Point taken and you are correct. But this makes no difference whatsoever.
The point is not whether somebody is divine or human but whether there is only one truth and WHOSE truth it is in that case. The point here being that ONLY the truth of Muhammed is divine, according to Islam, everything else is a lie. So Christians believe that the truth of Jesus (or rather St Paul) is the divine truth and Muslims believe that Muhammed's truth is the divine truth. THAT is what the struggle is all about.
Against this we have Zarathushtra's approach: Truth is not given beforehand through angels to prophets etc, but truth is PRODUCED, we are every one of us producing a truth relating to universal questions which we all have in common. It is the outcome of this process which is sacred, the attempt at producing a truth rather than a specific truth, which is sacred according to Zarathushtra. The Gathas is a book of productive questions, not of dogmatic truths!
This is in line with the concept of Megatheism. Only Zarathushtra takes Megatheism seriously. Islam and Christianity are fundamentally contradictions (truth can not be grasped but OUR truth is still the one and only truth = contradiction!). Zarathushtra however was a true megatheist (at least with the concept of Ahura) and even more than that (he also added Mazda). That's my point.
The infamous declaration of faith of muslims can be translated as "There is no god except Allah, Muhammed is his prophet". This can be taken literally: the phrase is intended to make the believer accept that M. is only the prophet of God, and no God himself, or anything else. That was informed in order to avoid the great sin committed by the christians, believing their prophet JC was God himself.
These are muslim explanations and not my personal beliefs.
--- In Ushta@yahoogroups.com, Alexander Bard
> Dear Parviz and Rory
> I will be happy to surrender to Allah Akbar, as long as he is not presented
> by a small bigot called Muhammed.
> There is nothing wrong with "There is only one god and that god is Allah",
> that line is actually just a tautology and no different than "There is only
> one world and that world is The World".
> The problem with Islam is instead the silly second phrase: "And his prophet
> is Muhammed".
> To which we should respond to the one billion or so Muslims: REALLY??? On
> What Grounds???
> Because THAT is where Islam flops. Always did.
> Our response is: There is only one god and that god is Allah, and he HAS SIX
> BILLION PROPHETS. Now, learn to live with that, because that is the truth!
> Or rather: There is one god and one god only and that god is Ahura and Ahura
> has six billion or so manifestiations which together form Mazda. TOGETHER
> they make Ahura Mazda.
> 2009/10/15 Parviz Varjavand
> > Dear Alex,
> > I demand sophistication and high level intellectual answers from you and
> > Arthur; please do not disappoint me. It is always simple to reduce somone to
> > the level of a cartoon character, and then win an argument with them. There
> > are XX00000000000 Moslems in this world, which one of them should I ask your
> > questions from?
> > If you want to understand Allaho Akbar and what surender to this consept
> > means, hold your breath and decide that you are not going to breath again.
> > You can not, and you will be forced to breath in order to live on. You have
> > to surender to Allah for He is Akbar, if you want to live. If you die and
> > win the bet, you still melt into Allah, for again "Allaho Akbar". This is
> > how I had Allaho Akbar explained to me by my Moslem friends that I respect.
> > The others cartoon Moslems or Christians, why bother with them, I can show
> > you cartoon Zoroastrians as much as you want me to, some of them on this
> > site even.
> > Ushta,
> > Parviz