He Wrote
At least five major factors make the comparison between Allah and God misguided and weak. In this article, God means the God of the Bible, whereas Allah means the god of the Quran.
My Response
Ok.
He Wrote
1. The historical span of Quranic and Biblical history must be considered.
The Old Testament books covers around 1,400 hundred years before Christ, and God did not send out leaders to wage war in most of these years. For example, the Book of Judges alone says that ancient Hebrews enjoyed many decades of peace between each judge who was raised up in order to fight off aggression, sometimes as long as eighty years, longer than Muhammad's 63 years (Judges 3:11, 31; 5:31; 8:28, to cite only these examples).
My Response
Whether some one experienced more peace does not really mean much. The prophet Muhammad constantly had problems with unbelieving pagans so therefore he did not have the comfort of having much peace since his enemies always wanted to wipe Islam out, and off course they all failed.
Furthermore notice the intellectual dishonesty, the prophet Muhammad's ministry lasted for only 23 years, however so the time span of the OT is up to TWO THOUSAND YEARS, so this intellectually bankrupt missionary wants to compare 1400 years as he said, to 23 years of the prophet Muhammad's ministry! Seriously, who writes this stuff?
He Wrote
In Islam, Muhammad lived in Medina for only ten years (AD 622-632). In this brief time, he either sent out or went out on seventy-four raids, expeditions, or full-scale wars. They range from small assassination hit squads to eliminate anyone who insulted him, to an Islamic Crusade during which Muhammad led 30,000 jihadists against Byzantine Christians.
My Response
The reason he went on full scale wars was to eliminate the threat of enemies who wanted to take the Muslims out. As for the supposed Muslim crusade visit this link which gives the background around surah 9 which is what James is referring to:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/009.qmt.html
As for prophet Muhammad killing people who insulted him and so on, show me this, and show me the isnad and don't bring weak sources please. So we will be waiting for that information. Please visit this link as it deals with this issue as well:
True Stories or Forgeries? The Killing of Abu 'Afak and Asma' bint Marwan?
He Wrote
Allah compelled Muhammad to fight often in his ten years according to the evidence in the Quran and Islamic history, but the true God for over 1,400 years did not wage nearly as many wars per year in Israel's existence according to the Bible and Biblical history.
My Response
I showed you multiple verses showing that several cities were destroyed by Moses and his army. So yes your God did wage a lot of wars, in fact they are not even wars, they are just massacres of women and children.
He Wrote
2. The Canaanites were beyond hope, whereas the Arab polytheists could be converted.
In the Old Testament, sometimes God commands all inhabitants of a region or town to be wiped out entirely, like Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18:16-19:29), The Quran also approves of this destruction (Suras 7:80-84; 11:77-83; 15:61-77; 26:165-173; 27:54-58; 29:28-30). This is the big lesson of the Genesis passage. If God had found even only ten righteous in those cities, then he would not have destroyed them. But he did destroy them, so Sodom and Gomorrah did not have even ten righteous, except Lot and his family, who were forewarned and escaped.
An analysis by Samuel J. Schultz in his basic introduction to the Old Testament describes the irretrievable degradation of the Canaanites. After describing the Canaanite deities, he writes of the Canaanite people:
Since the gods of the Canaanites had low moral character, it is not surprising that the morality of the people was extremely low. The brutality and immorality in the stories about these gods is far worse than anything found in the Near East . . . The Canaanites in Joshua's day practiced child sacrifice, sacred prostitution, and snake worship in their rites and ceremonies associated with religion. Naturally their civilization degenerated under this demoralizing influence. (Samuel J. Schultz, The Old Testament Speaks, 2nd ed., New York: Harper and Row, 1970, p. 92)
Thus, by comparison with surrounding nations in the Near East, which were not beacons of monotheism and righteousness, to say the least, the Canaanites practiced religious rituals far worse than surrounding nations in the Ancient Near East. Carthage, a city on the North African coast and settled by Phoenicians, who were part of the Ancient Near East, has yielded countless baby skeletons that had been used in sacrifice. So these people were too far gone.
It must be clearly repeated that according to the Bible no region or town that had a hope of repentance or righteousness was ever wiped out. But when it was, then we can be sure that God was acting wisely and justly, even if our modern emotions do not like this aspect of God's character.
See this lengthy article on how the Canaanites were worse than the surrounding pagan nations. The article also has a thorough explanation of God's severe decree.
My Response
I would like to expose the sub heading that James gives which is the following:
2. The Canaanites were beyond hope, whereas the Arab polytheists could be converted.
James gives a false impression; to begin with, the prophet Muhammad did not go and wipe out entire tribes like the Bible! In the Bible Moses not only wiped the Canaanites out, but several other tribes! As James also stated, the Arabs could be converted, and many of them did convert! The only ones the prophet Muhammad fought where the ones who kept on fighting him and wanting to kill him. So James gives a false impression, he tried to make it seem that the prophet Muhammad went and wiped out the entire Arab pagans when in fact this is not the case. The prophet Muhammad got Makkah without a fight! No blood was shed at all.
He Wrote
In contrast, Allah never commanded Muhammad to wipe out all the inhabitants of a region or town in Arabia at first. Rather, Allah and his prophet killed some and let others live, based on whether they accepted Islam. Evidently, the pagans of Arabia were not beyond hope.
My Response
So James himself admits the point I just caught him out for! Allah never commanded Muhammad to wipe out all the inhabitants! So why did James give the misleading impression! The prophet Muhammad did not kill people on the basis as to whether they believed or not.
Furthermore James is distorting Islam, the prophet Muhammad never killed pagans based on whether they accepted Islam or not, when the prophet Muhammad entered Makkah why didnt he simply kill all the pagans? If James is correct in his info then naturally we would expect such a thing to occur, yet no such happened!
In fact it is the Bible which has such commands:
Deuteronomy
Chapter 13
6-18
6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; 7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth; 8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: 9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. 10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage. 11 And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you.
12 If thou shalt hear say in one of thy cities, which the LORD thy God hath given thee to dwell there, saying, 13 Certain men, the children of Belial, are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known; 14 Then shalt thou inquire, and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought among you; 15 Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword. 16 And thou shalt gather all the spoil of it into the midst of the street thereof, and shalt burn with fire the city, and all the spoil thereof every whit, for the LORD thy God: and it shall be an heap for ever; it shall not be built again. 17 And there shall cleave nought of the cursed thing to thine hand: that the LORD may turn from the fierceness of his anger, and show thee mercy, and have compassion upon thee, and multiply thee, as he hath sworn unto thy fathers; 18 When thou shalt hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep all his commandments which I command thee this day, to do that which is right in the eyes of the LORD thy God.
He Wrote
Therefore, the historical context in Arabia 600 years after Christ is the exact opposite of the situation in Canaan 1400 years before Christ. Jesus ushered in a new era of salvation, and Christianity made some impact in Arabia. Hence, Muhammad's treaties with pagans differ widely from God's command to Moses and Joshua in their historical timeframes.
Allah's and Muhammad's policy of letting some pagans live and killing others in the same tribe necessarily means that the pagans of Arabia were not as hopelessly degenerate as the utterly annihilated Canaanites were?so Allah and Muhammad should never have waged war on them in the first place. Granted that the pagans of Arabia were not completely righteous, they still had hope and light that the Canaanites did not. But it is more accurate to say that Allah's and Muhammad's policy is ad hoc and confused.
The fact that Muhammad kept calling Arab pagans to convert?and some did?means that they were not beyond hope, so the parallel between God and Allah in the convertibility of the different pagans in the widely different historical contexts (ancient Israel and Late Antiquity Arabia) breaks down.
This therefore means that the comparison between the two historical periods is misguided.
My Response
The pagans did have a light and hope, that was the prophet Muhammad. Many of them never wanted to have peace with him or accept him, so they kept on fighting him and the prophet Muhammad simply fought them back. So James has no point it seems, we the Muslims know the pagans had hope! That is why unlike your Bible, Allah didn't command the prophet Muhammad to wipe them out! The prophet Muhammad fought them when they fought him, simple.
As for you claiming that Allah and the prophet Muhammad are confused, I say that you are confused, and you are lost.
He Wrote
3. God is very specific about who should be wiped out entirely and who should live, whereas Allah feels his way.
God's decrees are clear and specific, based on his wisdom. Here are four examples. First, God decreed that Edom should live, for the Edomites descended from Esau, the brother of Jacob. They were also outside of the Promised Land (Numbers 20:14-21; Deuteronomy 2:4-6). Second, God decreed that the Midianites should be battled because of their seduction of the people of God into a specially degraded immorality and idolatry (Numbers 25:1-18; and 31:1-54). Third, in the textual context of laying down the rules of warfare, the ancient Hebrews were commanded to offer peace to the pagan cities outside of the Promised Land of Canaan. But if these cities refused peace, then the Hebrews were to battle them. After victory, the pagan women and children were spared, but the men were killed (Deuteronomy 20:10-15). Fourth, in the same textual context of warfare, all cities within the Promised Land should be wiped out (Deuteronomy 20:16-18).
My Response
I would like to thank James for mentioning the following, note what he said:
Third, in the textual context of laying down the rules of warfare, the ancient Hebrews were commanded to offer peace to the pagan cities outside of the Promised Land of Canaan. But if these cities refused peace, then the Hebrews were to battle them
It is sad James has to distort his own book, James only told you part of the treaty, not all the terms of the treaty. I will quote the terms of the treaty with the part that James was too ashamed to mention:
Deuteronomy 20: 10-15:
10 When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace unto it. 11 And it shall be, if it make thee answer of peace, and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee, and they shall serve thee. 12 And if it will make no peace with thee, but will make war against thee, then thou shalt besiege it: 13 And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword: 14 But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee. 15 Thus shalt thou do unto all the cities which are very far off from thee, which are not of the cities of these nations.
So as you can see, there is a stipulation to this treaty, the people have to become slaves for you! So question, why didn't James mention that part? Was he ashamed? Was he scared? I think he was, the fact he didn't mention it shows how corrupt he believes his own book is.
Furthermore you simply have to chuckle at the level of intellectual bankruptcy that is being displayed! According to James the massacres and holocaust of the Bible are okay because they were aimed at a specific group of people! As he says:
God is very specific about who should be wiped out entirely and who should live,
So the genocide of the Bible is perfectly okay since it is at a specific people! Wow, if Christians actually make themselves feel better with this nonsense than what a sad situation we truly have! I honestly hope that Christians don't truly believe in such weak argumentation!
Furthermore I could play the same game as James, let us assume that Islam commands the annihilation of all pagans, well, the Quran is being specific, and it's simply being specific against the pagans! I am using James' logic here!
He Wrote
In these policies that are related to blood-ties, special punishments, geographical distance from Canaan (see point no. 5, below), and the Promised Land itself, God is very specific and very clear?though admittedly severe. He has a divine foundation and explanations for his tough actions. He was not growing in knowledge and feeling his way, for he laid out these policies before battle began and before the ancient Hebrews entered the Promised Land.
This divine clarity does not mean that the ancient Hebrews carried out God's decrees perfectly; they did not. For example, Joshua failed to consult the Lord in the Gibeonite deception, so he failed to wipe them out (Joshua 9). In the period of the Judges, Israel's disobedience was worse. But God's command was still clear. So the people's disobedience did not mean that the decrees were unclear or evolving or changing. Their disobedience is just that?disobedience on the human level
My Response
All this doesnt change the fact your God ordered prophets to kill women and kids. So I do not see what is the use to all this, all your doing is bringing up points to which no one cares, at the end of the day women and children are being murdered and no one cares about your sad justifications of this terrorism and genocide.
He Wrote
In contrast, Muhammad's god fluctuates according to circumstances. He goes from one treaty or command to the next in regards to the polytheists in Arabia.
It is difficult to trust that Allah can read the pagans' hearts, as Muhammad progressed in his revelations from peace with pagans (and Jews) to their deaths in some cases, but not in others, even at the same time and in the same region, based on his military power. For example, early on, Allah and Muhammad wanted to purify the Kabah shrine, but they were unable militarily (Sura 2:125-126; 190-195). Then, nine years later, after they grow in military power, they set out to purify (read: conquer) Arabia. After this is mostly accomplished, they set out to conquer the Byzantine Empire. Thus, Allah and Muhammad do not act thoroughly, but stumblingly, based on military strength, not a secure divine decree.
My Response
So James has to make things up. When the prophet Muhammad and his army first fought the pagans, they were outnumbered! The prophet Muhammad was not greater in number. Furthermore the Muslims were ALWAYS the ones who were less in number and equipment when they began their wars, whether it be against the Pagans, Persians, or the Byzantines.
He Wrote
Specifically, in Arabia alone, Allah and Muhammad sign the Treaty of Hudaybiyah with Meccan pagans in AD 628. He was caught in a tight squeeze, so he agreed, under Allah's guidance, to live peacefully with the Meccans. Then a year later Muhammad finds (in his own mind) probable cause to break the treaty. Then even later than that, according to Sura 9:1-5, quoted above, Allah permits Muhammad unilaterally to break treaties with polytheists, but in other cases he keeps the treaties until their expiration date. Even the highly respected Muslim commentator Sayyid Abul A'La Maududi says in his comment on those Quranic verses that Muhammad did not fight polytheists sometimes because he was too weak, so he settled for a treaty. But when he became strong, he terminated the treaties (unilaterally) in Sura 9:1-5 (The Meaning of the Qur'an, vol. 2, p. 218, note 82). This implies that Muhammad and his god should never have waged war on the Arab polytheists in the first place, 600 years after Christ came.
My Response
The prophet Muhammad was not in a 'tight squeeze', he simply did the right thing and agreed to make terms of peace with the pagans, which worked out to perfection, as it allowed the Muslims to put all their efforts into spreading and teaching Islam, as before the treaty they were largely preoccupied with having to ward of the pagan threat. Perhaps this is why James is so mad, he probaly wished that the pagans refused peace with the Muslims and to just wipe them out.
As for Muhammad breaking the treaty here and there, why don't you please show this to us. For more on the treaty of Hudaybiyah please visit this link:
Rebuttal to Sam Shamoun's article Muhammad's False Prophecies - Part 2.
He Wrote
Allah's zigzagging differs entirely from the true God's clarity in the Old Testament. God does not change his mind based on a surprising circumstance that he does not seem to foresee. In severe decrees especially, God is not in training or in process, as seen in progressive revelations.
Thus, the true God is clear and stable in his severe, divine commands, whereas Allah is unclear and fluctuating in his severe commands. This is significant because Allah gives the impression of feeling his way, but God is decisive.
My Response
Actually the terms of war are very clear in the Quran. Fight those who fight you, and make peace if they make peace with you:
002.190
YUSUFALI: Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.
002.191
YUSUFALI: And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.
002.192
YUSUFALI: But if they cease, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
Those are the rules on Islamic warfare, very simple.
He Wrote
4. Who was attacked?
In the Bible, the true God orders warfare only against Canaanites who were too far gone in their decadence. Let us assume, contrary to fact, that a nation neighboring Israel was made up of ethical monotheists. Would the true God decree that a war should be waged against them? To reason deductively, Deuteronomy 20:10-15 says explicitly not to attack nearby pagans outside of Canaan. Also, Jonah preached to Nineveh hundreds of miles away, and the inhabitants of this city were neither degraded Canaanites nor monotheists. Jonah preached good news. So how much more would God not attack a nation if it were made up of monotheists?
he bottom line is this: the only reason that God ordered these wars after the Exodus was to purge a small and specific land (see no. 5, below). He did not ordain wars of conquest outside of Israel to spread the Hebrew religion around the known world. If the Hebrew religion were spread, it was done by proclamation, as seen in the calling of Jonah.
On the other hand, Muhammad waged war on polytheists, and Muslims believe that these polytheists were also too far gone morally?a questionable belief as seen in point no. two, but let us assume it only for the sake of argument. Then problems still emerge.
Namely, Muhammad also attacked Jews and Christians, who are monotheists.
As for the Christians, Muhammad embarked on an Islamic Crusade against the Byzantines in AD 630. The Byzantines never showed up, so Muhammad the prophet believed a false rumor that the Byzantines were mustering a large army to invade Arabia. But along the way he extracted agreements and protection money from Arab Christians (and Jews) so that they would not be attacked again by Muhammad. Allah ordained wars of conquest outside of Arabia in order to spread Islam by military force. Muhammad and his deity wanted either conversion (the converted paid a "charity" or zakat tax) or money in a jizya tax on the unconverted. Either way, money flowed into the Islamic treasury back in Arabia.
As for Muhammad's attacks on the Jews of Medina, they were not as degenerate as the polytheists in Muhammad's times. At first, Muhammad wanted to be accepted by the Jews, for they held to the Torah. But the Jews rightly rebuffed him as being outside of Biblical revelation and as being a gentile. As the conflict with them grew and Allah's and Muhammad's military power grew, their policy progressively changes, but never improves; it devolves. He clears the Jews out of Medina first by exile (Qaynuqa tribe); then by military besiegement and exile (Nadir tribe); and finally by extermination of the men and enslavement of the women and children, except he kept a beautiful Jewish woman for himself (Qurayza tribe). In this gradual elimination, Muhammad waged a propaganda war, dehumanizing some of the Jews by calling them "apes" and "pigs" (Suras 7:166; 2:65; 5:60).
For more on this dubious policy on the Jews, please refer to this article , where the standard lines of defense put forward by Muslims are answered.
These changes in Allah's policies on Christians and Jews reveal that Allah's decrees are based on the shifting sands of circumstances, such as military power or weakness, and progressive revelations. He wants to be accepted by both of them at first, but they reject him, so his militancy grows according to those circumstances.
Certainly, the God of Israel would never have exterminated a city that had ten righteous citizens. That is the lesson of Genesis 18:16-19:29, in which Abraham questioned God's decree to destroy these cities. On the other hand, Muhammad did not kill Jews and Christians to rid Arabia of dark polytheism because the Jews and Christians are not polytheists. So Muhammad's warpath is confused. Moses and Joshua were commanded to rid Canaan of paganism that had become darker than the paganism found in the ancient Near East. Any comparison between the two divergent cultures at the time of Moses and at the time of Muhammad is seriously flawed.
Muhammad's attacks on monotheists, besides polytheists, in and outside of Arabia demonstrate beyond all doubt that Allah and God at war are worlds apart.