muhammed

what do you think of muhammed? as in the prophet of islam.

Funny, when it's Islam its murder but when it's tens of thousands killed on the order of Moses ...

Islam does acknowlege Musa. I will not lie and say that he did not ever engage in battle, and of course people died in that battle. You dont just smile at the enemy, Islam doesnt believe in that, if you are being attacked you attack back, but in those battles there were many regulations for the Muslim army. Amongst them being no killing of women, children, monks who had given their lives to the worship of god. No mutulations, no raping, no tree cutting for no reason, war is something that can take place IF there is no other way but if it does it has to be carried out by muslims in the most civilised manner, Im sure you have read about the war in the past, and even just in the Twentieth centuary we saw a few of the most bloodiest wars in recorded history, if a Muslim does not adhere to these limits set by Allah he is only wronging himself.
Abu Afak was a man who did a disgracing type of poetry against the prophet of Allah, it was not because he was arrogant and became upset, it was because if he as the head of Gods religion was degraded then it degraded the religion in the eyes of others.
I cannot explain this in a message, you have to compare war in the time the prophet and war caried out by others.
He didnt murder a bunch of people, that is a surprising statement from Decius.

Sorry Decius, I was reading about this Abu Afak story again, when we take any stories, or sayings or prophet Muhammed we refer to hadeeth science, which is the research methodolgy of Muslim scholars, every single persoan in that chain who had claimed to hear this story would be analysed, but thats another topic that you may read about if you please, well, yes this story is mentioned in biographies of the prophet Muhammed, but hadeeth scholars have failed to find any chain of narrators to confirm that this actually took place, so until anyone can produce this chain of narrators then it is a bit pointless for me to have justified something that might not have happened.

Narrated Anas bin Malik: A Jewish woman brought a poisoned (cooked) sheep for the Prophet who ate from it. She was brought to the Prophet and he was asked, "Shall we kill her?" He said, "No." I continued to see the effect of the poison on the palate of the mouth of God's Apostle.
(Sahih al-Bukhârî, Volume 3, Book 47, Number 786)

This has a complete chain of narrators, and is recognised by all who have studied hadeeth science, if he didnt kill a young Jewish women for intentionally trying to kill him, then would he kill one who only abused him verbally.?
I know i defended that story before, but that was my mistake.

The Quran is not the biography of the prophet Muhammed, he is barely mentioned in it, so these stories are not in it. If it was then there would be no need for a chain of narrators, then it would be word of God, then it would be fact.

But surely if it is this confusing for the muslim scholars to try and sort out how is the average every day Muslim supposed to know what teachings to follow. Morality can't be something you pick and choose, this is something that annoys me about the mountain of laws to be addeared in the Jewish religion; you can do this one day but not on another. If its wrong its wrong. You don't kill, rape, torture, and other wise inflict suffering on another human being, it just isn't done, no ifs, buts, maybes or lets look at the teachings of this one or that one.... rubbish!