gnostic
The Lost One
godobeyer said:Evidence it's the Quran its self , because we believe that the Quran could not made by human .
The Qur'an can't be evidence to itself. :biglaugh:
And your belief in the book, doesn't mean all your beliefs to be evidences.
That's circular logic. There so much flaws in that sort of thinking.
godobeyer said:Even he knows a little , where is the problem ?
it's a certification of not guilty to copy/paste from the Torah and Gospel ?
Muhammad (pbuh) was illiturate , which mean he could not read or write .
I actually have ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER about Muhammad knowing biblical stories before he became a prophet. The problem seemed to be the Muslims, who think that just because he may not be able to read, that he couldn't hear the stories being recited or preached by Jews or Christians. There is no logic with the way they think Muhammad was.
People (Muslims) who think like that, think that Muhammad must be very stupid. I don't think Muhamamd is stupid at all. He broke away from Judaism and Christianity to start a completely new religion and he had inspired people to fight for his cause and for the survival of his fledgling religion. That's not stupid at all.
Some people can learn through reading, best. While other preferred to listen. The third way to learn is through seeing (observation) and doing. So not being able to read at that time (Muhammad's) doesn't mean anything.
That's why I only feel contempt for people who think that the only way to learn stories is through reading. Right now, you are equating illiteracy with stupidity. You keep saying he can't read.
Many Christians couldn't read too, at that time. But that didn't stop them from learning the gospels through missionaries...through words of mouth. Storytellers, bards were illiterate, and these stories were passed on through listening to recitals, hence oral traditions.
Last edited: