Answering Christianity Research Center

MAIN BOARD (You must register to post) => GENERAL TOPICS | BOARD ANNOUNCEMENTS => Topic started by: AMuslimDude213 on November 17, 2018, 01:26:27 AM

Title: My refutation to Apostate Prophet
Post by: AMuslimDude213 on November 17, 2018, 01:26:27 AM

I'll be making more refutations and the last part to Apostate Prophet. You can see the texts,etc for yourself and judge by yourself if Apostate Prophet really is truthful.
Title: Re: My refutation to Apostate Prophet
Post by: AhmadFarooq on November 18, 2018, 08:36:07 AM
— Point: Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah."

The entire narration is:
Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Messenger (ﷺ), and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform that, then they save their lives and property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah."

As far as I've understood it, the narration is talking about people who have already become Muslims. I think pointing this out would've made a better, more accurate argument.

My understanding is based on the fact that it is an accepted fact non-Muslims cannot be forcefully converted, the "no compulsion is religion" argument; and if that wasn't enough, I doubt there is any difference of opinion on the matter that in Islam, non-Muslims are supposed to say Muslim prayers and pay Zakat (" the obligatory charity" in the above narration).

From my understanding this narration is a good example of things because they are so clear, it takes a longer time to realise what is obvious. The anti-Islamists, quite often, criticise Islam because, in their opinion, Islam forces non-Muslims living under Muslim rule to pay the Jizya tax. However, through this narration they also argue Islam calls for forcing non-Muslims to convert too. In other words, Islam taxes non-Muslims while at the same time it forces conversion thereby eliminating its non-Muslim population. Who is going to pay the Jizya, if all non-Muslims have to be eliminated?

This is a clear and obvious contradiction. Either there has to be a Jizya tax or there is to be forceful conversions. Both of these conditions cannot exist at the same time!

Therefore, the narration has to be talking only about Muslims and from here (, you can see that this narration and others similar to it come forward during the Ridda wars after Prophet Muhammad's death.

Here you also quote Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, and I believe the quoted incident is unreliable, but I could be wrong here.

The "dictator" narration you quoted from Jami`at-Tirmidhi Hadith is not the evidence which refutes this person's argument. You accused him of misquoting the Hadith, the accusation is probably correct but, in my opinion, not because of the Tirmidhi Hadith but because of the Sahih Bukhari Hadith not quoted in full.

— Point: Prophet Muhammad "created a state".

Maybe a nitpick, but Prophet Muhammad did not go to Medina for the purpose of creating a government or state, its just that majority of the people there accepted him as their leader and that naturally gave him and his followers the government.

— Point: "Unlike in other religions, Islam has misogyny..."

Did he really say "unlike". Sure, there are a number of interpretations which can be argued as misogynistic (whether those interpretations are correct or not is another matter) but to say that other religions don't have similar or even worse problems is quite an extraordinary claim. But after this he contradicts himself, saying: "... to be fair there weren't many ideologies and thoughts that were very friendly with women in the past", but apparently unfriendly ideologies don't count as misogyny in front of this person.

— Point: Qur'an 2:282

You write that "it says that a woman may err due to her emotional attachment to her husband in court and the other woman can remind her". However, the verse explicitly does not indicate anything regarding any "emotional attachment".

A better argument would've been to point out the interpretation of those scholars who argue that the verse is only providing a recommendation about the witnesses, and it is completely silent on the question of whether a single woman's testimony would be accepted or not in a court of law. According to one source, even "Ibn Taymiyyah also reasoned the deficiency of using Qur'an 2:282 to prove evidentiary discrimination against women."
Title: Re: My refutation to Apostate Prophet
Post by: AMuslimDude213 on November 18, 2018, 10:07:22 AM
The reason I didnt answer in full and properly is because I had very limited resources to work with in the refutations, and I couldnt quote longer things because people could have barely read it, but I believe my 2nd refutation is much better than the first one to apostate prophet.
Title: Re: My refutation to Apostate Prophet
Post by: AMuslimDude213 on November 18, 2018, 10:20:35 AM
Nvm the video needs a bit of reediting i reupload it later
Title: Re: My refutation to Apostate Prophet
Post by: submit on December 08, 2018, 11:00:47 PM
The people refers to the inhabitants in Arab lands.

I heard Aws say: 'I came to the Messenger of Allah [SAW] among the delegation of Thaqif and I was with him in a tent. Everyone in the tent had gone to sleep except him and I. A man came and whispered to him, and he said: Go and kill him. Then he said: Does he not bear witness to La ilaha illallah (there is none worthy of worship except Allah) and that I am the Messenger of Allah? He said: He does bear witness to that. The Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: Leave him alone. Then he said: I have been commanded to fight the people until they say La ilaha illallah. If they say it, then their blood and their wealth become forbidden to me, except for a right that is due. (One of the narrators) Muhammad said: I said to Shu'bah: 'Doesn't the Hadith contain: Does he not testify to La ilaha illallah (there is none worthy of worship except Allah) and that I am the Messenger of Allah?' He said: 'I think it is both, but I do not know.

When the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) passed away, Abu Bakr (May Allah be pleased with him) was appointed as his successor (caliph). Amongst the Arabs some men apostatised. Abu Bakr (May Allah be pleased with him) resolved to fight them. 'Umar bin Al-Khattab (May Allah be pleased with him) said to Abu Bakr: "How can you fight them when the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) has declared: 'I have been commanded to fight people till they testify La ilaha illallah (there is no true god except Allah); and if they do it, their blood (life) and property are secured except when justified by law, and it is for Allah to call them to account." Upon this Abu Bakr (May Allah be pleased with him) said: "By Allah, I would definitely fight him who makes distinction between Salat and the Zakat, because it is an obligation upon the rich to pay Zakat. By Allah I will fight them even to secure the piece of rope which they used to give to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ)." 'Umar (May Allah be pleased with him) said: "I realized that Allah opened the heart of Abu Bakr (May Allah be pleased with him) for fighting those who refused to pay Zakat, and I fully recognized that Abu Bakr
Title: Re: My refutation to Apostate Prophet
Post by: submit on December 08, 2018, 11:04:35 PM
The fighting against the inhabitants of Arabia coincide with the prophecy from the passage Isaiah 42
Title: Re: My refutation to Apostate Prophet
Post by: AhmadFarooq on December 11, 2018, 03:38:21 AM
Aside from the verses and Hadiths regarding violence which explicitly include the context of self-defence, there is definitely a portion of scripture which does not include such conditions, at least not explicitly. In other words, scripture that calls for violence against non-Muslims without explicitly mentioning it be done only for protection against harm.

The present Hadiths and Qur'an 9:29 are significant in this regard. From what I've seen, there are three major interpretations for scripture pertaining to this subject matter.

1. The idea that such scripture, like the rest of violence pertaining verses and Hadiths, also refers only to self-defence, it's just not explicitly mentioned. For example, Qur'an 9:29 is argued to have come ( at a time of warfare between Muslims and Christians.

2. That Qur'an 9:29 referring to people of the Book, and Prophet's commands to destroy idol temples in Arabia are relevant to all humanity for all time. If I understood correctly, Ibn Taymiyyah argued along those lines, such as in Al Sarim-Ul-Maslool, and I have seen Wahabism argue, according to their interpretation, for the Islamic obligation to destroy all idols ( wherever they may exist.

3. That such scripture is relevant to only the Arabs or the people in surrounding areas, who were directly reached by Prophet Muhammad's teachings. The argument being, that since Prophet Muhammad had a direct link with God, therefore the Prophet would have been able to resolve any suspicion against Islam that a sceptical person might have had, and even provide miracles if need be. Since there would have been no reason or excuse to deny God when a Prophet is present among the people, no one had the right to deny Islam; and those who did so, deserved punishment. This punishment, during the previous Prophets' and Biblical times, was served directly by God while during  Prophet Muhammad's times was served by Muslims. This punishment is what, Qur'an 9:29 and the destruction of Arab idol temples, is referring to. People to whom Prophet Muhammad's teachings did not reach or those who lived after him, are exempt from such a punishment as they may have a legitimate excuse or unanswered question for not believing in Islam.

The narrations mentioned above might very well be referring to only the Arabs, however, they alone are definitely not enough to convince people who believe in the second interpretation. As far as I understand, the narrations include nothing to suggest their being restricted only to the Arabs.
Title: Re: My refutation to Apostate Prophet
Post by: Sama on October 31, 2019, 04:50:09 AM
The Annihilatory Refutation of "The Apostate" Rizzwan
Title: Re: My refutation to Apostate Prophet
Post by: QuranSearchCom on November 03, 2019, 10:02:15 AM
Jazaka Allah Khayr for the link, akhi Sama.  I am going to add it to the infidel's page, insha'Allah.

Take care,
Osama Abdallah