Muslims: Did Muhammad Actually Exist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ComeHome2Rome
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Usbek_de_Perse said:
As to the poisoning by a Jewess, I find something strange in the story of al-Baidwawi: “Then she took a deadly poison that kills instantly and poisoned the lamb, putting more poison in the leg and shoulder.”

He goes on to state: "Then Muhammad sent for this Jewess and asked her, “Have you poisoned this lamb?” She said, "You have acquired certain powers with which you judge those who are not loyal to you. You killed my father, my uncle and my brother. . . So I said, “If he is a king, then I would be relieving us of him, and if he is a prophet, he will be able to perceive.’” It was said that he pardoned her, while others say he commanded her to be put to death and crucified. When Muhammad fell ill just before his death, he said to Aisha, “Aisha, I still feel the effect of the poisoned food I ate; this is the time of my demise by that poison.”

If the poison was one that kills instantly, how did Muhammad go on for some time talking about it and confronting the Jewess? I think the story is made up based on an elaborated rumor.
Click to expand...
Sometime did not pass. He confronted the Jewish woman during the same day.
 
jakasaki said:
Sometime did not pass. He confronted the Jewish woman during the same day.
Click to expand...
According to al-Baidawi, the poison was supposed to work instantly. He had time to summon her to him, presumably at least an hour or so.
 
GaryTaylor said:
The Quran isn’t evidence of Mohammads existence.
Click to expand...
This argument reminds me of the arguments about whether or not men walked on the moon. Of course Mohammad existed.

You are simply fabricating a problem where there is no problem to deal with.
 
Usbek_de_Perse said:
According to al-Baidawi, the poison was supposed to work instantly. He had time to summon her to him, presumably at least an hour or so.
Click to expand...
Al-Baidawi…??? from what time period did this guy make this claim to the poison being “instant”…? Is this the same al-baidawi from the 13th century…?
 
It was my understanding that it was several years ahead of Muhammad’s death that he was poisoned. I’ve never heard anything about the poison being instant, although it was served to him in a dish of meat. He apparently tasted the poison as soon as the meat touched his tongue, and spit it out, but it was too late and he was left with the poison in his system until the end of his life. I don’t know if any poison was known to exist in that time with such qualities as to keep a person alive for years and then kill them. It may be an apocryphal story to demonize Jews.
 
عبدالله بن عمر البيضاوي. That’s him. Do you have an earlier source for the poisoning story? من فضلك
jakasaki said:
Al-Baidawi…??? from what time period did this guy make this claim to the poison being “instant”…? Is this the same al-baidawi from the 13th century…?
Click to expand...
 
Nabooru said:
It was my understanding that it was several years ahead of Muhammad’s death that he was poisoned. I’ve never heard anything about the poison being instant, although it was served to him in a dish of meat. He apparently tasted the poison as soon as the meat touched his tongue, and spit it out, but it was too late and he was left with the poison in his system until the end of his life. I don’t know if any poison was known to exist in that time with such qualities as to keep a person alive for years and then kill them. It may be an apocryphal story to demonize Jews.
Click to expand...
The whole “poison” thing is suspicious.

First, Mohamad goes into war with a Jewish tribe.

Kills many, including the Jewish woman’s husband, her father & her uncle.

Then Mohamad allows this “Jewish” women to cook for the muslims, including Mohamad and his gang…???

The last person Mohamad would want cooking for his meal would be the people he slaughtered.
 
HelenRose said:
This argument reminds me of the arguments about whether or not men walked on the moon. Of course Mohammad existed.

You are simply fabricating a problem where there is no problem to deal with.
Click to expand...
Outlandish as it may sound, Catholic Answers show “Searching for Muhammad” had for their guest: Robert Spencer who claims that there is no evidence of Mohammad’s existence.

catholic.com/radio/shows/…-muhammad-7264
 
ComeHome2Rome said:
I listened recently to “Searching for Muhammad” a Catholic Answers show with the guest: Robert Spencer.

catholic.com/radio/shows/searching-for-muhammad-7264

I was extremely surprised to hear that there is no historical evidence that the Prophet Muhammad actually existed. :eek:

What do Muslims think about this? Have you ever considered the possibility? Have you ever investigated this? If so, what did you discover?

Also curious about the coins Robert Spencer discovered that had Muhammad on them & on the other side the Cross. What do Muslims make of that historical evidence? Did early Muslims believe in the Cross and later change the belief? And what about the different versions of the Qur’an found?
Click to expand...
It was an interesting show, based on a premise that has been explored by other scholars in the past, some of whom met very hasty and violent ends. The premise of the argument is that there is no contemporaneous evidence of Muhammad’s existence in any of the early writings from the period when Arabic expansion began - not within the Arab communities, and not within the lands which they conquered. The argument continues that it was only much later (perhaps 70-80 years after the period of Arab conquest began), that writings discussing “the Prophet” and his teaching began to arise, and that these writings were in fact an amalgam of other religious teachings combined to: (1) subdue the conquered populations; (2) spur on Arab expansion; and (3) unify the movement around a single aggressive expansionist religion.

But it makes me wonder: If there’s validity to the argument how come we have not heard it raised before now? But it was a very entertaining broadcast, even if not entirely convincing.

Peace,
Robert
 
This is my understanding.

Some Islamophobes here should read this article from the Fordham University website. It is a quote from Muhammad, Prophet and Statesman by William Montgomery Watt. Watt was a noted orientalist and priest in the Scottish Episcopal Church.
Nabooru said:
It was my understanding that it was several years ahead of Muhammad’s death that he was poisoned. I’ve never heard anything about the poison being instant, although it was served to him in a dish of meat. He apparently tasted the poison as soon as the meat touched his tongue, and spit it out, but it was too late and he was left with the poison in his system until the end of his life. I don’t know if any poison was known to exist in that time with such qualities as to keep a person alive for years and then kill them. It may be an apocryphal story to demonize Jews.
Click to expand...
 
Usbek_de_Perse said:
عبدالله بن عمر البيضاوي. That’s him. Do you have an earlier source for the poisoning story? من فضلك
Click to expand...
Volume 3, Book 47, Number 786: Narrated Anas bin Malik:

A Jewess brought a poisoned (cooked) sheep for the Prophet who ate from it. She was brought to the Prophet and he was asked, “Shall we kill her?” He said, “No.” I continued to see the effect of the poison on the palate of the mouth of Allah’s Apostle .
 
Are you seriouse? He is just as documents as Jesus. Beleave his message or not he was a very real person. I’ve been to Istambul and seen his sword, right next to the hand of John the Apostle and (supposedly) the Staff of Moses.
 
HelenRose said:
I don’t know if Homer existed he may have been somebody else with the same name.
Click to expand...
A bit off topic, but the academic argument there is whether Homer was a poet, a compiler, or a group. “Homer” itself means “Bard”, and so is probably at the very least an assumed name.
 
Hunter24 said:
Are you seriouse? He is just as documents as Jesus. Beleave his message or not he was a very real person. I’ve been to Istambul and seen his sword, right next to the hand of John the Apostle and (supposedly) the Staff of Moses.
Click to expand...
Yes, the Catholic Answers show “Searching for Muhammad” had for their guest: Robert Spencer who claims that there is no evidence of Mohammad’s existence. Apparently, there are no writings about him until about a century after his death, but with Jesus within the same decade there were writings about him.

catholic.com/radio/shows/…-muhammad-7264

Are you sure that (supposedly) doesn’t also belong in front of “seen his sword”? How do you know that it actually belonged to him, except that some one in Istanbul told you it was his? If it was his and he did conquer various peoples, why do they also have no record of him having been in the lands he supposedly conquered? - according to Robert Spencer.
 
Hunter24 said:
Are you seriouse? He is just as documents as Jesus. Beleave his message or not he was a very real person. I’ve been to Istambul and seen his sword, right next to the hand of John the Apostle and (supposedly) the Staff of Moses.
Click to expand...
Listen to the recorded show. His situation is quite different from that of Jesus with respect to the historical record.
 
Other than his time as a caravaner, when he was young, Muhammad was never said to have left the Arabian peninsula. The conquests outside Arabia happened after his death.

It is dangerous for Christians to engage in non-scholarly speculation about the life of someone who very definitely lived. Do we need to make the lives of Christians living in Muslim lands any more difficult?
ComeHome2Rome said:
Yes, the Catholic Answers show “Searching for Muhammad” had for their guest: Robert Spencer who claims that there is no evidence of Mohammad’s existence. Apparently, there are no writings about him until about a century after his death, but with Jesus within the same decade there were writings about him.

catholic.com/radio/shows/…-muhammad-7264

Are you sure that (supposedly) doesn’t also belong in front of “seen his sword”? How do you know that it actually belonged to him, except that some one in Istanbul told you it was his? If it was his and he did conquer various peoples, why do they also have no record of him having been in the lands he supposedly conquered? - according to Robert Spencer.
Click to expand...
 
I heard part of that show. The question is not whether Mohammed existed, but whether he did what is claimed, when claimed. What I heard is that for at least 50 years after he died, neither Muslim/Arab conquering armies nor any conquered people mentioned anything about this new religion. It was only c700 that the first written accounts appear. So, the question goes, why weren’t these Arab armies, supposedly conquering in the name of Allah and Islam, telling the conquered people about it?
 
ComeHome2Rome said:
Outlandish as it may sound, Catholic Answers show “Searching for Muhammad” had for their guest: Robert Spencer who claims that there is no evidence of Mohammad’s existence.

catholic.com/radio/shows/…-muhammad-7264
Click to expand...
That doesn’t mean he didn’t exist. There is little evidence of any of the individual lives of most of the people who lived during that time.

I hold in great respect the spoken traditions of the peoples of the world. I deeply distrust this move to spin the story away from those spoken traditions. This smacks of propaganda.

I don’t like games of that nature when people attack my Catholic faith. I don’t like it when it is directed toward some other faith.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top