Talk:Criticism of Muhammad/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Why Prophet Muhammad gets criticism and other religious figures do not!

It is quite simple. Mohhamed has the distinction of being the ONLY founder of a surviving religion to have encouraged and have engaged-in violence. No other founder of any world religion preached or encouraged violence, whether that be the Buddha, Jesus, Mahavira, Zoroaster, Guru Nanak, or Bahá'u'lláh

That and his sexual activities. There are other things as well. Arrow740 05:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Don't forget his buying, selling, owning and creating (through war) slaves. Hypnosadist 08:41, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Why does the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) get criticism and not other religious figures?

This article is absolutely disgusting. I mean c'mon i could easily write an article bad-mouthing other religious figures. So why does the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) get criticism. This article is TERRIBLE, and must be removed. Xtremeownage should sign his comments.

It could be the fact that so many Muslims consider him to be the ultimate role model. When such is claimed, and the man's morals are questionable to some, it's doubtless that the critics would me more vocal critics than if such a thing was not claimed. Feel free to add criticisms of the Guru Nanak Dev, Siddharta Gautama, or of Zoroaster. Personally, I find Muhammad to be a great man, but not much greater than Alexander the Great or Genghis Khan... regardless of his claims to prophet-hood. Thanks for sharing your opinion, though.--C.Logan 20:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree with C. Logan. Although Buddha was worse as a role model, Muhammad was great, but not much greater than Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, or King William I.

Irrelevant to influential figures in other religious traditions, Muhammad is an incredibly controversial figure, in part due to the medieval Christian portrayal of Islam as a Christian heresy and its characterization of Muhammad as an insane sexual deviant which have continued to this day, as evidenced by post 9/11 comments by Jimmy Swaggert and others. Considering the controversy, it is important to develop an understanding of the roots and explanations of the criticisms of Muhammad. Aharriso 03:27, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I would like to see some credible accounts of Jesus, Moses, the rest of the Jewish prophets, and Buddha behaving similarly to Muhammad. Frotz 09:06, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Moses, Joshua and Elijah make Muhammad look like Gandhi (who was also a common racist in the end). If you're too lazy to read the bible (as is apparent) just do a cursory web search. David80 11:56, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

NO HE DID NOT, that is all propaganda, Jesus himself said that he did not come to bring peace but the sword in the Bible. As did many other religious figures, YOU ARE LIARS, and should be ashamed of yourselves. Sick minded liars. Xtremeownage should sign his comments.

What exactly are you responding to? Reading your first sentence, I don't see any comments above to which it could be in response to. Anyhow, you may want to do a little bit of reading about the verse in question before you push your interpretation - many, like myself, don't believe that it condones violence at all. The rest of your comment is generally humorous. Perhaps you should consider religious beliefs with a healthy grain of skepticism, or... you know, at least give some sort of supporting evidence for the childish shaming and finger-pointing you're attempting here.--C.Logan 10:31, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.