Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Users
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Free Minds Forum Icon
  1. Home
  2. General Issues / Questions
  3. General Issues / Questions
  4. Why no record of prophets in europe,australasia and america?

Why no record of prophets in europe,australasia and america?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Issues / Questions
137 Posts 8 Posters 4.9k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • U Offline
    U Offline
    unknownuser
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Peace all. 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 there....He also states that maybe the people in the middle east didnt know that america,australia or europe existed,and so they didnt know that there may be prophets outside of the middle-eastern 'cartel'...
    Any ideas....?
    Peace all.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • B Offline
      B Offline
      bmbmm
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Salam,

      Interesting point. I think finding a record is not the criterior to justify the sending of messengers to these places. It there are records then its cool. I think what one looks at is the message, through many means.

      Peace

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • U Offline
        U Offline
        unknownuser
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        Peace bmbmm. He is asking,why no evidence in quran or other sources,of prophets outside the middle east? Even fossil records will do for wolfie...
        Peace all.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • P Offline
          P Offline
          phoenix1
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          peace enquirer,

          you are forgetting people like Buddha and Socrates. Just because Jesus and Muhammad are the most popular doesn't mean they were the only ones.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • U Offline
            U Offline
            unknownuser
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            Peace phoenix.Yes you are right...I said that to my uncle as well...but some muslims dont recognise the 'geniuses' you mentioned...And lets not forget niestcze(pbuh) and einstein.(pbuh.)
            Peace all.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • M Offline
              M Offline
              mquran
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              Salaamun alaikum,

              I believe al-quraan when it says that all ummas will recieve messengers (10/47). However, when your uncle seeks a 'record' of messengers, one can already surmise the kind of thing he's looking for.

              I have a non-immediate neighbour who's known, like Morgan Freeman's character in Shawshank Redemption, to be a man who can get things. He provides this service to his neighbours to ease their burdens. He also gives snippets of wisdom about God who he 'feels' helps those who helps others. Why isn't he a 'rasul' ?

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • P Offline
                P Offline
                phoenix1
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                peace enquirer,

                Einstein was a genius, but i don't know about his spiritual side. Buddha was spiritually enlightened. What his IQ was doesn't matter.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • U Offline
                  U Offline
                  unknownuser
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #8

                  Peace phoenix. From what i have read of einstein he was a very 'spiritual' and humane person....You are right some people can be very high IQ but not spiritual or humane...
                  Niesctczes' books are absolutely awesome,that man had some ideas way ahead of his time...He seemed very spiritual and humane too...
                  Peace all. Ps;socrates was also a superb and spiritual brother... ) And as for buddha,from what i have read of him he was one of the all-time greatest,if not the greatest brothers...

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • M Offline
                    M Offline
                    mquran
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #9

                    Niesctczes' books are absolutely awesome,that man had some ideas way ahead of his time...He seemed very spiritual and humane too...

                    How was Nietzsche humane ? He detested 'slave morality' and espoused the doctrine of the superman. Neitzsche in my view negated spirituality.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • B Offline
                      B Offline
                      bmbmm
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #10

                      Niesctczes' books are absolutely awesome,that man had some ideas way ahead of his time...He seemed very spiritual and humane too...

                      How was Nietzsche humane ? He detested 'slave morality' and espoused the doctrine of the superman. Neitzsche in my view negated spirituality.

                      OK

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • P Offline
                        P Offline
                        phoenix1
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #11

                        peace

                        I gotta learn more about Niesctczes.

                        What about Da Vinci?

                        and what about women?
                        maybe buddha was a transexual?

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • P Offline
                          P Offline
                          phoenix1
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #12

                          peace bmbmm,

                          you said "OK"

                          what does that mean?

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • U Offline
                            U Offline
                            unknownuser
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #13

                            Peace mquran. From what i have read,the slave mentality he detested was people accepting things (eg the corrupted christian morals of the time.) unquestioningly and without verification.
                            And his superman doctrine was that people should take action and responsibility for their own deeds/free-will to become 'better,more creative people'....That is my view/take on what i read of his work. Many people use/interpret his work for good or bad.
                            Peace all.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • M Offline
                              M Offline
                              mquran
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #14

                              Phoenix I gotta learn more about Niesctczes.

                              Start with his introduction from www.iconbooks.co.uk then move on to 'how to read neitzsche', another excellent introduction.

                              Enquirer. From what i have read,the slave mentality he detested was people accepting things (eg the corrupted christian morals of the time.) unquestioningly.

                              Oh ok, I sort of saw the 'guilt' and 'suffering' factor as the main bone of his contention but that's just me.

                              And his superman doctrine was that people should take action and responsibility for their own deeds/free-will to become 'better people'....That is my view/take on what i read of his work. Many people use his work for good or bad.

                              As far as I can see, 'better people' here isn't the comparitive form of 'good' kind of 'better. But yes, this is simply my take on Neitzsche. Apparently, Iqbal was said to have been inspired by his superman idea. I can certainly see similarities from what I've read of Iqbal.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • U Offline
                                U Offline
                                unknownuser
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #15

                                Peace phoenix. The bible,i believe,mentions 'ruth' as a prophet...I dont know anything about da-vinci..Maybe others can help with him? .Nostradamus was also an interesting fellow,some say he predicted the twin towers (9-11.) about 500 years ago...and hitler,etc.etc...
                                Im sure there were women prophets,and homosexual,and transexual ones too.
                                peace all. ps;niesctze ideas are sometimes 'unusual' on the surface,but he is a genius,and has fantastic ideas.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • U Offline
                                  U Offline
                                  unknownuser
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #16

                                  Peace mquran. I think iqbal was a genius too.What do you think of iqbal?

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • M Offline
                                    M Offline
                                    mquran
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #17

                                    I think iqbal was a genius too

                                    Well, I look at a person's ideas and use them as face value. I never met Nietzsche or Iqbal but I'm certainly fascinated by their philosophy. At the same time, if I were concerned, I'd be perplexed at the contradictions in Iqbal's positions. Iqbal displayed a very acute sense of the philosophy of al-quraan yet at the same time displayed a very unquranic 'muslim nationalism'. But like I say, this has no bearing on me, only that's interested reading is all.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • U Offline
                                      U Offline
                                      unknownuser
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #18

                                      Peace mquran. Yes,they are all human,and so have the potential for mistakes,contradictions,incomplete understandings etc...I think we can get ideas off these guys,and then ascertain/verify if the ideas are practically beneficial or not,even if we have to modify,or reject some of their ideas...
                                      Peace all.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • S Offline
                                        S Offline
                                        Someone
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #19

                                        Peace all,

                                        Nowhere do I see in the reading something alluding to that all "anbyae" were from the middle east, they can be from anywhere, even from the amazon jungle, from the mayas and the aztecs.

                                        I think that one of the reasons they seem to come all from that place is geography.

                                        For a long time, middle east is the terestrial connection for three continents, thus the easiest and cheapest way of travelling. Many People from the three continents coexist in that region, the traveller, to locals, caravans, merchants etc... Each of them bringing his culture, stories. It is a good environment for hearsay to floorish, making all kind of stories and refining them. This is also true with knowledge. So with time, the majority of these stories were attached to that region.

                                        --

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • L Offline
                                          L Offline
                                          Leyla
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #20

                                          Peace

                                          If I may throw my words in here ....
                                          I feel troubled by Nietzsche.
                                          Some of his philosophy seems so superb .... but not only does he lack spirituality, his moral theory is disturbing.
                                          Actually I would even say that he has more spirituality than sense of morality.

                                          My relationship to Iqbal is similar. His "Reconstrusction" is one of the best pieces I ever had but his fractionalizing dreams of two nations.... seems so contradictory to me.

                                          However, one needs to aknowledge that both these individuals published over a long time. Of course there opinions and thought systems evolved over time, changed, touched new dimensions.
                                          The problem is that we don?t really see this anymore when we nowadays take "THE philosophy of Iqbal" or "THE philosophy of Nietzsche".

                                          Regards,

                                          Leyla

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Users