The suicide killer's father

[smaneck]

Do you ever consider that YOU, Masta, might be sinning by calling a murderer and a pedophile a "Messenger of God"?

If Muhammad is a murderer so were most of the Prophets of the Old Testament. As for His being a pedophile which scripture defines the age of consent to marriage such that this would be considered a sin?

[barnasha]

If Muhammad is a murderer so were most of the Prophets of the Old Testament. As for His being a pedophile which scripture defines the age of consent to marriage such that this would be considered a sin?

marrying women at a younger age is one thing, "pedophilia" (a phenomenon much more associated with christianity than islam) is nothing but gutter mouth name-calling by people who, hypocritically, seem to think of themselves as morally superior as those whom they slander.

the way of christ is to be slandered... not to be a slanderer.

[Narnian]

What crimes?

You already know the answer to that.

Who should we trust, an anti-islamic activist with an axe to grind, who slanders the man with anything he or she can find?
Or university professors and scholars?
The fact that they come from someone who is incredibly biased just makes that job easier
Since I "fact check" everything, I won't start believing rumors or allegations

Ad Hominem and Genetic Fallacy

If you've got anything non fallacious to say, then I am willing to hear it!

[barnasha]

You already know the answer to that.



Ad Hominem and Genetic Fallacy

If you've got anything non fallacious to say, then I am willing to hear it!

What about an ad hominem?

What is fallacious?


Food.
Carbon based life forms.
Trees.
Fountain pens.


I can list some categories too.

but what pertinence do they have to this conversation?



lying!
something that is not true!
fallacies!



I can pretend to make arguments by talking generically about logical fallacies, without actually addressing anything related to the topic at hand too.

if your mere mentioning of a CATEGORY of logical fallacies, by saying the words "ad hominem" (do you even know what the words mean?) proves anything,

my mentioning of lying means you're lying.

game set and match!

[penguinfan]

What crimes?

Who should we trust, an anti-islamic activist with an axe to grind, who slanders the man with anything he or she can find?

Or university professors and scholars?

Since I "fact check" everything, I won't start believing rumors or allegations.

The fact that they come from someone who is incredibly biased just makes that job easier.

Let's see, off the top of my head, and what I can find with a quick search of Watt's book:

Depriving the Banu Qaynuqa tribe of food during a siege of their compound.

The execution of two captives after the battle of Badr.

Wars of conquest.

Kidnapping, assassination, intimidation of tribes who happened to be non-Muslim.

The destruction of Pagan shrines.

The wholesale slaughter of an entire tribe without any type of trial.

The killing of apostates and poets after Muhammad took Mecca.

The murder of Marwan and Abu Afak.

The enslavement of women and children.

The destruction of the date trees of the Banu Nadir tribe and the destruction of the vineyards that belonged to the city of Ta'if.

The murder and enslavement of anyone who did join the "Islamic security system," Muhammad at Medina, p116.

The taking of men, women, and children as booty from the village of Tamim.

The list, of course, is long. Since you are only interested in what scholars write, I am more than happy to cite scholarly opinion. I would expect you to do the same in return.

[Ibn Abu Talib]

So why do these events count as crimes?

[smaneck]

marrying women at a younger age is one thing, "pedophilia" (a phenomenon much more associated with christianity than islam)

Dear Barmasha,

There is just as much pedophilia in the islamic world as the West, but it generally involves young boys not girls.

warmest, Susan

[smaneck]

Do you ever consider that YOU, Masta, might be sinning by calling a murderer and a pedophile a "Messenger of God"? Where is your intelligence, your rationality and conscience when you blindly believe that someone who committed such henious crimes was the "last and most important prophet", a "role model for all mankind"?

For something to be a crime it has to be against the law. You don't believe in written codes, remember?

[penguinfan]

So why do these events count as crimes?

That's a question for barnasha to answer.

[barnasha]

Let's see, off the top of my head, and what I can find with a quick search of Watt's book:

Why is "Watt" your source?

I suggest not relying on one single second-hand source of information. Not even a single *first hand* source.

Especially when it comes to more heated topics like history and religion.

Let's take this slowly, one piece at a time.

Instead of presenting a laundry list of accusations of criminal acts, why not make a case using a few of your strongest examples and see how well it holds up.

And if possible try to do it as much as you can off the top of your head... not some gentleman or gentlelady named Watt's head.

[penguinfan]

So, what first hand sources do you suggest?

[barnasha]

So, what first hand sources do you suggest?

for what?

nothing wrong with citing Watts, actually, especially if the citations include his citations and rationale.

making your own is better.

the point is not that you used his book, the point is the way in which you are making your case... a string of conclusions and assertions without the rationale (e.g. dates, reasoning, etc) behind them.

I remember learning essay writing in school, i didnt find it that useful at the time, but in fact it's a very powerful way to make an argument:

introduction/thesis
point 1
point 2
point 3
conclusion

usually a good argument has this kind of structure... it's concise, well articulated, etc.

a really persuasive argument is one that makes concessions, it shows the amount of weighing that happened when the argument was made.

what you did is the equivalent of taking the very tiny bit of the conclusion and just showing that... a list of conclusions..

if you had scanned the quran or hadith and cited some things from there it woldn't be as bad since you'd be going directly to the source, but even then, a string of assertions wil not really constitute a well formed argument.
take care,
b

[penguinfan]

Watt, like Rodinson, usually does not cite his sources if they are from Islamic texts. I would first off, before I spend time researching any of these "crimes," ask you what you would consider a crime in the first place. If you believe the enslavement of human beings to be a crime, then we can look at the historical context of these incidents, whether it was an action carried out under Muhammad's orders, tacitly approved by him, or done under the authority of other Muslims (ie, Khalid Walid, Muhammad's adopted son, Ali) and whether Muhammad punished or rebuked these men in any way for these instances - such as Jesus rebuking Peter for using violence.

Since you seem to not have any problem with Watt, I will go ahead and use him along with any other respected Middle East/Islamic historians that I have read. If an incident needs further elaboration, then I have no problem with referring back to the original sources. Right now, I am currently reading Tabari's volume on the last two years of Muhammad's life and my library has Ibn Ishaq's sirah, although the book is presently not on the shelf where it should be. I expect that you would take these two sources as legitimate in addition to Waqidi and Sa'd. However, citing these last two authors is a moot point. I do not believe that my library carries either of them. In the case of contradicting conclusions from more modern historians vs. the ancient writers, I would ask that we should side with the ancient writers +unless+ the more modern historians logically explain how they came to a certain conclusion of theirs and why it conflicts with the early sources. If the early sources contradict, then I would ask that we should agree to refer to Ibn Ishaq since his writing was closest to the actual events.

Additionally, there are a number of disputed issues, such as the murder of Abu Afak and Marwan. How exactly would you deal with this particular example? Muslim websites that I have been on, point out that the isnads are either weak or non-existent (at leas Ishaq does not provide one). Should it be pointed out that Ishaq often did not provide chain of narrations because it often was not as important to do so at the time of his writing as it was for later Hadith collectors and historians? Moreover, would you accept alternative hadiths with strong isnads from other historians that corroborate the murder of at least one of these people? It should also be noted that assassinating poets and others who were critical of Muhammad and/or his message is a recurring theme in the biographies and hadith. One could therefore conclude that even if an isnad is weak, the probability of this actually happening would not be unusual at all for the Muhammad that is depicted in the early biographies.

[barnasha]

Watt, like Rodinson, usually does not cite his sources if they are from Islamic texts.

well, since Watt is not here to argue your points, I guess that's your problem....

I would first off, before I spend time researching any of these "crimes," ask you what you would consider a crime in the first place. If you believe the enslavement of human beings to be a crime, then we can look at the historical context of these incidents, whether it was an action carried out under Muhammad's orders, tacitly approved by him, or done under the authority of other Muslims (ie, Khalid Walid, Muhammad's adopted son, Ali) and whether Muhammad punished or rebuked these men in any way for these instances - such as Jesus rebuking Peter for using violence.

Pardon me for saying it, btu this sounds an awful lot like a witchhunt to me.

What are your intentions here? To argue that Muhammad is a criminal?

Bringing up slavery is funny since this is the guy who made huge steps towards the abolishment of slavery, and the introduction of slave's rights, centuries before any other civilization (although maybe I dont' know of some other civilizations someone can enlighten me if so). So I don't think you want to go down that road if your idea here is to malign the man.

Since you seem to not have any problem with Watt, I will go ahead and use him along with any other respected Middle East/Islamic historians that I have read. If an incident needs further elaboration, then I have no problem with referring back to the original sources. Right now, I am currently reading Tabari's volume on the last two years of Muhammad's life and my library has Ibn Ishaq's sirah, although the book is presently not on the shelf where it should be. I expect that you would take these two sources as legitimate in addition to Waqidi and Sa'd. However, citing these last two authors is a moot point. I do not believe that my library carries either of them. In the case of contradicting conclusions from more modern historians vs. the ancient writers, I would ask that we should side with the ancient writers +unless+ the more modern historians logically explain how they came to a certain conclusion of theirs and why it conflicts with the early sources. If the early sources contradict, then I would ask that we should agree to refer to Ibn Ishaq since his writing was closest to the actual events.

Well, Watt can make his own arguments. So can you. Don't just go through and copy all of Watts conclusions and expect for them to fly without any justification. I'm sure he offered an explanation for his arguments, and so should you, if you offer them.

Additionally, there are a number of disputed issues, such as the murder of Abu Afak and Marwan. How exactly would you deal with this particular example? Muslim websites that I have been on, point out that the isnads are either weak or non-existent (at leas Ishaq does not provide one). Should it be pointed out that Ishaq often did not provide chain of narrations because it often was not as important to do so at the time of his writing as it was for later Hadith collectors and historians? Moreover, would you accept alternative hadiths with strong isnads from other historians that corroborate the murder of at least one of these people? It should also be noted that assassinating poets and others who were critical of Muhammad his message is a recurring theme in the biographies and hadith. One could therefore conclude that even if an isnad is weak, the probability of this actually happening would not be unusual at all for the Muhammad that is depicted in the early biographies.

Well hadith means story. Isnad means the chain of people who told the story.

A story is not necessarily true or accurate. Right? We must examine where the story came from to see if it is true or not before we accept it as such.


Regardless, we can examine each case on a case by case basis.

The point is the arguments will have to stand, we do not just float opinions or conclusions and expect them to stick in a proper argument.


take care.
b

[penguinfan]

Bringing up slavery is funny since this is the guy who made huge steps towards the abolishment of slavery, and the introduction of slave's rights, centuries before any other civilization. So I don't think you want to go down that road if your idea here is to malign the man.

Is that your opinion or the opinion of authors that you have read? I remember in the past that you portrayed the Meccans as blood thirsty who would have wiped the Muslims out at any chance they could get. Is that your opinion through your own research or is this the opinions of other people?

Because, I can tell you that through my reading of the history of Muhammad, the Meccans were not, in any way, blood thirsty - and more importantly, I can back this up with historical fact cited by Ibn Ishaq. Can you?