Search and find articles and topics quickly and accurately!  See different advanced ways to search for articles on this site.

Further Topic Research:
Syntax help

Revisiting "Was Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) Unfair In The Way He Punished The Armed Robbers From The Tribe Of Ukl?" (Part 2)

 A Concise Rebuttal

By
Bassam Zawadi

 

 

 

I originally wrote an article here http://www.answering-christianity.com/bassam_zawadi/was_prophet_muhammad_unfair.htm which Sam Shamoun responded back to here http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/cruelty.htm and then I responded back here http://www.answering-christianity.com/bassam_zawadi/counter_rebuttal_to_people_of_ukl.htm and Sam Shamoun responded back here http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Osama/zawadi_ukl.htm and now I am responding back here.

I urge all readers to read the debate from the beginning in order to grasp and understand what this article is saying.

 

Sam Shamoun wrote a 16 page response to me in which 9 pages are red herrings. They have absolutely nothing to do with the topic in discussion. He talks about how its not fair that Muslims don't get executed for murders against non Muslims and how Islam teaches that you should fight against those even if they did not physically wage war against you etc. 

This has nothing to do with the topic. Lets look at the title of discussion again, "Was Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) Unfair In The Way He Punished The Armed Robbers From The Tribe Of Ukl?" 

Basically Sam Shamoun has not given any new arguments. He keeps insisting that God sent down Surah 5:33 was given after Muhammad's punishments the people from Ukl. He insists that this was a rebuke from God for his cruelty. 

However, I already answered this......

 

And he said he heard Muhammad Ibn Ajlan say: This verse has come down on the Messenger of Allah peace be upon him as a recrimination in that and taught him the punishment of people like them from cutting and killing and refusal (refusing to give the water) and he did not pierce the eyes of anyone after them. He said this statement has been mentioned to Ibn Umar, he renounced the fact this verse came down as a recrimination and said that indeed the punishment of those men was by their eyes (meaning they deserved to have their eyes pierced) then this verse came down as a punishment for anyone besides them for who fought after them and the piercing of the eyes as a punishment was over. 

Source:  http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=4&Rec=5480

 

It is clear that Surah 5:33 was to be a punishment for those that came after the people of Ukl, however those people of Ukl did deserve what they got. 

Sam quotes hadith (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 261) and (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 82, Number 797) to try and prove that Muhammad did not allow them to have their water. However, the Hadith does not say that. The Hadith simply says that they were brought to the Prophet and then the Prophet order for their hands and feet to be cut off. Isn't it possible that the people were brought to the Prophet and then the Prophet issued the order and then the Prophet left but the companions of the Prophet did not give them the water? Do we see a direct order from the Prophet stating that they should die of thirst? 

Sam also says that I quoted Ibn Umar in order to undermine the other narrations. I wasn't trying to undermine the other narrations. I never said the other narrations were weak or false. What I said was that I would rather take Ibn Umar's opinion over the opinion of the other companion who thought that the verse was sent down as recrimination. 

Then I was left with some questions to answer.....

 

          If any one does to someone what the tribe of Ukl did to that poor shepherd then of course we will punish them accordingly. This real Islamic society will be a society that protects its citizens and fights crime hard. 

Recommended Readings

http://www.answering-christianity.com/bassam_zawadi/shariah_law_being_strict.htm http://www.answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri/rebuttal_to_sam_shamoun_47.htm  http://www.answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri/counter_rebuttal_to_sam_shamoun_1.htm

 

 

 

 

 

Back to My Rebuttals, and exposing the lies of the Answering Islam team section.

Rebuttals by Bassam Zawadi.

Islam and the Noble Quran - Questions and Answers.

Answering Trinity.

Contradictions and History of Corruption in the Bible.

Questions about Jesus that trinitarian Christians don't have logical answers for.

What parts of the Bible do Muslims believe are closest to the Truth? and Why?

"Allah" was GOD Almighty's original Name in the Bible according to the Hebrew and Aramaic sources.

Scientific Miracles in Islam and the Noble Quran.

Most of the Bible's books and gospels were written by mysterious people!

Jesus mentioned Muhammad by the name in the Bible.

Did Isaiah 53 really prophesies about the crucifixion of Jesus? It supports Islam's claims about Jesus peace be upon him never died on the cross.  I also addressed John 19:36-37 from the Bible and proved that Jesus never got crucified, since GOD Almighty promised that he will protect Jesus' body and not let even a single bone be broken.    My question to all Christians is: How in the world is it possible for the feet to get nailed on the cross without any penetration to the bones by the nails, hence breaking part of the feet's bones?! I also added refutations to Exodus 12:46, Numbers 9:12, Zechariah 12:10 and Psalm 34:20, which supposedly prove the Christians' belief about Jesus crucifixion.  I proved that this dogma has no truth what so ever and exposed the wrong Trinitarian English translation of Zechariah 12:10.


Send your comments.

Back to Main Page.