A movie about Muhammad

[Sister_Amy]

I could be a fair writer and say that Napolean had three legs. But why would anyone believe me unless I had historical sources to back it up.

This is key. I mean, it’s useless to say Muhammad did something unless someone either witnessed it and reported it (and that someone is known) or he told someone about it who reported it.

 

[ralphinal]

I could be a fair writer and say that Napolean had three legs. But why would anyone believe me unless I had historical sources to back it up.

This is key. I mean, it’s useless to say Muhammad did something unless someone either witnessed it and reported it (and that someone is known) or he told someone about it who reported it.

Perhaps, but the person who wrote that book was well respected before it was published in 2002. IN fact that author had been a noted historian for 40 years!

 

[Sister_Amy]

Perhaps, but the person who wrote that book was well respected before it was published in 2002. IN fact that author had been a noted historian for 40 years!

And without any evidence… it doesn’t mean anything. If Muhammad did something, it is not for modern historians to witness it. His Companions had to witness it and record it. And if they haven’t, if there is no proof, then there’s no point in continuing the discussion.

 

[ralphinal]

And without any evidence… it doesn’t mean anything. If Muhammad did something, it is not for modern historians to witness it. His Companions had to witness it and record it. And if they haven’t, if there is no proof, then there’s no point in continuing the discussion.

So unless Muhammed himself said he did it or one of his friends saw it, it did not happen? No wonder the Muslims hold such a high view of him! Setting aside everything else, you are saying that he wrote his own legacy.

 

[Sister_Amy]

So unless Muhammed himself said he did it or one of his friends saw it, it did not happen? No wonder the Muslims hold such a high view of him! Setting aside everything else, you are saying that he wrote his own legacy.

I don’t mean one of his “friends” but somebody around him.

If nobody saw him do something–then how do you know, 1400 years later, that he did it? I mean according to WHOM?

If you want to say taht Jesus was crucified, ask: according to WHOM? Who saw it? Doesn’t that matter? Or can you just believe what anyone says, even if they have no proof?

How are you going to know someone did something if nobody saw it, and he never talked about it?

 

[ralphinal]

I don’t mean one of his “friends” but somebody around him.

If nobody saw him do something–then how do you know, 1400 years later, that he did it? I mean according to WHOM?

If you want to say taht Jesus was crucified, ask: according to WHOM? Who saw it? Doesn’t that matter? Or can you just believe what anyone says, even if they have no proof?

How are you going to know someone did something if nobody saw it, and he never talked about it?

Well, glad you mention it.

Things can be recorded by people not close to the action. Now, these reports must be verified. A good historian would do that. For example, Muhammad lived in an area that had writing, and people who were related to others may have recorded things. Some of these documents may have survived. I am not saying this is the case, but it could be.

Interesting that you mention the crucifixion. Jesus said it occured. Those with did as well. Why does the same standard not apply?

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

… So which is this? I really don’t know. Sorry! It’s a popular story that comes up which is why I’m familiar with it, but I’m not aware of it in any book of hadith. (It might be in a book of hadith I’m not familiar with though, which is pretty much most books.)…

Can you see my concern?

I think you are the only one that provided something nice about Muhammad in this thread, but you don’t even know if the story is true.

Would you tell me a story of Muhammad - that you know is true - and would like to see in the movie?

 

[Sister_Amy]

Well, glad you mention it.

Things can be recorded by people not close to the action. Now, these reports must be verified. A good historian would do that. For example, Muhammad lived in an area that had writing, and people who were related to others may have recorded things. Some of these documents may have survived. I am not saying this is the case, but it could be.

Interesting that you mention the crucifixion. Jesus said it occured. Those with did as well. Why does the same standard not apply?

The same standard DOES apply. Let’s apply the same standard. If a person did something in privacy, how is a historian going to know about it centuries later, if the person who did it never tells, and nobody saw it, or if anyone did see it they didn’t report it? Nobody’s going to know.

When it comes to the crucifixion, according to you, you have Jesus’s word for it! And the people around him!

So yes, let’s please apply the same standard.

 

[Sister_Amy]

Can you see my concern?

I think you are the only one that provided something nice about Muhammad in this thread, but you don’t even know if the story is true.

Would you tell me a story of Muhammad - that you know is true - and would like to see in the movie?

I consider it as true. But you know, there are some people in another thread who are slandering Muhammad with a story with far less authenticity and acceptance than what I have presented you. Just so you know that…

There is a story though, I’m pretty sure it’s an authentic hadith, about a Jewish woman who used to dump her trash on the doorstep of Muhammad. She was pretty regular in doing it because she hated him so much, until she got sick. And while she was sick she didn’t do it anymore and Muhammad noticed that it had stopped, so he asked around about what had happened to her. The people told him that she was ill so he went to visit her, while she was ill! And he said he missed what she used to do.

There was a boy who was given (by his mother) to Muhammad to be a servant in his house, his name was Anas. Anas said that Muhammad never passed by a child but that he patted him on the head. When Anas’s brother had a pet bird that died (we are talking about a child here), Muhammad went to go visit him, and asked him about what happened to the bird.

There was a man in Medina who was a Christian, and was the slave of a Jewish man. The Christian man had been Zoroastrian but then converted to Christianity looking for the true religion and had heard that there would be another prophet who wouldn’t take charity. He heard about Muhammad then and went to see him, and he gave him some dates as charity and noticed that Muhammad didn’t touch them but gave them to his companions–and Muhammad didn’t know what this man knew. So the man came back the next day and gave him dates as a gift, and then Muhammad took a date and shared with his companions. So the man believed he was a prophet, and wanted to join the Muslims, but he was a slave. So his master said that in order to gain his freedom he would have to acquire a very large sum of money and also plant 300 date palm trees that all bore fruit. In order to help free this slave, Muhammad had his companions raise the money which was demanded, and then he personally went and planted 300 trees to ensure they’d all bear fruit, just to free this one slave.

One of my favorite stories, which I remind my friends of sometimes often, is of a desert Arab who came into the mosque in Medina, and he urinated in it! Muhammad’s companions who were with him were very angry about it and wanted to even hurt the man for doing that, but Muhammad went and told him gently that this mosque was not the place for that (i.e., urinating.) He was very gentle with the man and the Bedouin embraced Islam because of that.

 

[ralphinal]

The same standard DOES apply. Let’s apply the same standard. If a person did something in privacy, how is a historian going to know about it centuries later, if the person who did it never tells, and nobody saw it, or if anyone did see it they didn’t report it? Nobody’s going to know.

When it comes to the crucifixion, according to you, you have Jesus’s word for it! And the people around him!

So yes, let’s please apply the same standard.

Sure thing.

By the way, I have Jesus and those around him saying he was crucified and died and Muhammad saying 600 years later that it did not happen. Who is right?

 

[Sam_777]

Charlie Zeaiter;3923013:

You can’t make a movie about Muhammed showing him in front of the camera, its prohibited in the Islamic countries to produce such a movie, let someone in the west produce such a movie and see how many “Death Fatwas” will be issued against him/her.

Oh well, that’s a shame; So no movies about Muhammad.

Would we be allowed to write a book about Muhammad? What kind of stories would you put in there?

(I’m starting to wonder if we’re allowed to submit posts regarding Muhammad, because we don’t seem to talk about him enough. We’ve been told that we should love him, but I still don’t know why. )

I think Sam is just trying to scare you away, or make Muslims out to be overly paranoid. People HAVE made movies about Muhammad, and I mentioned two of them.
[/quote]

I think I have said “in front of the camera” as shown above.

And you yourself said that here:

I’ve seen both and found them both to be pretty weird and hard to follow since they don’t show the Prophet Muhammad (saaws) and neither do they show any of the major Companions!!

Simply because its prohibited in Islam to show the main Islamic religious figures, here is the official Fatwa number 13 dated 16-4-1393H enforced by the Main Islamic Clerics Committee of Saudi Arabia together with Muslim World League to prohibit making any movie about Muhammed or his caliphs.

binbaz.org.sa/mat/8166

Amy, next time please ask your Arabic Shaikh before making Fatwas on me .

 

[Sister_Amy]

I think I have said “in front of the camera” as shown above.

And you yourself said that here:

Simply because its prohibited in Islam to show the main Islamic religious figures, here is the official Fatwa number 13 dated 16-4-1393H enforced by the Main Islamic Clerics Committee of Saudi Arabia together with Muslim World League to prohibit making any movie about Muhammed or his caliphs.

binbaz.org.sa/mat/8166

Amy, next time please ask your Arabic Shaikh before making Fatwas on me .

Yeah nice try but you know I don’t make fatwas.

 

[Sister_Amy]

Sure thing.

By the way, I have Jesus and those around him saying he was crucified and died and Muhammad saying 600 years later that it did not happen. Who is right?

I have God witnessing the whole event and the next 600 years and saying that what you heard isn’t true.

 

[Verisimilitude]

I have God witnessing the whole event and the next 600 years and saying that what you heard isn’t true.

I used to think you were fairly bright if misguided.

 

[ralphinal]

I have God witnessing the whole event and the next 600 years and saying that what you heard isn’t true.

No, you have a man saying that an Angel speaking for God told him that. All things aside, that is called hearsay in a court of law and would not be allowed as evidence.

 

[Sister_Amy]

We are now 2000 years after the fact, Ralph, what you have is hearsay as well.

 

[ralphinal]

We are now 2000 years after the fact, Ralph, what you have is hearsay as well.

That depends. If the Apostles were the ones who wrote some of the Gosples, no it is not hearsay. If not, then yes it might be.
Further, in Revelation, Jesus tells John that he was dead and is now alive.

We would still have the recorded deaths of people in the first century who claimed to know Jesus and know this to be true.

If we take the worst case scenario for both works, we have hundreds of people who knew Jesus and what happened to him.

Only Muhammad heard from the Angel.

 

[Sister_Amy]

That depends. If the Apostles were the ones who wrote some of the Gosples, no it is not hearsay. If not, then yes it might be.
Further, in Revelation, Jesus tells John that he was dead and is now alive.

We would still have the recorded deaths of people in the first century who claimed to know Jesus and know this to be true.

If we take the worst case scenario for both works, we have hundreds of people who knew Jesus and what happened to him.

Only Muhammad heard from the Angel.

Well, if Muhammad heard from the Angel, I’ll trust the Angel, who is a messenger of God!

Nobody knows who John is, the John who wrote Revelation. Or maybe you know, but my seminary trained New Testament teacher said nobody knows. But you have to believe that Jesus told him that, even though you don’t know who he is?

“Hundreds of people” haven’t written down their testimonies–we only have reports that “hundreds of people” were there.

I start with the premise that either way, God knows what happened. If God sent an angel to Muhammad… then I’ll be believing Muhammad, who heard from the angel. That’s easier for me to accept (just one person I have to believe, who I know is trustworthy) than “hundreds of people” who I know nothing about, nor have any proof for what they saw.

 

[ralphinal]

Well, if Muhammad heard from the Angel, I’ll trust the Angel, who is a messenger of God!

Nobody knows who John is, the John who wrote Revelation. Or maybe you know, but my seminary trained New Testament teacher said nobody knows. But you have to believe that Jesus told him that, even though you don’t know who he is?

“Hundreds of people” haven’t written down their testimonies–we only have reports that “hundreds of people” were there.

I start with the premise that either way, God knows what happened. If God sent an angel to Muhammad… then I’ll be believing Muhammad, who heard from the angel. That’s easier for me to accept (just one person I have to believe, who I know is trustworthy) than “hundreds of people” who I know nothing about, nor have any proof for what they saw.

And this is the issue between Muslims and Christians. You have one man who says that he spoke to an angel, and that angel was a messenger of God and that God taught him the true faith through that angel. There is no corroberation, no other witnesses, just one man and the book he recited.

We have no real proof of any of it, short of the Qur’an, which according to the Qur’an is enough.

WHat is the difference between Muhammad and Joseph Smith?

 

[Angelos]

Well, if Muhammad heard from the Angel, I’ll trust the Angel, who is a messenger of God!

Nobody knows who John is, the John who wrote Revelation. Or maybe you know, but my seminary trained New Testament teacher said nobody knows. But you have to believe that Jesus told him that, even though you don’t know who he is?

“Hundreds of people” haven’t written down their testimonies–we only have reports that “hundreds of people” were there.

I start with the premise that either way, God knows what happened. If God sent an angel to Muhammad… then I’ll be believing Muhammad, who heard from the angel. That’s easier for me to accept (just one person I have to believe, who I know is trustworthy) than “hundreds of people” who I know nothing about, nor have any proof for what they saw.

How can you believe that the Almighty God waited 600 years to reveal the truth about Jesus and deprived Jesus’ followers from the truth whereas he revealed it to a man who lived six centuries later and knew nothing about faith??? Why would God do that?