Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Finality of Prophethood ...
Today at 06:18 PM

Imam Tawhidi
Today at 02:37 PM

Safe spaces
Today at 01:33 PM

Islamophobia is Wrong Wor...
by zeca
Today at 01:30 PM

Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
Today at 12:29 AM

Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
Yesterday at 06:30 PM

Egyptian Ex Muslim lookin...
Yesterday at 05:57 PM

Nigeria mosque bombing_50...
Yesterday at 02:21 PM

المياة النقية%%%%
by akay
Yesterday at 11:20 AM

Islam is a cult
November 20, 2017, 10:58 PM

The elephant in the room:...
November 20, 2017, 12:51 AM

Letter to God
November 19, 2017, 09:02 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?

 (Read 4973 times)
  • 12 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     OP - March 11, 2016, 11:32 AM

    I read an article by Ali Sina saying that Muhammed had epilepsy he came to this conlusion from the information of symptoms gatherd from different hadiths and i've also heard this hadith about halima , muhammed's foster mother ,brining her back to his mother saying muhammed was possessed by devil (may be he had some seizure or something). 

    was he really an epileptic ? Thoughts ?
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #1 - March 11, 2016, 01:22 PM

    I read an article by Ali Sina saying that Muhammed had epilepsy he came to this conlusion from the information of symptoms gatherd from different hadiths and i've also heard this hadith about halima , muhammed's foster mother ,brining her back to his mother saying muhammed was possessed by devil (may be he had some seizure or something).  

    was he really an epileptic ? Thoughts ?

    well there were many Muhammads that are added in hadith which one are you talking abut asfexmuzzie?  It is certainly not the Muhammad of Quran. And ..  and ..one of those Muhammads .. "The Ali Sina hadith Muhammad" may have had such Temporal Lobe Epilepsy  problem.. People come to that conclusion assuming all this  stuff that you read below are facts and NOTHING BUT FACTS ..  but but I don't trust hadith and I don't trust stories unless they answer all of my questions.

    Quote
    ...…the Prophet married her (Aisha) when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old…

    .....Allah’s Apostle replied, “Sometimes it is (revealed) like the ringing of a bell, this form of Inspiration is the hardest of all and then this state passes ‘ off after I have grasped what is inspired........

    Then Allah’s Apostle returned with the Inspiration and with his heart beating severely. Then he went to Khadija bint Khuwailid and said, “Cover me! Cover me!” They covered him till his fear was over and after that he told her everything that had happened and said, “I fear that something may happen to me.”

    Verily I saw the Prophet being inspired Divinely on a very cold day and noticed the Sweat dropping from his forehead (as the Inspiration was over).

    The Prophet returned to Khadija while his heart was beating rapidly. She took him to Waraqa bin Naufal who was a Christian convert and used to read the Gospels in Arabic Waraqa asked (the Prophet), “What do you see?” When he told him, Waraqa said, “That is the same angel whom Allah sent to the Prophet) Moses. Should I live till you receive the Divine Message, I will support you strongly.”

    Allah’s Apostle used to bear the revelation with great trouble and used to move his lips (quickly) with the Inspiration.”
     


    well if someone believes all that nonsense and more I see in hadith., then yes the concusion that comes out of such stories is "one of those hadith Muhammads may  have had such problem"

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #2 - March 11, 2016, 02:56 PM

    ^

    Agree with Yeez. Hadiths are untrustworthy and a large portion of hadith sounds like fairy tale.

    It's just hard to take it seriously. Also diagnosing Mo based on several vague description is not very good IMO. It's not clinical diagnosis it's just some guesses based on some hadiths. Don't take it seriously and don't use it as an argument against Islam.
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #3 - March 11, 2016, 04:25 PM

    There are many reasons someone might be deluded into thinking they are hearing the voice of God. Talking to my uncle, who is a schizophrenic, hearing him describe episodes when it has gotten bad, he has had all sorts of auditory and visual hallucinations and can be absolutely certain in paranoid delusions. When his schizophrenia is under control, he's a pretty normal person. But during the episodes he almost always hallucinates religious imagery. He's heard what he thought was God speaking to him and during one particularly bad episode, he was completely convinced he was an end times prophet.

    There's all kinds of other conditions that can lead to these delusions. No need to narrow it down to only epilepsy.

    And there's even more reasons why someone would lie about being a prophet and perfect example for everyone to listen to and follow.

    And that's assuming the Muhammad character existed as described and produced the Quran. An unsafe assumption, considering what we know about how the Quran was compiled.



    "I moreover believe that any religion that has anything in it that shocks the mind of a child, cannot be a true system."
    -Thomas Paine
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #4 - March 12, 2016, 05:10 AM

    The epilepsy meme isn't just from Hadith; the Byzantine Greeks were sure of it as well. Theophanes mentioned this ~ 800 CE.

    It seems to me that a lot of Muhammad's "biography" was just later scholars scraping up the smoking remains of flame-wars from generations before them. Maybe the Jews and Christians got out there first with a meme that Muhammad was crazy; then the Muslims would have to declare that the ravings were holy trances. Or maybe the Muslims got out there first with stories of Muhammad's intense holiness; so the Jews and Christians declared that he was meshugga and subject to "Auto Suggestion". But who can know?
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #5 - March 12, 2016, 11:05 AM

    Whether the prophet - or any prophet - was what we would nowadays clinically diagnose as epileptic is an unanswerable question ( and also something of an ungainly polemical tool ).

    However, it would be good to acknowledge that in antiquity, what appears to correspond to epilepsy was, by the Greeks for example, known as the Sacred Disease.



  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #6 - April 22, 2016, 02:50 PM

    "The available data are not sufficient for a diagnosis"


    If on the other hand you were a medieval warlord and had health problems, you'd better make an explanation for it, that supports your leadership.
    Show weakness, and you are toast.

    If on the other hand you have a direct connection with Gawd Almighty, let's see who dares challenging you, just because you go mentally offline, sweat, jerk and drool a little once in a while.

    And luckily there are plenty of other sectarian sources of inspiration around, and all you have to do, it to cherry pick the stuff you like and add your own pet peeves.
    Presto: You are now Gawds Right Hand!

  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #7 - April 23, 2016, 01:56 PM

    asfexmuzzie   says this and more
    I read an article by Ali Sina saying that Muhammed had epilepsy he came to this conlusion....................

      and Ursus  talks about Gawds Right Hand!
    ...... other hand  has (ve ) a direct connection with Gawd .............You are now Gawds Right Hand!


    Hmm good point Ursus  good point    "other hand  has(ve  ) a direct connection with Gawd ..........and You are now Gawds Right Hand!"

    well let me scribble this

    ".....man has direct connection to gawd ... or
    .....man is in the gawd's right hand... or
    .....gawd is in man's right hand ..or
    .....man has the power for right hand posses.... now..
    .....masturbation.....mental masturbation all over the room
    .....all over the society...
    .....we need Aisha(RA) to clean it... "


    but I tell you this ..  Mr.Ali Sina  or dr. Ali Sina?? (not sure)  is great writer of articles ..good guy.. very smart guy., In fact he sent me the first chapter of his book to edit.,I still have to on my computer.,  Now  my question to you two guys is ..

    Does Ali Sina has any connection to Gawd? and
    does he posses gawd? .. or
    did gawd possessed him??

     I am pulling my hair on those questions after reading his recent articles since he became the follower of the Christ.. Jesus Christ...   So do you two guys have any answers to those questions??

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #8 - April 23, 2016, 03:41 PM


    ".....man has direct connection to gawd ... or
    ..... gawd's right hand...  has the power for.....masturbation.....mental masturbation all over the room


     So do you two guys have any answers to those questions??


    I have no answer...... But you have forever changed the way I'll consider the phrase "being someones right hand"!
     thnkyu
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #9 - April 24, 2016, 04:14 PM

    A problem is to make such a diagnosis one is accepting what Islamic tradition claims is accurate then arguing against it in order to force a conclusion. It is a false dilemma.  C.S. Lewis did this for an argument for Christ. He accepted the Bible at face value, it was accurate to the point that Jesus' claims were in fact statement made by Jesus. He then proposed either Jesus was liar, lunatic or lord. If you reject Jesus as Lord, Lewis is forcing you to pick between liar or lunatic. Ali Sina has done the same thing. An easy counter is to point out that Islamic tradition is not accurate as claimed. Done, the first premise is questionable. Another is the interpretation of various traditions has not been shown to be accurate. Another premise is questionable. Another point is that many people by instinct assign agency for a number of acts. They see their own acts as the Will of God. So if assignment of such agency is a sign of mental illness rather than flawed reasoning then we are all in trouble. Most of us have assigned some act or event to an agency even if it was just a sound in the bush caused by the wind rather than a dog, cat, etc.
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #10 - April 25, 2016, 10:36 PM

    bogart: "It is a false dilemma"

    Ali Sina asserted the consequent, but I do not see where he presented a false dilemma. However in regards to the former, you have done the same. That said: No, it is not easy to counter Ali’s hadiths evidence, any more than easy to counter non-acceptance of hadiths as evidence,

    In fairness to Ali, he did not claim a medical research paper accepted by AJM or BJM, it was merely a peer to peer essay. His target audience was Muslim readers, (and perhaps those exploring Islam), who are likely to accept hadiths as authentic. If authentic, then Ali has presented a plausible theory on Mohammed and Quran, notwithstanding absence of medical qualification.

    Edit: I am aware Ali was not the first to advance the epilepsy theory .

    Regards, Joseph
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #11 - April 26, 2016, 12:31 AM

    bogart: "It is a false dilemma"

    Ali Sina asserted the consequent, but I do not see where he presented a false dilemma. However in regards to the former, you have done the same. That said: No, it is not easy to counter Ali’s hadiths evidence, any more than easy to counter non-acceptance of hadiths as evidence,


    By presenting Islamic tradition as authentic and accurate this sets the stage for a forced conclusion. If the groundwork is not authentic or accurate then the whole argument collapses. Thus it is a false dilemma  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma Dismiss the absolutist claims and the argument is worthless.

    Quote
    In fairness to Ali, he did not claim a medical research paper accepted by AJM or BJM, it was merely a peer to peer essay. His target audience was Muslim readers, (and perhaps those exploring Islam), who are likely to accept hadiths as authentic. If authentic, then Ali has presented a plausible theory on Mohammed and Quran, notwithstanding absence of medical qualification.


    Many Muslims do reject literalism, accuracy and authenticity of ahadith, thus the false dilemma collapse. Besides Muslims can simply accepted all the supporting sources to confirm their views that he was the messenger of God and this was just the side-effect. Hence why the only conclusions Ali can produce as mentally ill or he was in fact a prophet of God. If I reject this premises regarding hadith the argument is finished. The ahadith could be false completely, distorted after time, missing information, etc.


    Quote
    Edit: I am aware Ali was not the first to advance the epilepsy theory


    People do this all the time with many historical figures. They made a show about it on History Channel the start claiming people like Caesar or Alexander were murderous megalomaniacs. The show makes the same mistake as Ali Sina. Both are taking history sources as 100% fact. No historian dealing with this era would make such a claim without looking like a fool or a hack.

    For example many laymen think Alexander's conquests according to the sources happened as these sources claim. However for many of the areas conquered in Central Asia, north of Persia proper, there is zero evidence of the Greeks in the area during his life time. There are also cities claimed as being conquered that did not exists until the Successor State period, evidence against the sources. There is only one piece of evidence even supporting his actions in India which are coins. That is all there is, no weapons, cultural icons, remains, just coins. These coins do not demonstrate the battles happened as per the source claim. Only that Alexander was there, nothing more. Did Alexander consider himself a God, or son of a God, because later sources claim so or because later cultures turned him into one? Are these sources talking about Alexander himself or merely the current ideas about Alexander the population believes in. It would be like reference Christian sources to conclude Christianity is true, fraud or delusions, just as C.S Lewis did.

    Also consider Hadith "science" is no more than giving authority to a game of Chinese whispers yet modern historians know that oral tradition becomes distorted within the 3rd generation removed from the event. Distorted being a modification from the original. This add up over time. We should trust X source because the same book which mentions X sources says it is reliable, purely circular reasoning.
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #12 - April 26, 2016, 07:49 PM

    Quote from: bogart
    For example many laymen think Alexander's conquests according to the sources happened as these sources claim. However for many of the areas conquered in Central Asia, north of Persia proper, there is zero evidence of the Greeks in the area during his life time. There are also cities claimed as being conquered that did not exists until the Successor State period, evidence against the sources. There is only one piece of evidence even supporting his actions in India which are coins. That is all there is, no weapons, cultural icons, remains, just coins. These coins do not demonstrate the battles happened as per the source claim. Only that Alexander was there, nothing more. Did Alexander consider himself a God, or son of a God, because later sources claim so or because later cultures turned him into one? Are these sources talking about Alexander himself or merely the current ideas about Alexander the population believes in. It would be like reference Christian sources to conclude Christianity is true, fraud or delusions, just as C.S Lewis did.

    Do you have any references for historians questioning the sources on Alexander?
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #13 - April 26, 2016, 10:18 PM


    [quote/] For example many laymen think Alexander's conquests according to the sources happened as these sources claim. However for many of the areas conquered in Central Asia, north of Persia proper, there is zero evidence of the Greeks in the area during his life time. There are also cities claimed as being conquered that did not exists until the Successor State period, evidence against the sources. There is only one piece of evidence even supporting his actions in India which are coins. That is all there is, no weapons, cultural icons, remains, just coins. These coins do not demonstrate the battles happened as per the source claim. Only that Alexander was there, nothing more. Did Alexander consider himself a God, or son of a God, because later sources claim so or because later cultures turned him into one? Are these sources talking about Alexander himself or merely the current ideas about Alexander the population believes in. It would be like reference Christian sources to conclude Christianity is true, fraud or delusions, just as C.S Lewis did.

    Also consider Hadith "science" is no more than giving authority to a game of Chinese whispers yet modern historians know that oral tradition becomes distorted within the 3rd generation removed from the event. Distorted being a modification from the original. This add up over time. We should trust X source because the same book which mentions X sources says it is reliable, purely circular reasoning.
    [/quote]

    With Alexander the Great we actually have Plutarch and other biographers quoting what the eyewitnesses to Alexander's life wrote. The accounts agree quite well and archaeology and other external verification has led historians to believe the main outline of Alexander's life is historically preserved. Of course some of the biographers have taken liberties and embellished and changed things and historians have an idea of which sources are more reliable and which aren't. Despite our surviving sources being late, they are not reliant on oral tradition. Just saying because I recently looked into this.

    I'm just getting around to reading Bart Ehrman's new book on the reliability of oral tradition and I've heard him talk on it where he concludes that oral tradition is extraordinarily unreliable at preserving historical facts and significant changes can be brought about in a short amount of time (forget generations, days and weeks are enough). It will be a very interesting read

    "I moreover believe that any religion that has anything in it that shocks the mind of a child, cannot be a true system."
    -Thomas Paine
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #14 - April 26, 2016, 11:09 PM

    By presenting Islamic tradition as authentic and accurate this sets the stage for a forced conclusion. If the groundwork is not authentic or accurate then the whole argument collapses. Thus it is a false dilemma


    Firstly, Ali’s essay was broadcast, doubtful he was unaware of Quran-only Muslims. Should go without saying, to that group his essay was irrelevant.

    Secondly, I will not get into reliability of hadiths discussion with anyone, but I find no good reason Ali Sina must put hadiths to proof before publishing his essay. He only concerned himself with reader holding hadiths to be fact, not whether you and I might reject hadiths.

    To Muslims accepting hadiths as canonicals of Islam, Ali forces nothing upon them which is not accepted as true.  One can answer yes to both statement, but reject conclusion. The respondent can even reject the second statement as unnecessary for discussion. Therein lies the rub. What is the explanation for the unflattering nigh-Quran hadiths, and why do Islamic sites avoid addressing them, and why is their only response is to rake Ali over the coals?

    This is where I focus in reading Ali’s essay, communication between common people, not scholarship. Beside if person speaks or writes in scholarly language, it would be Greek to me.

    Regards, Joseph
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #15 - April 27, 2016, 06:37 PM

    Do you have any references for historians questioning the sources on Alexander?


    Yes. It is hard to find these sources that are open to everyone so I will just link the book and quote(s) from these.

    Alexander the Great in Fact and Fiction By A. B. Bosworth, Elizabeth Baynham

    "The besetting problem of Alexander scholarship is the dearth of contemporary sources. That has not changed in the last decades...The corpus of contemporary inscriptions has been increased by a handful of documents from Macedonia which raise interesting questions about Alexander's relations with his subjects in the distant homeland but leave us more perplexed than enlightened. The same applies to the study of Alexander'ss prolific and enigmatic coinage. New issues have been discovered, predominantly in the great Babylon hoard; we now have more (and more revealing) examples of the Porus decadrachms and a whole series of tetradrachms with Indian themes. However, the problems of dating and provenance remain as controversial and intractable as ever...The gaps in our knowledge are usually too extensive for us to resolve the problems presented by the material evidence"

    Alexander the Great By Richard Stoneman

    "Difficulty in discovering the true nature of Alexander is due to the nature of surviving evidence that endows him with multiple, different characters...This situation is at first difficult to understand since we know the names of 20 contemporaries who published accounts about him. However, much of the problem stems from the fact the accounts themselves have not survived. A portion of only one contemporary work has been attached to a later account: the official report of the admiral of Alexander’s fleet that sailed back from India into the Persian Gulf survives in the fuller account of Alexander’s life written by Arrian in the late second century ce. The rest of the major surviving works date to the first century bce and the first and second centuries ce, thus postdating Alexander’s death by three or more centuries."

    Alexander the Great and the Mystery of the Elephant Medallions By Frank L. Holt

    "Nine hundred years later, historians still lament that one of the most important persons and periods in all of history must be studied without the benefit of adequate firsthand testimony. This requires extra caution in our handling of the evidence: we must ask whether the sources at our disposal have been corrupted by myth or political manipulation; whether a secondary author has misunderstood or miscopied a primary one; and whether it is possible to identify and correctly evaluate the lost sources upon which our best extant accounts depend. For example, scholars have determined that a dozen or so contemporaries of Alexander's actually published firsthand records of the reign; these include, among others Aristotle's relative Callisthenes; Chares, the court chamberlain; Ptoloemy, a general and future king of Egypt ; Aristobulus, a technical expert; Onesicritus, chief pilot of Alexander's flagship; and Nearchus, admiral of the fleet. Among these Ptolemy and Aristobulus provided the basis for Arrian's history, although he consulted other primary authors as well. Another contemporary of Alexander's, but probably not an eyewitness participant in the campaigns, was Cleitarchus, whose version of event heavily influences the so-called Vulgate tradition represented by the extant histories by Diodorus, Curtius and Justin.




     
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #16 - April 27, 2016, 07:20 PM

    Thanks bogart. I started reading Robin Lane Fox's book on Alexander a few years ago though I didn't get very far with it. I did wonder about the use of sources. Reading it now I'd probably be a bit more critically aware.
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #17 - April 27, 2016, 09:16 PM

    With Alexander the Great we actually have Plutarch and other biographers quoting what the eyewitnesses to Alexander's life wrote. The accounts agree quite well and archaeology and other external verification has led historians to believe the main outline of Alexander's life is historically preserved. Of course some of the biographers have taken liberties and embellished and changed things and historians have an idea of which sources are more reliable and which aren't. Despite our surviving sources being late, they are not reliant on oral tradition. Just saying because I recently looked into this.


    The problem is you do not know if what Plutarch quotes are accurate as we lack originals. Also he is centuries removed from the sources. As per above post I made these accounts do vary. Yes we can construct outline of his life. However when it comes to character details these sources are unreliable. Some of the conquests are questionable. The ahadith mention character details not what are considered events of history.

    Look at Pultarch's sources. For example Arrian admired Alexander while Cleitarchus thought he became corrupted by success. Both are opinions but which is accurate, if one actually is? Was he corrupt or a person to be admired. Do we attempt to construct a middle-ground between both or do we accept that a character profile is beyond what is available from the sources.

    Quote
    I'm just getting around to reading Bart Ehrman's new book on the reliability of oral tradition and I've heard him talk on it where he concludes that oral tradition is extraordinarily unreliable at preserving historical facts and significant changes can be brought about in a short amount of time (forget generations, days and weeks are enough). It will be a very interesting read


    For a complete, or even major view point, yes it is not reliable. However this does not mean individual parts are false.
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #18 - April 27, 2016, 09:26 PM

    Thanks bogart. I started reading Robin Lane Fox's book on Alexander a few years ago though I didn't get very far with it. I did wonder about the use of sources. Reading it now I'd probably be a bit more critically aware.


    The major issues is to separate events from the narratives about the people involved in these events. History and biographies of that era did not shy away from mixing mythology and creating a story like narrative into their accounts. Plutarch wrote in such a manner. 
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #19 - April 27, 2016, 09:47 PM

    Firstly, Ali’s essay was broadcast, doubtful he was unaware of Quran-only Muslims. Should go without saying, to that group his essay was irrelevant. 


    Hence why it is a false-dilemma. It only includes that which helps the argument's premises not against. That was done for a purpose.

    Quote
    Secondly, I will not get into reliability of hadiths discussion with anyone, but I find no good reason Ali Sina must put hadiths to proof before publishing his essay. He only concerned himself with reader holding hadiths to be fact, not whether you and I might reject hadiths.


    Again that is the point of the false-dilemma. Take X at face value yet do not establish X as fact.

    Quote
    To Muslims accepting hadiths as canonicals of Islam, Ali forces nothing upon them which is not accepted as true. 


    Which is their own false-dilemma. Granted it is a trap they set for themselves but Ali Sina takes full advantage of it.

    Quote
    One can answer yes to both statement, but reject conclusion. The respondent can even reject the second statement as unnecessary for discussion. Therein lies the rub. What is the explanation for the unflattering nigh-Quran hadiths, and why do Islamic sites avoid addressing them, and why is their only response is to rake Ali over the coals?


    I have read no response so I can not comment on it. I am attacking a flawed argument since it is based on a fallacy. Even if they accept such a flawed argument this only reflects they are incapable deconstructing a fallacious argument.

    Quote
    This is where I focus in reading Ali’s essay, communication between common people, not scholarship.


    Which why the common man accept such fallacious arguments and are prone to ridiculous beliefs.. They are out of their depth.

    Quote
    Beside if person speaks or writes in scholarly language, it would be Greek to me.


    Well that is a point a lot of people abuse in order for these sorts of arguments to be accepted and propagated. They rely on your ignorance and unwillingness to attack the argument's premises based on research beyond face-value views. You are directed to the conclusion not the groundwork of it. Hence why it so easy to attack literalism as it is a false dilemma. Either X is true or false.

  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #20 - April 28, 2016, 07:52 AM

    ........................

    Which is their own false-dilemma. Granted it is a trap they set for themselves but Ali Sina takes full advantage of it.

    I have read no response so I can not comment on it. I am attacking a flawed argument since it is based on a fallacy. Even if they accept such a flawed argument this only reflects they are incapable deconstructing a fallacious argument.

    ............ Either X is true or false.


    well he has the right to take full advantage of others stupidity ., if you say what you wrote to him.,He will say., he will accept that he is wrong provided Muslim intellectuals across the globe accept Islam is false and it is based on false premises

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #21 - April 28, 2016, 01:59 PM

    Damn yeez you hit the nail on the head.

    There are people like Ali Sina making conclusion based on hadiths because there are many muslims who take hadiths/Islamic traditions very seriously in the first place.
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #22 - April 28, 2016, 02:28 PM

    I’m not championing Ali’s essay, I simply offered a different viewpoint which was absent in thread. I’m content with all I’ve said, and have nothing more to add. If you find it insufficient, so be it. However another issue has come about.

    Quote
    Which why the common man accept such fallacious arguments and are prone to ridiculous beliefs. They are out of their depth.

     

    It’s been claimed people rate their intelligence higher than it really is, nevertheless I believe myself of average intelligence. Although I am certainly impressed even awed by those with superior intelligence, I’m not in need of their protection. Nonetheless I think you failed to consider the Muslim reader in all likelihood sought advice from a learned Muslim.

    And what about you? Take for example someone like William Lane Craig, skilled philosopher and debater. You're most likely no match for him, but if you needed advice on how to counter him, where would you search?  Seems atheists have no one capable of challenging him. Bart Ehrman, Four Horsemen of Atheism, Quentin Smith etc, any atheist philosopher you can think of. none are qualified to debate Lane Craig. I’ll leave it at that.

    Regards, Joseph
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #23 - April 28, 2016, 04:41 PM

    .............However another issue has come about...........


    Joseph.,I suggest entirely different issue  &  tell you a secret of Islam and that is

    "THERE WAS NO QURANIC MUHAMMAD & THERE WERE MANY HADITH MUHAMMADS"
     
    and let me correct you on that  William LAME Craig
     
    Quote
    .......... William LAME Craig, skilled philosopher and debater rubbish talker ..

    You're most likely no match for him, but if you needed advice on how to counter him, where would you search?  ............

     I would ask him  to search & read his bible and and  use common sense to rationalize what  is there in OT & NT Joseph..

    These books were written by some cave men and they are  books of their time with some stories and rhyming sonnets

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #24 - April 28, 2016, 05:55 PM

    It’s been claimed people rate their intelligence higher than it really is, nevertheless I believe myself of average intelligence. Although I am certainly impressed even awed by those with superior intelligence, I’m not in need of their protection. Nonetheless I think you failed to consider the Muslim reader in all likelihood sought advice from a learned Muslim.


    Even educated people can be trapped by their ideology. Rushing to people that already accept literalism is only confirmation bias

    Quote
    And what about you? Take for example someone like William Lane Craig, skilled philosopher and debater. You're most likely no match for him, but if you needed advice on how to counter him, where would you search? 


    Sean Carrol for the views on cosmology.  Philosophy is another story as these do not address "hard" facts as cosmology attempts to. Since you have already declared other philosophers are no match why bother mentioning anyone? You already think Craig is superior to anyone that has or will argue against his points. You treat a debate win as evidence of the claims within the debate are facts of reality. Your presupposition is showing.

    Quote
    Seems atheists have no one capable of challenging him. Bart Ehrman, Four Horsemen of Atheism, Quentin Smith etc, any atheist philosopher you can think of. none are qualified to debate Lane Craig. I’ll leave it at that.


    Sam Harris exposed Craig's errors as well but does not the credentials of Carrol

    You confuse winning a debate as if this means the argument is true. Debates are about swaying the layman audience and poking holes in arguments. If the audience is swayed there is a win. If the opponent does not poke enough holes in Craig's arguments it is a win. Debates wins does not mean any views are true. Craig has been shown to be wrong in written format time and time again where limits of a debate are not applied.

    Also your example is flawed as you replace Ali Sina, layman, with Craig, PhD philosophy and theology. Ali Sina is only using the authority invested by Muslims into hadith science not his own. He is making a diagnosis outside his field. While Craig does the same these points are used to support arguments and a field(s) he is an expert in. However again you demonstrate that the conclusion is what matters not the premises of the argument.

    No expertise vs no expertise shifts to expertise vs no expertise.

  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #25 - April 29, 2016, 03:49 AM

    The problem is you do not know if what Plutarch quotes are accurate as we lack originals. Also he is centuries removed from the sources. As per above post I made these accounts do vary. Yes we can construct outline of his life. However when it comes to character details these sources are unreliable. Some of the conquests are questionable. The ahadith mention character details not what are considered events of history.

    Look at Pultarch's sources. For example Arrian admired Alexander while Cleitarchus thought he became corrupted by success. Both are opinions but which is accurate, if one actually is? Was he corrupt or a person to be admired. Do we attempt to construct a middle-ground between both or do we accept that a character profile is beyond what is available from the sources.

    For a complete, or even major view point, yes it is not reliable. However this does not mean individual parts are false.



    The point I thought was important to make is that yes, we do rely on quite late sources for our knowledge of the ancient world (ie Alexander's conquests). But something like the conquests and life of Alexander is much more reliable than the ahadith because the biographers were using *written* eyewitness testimony as their sources, and not leaning on a much less reliable oral tradition.

    Oral tradition, despite the claims of Muslim and Christian apologists, is terrible at preserving accurate historical information.

    "I moreover believe that any religion that has anything in it that shocks the mind of a child, cannot be a true system."
    -Thomas Paine
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #26 - April 29, 2016, 03:53 AM

    And eh... it's a decent strategy for sina to take the sources at face value and show how it can be devastating for Islamic theology. Sure, its not gonna apply to all Muslims, but it's a perfectly valid move to assume one of your opponents presuppositions and shows how it blows up the rest of their belief structure by implication.

    "I moreover believe that any religion that has anything in it that shocks the mind of a child, cannot be a true system."
    -Thomas Paine
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #27 - April 29, 2016, 04:59 AM

    And eh... it's a decent strategy for sina to take the sources at face value and show how it can be devastating for Islamic theology. Sure, its not gonna apply to all Muslims, but it's a perfectly valid move to assume one of your opponents presuppositions and shows how it blows up the rest of their belief structure by implication.


    Sure. That is because they have setup their own false dilemma that has trapped them and is easy to exploit. However this does not make the diagnosis correct.

    [/quote]
    The point I thought was important to make is that yes, we do rely on quite late sources for our knowledge of the ancient world (ie Alexander's conquests). But something like the conquests and life of Alexander is much more reliable than the ahadith because the biographers were using *written* eyewitness testimony as their sources, and not leaning on a much less reliable oral tradition.


    Trusting something is accurate just because its says it used written sources does not guarantee any accuracy or reliability. Each source contradicts the other in some way. Arrian contradicts himself. He also picks who he decides is trustworthy and what is worth tell as a story. At times he feels Ptolemy is trustworthy then at times isn't. Also keep in mind the source Ali Sina has used are about minor characteristics so would be like reading the accounts of Alexanders death or a time of illness then making a diagnosis based on that.

    Quote
    Oral tradition, despite the claims of Muslim and Christian apologists, is terrible at preserving accurate historical information.


    Yup. Oral tradition is often a fall back position when it comes to faith statements to history statements

  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #28 - April 29, 2016, 01:09 PM

    Quote
    I would ask him  to search & read his bible and and  use common sense to rationalize what  is there in OT & NT Joseph.. These books were written by some cavemen and they are  books of their time with some stories and rhyming sonnets


    Yeezevee

    You certainly can request all those things of Lane Craig...So what is each left with…a sense of right, the other guy lacks common sense, judgement of the others intelligence. conviction?

    BTW: I think you have overlooked the cave drawings of Impala. That was prophecy of Chevy ; )

    Regards, Joseph
  • Was Muhammed an Epileptic ?
     Reply #29 - April 29, 2016, 02:51 PM

    Even educated people can be trapped by their ideology. Rushing to people that already accept literalism is only confirmation bias


    Certainly I will agree intelligent people can be susceptible to literalism, bias etc.

    Philosophy and debate are tools and have a place. Just the same I cannot find anywhere in my posts saying, winning the debate is winning the truth, nor where I declared a winner: That was your assumption, I merely borrowed the verdict from Common Sense Atheism as objection to your viewpoint. That unwashed masses need brilliant person such as yourself to protect them: Whereas your intellectual class will do just fine even against sophisticated argument. If you haven’t got the message, then I’ll be a little clearer: It may not be who you are, but I read a sense of superiority.  However at least we agree debate doesn’t equal truth, and everyone makes post-debate victory spin.

    Your hang up on formality comes off all-or-nothing. That said, I would not use Ali’s method: Disproving Islam would not prove Christianity. Nonetheless difficult to understand where your outrage to Ali’s essay comes from: No great crime against logic occurred. You’re irritated an incorrect formula was used to dispute what you believe is myth. So what, isn’t that what atheists harp on about, religionists need to examine their belief, and does it matter how the examination comes about? I don’t know if Ali intentionally used fallacy as form of sophisticated argument. If he did, it was clever. The negative was stated, now the hadith believer must give positive explanation, and that in of itself will have problems.

    Lastly, not of importance but it was raised as incidental, and I’ll treat it likewise. I’m willing to venture your thoughts on science and philosophy had Carroll in mind. He overreached by putting “science to Immortality of the soul, which is not a scientific question” That is silly.

    Regards, Joseph
  • 12 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »