How do Muslims rationalize the actions of Muhammad?

[Agabriel]

Muhammad told his followers to lie, here are a few passages:

Bukhari:V7B67N427 “The Prophet said, ‘If I take an oath and later find something else better than that, then I do what is better and expiate my oath.’”
Qur’an 9:3 “Allah and His Messenger dissolve obligations.”
Qur’an 66:2 “Allah has already sanctioned for you the dissolution of your vows.”
Bukhari:V4B52N268 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘War is deceit.’”
Ishaq:519 “Hajjaj said to the Apostle, ‘I have money scattered among the Meccan merchants, so give me permission to go and get it.’ Having got Muhammad’s permission, he said, ‘I must tell lies.’ The Apostle said, ‘Tell them.’”
Qur’an 5:41 “Whomever Allah wants to deceive you cannot help. Allah does not want them to know the truth because he intends to disgrace them and then torture them.”
Ishaq:567 “Muhammad informed Umar [the second Caliph], and he called the Prophet a liar.”
Ishaq:365
Tabari VII:94 “Muhammad bin Maslamah said, ‘O Messenger, we shall have to tell lies.’ ‘Say what you like,’ Muhammad replied. ‘You are absolved, free to say whatever you must.’”
Bukhari:V5B59N369 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Who is willing to kill Ka’b bin Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?’ Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslamah got up saying, ‘O Allah’s Apostle! Would you like me to kill him?’ The Prophet said, ‘Yes,’ Maslamah said, ‘Then allow me to say false things in order to deceive him.’ The Prophet said, ‘You may say such things.’”

He was an assasin. He had an old man over 100 years old killed and a young woman who was breastfeeding her baby killed.

He was in over 30 battles that he started and was known to attack caravans with women and children along so he could take them as slaves. He encouraged his followers to continue these raids and there were over 70 of them during his lifetime alone.

He would rape the women right after he killed their men relatives and enslave their children.

He had at least one man tortured to get where he had his property hidden so he could steal the rest of it.

Tabari VIII:122
Ishaq:515 “The Prophet gave orders concerning Kinanah to Zubayr, saying, 'Torture him until you root out and extract what he has. So Zubayr kindled a fire on Kinanah’s chest, twirling it with his firestick until Kinanah was near death. Then the Messenger gave him to Maslamah, who beheaded him.”

His lust was beyond the pale. He had children, slaves, his own stepson’s wife, etc and just said that it was what Allah wanted him to have. He used God to get whatever he wanted.

There is more - how do you justify this in your minds?

 

[wina]

Muhammad told his followers to lie, here are a few passages:

He was an assasin. He had an old man over 100 years old killed and a young woman who was breastfeeding her baby killed.

He was in over 30 battles that he started and was known to attack caravans with women and children along so he could take them as slaves. He encouraged his followers to continue these raids and there were over 70 of them during his lifetime alone.

He would rape the women right after he killed their men relatives and enslave their children.

He had at least one man tortured to get where he had his property hidden so he could steal the rest of it.

His lust was beyond the pale. He had children, slaves, his own stepson’s wife, etc and just said that it was what Allah wanted him to have. He used God to get whatever he wanted.

There is more - how do you justify this in your minds?

Agabriel, I think you put your thread in the wrong forum.

 

[the_phoenix]

Hail Mary,
Full of Grace,
The Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou among women,
and blessed is the fruit
of thy womb, Jesus.
Holy Mary,
Mother of God,
pray for us sinners now,
and at the hour of our death.
Amen

 

[R_not]

Amen

 

[Agabriel]

Agabriel, I think you put your thread in the wrong forum.

Yes, I have asked to have it moved. I don’t know how else to do it.

 

[R_not]

They don’t. they intimidate, terrorize, threaten with lawsuits, claim they are victims of oppression, etc when their prophet, the koran and hadiths are all brought to light.

Or ignore. They think it will all go away (because they know they have groups that will do the above for them).

 

[Eucharisted]

Muslims justify Mohammed’s evil deeds - not saying he didn’t do good deeds - either by threatening or suing (the legal method), by ignoring the issue hoping it will go away (the ignorant method), by reminding us of the “faults” and “fallings” and “evil deeds” of God and of His Church (the comparative methoid), and by using fallacies in arguments (the fallacious method).

 

[ralphinal]

No prophet in ISlam is able to commit a sin. It is part of being a prophet. That means that anything that Muhammed did is not a sin when he did it.

 

[JBassist17]

No prophet in ISlam is able to commit a sin. It is part of being a prophet. That means that anything that Muhammed did is not a sin when he did it.

Wait is this really the approach? I’m fairly ignorant on this particular matter.

 

[ralphinal]

Wait is this really the approach? I’m fairly ignorant on this particular matter.

Yes, but the level that they will use it depends.

No prophet is able to sin. Anything that Muhammed did that seems like a sin cannot be one.

 

[Eucharisted]

Ralph,

I must gently correct you on the Islamic view on Mohammed. Muslims believe Mohammed was sinless in regards to handling the Qu’ran, meaning he did not mistake, change, add, or take away anything from Allah’s revelation. This is the common belief of infallibility in Islam (“protection in recieving and transmitting the Qu’ran”), and it is as far as believing in Mohammed’s sinlessness goes for all Muslims.

As for some Muslims believing Mohammed was sinless in whatever he did (“protection from sin”), the Sunni believe Mohammed was sinless and did not make mistakes. The Shia believe all the prophets of Islam were sinless (“protection in recieving and transmitting the Qu’ran and protection from sin”), and they are called the Fourteen Infallibles.

Some heretical groups, such as the Kharijites, believe Mohammed was not protected from sin, but he was protected in recieving and transmitting the Qu’ran.

 

[R_not]

What about mohammed having to redefine sin? He was the one who wanted to islam to be an ‘Abrahamic’ faith - and so he should have known the 10 commandments

He broke most of them and had to redefine sin for muslims. halal, haram, and shirk.

Basically, anything done against infidels is a-ok! But, there are restrictions on what they could do to another muslim, except women. Women they could beat up and honor kill (which includes torture too). They also don’t care about collateral damage either. I guess they blame it on Jews, the evil Satan, or anyone except themselves anyway - so it is no big deal to them. They use them as propaganda afterwards in many instances.

And that ‘Abrahamic’ faith junk is just that - junk. There is nothing ‘Abrahamic’ about islam.

So, whatever mohammed did was a-ok. And if it didn’t fit the moral code of the time - mohammed just said ‘allah said it was ok’ for him to do.

What a racket!

This reminds me of the leader of the Abu Sayaff - Sabaya - a psychopathic murderer. Here is a quote from one of he kidnappers that belonged to Abu Sayaff about Sabaya, the (now dead) leader of the Abu Sayaff, ‘You know Sabaya? Sabaya is a really bad guy. There is nothing good about Sabaya. Sabaya has to be in jihad because it is the only way for him to get into heaven is for him to die in holy war.’

The twisted mind to think that just because they belong to a religion such as islam will bypass all of God’s laws - 10 Commandments - and get them to heaven.

 

[ralphinal]

Ralph,

I must gently correct you on the Islamic view on Mohammed. Muslims believe Mohammed was sinless in regards to handling the Qu’ran, meaning he did not mistake, change, add, or take away anything from Allah’s revelation. This is the common belief of infallibility in Islam (“protection in recieving and transmitting the Qu’ran”), and it is as far as believing in Mohammed’s sinlessness goes for all Muslims.

As for some Muslims believing Mohammed was sinless in whatever he did (“protection from sin”), the Sunni believe Mohammed was sinless and did not make mistakes. The Shia believe all the prophets of Islam were sinless (“protection in recieving and transmitting the Qu’ran and protection from sin”), and they are called the Fourteen Infallibles.

Some heretical groups, such as the Kharijites, believe Mohammed was not protected from sin, but he was protected in recieving and transmitting the Qu’ran.

So, how is this different from what I posted? The two largest Muslim groups hold that he was sinless and did not make mistakes. That means that when Muhammed raped, looted, and all that, it was not a sin.

 

[Eucharisted]

So, how is this different from what I posted? The two largest Muslim groups hold that he was sinless and did not make mistakes. That means that when Muhammed raped, looted, and all that, it was not a sin.

Yes, the two largest groups, but they are not all the Muslims altogether. I just wanted to correct you on how Islam defines the sinlessness of Mohammed, even though it is incorrect.

 

[sedonaman]

And that ‘Abrahamic’ faith junk is just that - junk. There is nothing ‘Abrahamic’ about islam.

Let’s pull that Abrahamic thread for a moment.

I heard an interesting homily recently about the incident where Abraham was commanded by God to sacrifice Isaac, and Isaac was saved at the last minute. Here is the idea: God asked for the sacrifice of Abraham’s son, and God would not ask man to do anything He wouldn’t be willing to do Himself. To prove it, He sacrificed His only Son.

If Allah isn’t willing to do that [and we have no indication that he would be], Islam could not be an “Abrahamic” faith.

 

[paarsurrey]

How do Muslims rationalize the actions of Muhammad?

Hi

Kindly quote from Quran; please quote a verse with five verses preceding and five following for the usual context.

I love Jesus and Mary as I do love Buddha and Krishna.

Thanks

 

[R_not]

Let’s pull that Abrahamic thread for a moment.

I heard an interesting homily recently about the incident where Abraham was commanded by God to sacrifice Isaac, and Isaac was saved at the last minute. Here is the idea: God asked for the sacrifice of Abraham’s son, and God would not ask man to do anything He wouldn’t be willing to do Himself. To prove it, He sacrificed His only Son.

If Allah isn’t willing to do that [and we have no indication that he would be], Islam could not be an “Abrahamic” faith.

Your note really made me think and actually gave me the goose bumps and a need to cry all at once.

Thank you.

 

[Jay53]

No prophet in ISlam is able to commit a sin. It is part of being a prophet. That means that anything that Muhammed did is not a sin when he did it.

:newidea: Reuben J actually mentioned this same thought in another thread: that Islam views all prophets as sinless and if true, this would actually fill in a missing puzzle piece in my brain!!!

I have been trying to figure out for the longest time how a person can objectively look at the life of Jesus (chaste, humble, preached a message of peace, healed people) and then objectively look at the life of Muhammad (had multiple sex partners including a 9 year old girl, murdered people, ordered other people to murder, encouraged people to lie) and decide to follow Muhammad - to believe that God sent Jesus, a sinless man born of a virgin and then 600 years later sent another prophet (supposed to be the “last” prophet), not born of a virgin who is not sinless and committed many atrocities.

BUT, if in the Muslim mind all prophets are sinless, then in their minds Muhammad’s prophethood would somehow exhonerate/excuse/justify all of his bad/immoral behavior. It’s as if his prophethood somehow makes sinful behaviors (which are unacceptable to God for mankind in general) somehow acceptable to God for just him.

My only issue with this would be converts to Islam. And perhaps Sister Amy, as a convert, can speak to this. I can understand Muslims who have never known any other religion being taught this so that they accept it as normal, but how do converts from other religions reconcile in their minds the acceptability of sinful behavior? How do they blindly accept that all prophets are perfect/sinless in the face of obvious evidence to the contrary?

If this is in fact true, that Islam views all prophets as perfect and sinless, this explains alot to me that I didn’t get before.

 

[dolphinlove]

I like it when you question them about the sins of prophets and they call them ‘mistakes’, not sins… that gives me a good belly laugh

 

[swariffin]

No prophet in ISlam is able to commit a sin. It is part of being a prophet. That means that anything that Muhammed did is not a sin when he did it.

Planten said that “The example is better than precept” That means not only what Muhammad said must be followed (as it is the word of God), anything Muhammad did must be followed too. That puts Muhammad in an unrestricted infallibility.