Why Islam is not the True Religion

[CatholicIllini]

So I have to admit that I am not an expert on Islam or Muhammad. But based on the relatively small amount of research I have done, I have found that it is undisputed fact that Muhammad encouraged and participated in wars and massacres and that he had multiple wives, one of whom was 9-years-old when they married. Also, Muslims believe that Muhammad never performed any miracles to prove that he was a prophet, except for writing the Quran. In addition, most of the moral and theological teaching contained in the Quran, such as Heaven and Hell, the Final Judgment, love of neighbor, and forgiveness of sins, were all borrowed from the already existing beliefs of Christians and Jews. How can a man who encouraged war, the massacre of unarmed men, and polygamy be considered moral? If he didn’t perform any miracles, why should we believe that he was a prophet? What did Muhammad contribute to morality and theology that was original?

 

[mgoforth]

Hatred of those who are “different” is a powerful recruiting strategy in our fallen world. Remember that Hitler was handed his dictatorial powers on a silver platter because he advocated open persecution of the Jews, who were supposedly to blame for Germany’s economic depression.

And yes, I did just compare Mohammed to Hitler.

Luckily, the message of the Prince of Peace is infinitely more powerful!!

 

[OchsFam]

While I am not condoning the religion, it is important to distinguish something. Think about some of the most prominent figures in the OT, how many would fit the description you have just condemned? Solomon had 700 wives, David was a murder, Jonah didn’t “perform” any public miracles, Joshua led Israel into the promised land to completely wipe out everyone; men, women, children, and livestock.

My point is that you cannot always apply current standards to a historic figure and use it to claim they are not legitimate instruments of God. The biggest knock against Muhammad can be found in the story in which the Koran is dictated him. His description of the angel is clearly that of Satan (also, no book of the Bible, Old or New, was dictated). You could also compare that to the clear contradictions to the teachings of Christ, whom they recognize as a prophet, which would indicate a changing God since they live essentially in accordance with OT laws (eye for an eye, wipe out non-believing religions, etc.).

If you try to use a broad stroke to judge the validity of a messenger, you may wipe out legitimate ones.

God Bless.

 

[mgoforth]

While I am not condoning the religion, it is important to distinguish something. Think about some of the most prominent figures in the OT, how many would fit the description you have just condemned? Solomon had 700 wives, David was a murder, Jonah didn’t “perform” any public miracles, Joshua led Israel into the promised land to completely wipe out everyone; men, women, children, and livestock.

I think the difference is that the Church readily admits that those OT figures were flawed, sinful humans. We might honor Solomon for his wisdom, but not for his 700 wives or his idol-worshiping days. Likewise we honor the good things that David did, but not the murder and adultery. Joshua is a bit different, because I believe that the order to kill everyone came from God directly. But even in his case, no Christian is taught that Joshua was a perfect man. He certainly must have made mistakes too.

Our only perfect man is Jesus Christ because He is God.

Muslims will never admit that Mohammed made any mistakes at all, I believe to even suggest it is blasphemous to them. They choose to gloss over the fact that early portions of the Koran blatantly contradict the sections written later. Their claim is that God “found a better way to explain himself” and instead of peaceful tolerance of other religions (which the early sections proclaim), the “corrected” message is to slaughter all non-Muslims.

Muslims claim their prophet was perfect and without error, but the facts of Mohammed’s life refute their claims.

 

[Kouyate42]

So I have to admit that I am not an expert on Islam or Muhammad. But based on the relatively small amount of research I have done, I have found that it is undisputed fact that Muhammad encouraged and participated in wars and massacres and that he had multiple wives, one of whom was 9-years-old when they married. Also, Muslims believe that Muhammad never performed any miracles to prove that he was a prophet, except for writing the Quran. In addition, most of the moral and theological teaching contained in the Quran, such as Heaven and Hell, the Final Judgment, love of neighbor, and forgiveness of sins, were all borrowed from the already existing beliefs of Christians and Jews. How can a man who encouraged war, the massacre of unarmed men, and polygamy be considered moral? If he didn’t perform any miracles, why should we believe that he was a prophet? What did Muhammad contribute to morality and theology that was original?

There’s a whole host of issues with this post that are decently wrong. I almost converted to Islam and so I feel I can speak with some authority.

• Firstly, the whole issue of Aisha’s age when she married the Prophet is subject to intense scrutiny, debate and confusion in the Islamic world. Some sources place her as old as 19 (not 9!) or at the least 16 when she was married to Al Mustafa.
  
  The major problem here is that the source text for this particular piece of information suffered from not having undergone the same rigorous testing and scrutiny as the hadeeth which explained Islamic law and practical matters. This was in part because these hadith made little difference to any real issues of Islam, but were of mere scholarly interest. Their appearence in the hadith is not really a mark of accuracy.
  
  It appears that Maulana Muhammad Ali was the first Islamic scholar directly to challenge the notion that Aisha was aged six and nine, respectively, at the time of her nikah and consummation of marriage. This he did in, at least, the following writings: his English booklet Prophet of Islam, his larger English book Muhammad, the Prophet, and in the footnotes in his voluminous Urdu translation and commentary of Sahih Bukhari entitled Fadl-ul-Bari, these three writings being published in the 1920s and 1930s. In the booklet Prophet of Islam, which was later incorporated in 1948 as the first chapter of his book Living Thoughts of the Prophet Muhammad, he writes in a lengthy footnote as follows:
  
  “A great misconception prevails as to the age at which Aisha was taken in marriage by the Prophet. Ibn Sa‘d has stated in the Tabaqat that when Abu Bakr [father of Aisha] was approached on behalf of the Holy Prophet, he replied that the girl had already been betrothed to Jubair, and that he would have to settle the matter first with him. This shows that Aisha must have been approaching majority at the time. Again, the Isaba, speaking of the Prophet’s daughter Fatima, says that she was born five years before the Call and was about five years older than Aisha. This shows that Aisha must have been about ten years at the time of her betrothal to the Prophet, and not six years as she is generally supposed to be. This is further borne out by the fact that Aisha herself is reported to have stated that when the chapter [of the Holy Quran] entitled The Moon, the fifty-fourth chapter, was revealed, she was a girl playing about and remembered certain verses then revealed. Now the fifty-fourth chapter was undoubtedly revealed before the sixth year of the Call. All these considerations point to but one conclusion, viz., that Aisha could not have been less than ten years of age at the time of her nikah, which was virtually only a betrothal. And there is one report in the Tabaqat that Aisha was nine years of age at the time of nikah. Again it is a fact admitted on all hands that the nikah of Aisha took place in the tenth year of the Call in the month of Shawwal, while there is also preponderance of evidence as to the consummation of her marriage taking place in the second year of Hijra in the same month, which shows that full five years had elapsed between the nikah and the consummation. Hence there is not the least doubt that Aisha was at least nine or ten years of age at the time of betrothal, and fourteen or fifteen years at the time of marriage.”
• As to the miracles of Muhammad, there are some. One such detailed is the splitting of the moon. From the Qur’an:
  ** “The Last Hour draws near, and the moon is split asunder!” (Quran 54:1)**

You may find the following article helpful: islamreligion.com/articles/151/

• As to the wars and such, Islamic jurisprudence sets strict guidelines for war. Such wars must be only to protect the practice of Islam and must be self-defense only. Islam prohibits the killing of non-soldiers, women, children, the elderly, people in religious orders/communities, cutting down crops or livestock, destroying city walls or houses.
  
  Muhammad was following these guidelines in going to war as he did.

Also, take a look at the Bible. There’s plently of wars in the likes of Judges and Chronicles.