Freethought & Rationalism Archive

TruthPrevails · 04-06-2012, 05:28 AM

I don't know, but there are questions being raised on this issue.
I am aware Moses, Buddha (Guatama), Jesus, of their respective holy texts are likely to be mythical persons. So there is a likelihood, Muhammad could be a myth.

As usual, with such a question, it is likely there could a real person, e.g. a prince for the Buddha, but what is presented in the holy texts is far from what the real person was.

Here is one view on the question.

Quote:

Jesus Christ, the figure at the center of the Christian bible, may well have never existed. Thanks to countless books, films, articles, and other elements, more and more people have started to realize that there is little to no historical evidence in support of this man who supposedly made such a huge impact in his day.

Muslims often claim, or seem to believe, that their prophet Muhammad is on more solid historical grounding than Jesus, yet most of the time, the conversation seems to progress no further.

Muhammad's existence is simply accepted as a fact that has been so well established that clarification is assumed to be unnecessary.

Indeed, many Muslim scholars and academics today will allege that Muhammad's life is better documented than the life of Christ, but when we push it beyond their simple assurance, will we find that this is correct?

Views?

TruthPrevails · 04-06-2012, 05:29 AM

Here is another view.

TruthPrevails · 04-06-2012, 05:34 AM

Quote:

Professor Hired for Outreach to Muslims Delivers a Jolt
Islamic Theologian's Theory: It's Likely the Prophet Muhammad Never Existed

MÜNSTER, Germany -- Muhammad Sven Kalisch, a Muslim convert and Germany's first professor of Islamic theology, fasts during the Muslim holy month, doesn't like to shake hands with Muslim women and has spent years studying Islamic scripture. Islam, he says, guides his life.

So it came as something of a surprise when Prof. Kalisch announced the fruit of his theological research. His conclusion: The Prophet Muhammad probably never existed.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122669909279629451.html

Chili · 04-06-2012, 06:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TruthPrevails

I don't know, but there are questions being raised on this issue.
I am aware Moses, Buddha (Guatama), Jesus, of their respective holy texts are likely to be mythical persons. So there is a likelihood, Muhammad could be a myth.

As usual, with such a question, it is likely there could a real person, e.g. a prince for the Buddha, but what is presented in the holy texts is far from what the real person was.

Here is one view on the question.

Quote:

Jesus Christ, the figure at the center of the Christian bible, may well have never existed. Thanks to countless books, films, articles, and other elements, more and more people have started to realize that there is little to no historical evidence in support of this man who supposedly made such a huge impact in his day.

Muslims often claim, or seem to believe, that their prophet Muhammad is on more solid historical grounding than Jesus, yet most of the time, the conversation seems to progress no further.

Muhammad's existence is simply accepted as a fact that has been so well established that clarification is assumed to be unnecessary.

Indeed, many Muslim scholars and academics today will allege that Muhammad's life is better documented than the life of Christ, but when we push it beyond their simple assurance, will we find that this is correct?

Views?

Must be careful here because myth is real and we are not. So to say that they were mythical makes them real and this Moses was not real, but Siddharta was.

Moses was a reformer, like Muhammad, with his ass on fire, as we say, like our friend Billy here and Luther, and Hitler and soo many more, each with their own agenda to reform the world around themselves instead of their own mind.

Jesus was an insurrectionist as second Adam and so really was the pupa stage in the life of Joseph and Christians kind of are placenta worshipers while the Christ got away on them and hence they have fallen from Gods favor, here again, as the saved sinners they proudly proclaim to be with the hope of better days ahead.

Moses' problem was that he should not have parted the water to get into the promised land but walk on top instead, as on 'the other side of life' that is all there is now with reason crucified, and so insanity begins for him and them.

Scholars are students and they do not really know. I think they used to call them goat-humpers for not hearing the voice of the shepherd and are just looking for fresh one and telling us how good it was.

Muslims here made hogs their target, with the house not empty when they received. And of course Jesus and Muhammad were real, but the question now becomes: what is real?

In my view Jesus was in illusion as second Adam and Muhammed was historic as Reformer.

See when the guy says 'Jesus Christ' he already tells us that he does not know because Jesus was not Christ and actually needed to die for Christ 'to be' and is why he was never called Christ in the Gosples until after Jesus died. . . . and so who was the 'he' they called Jesus was Christ was born?

Steve Weiss · 04-06-2012, 06:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TruthPrevails

Quote:

Professor Hired for Outreach to Muslims Delivers a Jolt
Islamic Theologian's Theory: It's Likely the Prophet Muhammad Never Existed

MÜNSTER, Germany -- Muhammad Sven Kalisch, a Muslim convert and Germany's first professor of Islamic theology, fasts during the Muslim holy month, doesn't like to shake hands with Muslim women and has spent years studying Islamic scripture. Islam, he says, guides his life.

So it came as something of a surprise when Prof. Kalisch announced the fruit of his theological research. His conclusion: The Prophet Muhammad probably never existed.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122669909279629451.html

Oh my god! Another elaborate myth is finding its rightful place in the dustbin of history. Zero evidence for an Abraham and a Moses, equally none for Jesus, and now even the existence of the last of the Abrahamic prophets is being called into justified question, not on minor issues of doctrine but as to an actual existence as such.

No writings about the life of the prophet for 200 years after his death exist and even those oral traditions being edited and cleansed for public consumption. How much credence can one give to any historical records with provenance that flimsy? Even contemporary eyewitness accounts are notoriously inaccurate and vary from observer to observer, and how much more insubstantial must biased hearsay accounts be of alleged holymen? The big men of Abrahamic religions exposed for the myths that they are? What must become of these traditions when they are shown to be wearing no clothes? Will Buddha's existence be the next to be added to the list as bogus?

Chili · 04-06-2012, 06:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TruthPrevails

Quote:

Professor Hired for Outreach to Muslims Delivers a Jolt
Islamic Theologian's Theory: It's Likely the Prophet Muhammad Never Existed

MÜNSTER, Germany -- Muhammad Sven Kalisch, a Muslim convert and Germany's first professor of Islamic theology, fasts during the Muslim holy month, doesn't like to shake hands with Muslim women and has spent years studying Islamic scripture. Islam, he says, guides his life.

So it came as something of a surprise when Prof. Kalisch announced the fruit of his theological research. His conclusion: The Prophet Muhammad probably never existed.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122669909279629451.html

. . . he converted to Islam because it was a more "rational religion" while he likes to be disciplined by their tradition to draw near to his own 'holiness.' Interesting contradiction.

TruthPrevails · 04-06-2012, 07:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Weiss

Will Buddha's existence be the next to be added to the list as bogus?

As a side note, re OP,

Quote:

Originally Posted by OP

I am aware Moses, Buddha (Guatama), Jesus, of their respective holy texts are likely to be mythical persons.
As usual, with such a question, it is likely there could a real person, e.g. a prince for the Buddha, but what is presented in the holy texts is far from what the real person was.

TruthPrevails · 04-06-2012, 07:11 AM

A note from,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Muhammad

Quote:

Attempts to distinguish between the historical elements and the unhistorical elements of many of the reports of Muhammad have not been very successful.[5] A major source of difficulty in the quest for the historical Muhammad is the modern lack of knowledge about pre-Islamic Arabia.[6] 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]

Steve Weiss · 04-06-2012, 07:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

Quote:

Originally Posted by TruthPrevails

I don't know, but there are questions being raised on this issue.
I am aware Moses, Buddha (Guatama), Jesus, of their respective holy texts are likely to be mythical persons. So there is a likelihood, Muhammad could be a myth.

As usual, with such a question, it is likely there could a real person, e.g. a prince for the Buddha, but what is presented in the holy texts is far from what the real person was.

Here is one view on the question.

Views?

Must be careful here because myth is real and we are not. So to say that they were mythical makes them real and this Moses was not real, but Siddharta was.

Moses was a reformer, like Muhammad, with his ass on fire, as we say, like our friend Billy here and Luther, and Hitler and soo many more, each with their own agenda to reform the world around themselves instead of their own mind.

Jesus was an insurrectionist as second Adam and so really was the pupa stage in the life of Joseph and Christians kind of are placenta worshipers while the Christ got away on them and hence they have fallen from Gods favor, here again, as the saved sinners they proudly proclaim to be with the hope of better days ahead.

Moses' problem was that he should not have parted the water to get into the promised land but walk on top instead, as on 'the other side of life' that is all there is now with reason crucified, and so insanity begins for him and them.

Scholars are students and they do not really know. I think they used to call them goat-humpers for not hearing the voice of the shepherd and are just looking for fresh one and telling us how good it was.

Muslims here made hogs their target, with the house not empty when they received. And of course Jesus and Muhammad were real, but the question now becomes: what is real?

In my view Jesus was in illusion as second Adam and Muhammed was historic as Reformer.

See when the guy says 'Jesus Christ' he already tells us that he does not know because Jesus was not Christ and actually needed to die for Christ 'to be' and is why he was never called Christ in the Gosples until after Jesus died. . . . and so who was the 'he' they called Jesus was Christ was born?

None of the above is supported by historical evidence.

Steve Weiss · 04-06-2012, 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TruthPrevails

Here is another view.

Too bad Jay Smith, an apologist for Christianity, does not apply his critical mind to Christianity in the same way that he does to Islam. All Abrahamic religions are equally invalid and irrational.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-06-2012, 05:29 AM	#2
TruthPrevails Banned Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Non-theist orbiting the Sun Posts: 6,761	Here is another view.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.