Mohammad - a perspective

reply to post by sk0rpi0n

1. If you believe Mohammad was a false prophet, then why did God allow him success and thereby letting Islam emerge in the middle east?

Christianity and Islam are perfectly polarized against each other.

Christian Persona = Islamic Persona

Jesus = Dajjal
False Prophet = Isa
Anti-Christ = Imam Mahdi

- Muslims will say, "Here is Isa, the second coming of the Messiah!"
- Christians will respond, "That is not the messiah! That is the false prophet!"

- Christians will say, "Look, here is Jesus in his second coming!"
- Muslims will reply, "You fools! That is the Dajjal!"

- Muslims will say, "Here is Imam Mahdi. He is here to reclaim the caliphate, reestablish the Islamic Empire, and rule the world under Shariah."
- Christians will cry out, "No!!! He is the Antichrist here to establish the One World Government!"




A great compilation of related information and sources:
ATS Thread by AshleyD:
Correlations Between the Antichrist and the Islamic Mahdi

reply to post by racasan

Originally posted by racasan
QUR’AN 55:70-77 mentions Houris – (where we get the word whore) all laying around on green cushions

That is a false etymology of whore. Houri comes from arabic "howr 'in", which basically just means "white eyed". The hebrew cognate is similar as well "h-w-r a'-y-n" meaning the same thing. Nothing about being virgins, or having large breasts, or firm or whatever. The term is even gender neutral- there is no specification on it being male or female. "Whore" comes from a proto-indo-european root, not semitic, "karo" meaning "dear". They are not related.

The Hadith which mention the number 72 are understood to be weak, even by the authors. If you check them in the book, you will see that they are marked "Da'if" in Sunan Abu Maja, and are not included in the collected category that Tirmidhi classified as "authentic".

Originally posted by babloyi
"To quote the Quran"? Sorry, no. There is no basis for "72 virgins" anywhere in the Quran.

Please read things properly before replying.

I stated that the 72 virgins were motioned in the Hadith, not the Koran.

Authenticity of 72 Virgins Hadith

You reply to things inaccurately a lot. I don't know whether it is intentional.

Originally posted by babloyi
Nothing about big or firm or round or swelling or sagging

Any yet here in the Koran are the reference to breasts to be enjoyed by the righteous in paradise that you are unaware of

إِنَّ لِلْمُتَّقِينَ مَفَازًا Koran 78:31
Indeed, for the righteous is attainment -
حَدَائِقَ وَأَعْنَابًا Koran 78:32
Gardens and grapevines
وَكَوَاعِبَ أَتْرَابًا 78:34
And full-breasted [companions] of equal age
Islam True Call

Don't forget to contact the site run by Muslims and tell them that the Sahih International translation of the Koran is wrong.

You being such an expert after all.

Originally posted by ollncasino

"I was ordered to fight all men until they say 'There is no god but Allah."
Muhammad

Originally posted by babloyi
There is no such quote anywhere in the farewell address. In fact, the way you have phrased it, there is no such quote anywhere at all (except perhaps in the minds of anti-islamists).

The source of that quote is an Arab military historian, Muhammad ibn Umar al-Waqidi, who wrote Kitab al-Maghazi (London, UK: Oxford University Press, Vol. 3, 1966, p. 1113).

Al-Waqidi (born 747, Medina, died 823, Baghdad), was Arab historian, author of the Kitāb al-maghāzī, a well-known work on the military campaigns (al-maghāzī) of the Prophet Muhammad.

l-Wāqidī is said to have written about 21 books, largely historical, including histories of the cities of Mecca and Medina. Some works also dealt with the Qurʾān (Islamic sacred scripture), fiqh (jurisprudence), and Ḥadīth (tradition).

Only the Kitāb al-maghāzī, a monumental chronology, survives.

A similar quote exists in Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, number 24, which is a sacred Hadith to Sunni Muslims who make up about 85% of Muslims worldwide

Allah's Apostle said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform a that, then they save their lives an property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah."

Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 2:

For a man who fancies himself an expert on Islamic writing, you appear ignorant of the Sahih Bukhari, a text which is one of the six canonical hadith collections (Al-Kutub Al-Sittah) of Sunni Islam.

Are you really ignorant or do you just hope that non-Muslims are?

reply to post by ollncasino

Originally posted by ollncasino
Please read things properly before replying.

I stated that the 72 virgins were motioned in the Hadith, not the Koran.

I dunno. It is perhaps possible you are suffering from split personality disorder? Or maybe someone else hijacked your account?

Originally posted by ollncasino
So Muslims who die in jihad can look forward to 72 virgins with big, firm, round “swelling breasts” that are not inclined to sagging (to quote the Koran).

But I suppose it is me who replies to things inaccurately?


When have I ever recommended the Sahih International version of the Quran? It is based off the Hilali-Khan translation, which has been criticised even by muslims. Why would you use it? Simply because it includes extra things inserted in parenthesis that anti-islamists find useful?
You quoted it yourself. The text says "وَكَوَاعِبَ أَتْرَابًا". There is nothing about breasts anywhere in that text. Type in "breasts" into google translate and set it to arabic, and you can see. You'd get "ثدي" or "نهد". None of these words are in that text. That text could be translated as "and splendid companions".

If someone looked up that passage, more likely than not, they'd get the website with the translation from Yusuf Ali, Pickthall and Shakir, none of which mention breasts. Or they'd get the translation from Muhammad Asad, which again, makes no mention of breasts. I suppose if they want to look hard enough to find something wrong, they can get odder translations, sure.

As for your second reply, the Farewell sermon of Muhammad is VERY well documented. Here are two examples:
www.islamreligion.com...
www.islamicity.com...

There is a reason that the maghazi literature never made it into scripture. It wasn't written with verifiability and authenticity in mind. Since I do not have that volume with me, I cannot check or verify the authenticity of your cliam, but such a saying of Muhammad does exist, but certainly not in the form you presented it. He never said that he was brought to fight "all people". It refers to fighting people who were waging war against Muhammad and Islam.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by ollncasino

 

Ok, let me repeat the OPs questions one more time.

1. If you believe Mohammad was a false prophet, then why did God allow him success and thereby letting Islam emerge in the middle east?

2. If christianity is the true path, then why didn't God allow for christianity to prevail in the middle east, instead of having Mohammad show up and spread Islam, which you see as a false religion.

3. If you believe muslims will never be saved unless they accept christianity, then doesn't it mean that God made it difficult for muslims to be saved? Because as you know, muslims are rather strict about religion and will not simply "accept Jesus as lord" just because they read it in a tract. So, why did God put muslims in a difficult situaton?

Well?

Well, the Bible says that the Jews would be persecuted until His Second Coming, so what better way to persecute them than though the Muslims and Arabs, who don't believe Jesus is God either?

What we do know is that Jesus' lineage comes from Abraham's son Isaac. Isaac had Jacob and the twelve tribes of Israel were born.

Now we have Muhammad's lineage which comes from Abraham's son Ishmael. Ishmael had 12 sons that went on to create twelve Arab tribes and eventually we have Muhammad who created the Islamic religion, which tells Muslims to dispel the Jews from the Middle East. Coincidence? I think not.

Sounds like God plans for both sides to war with each other until they both wake up, but both sides had to be successful to build up their armies against one another.

Originally posted by babloyi
When have I ever recommended the Sahih International version of the Quran? It is based off the Hilali-Khan translation, which has been criticised even by muslims. Why would you use it? Simply because it includes extra things inserted in parenthesis that anti-islamists find useful?

Yet The Holy Qur'an (1997) by Saheeh International is based on the Hilali-Khan translation. It is published by the Dar Abul Qasim Publishing House, Saudi Arabia.

Those silly Saudi Arabians. They should have asked you to translate the Koran for them.

Muhammad said:

"I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle"

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, number 24

Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 2:

Sahih Bukhari is a sacred Hadith to Sunni Muslims who make up about 85% of Muslims worldwide

Originally posted by babloyi
Nothing about being virgins, or having large breasts, or firm or whatever.

78:33
وَكَوَاعِبَ أَتْرَابًا
And full-breasted [companions] of equal age

78: 33 Companions of equal age

Arabic: Kawa’eba atraba

In this Surat, the Quran describes the pleasures to be expected in paradise with its gardens, grapes, drinks and women. In the above verse, the Quran describes to the Muslims (men of course) the kind of women they might expect to enjoy.

The Arabic word ‘Kawa’eba’ means young virgin women whose breasts are firm and well shaped, as opposed to the sagging breasts of older women.

The word ‘atraba’ means ‘of equal age’. Therefore an appropriate translation would be: ‘Young women whose breasts are firm and well shaped and all of equal age’.

www.islam-watch.org...

verses 78:33 are from the Koran...

It looks like your knowledge of the Koran has let you down again. By the way, I clearly stated that the '72' came from Hadith.

To quote myself:-

It even describes their physical attributes—large eyes (Q 56:22) and big, firm, round “swelling breasts” that are not inclined to sagging (Q 78:33). Hadith 2687 is where the number 72 is mentioned.

It looks like you are mistaken again.

Allah's Apostle said:

"I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle"

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, number 24,
Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 2:

reply to post by ollncasino

Originally posted by ollncasino
Yet The Holy Qur'an (1997) by Saheeh International is based on the Hilali-Khan translation. It is published by the Dar Abul Qasim Publishing House, Saudi Arabia.

Those silly Saudi Arabians. They should have asked you to translate the Koran for them.

They're Saudi Arabians. So what? Does that suddenly make them the ruling authority on Islam? You talk as if I'm making up things as I go along. The Hilali-Khan translation is certainly not one of the more accepted translations. Even the wiki page on it had to have a section labelled "Controversy", including some muslims who disagreed with it.

Originally posted by ollncasino

Muhammad said:

"I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle"

Yes, thank you for repeating what I just said in my previous post. Now if you don't mind, why don't you compare what you quoted here vs what you initially quoted, and tell me the difference?

As I said (and because it seems you missed it, I'll say again), there is no mention of "all people". This hadith was referring to people who were at war against Muhammad and Islam.

Originally posted by ollncasino
Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 2

Sahih Bukhari is a sacred Hadith to Sunni Muslims who make up about 85% of Muslims worldwide

Are you telling me? You think I don't already know what Sahih Bukhari is? No offense, olln, but I sometimes wonder if you employ a machine to do your posting for you. You repeat, again and again, the same stock phrases, perhaps in an attempt to guile the reader into some sort of "since it has been said so many times, it must be true" thought process.

It is not really pertinent to the topic, but yes, Sahih Bukhari as a book of hadith (not "A Hadith") is generally accepted by most muslims (excluding perhaps those who do not accept Hadith in general), not just sunnis. I am not quite sure what you mean by "sacred". It is certainly not the Quran. Muslims would agree that the Quran is sacred. The Sahih Bukhari is a collection of sayings of the Prophet Muhammad along with the chain of narrators who claimed he said these things. However, just because a hadith is in the Sahih Bukhari, doesn't automatically make it authentic.

Originally posted by ollncasino
78:33
وَكَوَاعِبَ أَتْرَابًا
And full-breasted [companions] of equal age

...

verses 78:33 are from the Koran...

It looks like your knowledge of the Koran has let you down again.

It looks like you are attempting to again repeat a conversation that was already concluded. Perhaps you didn't read? Yes, verses 78:33 ARE from the Quran. "full-breasted" is not. It isn't that hard to understand. But I suppose if you pick your translations up from a website called "islam-watch.com", you can't expect anything better.

Originally posted by ollncasino
By the way, I clearly stated that the '72' came from Hadith.

By the way, you did the exact opposite of clearly stating anything, and you seem to be trying to jump through hoops to deny this now. Do I need to hold your hand through all of this?

You said:

Originally posted by ollncasino
The 72 Virgins notion has its origins in the Qur’an. (Said by YOU)

...(External quote from IslamQuotes. NOT said by you, but it verifies that the 72 virgins theory has nothing to do with the Quran)...

So Muslims who die in jihad can look forward to 72 virgins with big, firm, round “swelling breasts” that are not inclined to sagging (to quote the Koran). (Said by YOU again)

Then I replied:

Originally posted by babloyi
"To quote the Quran"? Sorry, no. There is no basis for "72 virgins" anywhere in the Quran. Nothing about big or firm or round or swelling or sagging.

If you made an editing mistake, fine. But why deny it?

Originally posted by babloyi

They're Saudi Arabians. So what? Does that suddenly make them the ruling authority on Islam?

More of an authority of what is a good translation of the Koran than you. That is for sure.

Originally posted by babloyi

It is not really pertinent to the topic, but yes, Sahih Bukhari as a book of hadith (not "A Hadith") is generally accepted by most muslims (excluding perhaps those who do not accept Hadith in general), not just sunnis.

Sahih Bukhari is one of the six canonical hadith collections (Al-Kutub Al-Sittah) of Sunni Islam which makes up 85% of Muslims worldwide.

You objected to

"I was ordered to fight all men until they say 'There is no god but Allah." Prophet Muhammad's farewell address, March 632

Islamic Imperialism: A History by Efraim Karsh

yalepress.yale.edu...

Yet Sahih Bukhari states

Allah's Apostle said:

"I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle."

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, number 24

So the Sahih Bukhari is very pertinent.

reply to post by babloyi


Ah thanks for the info about the whore thing


But I am still interested in who are these pearly boys and Houris?

And just out of interest - how many do you think there are?

reply to post by ollncasino

Originally posted by ollncasino
More of an authority of what is a good translation of the Koran than you. That is for sure.

You mean me AND the scores of muslims who disagree with those translations? No, they are not.

I am glad you posted the two quotes side-by-side. Disregarding what I said about the hadith (which if I repeated, it would be for the 3rd time, but you seem to be ignoring them), why don't you read the two and figure out what a fundamental difference wording makes?

reply to post by racasan

No problem, racasan. These "immortal youth" are probably not human, as are not the houri (and these two are very likely the same thing): There are some descriptions of them that they will be so translucent, that their marrow would be visible. I have no idea how many of them there could be.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
I'm looking at the arrival of Mohammad and Islam from a historical perspective. Why God allowed Islam to emerge is extremely relevant to christians.

Part of the reason Muhammad's jihads were so successful was that the plundered booty was distributed between the conquering Muslims. It was quite an incentive as Arabs traditionally like to raid others.

Muhammad thought very highly of jihad.

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah's Apostle was asked, "What is the best deed?"

He replied, "To believe in Allah and His Apostle (Muhammad). T

he questioner then asked, "What is the next (in goodness)? He replied,

"To participate in Jihad (religious fighting) in Allah's Cause."

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, number 25

Sahih Bukhari is one of the six canonical Hadith collections (Al-Kutub Al-Sittah) of Sunni Islam who make up about 85% of Muslims worldwide.

What is clear is that the Hadith paints Muhammad as a man who encouraged jihad. In what sense is Islam a religion of peace if the founder of Islam was a Jihadist?

Originally posted by babloyi
I am glad you posted the two quotes side-by-side. Disregarding what I said about the hadith (which if I repeated, it would be for the 3rd time, but you seem to be ignoring them), why don't you read the two and figure out what a fundamental difference wording makes?

Why don't you tell me? Try proving it with links to either the Koran or Hadith.

"I was ordered to fight all men until they say 'There is no god but Allah."

Prophet Muhammad's farewell address, March 632

Source: Arab military historian, Muhammad ibn Umar al-Waqidi (747-823)
'Kitab al-Maghazi' (London, UK: Oxford University Press, Vol. 3, 1966, p. 1113).

reply to post by ollncasino

Ah...I see you switched back to the inaccurate translation, falsely attributed to the Farewell Sermon. I suppose it DOES serve your purposes better.

What do I need links for? Do people now need "links" to be able to read and comprehend text? Surely you understand the difference between "ALL men/people" and "THE people"?

Originally posted by babloyi
What do I need links for? Do people now need "links" to be able to read and comprehend text?

It isn't unreasonable to request that you prove your assertions by reference to the Koran and Hadiths.

That is what were are arguing about after all.

You claimed that "the people" who were to be forced to be Muslims by Muhammad by the sword only referred to people Muhammad was at war with (as if that makes much of a difference). Yet you provide no evidence of that claim.

Would I be correct in stating that you cannot prove your assertions by reference to the Koran and Hadith?

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n

If you believe Mohammad was a false prophet, then why did God allow him success and thereby letting Islam emerge in the middle east?

Why does God do anything that He does? No one understands the mind of God. His ways are not our ways. Why did God allow 'the chosen people' to spend 400 years in bondage in Egypt? Why did He allow other captivities of them? Why did He allow all the martyrs through the ages to suffer so much? Why does he allow Charlie Sheen to have all that money and a healthy body to abuse and yet innocent children to get cancer and die painful early deaths? Why why why?

Just because it's there, doesn't mean it has any truth within it.

Muhammad was a thief and a murderer. this is well documented.
I do not believe his so-called visions happened. Not for a minute.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Muhammad was a thief and a murderer. this is well documented.
I do not believe his so-called visions happened. Not for a minute.

And a slaver and murderer of POWs.

Koran

33:26 And those of the People of the Book who aided them - Allah did take them down from their strongholds and cast terror into their hearts. (So that) some ye slew, and some ye made prisoners.

33:27 And He made you heirs of their lands, their houses, and their goods, and of a land which ye had not frequented (before). And Allah has power over all things.

www.muslimaccess.com...

A much more comprehensive explanation is that of Ibn Ishaq.

Ibn Ishaq was a devout Muslim historian and was the author of the first biography about Muhammad - Sirat Rasul Allah - "Life of God's Messenger" in 768 AD. He provided details about the episode mentioned in sura 33:26 & 33:27.

www.archive.org...

From page 84 & 85 of Ibn Ishaq's biography about Muhammad

"The apostle of Allah imprisoned the Qurayza in Medina while trenches were dug in the market-place. Then he sent for the men and had their heads struck off so that they fell in the trenches. They were brought out in groups, and among them was Kab, the chief of the tribe. In number, they amounted to six or seven hundred, although some state it to have been eight or nine hundred. All were executed. One man turned to his people and said, 'It matters not! By God's will, the children of Israel were destined for this massacre!’ Then he seated himself and his head was struck off...

...Now the apostle distributed the property of the Banu Qurayza, as well as their women and children, to the Muslims, reserving one-fifth for himself. Every horseman received three shares, one for himself and two for his steed, and every foot soldier one share. There were thirty-six horses present on the day of the Qurayza. The apostle dispatched an emissary to Najd with the prisoners, to barter them as slaves in exchange for horses and camels. The apostle of Allah selected one of the Jewish women, Rayhana, for himself, and she remained with him as his slave until she died. He had suggested marriage to her, that she should wear the veil (to separate her from all other persons, as his wives did), but she replied, 'Rather allow me to remain thy slave; it will be more easy for me, and for thee.'"

reply to post by ollncasino

They weren't forced to be muslims. They were making war against Muhammad and Islam, and Muhammad said he was instructed to fight against them. If they became muslims (as Muhammad predicted they would), then the fighting would stop.

I don't have any link, as much of the Hadith literature is unfortunately not available online in english, but if you are able, look up Ibn Taymiyah's "Majmu-al-Fatawa". It says:

#19
It refers to combating those who are waging war, whom God has permitted us to fight, not to those who have a covenant with us

If you want links, look up in the Quran all the exhortations to fight THOSE WHO FIGHT YOU.

reply to post by babloyi

Ok so I assume that in Islam death works like it does in Christianity in that the body dies and then the soul floats up to heaven (or some variation on that theme)

But sex and eating and drinking (and whatever you do to the pearly boys!) are a function of the being alive in a body with glands and other bits – so what’s a disembodied soul going to do with all that stuff?

And since you don’t know how many of them you get then it could very well be that you get 72 – right?