The Prophet walked along a particular street every day on his way to conducting his affairs. From one of the windows, a woman who was angry at him for preaching the message of one God, would throw rubbish at him. Each day he would walk past, and each day she would throw her fetid refuse at him. One day, as he is walking past, there is no rubbish thrown at him.
He is concerned and so he enquires after the whereabouts of the woman. When he is advised that she is unwell, he goes to visit her to see the state of her health. She is shocked when he arrives, knowing full well the extent of her abuse. His kindness and patience in dealing with her cruelty wins her over, and she accepts the message that the Prophet has been preaching.
A tyrant can be defined as "a ruler who has unlimited power over other people, and uses it unfairly and cruelly". Does he fit that definition, I don't think so.
(I sense some pig quoting me. I sense this pig will use his or her primitive knowledge of Islam to ridicule Muhammad (peace be upon him))
and by the way, the person that wrote all that has got all their sources a bit messed up which is why theyve written a load of bob. he NEVER forced anyone into marriage and condemned it form happening...he said so himself that a woman must be asked thrice about if shes willing to go ahead with a marriage ceremony...and he didnt torture anyone coz he said "treat others in the way u want to be treated" and "hurting someones feelings is like breaking down the house of God"...
those dont sound like the words of a violent man do they?
this stuff is really only going to provoke people... i mean, these things can't be proved or disproved, religion's all about faith... and it's hardly likely that someone would be called a prophet/religous figure etc. if they were rapists etc. whether it be today or hundreds of years ago.
Don't quote me on this but, all I know is that the prophet married the 9 year old girl for humanitarian reasons. Basically he married her to keep the peace of the land.
this stuff is really only going to provoke people... i mean, these things can't be proved or disproved, religion's all about faith... and it's hardly likely that someone would be called a prophet/religous figure etc. if they were rapists etc. whether it be today or hundreds of years ago.
and by the way, the person that wrote all that has got all their sources a bit messed up which is why theyve written a load of bob. he NEVER forced anyone into marriage and condemned it form happening...he said so himself that a woman must be asked thrice about if shes willing to go ahead with a marriage ceremony...and he didnt torture anyone coz he said "treat others in the way u want to be treated" and "hurting someones feelings is like breaking down the house of God"...
those dont sound like the words of a violent man do they?
Originally Posted by The-Serial-Kisser
The Prophet walked along a particular street every day on his way to conducting his affairs. From one of the windows, a woman who was angry at him for preaching the message of one God, would throw rubbish at him. Each day he would walk past, and each day she would throw her fetid refuse at him. One day, as he is walking past, there is no rubbish thrown at him.
He is concerned and so he enquires after the whereabouts of the woman. When he is advised that she is unwell, he goes to visit her to see the state of her health. She is shocked when he arrives, knowing full well the extent of her abuse. His kindness and patience in dealing with her cruelty wins her over, and she accepts the message that the Prophet has been preaching.
A tyrant can be defined as "a ruler who has unlimited power over other people, and uses it unfairly and cruelly". Does he fit that definition, I don't think so.
(I sense some pig quoting me. I sense this pig will use his or her primitive knowledge of Islam to ridicule Muhammad (peace be upon him))
Let me clarify something for both of you:
To disprove something means to attack the ORIGINAL claim, not present a completely new argument which only serves as a tangent to the main argument.
It does make you question the followers of Islam when they know that their prophet (apparently) had sexual relations with a 9 year old girl, and still defend their religion to the hills.
Why do you think that the kuffar in that day and age didn't say anything about the very high-profile marriage to Aisha? Surely this was a fantastic opportunity to discredit someone who's claiming to be a Prophet don't you agree? I mean, they've practically accused Muhammad of everything under the sun, this is a historical fact, and yet if you study the seerah you will not find a single remark about this marriage to a nine year old by the icons of kufr. Qaiser and the King of Persia also knew of the marriage, did they say anything, if not, why? I'm intrigued you know.
Last edited by slawaccess23 : 16-10-2009 at 20:35.
Why do you think that the kuffar in that day and age didn't say anything about the very high-profile marriage to Aisha? Surely this was a fantastic opportunity to discredit someone who's claiming to be a Prophet don't you agree? I mean, they've practically accused Muhammad of everything under the sun, this is a historical fact, and yet if you study the seerah you will not find a single remark about this marriage to a nine year old by the icons of kufr. Ceasar and the King of Persia also knew of the marriage, did they say anything, if not, why? I'm intrigued you know.
Why do you think that the kuffar in that day and age didn't say anything about the very high-profile marriage to Aisha? Surely this was a fantastic opportunity to discredit someone who's claiming to be a Prophet don't you agree? I mean, they've practically accused Muhammad of everything under the sun, this is a historical fact, and yet if you study the seerah you will not find a single remark about this marriage to a nine year old by the icons of kufr. Ceasar and the King of Persia also knew of the marriage, did they say anything, if not, why? I'm intrigued you know.
Are you telling me to debate with someone who is deaf, dumb and blind? Who does not posses any sense faculties to understand, comprehend and contemplate? Whose heart is the likeness of a pitch black deep hole where light cannot even reach there?
It is nothing personal and the Qur'an description of such rebellious wrong-doer are quite befitting for you. I'm afraid. Take it a learning point and maybe it will not apply to you in future, if you will understand.
This is your shortcoming and soon you shall know the truth.
Originally Posted by slawaccess23
Qaiser (Byzantinian Emperor) knew about the Prophet. What's wrong? This is a historical fact.
The Byzantine Emperor has got sod all to do with Persia or Caeser.
A her parents wanted her to marry a Muslim man as they wanted their daughter to live in a Muslim household. Therefore, using the advice of another woman, the parents approached Muhammad to ask if he would accept her in marriage. He agreed (she was around 9/10 at this stage) and they were engaged for around 2/3 years before they finally married. The marriage was apparently consummated when she reached puberty or after she had fully developed.
Some hadith vary on age but according to details of her previous engagement she'd have to be around 9/10 during engagement to Muhammad. There are discrepancies on age since the hadith were written up to and around 300 years after the death of Muhammad.
According to hadith she had been engaged to another (non-Muslim) man at the age of 6 or 7 but her parents wanted her to marry a Muslim man as they wanted their daughter to live in a Muslim household. Therefore, using the advice of another woman, the parents approached Muhammad to ask if he would accept her in marriage. He agreed (she was around 9/10 at this stage) and they were engaged for around 2/3 years before they finally married. The marriage was apparently consummated when she reached puberty or after she had fully developed. Marital agreements were common in order to ensure financial security for a girl for the rest of her life hence the early engagement. As a reference the Virgin Mary was around 12 years old when giving birth to Jesus.
Some hadith vary on age but according to details of her previous engagement she'd have to be around 9/10 during engagement to Muhammad. There are discrepancies on age since the hadith were written up to and around 300 years after the death of Muhammad.
All of that sounds quite plausable to me, although I would like to know why you don't consider that last sentence to be a bit of a problem. How reliable can a source written 300 years after the event possibly be?
The Byzantine Emperor has got sod all to do with Persia or Caeser.
He had the second most powerful position internationally during the era of the Prophet, it was US pre-Islamic era, check your facts please. Study the lifetime of Muhammad and who he interacted with, i don't want to waste my time responding to people who haven't done their homework and yet think they know it all.
Thoughts? I am particularly interested in Muslims' viewpoints. Do you agree with this (I'm guessing not), and if not are you able to disprove it?
Edit: This thread is an invitation for a debate with the author of the article, not an open insult to Islam. No point in posting if you're not going to read the article.
Yeah, it's sick and I don't see how anyone could worship someone like that. But hey, people will believe in anything these days...
He had the second most powerful position internationally during the era of the Prophet, it was US pre-Islamic era, check your facts please. Study the lifetime of Muhammad and who he interacted with, i don't want to waste my time responding to people who haven't done their homework and yet think they know it all.
What the bloody hell has that got to do with the Shah of Persia or Caeser?
What the bloody hell has that got to do with the Shah of Persia or Caeser?
What have any of your post got to do with my original post, huh? You just said "you what?" suggesting you don't have a clue about the topic at hand. If you have constructive criticism, i don't mind having it. Funky emoticons don't the job really.
Discuss theological issues, which are issues inherent to a religion, not their political manifestations.
Re: Muhammad a pedophile, rapist and torturer?
