hearsay fugitive.

Or maybe it didn't. (I can start using "maybe" to suit my arguments just like you do ... it's just so convenient).

(February 3, 2015 at 7:03 am)pocaracas Wrote: Fugitive? from where? these fugitives would be fleeing Mehmet's arabs? Then they were the enemy... odd.

Enemy or not, it still doesn't negate the interpretation that the words "command from on high" in Sebeos's quote seems to refer to God's command, which you admitted previously.

(February 3, 2015 at 7:03 am)pocaracas Wrote: Anyway... Hearsay, rumor... human nature.
Why do you keep dismissing these as unlikely players in the tale?

Because I believe in the sacred texts.

You, of course, prefer to believe in hearsay and rumor theories which you have no evidence for, either.

(February 3, 2015 at 7:03 am)pocaracas Wrote: No, it doesn't imply that.
But that is one option of how things came to be.

So that also means that nothing about that quote implies what you've been arguing for (i.e. the "option of how things came to be"). There's no actual implication of a rumor ... it's just an "option" ...

Then what about the option that the rumor was true from the very beginning? Does that have less of an implication? If so, then why?

(February 3, 2015 at 7:05 pm)Rayaan Wrote:

(February 3, 2015 at 7:03 am)pocaracas Wrote: Can I start with 2, first?
Liars claim things about other people. Typically, liars refrain from attributing anything to themselves... it's one of the rules.

But liars typically do not make supernatural claims about dead people, especially since it's obvious that they (just like everyone else) have no way of even knowing such things ... unless they received them via divine revelations.

If they claim to know such (unknowable) things, then they've automatically ascribed supernatural abilities to their own selves.

Lots of people have claimed to know unknowable things throughout history...
Some believed in them, some didn't.
Cue to every religion that has ever existed on this planet.

(February 3, 2015 at 7:05 pm)Rayaan Wrote:

(February 3, 2015 at 7:03 am)pocaracas Wrote: 1. If Mo was the legendary leader people hailed him to be (in those two notes about him predating Sebeos), then such tales of divine inspiration could easily surface. Like I said before, these tales may have been just people jesting, or suggesting... but others may have picked it up as truth and passed it on... that's why I called it a rumor.

They do surface - all found in the oral traditions recorded in the hadiths.

And your answer still evades the question, which is:
How can a person (i.e. the rumor starter) make a supernatural claim about some dead guy without first convincing people that he has divine and/or psychic abilities? How else can he claim to know such things that no one else knows?

Didn't I say it could have started as an obvious jest? and I can complete it with a: with each retelling the ironic bits fell off and people started giving credence to the tale., hence a rumor started that the legendary leader of the arab conquering tribe was also divinely inspired.
It's a possible scenario.
One that plays with elements from humanity with which we deal almost daily.

(February 3, 2015 at 7:05 pm)Rayaan Wrote:

(February 3, 2015 at 7:03 am)pocaracas Wrote: Or maybe the tale came to him with the requirement of a few grains of salt... maybe the tale came to him from some hearsay merchant, some hearsay fugitive.

Or maybe it didn't. (I can start using "maybe" to suit my arguments just like you do ... it's just so convenient).

Like we've said all along... we have nothing concrete, many options are valid...
Even the fabrication of the whole (or part of) Sebeos account, like Min has hinted.

(February 3, 2015 at 7:05 pm)Rayaan Wrote:

(February 3, 2015 at 7:03 am)pocaracas Wrote: Fugitive? from where? these fugitives would be fleeing Mehmet's arabs? Then they were the enemy... odd.

Enemy or not, it still doesn't negate the interpretation that the words "command from on high" in Sebeos's quote seems to refer to God's command, which you admitted previously.

It does render the story similar to what cartographers and sailors of old would label as "here be monsters".
How would enemies know about the beliefs of their conquerors?
How would they know about the origin of their beliefs?
And fugitives are seldom high ranking (in the know) personnel... they're the dung heap no one cares about and are allowed to escape.

(February 3, 2015 at 7:05 pm)Rayaan Wrote:

(February 3, 2015 at 7:03 am)pocaracas Wrote: Anyway... Hearsay, rumor... human nature.
Why do you keep dismissing these as unlikely players in the tale?

Because I believe in the sacred texts.

You, of course, prefer to believe in hearsay and rumor theories which you have no evidence for, either.

Why do you believe in those texts?
What renders their content so "sacred"?
Why the ones you believe in and not others? Many alleged sacred texts exist, from several places and time periods on Earth. Why those in particular?
Why believe in any of them?
What part of human nature renders sacred texts more believable than their fabrication?

(February 3, 2015 at 7:05 pm)Rayaan Wrote:

(February 3, 2015 at 7:03 am)pocaracas Wrote: No, it doesn't imply that.
But that is one option of how things came to be.

So that also means that nothing about that quote implies what you've been arguing for (i.e. the "option of how things came to be"). There's no actual implication of a rumor ... it's just an "option" ...

Then what about the option that the rumor was true from the very beginning? Does that have less of an implication? If so, then why?

The option that the rumor was true would imply that Mo was a great leader, a great preacher and also had a direct channel with a god.
And this god, instead of giving Mo the most wonderful treasure of information.. information about the past, about the future, about the world, about human peaceful co-existence, about how to bring his neighbors in league with him... gave him commands to take over his neighbors by force and rule them, with such ludicrous rules as cover the women so other men will not covet them.
Way to go, oh god-seemingly-made-in-man's-image.
What a waste of a prophet.

But if it was just a claim and no actual channel to any god existed for real.
Well then, I'll have to throw this one back at you: how could he have convinced his people that he did have a channel to a god?
Oh, never mind, con artists do it all the time. Human nature works, too. Although, it would have been more difficult than if that notion surfaced as a rumor that later took hold.
But if he did manage to convince people of his prophethood and they did win so many battles and he became a legendary prophet, then why has nothing contemporary mentioning such an astonishing person ever been found?
We have lots of contemporary stuff for other people... older people... even for Herod (nothing mentioning a Jesus, nor a zombie apocalypse, curiously)... but for a desert dwelling, highly influential leader of a tribe in the early 600's there is a remarkable absence.
Why is everything written about the man from after his death?

Oh... and if Min's hint that Sebeos is a fabrication... oh well... back to nothing-land for old Mehmet.