Muhammad The Greatest: A comparative study

[Imagist]

How did you establish this as a fact? It comes across as mere bigotry.
I find it disturbing.

This certainly isn't true of ALL or even most muslims. However, a disturbingly large number of muslims do believe that the "sword verses" from the Quran not only justify killing non-muslims, but encourage it. Just in this thread, a number of muslims have suggested that it was okay for Muhammed to kill non-muslims.

In my opinion, the verses DO encourage violence toward non-muslims. However, to their credit, many if not most muslims believe that Islam is a religion of peace.

 

[Imagist]

Response: I'm reading statements. Where is the proof that these claims are true?

Fatihah, these claims are based in ancient texts and historical records, as has been mentioned and linked. Stop asking for evidence that has already been provided.

 

[Sahar]

Still waiting for one of Muhammed's followers to explain to me how slaughtering other human beings because of what they believe is a sign of good character.

Muhammad followers are called "Muslims".
No one should be slaughtered because of their personal beliefs.

 

[Kodanshi]

Muhammad followers are called "Muslims".
No one should be slaughtered because of their personal beliefs.

I’ve highlighted the appropriate word. Of course no–one SHOULD, but it DOES happen, and within Islâmic circles too. Why? As an analogy: communism works on paper, but have we seen it established successfully?

 

[England my lionheart]

The Hudood Punishments are for criminals, criminals offended themselves with committing crimes, so they deserve PUNISHMENT. And that's the punishment which our creator established for anyone commits such crimes.
England, criminals before committing any crime know the punishment of that crime, if someone is going to steal, s/he will think many times before doing that, beacuse s/he realize that their right hands will be cut off. And that's is the aim of punishment, to make people think thousands of times before putting themselves in this embarrassing situation with disobeying Almighty Allah.

If a Woman is raped in Pakistan but cannot produce four witnesses to the fact she will be tried for adultery and stoned to death,it is a hideous and inhuman punishment for something that isn't life threatening.
AIUK : Search Results
I have pasted a link which makes some shocking reading for me,Iran have run out of Homosexuals so they are concentrating on adultery now,the only saving grace 1 billion Muslims do not practice these sick punishments Alas half a Billion do.

 

[maro]

Ok hereis one
Bukhari vol. 7, #88:
"Narrated Urwa: ‘The prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).

wrote the marriage contract = agreed with her father = engaged her..or whatever you call it..it doesn't mean there was a real contract to be written...In arabia ,1400 years ago,there were no contracts ,trust me

 

[England my lionheart]

wrote the marriage contract = agreed with her father = engaged her..or whatever you call it..it doesn't mean there was a real contract to be written...In arabia ,1400 years ago,there were no contracts ,trust me

Then the Hadith is false?

 

[Fatihah]

You said:



This is equivalent to saying that everything scholars say is right, by the following logical relationship:

1. If a person is wrong, then (s)he is not learned and is not a scholar.
2. Therefore a person who is a scholar is not wrong.
3. Therefore a person who is a scholar is right.

Or in logical notation:

1. wrong(person) -> 'scholar(person)
2. scholar(person) -> 'wrong(person)
3. scholar(person) -> right(person) (assumes 'wrong === right)

Response: Unfortunately, you have responded to a post of mine but you didn't take the time to read the context of the post.

I never claimed that scholars are always right. When I said that a scholar can't be wrong it was said in the following context:

I said previously that the qur'an and hadiths contain things that have different interpretations and those gifted in knowledge and understanding (scholars) can understand.

Now if a person is considered a scholar and they interpret something wrong, then to say that the scholar got it wrong does not make sense. The person was never a scholar to begin with. That's like me claiming to be a mathematician and don't know what 2+2 is. To say that I am a mathematician who got it wrong does not make sense. I was never a mathematician in the first place.

A scholar can be wrong. A scholar can have an opinion and that opinion can be wrong. That does not invalidate his scholarship. But if a person says that they are right in what they know, even a scholar in what they say is right when they are actually wrong, then to say that the scholar is wrong doesn't make sense. They were never a scholar to begin with. It makes more sense to say that the person is wrong.

 

[Autodidact]

Muhammad followers are called "Muslims".
No one should be slaughtered because of their personal beliefs.

O.K. then, thanks for being willing to address this difficult issue. It sounds like you agree with me that the Islamic doctrine of death for apostates, promulgated under Muhammed's teaching, is wrong--right?

 

[Fatihah]

Nothing is wrong with it if you have even the slightest reason to believe that the evidence is false, based on faulty logic, or anything like that. However, you have no reason to believe that the evidence I have presented is false except that it doesn't say what you want it to say.

Despite this, I have shown a second link which verifies the information in the first link. So please, answer my question.



I have provided my evidence in my previous post.

Furthermore, I am juggling responses to 3+ different people on this thread. If I can do it, you can too. Pretending you can't is just a cheap escape from having to answer my question.

I have provided Hadiths, logic, and historical references to show that Muhammed had sex with a nine-year-old girl, recommended camel urine, which has no medical properties and is actually toxic, as a medicine, and was the aggressor in a religious conflict. Even if you do not find the evidence for one of these to be compelling, there are the other two.

You claim that the links I have posted are not legitimate, but the links that I have posted are links to parts of ancient texts and histories which are the only information we have about Muhammed's behavior during his life. If we discard this evidence as false, we have no information about Muhammed's behavior during his life; we would have nothing to emulate, so the entire question "Should we emulate Muhammed?" would be irrelevant.

I have provided a dearth of evidence for my statements. Now please stop sidestepping the issue and respond with the same courtesy that I have extended to you.

Fatihah, you keep asking for proof but refuse to be held to the same standards you are holding us to. Where is your proof that the evidence I have presented is false, or even doubtful?

Your entire argument so far has been asking for evidence. I have provided evidence, and despite my continuing to cite more and more evidence, you have yet to be satisfied. This leads me to doubt that any amount of evidence will ever be enough for you, which means that you aren't actually interested in evidence.

Response: Above you claim that you have provided your evidence and now you would like to see mine. I have no problem in doing so but let's take a look at your evidence first.

In post #23 of page 3 when I asked for evidence that the links you've provided as evidence to back up your claims of Muhammad are true, you've responded in post #36 of page 4 with the following:

If you have any basis for your claim that the links contain faulty information, please provide it. Ancient texts are the best and only source we have about what Muhammed did during his life, so there's no choice but to take them seriously. As for the Wikipedia article, if you can provide a credible source which contradicts what is on the Wikipedia article, I'll be happy to change the information there myself.

This clearly does not answer the question as to how you know that these links of information are actually true. So to claim that you have provided evidence that your information is true is obviously false. Surely you have provided evidence, that I agree, but have absolutely no proof that the evidence is true.

Again when I asked England my lionheart in post #29 of page 3 how does he know if the hadiths of Tabari are true, you responded in post #41 of page 5 with the following:

We don't have any evidence of Muhammed's behavior other than texts written near the time of Muhammed, so in a discussion of whether or not we should emulate Muhammed's behavior, it is reasonable to assume that these texts are true. If you have reason to believe that this particular text is more unreliable than the others, then please present it.

Otherwise, you must either accept that all such texts are unreliable (and therefore we cannot emulate Muhammed's behavior because we do not know how he behaved) or you must accept that all such texts are as reliable as we can get (and therefore it is just as likely that Muhammed had sex with a nine-year-old as anything else in the Hadiths).

So according to your response above, it is reasonable to assume that the collection of Tabari is true because, and these are your words, "We don't have any evidence of Muhammed's behavior other than texts written near the time of Muhammed, so in a discussion of whether or not we should emulate Muhammed's behavior, it is reasonable to assume that these texts are true".

That is your reason? Just because something was written down during his lifetime it is reasonable to assume it's true? One can clearly see the how illogical this is.

Furthermore, when asked again in post #49 of page 5 for proof that the links you provide has true evidence, you responded in post 101 of page 11 with the following:

The link contains evidence which I believe to be true. If we go down this line of reasoning, I can provide evidence for my evidence, but then you could simply ask me for evidence of my evidence of my evidence. (End Quote)

Again, the question goes unanswered. You're not providing any logic as to what makes these links of information true except that they are true because someone said they are true.

So based on your evidence above, one can easily see that there is absolutely no logical reasoning to believe that the evidence you have provided is true.

Now for my evidence. Let me first give you a scenario. I make the claim to you and say that a basketball can't bounce. You beg to differ and claim that a basketball can bounce. So I begin to provide evidence from some historian and scholars that say that the basketball can't bounce. Likewise, you provide evidence for you case in the same manner. So what is the result? How do we determine whose evidence is correct?

Well here's a suggestion. What better way to know if a basketball will bounce than to get a basketball and bounce it yourself!!! In other words, test the logic!! What can be more logical than that?

That is the key. When a scientist discovers the cure for a certain illness works, how did they know that the medicine will work? By testing medicine. The medicine is created out of their own logic. So if the medicine is correct than the logic behind it must be correct.

So let's apply the same to our situation. My argument is simple but would be very difficult to sum up in this one post so my evidence will be based on every question you pose. So why is it that your evidence is wrong and what proof do I have that it is wrong? Simple. Because Allah(swt) said so. If this evidence is not enough, feel free to ask for more. It is now up to you to hammer away with any questions you feel is necessary to gain evidence for my claim. I insist.

 

[Fatihah]

Fatihah � Re: seal of prophethood, you wrote: Response: I followed your link accordingly and it does not say that. So you should be humble enough to say that the quoted hadith is a fabrication and it is not there.

I�ll quote it for you: �I stood behind him and saw the seal of Prophethood between his shoulders, and it was like the "Zir-al-Hijla" (means the button of a small tent, but some said 'egg of a partridge.' etc.)�

It is from Sahih Bukhari, and in no way Daeef.

Archery, you said: Response: The hadith does not say that they are apostates. This is a fabrication and I used your own link to verify so you can't deny it.

Again I quote: �He said that he (the Holy Prophet) said: Who learnt archery and then gave it up is not from us. or he has been guilty of disobedience (to Allah's Apostle).�

Note, not from us, and disobedient to allah�s Apostle. Not from us, as in an infidel.

Muhammad strikes �Aishah, you wrote: Response: I have followed your own link and there is nothing there that says that. So you should be humble enough to either correct the link or acknowledge that it is a fabrication.

Again let me quote: �He said: Was it the darkness (of your shadow) that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He struck me on the chest which caused me pain�

Please read the full ahadith I quote in future, thank you.

Response: It is you that has made the claim that these hadiths are in Bukhari and Muslim and provided links for evidence. I already know and am very familiar with Bukhari and Muslim so I already know what's inside. I used your links and these hadiths are not there. One is even a fabrication. Either you provided the wrong links or you are lying. Which one is it? I sincerely hope you wouldn't lie.

 

[Fatihah]

The hadith justifies killing people who deconvert from Islam. That is evil. People who advocate such actions advocate evil. I do not consider such views as good character. If you do, then we have no shared values on which to base this discussion.

Response: There may be hadiths out there that say to kill the "deconverts" as you say but I don't see what that has to do with the character of Muhammad.

 

[Sahar]

But I did answer your question.

The so-called history of Muhammad is so one-sided, that we only know his side of what you called the "truth". We don't have any historical accounts by the pagan Arabs, and the only hostility mentioned are written by Muhammad's friends, who claimed that the pagans were hostile to him.

Where are the evidences of their claims? And if there are claim, then where are the counter-claims? There are none, because anyone opposing Muhammad were dead by his hand or that of his followers.

Nope apparently you were too afraid to answer as you know it will ruin your ignorant baseless statements.
So if the Muslim historical account is unreliable, how come your judgment is based on it?
If it was unreliable, was there any other source that told you about the Jewish poet? About the Jews? Or the fact is you don't have any other source except the Islamic one and what you do is one of two things; either hypocrisy or willful ignorance!
How come you pick what you want from the unreliable Muslim account and suddenly it becomes reliable but you exclude the other parts as unreliable because it will ruin entirely your argument?

 

[Sahar]

O.K. then, thanks for being willing to address this difficult issue. It sounds like you agree with me that the Islamic doctrine of death for apostates, promulgated under Muhammed's teaching, is wrong--right?

I don't believe that the prophet pbuh killed anyone solely for changing their beliefs but it was associated with other crimes like treason.

 

[Fatihah]

Killing people for leaving your religion is despicable. Here is a collection of hadith calling for it. That's horrible.

This is not academic. I know actual ex-Muslims who live in fear of their lives because of these teachings. The man who started this doctrine, Muhammed, taught evil.

To tell the truth, it scares me even to post these words. After all, if you can be persecuted for allowing a child to give his teddy bear the wrong name, and if people from other countries can be slaughtered because a newspaper printed a cartoon you don't like, what could happen to me for daring to question the teachings of Allah? It's a good thing for me this board is anonymous or I would not dare to take this stand, lest one of Allah's followers take it upon themselves to kill me for it.

Is that your idea of good character?

Response: It's horrible if someone tries to defend their lives from danger? Perhaps you don't cherish your life but to fault a muslim for cherishing theirs is absurd.

 

[Sajdah]

If a Woman is raped in Pakistan but cannot produce four witnesses to the fact she will be tried for adultery and stoned to death,it is a hideous and inhuman punishment for something that isn't life threatening.
AIUK : Search Results
I have pasted a link which makes some shocking reading for me,Iran have run out of Homosexuals so they are concentrating on adultery now,the only saving grace 1 billion Muslims do not practice these sick punishments Alas half a Billion do.

I'd like to discuss the issue of the raped woman you are talking about, but I guess that this thread is not about current events. So let's go back to the OP.

 

[Fatihah]

I was referring to the fact that Rf member Kodanshi felt it necessary to actually write a piece trying to persuade Muslims NOT to kill apostates. The fact that this conversation even takes place is outrageous--it should go without saying that murdering people for their beliefs is not acceptable.

You will also notice that not a single Muslim in this thread has responded in any way to the charge.

Response: What charge?

 

[ProudMuslim]

I don't believe that the prophet pbuh killed anyone solely for changing their beliefs but it was associated with other crimes like treason.

That is absolutely right.

 

[ProudMuslim]

Why? Who is harmed by it?

The children who are born outside wedlock are most harmed by it. Do you really want to discuss the consequences of sex outside marriages or are the teen pregnancy, STDs, the rise of illegitimate kids, the seperation of kids from their biological parents through means such as adoption and voluantry raising the kid by single parents resulting in pyschological problems are enough to say sex outside wedlock is not love, its a perfect definition of irresponsibility.

 

[ProudMuslim]

That's a lot of speculation.

Oh no but the claim that Aisha (RAA) was 9 is not a speculation?

This is only minimally better than marrying a nine-year-old.

No is not.

It's not unreasonable to believe that Muhammed would make exceptions for his wife.

Your deduction.

Just because you feel fondly for this guy doesn't give you an exclusive right to history.

What a childish comment? My statement was clear and stand firm. When Muslims still debate an event or law of their belief system, non-Muslims have no place dictating which one to believe or dismiss by getting themselves fixated on believing a version of the many historical versions. Just because you don't believe he was a Prophet, doesn't give you a right to dictate which story to believe and which to disbelieve.

So your defense of Muhammed is that he claimed a neighboring city as a holy place, and this justifies him attacking its people and destroying their temples?

When did i say that?

For comparison, how would you like it if Christians suddenly decided that Mecca was their holy place, and decided to attack it and burn all the mosques?

Well that what the Christians did in Jerusalem with their Crusade campaigns.

I never said anything about what people will or will not do. What I said was that people don't have to emulate Muhammed.

No one said people have to emulate Muhammed (PBUH), we are saying Muslims have to emulate Muhammed (PBUH) and we have pride doing so.

People all over the world follow corrupt and hypocritical leaders.

Please provide examples of corrupted leaders who found a religion that continues to life after over thousand of years and their faith is still rapidly growing and attracting followers from all around the world.

My evidence was taken directly from the Hadiths.

So are mine, but i also take it from holy Qurán.

Ordinary or not, even Muhammed didn't claim perfection. According to him, only Allah can be perfect.

Who called him perfect?

So you openly admit to picking and choosing texts that say what you like?

Nope, go back and read what i have posted. I said i choose to believe the ancient texts that SUPPORTED the teachings of Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) through holy Qurán and Hadiths.

Unless you have evidence to show that a source is unreliable or illogical, it can't be discounted.

I think the problem lies within you. I have already explained that whatever contradicts Quránic teaching is false because Islam is founded by Muhammed (PBUH) and he wouldn't violate divine messages. On top of that, there are ancient texts that support this claim. What else should be presented to you as an evidence?

Basically, you have just admitted that you are biased and can't think logically on the subject.

I think you just admitted being biased and incapable of logical thinking when it comes to Prophet Muhammed (PBUH). You have your own preconcieved ideas and just looking for any texts that supports these ideas.

Because, like most people, he's not all good or all evil. A person can do both good and evil in one's lifetime.

Really??So a man who you describe as a pedophile and a killer is like most people to you? Most of people that you know are pedophiles and killers? And on top of that, you find such a person not evil, but normal? You see you make no sense whatsoever. You want to appear as neutral when you clearly have issues with Islam and the Prophet. I dont mind that because i know many people are like you but just admit it. It is much better than giving absurd comments or illogical explanations.

And just to let you know, most people are not Prophets. True Prophets were humans and no human is perfect. But they also were chosen by God and they did not commit the mistakes of what we the normal humans do and did alot for humanity.