Muhammad The Greatest: A comparative study

[Imagist]

Response: The statement doesn't make any sense. If they are scholars how can they be wrong? A scholar is a learnered person. If he is wrong than he is not learned and is not a scholar.

Are you serious? Scholars have learned more than most of us, but that doesn't mean that everything they say is right. They are still humans.

Furthermore, scholars often disagree, so by definition some of them have to be wrong.

 

[Imagist]

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.

Response: Exactly. What's wrong with that? What's wrong with asking someone to verify their evidence?

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 ask you: what evidence do you have to disbelieve that article? How exactly do you think that Muhammed came to rule over Mecca, a city that had thrown him out? Did they just one day decide that they really liked him after all, and welcome him in with open arms?

Response: My friend, I have no difficulty and would love to answer your question but I don't want to juggle two things at the same time. Right now you have made claims concerning Muhammad and islam and I am asking for the evidence to back up your claims. Once you've done so, I would be more than happy to answer your question. Otherwise, I would get the impression that that you don't have any evidence and only wish to slander. If that is the case than I woul discontinue any dialogue with a person of such character. So I would need to know the true intent behind your arguments before I engage in a dialogue with you or anyone for that matter because I created this to truly understand why Muhammad is viewed the way he is.

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I have provided Hadiths, logic, and historical references to show that Muhammed had sex with a nine-year-old girl, recommended camel urine, which has no medical properties and is actually toxic, as a medicine, and was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.

 

[Imagist]

Response: O.K. Now if your problem is that you disagree with the fact that camel's urine does not have medical properties and this somehow disqualifies him as a prophet or as a man of great character than provide the evidence that shows that Muhammad was wrong. Otherwise, your contention to the hadith is rather senseless.

I have already presented evidence showing that camel urine is not only medicinally useless, but it is actually harmful (it is cytotoxic, meaning it causes death at a cellular level).

Others on this thread have argued that a certain component of mare urine is medicinally useful. This is irrelevant, because Muhammed didn't recommend a component of mare urine, he recommended unfiltered camel urine.

 

[Fatihah]

Sorry, but this whole Muhammad being the greatest come out of arrogance.

Was he a great leader? Yes.

Was he a great prophet? Yes. He founded a whole new religion that has something in common with both Judaism and Christianity.

Was he the greatest man? No. Only a Muslim would say he is.

Response: And only a non-muslim would say he's not.

Quote:
Was he the greatest prophet? Certainly not. He was not innovative, nor revolutionary. As I said early he had mixed some of the teachings from both Judaism and Christianity. He was a copy-cat and adapt his religion to Arabic culture.

Response: You may have said a lot of things earlier but that's the whole issue. They're just sayings. Where's the proof?

 

[Imagist]

Response: That doesn't answer the question as to why you can consider something is true because it was written.

By this logic, all written evidence for everything must be discarded simply because it is written. That means that you must discard the Quran. Are you really sure that you want to make this argument?

The way that this really works, is if you doubt the truth of something written by a credible source, you must give evidence for your doubts. If you fail to do that, you have no choice to accept that what was written is probably true.

So please elaborate: why exactly do you believe the Hadith in question to be false?

 

[Imagist]

Response: You may have said a lot of things earlier but that's the whole issue. They're just sayings. Where's the proof?

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.

 

[Fatihah]

So if thats the case then the scholars who were baying for blood and Jihad in Turkey a few weeks ago are right,the fact that no Muslim has answered the call proves they are wrong = scholars can be wrong.

Response: No. The fact that these scholars said things that are not supported by the qur'an shows that they were not scholars at all.

 

[Fatihah]

Response: That doesn't answer the question as to what evidence has convinced you to believe what you believe. You have also read hadiths and talk to muslims that go against what you believe as well. The question is why have you chosen not to believe them and uphold your beliefs instead?

I think the reason i believe what i do about Muhammed is because i was not raised a Muslim in much the same way as i was'nt raised a Hindu or Buddist so i see a different picture to you.
I cannot say you are wrong believing what you do,thats faith,thats your freedom of choice which is essential in a free world but one Mans Elvis is another Mans Kareoke singer.

Response: Then it is safe to say that even you can't say that your belief is based on facts but rather you believe these things just because you want to.

 

[Fatihah]

Pssst being a scholar doesn't make you always right.

Response: I never claimed it did. But when a person claims to know something is right when they are actually wrong does not make them a scholar in what they know.

 

[Imagist]

Response: Then it is safe to say that even you can't say that your belief is based on facts but rather you believe these things just because you want to.

The implication here is that your belief is based in facts, and that you don't believe what you believe just because you want to. What is your evidence that Muhammed is a good person to emulate?

 

[Sajdah]

I never said they were justified. However, just because someone does you a wrong doesn't mean that you can go back and do something even worse to them.



This is simply not true. Read the links I posted.

What's wrong with you?
If your basis here is your ignorance about the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him, then educate yourself firstly and read this before arguing just for arguing.

the conquest of Makkah

The treaty of Hudaybiya heralded the conquest of Makkah. The number of people who embraced Islam after the treaty until the 8th year of Hijra increased many folds compared to number at the beginning of the Message. Each of the tribes of Daus, Ashja‘ and Ghaffar embraced Islam. By virtue of the first article of the treaty, the tribe of Khuza‘a embraced Islam and was known to be in the party of Prophet Muhammad (SAWS[1]). On the other hand, the tribe of Banu Bakr was in Quraysh’s party. Many wars used to take place between Khuza‘a and Bani Bakr, but these conflicts calmed down after the treaty of Hudaibiyah. However, since Khuza‘a was getting stronger by being with Prophet Muhammad (SAWS), Bani Bakr decided to violate the treaty and attack them in order to have the upper hand over their rivals. Thus, Bani Bakr, led by Nawfal Ibn Mu‘awiyah, took Quraysh’s consent to attack Khuza’a. Sohail Ibn Amr, Ikrima Ibn Abu-Jahl, and Safwan Ibn Umayyah helped Bani Bakr and even provided them with weapons to launch this attack, knowing that by doing this, both Bani Bakr and Quraysh would be breaking the treaty, which stated that there would be no war for ten years.
The tribe of Khuza‘a was preparing for Umrah and spent the night in al-Wateer. Nawfal Ibn Mu‘awiyah and his companions attacked Khuza’a while they were sleeping and killed three of them. Khuza‘a ran to the Haram for shelter but Nawfal followed them and killed 20 of them inside the Haram. Killing in al-Haram was a great sin for the Arabs but the people of Bani Bakr were used to stealing there so killing was not that big of a deal for them. Khuza‘a rushed to Juthail Ibn Warqa’ but ten of them were killed on his doorstep. Juthail quickly sent Amr Ibn Salem to Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) to tell him what happened as fast as he could. Amr reached the Prophet’s Mosque and narrated to Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) what happened in the form of a poem. When Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) heard what happened, he said, “you are triumphant Amr Ibn Salem.” Prophet Muhammad SAWS could never stand treason and disloyalty. His plan was the conquest of Makkah. He did not inform his companions about Quraysh’s treason because he did not want bloodshed. It was time to consolidate Islam in the Arab Peninsula.

Revenge was never the aim of Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) although Quraysh had tormented him and his companions for nearly 20 years in Makkah. Quraysh was the cause of Khadija’s death and they killed his beloved uncle Hamza, but he still wished them guidance. Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) was an example of tolerance, forgiveness, benevolence, strength, power, wisdom, and all sublime ethics. Quraysh now gathered in Dar-an-Nadwa to discuss the issue. Abdullah Ib Abi-as-Sarh was once a Muslim and stayed with Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) in al-Madinah for one year but later became an apostate because he did not acquire a high rank among Muslims after accepting Islam. He told Quraysh that they could either pay blood money, or send the murderers to Khuza‘a to take their revenge, or declare war. Abu-Sufyan had another plan. He did not know that Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) already knew of what happened, so he decided to go to al-Madinah to offer Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) a peace treaty with a new date, under the pretext that Abu-Sufyan himself did not attend the treaty of al-Hudaybiya. By that, it would seem that Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) did not have the right to retaliate for what happened to Khuza‘a as it took place before the new treaty. Hence, Abu-Sufyan took off to al-Madinah. He headed to his daughter Ummu Habiba, Prophet Muhammad’s wife. It is noteworthy that Abu-Sufyan was very happy to marry his daughter to Prophet Muhammad (SAWS) as he knew that the latter would honor and respect her. [continue]

 

[Fatihah]

Fatihah: You have not responded to my point that murder is not a good thing, and people who promote murder are not good people.

Response: I didn't know it required a response but yes murder is not a good thing and promoting it is not a good thing but in the case of self-defense it is very much o.k.

 

[England my lionheart]

Response: No. The fact that these scholars said things that are not supported by the qur'an shows that they were not scholars at all.

How about the council of Experts/Ayatollahs who control Iran who administer Sharia law and dish out a 100 lashes before executing an adulterer or rape victim who because she does'nt have four witnesses to support her as a victim of rape.
There are many Scholars and anyone can profess to be one and all can claim to be right however many do not have solid proof that they are.

 

[Sajdah]

Is love a crime
Volume 2, Book 23, Number 413:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar :
The Jew brought to the Prophet a man and a woman from amongst them who have committed (adultery) illegal sexual intercourse. He ordered both of them to be stoned (to death), near the place of offering the funeral prayers beside the mosque."



Photo : this woman is burried up to her waist in preparation for her stoning to death.
Hajiyeh Esmaelvand was killed in such a manner in December 2004. She was accused of adultery. She is but one victim of this law of the Sharia.
The stoning of women is practiced in Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Nigeria and Saudi Arabia.

Hi, England.

I'm shocked that you have this so kind heart towards Muslim women. As I'm wondering about your attitude towards that Muslim Woman too?!!!!!!!


A Palestinian woman wounded in Israeli missile strikes is helped into the emergency area at Shifa hospital in Gaza City, Saturday, Dec. 27, 2008. (AP)

Shall we call it double standard? contradiction to justify the rejection of Allah's rules ? Or your heart beats only for criminals, not innocents?!! (Just a thought).

 

[Fatihah]

Are you serious? Scholars have learned more than most of us, but that doesn't mean that everything they say is right. They are still humans.

Furthermore, scholars often disagree, so by definition some of them have to be wrong.

Response: You would have a point if I said that everything that scholars say is right but those words are not mine.

 

[Autodidact]

Response: I don't know the circumstances of the situation nor the intent or reason behind why the christian wants to kill. You will have to be more specific.

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.

 

[England my lionheart]

Hi, England.

I'm shocked that you have this so kind heart towards Muslim women. As I'm wondering about your attitude towards that Muslim Woman too?!!!!!!!


A Palestinian woman wounded in Israeli missile strikes is helped into the emergency area at Shifa hospital in Gaza City, Saturday, Dec. 27, 2008. (AP)

Shall we call it double standard? contradiction to justify the rejection of Allah's rules ? Or your heart beats only for criminals, not innocents?!! (Just a thought).

Just a thought,many many Women in Pakistan are stoned to death because if a rape victim cannot produce 4 witnesses to the fact they are adulterers and Stoned.
Adultery can happen because of lust but mostly for love and even if it were for lust is it really cool to stone a defensless often innocent Woman to death.
As for Palestine,this has been debated over and over on this Forum but if this kind of thing is to stop Hamas must drop the Gun and the Charter and stop buying Rockets instead of Bread for its people, and i don't call it double standards,i call it Human rights

 

[Imagist]

Are you serious? Scholars have learned more than most of us, but that doesn't mean that everything they say is right. They are still humans.

Furthermore, scholars often disagree, so by definition some of them have to be wrong.

Response: You would have a point if I said that everything that scholars say is right but those words are not mine.

You said:

Response: The statement doesn't make any sense. If they are scholars how can they be wrong? A scholar is a learnered person. If he is wrong than he is not learned and is not a scholar.

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)

 

[Autodidact]

Response: I didn't know it required a response but yes murder is not a good thing and promoting it is not a good thing but in the case of self-defense it is very much o.k.

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?

 

[Imagist]

The man who started this doctrine, Allah, taught evil.

Minor correction: the man is Muhammed. Allah is the associated diety.

(Here's crossing my fingers that it was a typo.)