Hadith “Do Not Greet Jews… Force Them To Narrow Road…” Explained

New piece on a Hadith report that is often misinterpreted…

Discover The Truth

Kaleef K. Karim

I have always advised Muslims and others that when you use a Hadith or a Quranic verse, you should know the historical background as why it was said and when it was revealed. If you do not know the very basics of when and why a verse of the Quran was revealed or why the Prophet (p) said a statement, don’t try give an explanation and lead  innocent people astray. Without its historical background one will at times give an interpretation that may be alien to the way it was understood when it was uttered. For example, the following Hadith is often quoted and twisted by individuals who want to paint the Islamic faith negatively:

“Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger as saying: Do not greet the Jews and the Christians before they greet you and when you meet any one of them on the roads force him…

View original post 2,354 more words

Advertisements


Categories: Islam

92 replies

  1. Good article!

    Liked by 2 people

  2. The Jews just made preparations to defend themselves against Mohammed who was plotting against them.

    That is not illegal but the obligation of all nations.

    If the Jews were attacking why is Mohammed the one who is riding to their location and not vice versa?

    Like

    • LOL madman! Still living in your personal insane asylum?

      Did you even read the article? It states that the Jews being referred to were the Bani Qurayzah who had betrayed Muhammad during the Battle of the Trench. They had committed treason by violating their treaty obligations. Therefore, the Prophet was justified in marching against them.

      You see, madman, unlike your god who commanded the Israelites to wipe out the Canaanites without provocation, my God only commands fighting in self-defense, which as you said, is not illegal but the obligation of all nations.

      Liked by 3 people

    • “unlike your god who commanded the Israelites to wipe out the Canaanites without provocation”

      Looks like fail failed his OT101 reading comprehension test back in his backwater madrasah.

      Like

    • Hey Lassie! How you doing boy?

      Don’t bark at me you gentile mutt. I’m just describing the genocide your mangod commanded of the Israelites. Dont blame me if it makes uncomfortable. Now be a good boy and go back to your doghouse with your tail between your legs. 😉

      Like

    • Good to see you are still as racist and bigoted as ever failure.

      Sadly, it is you who doesn’t get it, because you still haven’t actually bothered to read the Old Teatament. What did God say about the Canaanites? Remember, you can’t throw Him under the bus because you, my muhammadan friend, are to recognise the Torah as binding.

      You are a radical dear boy, happily justifying slaughtering people as long as you perceive it to be “self defence”. Is it any wonder that so many Muslims think they are being attcked by the west? Is this so you can mercilessly kill people and feel vindicated?

      You are from Australia right? Which muhammadan gang you running with these days? You been arrested by the ME crime squad yet?

      Like

  3. No treaty can demand a total and blind trust in someone who is just a man and capable of anything including being a threat to life and limb. Obviously the Jews judged Mohammed by his words and actions to be a threat to them despite the treaty. In which case they were not bound to comply with it. They took purely defensive measures to protect themselves, not attacking Mohammed in any way.

    Mohammed’s response was both disproportionate and unjustified, not to mention unlawful.

    Thou shalt not kill is a higher law which Mohammed broke in response to this supposed act of treason.

    Like

    • LOL, more insanity from the madman!

      Who are you to decide what a treaty can and cannot justify? The Muslims were fighting for their lives, so your crocodile tears for the Bani Qurayza are out of place.

      And all of this is ironic anyway coming from a hypocrite Christian who justifies the mass slaughter of the Caananites because it’s in his Bible. That’s why no one really takes you silly apologists seriously. And it’s also why your religion is losing adherents in droves. People are tired of your hypocrisy and lies. Poor, poor madman…

      Liked by 4 people

    • Madmanna: Mohammed’s response was both disproportionate and unjustified, not to mention unlawful.

      What would have been a proportionate response considering that if Quraish had won the Battle of Trench then the Muslim community was done for, and considering that the slaughter of Qurayzah served as a massive deterrent to other enemy groups?

      Like

  4. Faiz, still your old self I see.

    Like

  5. So it’s ok to be a bigot to other religous faiths according to Fail and the article, as long the other people are your “enemy”. The Jews and Christians being the enemy apparently justifies Muhammad’s racism. So, who exactly are the enemies of modern Muslims I wonder?

    “all the troubles that exist around the world are because of the Jews. When the Jews are wiped out, then the world would be purified,” Muhammad Raza Saqib Mustafai (Pakistani scholar)

    Let the Islamic bigotry begin!!!

    Like

    • As if the Bible isn’t the most anti semitic book in the world.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Lol, still not getting it eh?

      The hadith only had to with a specific group. It doesn’t have to be applied to all cases and for all times. No racism there, you mangy little Gentile puppy!

      Also, don’t forget Lassie that your mangod justified racism by separating Jews and Gentiles. If you had been there, you would have had to wait for the Jews to get their shot at salvation first through the mangod. However, if you acknowledged your inferiority as a Gentile dog, then maybe you could get your fill too. Ah, what a lovely Biblical story…

      Like

    • ” It doesn’t have to be applied to all cases and for all times.”

      Says Fail. Epic Fail.

      “Prophet Muhammad’s status as role model and the validity of the sunnah are not limited to his life or to a certain time period. The Holy Quran and the notions of the sunnah state this issue clearly”

      Like

  6. The Jews had no mandate from God to fight Mohammed’s pagan religion extermination war.

    Like

    • Too bad God didn’t take the side of Jews or pagans when Muhammad(saw) fought them to victory.

      Liked by 1 person

    • LOL, yep the only mandate they had was to kill the Caananites!

      But seriously, they signed the treaty which called on both parties to help and cooperate with each other. Thus, the Jews were responsible for their treachery and they got what they deserved.

      Again, all your crocodile tears are worthless since they are coming from a hypocrite pagan trinitarian.

      Liked by 2 people

  7. Faiz: “Who are you to decide what a treaty can and cannot justify? The Muslims were fighting for their lives, so your crocodile tears for the Bani Qurayza are out of place.”

    I reply:

    The pagans were fighting for the survival of their religion, their livelihoods and their lives because Mohammed would accept nothing short of total domination of their society and culture, their holy places, and the extinction of their religion.

    But pagans, as all non-Muslims, have no rights under Islam so its deemed a virtue to go to war with them.

    Like

    • Oh madman, your idiotic ramblings only make it more obvious how insane you are.

      And what you still don’t get is any of your arguments are worthless while yoy defend and justify the extermination ordered by your mangod of the Canaanites. Condemn that first and then you can open your mouth about alleged human rights abuses in Islam. Until then, your hypocrisy will relegate you into the dustbin and no one will take you seriously.

      LOL, apparently you think that the pagans were justified in trying to wipe out Islam because they were trying to save their religion. So I guess Muslims have no rights in your warped mind? Like I said, the Muslims were fighting for their lives, so any action they took against their enemies were completely justified. Recall that when they came to Medina, they made a treaty with the Jews. They would be able to practice their religion and the Muslims would practice theirs. This idea has been enforced throughout most of Islamic history.

      In contrast, there was no negotiation between your mangod’s Israelite hordes and the Canaanites. It was death or slavery, and nothing else. Will you condemn this madman? Come out of your psychic warped mind and listen to reason.

      Like

  8. Of course, the moral problems with the mass murder and enslavement of innocent jews flies over the head of our muslim friends.

    Mohammed was supposed to be a moral example for all time, and a shining example of moral behaviour – there is nothing about mohammed’s behaviour regarding the banu qurayza that warrants our admiration. Aggressors, war-mongers, and men of the sword have mass murdered those who opposed them. How is mohammed different or superior to Genghis khan in his actions? Both slaughtered opponents, and both spread their power through fear and warfare.

    What about this situation that warrants our admiration?

    Like

    • Kevin: Of course, the moral problems with the mass murder and enslavement of innocent jews flies over the head of our muslim friends.

      In your opinion, did Muhammad fight anyone who was actually guilty? Also, how should he have dealt with Qurayzah?

      Like

    • Lol, another insane hypocritical trinitarian opens his mouth. People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. Condemn the slaughter of innocent Canaanites before you compare Muhammad to the likes of Ghengis Khan because as anyone armed with the facts can see, it is actually logical to compare the Biblical Moses with Genghis Khan. You see, just like Moses, Genghis Khan and his hordes were not above killing women and children.

      Like

    • Whatever happened to the caananites is not put forward as a great example for all mankind for all time. Mohammed’s actions are supposed to be an example for all mankind for all time.

      so answer the question please. What about mohammed’s murder of the jews warrants our admiration and what example is he setting for us to follow?

      Like

    • Nothing warrants our admiration Kevin- I agree with you.

      Like

    • Kmak

      You’re deflecting.

      Muslims claim that mohammed’s actions are exemplary for all time – my question is simple; what about the murder and enslavement of innocent people is a great example to be followed? How are mohammed’s actions any different than the actions of gengis khan? Or Stalin? And what are the lessons that this reaches us to lead moral lives?

      Like

    • Kev: so answer the question please. What about mohammed’s murder of the jews warrants our admiration and what example is he setting for us to follow?

      Murder is unlawful killing. Since Muhammad was operating on Divine Command, he wasn’t guilty of anything unlawful.
      The destruction of Qurayzah served many things such as raising the costs of disloyalty, displaying the power of Muslim army as well as discouraging future attacks. Also, it showed that God was on Muhammad’s side.

      Death and destruction are not admirable but are a part of life. I believe what Muhammad did represented the most optimal outcome. I ask you again, how should have Muhammad dealt with the Qurayzah whose betrayal had put the entire Muslim community in peril?

      Like

    • Kev: How are mohammed’s actions any different than the actions of gengis khan? Or Stalin?

      That’s easy. Muhammad was acting on God’s command. Whatever God commands is optimal in that it always maximizes benefits and minimizes loss. Thus, what Muhammad did to the Jews represents an optimal outcome. Do we have any a priori reasons for believing the actions of Gengis Khan or Stalin are optimal? No.

      Any other challenges?

      Like

    • Paul, how come all my replies go into moderation?

      Like

    • I don’t know. Only Paulus is on moderation.

      Like

    • kmak

      That’s easy. Muhammad was acting on God’s command.

      All you have is mohammed’s word for that. The ancient hebrews had the benefit of seeing god’s presence during the exodus, and the light of god in the face of Moses. The patriarchs came face to face with the lord, and these appearances were often witnessed by many people.

      No one saw the beings that mohammed claimed were god, so there are no compelling reasons to think that his claims were true. Even worse, Genghis khan claimed that he was acting on the will of god – he killed millions of muslims.

      In short there is no reasonable evidence that mohammed was acting the orders of god.

      Like

    • Kev: In short there is no reasonable evidence that mohammed was acting the orders of god.

      Way to change the goalposts! You initially demanded to know how Muhammad’s actions were different from Genghis’ and Stalins’. Now you’ve changed the topic to wether Muhammad was God’s prophet or not. This is what you always do when you’re cornered, change the topic.

      Like

  9. Of course, the moral problems with the mass murder and enslavement of innocent jews flies over the head of our muslim friends.

    Mohammed was supposed to be a moral example for all time, and a shining example of moral behaviour – there is nothing about mohammed’s behaviour regarding the banu qurayza that warrants our admiration. Aggressors, war-mongers, and men of the sword have mass murdered those who opposed them. How is mohammed different or superior to Genghis khan in his actions? Both slaughtered opponents, and both spread their power through fear and warfare.

    What about this situation that warrants our admiration?

    Like

    • Kev said: “What about this situation that warrants our admiration.”

      This hypocritical arguement backfires on Christians. As the same can be said of the slaughter of innocent Canaanites. What’s worse is that it was your Trinitarian God which includes Jesus who commanded the slaughter. So we see your God/Jesus himself directly responsible and guilty of an act which does not warrant our admiration.

      Like

  10. “LOL, apparently you think that the pagans were justified in trying to wipe out Islam because they were trying to save their religion.”

    Clearly Mohammed’s tactic after he moved to Medina was to provoke the Meccans in to an all out war by attacking their jugular vein, the trade caravans.

    This tactic worked.

    After that the Meccans had no choice but to try and totally defeat him in battle. They knew that Mohammed would never give up fighting them. It was him or them.

    You’re wasting your time Faiz trying to portray Mohammed as the innocent victim of the Meccans agression. Mohammed was the instigator from the get go.

    Like

    • Madman, you really need psychiatric help. Your insanity is getting worse by the minute.

      The Meccans had illegally seized Muslim property, you dingbat! And do you honestly think that the Muslims were safe in Medina? The Meccans were still after them! Thus, the attacks on the caravans were completely justified.

      It is both hilarious and disturbing to see how you desperately try to make the Meccans into the victims and try to justify their campaign of extermination against the Muslims. Thank you for exposing the truth about your psychotic mind.

      And I have still yet to see any condemnation of the mass-slaughter of the Canaanites. Who was the instigator: the Canaanites or the Israelites?

      Like

  11. Oooh, Lassie is pissed!

    “Good to see you are still as racist and bigoted as ever failure.

    Sadly, it is you who doesn’t get it, because you still haven’t actually bothered to read the Old Teatament. What did God say about the Canaanites? Remember, you can’t throw Him under the bus because you, my muhammadan friend, are to recognise the Torah as binding.

    You are a radical dear boy, happily justifying slaughtering people as long as you perceive it to be “self defence”. Is it any wonder that so many Muslims think they are being attcked by the west? Is this so you can mercilessly kill people and feel vindicated?

    You are from Australia right? Which muhammadan gang you running with these days? You been arrested by the ME crime squad yet?”

    Actually Lassie, I have read the “Old Testament”. It’s actually called the Tanach by the Jews. And it doesn’t surprise me that you are trying to justify the slaughter of the Canaanites by appealing to an alleged command from God! Thank you for proving once again that you are a shameless hypocrite! What else can be expected from a pagan trinitarian?

    Mercilessly kill people? I don’t believe in that because my religion does not teach that. In contrast, your mangod literally commanded the merciless killing of people:

    “When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations—the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites, seven nations larger and stronger than you— 2 and when the Lord your God has delivered them over to you and you have defeated them, then you must destroy them totally.[a] Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy.”

    Ouch!!!

    What makes you think I am from Australia?

    Like

    • When did I justify anything? My name isn’t failure!

      I asked you what God said about the Canaanites. And I’m still waiting, especially now that you’ve claimed to have read the Old Testament (sorry, I highly doubt you’ve read more than what Ahmed defeat cited in the 90’s). You’ve told us that the Canaanites were “innocent”. How did you come to that conclusion? The same way you decided the Muslims were innocent too?

      Do you wipe your backside with stones, like Muhammad, and then strategically place them like tarot cards to decide your moral compass?

      Like

  12. I thought Faiz was a Londoner. It must be that smog. Kills your brain cells 🙂

    Like

    • LOL, at least I have brain cells! Yours, on the other hand, have been dead for quite some time! If you want, I can look for some good psychiatric institutions for you. I hear they do amazing things for people suffering from psychotic delusions. 😉

      And no, I am not a Londoner either. Keep guessing. This is fun!

      Like

  13. Oh come now Lassie. Don’t be dishonest like your false apostle Paul.

    “When did I justify anything? My name isn’t failure!

    I asked you what God said about the Canaanites. And I’m still waiting, especially now that you’ve claimed to have read the Old Testament (sorry, I highly doubt you’ve read more than what Ahmed defeat cited in the 90’s). You’ve told us that the Canaanites were “innocent”. How did you come to that conclusion? The same way you decided the Muslims were innocent too?

    Do you wipe your backside with stones, like Muhammad, and then strategically place them like tarot cards to decide your moral compass?”

    LOL! By asking me if the Canaanites were “innocent”, it is obvious that you are trying to establish an excuse for their slaughter. How was it you put it? Ah yes…the merciless killing of people.

    I think any decent human being, which automatically disqualifies you (you know, since you are a slobbering mutt), would conclude that there is no excuse for killing women and children, regardless of any crime their people may have committed. Oh and I already know why you think they were not “innocent”. Does it have something to with enticing the Israelites into committing depraved sexual acts? Hmm?

    I would think, Lassie, that the Canannites babies were innocent. Don’t you think so? Let me know. There’s a good boy.

    Like

  14. “The Meccans had illegally seized Muslim property, you dingbat! ”

    Blood for property. A fair swap for Mohammed. If it’s only infidel blood.

    “And do you honestly think that the Muslims were safe in Medina? The Meccans were still after them! ”

    Conspiracy theories abound where there’s Muslims around.

    Not bad. It rhymes.

    What do you think Faiz?

    Somehere in England, I think. It’s not important.

    Like

    • Madman’s psychosis keeps getting worse! Is there a psychiatrist in the house?

      LOL, yes as if the Meccans would have been fine as long as Muhammad (pbuh) had simply resettled in another city and would then leave him alone! Your ignorance of history is appalling!

      Still waiting for your condemnation of the mass-slaughter of the Canaanites. Who was the instigator: the Canaanites or the Israelites?

      Like

    • Oh and I’m not from England. Guess again!

      Like

  15. “The Meccans had illegally seized Muslim property, you dingbat!”

    Talking of illegally seizing Muslim property what was that other Jewish tribe in Medina who were banished by Mohammed and all their property illegaly seized?

    They must have broken a treaty as well I guess.

    Like

  16. Seems to be a lucrative way of earning a living.

    Like

  17. “I think any decent human being, which automatically disqualifies you (you know, since you are a slobbering mutt), would conclude that there is no excuse for killing women and children,”

    When Allah destroyed all the towns that refused the warner he must have killed the women and children along with the unbelievers. Otherwise the Koran would have mentioned that the women and children were separated first before the town was destroyed.

    No appeal to the hadith can be made because this only regulates what came after Mohammed arrived on the scene.

    Like

    • LOL, psychotic madman just can’t find a way to justify his mangod’s genocidal orders.

      People die from natural causes all the time. It’s a bit different from deliberately killing a baby, don’t you think madman? Please say no so that we can all see what a psychotic man you really are!

      Like

  18. Kevin said:

    “Whatever happened to the caananites is not put forward as a great example for all mankind for all time. Mohammed’s actions are supposed to be an example for all mankind for all time.

    so answer the question please. What about mohammed’s murder of the jews warrants our admiration and what example is he setting for us to follow?”

    What difference does that make? What happened to the Canaanites was still wrong regardless of what time period it happened, was it not? Answer the question. Was it wrong?

    Muhammad (pbuh) only killed the combatants of the Bani Qurayzah. This was only after he had tried cooperation and mercy. He didn’t kill anyone of the Bani Qaynuqah or Bani Nadir, even after they had plotted against him. But the Bani Qurayzah had betrayed him at his most desperate hour. This was also the only time he did this. Thus, it is not for all times. However, the example set is that we are allowed to punish those who break their obligations with us, especially during wartime.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I love how muslims are so quick to defend Muhammad by appeal to God, i.e. they are happy to commit shirk to defend the deen lol.

      Like

    • Faiz

      What happened to the banu qurayza was wrong no matter what time period it happened. What’s your point? I’m not obliged to view the actions ıf OT prophets as exemplary for all time. As a muslim, you are obliged to consider the cold blooded murder of enemy combatants and the enslavement of their women and children as exemplary.

      So please answer the question – what is the good example in murdering all these people? Where is the justice in enslaving innocents? How is that moral? How are these murders any better than the actions of Stalin, Genghis, and Hitler, who all did the same thing to people they claimed went against their beliefs?

      Like

    • “Muhammad (pbuh) only killed the combatants of the Bani Qurayzah.”

      Boys who have just reached puberty or around that age, are classified as combatants?

      Another example of the great moral example?

      Like

  19. Lassie barked:

    “I love how muslims are so quick to defend Muhammad by appeal to God, i.e. they are happy to commit shirk to defend the deen lol.”

    So no answer Lassie? Just a deflection?

    Did your mangod command the merciless killing of people? Yes or no? Were the Canaanite babies innocent? Yes or no?

    Like

  20. Lassie barked:

    “” It doesn’t have to be applied to all cases and for all times.”

    Says Fail. Epic Fail.

    “Prophet Muhammad’s status as role model and the validity of the sunnah are not limited to his life or to a certain time period. The Holy Quran and the notions of the sunnah state this issue clearly””

    LOL, an epic an act of desperation from Lassie the Gentile mutt! As I stated, the example set is that Muslims can punish those who act treacherously. In addition, the Sunnah has to be practiced in its entirety, not just based on certain events. How did the Prophet act against the Bani Qaynuqah and Bani Nadir? How did he act against most of his enemies? What about when he conquered Mecca?

    Still waiting for Lassie’s answers to my questions. Will the mangy mutt answer or will he continue to deflect? Time will tell…

    Like

    • Nice attempt at a deflection. You really don’t like being exposed for contradicting the deen, do you? Shameless that you still won’t admit your error.

      Btw, how have you felt about the ME crime squad?

      Like

  21. Lassie barked:

    “Nice attempt at a deflection. You really don’t like being exposed for contradicting the deen, do you? Shameless that you still won’t admit your error.

    Btw, how have you felt about the ME crime squad?”

    LOL, STILL no answers?

    I answered your pathetic attempt at simplifying the Sunnah.

    We both know that you pagan trinitarians don’t like being told you’re wrong about something. That is why you keep deflecting and projecting your stubbornness on to others. How pathetic!

    Now, will you answer my questions…

    Like

    • What is the ME crime squad?

      Like

    • ” It doesn’t have to be applied to all cases and for all times.”- Fail

      “Prophet Muhammad’s status as role model and the validity of the sunnah are not limited to his life or to a certain time period. The Holy Quran and the notions of the sunnah state this issue clearly”

      And we are apparently the ones simplifying the sunnah LOL. You Muslims just pick and choose which parts you want to follow, depending on who you’re targeting for dawah. It’s pathetic.

      You say it’s not applied for all times yet Islamic leaders say the opposite. You’ve committed shirk numerous times. By your own religions standards you are heading for hell. Good luck

      Like

  22. Lassie barked:

    “no deflection- you just keep committing shirk by defending Muhammad by appeal to God.”

    STILL no answer?! Wow, Lassie is really afraid of exposing the evil of his religious beliefs.

    Did your mangod command the merciless killing of people? Yes or no? Were the Canaanite babies innocent? Yes or no?

    Like

    • Mercy? They had 400 years.

      God’s justice is his, as he appropriated toward Canaanites, other Gentiles and equally the Jews.

      You still continue to commit shirk but justifying muhammad, a man, to God. Ironically, this very God you criticise you also claim theological heritage with. Just another fail from you lol.

      So do be a good chap and enlighten us as to why you justify a man by appeal to God? Or will you continue to deflect due to your constant contradictions of the deen and your embarrassment for the one you worship (Muhammad)

      Like

  23. Madman said:

    “Boys who have just reached puberty or around that age, are classified as combatants?

    Another example of the great moral example?”

    LOL, so still avoiding answering my question?

    I wonder how Moses and his men determined which of the girls were virgins? Imagine what those girls had to endure. First, they had to watch their families slaughtered and then they had to endure being taken as slaves. But that doesn’t bother you, does it? You are true madman, aren’t you?

    Here is a little history lesson for you: in ancient times, puberty was considered a sign of manhood. Once you entered puberty, you were considered an adult and given adult responsibilities. You were expected to be mature. That’s why the mother of your mangod would have married Joseph at a young age.

    Now, will you answer my question?

    1. Who was the instigator: the Canaanites or the Israelites?

    2. People die from natural causes all the time. It’s a bit different from deliberately killing a baby, don’t you think madman? Please say no so that we can all see what a psychotic man you really are!

    Like

    • Faiz,

      As I see it the Jews considered Mohammed’s war against the Meccans as being an unjust, aggressive war instigated by Mohammed out of motives of avarice, megolomania and bloodlust. Therefore against the ten commandments. Therefore they acted in accordance with their conscience and refused to take up arms. Their treaty with God was higher than their treaty with Mohammed.

      After they rejected Mohammed as prophet they became the military targets of the warner because this is how the “revelations” depict Allah’s response. There is no exception to this in the Koran. Thus they were forced on the defensive.

      In the light of this discussions about who should rightly be regarded as combatants is irrelevant. The war itself was never a just war measured by the ten commandments and the other laws of Moses.

      Your questions re Canaanites are off topic.

      Questions for you, off topic:

      Why did Allah kill all the children in the flood of Noah?

      Why did Allah kill all the women and children at Sodom and Gomorra?

      Is Mohammed more righteous and just than Allah?

      Like

    • Faiz,

      Your discussion of the Canaanites is off topic for this thread.

      As I see it the Jews considered Mohammed’s war with the pagans to be unjust in the light of their scriptures, particularily the ten commandments. Therefore they could not partake in it with a good conscience before God.

      They also rejected his claim to be a prophet so their crime was a double one. Thus they became the object of Allah’s wrath. Because of “revelations” they knew that this justified their destruction so they had no choice but to seek to defend themselves, even if it meant seeking the help of pagans.

      Breaking a treaty is the smokescreen behind which these facts are hidden.

      Questions for you:

      Did Allah kill women and children in the flood?

      Did Allah kill all the women and children of Sodom and Gomorrah?

      Is Allah less just than Mohammed?

      Like

  24. Lassie barked:

    “You say it’s not applied for all times yet Islamic leaders say the opposite. You’ve committed shirk numerous times. By your own religions standards you are heading for hell. Good luck”

    LOL, the desperation of poor Lassie…

    Your strawman argument doesn’t prove anything. I said that the Sunnah has to be practiced in its entirety. How did the Prophet act against most of his enemies? How did he act when he conquered Mecca? Why would the Bani Qurayzah incident somehow outweigh all the other times he acted mercifully?

    By the way, in the Bani Qurayzah incident, the Prophet was not even the one who made the final judgment. Nor was the judgement based on Islamic law. The judgment was passed by Sa’d Ibn Muadh and it was based on the laws of the Jews. Thus, there is no reason to consider the Bani Qurayzah incident as somehow overriding well-established tenets of the Sunnah.

    Like

  25. Lassie barked:

    “Mercy? They had 400 years.

    God’s justice is his, as he appropriated toward Canaanites, other Gentiles and equally the Jews.

    You still continue to commit shirk but justifying muhammad, a man, to God. Ironically, this very God you criticise you also claim theological heritage with. Just another fail from you lol.

    So do be a good chap and enlighten us as to why you justify a man by appeal to God? Or will you continue to deflect due to your constant contradictions of the deen and your embarrassment for the one you worship (Muhammad)”

    LOL!!! Still no straight answer, only excuses for your mandgod’s genocidal commands! And yet you criticize Muhammad (pbuh) for dealing with some treacherous Jews?! Christian hypocrisy rears its ugly head yet again.

    Why won’t you answer my questions? What are you afraid of? Does your mangod’s genocidal commands disturb you (as they should)? Or are you the one who is embarrassed of his pagan religion?

    Will you answer my questions? Come one, be a good boy! Speak, boy, speak!

    Did your mangod command the merciless killing of people? Yes or no? Were the Canaanite babies innocent? Yes or no?

    Like

    • “Why won’t you answer my questions?”

      I did.

      “only excuses”

      So now you admit I did answer your question? Why describe my answer as an “excuse” if I didn’t answer? Another fail my Australian friend. Repeating yourself while admitting I did answer your question only demonstrates how childish you are.

      Like

  26. Kev/Kevin/Kev34 said:

    “Faiz

    What happened to the banu qurayza was wrong no matter what time period it happened. What’s your point? I’m not obliged to view the actions ıf OT prophets as exemplary for all time. As a muslim, you are obliged to consider the cold blooded murder of enemy combatants and the enslavement of their women and children as exemplary.

    So please answer the question – what is the good example in murdering all these people? Where is the justice in enslaving innocents? How is that moral? How are these murders any better than the actions of Stalin, Genghis, and Hitler, who all did the same thing to people they claimed went against their beliefs?”

    Wow, three Christian apologists have tried their luck and not one has been willing to answer my questions. Kev/Kevin/Kev34, I asked you a question. Will you answer it? I didn’t ask you whether it was “exemplary” for “all times” or not. What difference does that make? What happened to the Canaanites was still wrong regardless of what time period it happened, was it not? Answer the question. Was it wrong?

    I find it amusing how you Christians foam at the mouth over Muhammad’s (pbuh) treatment of the Bani Qurayzah but try to disregard the genocide of the Canaanites. You express outrage at the former but utter hardly a peep at the latter. What gives? Why are you people such hypocrites? And why can’t any of you answer my questions?

    Like

    • faiz

      You keep avoiding answering my questions – what example is the mass murder of innocent people and the enslavement of women and children are muslims supposed to follow? What about these actions deserve our admiration?

      Christians and jews are not called to follow the example of the OT prophets, so we don’t view these behaviours as something that we should follow. Muslims are called to imitate mohammed in all things and find his behaviour exemplary.

      No amount of changing the subject can help you with that.

      Like

    • “Christians and jews are not called to follow the example of the OT prophets, so we don’t view these behaviours as something that we should follow.”

      you mean you don’t follow what your god COMMANDED ot prophets like ripping out unborn from 0-9 months from one location to the other?

      why do you say example of ot prophets when the trigger was god himself?
      god said, go and kill the amalekite unborn for what their ANCESTORS had done 400 years earlier. god took out a grudge on unborn 0-9 months.

      Like

    • “Christians and jews are not called to follow the example of the OT prophets, ”

      kev, which verses from the torah did the jews use to shaft your god when they told the pagans about their laws view on blasphemers?

      weren’t these jews following the prophets when they shafted “fully god and fully man” ?

      Like

  27. This article at Discover-the-Truth has some great information, which clears up a lot of misconceptions that non-Muslims have: https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/01/01/re-examining-banu-qurayzah-incident/

    What this article reveals is that some of the men among the Bani Qurayzah were actually spared, so long as they had not cooperated with their tribes against the Muslims:

    “Imam Shafi’i , a prominent second-century scholar, says:

    “…not all of them took part in aiding against the Prophet and his Companions, but all of them remained in their stronghold and did not abandon the treacherous people from among them, EXCEPT A SMALL PARTY (NAFAR) AND THIS (ACTION) SAVED THEIR LIVES AND KEPT THEIR POSSESSIONS IN THEIR HANDS“. [25]

    Shaykh Muhammed Al-Ghazali says:

    “The siege continued for twenty-five days during which the Muslims allowed the Jews who had refused to betray the Prophet during the Battle of the Ditch TO LEAVE AND GO WHEREVER THEY WISHED AS A REWARD FOR THEIR FAITHFULNESS. [26]

    Islamic scholar, Syed Maududi:

    From among the prisoners of the Banu Quraizah, the Holy Prophet forgave Zabir bin Bata and ‘Amr bin Sa’d (or Ibn Su’da), the former because he had given refuge to Hadrat Thabit bin Qais Ansari in the Battle of Bu’ath, in the pre-Islamic days of ignorance; therefore, he handed him over to Hadrat Thabit that he may repay him for his favor. And he forgave ‘Amr bin Sa`d because it was he who was exhorting his tribe not to be treacherous when the Bani Quraizah were committing breach of the trust with the Holy Prophet. [27]

    Dr. Resis Haylamaz:

    THE FATE OF THOSE PARDONED AND THE CAPTIVES:
    “The judgement passed by Sa’d ibn Muadh did not include all of the Banu Qurayza; among the Banu Qurayza that day there were youths such as atiyyatu-l-Qurazi and Rifa’a ibn Shamwal Amr ibn Su’da, ibn Sa’ya’s sons Salaba and Usayd and their cousin Asad ibn Ubayd. THESE MEN OF CONSCIENCE WERE FORGIVEN. Zabir ibn Bata had cone a great favour for Thabot ibn Qays ibn Shammas during the times of Buath wars. …” [28]”

    Like

  28. Lassie barked:

    “So now you admit I did answer your question? Why describe my answer as an “excuse” if I didn’t answer? Another fail my Australian friend. Repeating yourself while admitting I did answer your question only demonstrates how childish you are.”

    LOL!!! Still not answering my question? Now you’re resorting to petty semantics? I said you didn’t give me a STRAIGHT answer, only excuses for your mangod’s genocide. So here are the questions again:

    Did your mangod command the merciless killing of people? Yes or no? Were the Canaanite babies innocent? Yes or no?

    Dude, I have no idea where you got the idea that I live in Australia.

    Like

    • Oh I see. You want an answer that accepts your moral assumptions and false dichotomy. Why don’t I just become a muhammadan while I’m at it?

      Look infant, you’ve been given an answer. You admitted it. Just because you don’t accept it ain’t my problem. Grow a pair and move on

      Like

  29. Lassie barked:

    “Oh I see. You want an answer that accepts your moral assumptions and false dichotomy. Why don’t I just become a muhammadan while I’m at it?

    Look infant, you’ve been given an answer. You admitted it. Just because you don’t accept it ain’t my problem. Grow a pair and move on”

    LOL!! Still not answering!

    Did your mangod command the merciless killing of people? Yes or no? Were the Canaanite babies innocent? Yes or no?

    Oh well…I guess it can’t be helped. I guess Lassie is content in worshiping a pagan and genocidal god.

    Now go back to chewing on your pair, just like dogs do! 😉

    Like

    • Dumb. Really dumb. You apparently can’t even see the fallacious assumptions in your question. Perhaps an equivalent may help you?

      Did the pedophile Muhammad have sex with a nine year old girl? Yes or No?

      See the assumptions in the question? Now, according to your juvenile ramblings above, anything other than a yes or no answer is not a “straight” answer. That’s how pathetic your reasoning is.

      Like

    • Still not giving an answer? Lassie, come on boy. Stop making excuses and trying weasel your way out. I know the questions make you uncomfortable. That’s exactly the point! I love watching you pagan hypocrites squirm. So again:

      Did your mangod command the merciless killing of people? Yes or no? Were the Canaanite babies innocent? Yes or no?

      These are simple questions requiring a simple yes or no answer. Speak boy!

      Like

  30. Madman ranted:

    “Your discussion of the Canaanites is off topic for this thread.

    As I see it the Jews considered Mohammed’s war with the pagans to be unjust in the light of their scriptures, particularily the ten commandments. Therefore they could not partake in it with a good conscience before God.”

    LOL!!! Apparently, madman can now read the minds of people who lived 1400 years ago!

    Yes, I’m sure the Jews would believe that. Oh but wait…their own scriptures talk about killing pagans and wiping out entire generations. I guess that was okay!

    Don’t project your hypocrisy on to them. They didn’t oppose Muhammad (pbuh) because of some misplaced sense of “justice”. They opposes him because they feared that his growing influence and his claim to prophethood. Given their racist outlook, they could not accept an Arab prophet. That was the sole reason they opposed him.

    “They also rejected his claim to be a prophet so their crime was a double one. Thus they became the object of Allah’s wrath. Because of “revelations” they knew that this justified their destruction so they had no choice but to seek to defend themselves, even if it meant seeking the help of pagans.”

    LOL, yes just like the Jews of Jesus’ time became the object of Allah’s wrath as well!

    But seriously, your laughable assumptions are simply the result of your own deluded mind. What else can we expect from a clearly deranged individual who defends Biblical genocide but then foams at the mouth like a rabid dog because a few traitorous Jews got what they deserved.

    “Questions for you:

    Did Allah kill women and children in the flood?

    Did Allah kill all the women and children of Sodom and Gomorrah?

    Is Allah less just than Mohammed?””

    LOL!!! Still not answering my questions. When will you apologists grow a spine?

    Answer my questions, madman. Quit stalling.

    1. Who was the instigator: the Canaanites or the Israelites?

    2. People die from natural causes all the time. It’s a bit different from deliberately killing a baby, don’t you think madman? Please say no so that we can all see what a psychotic man you really are!

    Like

  31. Kev/Kev34/Kevin said:

    “You keep avoiding answering my questions – what example is the mass murder of innocent people and the enslavement of women and children are muslims supposed to follow? What about these actions deserve our admiration?

    Christians and jews are not called to follow the example of the OT prophets, so we don’t view these behaviours as something that we should follow. Muslims are called to imitate mohammed in all things and find his behaviour exemplary.

    No amount of changing the subject can help you with that.”

    Kevin, again you refuse to answer my question. I didn’t ask you whether you follow the OT prophets or not. I am asking whether what they did was right or wrong. So to repeat once again:

    What happened to the Canaanites was still wrong regardless of what time period it happened, was it not? Answer the question. Was it wrong?

    I already answered your question. Of course I think it was admirable. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a practical man. He tried friendship and cooperation. That didn’t work. He tried mercy when he spared the Bani Nadir despite their plots against him. That didn’t work. Finally, he had to be firm and send a message. He was fighting for the lives of his followers. He did what he had to do. He punished the Bani Qurayzah with an exemplary punishment. He had the instigators executed but those who were not involved were spared. Of course that is exemplary! He punished the wicked and spared the righteous. Now of course, in our world, he probably would have done it differently. I am sure if Arabia had prisons at the time, he probably would have imprisoned the instigators. Even then, I think the ringleaders would still be deserving of death. Treason is still a capital crime in many countries. Why would it be any different 1400 years ago?

    In contrast, the OT prophets killed women and children and took little girls as slaves. Why don’t you foam at the mouth over that? So again, what gives with the hypocrisy? Is it innate in you Christians?

    Liked by 1 person

  32. Will any Christian answer these questions:

    1. Was the slaughter of the Canaanites right or wrong regardless of the time period?

    2. Who was the instigator: the Canaanites or the Israelites?

    3. Did the Biblical god command the merciless killing of people?

    4. Were the Canaanite babies innocent?

    Will we get an answer or will there be radio silence from Christian land?

    Like

  33. Faiz,

    I assume the Jews acted in accordance with their scriptures. This would have required them to justify all the wars they fought to be in accordance with them. Mohammed’s religious war against the Meccans fits the Koran but it has no justification from the OT. The Jews would have needed a Mandate in the form of a miraculous communication , such as an audible voice from God, the same as Joshua and Moses received from God to Mandate their wars. This would constitute a Special waiver from the requirements of the ten commandments. This is obvious without mind-reading powers.

    When you answer my questions I will answer yours

    Like

    • LOL, so madman will not answer the questions posed to him and only responds with asinine questions. You also seem to have become a laughable apologist for the Bani Qurayza Jews. However, the problem is that your special pleading opens up the same can of worms that you have been struggling with in this thread: the problem of genocide. It’s the Bible that says this. Thus, the Jews and their so-called sense of “justice” is laughable as long as the condemnation of the sickening genocide remains elusive.

      So I ask again:

      1. Who was the instigator: the Canaanites or the Israelites?

      2. People die from natural causes all the time. It’s a bit different from deliberately killing a baby, don’t you think madman? Please say no so that we can all see what a psychotic man you really are!

      Answer the questions madman. Otherwise, you might as well commit yourself to a psychiatric institution now!

      Like

  34. “Mercy? They had 400 years.”

    you mean the unborn and the infants ? they didn’t get any divine revelation, they got to see end of sharp sword.

    if killing unborn and infant is justified through ripping them, why weren’t unborn and infant killed 400 years earlier?

    who are you to judge when your religion says that god told saul to slice out unborn from women stomachs?

    Like

    • Exactly. Good points.

      These Christians are just a bunch of shameless hypocrites. They make excuses for genocide but shed crocodile tears for the Bani Qurayza.

      Like

  35. ” Treason is still a capital crime in many countries.”

    And groundless warmongering is also a crime.

    Like

  36. I really wonder why christians bother to talk about Banu Qurayza and apparently shed some tears for them when in the OT God commanded humans to slaughter humans in other words, “Genocide”. Of course christians would say “well you know they were wicked thats why they were commanded to be killed” Ah ok, so i wonder How on earth were the kids considered wicked…Infact those that were Executed in Banu Qurayza were only those considered as combatants unlike those genocides commanded by God in the OT….seriously i’ve never seen such hypocrisy in my life, coming to say to us that it is immoral to kill combatants when God in the OT does much worse than that…

    Like

Trackbacks

  1. Hadith “Do Not Greet Jews… Force Them To Narrow Road…” Explained | kokicat

Please leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: