Missionary Claims of Violence

Madina Archives


Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board

Missionary Claims of Violence
Anonymous
11/08/01 at 13:24:34
AA]

why is it that in the website for the [missionary website] is there claims of Muhammad [SAW] killing off his enemies on a whim? They provide proof from hadith and come up with arguments that are sounding convincing to the non-believer. please explain some claims... they are not bogus if the hadith is used unless they don't understand. what can i say when they ask about this? can u give an example of a false claim and explanation?
Khuda Hafiz.

[edited by admin]
Re: Missionary Claims of Violence
Kashif
11/08/01 at 18:57:37
assalaamu alaikum

What is the hadith that is used? If you can quote it here, perhaps one of the brothers or sisters can comment insha'Allah.

Kashif
Wa Salaam
NS
Re: Missionary Claims of Violence
NewJehad
11/10/01 at 07:33:04
slm

I was thinking about writing about this issue.
I have been to the sites and I have also spoken to a brother who was trained as a missionary dedicated to giving dawa to Muslims, but unfortunately for the missionaries he became Muslim.
There main way of giving dawa to Muslims is by showing Muslims that Islam is violent by the many evidences in Quran, Sunnah and Muslim history. They also show how Islam contradicts western values with many evidences.
You mentioned “killing at a whim”, Islam is not the only belief system where people kill. What they mean is killing at a time when they would not have killed. The key word here is “THEY”. What I mean is there are times when we would say killing is expectable and western culture would not, and there are times when western culture would say killing is expectable and we would not.
So basically they are saying Islam contradicts western culture.
And I agree one 100% with them!
But unfortunately the western culture has become the dominant culture in the world. And many people believe in it more then they believe in Allah and the last day. People of all religions today have blind faith that western culture is the ultimate truth, so the Christians and Jews have reinterpreted their religions to agree with western culture, or at lest dumped the parts of their religion that contradicts it. And it is a fact that the Muslims will follow the Christians and Jews even if it takes them down a lizard’s hole.
Today many Muslims have done the above. Some say we can be good Americans and good Muslims at the same time. If these people believe in the above more then they believe in Islam, all missionaries need to do is bring some verses of Jihad and incidences in our history where enemies to Islam converted to Islam and fought against their own nations and peoples in the armies of Jehad.
So all the “Muslims” who reinterpreted Islam to make it appetising to the kaffar, are really making Kufr appetising to Muslims. Islam needs no reinterpretation. It is the truth and it will always be the truth.
When people twist words of the Quran to hide our duty to fight, it is easy for the missionaries to untwist them to their real meaning cause the real meaning is clear.
The fact that it contradicts western culture is a good thing because western culture is a man made way of life, while ours is revealed by the creator, most high. How can some thing made by the whims of kaffar men have any thing in common with the revealed truth?
If it were possible for humans to make a system for people to live by, then there would have been no reason for all the 100 000’s of messengers Allah sent us.
Re: Missionary Claims of Violence
se7en
11/20/01 at 15:38:11
as salaamu alaykum,

One of the claims this site *loves* to make is that Rasulullah [saw] was violent, and used violence capriciously, whenever anyone opposed him or did something he disliked.

Think about what you know of Rasulullah [saw], about some of the incidents he endured with such patience and perseverance.  He had animal filth tossed on his back during salah, and he did not respond with hostility.  He told his daughter Fatima, Allah will take care of His messenger.

On his journey back from Ta'if, when he was physically injured, bleeding, frustrated - he did not respond in anger, did not consent to having these people destroyed.  He said, perhaps their children may be Muslim, so leave them as they are.

This man promised Jannah to a prostitute who gave drink to a thirty dog.  He told his companions to leave baby birds alone, as their mother was getting upset.  He gave rights to trees.   He would shorten the prayer if he heard a baby crying, so the mother could tend to her child.  He taught his followers to greet each other with "peace be upon you."  

This is Rasulullah [saw].  This was his character.  Does it seem like this man would turn so easily to violence?

He [saw] was a man chosen by Allah to teach His message - and we have to understand that His message faced hostility.  Muhammad [saw] was a teacher, a guide, a father, a husband, a political leader, an imam -- and he was a military leader.  Participated in battle, killed his enemies.  He fought for justice, stood up against oppression and responded to aggression.  But he *never*, once, in so doing, betrayed his character, or did something unbecoming of a messenger of God.

I'd like for you to read some excerpts from [url=http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/SM_tsn/]Ar Raheeq al Makhtum[/url], specifically from the Battle of Badr onwards.  This time is targeted by missionaries because many Muslims don't know enough of their history and seerah to understand his [saw]'s actions in the proper context.

InshaAllah when I get the time I'll address each of the claims on that page.  (Some are pretty ridiculous -- Ka`b bin al-Ashraf was not killed because he was "a jew and said bad things about the prophet" - he was killed because he instigated *war* and hostility towards the Muslims in Makkah.  Al-Nadr bin al-Harith and `Uqba bin Abi Mu`ayt were killed in the battle of Badr - that's not murder, that's war.  `Amr b. Jihash plotted to kill the prophet [saw].  None of these seem like "arbitrary" killings to me..)

Anyway, again, I'd really suggest that you read up on your seerah.  It's very important that you know your stuff before you go into sites like that, and get into debates about these issues.


wAllahu a'lam.

wasalaamu alaykum.





Re: Missionary Claims of Violence
se7en
11/20/01 at 23:15:01
as salaamu alaykum,

Hey - I just took a look at the "sources" for some of those articles...

[quote]the "Sirat Rasul Allah" originally written by Ibn Ishaq and later rescended by Ibn Hisham[/quote]
Ok.. that answers a lot of questions :)  Ibn Hisham is *the* source for seerah.  It's interesting that they use as their source a book that Ibn Hisham took apart.  Using shady sources to justify your claims.. that sounds like a real Christian thing to do :P
Re: Missionary Claims of Violence
momineqbal
11/21/01 at 02:57:15
[slm],

Is Ibn Ishaq's seerah considered shady? I have got the english translation of it and I will start reading it soon inshaAllah.
I read Husayn Haykal's "Life of Muhammad" and he basically rejects each and every miracle of the prophet (saw) except the Quran which he says is the only miracle from the prophet (saw). He even says that in Abrahah and his elephant army were killed by small pox and not by birds carrying stones of baked clay as mentioned in surah al-fil.

Is Ibn-Hisham's seerah available in english? I heard Martin Lings basically sources his work on Ibn Hisham's work.

wassalam
Re: Missionary Claims of Violence
Kashif
11/21/01 at 10:26:14
[quote]Using shady sources to justify your claims.. that sounds like a real Christian thing to do :P[/quote]
assalaamu alaikum

Subhanallah.. these were my thoughts exactly when a colleague at work gave me a book to study called "Why i became Christian" (supposedly written by some Muslim guy who converted to Christianity). I was a bit apprehensive at first thinking that i was going to get some heavy duty, scholarly work thrust into my hands.

What i got was exactly the opposite: unscholarly in its usage of sources and references, citing his dreams as evidences that Christianity was the correct religion.

What disappointed me the most was the twisting of the words of the Qur'an & hadith, and selective quoting from the Qur'an.

After reading this book, i'm never again going to treat the word of a Xtian missionary in the way i did before.

Kashif
Wa Salaam
NS
Re: Missionary Claims of Violence
Anik
11/21/01 at 13:49:16
asalaamu alaikum,

on the note of violnce claims, i was on in a chatroom and someone challenged me on Islam saying the prophet SAW had order the sentnce of a pregnant woman... somethinglike that, and a Jew who was innocently jumped upon by  anumbe rof people for being there at the time... he gave me a missionary link as well and it went to Sahih Bukhari...obviously there's a reason the Xtians weren't seeing- eithe rtheir lying, twisting, or not understanding that the actions of the Prophet SAW were always just and accounted for. asalaamu alaikum. abdullah,.
Re: Missionary Claims of Violence
Saleema
11/22/01 at 00:53:02
[slm]

flat out lies Abdullah. The beloved Prophet (SAW) never ordered the slaying of a pregnant woman! In fact, if a woman is found guilty of a crime, her punishment is delayed for some time so just in case she's not pregnant. And if she's pregnant, then her punishment isn't delivered until after she delivers.

and as for shahi bukhari references--what they do is delete some words or sentences. or fabricate the whole thing. or site a hadith that is known to be daeef (fabricated).

as for the jewish one you sited--never heard of such an inccident.

[wlm]
Re: Missionary Claims of Violence
se7en
11/24/01 at 01:38:38


as salaamu alaykum,

I don't know too much about Ibn Ishaq's seerah, but I'll look into it inshaAllah.

We had an interesting discussion on books of seerah a while back (and we mentioned that issue with Haykal's book too) but I can't seem to find it.. I'll keep looking..

take care :)

wasalaamu alaykum


Individual posts do not necessarily reflect the views of Jannah.org, Islam, or all Muslims. All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster and may not be used without consent of the author.
The rest © Jannah.Org