Was Muhammad a Messenger of God?

[Dawnofhope]

Of course Muhammad was a Messenger of God. 22% of the world population are not just following "some guy."
Muhammad is one of the greatest Messengers who ever lived, along with Jesus, the Bab and Baha'u'llah...
More later, gotta run to work, I mean bike. I do not like being late, I prefer being early...

Oh wait, I just remembered. How do we know if someone is a Messenger of God, a Prophet?

“What then is the mission of the divine prophets? Their mission is the education and advancement of the world of humanity. They are the real teachers and educators, the universal instructors of mankind. If we wish to discover whether any one of these great souls or messengers was in reality a prophet of God we must investigate the facts surrounding His life and history; and the first point of our investigation will be the education He bestowed upon mankind. If He has been an educator, if He has really trained a nation or people, causing it to rise from the lowest depths of ignorance to the highest station of knowledge, then we are sure that He was a prophet. This is a plain and clear method of procedure, proof that is irrefutable. We do not need to seek after other proofs.” Bahá’í World Faith, p. 273

"if He has really trained a nation or people, causing it to rise from the lowest depths of ignorance to the highest station of knowledge, then we are sure that He was a prophet."
I guess Muhammad must be a Prophet.

Although I agree with others that numbers are not all important we need to consider that Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world and and set to overtake Christianity as the largest religion later on this century. What strikes me is how it has endured for over 1,400 years and adapted itself to so many different cultures.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...e-the-worlds-fastest-growing-religious-group/

The big question though is whether or not it will properly adapt to the modern world with rising standards of education and propserity.

 

[siti]

there’s hype from both Muslims and Christians.

Yep - that! I think that explains it. And for a small and otherwise insignificant sect, Baha'is are particularly good at it.

Like this for example:

The various clans were barbaric and one group prided themselves on burying female babies alive. They were pagans and Muhammad convinced them to be like the Jews and Christians and worship One God...

...presumably because he thought that such heinous and barbaric acts could be more effectively justified in the name of one God rather than many - as indeed the Jews and the Christians had done previously?

How much of the head chopping really happened is anyone’s guess

...yes - exactly like that!

And this:

"if He has really trained a nation or people, causing it to rise from the lowest depths of ignorance to the highest station of knowledge, then we are sure that He was a prophet."
I guess Muhammad must be a Prophet.

There's a fair bit of guessing going on around here...

Anyway, if I can join in my guess is no - he was no more a messenger of God than our cat!

 

[LuisDantas]

Every faith including Hinduism and Buddhism appears bound by the historic and social conditions from which they emerged as far as I can see.

To a degree. But out of the top of my mind there seems to be no other that put itself in a comparable situation to that of Islaam. Certainly none of comparable demographical significance.

I mean, the doctrine actually names innovation as an evil to be avoided and proclaims itself as divinely protected from change and forevermore valid. That is quite the exquisite trap for a doctrine to establish to its own continued credibility.

Tribalism based on competing and warring factions is still relatively recent history so it should be within our grasp to make sense of. I look more for the universal truths that emerge from any faith. Such wisdom is readily apparent in the Dharmic Faiths and it seems a great loss not to appreciate that in the Abrahamic Faiths as well. It’s good you keep the lines of communication open with Muslims though.

It used to be easier.

 

[siti]

Every faith including Hinduism and Buddhism appears bound by the historic and social conditions from which they emerged as far as I can see.

Of course they are. And doesn't that speak against the notion of divine messengers? There is nothing in the "revelations" of these messengers that would not have been readily apparent to a reasonably intelligent member of the societies from which they emerged. The wonder of it all is that so few of them seem to see through the ruse - even in their own times let alone 1400 or 2000 years later.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Yep - that! I think that explains it. And for a small and otherwise insignificant sect, Baha'is are particularly good at it.

Like this for example:
...presumably because he thought that such heinous and barbaric acts could be more effectively justified in the name of one God rather than many - as indeed the Jews and the Christians had done previously?
...yes - exactly like that!

And this:

There's a fair bit of guessing going on around here...

Anyway, if I can join in my guess is no - he was no more a messenger of God than our cat!

Its always fun to hear your barbed and sharp edged wit however misdirected!

 

[siti]

misdirected!

Not so! The real reason that 1.5 billion people follow Muhammad's message is exactly what you referred to: "hype" - religious hype! (And that is what you are attempting to propagate here to in this thread.

And whilst I am on the topic - here's another example:

What strikes me is how it has endured for over 1,400 years and adapted itself to so many different cultures.

Islam has not adapted itself to different cultures any more than Christianity did. It has adapted different cultures to it - or annihilated them - just like Christianity did. C'mon Pakeha (or are you Maori?) - either way, you should know about cultural genocide where you are!

 

[Dawnofhope]

...presumably because he thought that such heinous and barbaric acts could be more effectively justified in the name of one God rather than many - as indeed the Jews and the Christians had done previously?

Infanticide appeared to be a significant problem amongst the Arabs that Muhammad put an end to.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide#Arabia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide#Islam

 

[paarsurrey]

Was Muhammad a Messenger of God?

There is absolutely no doubt that Muhammad** did not claim to be a god, he claimed to be only a prophet/messenger** of G-d*, and that he certainly was, else G-d* would have caught him from his neck and caused him to be killed. Right, please?
Muhammad was rather the last prophet/messenger of G-d* in status. Right, please?

Regards
____________
[3:3]Allah is He beside Whom there is no God, the Living, the Self-Subsisting and All-Sustaining.
https://www.alislam.org/quran/3
**[3:145]And Muhammad is only a Messenger. Verily, all Messengers have passed away before him. If then he die or be slain, will you turn back on your heels? And he who turns back on his heels shall not harm Allah at all. And Allah will certainly reward the grateful.
https://www.alislam.org/quran/3:145

 

[Vinayaka]

Infanticide appeared to be a significant problem amongst the Arabs that Muhammad put an end to.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide#Arabia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide#Islam

Replacing it with genocide?

 

[Dawnofhope]

Not so! The real reason that 1.5 billion people follow Muhammad's message is exactly what you referred to: "hype" - religious hype! (And that is what you are attempting to propagate here to in this thread.

And whilst I am on the topic - here's another example:

Islam has not adapted itself to different cultures any more than Christianity did. It has adapted different cultures to it - or annihilated them - just like Christianity did. C'mon Pakeha (or are you Maori?) - either way, you should know about cultural genocide where you are!

The history of humanity up to the twentieth century has largely been a succession of wars and survival of the fittest. Its been one empire or nation conquering another. Its been about politics and power. Religion has come into for certain but has it been the dominant driving force? I would argue that economic exploitation has been a much more important factor in one empire expanding rather than wanting to spread the Christian (or Islamic) message.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_European_colonialism_and_colonization

Ahau i te pakeha!

 

[Dawnofhope]

Muhammad was rather the last prophet/messenger of G-d in status. Right, please?

Baha'is reject the Islamic orthodox view of the meaning 'seal of the prophets'.

All sects of Islam maintain that the Prophet Muhammad is the final prophet, the last divine messenger for all time.

That means most Muslims acknowledge the founders of several previous religions, such as Moses, Jesus and even Zoroaster as inspired, but deny there will ever be any new messenger or new, divinely-revealed religion after Muhammad. Since the Baha’i Faith claims to be the next major Faith after Islam, this single point often prompts some Muslims to regard the Baha’i Faith as illegitimate. It has even caused deadly persecution of the Baha’is in predominately Islamic countries like Iran and Egypt.

The Baha’i Faith emerged from the background of Islam, much as Christianity emerged from Judaism. Baha’is, along with Muslims, revere the Qur’an as the Word of God. This includes Qur’an 33:40, the verse on which the doctrine of Muhammad’s finality is based:

Muhammad is not the father of any one of your men, but the Messenger of God, and the Seal of the Prophets; God has knowledge of everything.

Clearly, Baha’is actually do accept Muhammad as the Seal of the Prophets—but reject the interpretation that Islamic orthodoxy reads into this verse.

http://bahaiteachings.org/5-reasons-why-muhammad-is-not-the-seal-of-the-prophets

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khatam_an-Nabiyyin

 

[stvdv]

There are some things I greatly admire about Muhammad, but his multiple wives, marriage to a 6 year (old at age 53 ), his military conquests, his personal practice of cutting off heads, his appearing to look like a bloodthirsty tyrant at times, and his sometimes glorious and hedonistic lifestyles, seems about as far from a "holy lifestyle" as that of the average ISIS fighter.

I'm completely convinced that ISIS cuts off heads because Muhammad cut off heads.

But, he still may have been a man of God and made it to heaven....that doesn't mean he was not a sinner, who made no mistakes!

A lot like David.

Just checking: You mean "King David from the Bible" or do you mean "David T from RF". I thought you meant the second one.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Replacing it with genocide?

Genocide has been part of the human condition and the history of humanity. With nearly a quarter of the worlds population being Muslim and their rapid expansion after the death in Muhammad in 632 AD of course Islamic countries and empires have contributed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides_by_death_toll

 

[stvdv]

Should Muhammad be considered a Messenger of God?

I always "accepted these so called facts as true", never thought about it.

Today I remembered my Master saying "Do not follow Me; Just follow the good teachings".

That is what I always try to do. Take out the good teaching, skip the bad ones. Too many bad ones, I tend to skip all.

I believe we are all Messengers of God. Seeing the killing and rape and fornication/adultery/prostitution going on in scriptures I rather choose a scripture without all that stuff. I do not want these violent cheating stories in my mind. Probably that is why I always skipped them.

So I made my own mini Bible/Koran = "Hurt Never, Help Ever". I need not much more to know. Saves me soooooooo much time reading/searching truth
[I do enjoy nice verses to read. Just because I enjoy it, not to search for truth or so]

I never met Mohammed nor Jesus nor Bahaullah nor .... So actually I know nothing
I do believe everyone is a Messenger, so yes I am a Messenger as was Mohammed
Seeing all the bad stuff in Quran and Bible, I can honestly say "I am not the worst messenger"

I did see also good verses in Koran and Bible [need to skip much bad ones though]
So Jesus and Mohammed seem to be "not so bad messengers either"

 

[siti]

I would argue that economic exploitation has been a much more important factor in one empire expanding rather than wanting to spread the Christian (or Islamic) message.

That's the motivation - but the message? I don't think Constantine adopted Christianity as the state religion out of religious motives - it was a shrewd political and economic move - but the message he had spread throughout the empire was religious - religious hype. Likewise with the Islamic "conquest" of Indonesia - which was precipitated mostly by trade - but also by military control of trade routes and markets and the conversion of members of the ruling classes...and the odd war of course - can't have a divine message delivered without a war now and again to underline its importance can we. Anyway, you're right - the motivation is political power and economic exploitation - but the message and the means of controlling the subjugated populace is religion.

So the question is - if these great messengers were carrying great messages from God himself - why did they need the sword to advance the cause? Was God's message lacking in power?

 

[paarsurrey]

Baha'is reject the Islamic orthodox view of the meaning 'seal of the prophets'.

All sects of Islam maintain that the Prophet Muhammad is the final prophet, the last divine messenger for all time.

That means most Muslims acknowledge the founders of several previous religions, such as Moses, Jesus and even Zoroaster as inspired, but deny there will ever be any new messenger or new, divinely-revealed religion after Muhammad. Since the Baha’i Faith claims to be the next major Faith after Islam, this single point often prompts some Muslims to regard the Baha’i Faith as illegitimate. It has even caused deadly persecution of the Baha’is in predominately Islamic countries like Iran and Egypt.

The Baha’i Faith emerged from the background of Islam, much as Christianity emerged from Judaism. Baha’is, along with Muslims, revere the Qur’an as the Word of God. This includes Qur’an 33:40, the verse on which the doctrine of Muhammad’s finality is based:

Muhammad is not the father of any one of your men, but the Messenger of God, and the Seal of the Prophets; God has knowledge of everything.

Clearly, Baha’is actually do accept Muhammad as the Seal of the Prophets—but reject the interpretation that Islamic orthodoxy reads into this verse.

http://bahaiteachings.org/5-reasons-why-muhammad-is-not-the-seal-of-the-prophets

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khatam_an-Nabiyyin

"Baha'is reject"

Bahais are human beings, they are free to have any belief they like.
Likewise I don't agree with them.

I would like to ask, which one is God among Krishna, Jesus and Bahaullh, please?
There is no compulsion to respond it, only respond if one wills to do it.

Regards

 

[siti]

I would like to ask, which one is God among Krishna, Jesus and Bahaullh, please?
There is no compulsion to respond it, only respond if one wills to do it.

Well of course they're all God..."Thou art God. I am God. All that groks is God".

 

[David T]

Just checking: You mean "King David from the Bible" or do you mean "David T from RF". I thought you meant the second one.

Well definitely the second one is flawed but king David is what I was referencing. To.. I had forgot my name is that too. A Leonard Cohen song pops InTo my head thinking about king David..lol.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

The idea of "divine messengers" as understood in Abrahamic religions doesn't translate very well into my religious tradition. The Abrahamic religions seem to assume only certain special people ever receive messages from the gods (pardon, God in their case). My tradition assumes that everyone receives messages from the gods and everyone is a "messenger."

Could someone help me understand why only certain special people would be considered conduits for God in Abrahamic traditions? Why isn't this accessible to everyone in these religions as it is in my own?

I personally think even Druids themselves have some divine Abrahamic relationship that hasn't been discovered.

 

[Tumah]

The idea of "divine messengers" as understood in Abrahamic religions doesn't translate very well into my religious tradition. The Abrahamic religions seem to assume only certain special people ever receive messages from the gods (pardon, God in their case). My tradition assumes that everyone receives messages from the gods and everyone is a "messenger."

Could someone help me understand why only certain special people would be considered conduits for God in Abrahamic traditions? Why isn't this accessible to everyone in these religions as it is in my own?

Christianity, Islam and Baha'i notwithstanding, in Judaism it is possible for everyone to become prophets (at least, if you were born before the destruction of the First Temple). There used to be prophet-training camps where you can go to train to become a prophet. Prophets-in-training are references in 2 King 2:3, 4:1 and 6:1. The only exception to that I know of is Jeremiah who, due to a dearth of available already qualified prophets, was pre-programmed from pregnancy to eventually be able to prophecy (Jer. 1:5).
For Judaism, you don't need to be unique to become a prophet. You just need to be willing to put in the effort to become one. According to a tradition from the Talmud, over the years when prophecy was possible, there were 1.2 million prophets. So, definitely not as special as later religions make it out to be.