It is impossible Mohammad (s) and his family (a) historically existed and they did not perform miracles.

[sayak83]

I would not believe you and furthermore society would not believe nor accuse if they don't support you of being a sorcerer. You would be just termed a liar and that's it. You would not become famous. You wouldn't have followers believing you did miracles and opponents accusing you of sorcery.

You are repeating the same thing.
As I have shown, there are hundreds of such people today who have millions of followers and opponents based on miracle claims like that. Its just a regular feature of human history that such PPL exist.
Now that it has been shown people with many followers and having multiple miracle claims exist today, it's your burden to show how Quran or Hadiths miracle claims are different from these ones. Stop handwaving, show.

 

[Ajax]

I claimed in point number 1, that Quran and hadiths claim Mohammad (s) did miracles.The whole argument is making a case of miracles of Mohammad (s) being true, that is the conclusion. The premises, I am not claiming the conclusion, the premises together make the case.

So you believe that Mohammad did miracles, because Mohammad said that in his ...book and you consider that proof?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Salam

(1) The Quran and hadiths claim Mohammad (s) and his family (a) performed miracles (1), if they historically existed, and weren't able to perform such things, they would have been refuted and none would believe in them (2) or (3) they would have made tons of excuses for not performing miracles rather than emphasizing on them.

The answer to your question in the Title is, Yes, it is totally possible that Muhammed existed (which is a historically proven fact), but he didn't perform miracles (which are entirely unproven), just as Joseph Smith historically existed, but didn't work miracles.

The Hadith were written after Muhammed's death, so of course he is not there to correct them.

The only two examples of miracles in the Quran that I'm aware of are the splitting of the moon, and the night ascension. Both are utterly preposterous. Do you understand that if the moon somehow split, that it would be catastrophic here on earth? It would likely lead to irregular, potentially extreme tidal patterns, which could cause widespread coastal flooding and disrupt marine ecosystems. Furthermore, the moon helps stabilize Earth's axial tilt. Without the moon's consistent gravitational pull, Earth's tilt would become more erratic over time. This instability could lead to drastic changes in climate, making seasons more extreme or causing long-term climate shifts.

When put it all together these subjects, it becomes clear Mohammad (s) historically existed and performed miracles. Now comes the thread. I will be trying to elaborate on these subjects, but they are interlinked so will be sort of going about it in a round about way.

I'm sorry. I read your arguments very carefully, but they just didn't rise to the standard of proving what you claim.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I would not believe you and furthermore society would not believe nor accuse if they don't support you of being a sorcerer. You would be just termed a liar and that's it. You would not become famous. You wouldn't have followers believing you did miracles and opponents accusing you of sorcery.

Oh, I don't know about that. Nostradamus was a fraud. His quatrains could mean absolutely anything. But he is still remembered today, and many people buy into his nonsense.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

1. Why is it the "miracles" you disagree with have to meet such a higher standard than the miracles you simply proclaim are true?

Exactamundo!!!! Great post.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

You really don't understand my argument.

Most of what you said were not arguments at all, but simply proclamations. The few times you actually tried to present an argument, your arguments simply did not prove your claim.

 

[Augustus]

The only two examples of miracles in the Quran that I'm aware of are the splitting of the moon, and the night ascension

Neither of these are unambiguously in the Quran.

The “night journey” passage is arguably about Moses, and some scholars have even suggested it may be an interpolation.

Regardless it entirely relies on Hadith to turn a vague and ambiguous passage into the night journey.

The moon splitting is more likely talking about a future sign of the eschatology or making a point using such imagery.

Again the miracle is a creation of Hadith and is not apparent from the Quran alone.

Much of the Hadith, sirah and occasions of revelation literature seems to be exegetical in nature rather than historical. Early exegetes weren’t really sure about the meaning of much of the Quran and the literature appears to have been a solution to this problem.

 

[Link]

You are repeating the same thing.
As I have shown, there are hundreds of such people today who have millions of followers and opponents based on miracle claims like that. Its just a regular feature of human history that such PPL exist.
Now that it has been shown people with many followers and having multiple miracle claims exist today, it's your burden to show how Quran or Hadiths miracle claims are different from these ones. Stop handwaving, show.

Controlled settings can explain those miracles or some lies (since they aren't all in public setting).

This is different if today, someone would do miracles, and the entire city he is in would believe it and testify to it.

 

[Link]

The answer to your question in the Title is, Yes, it is totally possible that Muhammed existed (which is a historically proven fact), but he didn't perform miracles (which are entirely unproven), just as Joseph Smith historically existed, but didn't work miracles.

Latter day Saints claim God does not do miracles for public but it's for a few elite sincere friends of his to witness.

 

[Link]

So you believe that Mohammad did miracles, because Mohammad said that in his ...book and you consider that proof?

It factors in. But you should see why I said that.

 

[Link]

Most of what you said were not arguments at all, but simply proclamations. The few times you actually tried to present an argument, your arguments simply did not prove your claim.

There is an overall structure. Then each of those subjects have to be supported. I'm supporting them through out the thread.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

It's implicit, because it mentions that all such signs are called magic that has been persisting. So it means they accused Mohammad (s) of doing magic.

Does the Quran say, after Muhammad split the moon, and they saw it, then they accused Him of Majic?

Not that I remember.

Let me give you an example what Quran is talking about, when it says, they accused Muhammad of Sihr سحر

Suppose trump succeeds in pursuing his goal and defeating biden.

Some people could be superstitious and think, trump is doing Sihr, meaning using some psychic power, or some type of a Majic to promote his goals.
Then they can say, he is doing sihr. It does not mean, they witnessed a Miracle of any sort.

Muhammad was succeeding. His cause was progressing and people were becoming His followers. Then the opposition accused Him of doing majics.
It does not mean He actually did so.

I believe you are reading more than what Quran says.
Again, does the Quran gives a detail of the eventz that, Muhammad gathered the Public, then He split the Moon, then they saw it, and said this is Majic?

It does not have any of these details. You are reading it based on your imagination and what you want it to say.

 

[Link]

Does the Quran say, after Muhammad split the moon, and they saw it, then they accused Him of Majic?

Not that I remember.

Let me give you an example what Quran is talking about, when it says, they accused Muhammad of Sihr سحر

Suppose trump succeeds in pursuing his goal and defeating biden.

Some people could be superstitious and think, trump is doing Sihr, meaning using some psychic power, or some type of a Majic to promote his goals.
Then they can say, he is doing sihr. It does not mean, they witnessed a Miracle of any sort.

Muhammad was succeeding. His cause was progressing and people were becoming His followers. Then the opposition accused Him of doing majics.
It does not mean He actually did so.

I believe you are reading more than what Quran says.
Again, does the Quran gives a detail of the eventz that, Muhammad gathered the Public, then He split the Moon, then they saw it, and said this is Majic?

It does not have any of these details. You are reading it based on your imagination and what you want it to say.

I can talk to others about it. I can't talk to you, because my experience with you, is no sentence can have a definitive meaning. You change and twist where it suits you and declare something clear where it suits you.

 

[Link]

Salam

Two questions good to ask:

(1) If someone started performing miracles today is there a way to know?
(2) If someone in the past that definitely historically is known to exist performed miracles, is there a way to know?

These are not needed for my topic, just some good questions to think about.


A follow up to those two:

Is there a pathway of evidence that would show such a historical person performed miracles as opposed to all the frauds?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Salam

Two questions good to ask:

(1) If someone started performing miracles today is there a way to know?
(2) If someone in the past that definitely historically is known to exist performed miracles, is there a way to know?

These are not needed for my topic, just some good questions to think about.


A follow up to those two:

Is there a pathway of evidence that would show such a historical person performed miracles as opposed to all the frauds?

Your questions is based on assumption that Miracles exist.
Then, the question is, what is a Miracle? How do you define a Miracle?

How does the Scriptures define what a Miracle is, if, it defines it at all.

 

[Link]

Your questions is based on assumption that Miracles exist.
Then, the question is, what is a Miracle? How do you define a Miracle?

How does the Scriptures define what a Miracle is, if, it defines it at all.

I would be happy to discuss this with anyone but you.

 

[stevecanuck]

Neither of these are unambiguously in the Quran.

The “night journey” passage is arguably about Moses, and some scholars have even suggested it may be an interpolation.

Regardless it entirely relies on Hadith to turn a vague and ambiguous passage into the night journey.

The moon splitting is more likely talking about a future sign of the eschatology or making a point using such imagery.

Again the miracle is a creation of Hadith and is not apparent from the Quran alone.

Much of the Hadith, sirah and occasions of revelation literature seems to be exegetical in nature rather than historical. Early exegetes weren’t really sure about the meaning of much of the Quran and the literature appears to have been a solution to this problem.

Good point that 17:1 doesn't say which servant was taken on the midnight ride. It could easily have been Moses given that he is mentioned in the next verse. And not only is no further detail given, but the currently believed location of 'al masjid al aqsa' is entirely dependent on hadiths. It makes no sense that if 'Allah' had intended Jerusalem to become 'the third holiest site in Islam', he didn't think to mention it in any of his 6,236 utterances. (It's more fun to agree on things, isn't it?).

 

[Link]

Good point that 17:1 doesn't say which servant was taken on the midnight ride. It could easily have been Moses given that he is mentioned in the next verse. And not only is no further detail given, but the currently believed location of 'al masjid al aqsa' is entirely dependent on hadiths. It makes no sense that if 'Allah' had intended Jerusalem to become 'the third holiest site in Islam', he didn't think to mention it in any of his 6,236 utterances. (It's more fun to agree on things, isn't it?).

The ascension is not a miracle for people since it was not witnessed by masses. It's irrelevant to this topic.

 

[stevecanuck]

This is different if today, someone would do miracles, and the entire city he is in would believe it and testify to it.

What you're showing here is that 'miracles' only 'occur' when they have to be accepted on faith rather than by observation.

Just consider the entire basis of Islam, and that the only person spared from having to accept it on faith was Mohamed. He had 6,236 real-world visitations from Gabriel to cement his beliefs. That rest of you have take his word for everything he claims, yet the penalty for failing to do so is unthinkable never-ending torture.

How is the absurdity of that not the bleedin' obvious to you?

 

[stevecanuck]

The ascension is not a miracle for people since it was not witnessed by masses. It's irrelevant to this topic.

Absurd. It IS a miracle for anyone who believes the Qur'an and accepts the details given in hadiths.