(March 31, 2025 at 1:32 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: His followers drove airplanes into buildings, that's a big no-no for me.  It started the unwinding of a democracy that I cherished. Granted, he wasn't one of the terrorists, but his inspiration was certainly negative upon 19 guys.

Personally, my limit comes when his followers bomb music concerts or festivals.

(March 31, 2025 at 4:36 am)Rev. Rye Wrote:

(March 31, 2025 at 1:32 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: His followers drove airplanes into buildings, that's a big no-no for me.  It started the unwinding of a democracy that I cherished. Granted, he wasn't one of the terrorists, but his inspiration was certainly negative upon 19 guys.

Personally, my limit comes when his followers bomb music concerts or festivals.

And Jesus’ followers bomb churches and clinics, Abraham’s followers bomb children, Buddha’s followers light people on fire, and so on.

Muhammad-inspired atrocities are nothing special. I’m not excusing them, just saying that the problem seems to be religion generally.

Boru

I don't trust anyone who believes in invisible friends, seems to me they are hard of thinking

He (supposedly) created another religion as if world did not have enough of this dumb crap.

Take just the fact that the prophet Muhammad was a liar. He claimed to have split the Moon, that he flew to heaven on a winged horse, that he met jinns, and similar claims that are blatant lies.

I take a dim view of his early career raiding merchant caravans. But at bottom, I suspect it's a lot like a similar quip about Christians: “I have no problem with god - it's his fan club that scares me.” (A.B. Potts)

(March 30, 2025 at 5:30 pm)al-amiyr Wrote: Hello to all,

This is my first post here. As a scholar deeply engaged with Islamic studies, my expertise spans the entire breadth of the field. I'm interested in understanding the views of forum members concerning the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). Specifically, I would like to know if there is any particular aspect related to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) that has influenced you negatively. If so, could you please elaborate on why?

Thank you,

Al-Amiyr
30 March 2025

Welcome, Al-Amiyr. I'm wondering if you're Sunni, Shia, or other?

Let's categorize the responses based on their expressed opinions and sentiments toward Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and Islam, broadly grouping them into themes for clarity:

Neutral or Uninterested
BrianSoddingBoru4: Indifferent, noting that nothing negative specifically comes to mind.

Brewer: Lacks interest in discussions about Muhammad, remembers the controversy about depictions but is otherwise unengaged.

Concerns About Safety and Censorship
Neo-Scholastic: Expresses fear of speaking negatively about Islam publicly due to safety concerns for his family, implying there are dangers associated with criticizing Islam.

Philosophical or Theological Disbelief
Astreja: Rejects the concept of prophethood and divinity, viewing Muhammad as a non-divine figure making false claims.

Accusations of Immoral or Criminal Behavior
Pedophilia and Sexual Misconduct: Multiple users (e.g., Fake Messiah, Deesse23, Rev. Rye) criticize the Prophet (PBUH) for his marriage to Aisha (RA) at a young age, extending this to accusations of pedophilia and even rape. (Note: These will be addressed, showing that there is nothing in the hundreds of hadiths indicating the marriage with Aisha (RA) was consummated at age nine or any age. The original compound word in Arabic does not mean 'consummated.' I will demonstrate this from the original sources.)

Necrophilia: Fake Messiah claims the Prophet (PBUH) engaged in necrophilia; however, this claim is totally incorrect.

Homosexuality and Inappropriate Behavior: Fake Messiah also accuses the Prophet (PBUH) of homosexual tendencies and inappropriate behavior with children, referencing Islamic texts. (This claim too is a misrepresentation of the facts and will be addressed.)

Criticism of Followers and Alleged Inspirations for Violence
Thumpalumpacus: Criticizes the Prophet (PBUH) for allegedly inspiring the 9/11 terrorists.

Rev. Rye: Criticizes the Prophet's (PBUH) followers for recent violent acts like bombing music concerts.

BrianSoddingBoru4: Notes that followers of other religions also commit violence, suggesting the problem is with religion generally.

Historical Criticism or Acknowledgment of Time-Period Norms
The Grand Nudger: Views the Prophet (PBUH) as a typical warlord of his time, not exceptionally negative compared to others like Brennus or Cao Cao.

General Disdain or Dismissal
zebo-the-fat: Expresses distrust of anyone who believes in "invisible friends," implying a general skepticism of religious beliefs.

Ivan Denisovich: Criticizes the Prophet (PBUH) for allegedly creating more religious division and making unsubstantiated miraculous claims.

Angrboda: Dislikes the aspects of the Prophe'st (PBUH) life involving raiding and violence but notes a general issue with religious 'fan clubs.'

Inquiry About Sectarian Affiliation
Mister Agenda: Inquires about your sectarian affiliation (Sunni, Shia, or other), indicating an interest in understanding your specific perspective within Islam. (I will address this also)

This categorization helps identify the range of views expressed in response to my question and the common themes in the responses.

The most common claim or concern or most common negativity among the comments centers around the marriage of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) to Aisha (RA) at a young age, which several commenters refer to, using it to criticize the the Prophet (PBUH) for pedophilia and related sexual misconduct. This aspect is highlighted by users like Fake Messiah, Deesse23, and Rev. Rye, and it appears to be the focal point of negativity for those who are critical of the Prophet's character based on the available translated historical accounts. Because this has been the most common claim or concern, it will be the top focus of my responses. I am ready to approach this with an open mind and come to a rational conclusion based on the real facts, and I hope that you too are open to this. What are your views?

Al-Amiyr
01 April 2025

(April 1, 2025 at 6:22 am)al-amiyr Wrote: The most common claim or concern or most common negativity among the comments centers around the marriage of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) to Aisha (RA) at a young age, which several commenters refer to, using it to criticize the the Prophet (PBUH) for pedophilia and related sexual misconduct. This aspect is highlighted by users like Fake Messiah, Deesse23, and Rev. Rye, and it appears to be the focal point of negativity for those who are critical of the Prophet's character based on the available translated historical accounts. Because this has been the most common claim or concern, it will be the top focus of my responses. I am ready to approach this with an open mind and come to a rational conclusion based on the real facts, and I hope that you too are open to this. What are your views?

Al-Amiyr
01 April 2025

I apologize for coming late to the discussion.  Although different atheists have highlighted different points, the primary point of all of this seems to me (at least) to be that Muhammad assumed an absolute authority based on his alleged connection to God, or to the angel Gabriel if you prefer.  Many of the other points mentioned seem to flow from this one point of his highly questionable assumed authority, especially given our modern perspectives on the events of Muhammad's life and on his historical influence.  As atheists, we don't believe he had any such authority at all, since he claimed it was based on a God which did not (and does not) exist.  My understanding is that Sufis have been trying to liberalize Muhammad's absolutism ever since.

So it is all very well if you want to try to demonstrate that Muhammad behaved well toward Aisha according to the Hadith, at least by the standards of his time, but you will still have an uphill battle after that.

(March 31, 2025 at 1:50 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Seems pretty standard for a warlord of his time and stature. That's not great, but it's difficult to see how that would negatively influence anyone who didn't already believe he was more or better than he was. As far as warlords go, I think I prefer Brennus or Cao Cao.

Similar to this, I think he was a pretty typical cult leader. The thing with cult leaders is once they've died after founding a movement, the ripples of affect don't necessarily have anything to do with the original founder.

That being said I think it seems to be a religion where people more easily interpret the verses to incite violence.

You said you're a scholar on this topic, I'm not and I think you'll find that to most atheists he's just bloke who made some claims we have no reason to believe.
And the people who do believe the claims believe that we should burn in the afterlife, then once our skins have been burnt through God will replace our skin with more skin to be burned again on repeat forever because we don't believe the book this guy was involved with.