Quote:
Originally posted by hiredgun
So his existence is irrefutable. His character, at least in public, once you read the unanimously praising accounts (even secular ones) of his life, is beyond doubt as well. The only question left is whether or not a man whose character and honesty shaped and transformed an entire region and sparked an empire was lying about being a messenger of god.
|
You don't think that maybe the stuff about Mohammed claiming to be a messenger of God might be someone else's lie? Anyone with a political agenda can forge a first-hand eyewitness account purporting to be written by a reputable source.
Also, just because someone says something that is not true, they are not necessarily a liar. Mohammed may have genuinely believed he was a messenger of god, without being anything of the sort. A lot of otherwise rational, intelligent people of impeccable character can suffer from delusion for one reason or another.
Your assertion that because he was illiterate and wrote poems, they must have come from God is tantamount to saying 'It's so ridiculous it MUST be true. Discrepant facts about folklorish characters are usually best explained as the result of an amalgamation. Take Robin Hood and King Arthur, two characters of English folklore: Tales of their adventures are known to come from various differrent sources, in Arthur's case spanning several hundred years and most of Europe.
If the onus rests, as you seem to believe, on the atheist to account for the scriptures, rather than on the believer to justify themselves, then surely in turn, the believer must explain the existence of scriptures of conflicting religions. Lets start with, say
Christianity, Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Hinduism, Jainism, Asatru, Shinto and Sikhism.