Was Muhammad a good man?

[1robin]

I have a Question for the Christians if you find the Prophet Mohammed (saws) to be violent what about Moses (pbuh) and the other Prophets/Sons of Gods described in the OT?

FOUAD you change avatars like most of us change shirts.

We have covered this several times. I have no theoretical problem with Muhammad killing if ordered to by God. In many (probably most) that is not the case. His very first battle has people who were on the scene all saying the reasons for the caravan raids were because the loot they contained was large that year. Most of Muhammad's reasons are easily seen to be revenge, money, power, control, oppression, IOW personal. Yes Moses ordered many battles but he did so at God's command. When Israel did attack without orders from God they were punished very harshly.

Lets not forget The Prophet Mohammed (saws) was in a long war with the Pagans who started attacking him and hes followers, the death toll on both sides combined were around 1500 while in the OT its described that Moses(pbuh) killed over 3000 people in one event. This is without even mentioning all the other things that are told in the OT.

I knew the page after page after page on Muhammad's first battle was a waste of time. It is even in this thread. Unlike the Israelite's who were being raided at harvest time year after year by the Canaanites who walled up live children in their foundations. Muhammad was handed men and money by Medina tribes to stop the tribal warfare. When Muhammad actually had their troops what they got was anything but peace. He avenged, looted, and took what he wanted from anyone who had ever insulted him and had something he wanted. It did not stop for the next hundred years or so. When they ran out of pagans' they almost wiped themselves out. If their violence had not been unified and turned upon others in N Africa, Spain, and the shadow of the eastern roman empire Islam would have committed suicide before it ever got going.

Let me ask you this.

Why in the first 12 peaceful years was Islam only able to convert 300 or less people who were mostly related to Muhammad. However during it's next 10 blood soaked years, when Muhammad had treasure, power, and control to offer did it grow to 100,000 and the exact opposite is true of Christianity?

So if Mohammed (saws) is violent what does that make Moses (pbuh) and the other Prophets/Sons of Gods in the OT?

That is not accurate. Anything ordered by God is valid. What Muhammad did was not even attempted to justify by God's commands many times. I would as a Christian have to allow that if Allah existed and if Muhammad was ordered to by him that theoretically it was justifiable and in those cases where that is clearly claimed before the fact (and even though I deny Allah exists at all) I can't condemn them. That however leaves tens of thousands killed where Allah was not the motivation or was not connected with the butchery until after the fact. However you must first prove that a man born outside the line of prophets was a prophet before you could even attempt that justification where Allah ordered attacks upfront.

Oh, and hello FOUAD.

 

[FearGod]

FOUAD you change avatars like most of us change shirts.

We have covered this several times. I have no theoretical problem with Muhammad killing if ordered to by God. In many (probably most) that is not the case. His very first battle has people who were on the scene all saying the reasons for the caravan raids were because the loot they contained was large that year. Most of Muhammad's reasons are easily seen to be revenge, money, power, control, oppression, IOW personal. Yes Moses ordered many battles but he did so at God's command. When Israel did attack without orders from God they were punished very harshly.

I knew the page after page after page on Muhammad's first battle was a waste of time. It is even in this thread. Unlike the Israelite's who were being raided at harvest time year after year by the Canaanites who walled up live children in their foundations. Muhammad was handed men and money by Medina tribes to stop the tribal warfare. When Muhammad actually had their troops what they got was anything but peace. He avenged, looted, and took what he wanted from anyone who had ever insulted him and had something he wanted. It did not stop for the next hundred years or so. When they ran out of pagans' they almost wiped themselves out. If their violence had not been unified and turned upon others in N Africa, Spain, and the shadow of the eastern roman empire Islam would have committed suicide before it ever got going.

Let me ask you this.

Why in the first 12 peaceful years was Islam only able to convert 300 or less people who were mostly related to Muhammad. However during it's next 10 blood soaked years, when Muhammad had treasure, power, and control to offer did it grow to 100,000 and the exact opposite is true of Christianity.



That is not accurate. Anything ordered by God is valid. What Muhammad did was not even attempted to justify by God's commands many times. I would as a Christian have to allow that if Allah existed and if Muhammad was ordered to by him that theoretically it was justifiable and in those cases where that is clearly claimed before the fact (and even though I deny Allah exists at all) I can't condemn them. That however leaves tens of thousands killed where Allah was not the motivation or was not connected with the butchery until after the fact. However you must first prove that a man born outside the line of prophets was a prophet before you could even attempt that justification where Allah ordered attacks upfront.

Oh, and hello FOUAD.

Of course you are absolutely wrong because if money,power and control is what he was looking for then he refused them all as they were offered to him without the need for any wars.

[youtube]SLplKvhEKok[/youtube]

One man changed the history of Arabs from ignorance to the great Islamic Empire that reached Europe and the far east.

The prophecies of prophet Mohammed is an evidence that he was the messenger of God,actually if he was not a real messenger then why he was in need to tell future events that we will see it after his passing away.

[youtube]zgXLBwYSl-c[/youtube]
Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), a Mercy to the Worlds by Sheik Yusuf Estes - YouTube

[youtube]yj2Rokz99U8[/youtube]
Talking Shoe Prophecy by Prophet Muhammad SAW - YouTube

[youtube]HTxZLB7qTS8[/youtube]
15 - Signs of the Last Day - The Proof That Islam Is The Truth - Abdur-Raheem Green - YouTube

 

[1robin]

Of course you are absolutely wrong because if money,power and control is what he was looking for then he refused them all as they were offered to him without the need for any wars.

[youtube]II1hZmYKnpE[/youtube]
The Seal Of All The Prophets-Muhammad PBUH Trailer Muhammad Abdul Jabbar HD - YouTube

One man change the history of Arabs from ignorance to the great Islamic Empire that reached Europe and the far east.


The prophecies of prophet Mohammed is an evidence that he was the messenger of God,actually if he was not a real messenger then why he was in need to tell future events that we will see it after his passing away.

[youtube]zgXLBwYSl-c[/youtube]
Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), a Mercy to the Worlds by Sheik Yusuf Estes - YouTube

[youtube]yj2Rokz99U8[/youtube]
Talking Shoe Prophecy by Prophet Muhammad SAW - YouTube

[youtube]HTxZLB7qTS8[/youtube]
15 - Signs of the Last Day - The Proof That Islam Is The Truth - Abdur-Raheem Green - YouTube

Exactly what part of I can't watch utube is not getting through? He took by force everything I mentioned, despite the best efforts of utube, unfortunately for Islam history will not go away.

 

[Quagmire]

I almost never contend with condemnations of my grammar.

Of course not, where would you find the time.

This one however is an exception.

Thank you. I also felt it was exceptional.

 

[1robin]

Of course not, where would you find the time.



Thank you. I also felt it was exceptional.

How do I have this have this amazing power to summon you from the nether regions?

 

[Quagmire]

How do I have this have this amazing power to summon you from the nether regions?

Have anything to say about the topic?

 

[1robin]

Have anything to say about the topic?

Good lord that was instantaneous, summoning. How is it I can do this and how can I make sure to not? I did not think discussing the topic was required for talking with you. You have not defended or condemned Muhammad in a hundred posts. The closest you got was in falsely condemning an argument about Muhammad. However, if you can remember the subject have at it.

 

[Quagmire]

Good lord

No need to go over board.

"Sir" will do.

that was instantaneous, summoning. How is it I can do this and how can I make sure to not?

I think what you're asking is, "How can I smart off to you but somehow prevent you from responding to it".

Sorry, but if you need that kind of an edge, you're in the wrong place.

I did not think discussing the topic was required for talking with you.

Apparently not.

You have not defended or condemned Muhammad in a hundred posts. The closest you got was in falsely condemning an argument about Muhammad. However, if you can remember the subject have at it.

Any chance I can get you to focus on something bedsides me and my "nether regions" long enough to have some sort of intelligent discussion?

 

[1robin]

No need to go over board.

"Sir" will do.

Well at least you got some humor in I will allow it.

I think what you're asking is, "How can I smart off to you but somehow prevent you from responding to it".

I have no way of knowing what this means,

Sorry, but if you need that kind of an edge, you're in the wrong place.

Since you apply all the edges I need I must be in the right place.

Apparently not.

I can and will debate you if you make relevant posts or even be less that trolling me then we can have a discussion.

Any chance I can get you to focus on something bedsides me and my "nether regions" long enough to have some sort of intelligent discussion?

Muhammad was not a prophet because he was born outside the line that would produce them.


How about that one for starters?

 

[Quagmire]

No need to go over board.

"Sir" will do.

Well at least you got some humor in I will allow it.

And I'll allow you to go on being all the things that you are. :yes:

I have no way of knowing what this means,

Gee, me no speeky the english either.

Since you apply all the edges I need I must be in the right place.

I'm not going to ask you what that sentence was supposed to mean because I'm sure that by the time you see the question you will have forgotten (that's if it ever actually meant anything).

I can and will debate you if you make relevant posts or even be less that trolling me then we can have a discussion.

How is that supposed to happen when you immediately disregard anything that you can't refute as "irrelevant"?

Muhammad was not a prophet because he was born outside the line that would produce them.

Forgot what the topic is again, aye?

How about that one for starters?

How about saying something relevant to the topic, for starters?

 

[1robin]

And I'll allow you to go on being all the things that you are. :yes:

You allow or disallow actions not Characteristics.

Gee, me no speeky the english either.

And the humor train goes into the mountain.

I'm not going to ask you what that sentence was supposed to mean because I'm sure that by the time you see the question you will have forgotten (that's if it ever actually meant anything).

Anything that limits this discourse is fine with me.

How is that supposed to happen when you immediately disregard anything that you can't refute as "irrelevant"?

That is irrelevant, actually it is simply not true.

Forgot what the topic is again, aye?

Forget my straightening out your perception of what he topic involves? Muhammad claimed prophet hood. The truth of that determines his relative "goodness".

How about saying something relevant to the topic, for starters?

Just review my posts in the thread not in response to yours and take your pick.

 

[Quagmire]

You allow or disallow actions not Characteristics.

I'll allow you to believe that.

And the humor train goes into the mountain.

And as usual, you didn't manage to find a seat.

Anything that limits this discourse is fine with me.

I've noticed that. :yes:

That would explain your preference for head-games over any sort of civil or intelligent communication.

That is irrelevant, actually it is simply not true.

Well there ya go.

Forget my straightening out your perception of what he topic involves?

Why yes, where and when is this supposed to have happened?

Muhammad claimed prophet hood. The truth of that determines his relative "goodness".

And who made that rule? If we're going to spontaneously create and determine our own set of self-serving standards and insist that everyone else adopt those standards (although I realize you came up with this one for no other reason than to cover up a mistake you'd made) then I'm just going to say: Mohammad was a nomad. All nomadic people are good people. Case closed.

Just review my posts in the thread not in response to yours and take your pick.

I have. Why do you think I keep coming in here in the first place?

 

[1robin]

I'll allow you to believe that.

How could you impede my beliefs?

And as usual, you didn't manage to find a seat.

Was not looking for one.

I've noticed that. :yes:

I would hope so.

That would explain your preference for head-games over any sort of civil or intelligent communication.

Actually I do not like rhetoric. I would prefer your making a substantive claim.

Well there ya go.

I reckon so.

Why yes, where and when is this supposed to have happened?

As I said review my posts.

And who made that rule? If we're going to spontaneously create and determine our own set of self-serving standards and insist that everyone else adopt those standards (although I realize you came up with this one for no other reason than to cover up a mistake you'd made) then I'm just going to say: Mohammad was a nomad. All nomadic people are good people. Case closed.

Case reopened. Claims to speak for God and kill in his name is not equivalent to his height, his zodiac sign, or his nomadic status. It is a clam that if true is the best possible characteristic and if false a diabolical one that makes his goodness impossible. I did not invent that standard logical coherence and moral rationality mandates it.

I have. Why do you think I keep coming in here in the first place?

The best I could tell it is to yell at me.

 

[F0uad]

FOUAD you change avatars like most of us change shirts.

We have covered this several times. I have no theoretical problem with Muhammad killing if ordered to by God. In many (probably most) that is not the case. His very first battle has people who were on the scene all saying the reasons for the caravan raids were because the loot they contained was large that year. Most of Muhammad's reasons are easily seen to be revenge, money, power, control, oppression, IOW personal. Yes Moses ordered many battles but he did so at God's command. When Israel did attack without orders from God they were punished very harshly.

I knew the page after page after page on Muhammad's first battle was a waste of time. It is even in this thread. Unlike the Israelite's who were being raided at harvest time year after year by the Canaanites who walled up live children in their foundations. Muhammad was handed men and money by Medina tribes to stop the tribal warfare. When Muhammad actually had their troops what they got was anything but peace. He avenged, looted, and took what he wanted from anyone who had ever insulted him and had something he wanted. It did not stop for the next hundred years or so. When they ran out of pagans' they almost wiped themselves out. If their violence had not been unified and turned upon others in N Africa, Spain, and the shadow of the eastern roman empire Islam would have committed suicide before it ever got going.

Let me ask you this.

Why in the first 12 peaceful years was Islam only able to convert 300 or less people who were mostly related to Muhammad. However during it's next 10 blood soaked years, when Muhammad had treasure, power, and control to offer did it grow to 100,000 and the exact opposite is true of Christianity?



That is not accurate. Anything ordered by God is valid. What Muhammad did was not even attempted to justify by God's commands many times. I would as a Christian have to allow that if Allah existed and if Muhammad was ordered to by him that theoretically it was justifiable and in those cases where that is clearly claimed before the fact (and even though I deny Allah exists at all) I can't condemn them. That however leaves tens of thousands killed where Allah was not the motivation or was not connected with the butchery until after the fact. However you must first prove that a man born outside the line of prophets was a prophet before you could even attempt that justification where Allah ordered attacks upfront.

Oh, and hello FOUAD.

The hypocrisy is strong in this one.

When Moses(pbuh) did it, god orders it
When Mohammed(saws) did it, it was hes own command.

Again Moses(pbuh) killed 3000 people by one order, Mohammed's(saws) war what took much longer then several years were not even around 1500 on both sides.

"And Moses said to them, “Have you spared all the women? 16 “Behold, these caused the sons of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, so the plague was among the congregation of the Lord. 17 “Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man intimately. 18 “But all the girls who have not known man intimately, spare for yourselves," (Numbers 31:15-18).

Innocent children?

 

[1robin]

The hypocrisy is strong in this one.

Was that the most effective argument you had?

 

[F0uad]

Was that the most effective argument you had?

No, its just stupid you repeating yourself and acting like this :ignore:
Thats why.

 

[F0uad]

Moses(pbuh) had to be tough as nails. He faced down an empire in that story.
They lived in the DESERT. A more unforgiving environment does not exist short of the Poles.

The same thing as Mohammed(saws), not to forget that many of hes family members, friends(companions) were already killed by these people. What happened when Mohammed(saws) entered Mecca? He spared them all even the ones who killed hes closest companions. I don't think you know anything about Mohammed(saws) except how these Anti-islamic websites like to portrait him, the only thing you do is copy and paste certain things out of there context trying to justify your OT hero's.

If Mohammed(saws) was violent according to your standards then the people in the OT are monsters i can give you tons of references.

 

[1robin]

The hypocrisy is strong in this one.

No there wasn't.

When Moses(pbuh) did it, god orders it
When Mohammed(saws) did it, it was hes own command.

It was Muhammad's companions that claimed the reason for constant raids on caravans was money.

Again Moses(pbuh) killed 3000 people by one order, Mohammed's(saws) war what took much longer then several years were not even around 1500 on both sides.

1500 what? How many are killed is not the issue. The issue is why people were killed. In Moses case it was God's order because many of the Hebrews had constructed false God's and worshipped them. It was not as in Muhammad's case to steal money and goods, revenge, and because people had written unflattering poetry about Muhammad.

"And Moses said to them, “Have you spared all the women? 16 “Behold, these caused the sons of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, so the plague was among the congregation of the Lord. 17 “Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man intimately. 18 “But all the girls who have not known man intimately, spare for yourselves," (Numbers 31:15-18).

The reason for the killing is in the verses you used. "These caused the sons of Israel to trespass". Israel was the conduit for God's revelation. The integrity of that conduit demanded God act in extreme ways. He could not let Israel become corrupted by the diabolical practices of their neighbors. Muhammad nor Islam was the culture God intended to reveal himself through. Muhammad was doing (in many cases) exactly what he wanted for petty and self centered reasons. .

Innocent children?

This is just weird. Muhammad and Islam affirm the prophet hood of Moses. For some reason your condemning what Islam claims is true. Muhammad accepted Moses actions why aren't you. God can have morally justified reasons to wipe out a culture including children.

1. God created life and has the right to take it.
2. God has complete sovereignty over all life.
3. God knows the future of the individuals. For example he may have known those children would have corrupted his chosen culture, thereby lessening the effectiveness of his relation. He may have know those children would have been so corrupted by their pagan parents and wind up in Hell.
4. He can place those children in heaven, and has promised to do so. If he must take innocent lives he can save them.
5. The point is Muhammad did what Muhammad wanted to do. Moses did what God ordered.

 

[1robin]

No, its just stupid you repeating yourself and acting like this :ignore:
Thats why.

Acting like what?

 

[Quagmire]

How could you impede my beliefs?

Beats me. But you looked like you were having so much fun indulging in your illusion of grandeur that I thought I'd give it a try myself.

Was not looking for one.

I realize that. You'd rather stand on your head at the foot of the mountain and tell yourself that everybody at the top is beneath you.

I would hope so.

Actually I do not like rhetoric.

It seems to love you.

I would prefer your making a substantive claim.

this:

That would explain your preference for head-games over any sort of civil or intelligent communication.

...was probably the most substantive claim in this thread. At the very least it's the one with the most readily available evidence.

I reckon so.

Quite exaggerating. You're reckoning is never better than so-so.

As I said review my posts.

Please stop sending me to look for something which isn't there.

Case reopened. Claims to speak for God and kill in his name is not equivalent to his height, his zodiac sign, or his nomadic status.

And yet another point goes soaring over 1Robin's head. There must be a whole flock up there by now.

It is a clam that if true is the best possible characteristic and if false a diabolical one that makes his goodness impossible.

Bull. This, again, is just an erroneous and self-serving standard that you came up with on the spur of the moment to try and cover up one of your mistakes.

I did not invent that standard

Yes you did.

logical coherence and moral rationality mandates it.

No: a desperate need to save face mandated it.

The best I could tell it is to yell at me.

When have I ever yelled at you?