• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Mohammad Never Existed

1069 said:
Same with Jesus and Christians.
There's a reason it's called "blind faith".
It is impervious to rational arguments.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say I am impervious to arguments. Just that I'd rather hear Muslims arguments.
But yeah, I suppose that's what faith is
 
MrVicchio said:
But at the time, that was who recorded history... Governments. If Joe the Historian wrote about things they didn't like, it was.. destroyed.
Click to expand...

There were plenty of historians who wrote things unflattering about the state under which they lived.

But hey, it's okay you jut keep on going! BTW, do you listen to green day?
Click to expand...

A little, I'm more into less mainstream punk though.
 
Agent Ferris said:
So you follow a book claimed to be the recited word of god by a man who may or may not have even existed? Yep sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
Click to expand...

See ... brick wall.
Don't care what you think about Mohammed.
 
Last edited:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

That there are no non-Muslim sources which refer to Mohammad doesn't even come close to proving he didn't exist.

Religious faith isn't about being impervious to logic and reason. It is about believing in something when there's no evidence that you're either right or wrong.

THAT is simple logic.


TED,
Not a religious man.
 
Faith comes hard for me. Reality seems to fit better into my ideals. I'm more of a "if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck" kinda guy. Religion is a duck.
 
Laila said:
I am allowed out of the bedroom for a few hours everyday according to my partner :2razz:
Click to expand...

I can appreciate that.

But serious, my one-liner above, made in jest, got me to looking around. I was surprised to learn that Islam actually bestows many rights and roles upon it's women. The oppressive and often cruel, "non-rights" we see bestowed upon them in the television's camera eye are more often than not just cultural and traditional yokes and burdens placed upon them and not true with Islam at all.
 
soguks said:
@AgentFerris

i will nominate you for the nobel prize; after all, you are smarter then 1.5 b people .btw, i am sorry to have responded this thread in the first place, next time i will visit a mental hospital to wast my time with people in there, at least the people in there take medical care and pills for their problems.
Click to expand...

Are you saying just because 1.5 billion people believe Mohammed exists, that he must exist? This is truly a stupid argument.
 
Captain America said:
I can appreciate that.

But serious, my one-liner above, made in jest, got me to looking around. I was surprised to learn that Islam actually bestows many rights and roles upon it's women. The oppressive and often cruel, "non-rights" we see bestowed upon them in the television's camera eye are more often than not just cultural and traditional yokes and burdens placed upon them and not true with Islam at all.
Click to expand...

I'm a very strong believer in women's rights. I wouldn't follow a belief system if it didn't have within it rights and protections to women.
Most of the time it is culture that is oppressive to women but religion is used as a cloak to justify the behaviour.
 
Are you saying just because 1.5 billion people believe Mohammed exists, that he must exist? This is truly a stupid argument.
Click to expand...



Once upon a time, the whole world believed that the earth was flat.
 
Last edited:
Laila said:
I'm a very strong believer in women's rights. I wouldn't follow a belief system if it didn't have within it rights and protections to women.
Most of the time it is culture that is oppressive to women but religion is used as a cloak to justify the behaviour.
Click to expand...


Just as your religion is being used to justify the behavior of suicidal and barbaric heathens? If I was you, that would really piss me off. I'd say something about it. I would want my peers to know unequvically that I denounced such behavior and make a point to seperate it from my personal beliefs and religion. But that's just me, I suppose. Perhaps it is good that I follow no religions. I neither have to defend or justify their fairy-tales and attrocities.

I do realize, however, that others may disagree. But it's hard to let the disagreement of some people who follows myths, superstitions and fairy-tales, to get under my skin. In fact, it is hard for me to take them seriously at all.

It ain't easy being me.
 
kaya'08 said:
Are you saying just because 1.5 billion people believe Mohammed exists, that he must exist? This is truly a stupid argument.
Click to expand...

If 1.5 billion people believe Mohammed existed, and there is no evidence to the contrary, that means that the rest of us should respect that.
 
Captain America said:
Just as your religion is being used to justify the behavior of suicidal and barbaric heathens? If I was you, that would really piss me off. I'd say something about it. I would want my peers to know unequvically that I denounced such behavior and make a point to seperate it from my personal beliefs and religion. But that's just me, I suppose. Perhaps it is good that I follow no religions. I neither have to defend or justify their fairy-tales and attrocities.
Click to expand...

Can one separate personal beliefs from religion? Aren't they intrinsically linked if one is religious?
And it does make me angry and I never hide my opinions on reformation in my Mosque. I'm quite the troublemaker according to my Imam :cool:

For you no religion suits. I can't imagine me without religion.
 
But I can imagine you in a thong-bikini. ;)
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

That there are no non-Muslim sources which refer to Mohammad doesn't even come close to proving he didn't exist.
Click to expand...

It certainly demonstrates that his existence should be accepted as fact. It demonstrates that he should be seen in the same light as any other mythical character of history; such as, Achilles.

Religious faith isn't about being impervious to logic and reason. It is about believing in something when there's no evidence that you're either right or wrong.

THAT is simple logic.
Click to expand...

That's not logic that is acceptance without evidence which is the opposite of logic.
 
Winston Smith said:
Not true.

Historicity of Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Really then tell me which non-Christian contemporary wrote of Jesus? Josephus is the only one listed who lived during Jesus's supposed lifetime, and his work was a forgery all the other Greco-Roman sources listed in that wikipedia article weren't even born until 50-100 years after Jesus's supposed death.

Pliny the Younger b. 61 AD.

Tacitus b. 56 AD.

Suetonius b. 70 AD.

Mara Bar-Serapion of Syria doesn't identify Jesus by name but a "wise king" the original letter doesn't exist and the copies are only found in 6-7th century manuscripts and no date is given for his birth.

Your article mentions Lucian who wasn't even born until the 2nd century.

Your article lists some more Jewish sources but again they are from the Tannaitic Period between 70 and 200 AD and they provide nothing but recitation of the early Christian scriptures.
 
Last edited:
TacticalEvilDan said:
If 1.5 billion people believe Mohammed existed, and there is no evidence to the contrary, that means that the rest of us should respect that.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, but that's not my argument. Soguks is making the claim that he must have existed due to the sheer number of believers, that in itself is not conclusive evidence and cannot be accepted.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom