Proud Muslim said:
Yes they were never mentioned as if they did not exist even though Krishna existed thousands of years before Moses (Peace Be Upon Him). The difference i see is that Judeo-Christian scriptures ignored totally Krishna and Buddha, who am i supposed to consider Ishmael status through them?
This is a very weak argument. I don't see why it would have anything to to do with Krishna and Buddha.
Also the Buddha, or Siddhārtha Gautama flourished in the late 6th century and early 5th century BCE, a historical and legendary figure...more real than I can say about Abraham, Ishmael and Issac...so what could be possible daft reason would Moses even know of the Buddha?
Why would you think that Moses possible know what go on in India?
Of course, the Hebrew and Christian scriptures would ignore other religious figures around the world, but doesn't mean they don't exist in other cultures. The vast distance of geographical locations would have prevented people knowing each other religions.
Do you think that Moses' Exodus took him all the way to India?
I know that your prophet and Muslims like to exaggerate, but your illogic is quite staggering.
The Buddha or Siddhārtha Gautama, lived about a thousand years before Muhammad, and yet he wrote nothing of him.
Do Muhammad write of anything about the Buddha?
If Muhammad didn't write anything of either religious figure, why would Moses?
Being a prophet doesn't mean he is Mr Know-it-all, and that he would know what goes around the other side of the world.
Because they are prophets to the Bahais who are also considered of the Abrahamic religions. I as a Muslim cannot say they were not prophets because Allah (SWT) said that He sent many messengers and prophets to nations, they could very well be among them.
So????
You're quite daft.
Bahá'u'lláh lived in the 19th century. The earliest Islamic empire to conquer India was in late Middle Ages. During the centuries they have been in India, they would have known the Hindu and Buddhist religions by then. By Bahá'u'lláh's time, he would have these non-Islamic religious figures been well-known to the Bahá'í.
Your prophet didn't know of the Buddha and Krishna. Why didn't he write anything of them?
What does the Bahá'í Faith have anything to do with Ishmael being a prophet?
Tell me, Proud Muslim.
Would Muhammad know of any the Mayan deities of his time?
Or do you think the Olmec or Mayan civilisation would know about Ishmael or Muhammad?
Your introduction of the Bahá'í Faith into the whole debate about Ishmael has nothing to do with the thread, except perhaps trying to sidetrack me.
Are you trying to sidetrack me? Are you trying to divert me from the current thread?
Proud Muslim said:
Why did you single out "Islamic notion" in your deragtory comment? With each post you prove you have this sick fixation with Islam.
I supposed that you are referring to this comment.
gnostic said:
Or does it come down the stupid Islamic notion that men are stronger?
Well, the Qur'an do have the verse, where men are stronger, hence he is the master, so she must obey him.
To me it is lame excuse by Muhammad to make women feel inferior to men. Why would a strong and intelligent women should not be able decide what's right and wrong.
Do you want me to say Judaism and Christianity are misogynist and sexist religions?
Ok, they (Judaism and Christianity) are misogynist and sexist religions, just like Islam. I have no problem thinking that many of teachings and customs are stupidly archaic.
Judaism is a stupid religion. And so is Christianity. Does that make you feel better?
Do you want me to show respect for religions that I know are stupid, archaic and misogynist?
Well, not in your life time.
Muslims have been making lame interpretations of their own Qur'an in regards to the so-called scientific miracle in that modern science prove the Qur'an. And if I called it stupid, because there are no better words to describe their attempts of twisting the context of sacred book to make it seem "scientific", is nothing more than propaganda. Do you want me to respect such claims as being valid?
Proud Muslim said:
Back to the point, don't shift the topic here. The fact is Hagar is not considered prophet in the Judeo-Christian scriptures even though she fits their prophethood criteria, why not discuss this inconsistency in another thread?
Why don't we discuss here?
It is about prophethood of Ishmael, and I don't mind discussing about Abraham or Hagar here, because the whole issues are related.
If you read the Genesis, only ONCE did the word "prophet" was ever used (Genesis 20). Your scripture don't deny that Adam, Noah, Isaac and Jacob to be prophets, and yet none once were they ever called "prophet" in Genesis.
With that in mind, do the Hebrew scriptures require to say "prophet" next to Hagar's name for her to be a prophetess?
The requirement of being prophet is quite clear. A revelation revealed by a divine being or one of his agents (ie. angel).
If it is suitable for Muhammad being called a prophet, then why not Hagar? An angel or God went to Hagar twice. Don't that fit the requirement?
Someone here, said that requirement of being "prophet" is that the person to be "male". (Was it you? I don't remember.) Why?
It is the lamest excuse.
Proud Muslim said:
The fact that Abraham (PBUH) DID attempt to propogate God's message and guide his folks. The fact that he (PBUH) was supported with miracles. I don't know what Hagar did in order to be a prophet of God.
So you don't consider the message to Hagar in regard about her and her son's future descendants as not a miracle.
That's fine with me.
Then the Ishmaelites are not Arabs, and Muhammad is not descendant of Ishmael.
But tell me, Proud Muslim. Since if you seriously think performing a miracle is requirement, for being a prophet, then perhaps you can answer the next question:
What single miracle could you find in the Genesis that Ishmael had performed?
All he did was born, get banished, lived in the wilderness, and return for his father's burial. I don't see any miracle in there. Do you?
All I think you have done, is weakened Ishmael's position as being a prophet. He received no revelation, and he performed no miracle.
Proud Muslim said:
And i am a woman and i find laughable when a man tries to "empower" me by insulting my intelligence. Do you think we the women dont know that we are (and this is generally speaking) emotional beings, that we are physically not as strong as men, that internal instincts can overpower our feelings and hence perhaps our actions, that back then a woman in that condition is impossible to run and lead random, uncivilized and aggressive men. In fact even now a woman will not be able to control such men.
I am sorry mate, but i find people like you who think by censoring those facts of women due to "respect" are as laughable as those who try to censor the usage of "Black " out of respect! The word "Black" is not insulting, it is a fact, it is an ethnicity. If the person is Black then he is black. Women are different than men, there are some roles that are not suitable for a women just like there are some roles that are not suitable for a man.
But I don't "censor" what I say with regards to the way men and religion treat women.
The only reason that you don't feel "empower" or feel "strong" is because you let your archaic religion and the so-called devout Muslims to continue to dictate how you live your life, to feel weak and helpless.
A woman can be strong and intelligent as any man, and the reason for the limitation are derived from both external (religion) and internal (no self-confidence or self-worth) sources. Religion such Islam have indoctrinated young girls to feel weak.
