I consider anyone making such a claim to being extremely offensive and deliberately hateful because when they call the incarnations of Vishnu; Rama and Krishna as messengers.
messengers of whom? the deity of the quran whom theybelieve to exist.
This is an insult because stating that the God of Hindus is unreal and is instead a created thing, something that serves their deity allah. some sub ordinate to an entity of worship which we do not recognize.
It would be an insult Lord Rama by comparing Him with muhammad.
Lord Rama is the Perfect man. Because He is God. Only God is Perfect.
Lord Rama is the Most Morally Righteous.
Thus let us compare Lord Rama and muhammad:
- Rama left His consort when her chastity was called into question by a mere washerman even though He knew the accussations were baseless.
on the other hand
- when aisha was accussed of adultery, muhammad after some time claimed to have recieved revelations proving her innocent and then he ordered 40 lashes for the accussers.
- aisha was betrothed to muhammad when she was merely 6 years old and consummated marriage with her when she was 9. and that makes him a pedophile.
This would be comparing God as being equal to a pedophile.
Thus to us Hindus that would be extremely offensive.
Not only that in one instance where muhammad after he conquered a large Jewish settlement, he asked Kinana one of the Jewish leaders where the treasures of its tribe is, when Kinana refused to tell him, muhammad gives orders to al-Zubayr Al-Awwam, quote "Torture him untill you extract what he has". So he kindled a fire with a flint and steel on his chest untill he was nearly dead. After that muhammad had him beheaded.
This is a sign of muhammad not being a messenger of God because allah is not God, if it was, why didnt give it him revelations then? how come muhammad the tyrant had to mercilessly torture an innocent man to obtain information?
Its alright to upset infidels but unacceptable to state the facts about islam so as not to offend its followers?
Is this not hypocrisy? How can muslims claim Rama or Krishna as "messengers/prophets"?
When there ARE prophets/seers/sages in Hinduism who spoke of a Formless, Eternal and Monotheistic God?
Such as Vasistha and Valmiki who are also the characters of Ramayana?
Rama or Krishna are not described in the quran. So they themselves cannot believe in such.
It is offensive to Hindus.
Just as it may be offensive to muslims to call allah the servant of Shiva
messengers of whom? the deity of the quran whom theybelieve to exist.
This is an insult because stating that the God of Hindus is unreal and is instead a created thing, something that serves their deity allah. some sub ordinate to an entity of worship which we do not recognize.
It would be an insult Lord Rama by comparing Him with muhammad.
Lord Rama is the Perfect man. Because He is God. Only God is Perfect.
Lord Rama is the Most Morally Righteous.
Thus let us compare Lord Rama and muhammad:
- Rama left His consort when her chastity was called into question by a mere washerman even though He knew the accussations were baseless.
on the other hand
- when aisha was accussed of adultery, muhammad after some time claimed to have recieved revelations proving her innocent and then he ordered 40 lashes for the accussers.
- aisha was betrothed to muhammad when she was merely 6 years old and consummated marriage with her when she was 9. and that makes him a pedophile.
This would be comparing God as being equal to a pedophile.
Thus to us Hindus that would be extremely offensive.
Not only that in one instance where muhammad after he conquered a large Jewish settlement, he asked Kinana one of the Jewish leaders where the treasures of its tribe is, when Kinana refused to tell him, muhammad gives orders to al-Zubayr Al-Awwam, quote "Torture him untill you extract what he has". So he kindled a fire with a flint and steel on his chest untill he was nearly dead. After that muhammad had him beheaded.
This is a sign of muhammad not being a messenger of God because allah is not God, if it was, why didnt give it him revelations then? how come muhammad the tyrant had to mercilessly torture an innocent man to obtain information?
Its alright to upset infidels but unacceptable to state the facts about islam so as not to offend its followers?
Is this not hypocrisy? How can muslims claim Rama or Krishna as "messengers/prophets"?
When there ARE prophets/seers/sages in Hinduism who spoke of a Formless, Eternal and Monotheistic God?
Such as Vasistha and Valmiki who are also the characters of Ramayana?
Rama or Krishna are not described in the quran. So they themselves cannot believe in such.
It is offensive to Hindus.
Just as it may be offensive to muslims to call allah the servant of Shiva
Last edited:
