Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am not a muslim, but have studied the religion for many years now, from a historica/anthropological/archeological point of view, and not blindly from Quranic text.
A person can learn virtually nothing about the religion, from studying the Qur'an. It does not matter how many times you read it.
The Qur'an represents only 14% of Islamic doctrine, and is to vague and scatterbrained to convey anything, but does keep the people in line as sheep.
I am always willing to discuss islam with learned people, and offer sources for anything I print.
I try to confine my sources to Islamic text, but many early referenced are also from Christians.
I also emphasize dating the text.
Glad to have you here. Peaceful debate in the proper threads is always welcome.
I was quite anti-Islamic during my Christian years and as I was a Missionary in North Africa and the Mideast I did not have any good to say about the Qur'an. When I left Christianity I left all believe in God and became an Atheist, which I still feel is a better choice than Christianity and would still be an Atheist if had not found the peace the Qur'an gave to me.
It was When I discovered the actual beauty of the Qur'an, I accepted Islam
Glad to have you here. Peaceful debate in the proper threads is always welcome.
I was quite anti-Islamic during my Christian years and as I was a Missionary in North Africa and the Mideast I did not have any good to say about the Qur'an. When I left Christianity I left all believe in God and became an Atheist, which I still feel is a better choice than Christianity and would still be an Atheist if had not found the peace the Qur'an gave to me.
It was When I discovered the actual beauty of the Qur'an, I accepted Islam
While I an not much of a fan of Christianity, I will say in my opinion, it is the better of the Arbrahamic religions.
Jesus, the person, was an excellent role model for anyone to follow, regardless of their religious belief's.
While I an not much of a fan of Christianity, I will say in my opinion, it is the better of the Arbrahamic religions.
Jesus, the person, was an excellent role model for anyone to follow, regardless of their religious belief's.
Muhammed, on the other hand, is not.
As a Muslim I and many Muslims I know also believe Jesus(as) is an excellent Role Model.
From a historical sense very little is known about Muhammad(saws) about all we know is from the eye witness accounts (Ahadith) of what people saw him do or heard him say,
While the biography by Ishaq is the ealiest known, it is also known that it is not very accurate. The earliest known Copy was a copy of a copy and the ones who copied Ishaq's original are known to have added and embellished what Ishaq wrote. No mention of Muhammad(saws) outside of the Ahadith dates back to when Muhammad(saws) was alive.
Quote:
Information on Muhammad
Attempts to distinguish between the historical elements and the unhistorical elements of many of the reports of Muhammad have not been very successful.[6] A major source of difficulty in the quest for the historical Muhammad is the modern lack of knowledge about pre-Islamic Arabia.[7] Harald Motzki states:
At present, the study of Muhammad, the founder of the Muslim community, is obviously caught in a dilemma. On the one hand, it is not possible to write a historical biography of the Prophet without being accused of using the sources uncritically, while on the other hand, when using the sources critically, it is simply not possible to write such a biography[2]
After examining early non-Muslim sources that mention Muhammad dating from the seventh century, Michael Cook concludes:
[This material] precludes any doubts as to whether Muhammad was a real person: he is named in a Syriac source that is likely to date from the time of the conquests, and there is an account of him in a Greek source of the same period [...] The Armenian chronicler of the 660s attests that Muhammad was a merchant, and confirms the centrality of Abraham in his preaching.[8]
Sources for the historical Muhammad
11th century Persian Qur'an folio page in kufic script
The main source on Muhammad's life are Muslim sources written in Arabic, which include the Qur'an and accounts of Muhammad's life written down by later Muslims, based on oral traditions. These sources are known as sīra and hadith.
There are also non-Muslim sources written in Greek, Syriac, Armenian, and Hebrew by the Jewish and Christian communities.[2] These non-Muslim written sources go back to about 636 AD and many of the interesting ones date to within some decades later. One, attributed to a 7th-century Armenian scholar Sebeos, states that Muhammad was a merchant and that his preaching revolved around the figure of Abraham.[9] There are also confirmations of Muhammad's migration from Mecca to Medina in them. However, they also contain some essential differences with regard to Muslim sources and in particular about chronology and about Muhammad's attitude towards the Jews and Palestine.[2]
The Qur'an itself has some, though very few, incidental allusions to Muhammad's life.[2] However, the "Qur'an responds constantly and often candidly to Muhammad's changing historical circumstances and contains a wealth of hidden data that are relevant to the task of the quest for the historical Muhammad."[1]
In the sīra literature, the most important extant biography are the two recensions of Ibn Ishaq's (d. 768), now known as Sīrat Rasūl Allah ("Biography/Life of the Messenger/Apostle of Allah"), which survive in the works of his editors, most notably Ibn Hisham (d. 834) and Yunus b. Bukayr (d.814-815), although not in its original form.[1] According to Ibn Hisham, Ibn Ishaq wrote his biography some 120 to 130 years after Muhammad's death. Many, but not all, scholars accept the accuracy of these biographies, though their accuracy is unascertainable.[2] After Ibn Ishaq, there are a number of shorter accounts (some of which are earlier than Ibn Ishaq) recorded in different forms (see List of earliest writers of sīra). Another biography of Muhammad is that of al-Waqidi's (d. 822) and then Ibn Sa'd's (d.844-5). Al-Waqidi is often criticized by early Muslim historians who state that the author is unreliable.[1] These biographies are hardly biographies in the modern sense. The writers did not wish to record the life of Muhammad, but rather to describe Muhammad's military expeditions and to preserve stories about Muhammad, his sayings and the reasons of revelations and interpretations of verses in the Qur'an.[1] In addition to sīra, the biographical dictionaries of Ali ibn al-Athir and Ibn Hajar provide much detail about the contemporaries of Muhammad but add little to our information about Muhammad himself.[10]
Lastly, there are the hadith collections, which include traditional, hagiographic accounts of the verbal and physical traditions of Muhammad. These date two to three hundred years after the death of Muhammad. The main feature of hadith is that of Isnad (chains of transmission). The majority of Western academics view the hadith collections with caution as accurate historical sources.[11] However, other Western historians have also defended hadith and the general authenticity of Isnad.[12]
There are no eyewitness accounts of muhammed and the Sira is the first muslim source.
Funny you should mention early sources, greek Christian, because these are the first mention, 60 years to late, and the term used is "The mahood", a title, and not a proper name.
The first mention of Muhammed by name, is in the sirat Rasual allah.
Here again we have another monkey wrench.
The Sira was written by Ibn Ishaq in around 760, I would have to check, however the original no longer exists, and was edited by Ibn hussian about 60 years later.
4/5th of it was discarded because of "matters that would distress people".
The sira is the most vile book I have ever read, and would be illegal in a pornographic movie.
Some of the discarded sira was recovered in Taburi, the next writing, but nobody knows exactly what.
The Sira is still the most accurate source for the early formation of Islam, and was just fine for 1000 years, as muslims marched their way through Europe for booty.
Now in the 21st century, every attempt is being made to hide the only record of Muhammed, on the planet, even going as far as to re-write it for the gullible west.
A good example is the new book which gets raves, "The Serrah", sounds mysteriously like the sira.
It is a re-write that alters the original text, completely telling another story altogether.
These are the books given to the west, but ignored by the terrorists.
You also mention names, but another problem is these names are fabricated in the 300 years Islam was formed..
Why is there absolutely no record of these in their actual times, showing up hundreds of years later.
Word of mouth for 300 years, is a feeble attempt to try to validate anything.
In the 70s and 80s, Cambridge converged on Islam to seek out if the religion was credible, a staff of muslims, scholars from all over put it to the test.
Scholars included Smith, Crone, satchets, Wainsworth, and dozens of others.
islam provided a lot of material bur was not ready for the scientific methods of dating it, not just blindly accepting what islam says.
All turned out to be forgeries, or missdated by hundreds of years.
It turns out, islam has not one thing to validate it's religion, and a lot to prove it wrong.
In the 70s and 80s, Cambridge converged on Islam to seek out if the religion was credible, a staff of muslims, scholars from all over put it to the test.
Scholars included Smith, Crone, satchets, Wainsworth, and dozens of others.
islam provided a lot of material bur was not ready for the scientific methods of dating it, not just blindly accepting what islam says.
All turned out to be forgeries, or missdated by hundreds of years.
It turns out, islam has not one thing to validate it's religion, and a lot to prove it wrong.
No major disagreement with you. Out of the 1,000,000+ known ahadith in existence most have never been validated and have no Isnad dating them back to the time of Muhammad(saws)
Than the question arises as to why do many non-Muslims accept sources that vilify Muhammad(saws) if they do not believe he existed?
As I said earlier. Islam is a very individual religion. It is not much about the following of Dogma and doctrine. There is even some flexibility in following the 5 pillars if a person has a bonafide reason for not doing so.
Historical presentations etc often are full of errors. History seems to typically be what the present Generation determines it to be. I believe it is George Orwell in his novel "1984" coined the phrase “He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.†I have found that to be a very true assesment.
While I am not a Quarani I do believe a person can be a reasonably good Muslim with only Qur'anic knowledge.
The only real issue I see is if the Qur'an is the actual word of Allaah(swt). But that is something each person has to decide, based on what they find as proof.
Too many people use the Ahadith without any knowledge of "The Science of Hadtith"
No major disagreement with you. Out of the 1,000,000+ known ahadith in existence most have never been validated and have no Isnad dating them back to the time of Muhammad(saws)
Than the question arises as to why do many non-Muslims accept sources that vilify Muhammad(saws) if they do not believe he existed?
As I said earlier. Islam is a very individual religion. It is not much about the following of Dogma and doctrine. There is even some flexibility in following the 5 pillars if a person has a bonafide reason for not doing so.
Historical presentations etc often are full of errors. History seems to typically be what the present Generation determines it to be. I believe it is George Orwell in his novel "1984" coined the phrase “He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.†I have found that to be a very true assesment.
While I am not a Quarani I do believe a person can be a reasonably good Muslim with only Qur'anic knowledge.
The only real issue I see is if the Qur'an is the actual word of Allaah(swt). But that is something each person has to decide, based on what they find as proof.
Too many people use the Ahadith without any knowledge of "The Science of Hadtith"
One of the interesting aspects of the Smith presentation was the validity of the Insnads.
The problem was, the most heavily documented, were the most suspect,
The methods of investigating were including, but not confined to, paper type, script type, ink type, language, and carbon 14. carbon 14 is accurate to + or -, 15 years at 2000 years.
It turned out to be a complete embarrassment for Islam as everything they produced was proven phony, They will not even try anymore, and it is next to impossible to get a high ranking muslim to face off with a western scholar, in a no BS, direct question and answer.
To answer why people vilify Muhammed is not so much that he existed or not, few muslims and non-muslims alike, have gone down this path.
The resentment is for what is attributed to him, and the end result of world problems caused by the written documentation of a man.
What I see all the time in my studies, is direct lies told by the different branches of Islam, in an effort to hide the real Muhammed, while supporting him behind their backs. This is true in relating historical content, and modern day preaching.
The 5 pillars pre-date Muhammed and Islam, to the Rock God days, and seem to be a good ground to make a stand, however the one that is giving to the poor, specifically states giving money to the custodian of the Kab'ba, and not the poor, in Muhammeds case, that would be the Qussayy family.
This same action is apparent in muslim countries today, where most people dwell in poverty, while the leaders bask in obscene wealth.
One of the interesting aspects of the Smith presentation was the validity of the Insnads.
The problem was, the most heavily documented, were the most suspect,
The methods of investigating were including, but not confined to, paper type, script type, ink type, language, and carbon 14. carbon 14 is accurate to + or -, 15 years at 2000 years.
It turned out to be a complete embarrassment for Islam as everything they produced was proven phony, They will not even try anymore, and it is next to impossible to get a high ranking muslim to face off with a western scholar, in a no BS, direct question and answer.
To answer why people vilify Muhammed is not so much that he existed or not, few muslims and non-muslims alike, have gone down this path.
The resentment is for what is attributed to him, and the end result of world problems caused by the written documentation of a man.
What I see all the time in my studies, is direct lies told by the different branches of Islam, in an effort to hide the real Muhammed, while supporting him behind their backs. This is true in relating historical content, and modern day preaching.
The 5 pillars pre-date Muhammed and Islam, to the Rock God days, and seem to be a good ground to make a stand, however the one that is giving to the poor, specifically states giving money to the custodian of the Kab'ba, and not the poor, in Muhammeds case, that would be the Qussayy family.
This same action is apparent in muslim countries today, where most people dwell in poverty, while the leaders bask in obscene wealth.
This same action is apparent in muslim countries today, where most people dwell in poverty, while the leaders bask in obscene wealth.
Is that the result of any religious doctrine or simply because of corrupt people. The same can be said of many countries, even for us in the US. We currently have some of the wealthiest people on earth and yet almost Daily I see life on Pine Ridge, Crow Creek, Standing Rock and Rosebud.
I have lived in Appalachia, Mississippi and Alabama. Poverty is a major problem in the US and many turn their eyes to it. What you seem to see only in Muslim Nations is a major sin in every developed nation.
We have our share of regions that make Third World Nations look rich. The Lakotah/Oglal Reservation of Pine Ridge has one of the lowest standards of living in the world and the lowest in the Western Hemisphere, Life expectancy is even lower than what is found in Haiti.
(The Enay (NA-Native Americans) are a subject close to my Heart as My Current Wife is Enay as was my Deceased Wife. I am quite familiar with Rez life.
These are the sights I often see here in the center of the wealthiest nation on earth
[mod quoted post removed [/mod]
I was quite comfortable during my 20 or so years as an Atheist. Had all I wanted, was quite happy lived pretty much as a world traveler and must say enjoyed life to the fullest without religion or a belief in God(swt)
But, I found reason to believe Allaah(swt) exists and now my Joy and fulfillment is to serve him the best I can
I can not turn back, as I can no more stop believing in the existence of Allaah(swt) than you can begin believing in Him,
Last edited by mensaguy; 09-01-2014 at 04:23 AM..
Reason: Trolling user banned.
[quote=Woodrow LI;36310239]This same action is apparent in muslim countries today, where most people dwell in poverty, while the leaders bask in obscene wealth.
Is that the result of any religious doctrine or simply because of corrupt people. The same can be said of many countries, even for us in the US. We currently have some of the wealthiest people on earth and yet almost Daily I see life on Pine Ridge, Crow Creek, Standing Rock and Rosebud.
Herein lies the big question, what causes the poverty.
Basically, here in the states, it is lack of education, a born into, sense of entitlement, Welfare, etc.
You will have thieves in all societies preying on the public,
But here in America, if you are caught, you go to jail.
In Islam, it is allowed by Allah.,,, Written into the religion,... Huge difference.
You cannot take exceptions, and pretend they are the rule.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
