MOHAMMAD: THE CHILD KILLER

[Gabe]

Another member of this board has pointed out that Islamic terror attacks which result in the death of innocent children seem to go against what is taught in the Quran. He is correct, this is how at first it would seem. It is only when you take into consideration the ahadith and other writings (which all Muslims consider to be almost as authorative as the Quran itself and without which, they would only be left with half a religion) do you realise that these evil terrorist's are indeed following true accepted teachings of Islam and are following a presidence set by Mohammad himself; someone who is ultimately viewed by Muslims as the perfect role-model, much like us Christians with our views of Christ.

Muhammad Never Killed Children?

It is probably fair to say that Muhammad did not approve of the intentional killing of children. A verse from the Qur’an laments the pre-Islamic Arab practice of infanticide against baby girls. Other evidence from the Hadith suggests that he instructed his men not to kill children in battle, if it could be avoided, but to capture them for slavery.

Children were often given a specific reprieve from the mandate to "kill those who disbelieve in Allah":
[Muhammad said] “Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah. Do not be deceitful with the spoils; do not be treacherous, nor mutilate nor kill children.†(Ibn Ishaq 992)

But Muhammad’s definition of a child was not the same as our modern understanding. Following the surrender of the Qurayza stronghold, he ordered the execution of every male child who had reached puberty. His men had the boys drop their pants so that they could chop the head off of anyone with pubic hair:

Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi: I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.(Sahih Muslim 4390).

Keep in mind that many Muslims often insist that Aisha reached puberty at age nine, since that is the age that Muhammad began having sex with her. If so, then the age for “manhood†among boys might have been considered around twelve.

Muhammad also played a bit loose with the lives of women and children during wartime. As recorded in both Bukhari (52:256):

Narrated As-Sab bin Jaththama: The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." I also heard the Prophet saying, "The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle."

and Sahih Muslim(4322):
It is reported on the authority of Sa'b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him), when asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: “They are from them.â€Â

This does not justify the targeted killing of women and children per se, but it does prove that collateral damage is entirely acceptable if it accomplishes the military goal of spreading Islamic rule. It is doubtful that Muhammad would ever shrug of the killing of young Muslims as he did the killing of non-Muslim children.

Muhammad did, in fact, draw a distinction between Muslim and non-Muslim children and said that it would be permissible to kill a child who has no prospect of accepting Islam:
The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) used not to kill the children, so thou shouldst not kill them unless you could know what Khadir had known about the child he killed, or you could distinguish between a child who would grow up to he a believer (and a child who would grow up to be a non-believer), so that you killed the (prospective) non-believer and left the (prospective) believer aside. (Sahih Muslim 4457)

After capturing Mecca, the prophet of Islam also ordered the execution of two “singing girls†who had mocked him in verse:

“…two singing-girls Fartana and her friend who used to sing satirical songs about the apostle, so he ordered that they should be killed…†(Ibn Ishaq 819)

A link to the original article:

 

[Zechariah]

I don't clearly understand your title compared to your subject. You were stating in your title as if Mohammed were a child murderer, whereas by your quotes he wasn't. I think it's important to know that most Muslims today are peaceful, and the emphasis of Islam is to be NON-VIOLENT. Texts such as The Bible/Tanakh and the Qu'ran can easily be misinterpreted, and usually this can cause incorrect views in the masses.

 

[Gabe]

I don't clearly understand your title compared to your subject. You were stating in your title as if Mohammed were a child murderer, whereas by your quotes he wasn't.

Mohammad's view of what a 'child' is, differ's from ours. He see's a child as an individual who has not started going through puberty; in this sense he is not a child killer but if you do not consider a nine year old girl or a twelve year old boy to be an adult, then he is indeed a child killer. that was the point of this thread.

He also allows the killing of non-Muslim children (ie- non-Muslim girls under the age of nine and boys under the age of twelve) as 'collateral damage'.

I think it's important to know that most Muslims today are peaceful,

There are peaceful 'Muslims' in this world, i have said this many times but them being peaceful has nothing to do with Islam and THIS is what my many post's deal with. It also goes without saying, that an extremely large number of Muslims are most definitely NOT peaceful and these are the people who I (and the Quran) consider to be real Muslims and not moderate (nominal) peaceful 'Muslims'.

and the emphasis of Islam is to be NON-VIOLENT.

No, it clearly ISN'T. Any peacefull verses that you may have been shown in regards to the treatment of Christians, Jews and other non-believers in the Quran, are more than likely taken from what is known as the "Early Revelation" which were recorded while Mohammad was in Mecca and had very few followers. Reading the Quran correctly (as all good Muslims should) those verses were abrogated by the later Medinan verses.

Texts such as The Bible/Tanakh and the Qu'ran can easily be misinterpreted, and usually this can cause incorrect views in the masses.

Yes it can, but my interpretation of quranic text and other Islamic scripture are not; simply because most of the text is so explicit; it is impossible to twist them and make them appear to be anything other than what they are; HATEFULL AND VIOLENT. You only need to read the text for yourself to know this.

I hate having to quote from the Quran but unfortunately it is something that i have started to do out of necessity because people who have next-to-no knowledge of Islam and Islamic life, keep blindly insisting that it is peaceful and somehow ignore anything that says otherwise.

How would you interpret these passages?

"O you who believe! Whoever from among you turns back from his religion, Allah will bring a people whom He will love and they will love Him; humble towards the believers, stern towards the disbelievers, fighting in the Way of Allah, and never afraid of the blame of the blamers. That is the Grace of Allah which He bestows on whom He wills. And Allah is All-Sufficient for His creatures' needs, All-Knower." [Quran 5:54]

"O Prophet (Muhammad)! Strive hard against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be harsh against them, their abode is Hell, - and worst indeed is that destination. They swear by Allâh that they said nothing (bad), but really they said the word of disbelief, and they disbelieved after accepting Islâm, and they resolved that which they were unable to carry out, and they could not find any cause to do so except that Allâh and His Messenger had enriched them of His Bounty. If then they repent, it will be better for them, but if they turn away, Allâh will punish them with a painful torment in this worldly life and in the Hereafter. And there is none for them on earth as a Walî (supporter, protector) or a helper." [Quran 9:73-74]

"They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them," [Quran 4:89]

“They swear by Allah that they said nothing (evil), but indeed they uttered blasphemy, and they did it after accepting Islam; and they meditated a plot which they were unable to carry out: this revenge of theirs was (their) only return for the bounty with which Allah and His Messenger had enriched them! If they repent, it will be best for them; but if they turn back (to their evil ways), Allah will punish them with a grievous penalty in this life and in the Hereafter: They shall have none on earth to protect or help them.†(Q.9:74)

But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then are they your brethren in religion. We detail our revelations for a people who have knowledge. And if they break their pledges after their treaty (hath been made with you) and assail your religion, then fight the heads of disbelief -- Lo! they have no binding oaths in order that they may desist. (Q.9:11,12)

"The Messenger of God stated: In no way is it permitted to shed the blood of a Muslim who testifies that "there is no god except God" and "I am the Apostle of God" except for three crimes: a. he has killed someone and his act merits retaliation; b. he is married and commits adultery; c. he abandons his religion and is separated from the community."

Aisha reports: "The Messenger of God stated that it is unlawful to shed the blood of a Muslim other than for the following reasons: a. although married, he commits adultery or b. after being a Muslim he chooses kufr (disbelief), or c. he takes someone's life."

Uthman reports: "I heard the Messenger of God saying that it is unlawful to shed the blood of a Muslim except in three situations: a. a person who, being a Muslim, becomes a kafir;(non-believer/infidel) b. one who after marriage commits adultery; c. one who commits murder apart from having an authorization to take life in exchange for another life."

Uthman further reports: "I heard the Messenger of God saying that it is unlawful to shed the blood of a Muslim with the exception of three crimes: a. the punishment of someone who after marriage commits adultery is stoning; b. retaliation is required against someone who intentionally commits murder; c. anyone who becomes an apostate after being a Muslim should be punished by death."

Those are a few passages from Islamic holy scripture, instructing Muslims on how to deal with people who leave Islam. Please note that like most of the Quran's commands, they are STILL being followed by millions of present-day Muslims in the east AND the west. Have you seen anything peaceful or non-violent yet?

"Ali burnt some people [hypocrites] and this news reached Ibn 'Abbas, who said, "Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, 'Don't punish (anybody) with Allah's Punishment.' No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.' " (Sahih Bukhari 4.260)

Narrated Abu Burda:
".... The Prophet then sent Mu'adh bin Jabal after him and when Mu'adh reached him, he spread out a cushion for him and requested him to get down (and sit on the cushion). Behold: There was a fettered man beside Abu Muisa. Mu'adh asked, "Who is this (man)?" Abu Muisa said, "He was a Jew and became a Muslim and then reverted back to Judaism." Then Abu Muisa requested Mu'adh to sit down but Mu'adh said, "I will not sit down till he has been killed. This is the judgment of Allah and His Apostle (for such cases) and repeated it thrice. Then Abu Musa ordered that the man be killed, and he was killed. Abu Musa added, "Then we discussed the night prayers and one of us said, 'I pray and sleep, and I hope that Allah will reward me for my sleep as well as for my prayers.'" (Sahih Bukhari 9.58, also Sahih Bukhari 9.271)

Jabir ibn Abdullah narrates: "A woman Umm Ruman (or Umm Marwan) apostatized. Then the prophet ordered that it would be better that she be offered Islam again and then repent. Otherwise she should be executed.....She refused to accept Islam. Therefore she was executed."

Those are a few passages from Islamic holy scripture, showing Islamic (Saria) laws being put into practice, much like millions of present-day Muslims, both in the east AND west. Have you seen anything peaceful or non-violent yet?

The following, is a direct command from the founder and law-maker of islam, Mohammad:

"Any person (i.e. Muslim) who has changed his religion, kill him."

Is there anything peaceful or non-violent about this very LITERAL command? a command that puts ME personaly in danger of being killed by my own family and (ex) freinds? Do you realise how many innocent people die in the east AND west today, because of these commands? These are accepted Islamic laws that ALL Muslims are aware of, regardless of wether they are peaceful or not. There are countless other barbaric laws like these in Islamic scripture and MOST of the worlds Muslim population agree with me; they are NOT misinterpreted. Or have you never given a second thought as to why these moderate (nominal) peaceful 'Muslims' continualy fail to speak out against these murderous hateful monsters? I used to live in a 'moderate' Muslim community, by moderate, i mean Muslims who are not murderous Terrorists. You would be suprised as to how many of those 'peaceful' Muslims celebrated the 9/11 terror attacks. Of course, this is something that you could not have known; isn't ignorence bliss?

Gabriel

 

[Zechariah]

You have a good point Gabriel, but just look at Muslims, especially those in Michigan (my home state). They refrain from violent acts and see it as wrong. Maybe it's just how people follow Mohammed. I would assume, just like in christianity, there are a protestant-like group of muslims or catholic-like group. The biggest thing i've noticed is that it is a way of life, but those who choose to take the Qu'ran word by word and fulfill everything are indeed headed in the wrong way.

 

[Gabe]

Most of the Muslim population is divided roughly into two; you have the Sunni's (85%-90% of all Muslims, including the al-Qaeda, Hamas and Mujahideen terrorist organizations) and you have the Shiites (10%-15% of all Muslims, including the Hizbollah terrorist organization). Both denominations commit Terror attacks and both denominations still adhere to the Quran’s/Mohammad's barbaric teachings.

You have seen peaceful Muslims who do not condone violence in Michigan? Of course, why wouldn’t you? There are peaceful people who label themselves as Muslim; just as a child born of Nazi parents is not guaranteed to hate Jews or Blacks, so then is a child born of Muslim parents not guaranteed to hate non-Muslims or live by all of the Quran’s teachings. The major difference being that the child born of Nazi’s will not label himself as a ‘Nazi’ if he did not adhere to its beliefs (because people will openly admit to Nazism being evil) and if he did choose to label himself as a nazi regardless of his conflicting views; YOU WOULD NEVER HAVE PEOPLE TRYING TO JUSTIFY NAZISM. I would suspect that if people acknowledged Islam for what it really is and did not attempt to justify it so much, then just like Nazism, there would not be so many peaceful people willing to call themselves Muslim and there would not be so many peaceful people corrupting their kids by telling them that the Quran is good and is from Allah, their god.

If Nazi's told everyone that Nazism is peaceful, I doubt many people would believe them. Most people would have seen or heard about their beliefs and would know that what they are being told is a lie OR at the very least would investigate their beliefs further. Why is it so different when a Muslim says the very same thing about Islam? The only apparent difference that i can see, is that their are a whole lot more Muslims in this world than Nazi's and because of this, many people are afraid to speak the truth; even the media shy away from anything that may show Islam in a bad light. Where is the media coverage when Muslim's vandalise churches in the UK or attack priests? or how about, when apostates and children who are 'born Muslims' living in the UK are murdered for their disbelief? These are not acts committed by Islamic terrorists, they are simply Muslims living by their beliefs, I highly doubt many of the individuals who commit those acts I mentioned would ever contemplate blowing themselves up. There is a massive grey area that separates Peaceful 'Muslims' from 'Islamic Terrorists' and this is something that most do not consider when they hear critisism aimed at Islam; they presume (or hope that others presume) that you are a bigot who is painting all Muslims with the same brush.

Mohammad was evil, just as Hitler was (in my opinion based on his actions, more so.) The Qu’ran contains hateful teachings, just as Mein Kampf does (in my opinion, more so) why then, is it politically correct to criticize, educate or warn people about one and not the other? Evil is Evil, no matter how many peaceful people choose to follow family traditions and wrongfully label themselves with it, and the longer people try to ignore or deny the teachings contained within the Quran, the longer there will be kid's brought up as nominal Muslims who may eventually decide on being true to their faith, and even if they don’t; there are many other unseen aspects of Islamic life which are cruel (e.g.-treatment of women and children). Imagine how the world would be if everyone claimed that there is nothing wrong with Hitler and his views; the mere thought of it is ridiculous but this is what we see happening every day with Islam.

 

[Love25]

Most of the Muslim population is divided roughly into two; you have the Sunni's (85%-90% of all Muslims, including the al-Qaeda, Hamas and Mujahideen terrorist organizations) and you have the Shiites (10%-15% of all Muslims, including the Hizbollah terrorist organization). Both denominations commit Terror attacks and both denominations still adhere to the Quran’s/Mohammad's barbaric teachings.

You have seen peaceful Muslims who do not condone violence in Michigan? Of course, why wouldn’t you? There are peaceful people who label themselves as Muslim; just as a child born of Nazi parents is not guaranteed to hate Jews or Blacks, so then is a child born of Muslim parents not guaranteed to hate non-Muslims or live by all of the Quran’s teachings. The major difference being that the child born of Nazi’s will not label himself as a ‘Nazi’ if he did not adhere to its beliefs (because people will openly admit to Nazism being evil) and if he did choose to label himself as a nazi regardless of his conflicting views; YOU WOULD NEVER HAVE PEOPLE TRYING TO JUSTIFY NAZISM. I would suspect that if people acknowledged Islam for what it really is and did not attempt to justify it so much, then just like Nazism, there would not be so many peaceful people willing to call themselves Muslim and there would not be so many peaceful people corrupting their kids by telling them that the Quran is good and is from Allah, their god.

If Nazi's told everyone that Nazism is peaceful, I doubt many people would believe them. Most people would have seen or heard about their beliefs and would know that what they are being told is a lie OR at the very least would investigate their beliefs further. Why is it so different when a Muslim says the very same thing about Islam? The only apparent difference that i can see, is that their are a whole lot more Muslims in this world than Nazi's and because of this, many people are afraid to speak the truth; even the media shy away from anything that may show Islam in a bad light. Where is the media coverage when Muslim's vandalise churches in the UK or attack priests? or how about, when apostates and children who are 'born Muslims' living in the UK are murdered for their disbelief? These are not acts committed by Islamic terrorists, they are simply Muslims living by their beliefs, I highly doubt many of the individuals who commit those acts I mentioned would ever contemplate blowing themselves up. There is a massive grey area that separates Peaceful 'Muslims' from 'Islamic Terrorists' and this is something that most do not consider when they hear critisism aimed at Islam; they presume (or hope that others presume) that you are a bigot who is painting all Muslims with the same brush.

Mohammad was evil, just as Hitler was (in my opinion based on his actions, more so.) The Qu’ran contains hateful teachings, just as Mein Kampf does (in my opinion, more so) why then, is it politically correct to criticize, educate or warn people about one and not the other? Evil is Evil, no matter how many peaceful people choose to follow family traditions and wrongfully label themselves with it, and the longer people try to ignore or deny the teachings contained within the Quran, the longer there will be kid's brought up as nominal Muslims who may eventually decide on being true to their faith, and even if they don’t; there are many other unseen aspects of Islamic life which are cruel (e.g.-treatment of women and children). Imagine how the world would be if everyone claimed that there is nothing wrong with Hitler and his views; the mere thought of it is ridiculous but this is what we see happening every day with Islam.

Hitler means Germany and Italy by the way!!!!

And by the way banu Qurayz were Jewish Tribe who had treaty with Muslims and they broke it and the most intresting part in this Hadith that they were Judged by death penalty by Jewish man and due to jewish Laws!

You said you are ex Muslim so when you were Muslim how many infidels you killed per day and what about your Father ALI he were like Germans and Italians also!?

Peace

 

[Gabe]

Hitler means Germany and Italy by the way!!!!

And by the way banu Qurayz were Jewish Tribe who had treaty with Muslims and they broke it and the most intresting part in this Hadith that they were Judged by death penalty by Jewish man and due to jewish Laws!

You said you are ex Muslim so when you were Muslim how many infidels you killed per day and what about your Father ALI he were like Germans and Italians also!?

Peace

No, Hitler does not "mean" Germany and Italy, and what does my dead father have to do with this thread?

Mohammad may not have ordered the slaughter of all boys with pubic hair but he agreed with the decision to do so. Not only this but he took part in the slaughter himself:

“Then the apostle (Mohammad) went out to the market of Medina (which is still a market today) and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for them and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches. ….There were 600 or 700 in all, though some put the figures as high as 800 or 900. … This went on until the apostle made an end of themâ€Â
Ibn Ishaq :464

 

[Love25]

Hitler means Germany and Italy by the way!!!!

And by the way banu Qurayz were Jewish Tribe who had treaty with Muslims and they broke it and the most intresting part in this Hadith that they were Judged by death penalty by Jewish man and due to jewish Laws!

You said you are ex Muslim so when you were Muslim how many infidels you killed per day and what about your Father ALI he were like Germans and Italians also!?

Peace

No, Hitler does not "mean" Germany and Italy, and what does my dead father have to do with this thread?

Mohammad may not have ordered the slaughter of all boys with pubic hair but he agreed with the decision to do so. Not only this but he took part in the slaughter himself:

“Then the apostle (Mohammad) went out to the market of Medina (which is still a market today) and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for them and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches. ….There were 600 or 700 in all, though some put the figures as high as 800 or 900. … This went on until the apostle made an end of themâ€Â
Ibn Ishaq :464

see you dont know the Sceince of Hadith, and this Hadith you brought is very weak IBN ISHAQ and we all know that those Hadith were recorded to EXPOSE what Jews and Others invented and inserted in Hadiths!

So bringing hadith that were exposed more then thousand year ago and use it as source ...... I will not even comment about that but will leave you as NEW christian full of love and Honesty to answer this!!!!!

Peace

 

[Gabe]

Hitler means Germany and Italy by the way!!!!

And by the way banu Qurayz were Jewish Tribe who had treaty with Muslims and they broke it and the most intresting part in this Hadith that they were Judged by death penalty by Jewish man and due to jewish Laws!

You said you are ex Muslim so when you were Muslim how many infidels you killed per day and what about your Father ALI he were like Germans and Italians also!?

Peace

No, Hitler does not "mean" Germany and Italy, and what does my dead father have to do with this thread?

Mohammad may not have ordered the slaughter of all boys with pubic hair but he agreed with the decision to do so. Not only this but he took part in the slaughter himself:

“Then the apostle (Mohammad) went out to the market of Medina (which is still a market today) and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for them and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches. ….There were 600 or 700 in all, though some put the figures as high as 800 or 900. … This went on until the apostle made an end of themâ€Â
Ibn Ishaq :464

see you dont know the Sceince of Hadith, and this Hadith you brought is very weak IBN ISHAQ and we all know that those Hadith were recorded to EXPOSE what Jews and Others invented and inserted in Hadiths!

So bringing hadith that were exposed more then thousand year ago and use it as source ...... I will not even comment about that but will leave you as NEW christian full of love and Honesty to answer this!!!!!

Peace

And answer it I will. This may be one of the weaker hadiths, but this does not make it useless if it does not contradict the sahih (authentic) hadiths. Mohammad gave the power of judgement to someone else, that's a fact. Mohammad agreed with that judgement, so much so that he called it “a judgement similar to Allah's Judgement†this is a fact, and that fact alone proves him to be a child killer. He had the power to stop it but did not. If Sad bin Muadh did not make that judgement call, Mohammad would have:

Sahih Bukari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 148:

"Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: "Some people (i.e. the Jews of Bani bin Quraiza) agreed to accept the verdict of Sad bin Muadh so the Prophet sent for him (i.e. Sad bin Muadh). He came riding a donkey, and when he approached the Mosque, the Prophet said, "Get up for the best amongst you." or said, "Get up for your chief." Then the Prophet said, "O Sad! These people have agreed to accept your verdict." Sad said, "I judge that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as captives." The Prophet said, "You have given a judgment similar to Allah's Judgment (or the King's judgment)."

...the most intresting part in this Hadith that they were Judged by death penalty by Jewish man and due to jewish Laws!

This is false. Unknown to the Jews, Sad bin Muadh was a Jewish convert to Islam:

Sahih Bukari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 448:

Narrated 'Aisha: Sad was wounded on the day of Khandaq (i.e. Trench) when a man from Quraish, called Hibban bin Al-'Araqa hit him (with an arrow). The man was Hibban bin Qais from (the tribe of) Bani Mais bin 'Amir bin Lu'ai who shot an arrow at Sad's medial arm vein (or main artery of the arm). The Prophet pitched a tent (for Sad) in the Mosque so that he might be near to the Prophet to visit. When the Prophet returned from the (battle) of Al-Khandaq (i.e. Trench) and laid down his arms and took a bath Gabriel came to him while he (i.e. Gabriel) was shaking the dust off his head, and said, "You have laid down the arms?" By Allah, I have not laid them down. Go out to them (to attack them)." The Prophet said, "Where?" Gabriel pointed towards Bani Quraiza. So Allah's Apostle went to them (i.e. Banu Quraiza) (i.e. besieged them). They then surrendered to the Prophet's judgement but he directed them to Sad to give his verdict concerning them. Sad said, "I give my judgement that their warriors should be killed, their women and children should be taken as captives, and their properties distributed."

Narrated Hisham: My father informed me that 'Aisha said, "Sad said, "O Allah! You know that there is nothing more beloved to me than to fight in Your Cause against those who disbelieved Your Apostle and turned him out (of Mecca). O Allah! I think you have put to an end the fight between us and them (i.e. Quraish infidels). And if there still remains any fight with the Quraish (infidels), then keep me alive till I fight against them for Your Sake. But if you have brought the war to an end, then let this wound burst and cause my death thereby.' So blood gushed from the wound. There was a tent in the Mosque belonging to Banu Ghifar who were surprised by the blood flowing towards them . They said, 'O people of the tent! What is this thing which is coming to us from your side?' Behold! Blood was flowing profusely out of Sad's wound. Sad then died because of that."

 

[Love25]

Ok since you know all that then why you didnt say it from the begining!?

I will tell you why you did so:

simply becuase the Hadith were it says they were 600 or 900 Jews and children killed is EXPOSED by science of Hadith long ago, but you wanted to make the picture look as worse as it can be so you had to use Hadith inserted by some jew long ago!!!

Banu Quraiz were Jewish tribe who made treaty with Muslims (see Muslims lived side by side with jews) but they broke this treaty and became on the side of Arab pagans in the war so Muslims went to them and punsihed those who were responsible of that and they Judgement again I repeat were made by:

JEW and due to OLD TESTMENT rules of God which is same God of you and me by the way!

Which make me wonder why is it problem for you if Prophet Mohamed (pbuh) said that those laws are same like Muslim ones!?

Beside what is the problem if death penalty is the punsihment for TREASON during war or battle time, since when this were crime!?

So I kindly ask you as New christian full of love and Honesty, and since you have the knowlegde bring the right picture about Islam to those who dont know a lot about Islam, and I think there is no need to play with hadiths that already exposed more then thosuand years!!!!

May Allah (swt) guide you!

Peace

 

[Gabe]

Ok since you know all that then why you didnt say it from the begining!?

I will tell you why you did so:

simply becuase the Hadith were it says they were 600 or 900 Jews and children killed is EXPOSED by science of Hadith long ago, but you wanted to make the picture look as worse as it can be

No, I've already explained my use of that hadith:

This may be one of the weaker hadiths, but this does not make it useless if it does not contradict the sahih (authentic) hadiths.

so you had to use Hadith inserted by some jew long ago!!!

Yes, blame it on those conniving Jews, everyone else does. Instead of stating these assertions as facts, why not back them up with evidence?

Banu Quraiz were Jewish tribe who made treaty with Muslims (see Muslims lived side by side with jews) but they broke this treaty and became on the side of Arab pagans in the war so Muslims went to them and punsihed those who were responsible of that and they Judgement again I repeat were made by:

JEW and due to OLD TESTMENT rules of God which is same God of you and me by the way!

And I repeat once again; Sad bin Muadh was not a Jew, but a Jewish convert to Islam.

Which make me wonder why is it problem for you if Prophet Mohamed (pbuh) said that those laws are same like Muslim ones!?

Beside what is the problem if death penalty is the punsihment for TREASON during war or battle time, since when this were crime!?

Since Mohammad did not discriminate between combatants and non-combatants in his slaughter, and regardless of whether or not any of them actually fought in this so-called "battle" they had all surrendered and this did not stop him from allowing the slaughter of children.

The name of this thread is “MOHAMMAD: THE CHILD KILLER†and this he indeed is.

 

[Love25]

No, I've already explained my use of that hadith:

This may be one of the weaker hadiths, but this does not make it useless if it does not contradict the sahih (authentic) hadiths

So you are now making your OWN Hadith science!?

What you say no Muslim will agree about since first day from Islam and by anyone who wrote Hadith till today and till end of life on this earth, you want to use fabricated and inserted hadith please do, but dont say this is Islam!

And I see you dont understand what is weak Hadith means!

--------------------------------

[[Yes, blame it on those conniving Jews, everyone else does. Instead of stating these assertions as facts, why not back them up with evidence?]]

What evidence!?

I dont need any this Hadith is EXPOSED more then thousand years ago I didnt INVENT anything new, and you by using Fabricated Hadith and already exposed long ago means you TRY to find anything about Islam and DIG in something already again I say EXPOSED!

------------------------------

And I repeat once again; Sad bin Muadh was not a Jew, but a Jewish convert to Islam.

Ok if this is the case then why this hadith is considered Fabricated!?

Dear in ALL Battles during life time of prophet Mohamed (pbuh) less then 400 MEN were killed and by the way FROM BOTH SIDES Muslims and non Muslims!!!

----------------------------

Since Mohammad did not discriminate between combatants and non-combatants in his slaughter, and regardless of whether or not any of them actually fought in this so-called "battle" they had all surrendered and this did not stop him from allowing the slaughter of children.

The name of this thread is “MOHAMMAD: THE CHILD KILLER†and this he indeed is.

And your Prove is Fabricated Hadith!!!

When I adresss protestant I use with them their Bible, and when I do with catholics I use their bible and when I take to Jehovah witness I use their bible, when I adress Jews I use Torah and Talmud, so A B C logic says when you adress Muslims you should:

NOT USE FABRICTAED HADITH BY NON MUSLIMS (if you dont like Jew)!

Peace

 

[Gabe]

The fact that Sad bin Muadh was a Jewish convert to Islam, and the fact that Mohammad did not discriminate between combatants and non-combatants in his slaughter are proven by the hadiths I provided from the Bukhari collection, they are not fabricated hadiths.

"Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: "Some people (i.e. the Jews of Bani bin Quraiza) agreed to accept the verdict of Sad bin Muadh so the Prophet sent for him (i.e. Sad bin Muadh). He came riding a donkey, and when he approached the Mosque, the Prophet said, "Get up for the best amongst you." or said, "Get up for your chief." Then the Prophet said, "O Sad! These people have agreed to accept your verdict." Sad said, "I judge that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as captives." The Prophet said, "You have given a judgment similar to Allah's Judgment (or the King's judgment)."

Narrated 'Aisha: Sad was wounded on the day of Khandaq (i.e. Trench) when a man from Quraish, called Hibban bin Al-'Araqa hit him (with an arrow). The man was Hibban bin Qais from (the tribe of) Bani Mais bin 'Amir bin Lu'ai who shot an arrow at Sad's medial arm vein (or main artery of the arm). The Prophet pitched a tent (for Sad) in the Mosque so that he might be near to the Prophet to visit. When the Prophet returned from the (battle) of Al-Khandaq (i.e. Trench) and laid down his arms and took a bath Gabriel came to him while he (i.e. Gabriel) was shaking the dust off his head, and said, "You have laid down the arms?" By Allah, I have not laid them down. Go out to them (to attack them)." The Prophet said, "Where?" Gabriel pointed towards Bani Quraiza. So Allah's Apostle went to them (i.e. Banu Quraiza) (i.e. besieged them). They then surrendered to the Prophet's judgement but he directed them to Sad to give his verdict concerning them. Sad said, "I give my judgement that their warriors should be killed, their women and children should be taken as captives, and their properties distributed."

Narrated Hisham: My father informed me that 'Aisha said, "Sad said, "O Allah! You know that there is nothing more beloved to me than to fight in Your Cause against those who disbelieved Your Apostle and turned him out (of Mecca). O Allah! I think you have put to an end the fight between us and them (i.e. Quraish infidels). And if there still remains any fight with the Quraish (infidels), then keep me alive till I fight against them for Your Sake. But if you have brought the war to an end, then let this wound burst and cause my death thereby.' So blood gushed from the wound. There was a tent in the Mosque belonging to Banu Ghifar who were surprised by the blood flowing towards them . They said, 'O people of the tent! What is this thing which is coming to us from your side?' Behold! Blood was flowing profusely out of Sad's wound. Sad then died because of that."

 

[Love25]

The fact that Sad bin Muadh was a Jewish convert to Islam, and the fact that Mohammad did not discriminate between combatants and non-combatants in his slaughter are proven by the hadiths I provided from the Bukhari collection, they are not fabricated hadiths.

"Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: "Some people (i.e. the Jews of Bani bin Quraiza) agreed to accept the verdict of Sad bin Muadh so the Prophet sent for him (i.e. Sad bin Muadh). He came riding a donkey, and when he approached the Mosque, the Prophet said, "Get up for the best amongst you." or said, "Get up for your chief." Then the Prophet said, "O Sad! These people have agreed to accept your verdict." Sad said, "I judge that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as captives." The Prophet said, "You have given a judgment similar to Allah's Judgment (or the King's judgment)."

Narrated 'Aisha: Sad was wounded on the day of Khandaq (i.e. Trench) when a man from Quraish, called Hibban bin Al-'Araqa hit him (with an arrow). The man was Hibban bin Qais from (the tribe of) Bani Mais bin 'Amir bin Lu'ai who shot an arrow at Sad's medial arm vein (or main artery of the arm). The Prophet pitched a tent (for Sad) in the Mosque so that he might be near to the Prophet to visit. When the Prophet returned from the (battle) of Al-Khandaq (i.e. Trench) and laid down his arms and took a bath Gabriel came to him while he (i.e. Gabriel) was shaking the dust off his head, and said, "You have laid down the arms?" By Allah, I have not laid them down. Go out to them (to attack them)." The Prophet said, "Where?" Gabriel pointed towards Bani Quraiza. So Allah's Apostle went to them (i.e. Banu Quraiza) (i.e. besieged them). They then surrendered to the Prophet's judgement but he directed them to Sad to give his verdict concerning them. Sad said, "I give my judgement that their warriors should be killed, their women and children should be taken as captives, and their properties distributed."

Narrated Hisham: My father informed me that 'Aisha said, "Sad said, "O Allah! You know that there is nothing more beloved to me than to fight in Your Cause against those who disbelieved Your Apostle and turned him out (of Mecca). O Allah! I think you have put to an end the fight between us and them (i.e. Quraish infidels). And if there still remains any fight with the Quraish (infidels), then keep me alive till I fight against them for Your Sake. But if you have brought the war to an end, then let this wound burst and cause my death thereby.' So blood gushed from the wound. There was a tent in the Mosque belonging to Banu Ghifar who were surprised by the blood flowing towards them . They said, 'O people of the tent! What is this thing which is coming to us from your side?' Behold! Blood was flowing profusely out of Sad's wound. Sad then died because of that."

I see that your pride is asnwering me now!!!!

Even your answer is very weak, answer this Question:

Is there is only ONE SAAD in Arabian pensuala!?

You dig any Hadith with anyone called Saad and say this is the one!?

Ok supose he is the one FOR SAKE of FUN, thenwhich Hadiht is First:

the one of banu Quraiz were Judged or the other Two you brought with name of Saad!?

didnt it occur to you hat maybe he made this Judgment when he were still Jew, then when became Muslim the other two hadith were said!

Beside that:

We dont see any children killed or any 600/900 or close numbers to those who were punished in the RIGHT AUTHNETIC Hadith, but only in Fabricated and EXPOSED long ago Hadith!

And Also didnt you notice what Hadith says about that even jews agreed him to Judge!?

As New Christian you should be full of love and Honesty and Courage to confess that you made Mistake, other wise dont expect any Muslim or anyone with little knwolegde to beleive what you post!!!

May Allah (swt) guide you!

Peace

 

[Sanitarium]

I think it's important to know that most Muslims today are peaceful, and the emphasis of Islam is to be NON-VIOLENT.

Hi Zechariah,
I have created a thread about this here: Abrogation in Islam: it IS important.

The biggest thing i've noticed is that it is a way of life, but those who choose to take the Qu'ran word by word and fulfill everything are indeed headed in the wrong way.

Again please read my thread above to understand why you are mistaken here. Muhammad is Uswa Hasana (best example of conduct for Muslims) so to find the epitome of "good Muslim" we need only to look to Muhammad to find out what that is. I do not disagree that the majority of Muslims are peaceful people, but this is due to their own morality and not due to Islam. Have a look at this:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah's Apostle said, "I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and i have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand." Abu Huraira added: Allah's Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them).

Would the prophet of a (truly) peaceful religion say something like that? How about this one?

Abu Huraira reported that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon hlmg) said: I have been given superiority over the other prophets in six respects: I have been given words which are concise but comprehensive in meaning; I have been helped by terror (in the hearts of enemies): spoils have been made lawful to me: the earth has been made for me clean and a place of worship; I have been sent to all mankind and the line of prophets is closed with me.

See also: Sahih Muslim Muslim Book 004, Number 1063, 1066 & 1067.

There we have Muhammad, prophet of god, telling us that god has sent him and given him superiority over ALL other prophets (Jewish and Christ) in six respects; and one of them is terror!. Peaceful?

I'm not saying that all peaceful Muslims are bad people - they're not! But they are 'bad Muslims' if we are talking Islamically.

 

[Love25]

I think it's important to know that most Muslims today are peaceful, and the emphasis of Islam is to be NON-VIOLENT.

Hi Zechariah,
I have created a thread about this here: Abrogation in Islam: it IS important.

The biggest thing i've noticed is that it is a way of life, but those who choose to take the Qu'ran word by word and fulfill everything are indeed headed in the wrong way.

Again please read my thread above to understand why you are mistaken here. Muhammad is Uswa Hasana (best example of conduct for Muslims) so to find the epitome of "good Muslim" we need only to look to Muhammad to find out what that is. I do not disagree that the majority of Muslims are peaceful people, but this is due to their own morality and not due to Islam. Have a look at this:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah's Apostle said, "I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and i have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand." Abu Huraira added: Allah's Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them).

Would the prophet of a (truly) peaceful religion say something like that? How about this one?
[quote="Sahih Muslim Book 004, Number 1062":2efnpnlx]
Abu Huraira reported that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon hlmg) said: I have been given superiority over the other prophets in six respects: I have been given words which are concise but comprehensive in meaning; I have been helped by terror (in the hearts of enemies): spoils have been made lawful to me: the earth has been made for me clean and a place of worship; I have been sent to all mankind and the line of prophets is closed with me.

See also: Sahih Muslim Muslim Book 004, Number 1063, 1066 & 1067.

There we have Muhammad, prophet of god, telling us that god has sent him and given him superiority over ALL other prophets (Jewish and Christ) in six respects; and one of them is terror!. Peaceful?

I'm not saying that all peaceful Muslims are bad people - they're not! But they are 'bad Muslims' if we are talking Islamically.[/quote:2efnpnlx]

A B C work of any POLICE in the world is to TERROR CRIMINALS so for sure Prophets of God and good people Terror SATAN and his followers and I think you as christian I supose should beleive same thing it is even written in the bible!

Peace

 

[Sanitarium]

And by the way banu Qurayz were Jewish Tribe who had treaty with Muslims and they broke it and the most intresting part in this Hadith that they were Judged by death penalty by Jewish man and due to jewish Laws!

What is your evidence for this? Have a look at some rebuttals to this first:
Traitors or Betrayed?
What really happened to the Banu Qurayza

You said you are ex Muslim so when you were Muslim how many infidels you killed per day and what about your Father ALI he were like Germans and Italians also!?

This is a red herring (logical fallacy). We are discussing Islam and Muhammad, not Muslims (who may or may not be following the texts and the Sunnah).

see you dont know the Sceince of Hadith, and this Hadith you brought is very weak IBN ISHAQ and we all know that those Hadith were recorded to EXPOSE what Jews and Others invented and inserted in Hadiths!

No, this is the common claim brought in order to dismiss ahadith that you (Muslims) do not like. In fact, Ibn Ishaq's Sira and Tabari's collection are considered to be number one for the history of Islam. Just because the narrations in Tabari & Ishaq are not (as a whole) classified Sahih does not give you carte blanche to dismiss all of them. You realise that the criteria for a Sahih narration was invented by Bukhari (and used by Muslim - his student) hundreds of years after Ishaq & Tabari recorded their narrations. Why would you expect them to use Bukhari's criteria to judge between them?

Again, just because a narration is not in a Sahih collection does not automatically make it false. Just because a narration is in a Sahih collection, does not make it automatically true.

And answer it I will. This may be one of the weaker hadiths, but this does not make it useless if it does not contradict the sahih (authentic) hadiths.

I do not agree with this. Love25 has brought NO evidence to show the classification of this hadith, therefore it is errant to agree it is 'weaker'.

simply becuase the Hadith were it says they were 600 or 900 Jews and children killed is EXPOSED by science of Hadith long ago, but you wanted to make the picture look as worse as it can be so you had to use Hadith inserted by some jew long ago!!!

This is false. These ahadith have not been 'exposed' as frauds. Answer me this: If they are frauds, why do MUSLIM organizations continue to publish and spread them? Where is the warning that they are all 'fake'? hmmm? As stated, the Sira & Tabari are the number one source for the history of Islam.

JEW and due to OLD TESTMENT rules of God which is same God of you and me by the way!

Evidence that the Qurayza broke the treaty please? Also evidence that they were judged by the Torah. Thank you!

What you say no Muslim will agree about since first day from Islam and by anyone who wrote Hadith till today and till end of life on this earth, you want to use fabricated and inserted hadith please do, but dont say this is Islam!

And I see you dont understand what is weak Hadith means!

No we both understand what weak ahadith are, but YOU have not presented any evidence that they ARE weak. Evidence instead of assertations please.

 

[Love25]

And by the way banu Qurayz were Jewish Tribe who had treaty with Muslims and they broke it and the most intresting part in this Hadith that they were Judged by death penalty by Jewish man and due to jewish Laws!

What is your evidence for this? Have a look at some rebuttals to this first:
Traitors or Betrayed?
What really happened to the Banu Qurayza

You said you are ex Muslim so when you were Muslim how many infidels you killed per day and what about your Father ALI he were like Germans and Italians also!?

This is a red herring (logical fallacy). We are discussing Islam and Muhammad, not Muslims (who may or may not be following the texts and the Sunnah).

see you dont know the Sceince of Hadith, and this Hadith you brought is very weak IBN ISHAQ and we all know that those Hadith were recorded to EXPOSE what Jews and Others invented and inserted in Hadiths!

No, this is the common claim brought in order to dismiss ahadith that you (Muslims) do not like. In fact, Ibn Ishaq's Sira and Tabari's collection are considered to be number one for the history of Islam. Just because the narrations in Tabari & Ishaq are not (as a whole) classified Sahih does not give you carte blanche to dismiss all of them. You realise that the criteria for a Sahih narration was invented by Bukhari (and used by Muslim - his student) hundreds of years after Ishaq & Tabari recorded their narrations. Why would you expect them to use Bukhari's criteria to judge between them?

Again, just because a narration is not in a Sahih collection does not automatically make it false. Just because a narration is in a Sahih collection, does not make it automatically true.

And answer it I will. This may be one of the weaker hadiths, but this does not make it useless if it does not contradict the sahih (authentic) hadiths.

I do not agree with this. Love25 has brought NO evidence to show the classification of this hadith, therefore it is errant to agree it is 'weaker'.

simply becuase the Hadith were it says they were 600 or 900 Jews and children killed is EXPOSED by science of Hadith long ago, but you wanted to make the picture look as worse as it can be so you had to use Hadith inserted by some jew long ago!!!

This is false. These ahadith have not been 'exposed' as frauds. Answer me this: If they are frauds, why do MUSLIM organizations continue to publish and spread them? Where is the warning that they are all 'fake'? hmmm? As stated, the Sira & Tabari are the number one source for the history of Islam.

JEW and due to OLD TESTMENT rules of God which is same God of you and me by the way!

Evidence that the Qurayza broke the treaty please? Also evidence that they were judged by the Torah. Thank you!

What you say no Muslim will agree about since first day from Islam and by anyone who wrote Hadith till today and till end of life on this earth, you want to use fabricated and inserted hadith please do, but dont say this is Islam!

And I see you dont understand what is weak Hadith means!

No we both understand what weak ahadith are, but YOU have not presented any evidence that they ARE weak. Evidence instead of assertations please.

In Islam we DONT follow our desires and wishes Our SOURCE for ISLAM is Holy QURAN, and HADITH and for Hadith we have science of HADITH and it take YEARS for people to learn it even me as Muslim not Qualified to talk about it, so what about you!!!!

You asked Question why those Fabricated Hadith and Fake and weak ones are exsist and to this lets ask those who colected the Hadith who will tell you that it is to EXPOSE and SHOW to people what is Fabricated and inserted from True sayings!

Do you know Bukhari memorized 600 000 Hadith and not only those Sayings but also who said it!?

This Hadith which you know what i talk about is FABRICTAED and no Muslim use it while to make you happy the age of Aisha Hadith is right Hundred percent and there is no problem in it at all!

Peace

 

[Sanitarium]

and HADITH and for Hadith we have science of HADITH and it take YEARS for people to learn it even me as Muslim not Qualified to talk about it, so what about you!!!!

No this "science of ahadith" thing is a lie to keep fitnah (disbelief) at bay when Muslims find something they don't like in the ahadith. They are taught that they are "unqualified" to understand it properly, so they must ask someone higher (imam or someone) who can then lie to them and pacify their disgust.

You asked Question why those Fabricated Hadith and Fake and weak ones are exsist and to this lets ask those who colected the Hadith who will tell you that it is to EXPOSE and SHOW to people what is Fabricated and inserted from True sayings!

Really? I have a copy of Ibn Ishaq'a sira in my hand right now. Where is the warning label that tells Muslims that it's all fabricated? *flips through the pages* nope I can't see it. Where is it?

The point I'm trying to get across is that these are NOT considered 'all false' as you are claiming, because Muslims themselves are the ones perpetuating their existence. If they were fake you'd burn them like you do other books you don't like. (you = Muslims not you personally)

Do you know Bukhari memorized 600 000 Hadith and not only those Sayings but also who said it!?

Yes, so? And it was 700,000, not 600,000.

This Hadith which you know what i talk about is FABRICTAED and no Muslim use it while to make you happy the age of Aisha Hadith is right Hundred percent and there is no problem in it at all!

Peace

Actually I find the opposite. Muslims are happy to quote Ishaq and Tabari when it suits THEIR argument, but not accept them when it goes against their argument. Hypocritical if I may say so!

 

[Love25]

[/quote]
Actually I find the opposite. Muslims are happy to quote Ishaq and Tabari when it suits THEIR argument, but not accept them when it goes against their argument. Hypocritical if I may say so![/quote]

Not at all in Islam we CHECK source of everything and our only Source is Prophet of God same like Jews their source should be Moses (pbuh) for example, so we have Holy Quran and Hadith and those are our source, concerning Hadith they are classified and out of those 700 000 thousand Hadith that Bukhari new we have only 4000 Hadith that we are sure from their source, maybe you bring us the exsact number of those Hadith also!?

About using those other Hadith this we do when it is in complete Harmony with Holy Quran and hadith thats why it is called science of Hadith that people spen years to study it and need a lot of knwolegde to know before they enter it, like knowing Holy Quran, Arabic Language etc....

You will find some Muslims used Jewish and chrsitian sources in some stories and this classified as Islraelities!?

See any try to INSERT fabricated or weak hadith is immidiatly EXPOSED like the case of this Thread becuase Muslims were very careful in Saving Truth and this is we are proud with among all religions on earth as we have SOURCE to sayings of our Prophet and Original to God's words!!

Peace