• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

How much time do we really have?

Brian-M said:
The Roman-Persian war ended in 629, the Quran didn't exist until after 632. But even assuming that Mohammed did predict who would before the fighting ended, so what? If he guessed the outcome randomly he'd still have a 50% chance of being right.



Predicting that a staunch enemy of a religion will die without converting to that religion has a very high (although not certain) chance of being true. Not impressive in the slightest.



A thought occurs to me. The Quran wasn't written until after Mohammud died, so how can we be in any way sure that the "predictions" that are supposed to have come true were not added retrospectively to bolster the reputation of their prophet?



How do we know it was correct? Looking it up, the only source I can find that supports this claim is the Quran itself. If there's nothing to support this claim other than the fact that it's mentioned in the Quran, then why should we take it as evidence of the Quran's accuracy?



The Quran borrowed heavily from the Bible. This prediction is clearly taken from Deuteronomy 30:1-5.



So you admit that the Quran was wrong? The Pharoah died long, long ago, so it's clearly wrong..

Or are you talking about the Egyptian practice of embalming and preserving the bodies of the Pharaohs? All Pharaohs got that treatment and this was well known practice even in Mohammad's time. It was done by humans, not God, and everybody knew about it. No special revelations here.



Rediscoverd at what time? Looking up that city, all I find is that in 1996 an amateur archaeologist claimed to have found the remains of that city at Shisr in Dhofar province, but later realized that he was wrong. A later report in 2002 by a geology professor revealed that the NASA satellite data that the claim had been based on was misleading, and the site was just an isolated watering hole with a single building.

There's no evidence that this city the Quran claims that God destroyed ever existed.



If it was God protecting the Quran from changes/corruption, why did Uthman ibn Affan find it necessary to compile a standardized Quran in 653 and send copies of it to every province along with orders that all other Qurans were to be burned?


People who are convinced that the text is true also happen to believe that it's reliable? So what?

Catholicism is just one of the many denominations of Christianity, so that leaves Islam still sitting at #2.

Your entire post is garbage.
Click to expand...

This. All of this.

Polaris said:
Speaking of glasses, I left mine at home today. Is that Brian Cranston?
Click to expand...

Burgess Meredith.
 
I think you can see mikeb768 these tend to be disputable. So let's clear it up.

Is there any prophecy in there that you'd like to put forward that is coming up, in a reasonable amount of time, that we could agree on and then test?
 
Mike's avatar appears to be from the game Diablo III, one of the angels in a cinematic.

He may be too busy laying the smackdown on various of Diablo's servants to discuss this with us.
 
I want to see a debate between religious doomers...
Something like Christian vs Islamic vs Maya doom prophecies.
 
Yellow Astra said:
Jewish war = Jesus second coming, end of story.
So there you have a lie already in quran, because the bible don't talk about the end of the world as planet, it talks about the end of the Jewish times (Priesthood, Temple). And if you understood this then you realize that there are no more Prophets after 70 AD, so therefore he just made things up.
As we would say copy and paste from the bible books. So he is just another crook.
Click to expand...

Not sure I follow, the Quran contains a lie because of something found in the Bible?

Also a similar question for you, something I have written about in a previous post. "Why didn't Muhammad copy the mistakes which are found in the Bible as well?" Link
 
mikeb768 said:
Not sure I follow, the Quran contains a lie because of something found in the Bible?

Also a similar question for you, something I have written about in a previous post. "Why didn't Muhammad copy the mistakes which are found in the Bible as well?" Link
Click to expand...

Because he was just as ignorant as anyone else in those days.

It is pretty obvious that this silly book was written by humans without any magical influence. Except maybe the odd hallucinogen...
 
Brian-M said:
A thought occurs to me. The Quran wasn't written until after Mohammud died, so how can we be in any way sure that the "predictions" that are supposed to have come true were not added retrospectively to bolster the reputation of their prophet?
Click to expand...

This maybe something which is difficult to understand for someone who is unaware of the fact that the Quran literally means the "the recitation", so just like it is memorized by heart today by people of all ages, it was both circulation and memorized by heart by many of his followers during the life of the prophet.

As can be seen here "Koran by Heart"

And although the exact chronological order is something which is not agreed upon, we have a good understanding of when and where certain verses were revealed and the impacts which they had on the people and even society at large. Link
 
mikeb768 said:
This maybe something which is difficult to understand for someone who is unaware of the fact that the Quran literally means the "the recitation", so just like it is memorized by heart today by people of all ages, it was both circulation and memorized by heart by many of his followers during the life of the prophet.

As can be seen here "Koran by Heart"

And although the exact chronological order is something which is not agreed upon, we have a good understanding of when and where certain verses were revealed and the impacts which they had on the people and even society at large. Link
Click to expand...

Doesn't affect the point that he was just making **** up, though.
 
mikeb768 said:
This maybe something which is difficult to understand for someone who is unaware of the fact that the Quran literally means the "the recitation", so just like it is memorized by heart today by people of all ages, it was both circulation and memorized by heart by many of his followers during the life of the prophet.
Click to expand...

And, as Brian-M pointed out, the Companions each had versions of the Qur'an that differed from each other, which is why 'Uthman had to codify a definitive version and order all the variant copies to be burned.

And even then, there were still variances in the text, since, as you say, it was all about recitation, and there were a number of different "recitations", or Qira'at.
 
Darth Rotor said:
Not yet, but Pope Francis I has barely cracked his knuckles in whatever attempts he has in reforming the Church. Check the usual encyclicals coming out of the Vatican to see if that topic comes up. (Gonna bet the under on that one).

On Topic: If the 12th Imam ever arrives, and is recognized, I suspect that no small amount of trouble will attend that occasion. I am guessing that the prophecy in the OP is written from the Sunni, rather than Shia, perspective.
Click to expand...

The Sunni and Shia views are not so different regarding the Mahdi, while the Shias may have a more elaborate background story, both groups agree on many other aspects of his coming. This is something which is not actually considered to be one of the Major Signs although his coming is said to take place around the same period as the emergence of the Anti Christ and also spans over the time period during which Jesus will return.

Good question, and way to stay on topic!
 
mikeb768 said:
The Sunni and Shia views are not so different regarding the Mahdi, while the Shias may have a more elaborate background story, both groups agree on many other aspects of his coming.
Click to expand...

The differences go beyond merely a "background story". Either the Mahdi is the same Twelfth Imam who was born in the 9th Century, or he isn't. The Sunni definitely don't believe he'll be Muhammad al-Mahdi returning from Occultation, like the Shia do, so one group or the other are going to be apocalyptically disappointed when the Mahdi's identity (or lack thereof) is revealed, don't you agree?
 
Last edited:
A'isha said:
The differences go beyond merely a "background story". Either the Mahdi is the same Twelfth Imam who was born in the 9th Century, or he isn't. The Sunni definitely don't believe he'll be Muhammad al-Mahdi returning from Occultation, like the Shia do, so one group or the other are going to be apocalyptically disappointed when the Mahdi's identity (or lack thereof) is revealed, don't you agree?
Click to expand...

No I don't agree. The things which are said to ensue on account of his arrival will more than likely outweigh minor issues of discrepancy, such as his exact identity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom