Muhammad : Prophet Or Terrorist ?


#1

I think there’s a need for this thread since so many of us are ignorant of what truly is Islam and what it represents. Read the opening, then visit the website. Let us not continue in ignorance.

We apologize to anyone who may be offended by the history of the founder of Islam (Muhammad) below. And we are aware of the sensitivities involved. However, infinitely more damage has been done to Islam’s “believers” by Islam’s history of withholding the truth about its founder to them – - and the circumstances surrounding its inception – than any “damage” this true history below can cause.

As you will see below, Muhammad posed as an apostle of God. Yet his life is filled with lustfulness (12 marriages and sex with slaves and concubines), rapes, warfare, conquests, and unmerciful butcheries. The infinitely good, just and all holy God simply cannot tolerate anything in the least unjust or sinful. What Muhammad produced in the Qur’an is simply a book of gibberish consisting of later evil verses abrogating (superseding) earlier peaceful versus. These versus in Arabic poetically “tickle” the ears of Arab listeners.
This article is intended to warn Christians who may be “fooled” into Islam, because they did not have all the facts. The immortal souls of billions of individuals are involved here. To good Muslims I say; “I have sympathy with your having to grow up in a closed society – where not embracing Islam would have gotten you shunned or even killed”. According to many interpretations of the Qur’an (aka: Koran), conversion to a faith other than Islam is punishable by death.
The god of Muslims is revealed as a tyrant who demands Muslims submit to him. Whereas in the New Testament, Jesus revealed to Christians a God who is a loving Father, who wants us to come to Him via free will. In the Old Testament (Exodus 34:6) the real God revealed Himself as “merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth”.
When a Muslim declares that Islam is a religion of peace, he/she is either ignorant of the Koran (Qur’an), or is deceitfully thinking of this “peace”, as it extends only to those within the Muslim Community. The deceit is that they will not tell you exactly what they mean. According to the Qur’an: “Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah. Those who follow him are merciful to one another, but ruthless to unbelievers” Sura 48:29. “Kill the Mushrikun (unbelievers) wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush…” Sura 9:5. Also see Sura 9:29 Please note that there is not a single verse in the entire Christian Bible that contains this “open-ended”, universal command to kill/or be ruthless to unbelievers.

bibleprobe.com/muhammad.htm


#2

But it is - from its own POV; which is, however, not ours. I don’t see any deceit in this.

he/she is either ignorant of the Koran (Qur’an), or is deceitfully thinking of this “peace”, as it extends only to those within the Muslim Community. The deceit is that they will not tell you exactly what they mean. According to the Qur’an: “Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah. Those who follow him are merciful to one another, but ruthless to unbelievers” Sura 48:29. “Kill the Mushrikun (unbelievers) wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush…” Sura 9:5. Also see Sura 9:29 Please note that there is not a single verse in the entire Christian Bible that contains this “open-ended”, universal command to kill/or be ruthless to unbelievers.

bibleprobe.com/muhammad.htm

Neither :slight_smile: - the notion of terrorism is a modern one, which AFAICS can’t be applied to pre-modern types of society. It might be more accurate to describe his wars as a form of “holy war”, of the sort waged by the Israelites as described in the Book of Joshua.

The notion of exterminating unbelievers, however repellent to Christian feeling (now, anyway), is perfectly comprehensible, if one has certain assumptions about God & God’s Will. And in fairness to Mohammed (& Joshua), extermination was not always the order of the day.

Maybe the jihadi bombers are simply doing what would have been perfectly unremarkable 3000 years ago - we think of them as savages, & so on, because we do not live in a culture in which killing unbelievers is intelligible as a rational act: we have different assumptions.

BTW - I’m not defending these atrocities for one moment, but trying to make sense of them. We won’t be able to defend ourselves adequately, if we don’t make an effort to understand how they think. They are, after all, as human as we are - so it seems safe to assume they are not irrational; not that this makes what they do any more defensible: but if we adopt only our own POV, it’s not clear we will be able to understand why they do what they do. ##


#3

Crusaders liberate Nicea!
http://crusades.boisestate.edu/pics/CRUSADES/CrusadersAtNicaea.jpg
One less terrorist!


#4

Hi Gottle of Geer :wink:

I agree with you that it is not possible to consider Mohammed a “terrorist” in the modern sense of the word. He was not a terrorist for sure, but the things he himself had written and then attributed to Allah simply laid the foundation for the modern terrorists of Islam. He knocked down the barrier between devout faith and terrorism through a few verses in the Quran. Likewise, his fantasies about flying on a winged creature to Allah’s presence from Jerusalem instigated Muslims to hate Jews and perform jihad to conquer the Holy Land as well as giving Palestinians a political and religious reason to make Jerusalem their capital.

However, I also feel obliged to object to your analogies between Mohammed and a few prominent leaders in the Old Testament. I believe them to be false since none of those people had a long-term goal of making Judaism and the Torah dominant in the whole world! Jews believed that they were chosen by God, who saved them from slavery in order to make them into a powerful nation. This nation was destined to be different from all other peoples of the earth through faith in Abraham’s God. Mohammed, on the other hand, aimed to make Islam *the only religion *in the world by slaughtering idolaters and intimidating Jews and Christians.

Joshua and other leaders like David never claimed that going to battle was a God-given command valid for all generations until Judaism can conquer the world. Actually, Judaism obligated the separation of religious and administrative authority. For instance, David was the King while Abiathar was the high priest and Nathan the prophet. David was never considered a monarch manipulating all authority in Himself since He acknowledged His sins before Nathan the prophet. David was not both the King and the priest that received direct revelation from God!

Finally, Mohammed extended his jihads to Jews and Christians even though he had previously regarded them as the people of the Book through the former revelations before the Quran. Thus, he failed to distinguish Jews and Christians from pagans that did not worship Abraham’s God! Joshua and other judges never did such a thing! The people they killed to invade Canaan were basic idolaters unlike Jews and Christians in Mohammed’s period! :wink:

Peace & blessings to you


#5

i agree with you Angelos.


#6

Aha. BTW nice arabic. what is that meaning? I hope you didnt take it out from holy cran…:smiley:


#7

Mohammad could not be a prophet of God. His actions were not those of prophets or what they should be. In fact people like him and others are prophesized by Ezekiel so that we can recognize them for what they are - false prophets.

Eze 22:25"There is a conspiracy of her prophets in her midst like a roaring lion tearing the prey They have devoured lives; they have taken treasure and precious things; they have made many widows in the midst of her. … 27"Her princes within her are like wolves tearing the prey, by shedding blood and destroying lives in order to get dishonest gain.
28"Her prophets have smeared whitewash for them, seeing false visions and divining lies for them, saying, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD,’ when the LORD has not spoken.
29"The people of the land have practiced oppression and committed robbery, and they have wronged the poor and needy and have oppressed the sojourner without justice.

A mark of a true prophet is one who builds wall to connect the gap between man and God; in other word, a prophet of God is one who intercedes for the people; NOT exploiting them.

Eze 22:30"I searched for a man among them who would build up the wall and stand in the gap before Me for the land, so that I would not destroy it; but I found no one.

p/s been away for quite a while. Whatever happen to my past posts which I’m sure were >500 of them?


#8

The site was hacked, posts where lost, we must be doing something right.:slight_smile:


#9

Uhmm … not surprising they should resort to that. The agent of the prowling lion!


#10

One book that is on my “to-buy” list is The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World’s Most Intolerant Religion by Robert Spencer. I heard him on a number of shows the past couple of weeks (including Al Kresta) and it sound interesting. Spencer does not pull any punches. I have read The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to Islam (and the Crusades by him and found it very enlightening.


#11

I posted something similar on another thread…I think it was “What do they (Muslims) really want?”, so I think I’ll just kinda use some of the stuff I posted there…

I’m being careful with that site because I have seen another site that was Anti-Catholic, and this site is remarkably similar to it… I tried to keep emotion and bias out of my judgment when I read it…just incase it too twisted things…But what’s so great about the Koran is that it’s not written metaphorically like the Bible is, so you can’t really miss-interpret things!

I actually read a part of the Koran in a World History class. A lot of the things they say on that site is very true. Muhammad did tell his followers to kill non-believers if they didn’t convert, and he did have many wives, raped, etc. But a few of those “facts” are overblown… For one, do Muslim really “wail” when they see the Bible??? Sounds a bit farfetched… I agree with most of that site, and do think that Islam is a false religion, but this site could be partially pulling the wool over our eyes. Like I said, it is remarkably similar to remnantofgod.org/666-CHAR.htm#19… go to my thread about that if you really want to know.see how similar it is? Though, this site is actually more accurate and definatly not as twisting as the Anti-Catholic one… there is a lot of truth. Sometimes overblown truth, but still, basic truth… I once asked a Muslim friend about the whole killing non-believers thing… (I took a BIG risk) I said, “Would you kill me now since I refuse to convert?” He was a pretty big defender of Islam, especially that his sister was going against the family, now that she’s 18 and in college, and she’s converting to Christianity. (GO MARI!) Anyway, I was expecting to be killed there, but he just stared at me… Now I and another friend are purposly making him question Islam in hopes of making him convert as his sister did… (Gee, I can’t imagine why she would ever want to…:rolleyes: stupid face-coverings… ) Anyway, that’s my story of why Islam is controlling… no person with a brain would kill a friend who didn’t want to convert to a religion you yourself are questioning.

Oh, and you could and couldn’t call Muhammad a terrorist… You could, because he technically did raid Medina and kill a bunch of people so he could spread his belief, and that would probably make him a terrorist, but you couldn’t because that word is a modern term… but if Muhammad lived today, he would be called that…

p.s.— tell me if someone would like to know what the freakishly retarded reason for making women wear face coverings is. I’ll post it here…

p.p.s.— When were we hacked???


#12

Sorry to double post, but I must say this and it doesn’t fit in the other post…

My favorite comparison between Jesus and Muhammad:

**Jesus gave his disciples authority to drive out evil spirits and to heal every disease and sickness (Matthew 10:1; Mark 6:12-13)

~ ~ ~

Muhammad gave his followers the authority to wage war on unbelievers. **

:rotfl: :stuck_out_tongue: so funny and true…


#13

**

**

**## TY v. much :slight_smile: **

However - the only difference is in the extent of the spread of the religion. Joshua et all. slaughtered the inhabitants of one area only, because that area was what they believed God had given them. Muhammad had wider ambitions, presumably because he believed that was what he had been given to do by God. I don’t see any difference between Joshua & Mohammed, except in that. If Joshua had thought he should take on an even larger area, I can’t see why he would not have - & being killed in the name of Jehovah was presumably no less painful for the Canaanites, than being slaughtered in the name of Allah was for the opponents of Mohammed. If one believes one is serving a god by liquidating his enemies, it is not too important whether one is
[LIST]
*]**a Cathar being massacred by Crusaders **
*]**an Irishman being executed by Roundheads **
*]**a Syrian being killed to the greater glory of the gods of Assyria **
*]**an Arab being done to death by Muhammad **
*]**or a Canaanite being put to the sword by Israelites. **[/LIST]**Or - more recently - a Jew being massacred by Nazis or Communists. **

**I can’t see any moral difference between these - what they all have in common is the subjugation of human compassion to an amoral world-view which treats compassion to enemies as a sin or a failing. I find it especially worrying that if Hitler had lived in 1200 BC, we might be regarding his shenanigans as those of a great & saintly warrior of God: genocide & “holy war” differ only by perspective - both cause immense suffering. Joshua is essentially a Hitler living early enough not to be guilty of crimes against humanity; conversely, Hitler is a Joshua living 25 centuries too late. **

**It may seem odd to mention Hitler, but he’s theologically & ethically very interesting - a lot of Hitlerism fits snugly into Biblical ideas: such as the 1000-year Reich; & the genocide; which is little more than a mildly secularised fulfilment of Psalm 110 - Nazi Reich as Messianic Kingdom, in fact. That Psalm (like others) has plenty about breaking heads. **

…cont’d…]


#14

[cont’d & ended]

**That’s why I don’t agree with your argument from the separation of powers - for though that separation did happen, it was off-set by the notion of a Jewish (Solomonic ?) kingdom “from sea to sea” - & this vision of a world-wide kingdom, under a “political” Messiah of David’s line, is what Jesus rejected as a temptation of satan. He could have chosen to be a world-ruler in the place of Caesar, but not in essence different from him; instead, He chose the Cross. Which was far better. Hitler chose otherwise - so he got his Reich: on the devil’s terms. That is why Islam cannot last - it’s not built on the Cross, but denies it. Jesus refused a Solomonic empire - that sort of empire, even though its king is “son of God”, is founded on the breaking of heads. The Kingship of Jesus is established by breaking the head only of satan - not of men, Roman, Canaanite, Arab, or Jewish. ## **
**

Joshua and other leaders like David never claimed that going to battle was a God-given command valid for all generations until Judaism can conquer the world. Actually, Judaism obligated the separation of religious and administrative authority. For instance, David was the King while Abiathar was the high priest and Nathan the prophet. David was never considered a monarch manipulating all authority in Himself since He acknowledged His sins before Nathan the prophet. David was not both the King and the priest that received direct revelation from God!

**

Finally, Mohammed extended his jihads to Jews and Christians even though he had previously regarded them as the people of the Book through the former revelations before the Quran. Thus, he failed to distinguish Jews and Christians from pagans that did not worship Abraham’s God! Joshua and other judges never did such a thing! The people they killed to invade Canaan were basic idolaters unlike Jews and Christians in Mohammed’s period! :wink:

## They worshipped the god El - as did the Israelites. Things are complicated by the fact that the OT is largely an an attack upon the actual religion of Israel - as the OT itself reveals :slight_smile: Israel is different & distinctive - but not in a way that one can discern without faith in Israel’s God. ##

**

Peace & blessings to you

Vobiscumque :slight_smile: **


#15

Hi again,

But please remember that Jews did not preach the Torah to other nations - Gentiles - since they never aspired the compulsory unification of all religions under Judaism. What made them different was their belief! They were chosen! They believed and worshipped the God of Abraham, their father. More, the Torah never claimed that other nations had received the same kind of revelation and **the law **from one true God. Joshua or Elijah (He definitely killed many unbelievers) did not assert that the idols of the other nations were previously the true prophets sent to them by the same Creator. Thus, Joshua and other figures never based their wars on the distortion theory! Jehovah did not ask His worshippers to fight in His holy name until the whole world was converted to Judaism. In short, all those aspirations for a kingdom from one sea to another were basically political rather than theological!

In short, I still see many differences between Judaism and Islam, being able to discern Joshua from Mohammed bin Abdullah.

Blessings to you,
Angelos


#16

[quote=Lonely AngelSorry to double post, but I must say this and it doesn’t fit in the other post…
]**Jesus gave his disciples authority to drive out evil spirits and to heal every disease and sickness (Matthew 10:1; Mark 6:12-13)

~ ~ ~**

had Muhammad lived during the apostles’ time, they might have healed him from his bewitchment as he once admitted.
[/quote]


#17

November 28, 1095 Urban II authorized our ancestors to go on the First Crusade against the Muslims.
WP

First Crusade
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The First Crusade was launched in 1095 by Pope Urban II with the stated goals of aiding the Eastern Christians against the Turks or of capturing the sacred city of Jerusalem and the Holy Land from Muslims (varying by source). What started as an appeal to the French knightly class quickly turned into a wholesale migration and conquest of territory outside of Europe. Both knights and peasants from many nations of Western Europe, with little central leadership, travelled over land and by sea towards Jerusalem and captured the city in July 1099, establishing the Kingdom of Jerusalem and other Crusader states. Although these gains lasted for fewer than two hundred years, the First Crusade was a major turning point in the expansion of Western power, and was the only crusade to capture Jerusalem.


#18

In fairness we shouldn’t be comparing Popes with Muhammad. We should be comparing Jesus with Muhammad, and Popes with Caliphs.

Let us find out whether Christianity, which in its essence, is the teachings of Jesus (not some pope - which changes every few years) advocates violence and terror as opposed to Islam, which in its essence, is the teachings of Muhammad.


#19

As has been stated earlier Muhammed’s era of time keeps him from being a terrorist. He was a conqueror. One may lament the repurcussions of his expansionism but in the end he gained power, land and influence by means that were basically accepted in the ancient world. He took it.

If it weren’t for the religious claims of Muhammed he would be viewed today as another warlord of history. The problem that is created when religion is used as a justification for expansion is that ironically one losses basic honesty. When the Isrealites entered Cana they were not going to convert or “save souls” they were going to build a home. One may not think it right but it was the way things were done.

Now the Isrealites believed that God had given them that land so they felt justified. Similarly the crusaders went too the Holy Land to protect the interests of Christendom. They really didn’t go there to make converts. They wanted too break this new military power. They too thought that God favored them and therefore approved of the move. In these two scenarios we can see that the Isrealites and Crusaders justified their actions.

Where Muhammed becomes complicated is that he and his successors did want to convert those they defeated. This added a new dynamic to the typical justifications. Now any and all means of conversion could technically be acceptable since souls would be saved in the end. This outlook removed the natural boundaries and questions one has when they justify their actions.

So it is possible that the some Muslims can honestly look at some of the modern day acts of violence as loving in a way. If our soceity falls then theirs will be there to pick us up and show us the truth. It is the same as when certain religious groups come knocking on your door to convert you. From their standpoint everyone but them is damned but they try to convert us because they don’t want to see that.

All that being said we need to look toward what is happening today. The justifications that worked in days past does not work as well today. Everyone has to be able to veiw themselves critically. What bothers me out of the land of Islam today is not directly violence. What bothers me is the lack of self perspective.


#20

How about this comparison - while Muhammad gave his followers the authority to wage war on unbelievers.

Jesus had this to say:

Luke23:32 Two other men, both criminals, were also led out with him to be executed. 33When they came to the place called the Skull, there they crucified him, along with the criminals—one on his right, the other on his left. 34Jesus said,** “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”** And they divided up his clothes by casting lots.
Abraham interceded for the sinful people of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Moses pleaded for the disobedient people of Israel.

And Mohammad made war on unbelievers! Some prophet indeed.:eek:


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.