Source: LOONWATCH.COM
Author: Danios.
Robert Spencer has summarized the key arguments raised by Islamophobes in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades). Chapter one of his book is entitled “Muhammad: Prophet of War”, in which he recounts the life story of the Prophet Muhammad. In it, he portrays Muhammad as the aggressor and his Quraysh enemies as the victims. Spencer writes:
After receiving revelations from Allah through the angel Gabriel in 610, [Muhammad] began by just preaching to his tribe the worship of One God and his own position as a prophet. But he was not well received by his Quraysh brethren in Mecca, who reacted disdainfully to his prophetic call and refused to give up their gods. Muhammad’s frustration and rage became evident. When even his uncle, Abu Lahab, rejected his message, Muhammad cursed him and his wife in violent language that has been preserved in the Qur’an, the holy book of Islam: “May the hands of Abu Lahab perish! May he himself perish! Nothing shall his wealth and gains avail him. He shall be burnt in a flaming fire, and his wife, laden with faggots, shall have a rope of fibre around her neck.” (Qur’an 111:1-5)
Ultimately, Muhammad would turn from violent words to violent deeds. In 622, he finally fled his native Mecca for a nearby town, Medina… [1]
Muhammad’s message of monotheism does not adequately explain why the leaders of the Quraysh rejected his message so forcefully. Indeed, Muhammad preached a lot more than this: he called for a top-to-bottom reform of Meccan society, advocating for the rights of the poor and weak. While it is also true that Muhammad’s renouncement of the pagan gods was unbearable to many followers of the old religion, so too did his powerful critique of the rich and powerful set him on a collision course against them.
Read more HERE
Categories: ISLAM, Islam, Islam: A Religion of Peace, Religion
An argument from Thomas Carlyle
Sometimes it is suggested by the Christian historians that Islam spread by sword. This is an extremely absurd allegation. Rather than going into the convoluted details of history this criticism can be explained easily on logical grounds. We can borrow a line of reasoning from Sir Thomas Carlyle, so that Christians are able to understand it easily. He was a famous British historian from the nineteenth century. He writes, “Much has been said of Muhammad’s propagating his Religion by the sword. It is no doubt far nobler what we have to boast of the
Christian Religion, that it propagated itself peaceably in the way of preaching and conviction.” He continues his logic, “If we take this for an argument of the truth or falsehood of a religion, there is a radical mistake in it. The sword indeed: but where will you get your sword! Every new opinion, at its starting, is precisely in a minority of one. In one man’s head alone, there it dwells as yet.” He delivers his punch line by stating, “One man alone of the whole world believes it; there is one man against all men. That he take a sword, and try to propagate with that, will do little for him. You must first get your sword!”
FUNDAMENTAL VERSUS ALLEGORIC: WAR AND PEACE IN ISLAM
http://www.alislam.org/library/articles/War-and-Peace-in-Islam-20080402MN.pdf