The OP was about Mohammed, not Islam or religion in general. And based on Islamic literature, he sounds like a bit of a dodgy character. He married a 6 year old, though she didn't move in with him till she was 9. Still a bit young for that kind of thing if you ask me. And he was something of a bloodthirsty warrior. Cue people saying "but haven't many people died in the name of Christianity?", but again, we're talking about one particular man here, not whole religions and the misdeeds done in their name.
Jack - whilst I do agree with that, you have to remember that if you are practising any religon then it is because someone forced their beliefs on you.
If this guy was alive today what length sentence do we think he would be serving right now? he would be in prison. The child sex charges, the war crimes, the murders, the robberies etc etc. Maybe he would get death?
The OP was about Muhammad and not Islam, however they are linked. You say 'based on Islamic Literature, he sounds like a dodgy character'. I would ask what literature it i sthat people read? The issue with his wife is a recent thing, it was never an issue in his lifetime or for centuries after. As for bloodthirsty warrior? He commanded armies and fought battles but always looked to peace. Many of the battles were 'defensive' maybe you should read what was written about him at th etime or soon afterwards. He consistently comes out as number 1 for most influential men Michael Hart - “My choice of Muhammad to lead the best of the world’s most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels. George Bernard Shaw: "I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving the problems in a way that would bring the much needed peace and happiness. Europe is beginning to be enamored of the creed of Muhammad. In the next century it may go further in recognizing the utility of that creed in solving its problems." Lamartine's tribute to the Prophet: "If greatness of purpose, smallness of means and astounding results are the three criteria of human genius, who could claim to compare any great man in modern history with Muhammad?" (Histoire de la Turquie, 1855). Gandhi: "I become more than ever convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers and his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle”. Edward Gibbon : The greatest success of Mohammad’s life was effected by sheer moral force withoutthe stroke of a sword.” John William Draper: “Four years after the death of Justinian, A.D. 569, was born at Mecca, in Arabia the man who, of all men exercised the greatest influence upon the human race . . . Mohammed.” Thomas Carlyle in Heroes and Hero Worship and the Heroic in History- ''The lies (western slander) which well meaning zeal has heaped round this man (Muhammad) are disgraceful to ourselves only''
Do you still fail to understand the burden of proof after all this time? The burden of proof falls upon those making the claim, ie. Jesus existed and was either the son of god or a prophet of Islam.
He isn't making a thread about it saying Santa Claus is a nasty man because he visits little kids in the middle of night though is he?
I personally couldnt give 2 ****s about burden of proof This is GC and not a philosophical debate. I believe Jesus was a prophet of God. Jack Bauer dude believes in Jesus. He simply asked some one who questioned Jesus' existance 'Alternatively do you have evidence he didn't exist?' Your smug ass came in with 'How would you go about proving that someone who supposedly lived 2000 years ago didn't exist? ' Now the person making the 'doesnt exist allegation' has the burden of proof, as they made the allegation first no?
No. That's an attempt to avoid the burden of proof. You have to claim that he existed first in order for someone to question it. If I claim that the Easter bunny exists and somebody asks me to prove it, then I can't simply counter it and put the burden of proof upon them by saying, "prove it doesn't!".
NO the person making the assertion in the first instance has the burden of proof If i came to you and said jesus exists, then the burden of proof is on me as I am asking the question If you came to me and said jesus does not exist then YOU need to do the proving The burden of proof lies on the person making the assertion FIRST
