Nozzi: Get real. Michael Hart lived in the 20th century. How could he KNOW that Allah spoke to Muhammad?

Submitted by Plato (India), Apr 29, 2009 at 07:05

Nozzi you wrote,

>>The above are the extracts purely from the histroy of Prophet Muhammad and I did not alter any sentence by any means. From the above statement, we know that Allah spoke to him when he was 40 years old.<<

How on earth did you come to the conclusion that Michael Hart is saying that Allah spoke to Muhammad? Hart only states that Muhammad was convinced that God was speaking to him. ("When he was forty years old, Muhammad became convinced that this one true God (Allah) was speaking to him,.." )

What Michael Hart tells you is that he personally considers Muhammad to be the most influential person in history. Nowhere does he claim that Allah spoke to him. How on earth would a twentieth century person know that he did. Even Muhammad's followers did not know this fact except for his claim that Allah was speaking to him through Gabriel. You are like other Muslims who proudly quote this scientist thinking that what he says proves Muhammad's claims to be God' messenger. Go back and study carefully what Hart has written. You will find that among the people in whose company Muhammad appears include the likes of Genghis Khan, Stalin, Adolf Hitler, and Queen Isabella. For three years, preached only to close friends & associates. Then about 613, he began preaching in the public.

>> As we know Allah Spoke to Muhammad at the age of 40 years old and he did not slaughter any pagans despite the pagans that surrounded him prayed to many gods.<<

Neither you nor we know Allah spoke to Muhammad. It is only a belief of Muslims that Allah via Gabriel spoke to Muhammad. Muhammad did not give a shred of proof for his claim, nor can you. He could not slaughter the pagans around him because he was powerless and he had only a handful of followers. But has soon as he got the power and the opportunity in Medina he went freely slaughtered innocent people like traders carrying on their business peacefully. I hope you are aware of the number of caravans he looted and many people he got assassinated for criticizing him.

>>He spent three years in preaching only to his close friends & associates and yet he did not slaughter those pagans that were not friends & assoicates. For instance, if Allah demanded Prophet Muhammad to slaughter the pagans, he would certainly commenced his fight with pagans immediately instead of leaving the pagans behind and preached only to his close friends and assoicates.<<

Nozzi, you seem clueless. Ask your Islamic scholar how many followers he had in Mecca after three years or even after ten years. How could have fought a whole lot of pagans with his rag-tag following? That he had every intention of killing many was made known when he shouted "I bring you slaughter" at some Meccans who were teasing him (Read Ibn Ishaaq and be enlightened about your prophet, Nozzi).

>>He only began to preach to the public in 613 and that means he did not slaugther pagans before 613.<<

So you admit Muhammd started slaughtering pagans after 613. This is the person you consider an example for all mankind? It is mentioned from the statement that about 613, he began preaching in public. As he slowly gained converts, the mecan came to consider him as dangerous nuissance. The phrase, he slowly gained converts, in the statement implies he did not get converts immediately. Instead, it takes some time for him to get converts. As he took some time to get converts, it implies that he did not force pagans to be converted immediately and he was willing to wait for the pagans to become converts. The latter part of the phrase, the mecan became to consider him as dangerous nuissance, implies that Prophet Muhammad did not slaughter mecan immediately even though he took time to gain slowly converts.

>>For instance, if Allah demanded Prophet Muhammad to be cruel to slaughter pagans as long as he saw them, he should have gather his friends and associate to trigger off the war against the pagan prior to year 613.<<

Even Allah thought that Muslims have the strength of two pagans: 008.065 , 86 YUSUFALI: O Prophet! rouse the Believers to the fight. If there are twenty amongst you, patient and persevering, they will vanquish two hundred: if a hundred, they will vanquish a thousand of the Unbelievers: for these are a people without understanding. In Mecca the Prophet was outnumbered perhaps more than a hundred to one. Even Allah could not have helped him to slaughter the pagans.

>>As mentioned that he slowly gained converts, it implies that Prophet Muhammad was willing to wait for pagans to repent to become muslims.<<

Muhammad waited 13 years and had less than a 100 converts. In frustration he went to Medina gathered a bunch of armed desperados from among the Ansars and Muhajir and started his career of caravan raids the distribution of this ill-gotten wealth got him more followers and so began his meteoric rise as a conqueror.

>>From the above explanaltion, it seems that what is taught in muslim extremists is entirely different from what was practised by Prophet Muhammad.<<

If you read the Sira of the Prophet you will realize that the extremists are following faithfully in the footsteps of the Prophet.

>>For Prophet Muhammad is merciful since he was willing to wait for pagans to repent and that was why there was slow converts. Prophet Muhammad did not slaughter pagans prior to year 613 and it proves that Prophet Muhammad was not cruel as what muslim extremists believe. Thus, to see the word, fight, in the Holy Quran and to be interpreted as physical violence is not prudence.<<

You do seem to accept that Muhammad started slaughtering pagans after 613 (which in fact he did). Muhammad's cruelty towards unbelievers starts after 613 when he has a gang of armed men under his command. How does being cruel after 613 make Muhammad a merciful human???? Prophet Muhammad began his preaching from friends and associates prior to year 613 and after that, preaching public. Here you see the spiritual battle in which Prophet Muhammad slowing convinced his friends and associates and later expanded to the public. He won the spiritual battle in the sense that his preaching has slowed won the hearts of his friends and associates and the next, to the public.

>>Now, you should know that Prophet Muhammad was not cruel and he did not fight with pagans. <<

Muhammad after the year 613 did start to slaughter pagan and Jews sometimes in a most cruel manner (the Banu Quraiza for instance). How does waiting to gather strength before behaving cruelly towards his opponents make Muhmmad a merciful prophet?

>>It was in the year 613, the mecan came to consider him a dangerous nuissance.<<

Muhammad proved to be a dangerous nuisance because he insulted and abused the holy idols of the Meccans and wanted more Meccans to join him in rebelling against the established order. If you started abusing the religion of the Singaporean Chinese you live with would they tolerate you?

>>When this mecan came to consider him a dangerous nuissance, they certainly should be the first that decided to fight against them.<<

History will never forgive the Meccan pagans for not having fought and put an end Muhammad's abuse of their gods. If they had millions would not be suffering to this day in the name of Islam.

>>Why should this mecan come to consider him a dangerous nuissance? They were indeed the fool and unpardonable that set their hearts against Prophet Muhammad.<<

Nozzi, you are right, the Meccans were indeed the fools for not having put and end Muhammad's preaching before it threatened their very existence. What would the Meccans of today do to a preacher who said they should not bow down and kiss the lifeless stone in the Kaba??

Nozzi I suggest you use your Allah-given brain to compare and contrast Islam with other religions and evaluate it according to accepted ethical principles and investigate, if not research, Islamic history

Regards Plato

---

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".