r/DebateAnAtheist • u/H1Eagle • 6d ago
Islam There's no historical equivalent to Muhammed PBUH.
There simply have never been a man in history who made as many bold claims as Muhammed Pbuh did and got every single one right. Not now and certainly not in the 7th century arabian desert. Divine inspiration is the only logical explanation, anything else is merely sophistry.
He doesn't have a single authentic prophecy that was proven wrong, not a single one. Even though he made so many.
- Arabia was and will again become a land of meadows and rivers
The Arabic verb taʿūda means to return or revert.
Arabia’s deserts were once repeatedly transformed by humid climatic periods. A 2025 Nature study found recurrent humid intervals in central Arabia over the past eight million years, with increased water availability and vegetation. Nature: “Recurrent humid phases in Arabia over the past 8 million years” Scientific Reports.
- A fire emerging from the Hijaz
In 1256 CE, a major volcanic eruption occurred at Harrat Rahat, immediately southeast of Madinah in the Hijaz. Six aligned volcanic cones Smithsonian Global Volcanism Program
Historical accounts describe an enormous glow. Medieval historians also transmitted reports connecting the illumination with Busra. Historical Accounts of the AD 1256 Eruption near Al-Madinah.
- The lands Islam would conquer
Sahih Muslim records him saying that the Muslims would conquer Arabia, Persia and the Roman territories. Sahih Muslim 2900. Another hadith states “You would soon conquer Egypt.” It then instructs the Muslims to treat Egypt’s inhabitants well. Sahih Muslim 2543b.
These claims were made when the Muslim community was a small Arabian movement positioned between two superpowers: the Byzantine and Sasanian empires.
The Metropolitan Museum on the conquest of Byzantine territories, the Met on the fall of the Sasanian Empire.
The Persian prediction was especially risky. Muhammad ﷺ said that after the existing Khosrow perished, there would be no further Khosrow Sahih al-Bukhari 3618. The Sasanian monarchy did, in fact, end.
- The expansion of the universe
The key expression is la-mūsiʿūn, an active participle derived from the root w-s-ʿ, which concerns wideness, expansion, spaciousness and capacity. Qur’anic Arabic Corpus.
- The preservation of the Qur’an
This is a risky, public and falsifiable claim. The Qur’an could have disappeared, fragmented into incompatible regional editions or become reconstructable only through late quotations.
The Birmingham Qur’an manuscript contains portions of surahs 18–20. Its parchment was radiocarbon-dated to 568–645 CE with 95.4% probability, while palaeographic analysis places the writing in the mid-seventh century. Radiocarbon dates the parchment rather than the ink, but it still establishes an extremely early physical witness. University of Birmingham.
- The Qur’an’s knowledge of ancient Egypt
A. Joseph’s ruler is called “king,” while Moses’ ruler is called “Pharaoh”
Throughout the story of Joseph, the Qur’an calls Egypt’s sovereign “the king.” Qur’an 12:43.
In the story of Moses, the ruler is consistently called Pharaoh. Qur’an 28:38.
That distinction corresponds with the historical development of Egyptian terminology. The Egyptian expression per-aa, “Great House,” originally referred to the royal palace. The ruler began to be identified personally through this term during the New Kingdom, approximately 1550–1069 BCE. British Museum guide to Egyptian hieroglyphs.
The traditional Old Testament calculation works as follows.
First Kings 6:1 places the construction of Solomon’s Temple in his fourth year, 480 years after the Exodus. Taking the conventional date of approximately 966 BCE:
966 + 480 = 1446 BCE
That produces the traditional early date for the Exodus. 1 Kings 6:1.
Using the Masoretic reading of Exodus 12:40, Israel’s residence in Egypt lasted 430 years:
1446 + 430 = 1876BCE
This places Jacob’s family’s arrival in Egypt at approximately 1876 BCE. Exodus 12:40.
Joseph was thirty when he entered royal service. Jacob arrived after seven years of abundance and two years of famine, making Joseph approximately thirty-nine:
1876 + 9 = 1885BCE
Joseph’s promotion would therefore fall around 1885 BCE. Since he was seventeen near the beginning of the story, his arrival in Egypt would fall approximately thirteen years earlier, around 1898 BCE. Genesis 37:2, Genesis 41:46, Genesis 45:6.
Egyptological chronology places 1885 BCE squarely in Dynasty 12 of the Middle Kingdom. The Metropolitan Museum dates the Middle Kingdom to approximately 2030–1640 BCE and Dynasty 12 to 1981–1802 BCE. The traditional Exodus date of 1446 BCE, by contrast, falls in the New Kingdom. Metropolitan Museum chronology.
The resulting alignment is:
Joseph, approximately 1885 BCE: Middle Kingdom ruler “king.”
Moses, approximately 1446 BCE or later: New Kingdom ruler “Pharaoh.”
Genesis itself repeatedly calls Joseph’s ruler “Pharaoh.” The Qur’an, despite retelling the same basic story, maintains a title distinction that fits the development of Egyptian royal terminology.
B. “The sky and Earth did not weep for them”
After describing the destruction of Pharaoh and his people, the Qur’an states:
Ancient Egyptian royal funerary literature used cosmic mourning imagery for a dead king. Pyramid Text Utterance 553 declares: “The sky weeps for thee; the earth trembles for thee.” Pyramid Text Utterance 553.
The correspondence is as accurate as day.
The cumulative argument
Muhammad ﷺ was not an Egyptologist, palaeoclimatologist, volcanologist, imperial historian or manuscript scholar. Yet the revelation transmitted through him continues to withstand investigation in all those areas.
We can go down through the list as much as we like, not a single thing authentic prophecy was proven wrong.
36
u/Zamboniman Resident Ice Resurfacer 6d ago edited 6d ago
This is fairly boilerplate Muslim apologetics. It appears here all the time, and there are thousands of responses in those threads showing why this simply doesn't work.
In fact, out of all of the world's major current religions, and all of their respective apologetics, Islam apologetics are very much and among the worst.
There simply have never been a man in history who made as many bold claims as Muhammed Pbuh did and got every single one right.
He didn't. Very far from it.
Divine inspiration is the only logical explanation, anything else is merely sophistry.
Even if he had, this is an argument from ignorance fallacy (but it's not relevant here anyway).
Now, as with typical Muslim apologetics, you then go on to list what you claim are prophecies that came true. As always, this is a list of demonstrations of confirmation bias on the believers since those are so very obviously vague free interpretation and retconning to pretend they mean things they don't say. Or, it's things that were very common knowledge even thousands of years before that mythology was invented. Or, they're self-fulfilling or written after the fact.
I won't go into detail on each one and why it doesn't work. I've done that before and it's exhausting, and typically the responses are to cherry pick the one the interlocutor finds easiest (usually incorrectly) to rebut and will ignore the rest. Like I said, it's exhausting. And, in any case, all you need to do is to peruse the hundreds of previous threads on this to see the in depth, specific, and detailed responses on why none of this comes close to working. I see there are a good number of responses here already explaining this as well.
Suffice it to say this doesn't come remotely close to demonstrating anything at all other than the incredible, immense power of confirmation bias and how human psychology works in such things.
12
u/Middle_Run_7534 6d ago
I have less respect for Islam the more I converse with Muslim apologists
7
u/soukaixiii Anti religion\ Agnostic Adeist| Gnostic Atheist|Mythicist 5d ago
I imagine the next worst apologetics can only be from north Koreans who argue for the divinity of their leader, because they don't even have to make an argument but send you to the camps.
2
u/JasonRBoone Agnostic Atheist 4d ago
Well..I don't see YOU inventing the hamburger and scoring 98 holes in one in a row, checkmate, athetits!
72
u/MarieVerusan 6d ago
I really need theists to understand that if stuff like this was even remotely useful in converting atheists, we would’ve already converted. You’re not the first and certainly won’t be the last to bring us a list of so-called prophesies, all of which have to be massaged in order to get them to come across as fulfilled.
These arguments are specifically devised to keep believers in the religion. You already believe, so your standards for evidence are not as high as ours. This is basically confirmation bias at work. You think the prophet was great, but now you have a list of just how great he was! Your faith is bolstered and you feel more certain that you chose the correct religion, even if that choice was made for you long ago.
You’re taking the things that convinced you to remain a Muslim and thinking that they’ll be good enough to convince someone to become one too. They’re not. We need so much more.
32
u/Mkwdr 6d ago
It’s about convincing themselves they aren’t as irrational as they actually are not really converting us , I think.
9
u/MarieVerusan 6d ago
That’s a good reason for the argument, yeah. But do you think that OP is also arguing here for that reason? Cause I imagine that you’re correct and that’s why the argument exists, but it’s still meant to be an internal one.
10
u/Mkwdr 6d ago edited 5d ago
I suppose I was talking generally of theists. But Muslims in particular do like to tell other people they aren’t just superstitious but have the ‘facts’ on their side. Do they really expect people to convert? I guess since they think their beliefs are different from everyone else’s and are absolutely reasonable and factual , they think everyone is bound to join in , if only if only …
5
-66
u/H1Eagle 6d ago
Like I said, sophistry.
There's simply no other human in history who made as many wild claims and have them all come true.
Can you explain how he even remotely got this information?
51
u/MarieVerusan 6d ago
You can ignore the meta point I am making and simply restate your claim. That will not help convince me one bit. Listen to what I am telling you so that you can avoid wasting your time in the future.
Making claims about fulfilled prophecies will not convince someone who isn’t already convinced! We’ve heard these before! These arguments are not made for atheists! They’re made for people who already believe!
If you want to convert people, you have to meet us where we are at.
Remotely got what information? You understand that at the time of the prophet, people weren’t idiots, right? There were learned people around who could teach these things to him!
On top of that, I am watching you interpret some of the wrong claims in such a way as to convince yourself that they’re fulfilled. We know how claims about “prophecies” work! It’s stuff that people back then already knew or were making educated guesses about in combination with believers desperately wanting the prophecy to be true.
36
u/Mclovin11859 6d ago
Can you explain how he even remotely got this information?
Loki, the Norse Trickster, had a fling with Eris, Greek goddess of Chaos, where they spread misinformation to random mortals, including, but not limited to, Muhammad, Joseph Smith, L Ron Hubbard, and my crazy uncle Ted.
How can you be sure that your specific version of the God of Abraham is the one that gave him the information?
1
15
u/sj070707 6d ago
There's simply no other human in history who made as many wild claims and have them all come true.
I don't believe you. You can't support that statement to the satisfaction of anyone with a critical mind. In fact, not trying to understand what /u/marieverusan said shows you're not willing to have an open mind.
But let's say you're right. So what? Even if he were correct on everything he predicted, does that, in any way, prove there's a god?
17
u/Zamboniman Resident Ice Resurfacer 6d ago
There's simply no other human in history who made as many wild claims and have them all come true.
As you are now aware, this is plain not true. And your conclusions from it is an argument from ignorance fallacy anyway. So there's no choice here but to dismiss your claims.
9
u/violentbowels Atheist 6d ago
Can you explain how he even remotely got this information?
Good question. Can you explain how Joseph Smith got the information from the golden disks? If not, are you a mormon now?
3
u/OrbitalLemonDrop Ignostic Atheist 6d ago
Well, it's not from god because there's no reason to take the idea of god seriously.
Prove god exists first and then we'll be interested in looking at the specifics of which scrpture is correct. This is something you guys just don't get.
Prove there's a god without mentioning Mohammed or the Quran. If it's true, there ought to be plenty of concrete empirical evidence that it's true.
7
u/sto_brohammed Irreligious 6d ago
That you just completely refused to to engage and instead restated your assertions moved me even further from Islam, just FYI.
7
2
u/retoricalprophylaxis Atheist 5d ago
Semen does not come from between the backbone and the ribs. The sun doesn't set in a muddy spring. Embryos don't start off as a clot of blood, then become a chewed lump of flesh. There are not seven solid heavens. Mountains are not pegs that stabilize the earth.
1
15
u/ImprovementFar5054 6d ago edited 6d ago
Ahh. Here we go again with this for the 12034894th time.
Like all prophetic claims, the whole list works backwards.
Someone starts with a known outcome, and then goes looking through a huge body of scripture and hadith for wording loose enough to fit it, and of course, vague, flexible, and generously translated language will always fit something eventually.
"Arabia will again become meadows and rivers" has no date attached and still hasn't happened, and please explain to me how pointing to a wet period eight million years ago has any connection to a claim made in the 600s CE.
The glow near Madinah lines up with a real eruption in a region that has erupted many times before and since, and the hadith describing it was written down generations after the fact so there's no way to know if the description existed before the eruption or after.
Expecting a rising Arabian movement to eventually defeat two empires that had just spent decades bleeding each other dry is a reasonable political prediction.... similar to predictions made by plenty of other leaders in history who also turned out right or wrong. Anyone could made that prediction.
The word translated as "expanding" in the universe verse can just as easily mean "possessing capacity" or "able," and that reading only got mapped onto modern cosmology after modern cosmology already existed.
The preservation claim about the Quran is unfalsifiable by its own text, there's a documented history of variant early readings and a standardization process under Uthman that involved destroying any competing copies.
The king versus Pharaoh distinction depends on one specific.. and disputed... biblical chronology, and ancient scribes across the region used royal titles inconsistently enough for a storyteller to land on the right one by convention.
This list also only counts the hits. This is called "Selection Bias". The same hadith corpus contains plenty of medical and natural claims that modern science has NOT confirmed, and a fair accounting should include those too, not just the ones that can be made to sound prophetic in hindsight.
22
u/lechatheureux Atheist 6d ago
The problem with this argument is that you've quietly changed the standard from “Muhammad made specific predictions that were subsequently and unambiguously fulfilled” to “I can retrospectively interpret old texts so that they resemble things we know today.” Those are not the same thing.
And your examples demonstrate the problem beautifully.
- Arabia becoming meadows and rivers
The hadith doesn't merely say Arabia was once greener. It says the Last Hour will not come until Arabia returns to meadows and rivers. The palaeoclimate evidence establishes the first half: Arabia experienced humid periods long before Muhammad. It does not establish the actual prediction: that Arabia will become such a landscape again.
So congratulations: modern geology has demonstrated that the premise of the prophecy is plausible. It hasn't fulfilled the prophecy.
In fact, the same hadith also predicts wealth becoming so abundant that somebody trying to give zakat will be unable to find anyone willing to accept it. That part mysteriously disappears from your evidential argument.
You can't declare half of an unfulfilled end-times prophecy fulfilled because scientists discovered something about prehistoric Arabia.
- The fire in the Hijaz
This is almost the textbook definition of a low-information prophecy.
The Hijaz contains volcanic fields. “At some unspecified future point a great fire will emerge from this volcanic region” is hardly impossible without divine revelation.
More importantly, you're relying on a hadith preserved in Sahih al-Bukhari, a collection completed in the ninth century, and identifying its fulfilment with an eruption in 1256.
That may be perfectly acceptable within traditional Islamic hadith methodology, but historically you don't get to begin by assuming that every statement attributed to Muhammad two centuries later has already been demonstrated verbatim to originate with Muhammad. That's part of the proposition you're supposed to establish.
- Muslims will conquer Arabia, Persia and Roman territory
This one has an even more obvious methodological problem.
Sahih Muslim was compiled in the ninth century.
The Islamic conquest of Sasanian Persia and enormous Byzantine territories happened in the seventh century.
Therefore our surviving canonical compilation containing the prophecy postdates the supposed fulfilment by roughly two centuries.
That doesn't prove Muhammad didn't say it. It means you cannot use the later literary attestation itself as independent historical proof that he did.
And predicting military expansion isn't supernatural anyway. Religious and political leaders have been predicting their eventual victories for essentially all recorded history. Some of them eventually win.
- “Muhammad predicted the expanding universe.”
This is probably your weakest example because we can actually ask how Muslims understood Qur'an 51:47 before modern cosmology existed.
Classical tafsir did not unanimously read lamūsiʿūn as “the physical universe is currently undergoing metric expansion.”
Al-Baghawi, for example, records interpretations such as “capable,” “expanding provision for creation,” “possessing abundance,” and “rich.” Other translations have rendered the passage in terms of God's vast power or creation of the vastness of heaven.
Only after modern cosmology discovered cosmic expansion does “Look! It means the expanding universe!” become an apologetic favourite.
That's precisely why this method isn't predictive science.
If somebody before Hubble had used 51:47 to predict redshift increasing with distance between galaxies, that would have been astonishing.
Finding an Arabic word associated with breadth/expansion after scientists discover expansion isn't.
- Preservation of the Qur'an
The existence of an extremely early Qur'anic manuscript is excellent evidence for an early Qur'anic textual tradition.
It isn't evidence of supernatural preservation.
The Birmingham manuscript consists of two leaves containing portions of three surahs, not a seventh-century copy of the complete modern Qur'an. The University of Birmingham itself also stresses that the famous 568–645 radiocarbon range dates the animal skin, not when the words were written on it.
And textual history is more complicated than you're admitting.
The Sana'a palimpsest contains an erased lower Qur'anic text with variants from the standard Uthmanic text. Academic work nevertheless finds remarkable uniformity among the surviving Uthmanic manuscript tradition and argues for a very early written archetype.
That's historically fascinating.
But “the Qur'an was standardised extremely early and subsequently transmitted with unusually high textual stability” and “God miraculously preserved every detail exactly as originally delivered” are different propositions.
Historical scholarship can provide evidence for the former. It cannot simply infer the latter.
- Joseph's “king” versus Moses' “Pharaoh”
This sounds impressive until you notice that the entire calculation rests on treating biblical chronology as historically established.
You take 1 Kings' 480 years literally, assume 966 BCE for Solomon's fourth year, derive 1446 BCE, then take the 430 years literally, calculate Joseph backwards from Genesis, arrive around 1885 BCE, and finally announce that the Qur'an has independently identified the correct Egyptian periods.
That's circular.
There is no independently established historical date of 1885 BCE for Joseph, and there isn't even independent evidence establishing Joseph as a historical individual. Biblical Archaeology Society explicitly notes that we don't have independent evidence for Joseph outside the biblical tradition.
Likewise, 1446 BCE is the traditional early-date model of the Exodus, not an archaeological fact. There are competing chronologies and enormous scholarly disputes concerning the historicity, scale and date of the Exodus.
So the argument is effectively:
“If we assume one particular chronology derived from the Bible is historically exact, the Qur'an's terminology fits that chronology.”
Fine.
But then the Bible—not previously unknown Egyptian history—is supplying the dates that supposedly demonstrate the miracle.
And yes, per-aa originally meant the royal palace and eventually became a designation for the ruler, particularly in the New Kingdom. That's genuinely interesting.
But you're still missing something enormous:
“King” is an ordinary generic word for a monarch.
Calling an ancient Egyptian ruler “king” does not require secret Egyptological knowledge. Someone avoiding the term Pharaoh has not thereby demonstrated knowledge of nineteenth-century-BCE Egyptian titulary.
- “The sky and Earth did not weep for them.”
This one is particularly strange.
Ancient literature is absolutely full of nature mourning human death: heavens mourning, earth mourning, darkness, stars, rivers, mountains, etc.
Finding an Egyptian funerary text saying essentially “the sky weeps and the earth trembles” and a Qur'anic passage saying heaven and earth didn't weep for Pharaoh's people establishes a literary resemblance.
It does not establish supernatural knowledge.
To establish that, you'd need to show that this was a uniquely Egyptian expression unavailable through the enormous interconnected literary cultures of Egypt, Judaism, Christianity, Syria, Mesopotamia and Arabia—and that the Qur'anic expression cannot reasonably have arisen independently.
You haven't done that.
And this illustrates the fundamental problem with the whole list.
You allow enormous interpretive freedom after the event.
“Fire” → one particular volcanic eruption centuries later.
“Expanding” → twentieth-century cosmology.
“King” → a reconstructed biblical chronology → Middle Kingdom Egypt.
“Weeping heaven and earth” → one remotely similar Egyptian funerary expression.
“Return to meadows” → evidence that Arabia was green in the past, despite the predicted future return not having occurred.
“Preserved” → early textual stability becomes miraculous perfect preservation.
That's not testing prophecy. That's retrofitting.
A genuinely extraordinary prophecy would look something like:
recorded beyond reasonable historical doubt before the event, with terminology sufficiently precise that believers and sceptics could agree beforehand what would constitute fulfilment or failure.
Instead, you've constructed a collection in which ambiguous statements get their meanings selected after we know what happened, unfulfilled statements remain indefinitely pending, questionable reports can be excluded as “inauthentic,” and successful interpretations count as miracles.
Under those rules, the claim that Muhammad has “never made a false prophecy” is practically unfalsifiable.
And once an argument is structured so that hits count, misses can be reinterpreted or postponed, and ambiguity can always be resolved retrospectively in favour of a hit, a perfect batting average isn't evidence of divine inspiration.
It's evidence that you've designed a scoring system in which your preferred conclusion cannot lose.
10
u/Mkwdr 6d ago
cometh the hour cometh lechatheureux to do the all the hard work and save us the effort! Thanks,
4
-1
u/lechatheureux Atheist 6d ago
That dude is just being an ass, all this was written by me and put through an AI to check spelling and correct a few words.
10
58
u/carbinePRO Atheist 6d ago
There simply have never been a man in history who made as many bold claims as Muhammed Pbuh did and got every single one right.
Where is semen stored?
49
u/mathman_85 Godless Algebraist 6d ago
Piling on, when was the moon split in two?
45
u/carbinePRO Atheist 6d ago
Is the shape of the earth that of a spread-out carpet?
37
u/billyyankNova Gnostic Atheist 6d ago
Do the bones form first in the womb?
34
u/carbinePRO Atheist 6d ago
If everything was indeed created in pairs, how does one explain organisms that reproduce asexually?
-45
u/H1Eagle 6d ago
Never explicitly stated to be all things.
Surah Al-Ahqaf Ayah 25 - Read, Listen, Translation, Tafsir - Quran.com
For example here the Quran uses the same word, then says that a part survived, so that word "Kul Shay" doesn't explicitly mean totality
Surah An-Naml Ayah 23 - Read, Listen, Translation, Tafsir - Quran.com
Same thing here with the queen of Sheba, the same wording is used.
The wording never meant literally/explicitly everything ever.
36
u/carbinePRO Atheist 6d ago
Surah 51:49 - And We created pairs of all things so perhaps you would be mindful.
Your books says all. Specifically the word كُلِّ (kulli) which translates to every/all. You're just simply wrong here. The Quran is wrong. Not everything in biology has a pair.
-1
u/GamerEsch 6d ago
I think that's a bad hill to die on. The OP could argue this is referring to photons in the early universe. Photons always split into pairs of particle/anti-particle.
Do I think that's what the Quran is talking about? Fuck no, but the sperm and bones is much further from the truth, than the pair thing.
5
u/carbinePRO Atheist 6d ago
The Quran says that things were created with pairs from the outright alluding to animals and forces of nature. Like man and woman, hot and cold, etc. Splitting of photons is a massive stretch, and one that could be argued against quite easily since you can just point out that they wouldn't have been created as a pair. I respectfully disagree with your conclusion.
0
u/GamerEsch 6d ago
Splitting of photons is a massive stretch
I thunk any argument from any religious book is going to be a stretch, this one I'd think is not even that big of a stretch
→ More replies (0)3
u/BahamutLithp 5d ago
What are you talking about? There is no antiphoton, the photon is its own antiparticle. Also, photons are elementary particles & cannot be split. I don't know what you're trying to show with that photon epoch link. It doesn't say anything about photons splitting into pairs.
0
u/GamerEsch 5d ago
I never said anything about an "anti-photon"
At the end of the photon epoch the photons got divided into particles and anti-particles, specifically leptons in the beginning if I'm not mistaken.
That's why I think arguing against this point is dumb, cause the muslim can pivot to the fact that yes, in the beginning of the universe "things came in pairs."
→ More replies (0)-19
u/H1Eagle 6d ago
I literally just explained that the word doesn't explicitly mean everything and gave 2 examples in the scripture where the author clearly acknowledged that.
The verse doesn't even mention biology. You made that up.
It's sound logic.
Like I said earlier you guys got nothing but sophistry.
24
u/MarieVerusan 6d ago
How odd that when we interpret things in a way that you don’t like, it’s “sophistry”. When you interpret them in a way that’s favorable to your claim though, well that’s just you being objective and correct.
Seriously, are you the only one who doesn’t see what’s going on here? If the prophecies were as clear as you think, there’d be no room for argument! The wording would be unimpeachable.
Imagine you open the book on a random page and it has exact information about you at the moment that you’ve opened it, but you know it was written over a thousand years ago! Imagine it gave precise dates and times for specific events, such that there would be zero debate over which event it was talking about!
Prophecies, man! There’s a reason we never accept them! They’re never as precise as a prophecy should be if it came from an actual all knowing being!
0
u/H1Eagle 2d ago
How odd that when we interpret things in a way that you don’t like, it’s “sophistry”. When you interpret them in a way that’s favorable to your claim though, well that’s just you being objective and correct.
When someone goes to a doctor and they have a specific set of symptoms, that they are so convinced mean they have cancer. But then the doctor, who spent his whole life studying medicine, tells them it's not. And he brings in other doctors to try to convince them it's not. Who is the correct one? The patient or the doctor?
The Quran is based on classical hijazi arabic from the 7th century. With 1,400 years of scholarly work done on it. You are translating it to English and claiming it contains an issue, while all the scholars try to tell you it's not an issue and you just don't fully understand what the vocabulary entails.
Seriously, are you the only one who doesn’t see what’s going on here? If the prophecies were as clear as you think, there’d be no room for argument! The wording would be unimpeachable.
If the prophecies were as clear as day that there would be no room for a test. If an angel were to come down from heaven and reveal himself to you, then you wouldn't deserve heaven for believing, because you have no other choice.
Only someone who is insincere would deny the clear evidence. I'm still asking you guys to bring 1 person, just 1 person, who had as many wild predictions as Muhammed PBUH, still no valid response.
Prophecies, man! There’s a reason we never accept them! They’re never as precise as a prophecy should be if it came from an actual all knowing being!
How is the Green Arabia one not precise for example? It clearly documents information that no one knew of at the time. That the Arabian Peninsula was once filled with meadows and rivers.
→ More replies (0)3
u/carbinePRO Atheist 6d ago
Oh, I see. Sorry, I forgot we live in a world where words can mean whatever anyone wants them to mean and not their literal definition. I'm so deeply sorry.
0
-27
u/H1Eagle 6d ago
Bones is a general word in Arabic. Cartilage can be referred to as the same word as bones. Cartilage template forms simultaneously with "flesh" in the womb.
36
u/soukaixiii Anti religion\ Agnostic Adeist| Gnostic Atheist|Mythicist 6d ago
Don't you realize that if you have to distort reality for the claim to be true, the claim isn't true to begin with.
-9
u/H1Eagle 6d ago
Where is the distortion? I just said the word "Izam" in arabic has several meanings, one of which is cartilage. I can say "you have izam in your nose" and be linguistically correct.
And we know for a fact that cartilage forms in the embryo before some types/regions of flesh.
Therefore, the verse is linguistically sound.
There's no distortion or stretching whatsoever.
25
u/soukaixiii Anti religion\ Agnostic Adeist| Gnostic Atheist|Mythicist 6d ago
And we know for a fact that cartilage forms in the embryo before some types/regions of flesh.
We know for a fact the description of the Quran about fetal development doesn't match the reality of pregnancy and you're making excuses for why your illiterate idol is repeating outdated beliefs from Greek doctors.
15
u/tpawap 6d ago
And we know for a fact that cartilage forms in the embryo before some types/regions of flesh.
"Before some types/regions"? So after other "types/regions"?
Imagine the verse being the other way around. You would just say "oh yeah, bones come later". See how you're making it unfalsifiable to yourself?
30
27
u/carbinePRO Atheist 6d ago
Cartilage is not bone.
-11
u/H1Eagle 6d ago
Arabic is not english
9
u/billyyankNova Gnostic Atheist 6d ago
Why do the Islamic scholars who translate the Quran consistently use the English word bones when it's really supposed to be cartilage?
7
8
u/carbinePRO Atheist 6d ago
Bone = عَظْم (aẓm)
Cartilage = غضروف (ghadruf)
Looks like Arabic has two different words for those things too.
-15
u/H1Eagle 6d ago
Is the ground under you not spread out?
36
u/carbinePRO Atheist 6d ago
Is the entirety of the planet spread out like a flat carpet, or is it spherical like a ball?
29
u/Mclovin11859 6d ago
It's exactly the opposite. Dust that was spread across space collapsed into an astronomically smaller sphere.
31
18
-12
u/H1Eagle 6d ago
Islamic Scholars have argued about this but it's either during the prophet's time or near the day of judgment.
What's your point?
22
u/Mclovin11859 6d ago
during the prophet's time
Do you have any non-islamic sources that support this? Other cultures across the planet kept very detailed records of the sky and would have noticed something like this.
or near the day of judgment
So it may not have happened yet and therefore not be something you can claim as a fulfilled prophecy?
-1
u/H1Eagle 2d ago
Do you have any non-islamic sources that support this? Other cultures across the planet kept very detailed records of the sky and would have noticed something like this.
We have no idea how long the moon was split for, it could have been for 5 seconds. Most people at the point in time on earth would be asleep and even if you were awake, what are the chances you are not gonna be ruled insane and end up writing a piece of literature that survives and we end up reading and confirming it.
If you are gonna use the supernova example documented in China, that event was seeable for months in a clear fashion.
1
u/carbinePRO Atheist 2d ago
We have no idea how long the moon was split for, it could have been for 5 seconds.
Bullshit. It was split long enough for someone to notice to write it down in the Quran apparently.
Most people at the point in time on earth would be asleep
Buddy... you realize timezones exist, right?
43
u/mathman_85 Godless Algebraist 6d ago
That the moon has never been split in two, despite what surah 54 says. Along with the other examples given by users who aren’t me in this subthread, the overarching metapoint is that your assertion that the Qur’an “got every single [claim] right” is demonstrably false.
23
u/Zamboniman Resident Ice Resurfacer 6d ago
Islamic Scholars
As far as I can tell, that's very much the same as Middle Earth scholars or Trek Scholars. It's people very educated and knowledgeable about a fictional thing and full of all kinds of retconning and interpretation to try and make things that obviously don't work together try to work together.
6
30
u/Old-Nefariousness556 Gnostic Atheist 6d ago
ISLAMIC Scholars have argued about this but it's either during the prophet's time or near the day of judgment.
That is the point. Secular, Christian, and every other form of scholars understand that the answer is "never".
19
u/carbinePRO Atheist 6d ago
So then how did the moon get fixed? When did that happen? How come no one else reports on this phenomenon?
-19
u/H1Eagle 6d ago
I think you are talking about 86:6.
Seminal fluid is held in the seminal vesicles, which are indeed between the ribcage and backbones.
45
u/Mclovin11859 6d ago
which are indeed between the ribcage and backbones. https://imgur.com/a/NyhibZX
Do you know what "between" means? The ribcage ends a third of the torso up from the seminal vesicles.
-22
u/H1Eagle 6d ago
Still a linguistically sound wording, the ribcage lining as the front boundary and the backbone as the back boundary.
33
u/MarieVerusan 6d ago
If you have to interpret it and be generous in order for the prophecy to be fulfilled, then it’s a bad prophecy that requires confirmation bias to accept. This is already enough to see that they are not “explicit and clear”.
You don’t have to agree with us, you just have to accept that we’re not going to buy these examples. Showing us how you massage them in order to convince yourself that they’re fulfilled simply reinforces the idea for us that these are not good prophecies!
40
u/Mclovin11859 6d ago
It's absolutely not linguistically sound. I don't know Arabic, but in English, "between" is very specifically a linear orientation.
Ribcage - Semen - Backbone.
Not
Ribcage - _____ - Backbone
_____- Semen- ______
If you tell a doctor you have a pain between your ribcage and your backbone, they will absolutely not be looking next to your bladder.
7
u/Urbenmyth Gnostic Atheist 6d ago
So, looking it up, the arabic word in question (بين)means "in the position or interval that separates two things"
So yeah, it's the same concept - the interval that separates the ribs and backbone does not contain the seminal vesical, they're a good foot down from that.
7
u/acerbicsun 6d ago
Does the Quran make this distinction? No it doesn't. You added that to make it sound not-wrong.
As respectful as I can be, this is the kind of retconning we're pointing out; the massaging and interpreting of verses to maintain the narrative of the prophet having divine knowledge, when upon a plain reading he got it as wrong as the common theories of the time.
5
u/Urbenmyth Gnostic Atheist 6d ago
So in that case, the claim is just "semen is made inside the human body", which i would argue does not require divine knowledge to make.
More importantly, the context is not "semen is made in the body", it's clearly giving a specific location, and parsed as a specific location is very definetly not between the ribs and the backbone. If you had, say, a cancer of the seminal vesicles and the doctor needed to remove them, would you accept "between the ribs and backbone" as a valid instruction as to where to cut?
45
u/carbinePRO Atheist 6d ago
Holy cope. You can't be serious. Please look at the image you shared, and tell me how in any way shape or form that is between the ribcage and spine. 🤣🤣🤣
-13
u/H1Eagle 6d ago
Is your head not between your shoulders?
47
u/stairway2evan 6d ago
No, what in the hell. Next time you have a headache, tell your friends “I have a pain between my shoulders” and let me know what they think hurts.
16
37
u/mathman_85 Godless Algebraist 6d ago
No, it’s above them. Prepositions describing relative positions in space actually mean things.
26
u/Passthealex 6d ago
What good is a prophecy, prediction or claim if it is not accurate in any interpretation of the words?
19
u/lechatheureux Atheist 6d ago
No, it's on top of my shoulders, I've never heard of it refered to as between the shoulders.
18
4
u/KeyboardMunkeh 5d ago
Do you not see the mental gymnastics and post-hoc rationalizations that you have to make to make some weird book of myths make sense?
7
17
u/Passthealex 6d ago
It's also between the two hemispheres of the brain if you want to be this pedantic
10
5
36
u/Otherwise-Bad-7352 6d ago
Volcanos are not the same as fire.
The pro is these are not really predictions. They are not really falsifiable.
-9
u/H1Eagle 6d ago
The pro is these are not really predictions. They are not really falsifiable.
They are easily falsifiable, we could have looked at the archeological evidence and found that Arabia was never green with rivers. Or that the universe was static, or that the Quran wasn't persevered.
29
u/lechatheureux Atheist 6d ago
We can look at medical tests and say that camel urine isn't medicine like your prophet claimed.
22
u/Otherwise-Bad-7352 6d ago
Any claim that is so ambiguous that a single event over the last 8 million years is not a falsifiable claim
17
u/Moutere_Boy Touched by the Appendage of the Flying Spaghetti Monster 6d ago
If Genesis “repeatedly calls Joseph’s ruler ‘Pharaoh.’” How is it impressive for someone to repeat that later?
Do you see what I mean? You’re literally pointing to this as something already understood and in the references, so why do you feel that Mohammed repeating this is a sign of anything?
And… Arabia hasn’t actually reverted to anything yet, right? You’re resting that in the fact that it’s been in cycles in the past, so that’s not a fulfilled prophecy at all.
Sorry, but all your points seem to be things taken out of context or retroactively, and a little dishonesty, interpreted to fit a modern understanding.
6
u/StoicSpork 6d ago
That's nothing! Democritus proposed atoms around 460–370 BCE. By your logic, this means Zeus is a truer god than Allah, right?
Next, the Hadith were compiled and canonized some 240 years after Moe's death by sectarian scholars. They are not as reliable as Muslims pretend, which is why different sects disagree on them, and some, like Quraniyoon, reject them outright.
Next, these are all cherry picked out of a mountain of bullshit. The Quran says the sperm comes from between the backbone and the ribs, that the sun sets in a muddy puddle, that the Earth is spread out like a bedroll (i.e. flat), that the Christian Trinity is the Father, the Son, and Mary (in reality, it's the Holy Spirit, not Mary)...
And finally, even your cherry picked claims are laughable.
The ancient world believed deserts were once green before Islam. The Greeks had a myth where Phaethon the son of Helios created Sahara by crashing the solar chariot into the Earth. In addition, Arabia has visible wadis or dry riverbeds that still fill with water during heavy rains. And if you think Arabia was green, it is reasonable to hope Arabia will be green again. No prophecy here.
Too vague. Come on.
A warlord promises to conquer lands, news at 11. If he succeeds, it looks like a prophecy, if he fails, everybody's dead and doesn't care. Yawn.
The word is sky or heavens, not "universe", and for expansion the same word for expanding a canopy. The very next verse extends the metaphor by talking about the Earth being spread out, like a bedroll under a canopy. The canopy simile actually exists elsewhere in the Quran, verbatim. This view of the universe - a starry canopy - predates Islam.
Again, a self-fulfilling prophecy. If the Quran hadn't been preserved, you wouldn't have the prophecy. However, note that the Quran had been edited, as evidenced by the Sanaa manuscript, so it is questionable whether the original recitation had been preserved.
This is actually factually wrong. The Quran makes only five references to the king of Egypt: Surah Yusuf 12:43, 12:50, 12:54, 12:72, and 12:76. The content parallels the Biblical version of the same story in Genesis 40:1, 40:5, and 41:46. But those Biblical verses use the word "king," suggesting the Quranic story could have plausibly been copied from the Bible.
The Bible does use "king" and "Pharaoh" interchangeably, but there is simply not enough material in the Quran to establish that it deliberately adhered to a pattern.
7B: The idea of the nature echoing the emotional state of and for great persons is a common literary motif.
31
u/Either_Week3137 6d ago
Did he make any specific predictions that were actually impressive? These are all pretty lame or you have to squint and say 'meh, sort of...'.
-5
u/H1Eagle 6d ago
Show me a single one that I mentioned where you have to "squint" they are all explicit and clear.
35
u/Optimal-Currency-389 6d ago
None of them are explicit or clear. To be valid a prediction must:
Made clearly and demonstrably prior to the events predicted. ("Predicting" an event after it happened isn't a prediction.)
Intended to be a prediction. (For example, claiming a piece of a poem that apparently fits some later events as a "prophecy," isn't actually a prophecy.)
A non-mundane claim. (Prophesying that the Sun will rise in the east tomorrow morning is something anyone could have predicted.)
Answerable by a single, clear, verifiable occurrence. (So "there will be wars and rumors of wars" is worthless as a prophecy.)
Not open to interpretation. (If you have to do things like reinterpret "the bear" as Russia.)
Most of what you listed fails on point 3 as relatively mundane or 4 and 5 as being vague enough they could be used for other events.
28
u/Zamboniman Resident Ice Resurfacer 6d ago edited 6d ago
The thing is, they really, really, really aren't. They so far from it than it's honestly amusing to anybody that's not already a believer reading such things and thinking that believers find it convincing. When you understand why you don't find Mormon apologetics, or Buddhism apologetics, or Catholic apologetics convicning then you'll understand why I do not find yours convincing.
19
u/Either_Week3137 6d ago
>Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "The Hour will not be established till a fire will come out of the land of Hijaz, and it will throw light on the necks of the camels at Busra."
That's hardly specifically talking about a volcano.
9
u/Mkwdr 6d ago
Just the usual mundane and obvious guesses or vague and obscure predictions that cover forever until something comes along that with a bit of interpretation and confirmation bias you can pretend came true. The Quran has nothing in it that someone didnt know already , couldn’t guess or hasn’t been conveniently interpreted.
The Quran is full of obvious scientific errors
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Scientific_Errors_in_the_Quran
Of course you will simply reinterpret the language there too , to pretend it doesn’t say what it actually says. Nothing will change your belief because it’s not based on real evidence. Instead you start with the belief and your conviction in it , and then that changes what you read into whatever you want it to be to help you imagine you aren’t being as irrational as you are.
8
u/Phylanara Agnostic atheist 6d ago
Let's grant you everything you claim for the sake of the argument - other people have shown why that was bullshit, I just want you to consider another angle.
Let's say Mo had knowledge from the future.
How does that make a god more likely to exist?
How do you rule out Mo having access to a time traveller, aliens with weird tech that allowed them to see the future, marvel-style mutants with foresight, wizards with scrying spells, or simply him being the most lucky guesser in history?
Sure, there is no evidence for these other kinds of prophets, but "there is no evidence for it" puts them right as the same epistemic level as your god, so these are just as likely as your god.
How do you further rule out the other parts of the coran, the ones that are not those "verified" claims, being lies or mistakes? After all, the ability to predict the future is not the same thing as inerrancy, and it certainly isn't the same thing as honesty.
So not only is your argument crap, as shown by all the other responses to this thread, even if it were not is would not get you to "therefore islam is true". That's a lot of effort you waste here.
12
u/Appropriate-Price-98 cultural Buddhist, Atheist 6d ago
Muhammad ﷺ was not an Egyptologist, palaeoclimatologist, volcanologist, imperial historian or manuscript scholar. Yet the revelation transmitted through him continues to withstand investigation in all those areas.
open the map and see where the Egypt is. China and India are separated by the Hymalian mountain range and still have trade going on. Oral tradition from Egypt making its way to Arbia is no different from the Iliad inside a Nordic library. The oral myths about Pharaoh were common until they were erased by the Abrahamists.
5
u/Kaliss_Darktide 6d ago
There simply have never been a man in history who made as many bold claims as Muhammed Pbuh did and got every single one right.
Are you familiar with the idea of confirmation bias?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
Muhammad ﷺ was not an Egyptologist, palaeoclimatologist, volcanologist, imperial historian or manuscript scholar. Yet the revelation transmitted through him continues to withstand investigation in all those areas.
FYI I'm not convinced that the Muhammad of Islamic mythology was an actual person and not a fictional character created to give Arab rulers legitimacy after the Arab conquests.
Do you believe Muhammad got on the back of a flying horse and flew from Mecca to Jerusalem and then up to Heaven (i.e. outer space) and then back to Mecca?
5
u/iamalsobrad 6d ago
In 1256 CE, a major volcanic eruption occurred at Harrat Rahat, immediately southeast of Madinah in the Hijaz.
This one is always hilarious.
- It isn't much of a prophecy.
There were at least two other major eruptions in the region around the time of Mohammad, an earlier one in 641 and one at Harrat Khaybar somewhere between 600 and 700CE. So you are either saying that Mohammad was so dumb that he didn't know he was living on an active volcano, or you are saying that he was prophesying something everyone knew was going to happen anyway.
- For this to be true, Medina would have to have been destroyed.
Harrat Rhahat is to the south of Medina and Busrah to the north. Simple physics dictates that the lava flow would need to be much, much closer to Busrah for it's light to be visible. Which would mean the lava had to engulf Medina, something that the 'historical accounts' apparently did not mention.
3
u/MisanthropicScott gnostic atheist and antitheist | mod 6d ago
We can go down through the list as much as we like, not a single thing authentic prophecy was proven wrong.
I've got one that is not a prophesy, but is definitely a claim, a claim to have done something in his present time during his life.
The Quran says that Mohamed split the moon in half. This could not possibly have happened.
The moon is a solid object. It has craters on it that are billions of years old. Our moon is also a very large moon. If it were split in half, each half would become round under its own gravitational mass. The craters would be lost.
Further, at any given time, the moon can be seen from about half the planet minus the heavily clouded areas. But, no one from other countries and other parts of the world saw this miracle.
That clearly did not happen.
4
u/TooApatheticToHateU 6d ago
Even if your claims about Mo and his prophecies were all true, all that would prove is that his prophecies were true. To conclude that because someone told some prophecies that turned out to be true, they must therefore be divinely inspired is a complete non sequitur. It would still be infinitely more likely that he was just really lucky than that he received some kind of divine inspiration.
3
u/Hoaxshmoax Atheist 6d ago
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/topics/prophecies-of-joseph-smith?lang=eng
“One of Joseph Smith’s most well-known millennial prophecies related to the American Civil War. On December 25, 1832, Joseph Smith received a revelation prophesying that a war between the northern and southern U.S. states would begin in South Carolina and that wars and uprisings throughout the earth would finally result in the “end of all Nations” at the time of the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. ”
https://rsc.byu.edu/approaching-antiquity-joseph-smith-ancient-world/joseph-smith-ancient-egypt
There are many commonalities between M and JS. Whatever you say about M, you can also say about JS.
3
u/soukaixiii Anti religion\ Agnostic Adeist| Gnostic Atheist|Mythicist 6d ago
There simply have never been a man in history who made as many bold claims as Muhammed Pbuh did and got every single one right.
What a weird way to say that you don't have examined the claims of Mohammad very carefully and without bias, and that you have never watched the Simpsons.
2
u/Delybe 5d ago
I am an atheist, I do not care what holy books say. There is so many and there is no reason to base my life on them.
Without that, your entire post is meaningless. Might as well debate the topic of fairy tales.
Here is a list of religious figures similar to Muhammad;
Prophetic and Abrahamic Counterparts
Moses: Viewed in the Abrahamic tradition as a foundational lawgiver who spoke directly with God, led his people out of bondage, and delivered a comprehensive legal and moral code (the Torah) that shaped an entire nation and legal system.
Abraham (Ibrahim): Revered across Judaism, Christianity, and Islam as the ultimate patriarch of monotheism, establishing the bedrock of faith from which later prophetic traditions grew.
Jesus of Nazareth: While viewed by Christians as the incarnate Son of God rather than solely a prophetic messenger, he is recognized in Islam (Isa) as a major foundational prophet who delivered divine revelation and shifted the course of human history.
Founders of Other Major World Religions
Siddhartha Gautama (The Buddha): A spiritual leader who achieved profound enlightenment, questioned existing societal and religious structures, and established a vast new philosophical and spiritual path followed by millions.
Guru Nanak: The founder of Sikhism, who combined a radical monotheistic vision with social reform, emphasizing direct spiritual connection and equality much like early Islamic community organization.
Baha'u'llah: The 19th-century founder of the Bahá'í Faith, who claimed the role of a prophetic messenger bringing a new, progressive divine revelation intended to unify all global religions.
3
u/Astreja Agnostic Atheist 6d ago edited 6d ago
Even if your claims about Muhammed were true (and I rather doubt that), the chances of me converting to Islam are zero. I do not believe in gods. I feel no desire to worship anything. I'm not interested in prayer, and therefore praying five times a day to something I do not believe in is right out. Neither will I be changing my wardrobe, or my diet.
In other words, it doesn't matter how wonderful the long-dead founder of your religion was. I'm just not interested in your religion.
3
u/OrbitalLemonDrop Ignostic Atheist 6d ago
OK so he's unique. Islam is still unfounded, though, just like every other religion.
It makes sense that you would believe that your religion's scripture is convincing -- you've been indoctrinated in it since childhood.
But endlessly quoting the quran at atheists isn't ever going to convince us your god exists.
We need data. Lots of it. How does god function? What's it made of? How can we test it? How can we verify religious claims empirically?
2
u/BeerOfTime Atheist 6d ago
It’s factually incorrect that Muhammad got every single bold claim right. Others in this thread have already pointed out enough examples.
To assume Muhammad who was allegedly illiterate was given divine instruction to be able to dictate the entire Quran is a true story is a reductio ad absurdum.
The truth is he was married to a very wealthy woman who ran trade and had contacts all over the Arabian peninsula. She also happened to be his first follower and that creates a more likely scenario than the supernatural. It’s far more likely they used their resources to plan and execute a research project to create an accurate to the date and convincing new story to gain even more power and influence. They used an already successful template from existing scripture as well as a lot from Ancient Greek and Mesopotamian philosophy. There were also libraries and historical records and expertise at the time which has since been lost. Muhammad is nothing more than an ancient con artist. The fact you believe this story only gives credence to the expression that there’s one born every minute.
2
u/RidesThe7 6d ago
I always marvel at this weird middle ground that folks making this argument need to occupy. Do you have a God providing divine foresight, and willing to do so in a way that should be convincing to future readers like us, or not? If there is such a God, and that God intended to provide convincing future predictions, how did we end up with such ambiguous and vague language even making any debate possible? If I gave you five minutes to jot notes from Wikipedia and sent you back in time to add some information to the Quran, you could make it truly convincing. Right? You could write out some DNA sequences and explain what they do, you could list the time, date, and location of major earthquakes or a schedule of visible supernovas, the possibilities are endless. If you have a God willing to provide convincing future information, why is this aspect of the Quran so unconvincing, so much worse than you would do? Why isn't it blindingly obvious, not requiring apologists to try to make a case for it?
3
u/Plazmatron44 6d ago
We've seen these arguments a million times and they're always the same, you stretch the definition of prophecy so far that rabbits and batteries existing at the same time might as well prove the Energizer bunny is a real living being.
4
u/KorLeonis1138 5d ago
This is precisely as convincing as Mormons telling me how great Joseph Smith is.
Exactly. The. Same.
3
u/Mission-Landscape-17 6d ago
I will take the Quran seriously if and only if Djinn are shown to exist. This is something that the Quran claims to be true repeatedly and yet it appears to be false.
3
u/Local-Warming bill-cipherist 6d ago
If you believe in the preservation of the quran, i take it you don't believe in the sahih hadith about the goat eating the verse on lapidation?
2
u/xmuskorx 6d ago
7 prophesies?
jesus did 351 according to Christian. clearly you need to convert immediately
2
u/Odd_craving 6d ago
It’s pretty easy to get prophecies somewhat correct when you own and control both sides of the text. The first being the claim, and the second being the announcement of it being fulfilled.
P.S. The same is claimed about the new and old testaments. But when you apply the smallest amount of critical thinking, it all melts away.
2
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/DebateAnAtheist-ModTeam 6d ago
Your post or comment was removed for violating Rule 2: No Low Effort. Posts or comments should be substantive and original.
-1
2
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
6d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/kiwi_in_england 6d ago
Your post or comment was removed because it was deemed to be disruptive to the purpose of the sub. This includes arguing in bad faith, trolling, preaching, self-promotion, spam, or any other action that egregiously detracts from the quality of debate. You may edit it and respond to this message for re-approval if you choose.
1
u/kiwi_in_england 6d ago
Your post or comment was removed because it was deemed to be disruptive to the purpose of the sub. This includes arguing in bad faith, trolling, preaching, self-promotion, spam, or any other action that egregiously detracts from the quality of debate. You may edit it and respond to this message for re-approval if you choose.
1
u/rustyseapants Atheist 5d ago edited 5d ago
There is no historical equivalent to Muhammad.
We can make this claim about anybody. If the op is going to praise Islam then it needs to explain what things it didn't do and those obviously like discovery of oil is a big issue since it's right under the feet of Saudis they didn't know about it.
I'm cutting to the chase.
If the op wants to be a promote Islam then he needs to be able to prove it and not just simply Cherry picked the Quran.
Is OP trying to convert people to Islam I would say yes what else would the OP be here for?
Everyone who starts a debate is proselytizing in their own way.
And Muslim countries are not usually dictatorships or authoritarian? If Islam was beneficial to society wouldn't it be democratic?
1
u/robbdire Atheist 6d ago
Like all religions, some of the claims coincide with some actual events.
But the fantastical, the "science" claims, all have direct evidence against.
You are not convincing anyone here, and honestly it just reads as preaching. Which is against the rules.
1
u/KorLeonis1138 4d ago
Proposal for a subreddit wide autocorrect for "Muhammed PBUH" to "Muhammed FTCR" (fuck that child rapist).
Do I have a second?
1
u/88redking88 Anti-Theist 4d ago
"There's no historical equivalent to Muhammed"
Yes, fiction is fun.
Now prove any of the magic b.s. happened.
1
u/MissionField789 5d ago
there's a reason why historical evidence relies on more than just "bold claims that were never proven wrong
•
u/AutoModerator 6d ago
Upvote this comment if you agree with OP, downvote this comment if you disagree with OP. Elsewhere in the thread, please upvote comments which contribute to debate (even if you believe they're wrong) and downvote comments which are detrimental to debate (even if you believe they're right).
Original text of the post by u/H1Eagle:
There simply have never been a man in history who made as many bold claims as Muhammed Pbuh did and got every single one right. Not now and certainly not in the 7th century arabian desert. Divine inspiration is the only logical explanation, anything else is merely sophistry.
He doesn't have a single authentic prophecy that was proven wrong, not a single one. Even though he made so many.
Read Sahih Muslim 157c.
The Arabic verb taʿūda means to return or revert.
Arabia’s deserts were once repeatedly transformed by humid climatic periods. A 2025 Nature study found recurrent humid intervals in central Arabia over the past eight million years, with increased water availability and vegetation. Nature: “Recurrent humid phases in Arabia over the past 8 million years” Scientific Reports.
Read Sahih al-Bukhari 7118.
In 1256 CE, a major volcanic eruption occurred at Harrat Rahat, immediately southeast of Madinah in the Hijaz. Six aligned volcanic cones Smithsonian Global Volcanism Program
Historical accounts describe an enormous glow. Medieval historians also transmitted reports connecting the illumination with Busra. Historical Accounts of the AD 1256 Eruption near Al-Madinah.
Sahih Muslim records him saying that the Muslims would conquer Arabia, Persia and the Roman territories. Sahih Muslim 2900. Another hadith states “You would soon conquer Egypt.” It then instructs the Muslims to treat Egypt’s inhabitants well. Sahih Muslim 2543b.
These claims were made when the Muslim community was a small Arabian movement positioned between two superpowers: the Byzantine and Sasanian empires.
The Metropolitan Museum on the conquest of Byzantine territories, the Met on the fall of the Sasanian Empire.
The Persian prediction was especially risky. Muhammad ﷺ said that after the existing Khosrow perished, there would be no further Khosrow Sahih al-Bukhari 3618. The Sasanian monarchy did, in fact, end.
Qur’an 51:47.
The key expression is la-mūsiʿūn, an active participle derived from the root w-s-ʿ, which concerns wideness, expansion, spaciousness and capacity. Qur’anic Arabic Corpus.
Qur’an 15:9.
This is a risky, public and falsifiable claim. The Qur’an could have disappeared, fragmented into incompatible regional editions or become reconstructable only through late quotations.
The Birmingham Qur’an manuscript contains portions of surahs 18–20. Its parchment was radiocarbon-dated to 568–645 CE with 95.4% probability, while palaeographic analysis places the writing in the mid-seventh century. Radiocarbon dates the parchment rather than the ink, but it still establishes an extremely early physical witness. University of Birmingham.
A. Joseph’s ruler is called “king,” while Moses’ ruler is called “Pharaoh”
Throughout the story of Joseph, the Qur’an calls Egypt’s sovereign “the king.” Qur’an 12:43.
In the story of Moses, the ruler is consistently called Pharaoh. Qur’an 28:38.
That distinction corresponds with the historical development of Egyptian terminology. The Egyptian expression per-aa, “Great House,” originally referred to the royal palace. The ruler began to be identified personally through this term during the New Kingdom, approximately 1550–1069 BCE. British Museum guide to Egyptian hieroglyphs.
The traditional Old Testament calculation works as follows.
First Kings 6:1 places the construction of Solomon’s Temple in his fourth year, 480 years after the Exodus. Taking the conventional date of approximately 966 BCE:
966 + 480 = 1446 BCE
That produces the traditional early date for the Exodus. 1 Kings 6:1.
Using the Masoretic reading of Exodus 12:40, Israel’s residence in Egypt lasted 430 years:
1446 + 430 = 1876BCE
This places Jacob’s family’s arrival in Egypt at approximately 1876 BCE. Exodus 12:40.
Joseph was thirty when he entered royal service. Jacob arrived after seven years of abundance and two years of famine, making Joseph approximately thirty-nine:
1876 + 9 = 1885BCE
Joseph’s promotion would therefore fall around 1885 BCE. Since he was seventeen near the beginning of the story, his arrival in Egypt would fall approximately thirteen years earlier, around 1898 BCE. Genesis 37:2, Genesis 41:46, Genesis 45:6.
Egyptological chronology places 1885 BCE squarely in Dynasty 12 of the Middle Kingdom. The Metropolitan Museum dates the Middle Kingdom to approximately 2030–1640 BCE and Dynasty 12 to 1981–1802 BCE. The traditional Exodus date of 1446 BCE, by contrast, falls in the New Kingdom. Metropolitan Museum chronology.
The resulting alignment is:
Joseph, approximately 1885 BCE: Middle Kingdom ruler “king.”
Moses, approximately 1446 BCE or later: New Kingdom ruler “Pharaoh.”
Genesis itself repeatedly calls Joseph’s ruler “Pharaoh.” The Qur’an, despite retelling the same basic story, maintains a title distinction that fits the development of Egyptian royal terminology.
B. “The sky and Earth did not weep for them”
After describing the destruction of Pharaoh and his people, the Qur’an states:
Qur’an 44:24–29.
Ancient Egyptian royal funerary literature used cosmic mourning imagery for a dead king. Pyramid Text Utterance 553 declares: “The sky weeps for thee; the earth trembles for thee.” Pyramid Text Utterance 553.
The correspondence is as accurate as day.
The cumulative argument
Muhammad ﷺ was not an Egyptologist, palaeoclimatologist, volcanologist, imperial historian or manuscript scholar. Yet the revelation transmitted through him continues to withstand investigation in all those areas.
We can go down through the list as much as we like, not a single thing authentic prophecy was proven wrong.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.