Was Muhammad a good man?

[1robin]

I am Glad when Atheists ... admit that they believe that the Bible is a Myth.

At least they are Honest .. That's what I truly Love about Atheists.. Thank You..

A Christian who claims to believe in the Bible is no less honest than atheists who do not.

 

[1robin]

... I don't think anyone except you considers Dawkins a "prophet". And a lot of "converts" bash on their old religion, myself included. Realizing the religion you used to follow is closed-minded and ridiculous doesn't mean you were never a "true" follower of that religion in the first place. The "high and mighty" people such as yourself are a major reason I (and many other people) split from religion.

You decided whether the most profound concept in human history was true or not based on the (existent or non-existent) arrogance of another person. With those methods how can you not fail to grasp truth?

 

[1robin]

6.114. (Say to them, O Messenger "What! Shall I seek other than God to judge (to settle the matters between you and me), when it is He Who has sent down to you this (unique, most perfect) Book (in which truth and falsehood, right and wrong are) fully distinguished?" (The scholars among) those to whom We gave the Book before know that it is one being sent down in parts, in truth, by your Lord. So never be among the doubters (concerning the truth of your way).


Pay close attention to " Shall I seek other than God to judge"

Ultimately you have no right to judge another humanbeing..especially on matters which involve knowledge of the unseen (the persons intentions)

Well Muhammad certainly judged thousands. Just ask the hundreds of Jews lined up and beheaded until he was exhausted. Or the dozens of caravans the even the Muslim's themselves admitted were attacked for loot or terror and nothing more. I have already provided dozens of examples like these in this thread, with exhaustive details and no one has even attempted to refute them. What Muhammad says matters little compared with what he did.

 

[1robin]

Well Muhammad was important enough to have a book written in his name so to me he is good enough. Forget any act of barbarism associated with him and just accept the fact that 1 of my 3 favorite books is the Qur'an

Hitler had many books written about him, he even wrote a few himself. Is he also good?

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

You decided whether the most profound concept in human history was true or not based on the (existent or non-existent) arrogance of another person. With those methods how can you not fail to grasp truth?

It's only the truth according to those same arrogant people... You calling it the most profound concept in history is clear evidence of such...

 

[Sha'irullah]

Hitler had many books written about him, he even wrote a few himself. Is he also good?

Yep. I loved Mein Kampf.

Also you aware that good and evil doe snot even exist right? These are words we use to describe the things we are displeased with. Entirely subjective in nature this is(Imagine that is Yoda speaking).

Muhammad was by no means as worse then Stalin, or Genghis Khan or Pol-Pot

 

[1robin]

It's only the truth according to those same arrogant people... You calling it the most profound concept in history is clear evidence of such...

What concept can be considered more profound than creation, sin, God, Hell, Heaven and eternity? You got a more important issue somewhere? The Bible is probably true but maybe false, but certainly contains the most profound issues in human history. The first statement you made was proof of my claim but a genetic fallacy none the less. Nothing is true or false simply because a person who was arrogant (or even one who was falsely accused of being so) claimed it. Your standards have nothing what so ever to do with what is true. They are however (emotional based) and emotions not evidence is what most non-faith is based in. So while invalid it was not unexpected. Was Muhammad Ali a bad boxer because he had a mouth the size of Texas? Was what Billy Graham preached, either arrogant or insignificant when he assembled the largest groups of people ever assembled in one place in history (I think 1.5 million in Taiwan but my details are a little fuzzy) to hear what you call not profound, and billions have called life it's self?

 

[1robin]

Yep. I loved Mein Kampf.

Also you aware that good and evil doe snot even exist right? These are words we use to describe the things we are displeased with. Entirely subjective in nature this is(Imagine that is Yoda speaking).

Muhammad was by no means as worse then Stalin, or Genghis Khan or Pol-Pot

Are you joking or did you actually like Hitler? I am very well aware that if God does not exist then the truth categories of good and evil do not objectively have a foundation. Thank God, God does exist, so we can do things like know murder is actually wrong and have actual rights and stupid stuff like that. No Muhammad was not as bad as Stalin or the others (though what he produced might be, in fact is IMO) but that is not the question.

 

[Sha'irullah]

Are you joking or did you actually like Hitler?

I am quite serious about Hitler. I also find his mustache fascinating(no sarcasm).

I am very well aware that if God does not exist then the truth categories of good and evil do not objectively have a foundation.

WRONG. This has been disproved so many times it is laughable you bring it up. There is no objective truth of morality. Even Christians disagree with this such as homosexuality.
This is beyond incomprehensible as you should know more then anyone else no such thing as good or evil exist considering that as long as you kill in the name of god it is moral which you even admitted to before in this thread. Yahweh has no issues with murder, rape, molestation nor barbarism as long as it is in his name. The very morals in the Bible contradict each other so greatly that Thomas Jefferson had to cut excerpts out of the Gospels to make a "moral" Bible.

Thank God, God does exist, so we can do things like know murder is actually wrong and have actual rights and stupid stuff like that.

WITHOUT GOD there is peace. With religion one can rally up men and slaughter at will easily. Thanks to secularism it is that Christianity no longer kills. Thanks to secularism there is human rights as according to the Bible an infidel has none and should not even be welcomed to your home.

Thanks to secularism do you eat or have a country which tolerates any ideas. This is not found in Christianity nor Islam.

No Muhammad was not as bad as Stalin or the others (though what he produced might be, in fact is IMO) but that is not the question.

Muhammad created an empire and brought about a moment of stabilization. Stalin never bothered trying. We can debate this all you want but it is still a fact that despite any action of violence Muhammad did he did not go about slaughtering people needlessly. Hitler exterminated an entire race on the grounds that they were inferior. Stalin did not want peace. Muhammad used violence to achieve peace and the major difference in this is that Muhammad was the better.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

What concept can be considered more profound than creation, sin, God, Hell, Heaven and eternity? You got a more important issue somewhere?

World hunger? The root of the economic divide? You know, things that are actually relevant to everybody. Believe it or not, not everybody is obsessed with what will happen to them when they die. Call me crazy, but I'd like to get through the living part first.
Creation has no possible way to be proven (I'm sure you're gonna say otherwise, but that doesn't make it any more true than me saying I can prove Tupac is still alive), and sin is a fabrication by people who would have you be a subject to religious dogma for financial gain. Importance is in the eye of the beholder.

Nothing is true or false simply because a person who was arrogant (or even one who was falsely accused of being so) claimed it.

Exactly. So stop claiming your beliefs are the absolute truth...

Your standards have nothing what so ever to do with what is true.

I also never claimed to know the truth. I just have my beliefs and don't seek to impose them on anyone.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

Are you joking or did you actually like Hitler? I am very well aware that if God does not exist then the truth categories of good and evil do not objectively have a foundation.

Then thank God that God doesn't exist

 

[1robin]

World hunger? The root of the economic divide? You know, things that are actually relevant to everybody. Believe it or not, not everybody is obsessed with what will happen to them when they die. Call me crazy, but I'd like to get through the living part first.

I said most important not simply important. The Bible deals with issues that can mean you spend eternity in bliss even if you die from hunger. Which one is the most profound? The concepts it cover defeat death. What can be more profound than that? Certainly nothing that only covers our relative comfort in this infinitely less important finite veil of tears. That is why those facing death have such an interest in the Bible. " Oh death where is thy sting". Christians are so obsessed with life they consider what happens after they die as very important as we will be dead far longer than in this poor messed up world we have corrupted so your boxed canard does not even apply.

Creation has no possible way to be proven (I'm sure you're gonna say otherwise, but that doesn't make it any more true than me saying I can prove Tupac is still alive), and sin is a fabrication by people who would have you be a subject to religious dogma for financial gain. Importance is in the eye of the beholder.

I did not say it is proven. I did not say it was even true. I said it is near the top of what is important as far as concepts go. Your concepts cover a fleeting moment in an infinite expanse of time. Mine go from start into eternity.

Exactly. So stop claiming your beliefs are the absolute truth...

Find a statement I made that claims that first. I certainly do not think they are proven truths.

I also never claimed to know the truth. I just have my beliefs and don't seek to impose them on anyone.

What is the application for that? I have never imposed my take on anything on anyone and know no Christian who has. You can't force faith. Not even God tries to do that.

 

[1robin]

Then thank God that God doesn't exist

My 4 year old niece would have considered this response poor in both quality and even humor. This is the equivalent of "I know you are but what am I". If you make bad arguments a suitable substitute is humor IMO. However I got neither from this.

 

[1robin]

I am quite serious about Hitler. I also find his mustache fascinating(no sarcasm).

You agree with Mein Kampf or find it interesting. I need to know what level of logical insanity I am dealing with. Just kidding, mostly.

WRONG. This has been disproved so many times it is laughable you bring it up. There is no objective truth of morality. Even Christians disagree with this such as homosexuality.

You know very little about the debate as it has existed from the Greeks to the modern atheist and theist debaters like Harris, Craig, Hitchens, Bo teach, Flew, Lewis, Chesterton, DeSouza, etc... I see. There are two true things that almost everyone on either side agrees with.

1. If God exists an objective foundation for morality exists.
2. If he does not it does not.

Good luck trying to argue this as it is one of the easiest and simplest arguments to destroy I have ever heard and has been done so a thousand times by a thousand scholars.

This is beyond incomprehensible as you should know more then anyone else no such thing as good or evil exist considering that as long as you kill in the name of god it is moral which you even admitted to before in this thread. Yahweh has no issues with murder, rape, molestation nor barbarism as long as it is in his name. The very morals in the Bible contradict each other so greatly that Thomas Jefferson had to cut excerpts out of the Gospels to make a "moral" Bible.

If this represents your argumentation concerning morality your argument is even weaker than I thought. So weak in fact that it does not justify comment at this time. If you persist in this moral chaos I will eventually destroy it but do not have the time currently. You can find that claims destruction is ten thousand places if you wish.

WITHOUT GOD there is peace. With religion one can rally up men and slaughter at will easily. Thanks to secularism it is that Christianity no longer kills. Thanks to secularism there is human rights as according to the Bible an infidel has none and should not even be welcomed to your home.

Thanks to secularism do you eat or have a country which tolerates any ideas. This is not found in Christianity nor Islam.



Muhammad created an empire and brought about a moment of stabilization. Stalin never bothered trying. We can debate this all you want but it is still a fact that despite any action of violence Muhammad did he did not go about slaughtering people needlessly. Hitler exterminated an entire race on the grounds that they were inferior. Stalin did not want peace. Muhammad used violence to achieve peace and the major difference in this is that Muhammad was the better.

The rest of your moral argument is not even technically an argument. I do not know what it is. You do not seem to be slightest bit familiar with the issue as it is debated. Any stability Muhammad created was done so with the sword and lasted until about 15 minutes after he died when Islam almost killed it's self. Only the states politically controlled standardization of the text that it seems Uthman liked best for the Quran and the focusing of Islam's self destructive violent energy towards an almost dead Eastern Roman empire and the poor people of the southern med region did Islam find someone to kill besides other Arabs. Do you know how Muhammad came to have the slightest bit of violent power to begin with after a dozen years of being chased out of places where he preached the unwanted doctrines of Islam? Please watch a professional debate or read a book on the moral issue over the weekend. It is hard for me to justify fixing middle school level misunderstandings with it in order to get to the meat of the issue. You need groundwork before it is a task small enough for me to justify. IN fact I have went in depth on it with many links and quotes in the forum you can use. At least become familiar with it.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

Find a statement I made that claims that first. I certainly do not think they are proven truths.

Thank God, God does exist, so we can do things like know murder is actually wrong and have actual rights and stupid stuff like that.

Sounds like a claim to absolute truth if I ever saw one... I could show you a bunch from other threads but that's against forum rules, so I'll leave you with this one for now.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

I said most important not simply important.

Importance is in the eye of the beholder. I find real life issues a lot more important than guessing about the existence of a god or an afterlife. Pondering on whether or not heaven exists doesn't put food on the table or pay the rent.

The Bible deals with issues that can mean you spend eternity in bliss even if you die from hunger.

And if you spend a lifetime trying to figure it out, dying from hunger is exactly what you'll do.

The concepts it cover defeat death.

Funny, because everybody ever has died, and we've no evidence to suggest they did anything but die. Death is the only guarantee in life and nothing has defeated it so far.

Christians are so obsessed with life they consider what happens after they die as very important as we will be dead far longer than in this poor messed up world we have corrupted so your boxed canard does not even apply.

If they spent less time speculating and more solving real life issues, maybe the world wouldn't be so messed up and corrupt.

Your concepts cover a fleeting moment in an infinite expanse of time. Mine go from start into eternity.

And for what? We're both gonna die. You gaining speculative "knowledge" on what could possibly happen afterwards isn't going to change anything.

What is the application for that? I have never imposed my take on anything on anyone and know no Christian who has.

So you've never said all gay people should swear off of sex? Or that nobody should be allowed to have abortions?

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

My 4 year old niece would have considered this response poor in both quality and even humor. This is the equivalent of "I know you are but what am I". If you make bad arguments a suitable substitute is humor IMO. However I got neither from this.

You'll die unhappy...

 

[1robin]

Sounds like a claim to absolute truth if I ever saw one... I could show you a bunch from other threads but that's against forum rules, so I'll leave you with this one for now.

Claims to truth are not against any rules. Claims to truth about another faith being evil or that someone is the same as Hitler are wrong because they are offensive and cant be known.

 

[1robin]

Importance is in the eye of the beholder. I find real life issues a lot more important than guessing about the existence of a god or an afterlife. Pondering on whether or not heaven exists doesn't put food on the table or pay the rent.

In no way is what we eat as important as where we spend eternity. You and I both know that, the problem is you have made the false claim that pizza or beans is more important than heaven, hell, ultimate meaning, ultimate purpose, origins, and foundations of morality and instead of admitting food is less important as you should you are stuck inventing strange methods for trivializing the momentous and complicating the obvious. BTW the Bible talks plenty about food and eating.

And if you spend a lifetime trying to figure it out, dying from hunger is exactly what you'll do.

I have figured it out and have experienced God and have never suffered from hunger. Defending the indefensible is forcing you to state the ridiculous. Eating is certainly important but on no scale what ever is it more important than destination.

Funny, because everybody ever has died, and we've no evidence to suggest they did anything but die. Death is the only guarantee in life and nothing has defeated it so far.

This is an evidence fallacy. First there is thousand of examples of people who clamed to have experienced life after death. I even knew one. However even if there exists no evidence that does not mean that either the concepts in the Bible as concepts do not claim to do so (so unless KNOWN to be false are more important than lunch), nor that you should have any more evidence than you do. The most famous person who ever walk the Earth is said to have risen from the dead. Until you show some actually reason to believe life after death is untrue then the issue is of the very highest importance.

If they spent less time speculating and more solving real life issues, maybe the world wouldn't be so messed up and corrupt.

If Christians had not done what they have done the world would be far worse off than it is. Hundreds of hospital, public education systems, foreign aid, the red cross, heck they created the greatest nation on Earth (over 90% of our founding fathers were Christian). If Christianity did not exist then they would either not exist or would not have had the impact they did for good. There is only gain in having a book that suggests love and self sacrifice is the greatest of virtues.

And for what? We're both gonna die. You gaining speculative "knowledge" on what could possibly happen afterwards isn't going to change anything.

As I said what you are concerned with deals with a vanishingly small moment in time. What I mentioned deals with it all. No mater what words, bad arguments, and ridiculous logic you use eternity is more profound than a blink of geological time. It would do you more credit to have edited your claims that to go down with the ship by defending the indefensible. Pride is not anyone's friend.

So you've never said all gay people should swear off of sex? Or that nobody should be allowed to have abortions?

I do not think so. I almost always debate issues not people. The guy who argues for imposing death on a fetus without it's consent can't turn around and complain when someone has the unmitigated gall to force you respect that human being's life (born or not). Even if I had argued for what you state here I would have been for "imposing life" you are for "imposing death". To make it worse the one imposing death is telling the one who may or may not be imposing life that he is out of bounds. Good night nurse, is that is messed up. It is bad enough that secularism creates moral chaos but it becomes obscene what it is not admitted and chaos is redefined as good. That is of course what happens when morality is ripped from it's Godly foundations. It becomes as ambiguous as the opinions it is now based on.

 

[1robin]

You'll die unhappy...

Was that really worth typing?