Why no record of prophets in europe,australasia and america?
-
peace
what about George Washington, Mohandas k. Ghandi, Aristotle, Plato.
if we think objectively, messengers are all over the place who "contributes toward betterment".
you and i could be messengers too if we contribute towards betterment to inlfunce society...
peace, rifat
-
We also have a language problem here.
Somehow the English word prophet (and similar words in other western tongues) also means someone who predicst future events, in a very general way.
Terms like soothsayer, clairvoyant etc. are easily mixed up with "prophet".However, the quranic nab? has a different function. He does indeed also warn of future events but of those of a higher order.
He is one who has news (naba) of al-akhirat and who warns and brings good news to humans, if I recall the relevant verses right.
At the same time, even the word ras?l is quite often translated as "prophet".
Ras?l, though, is just simply one who brings the ris?lah of God, no matter how, I?d say.
He is the one who practices tilaw?t-ul-qur'?n, close following of al-qur'?n.
There are also other related terms, like e.g. mursal.Well, the gist of this
Nostradamus surely doesn?t qualify as a nab? or ras?l. Especially since he conveyed all his "prophecies" in a coded language, not meant for the public.
Nietzsche and Iqbal maybe got parts of the ris?lah and conveyed these parts to humanity but it seems to me that they didn?t get the whole thing.
And even severely messed up parts of it.
Buddha, on the other hand, could have been a genuine ras?l and/or nab?. From what I have read about his (probably) most authentic words this seems highly possible.
But we will never fully know ....
Lao Tse maybe also was.
But again, we will never fully know ...Last note
I think messengers and prophets of Allah need to have an active role. I imagine Niezsche, Aristotle and Plato as more sitting in their little room and writing some stuff or sharing it with some few pupils. But not really DOING much .... -
There is no evidence whatsoever that Buddah existed in the past, all you say guys is hearsay like the hadith exactly, Haha
-
My uncle has been asking me a question for some time now...He asks Why were prophets only seemingly sent to arab/semitic people only?...
Where is prophet 'bob' of the US,or nabi 'nick' of the Uk?...And while we are on the topic...rasool 'Sheila' from australia? Why no women,europeans,australians or americans?....My uncle sometimes mischieviously says,its because those areas with the 'traditional' 'documented' prophets,are the ones that most needed guidance,and so prophets were sent therehello
the followings may be the reasons
1- God couldnt find any briton/englishman who was spiritually, morally eligible for being a prophet. D
2- God wants all britons to be hell creatures and deliberately he has not sent them any messenger. D
3- No need to send any messenger to britons because britons as fierce imperialists have already been everywhere to exploit the rest of the world and so britons could easily access all scriptures sent to other people all over the world. D
If britons were believers then we would have to go on putting up with them in the nextworld, but they are hell creatures... Thank God! ) )
- Verily, those who are bent on denying the truth - from among the followers of earlier revelation or from among those who ascribe divinity to aught beside God - will find themselves in the fire of hell, therein to abide they are the worst of all creatures.
-
Peace Ahmed
Partly yes, partly know.
As I said, we will never fuly know the details of his life and, you?re right, every other claim is hearsay.
But of course a certain philosophy does not come from nowhere.So, studying those pieces of Buddhist philosophy that are deemed (!) as most old and most authentic (not all of Buddhism is) I?d say
Wherever and from whomever that stuff comes, it preaches in most parts a message that is not in contradiction to al-qur'?n and could have come from a nab? or a ras?l.And, no, those pieces do not include ideas of literal reincarnation, atheism or other parts of later Buddhism.
Additionally, these pieces forbid worship of images and call to the aknowledgement of one truth and to an ethical life.But, again, we will never fully know .....
-
peace layla,
1- God couldnt find any briton/englishman who was spiritually, morally eligible for being a prophet.
2- God wants all britons to be hell creatures and deliberately he has not sent them any messenger.
3- No need to send any messenger to britons because britons as fierce imperialists have already been everywhere to exploit the rest of the world and so britons could easily access all scriptures sent to other people all over the world.
YOU CALL THIS GOD THE MERCIFUL BENEFACTOR ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? o
-
P.S
Ahmed, believing that Muhammad Ibn Abdullah existed as a historical person is also hearsay, to a certain extent.
We will not fully know that one as well.
Though I do believe that he existed.Lol Layla
that is exactly what I'm saying, so when the Quran aloners suggest as such, they have to show us exactly how they accept history records, in a way we can not prove that anyone existed whom we never saw
agree?
-
For those who call Mohammad, "Mohammad ibn Abd Allah", can you please tell me where you got this info from and how you verfied it?, how did you know that Mohammad father was named Abd Allah
please don't bring any hadith, I need somethin from the Quran
cheers
-
Sal?m Ahmed
Oh, sorry. Obviously I missed an important development of yours. )
Last time I discussed with you you were the one who got angry when someone says that there is no historical proof for the existence of the man Muhammad.
Sorry for taking for granted that you still think that way!Regards,
Leyla
-
There Never Was A People Without A Warner
Verily We have sent thee (Muhammad) in truth as a bearer of glad tidings and as a warner, And there never was a people without a warner having lived among them (in the past).(24)
For We assuredly sent amongst every People an apostle (with the Command) "Serve Allah and eshew Evil" Of the people were some whom Allah guided and some on whom Error became inevitably (established). So travel through the earth and see what was the end of those who denied (the Truth).
(36)
Allah desired not to tell us about all the messengers He sent
And Messengers (Prophets who received revealed books) We have mentioned unto thee (Muhammad) before, And Messengers We have not mentioned unto thee; And Allah spake directly unto Moses.(164)
Why Allah did not mention all the messengers in the Quran?, because Allah is a God and He does what He wants and his creatures can't ask him why
Abiding therein so long as the heavens and the earth endure, except as your Lord please; surely your Lord is the mighty doer of what He intends.(107)
In many other cases though, when lost humans take their ego as their own man made god, i guess that weak man made god does what his master (the human) intends
Salam
-
Sal?m Ahmed
salam sister
Oh, sorry. Obviously I missed an important development of yours.
nice one sister, no development here, i'm using the Quran aloners flawed logic, you and Mquran call him Moahammad Ibn Abd Allah, now I can prove to myself where this name came from, i want you to enlighten me in how you managed to call him Mohammad Ibn Abd Allah using the Quran alone please?
if you resorted to the hadith then sorry this is double standards, confusion and non sensible by you
if you believed the sunni when they called him Mohammad Ibn Abd allah, then how come you did that?, it still sounds double standards, confusion and non sensible by you
Last time I discussed with you you were the one who got angry when someone says that there is no historical proof for the existence of the man Muhammad.
well, I can't remember really, whoever that man is, i'm sure according to the Quran that he is heading to a secured seat in hell, next to "possibly" Satan and Bin Laden
as I said sister, i can prove to myself that Mohammad exitsed or not and I care less if others believe in that
what i'm asking you now dear sister, how a Quran aloner like you and Mquran call Mohammad, Mohammad Ibn Abd Allah?, i need an answer from the Quran please, or at least you explain to me why you followed the sunni in that asspect if you fail to get me an answer from the Quran?, thanks
Sorry for taking for granted that you still think that way!
Regards,
Leyla
of course I think the same way regarding The Quran and message since i was a teen so please do and take it for granted what you have concluded in the past, however I can't take it for granted now that you are a Quran aloner, because you follow the sunni in calling Mohammad, Mohammad Ibn Abd Allah
no offence dear sister, but i'm a professional in catching others red handed
Peace
-
No red hand catch, sorry!
I only call him Muhammad Ibn Abdullah out of social convention.
But this convention has no relevance in the d?n for me.
I could likewise call him Muhammad the Arab or whatever.
The whole historical person has no relevance in the d?n for me, only that maybe probably (!) revelation of al-qur'?n was given to him. Maybe probably, not more.While I have conviction in al-qur'?n, I do not have conviction of the historical existence of that person.
I only ASSUME that he existed.So, your last post does not speak much to me.
-
There is no evidence whatsoever that Buddah existed in the past, all you say guys is hearsay like the hadith exactly, Haha
Peace Ahmed,
Yes, we don't have clear cut proof that somone called the "buddha" existed. There is some evidence though. Like the existence of the religion "Buddhism." And they even have "hadith" of buddha, his sayings in everything.
-
No red hand catch, sorry!
I only call him Muhammad Ibn Abdullah out of social convention.
But this convention has no relevance in the d?n for me.
I could likewise call him Muhammad the Arab or whatever.
The whole historical person has no relevance in the d?n for me, only that maybe probably (!) revelation of al-qur'?n was given to him. Maybe probably, not more.While I have conviction in al-qur'?n, I do not have conviction of the historical existence of that person.
I only ASSUME that he existed.So, your last post does not speak much to me.
well sister
it does, it made you admit that you assume he existed, well i see you using the wrong word "assume" that's all, i guess you meant "Believe"
haha sister
see, it is all about believing
now please help an english language ignorant like me and explain to me what the english language mean by the word believe?
btw, i never called Mohammad, Mohammad ibn abd Allah
thank you
-
There is no evidence whatsoever that Buddah existed in the past, all you say guys is hearsay like the hadith exactly, Haha
Peace Ahmed,
Yes, we don't have clear cut proof that somone called the "buddha" existed. There is some evidence though. Like the existence of the religion "Buddhism." And they even have "hadith" of buddha, his sayings in everything.
Peace bro
thanks man, so if we will give the haidth of mister Buddah any value, why not giving the haidth of mister Mohammad any value?
cheers