The Hypocrisy of Christians Who Attack the Prophet hood of Muhammad (peace be upon him)

by 

Bassam Zawadi

 

Please note: This article is only talking about Christians who vehemently attack and insult Islam. Not all Christians are like that,  for many of them respect Islam and speak (even when critiquing) about Islam in a well mannered fashion. 

 

Christians have attacked the Prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon him) by falsely alleging that he is a murderer, rapist, pedophile etc. They charge him with all these disgusting crimes yet they have all been soundly refuted. However, only for the sake of argument let us assume that their arguments against the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) are true. Does that disprove his Prophethood? 

Many of the arguments that they present are emotional, thus they commit the fallacy of appeal to emotion. They argue about things that they don’t like about regarding Islamic Law and they claim that the Prophet (peace be upon him) instituted these “immoral laws”. They reject these laws (e.g. cutting the hand of the thief, killing of apostates, permissibility of a man marrying more than one wife, etc.) because they don't agree with them or understand them (even though these laws could be found in their Bible). It is like me rejecting Christianity because I simply don't like the idea of someone dying for my sins. Christians would then argue back that I am committing the appeal to emotion fallacy. However why do they go and commit this fallacy against Islam and not allow it when it is used against them?

The Prophets of the Old Testament have done countless acts of atrocities (see here and see here and look at the section that says 'What the Bible and Quran say about the Prophets'). Yet, the Christians acknowledge these and still believe that these people are Prophets. But when the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) does something that Christians deem as objectionable then according to them that means he is not a Prophet. Do you see the hypocrisy? 

Christians reply back saying that they acknowledge that these Prophets are sinners, while most Muslims view their Prophets as sinless. Well, if Prophets could be sinners according to Christians and they successfully show us that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) did commit these sins that they have accused him of then all they have done is have shown that Muhammad (peace be upon him) is a Prophet and sinner. They still don't disprove his Prophethood since according to them a Prophet could be a major sinner. So they would only prove Muslims wrong when they say that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is sinless but not when they say that he is a Prophet. 

Christians will then argue back that Islam justifies these 'major sins' that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) allegedly committed, whilst but the Bible condemns them. However, if anyone refers to the link here and reads the articles he/she would realize that it is God commanding these atrocities. Nowhere in the Old or New Testament do we see any condemnation for these acts (obviously, how can God condemn Himself for issuing these very commands?)

The criteria that Christians use to attempt to disprove and attack the Prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon him) can be used even more forcefully against the Prophets of the Old Testament. So even if Christians were able to prove these arguments against Muhammad (if true, they are still no where as bad as the acts of the Prophets of the Old Testament), they still do not disprove his Prophethood. If they insist that this disproves his Prophethood then they also need to insist that the Prophets of the Old Testament are not Prophets as well. Therefore, they should renounce their faith in Christianity (for Christianity requires that you believe the Old Testament is inspired because Jesus gave it authority according to Christians). 

Christians might then argue back that the Muslim is committing the fallacy of tu quoque in the sense that the Muslim is appealing to the Bible in order to justify the 'immoral acts' committed by Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). However, Muslims should not appeal to the Bible in order to defend anything. For we find no immoral act committed by the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and the Muslim should refute the baseless arguments first and then point out the atrocities in the Bible that are far worse than the false allegations raised against the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

In conclusion, Christians are hypocrites for supposedly rejecting Islam for reasons that do not exist in the religion, but exist in their own religion. 

 

 

Return to General Articles on Chrisitianity

Return to Homepage

HomeWhat's new?IslamChristianityRefutations LanguagesMultimediaE BooksLinksContact Me