FH,

Your dad was right about you. He saw a steadfast Muslim in you. With a peace of mind, he confidently sent you to study in Europe. That way, you got good western education and would also be able to leverage off your western experience, to go on establishing mateships with non-Muslims, to the good cause of Islam.

It took me some time to realise that most people have an innert inability to change their thinkings, no matter what one tells them. So I do not expect to change your belief, or anybody else's, for that matter.

But I do not envy you at all. Your reply to my question simply confirms that you never even asked the most fundamental question that anyone seeking a truth ought to have asked. It seems you can't even comprehend such a necessity.

Put simply - you are just plain religious, someone that accepts a faith and then build your reasonings based on the belief.

As for me, I am very open-minded. I consider anything and believe in what logical reasonings would have me believe.

What I know is: Muhammad is NOT to be believed.

It is unfortunate Islam attained a critical mass early on that enabled it to expand uncontrollably.

It is not my business if someone insists on believing a tree or a rock. But Islam is a threat to freedom and democracy likes none others. This is a concern, especially when the threat comes from a frauded religion to begin with.

Still, if you have a proof that Muhammad did came face to face with Angel Gabriel, then please mention it.

( A mountain of teachings not based on the truth, is nothing but futile )

GZ Tan,

You quote:
“Your dad was right about you. He saw a steadfast Muslim in you. With a peace of mind, he confidently sent you to study in Europe”
Not sure who you mean by that statement? I started travelling after my father passed away and in fact I was agnostic till the age of 25. Resorting to personal comments and name calling as you do with Irfan is not intellectual.

You are the challenger on this forum and you contradicted yourself with your own statement:
“What I know is: Muhammad is NOT to be believed”

What if this statement is the Hoax? Now ask yourself why? The “why’’ is a great question and helped me over almost 6 years of soul search.

Why would an honest, illiterate, wealthy, popular and well respected merchant invent something at the age of 40 that will make him lose his status, his wealth, his popularity, risk his own life and his family members over the next 23 years? Only to die leaving behind a shield and a mule.

Start from there. The answer should be very personal to you and I don't want to know what you come up with. But use your own ópen mind as you claim and put your ego aside.

FH,

Why ?

Why has it not occurred to you Muhammad supposed he would be even more powerful, wealthier and more respected, if he could make people follow his stories and instructions?

If his life did not end in richness, that simply shows:
1. Muhammad never could fore-tell his future.
2. his hoax back-fired on him, at times.

But now Muslims twist a logic and argue that Muhammad's life "sacrifice" is a proof that an "honest" man had told an honest truth.

What a joke !

Have you not heard someone testifies that another person is "honest", therefore that person must have told the truth? If that person suffers bankruptcy, would that be further proof of his honesty?

Yes, I am the challenger. If you know anything about logical reasoning : The onus is on Muhammad to prove that his encounters with Angel Gabriel were true.

It is not up to people to prove a negative. Therefore the burden is on you to prove Muhammad had met Angel Gabriel. Since you are a believer.

Unless and until a proof is provided, my statement stands:

--> Muhammad is NOT to be believed !!

The answer should NOT be personal. It is only personal and hurtful when you fear the truth, when the honour of your ancestors, Arab race and dignity of Muslims are at stake.

But that's your problem. I am only interested in the truth.

GZ Tan: " I am only interested in the truth. "

Okay, despite myself I'll bite.

I'm interested in "the truth" too. How about GZ Tan provides us with conclusive proof of the Virgin Birth and of the Resurrection?

If he responds to his own challenge, I'll bet his 'evidence' is - empirically speaking - right up there with that which supports Mohammed and Gabriel.

GZ_tan, the malicious undertones in your argument are appalling and are in no way constructive...

The problem is that the level of collective description of a physical event has a corresponding level of holistic perception attached to it and perhaps thats what your argument is lacking, but rather you choose to fundamental-ise Islam by focusing on particular aspects that are only considered a drop in the ocean in theological terms. Are u actually a theologist or pertain to a similar scientific profession? If not i suggest you en-devour to not focus on truths based on small aspects of Islam but rather seek a holistic understanding of the faith. That is TRUTH in the true sense of the term

part of being logical, which you claim being the bastion of, is providing "reason or sound judgment" and based on your personal attacks on Fellow_Human your apparent sound judgment is seriously feeble. I don't care about your Wiki-religious understanding of Islam, but rather than having a chance to actually know more about it your caught up in the welter of your own grandeur.

I'm considerably young, 21 to be precise and as a confirmed Christian one day id be fervent to sit down and seek greater understanding from someone like Fellow_Human as i think there is a more realistic dynamic to the faith.

GZ Tan,

You don’t need to feel so hot under the collar with all upper case and exclamation marks. It’s just a discussion.

You said:
“The onus is on Muhammad to prove that his encounters with Angel Gabriel were true”

True and the proof (to me) is simple: his teachings.
Mohammed (pbuh) audience were a bunch of illiterate primitive tribes. They were into all sorts of unethical practices from territorial killing, burying new born females alive, etc..
Yet the message he taught despite alienating everyone (including some of the people of the book) was above monotheism, equality, co-existence, respect, social and family values. Even though the first 13 years of his preaching life he had no followers, he persisted with spiritual and ethical teachings. His personal life went down hill from the moment he started preaching until he passed away. He was OK that the truth even though unites every one, it also alienated every one.

As CJ Morgan said: there is no physical proof on anything really: there are no videos of flying UFO or Jesus walking on water. Yet people believe what makes sense to them. The Quranic story, in my view, is the most logical in comparison to other theologies.

I don’t deny you belief in your faith, so please respect my freedom to believe in mine.

Thank you,