Interpretation

Submitted by B. Williame (Belgium), Apr 23, 2008 at 03:14

Samer Sukhun,

It is your just right to believe in whatever Mohammed said. But I question something else about that.

As Mohammed(as I read on this forum mutliple times) was Illiterate, the words you have read where written by others and not Mohammed. So who ever wrote what you think he said, isn't neccesarelly trustworthy as I think you consider only your profet and Allah to be perfect.

Perhaps true that there was a not a single drop of blood shedded. He destabilized he's country for an army that wasn't at Tabuk waiting for him. As I also read they didn't seek the Roman army as they needed to return for their harvesting and the army was practically exhausted.

Don't know if that was a great victory against a ghost army... But I do hope there was a roman army, else it was a waste. So I do believe Muslims had to believe even for the justification back home that there was one.

Nevertheless this was informative for me as I never before heard about this battle and now I do. I also do hope I made you consider the fact that what ever words you read that where alleged to be said by Mohammed where written and passed down generations by lesser men and therefore gives no guarantee of its correctness. Same with the NT in the Bible. It mainly (if not only) consists of writings of 4 of the 12 apostles of Jesus. Why only 4 and not 12? Still there is no doubt that he existed and that his path was a peaceful one.

Regards

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".