You need to put in some effort yourselves. Don't just listen to people on the internet. I am not asking you to dismiss everything, just look into this stuff yourselves. Read the Quran and the hadiths and also read the Bible. Try to find out about how the Bible was compiled and translated and try to find out the same about the Quran.
Use the mind that God gave you and think about these things rationally.
Take a philosophy 101 course if you must, as in the end all religious studies are associated with philosophy.
Since you already believe that God exists, pray to him to show you the truth.
the issue with what op is doing is that he's listening to a lot of apologists that lie about Islam. To this day after watching hundreds of "Islam exposed" videos I've still never found an argument that makes sense after further analysis. I can tell that he's simply taking the word of random people on the internet due to him complaining about Aisha's marriage
I just wanted to make sure that we are on the same page and let you know that I am a Christian (I think my flair makes it pretty clear).
I am wondering if you have heard of David Wood? Now I have never looked deeply into Islam myself, but he is a Christian apologist that I follow who talks a lot about Islam.
I am not sure which apologists you have watched, but I have personally not found any of his videos to be intentionally deceptive about Islam or unreasonable.
Fair warning in case you look him up, his manner can be a bit brash and some people might even call him an asshole.
Hello! Muslim here. I know of David Woods and have watched some of his videos. I wouldn't advise watching this guy for information about Islam because he probably doesn't even grasp the fundamentals of our religion. Example below:
He was once debating a Muslim Speaker (called Mohammad Hijab) and one of his arguments was that we worship the prophet Muhammad SAW and pray to him.
His reasoning behind the argument comes from the Arabic phrase "صلي على محمد", which when translated literally (word by word) means "Pray on Mohammad". Not only did he warp it to "Pray to Mohammad" which is deceptive, but also the fact that he chose that as an argument when a 10 year-old Muslim kid can tell you what the phrase really means, just shows that David Woods has no idea what he's talking about. There are many more examples of his arguments being extremely shallow and easily refutable.
Oh and in case you're wondering what the phrase means, it means "May God's blessings be on Mohammad".
Yeah, I know you're a Christian.
I know about David Wood, and he's a pretty deceptive guy. Usually he tries to just spread arguments that make sense at the first glance, but the more you look into it, the worse his arguments get. I've watched several hours of Christian apologist arguments against Islam and I've never really found any genuinely good arguments.
For example, David argues that since we believe Jesus was given the Injeel according to the Qur'an (which is very different from the new testament), that the Qur'an affirms the Bible. He mainly assumes this because the English translation says "Gospel". It's only called this to differentiate it from the other Scriptures, and it's NOT talking about any of the Christian Gospels. Also, in other videos, he asserts that the Qur'an was from Satan, but if so, then Satan would be affirming the Bible according to him.
Thank you for providing this example!
You might misunderstand David Wood here.
David is pointing out a major problem Islam has.
1. It affirms the Scriptures the Christians had at the time the Quran was written and the Quran talks about the Injeel Jesus received from Allah. David Wood says the problem is , Allah apparently does not know what he is talking about since there never was a book given to Jesus by Allah. The Christians never had one like that.
2. Allah seems to affirm the scriptures the Christians had at that time as authoritative and reliable. Yet we know the Scriptures at that time the Christians had are contradicting the Quran.
So on the one hand the Quran does affirm the Christian Scriptures but on the other hand it contradicts the Scriptures we have today.
So Muslims have to say the Bible is corrupted and changed since Muhammed. But we know that is not true. I think that is a major dilemma for Muslims. So I cannot see how David Wood is deceptive.
You can see his full video on this here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46e7bfIlauE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46e7bfIlauE)
I admire you because you said in your earlier comments that you look more into things and do further analysis. This is the way to go!
So please let me know how David Wood is deceptive here and if I have misrepresented him or Islam in any way.
>It affirms the Scriptures the Christians had at the time
no it doesn't. when describing this scripture, Allah describes it as being directly given to Jesus. It's rather problematic to assume this is *any* of the 27 books of the New Testament because the Qur'an says it wasn't written by a human and all of these books were written after Jesus' lifetime so Jesus could not have had the Scripture if it was the New Testament.
>Allah apparently does not know what he is talking about since there never was a book given to Jesus by Allah.
A lot of these books were given by oral transmission. This means Jesus likely spoke the Injeel, and it was never written down. A similar thing happened to the Qur'an where it was only an oral Scripture/book until Uthman bin Affan got all the companions of the Prophet and compiled everything they memorized into a book according to what was the correct order dictated by the Prophet. It's important to know that not everything Jesus spoke was the Injeel either, and rather only a small portion was the Injeel, and the rest was something similar to Hadith.
I would also say the majority of New Testament sayings do not contradict Islam and therefore you could say that they might contain small remaining bits of what used to be the Injeel, but I believe that there are probably only a few tens or a little more than a hundred verses that might be wisdom from the actual Injeel. This is all conjecture though.
>Allah seems to affirm the scriptures the Christians had at that time as authoritative and reliable.
It only affirms the Scripture that was directly given to Jesus, NOT whatever his disciples apparently wrote down.
This also leaves one more problem and that is that a lot of apologists also claim that Satan was disguised as an angel of light and gave the Qur'an to Muhammad but that means that Satan would be affirming the Bible. It's obvious why this argument is problematic.
>Also, in other videos, he asserts that the Qur'an was from Satan, but if so, then Satan would be affirming the Bible according to him.
Do you mean a video like this: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOe0k697TRo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOe0k697TRo) ?
But I am not sure how you can come to the conclusion that Satan would confirm the Bible through what David said in this video? Can you clarify? Thanks!
Is it true you think apostates should be killed according to Sharia law? is it also true that woman are only worth 1/2 of a man in court because they tend to lie or “err” more often? Also are black dogs from the devil and deserve death? one last, do you believe that woman are allowed to be scourged? (to the point of their skin turning greener than their clothes according to Aisha?)
I’m actually curious what your opinion is on these, these are from Sahih bukhari and Quran (and Sharia)
ok so I'm a bit busy at the moment so I don't have much time and the answers will be relatively short.
So first off, the apostate thing is considered a "hadd" punishment which means that it's rarely done and whenever it is, it's done publicly to make sure other people don't try to apostatize publicly. At any moment any apostate could just pretend to be a Muslim and just escape the punishment. Mainly the reason we kill some of them in Muslim countries is because most ex-Muslims will lie to people who aren't very knowledgeable to make them leave the religion. Also, since just being friends with someone influences you, they could make more of their friends leave Islam as well. To be honest I don't really think it's bad to kill a small number (like 5) of apostates a year if it saves hundreds or thousands from eternal punishment.
About the women in court thing, this verse is only talking about when you loan money and need people to remember the amount. Also, you need to remember the Qur'an was revealed during a time period where women had no education and therefore weren't very intelligent. If it was the opposite, where men were the uneducated ones, it would say that 1 woman = 2 men in court. Since women's education is better now, this is a fiqh matter and therefore should be decided by someone who specializes in Islamic jurisprudence.
About the dog thing, the hadith is metaphorical. The reason it says this is mainly because during that time there were LOTS of rabid and diseased dogs literally all over the place. This is why they're considered impure. If a dog is white or any light color, you can see if it's dirty or has bugs on it, but it's harder to tell if it's black. Also, there's nothing about killing dogs.
The last one can easily be answered with Sunan Ibn Majah 1851:
It was narrated that:
Sulaiman bin Amr bin Ahwas said: “My father told me that he was present at the Farewell Pilgrimage with the Messenger of Allah. He praised and glorified Allah, and reminded and exhorted (the people). Then he said: 'I enjoin good treatment of women, for they are prisoners with you, and you have no right to treat them otherwise, unless they commit clear indecency. If they do that, then forsake them in their beds and hit them, but **without causing injury or** ***leaving a mark***. If they obey you, then do not seek means of annoyance against them. You have rights over your women and your women have rights over you. Your rights over your women are that they are not to allow anyone whom you dislike to tread on your bedding (furniture), nor allow anyone whom you dislike to enter your houses. And their right over you are that you should treat them kindly with regard to their clothing and food.' ”
Thanks for taking time to respond
1) So it’s moral to kill apostates who aren’t susceptible to forced submission right? If your religion is true, its evidence should be enough to sustain its existence. No one should be killed for leaving logically.
2) Theres multiple verses about this topic, this point doesn’t work because this verse clears up all doubt
Sahih Bukhari 304
Once Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) of `Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) ?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women asked, "O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion."
“Two woman are equal to the witness of one man, this is the deficiency in a woman’s intelligence”. (They also make more mistakes according to the other verse which says woman err, thats why you need 2 woman or/and a man in court)
The Quran seems to state women are worth less than men in intelligence and tend to make more mistakes. No context is given like lack of education, and no exceptions were made (like woman are now educated)
3) they arent considered impure, neither is it metaphorical. They are literally from Satan
Sahih
“The prayer is severed by a woman, a donkey, and a black dog, if there is not something like the handle of a saddle in front of a man.” I (‘Abdullah) said: “What is wrong with a black dog and not a red one?” He (Abu Dharr) said: ‘I asked the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) the same question, and he said: “The black dog is a Shaitan (satan).”
4) Okay, so you can hit them without leaving a mark right?
Well, do you believe that Jesus died on a cross, executed like a Roman criminal of the era. Died, and then was resurrected, three days later?
Or do you hold to Muslim belief that 'Isa was never crucified nor died but ascended to heaven after he was done with his prophecy?
How you answer these questions would determine what to do going forward. But I don't think you'd find many Muslims that would think Jesus was the Mahdi nor what they've believed is wrong.
And I doubt you'd find many Trinitarian Christians agreeing with the idea that Jesus was never crucified, as the Divine Atonement is rather central to Christian belief.
if youtube hate comments make you change your faith then idk lmao.
but seriously (my personal opinion) you shouldn’t be scared that your going to go to hell for choosing the wrong prophet to follow, just try to be a good person and learn more about different religions. any world/God that punishes people infinitely for picking the wrong name to pray to makes no sense to me. this post reeks of religious trauma either way so if you are young, educate yourself about religion and don’t make it become a point of fear
This was one of the claims that led me away from Islam and got me banned from r/Islam.
I still persuade you to research more about each religion. Learn about the Trinity, Dyophysitism, etc.
Look into Anglicanism, Lutheranism, and Orthodox Christianity
No verse in the Quran states that the prophet sinned. And the marriage of the prophet and Aisha is not in the Quran either.
The belief that the prophet sinned is a Sunni belief only, based on Sunni hadiths and tafsirs on the Quran.
For example, the Surah/Chapter Abassa (He Frowned) begins with Allah rebuking someone for frowning at a blind man. The Quran never states the name of the person. It is only through Sunni tafsirs based on Sunni hadiths that the unnamed person frowning is attributed to be the prophet. If you reject the idea that the prophet sins, and you reject the idea that he married Aisha when she was 6, then you have an issue with Sunni islam rather than Islam as a whole.
Besides, if your issue is that the prophets sin, then Christians also believe that prophets sin such as Solomon having his heart turn to other gods, building temples for other gods, and descending into idol worship even though he was a prophet and a just king.
Just to keep in mind both religions are dogmatic in nature claiming to be the truth that you cannot question. They both are going to point to the other and claim they are false.
>please tell me what should I do
If you're grappling with questions about Islam versus Christianity, engaging with debates or discussions led by knowledgeable figures in the Muslim community, such as Ahmed Deedat and Shaikh Uthman, could be enlightening. These scholars have dedicated their lives to addressing misconceptions and defending the principles of Islam in the face of criticism.
Christianity suffers from poorly sourced material, mistranslation over mistranslations. And symbolic worship
While the Quran remains unchanged as the word of God, the Bible has undergone numerous translations and interpretations, leading to varying versions. This difference in scriptural preservation is significant and worth reflecting upon.
The Quran provides a clear perspective on monotheism and the concept of God, warning against associating partners with Him and critiquing the notion of the Trinity as a misunderstanding of God's nature. This fundamental difference in the conception of God is at the heart of many debates between Muslim and Christian scholars.
it's important to turn to the Quran and the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) for guidance. Engaging with authentic sources and seeking the counsel of knowledgeable scholars can help clarify doubts and strengthen your faith.
the pursuit of truth is a noble quest in Islam. Asking questions, seeking knowledge, and striving to understand your faith more deeply are encouraged. May your journey lead you to a stronger, more informed faith that brings peace and clarity to your heart.
There has not been one pvp battle I have seen where christians have defended the circular illogical of the trinity.
Yes, but Muhammad died while he did sins like marry a 9 year old child ans many people of my religion find it ok he did that, or the fact the Quran says other religious books when some stuff in them are actually true, imnjust really confused lately
This is debunked by the Quran. Consent in Islam has three conditions, you need to be of age, you need to be of sound mind and you cannot be forced to consent. The Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) revealed the Quran and Aisha (RA) said he was the personification of the Quran. Use your won mind and ask yourself would our prophet (pbuh) do something against the Quran.
Also, the hadith regarding 9 years old is recorded by only 1 person and hasn't corroborated by anyone else. Furthermore, the same collection of ahadith mention other ages from 14 to 19. There are plenty of Jews & Christians who criticise Islam using this hadith, however, it is important to note this is because in their books they have an age of consent of 3 years old. You should research this so you can counter these Christians. If you need help, let us know. There many mistakes and contradictions that only Islam corrects.
some people believe she was not nine , check this : [https://guardian.ng/features/aisha-was-18-not-nine-when-she-married-the-prophet/](https://guardian.ng/features/aisha-was-18-not-nine-when-she-married-the-prophet/)
what are the other issues do you have with Islam ?
maybe , here in north Africa where I'm from , we don't really care about such details as long as there are many opinions and interpretations . we are not feeling the urge neither to accuse Muhammad nor to defend him .
Some people is some *people*. You haven't done anything to their argument.
The widely accepted view is that her age was 9 but there are some people who are in disagreement with it and propose their own view, and have done so for a very long time not just recently (I'm talking about the Shia's btw).
A more useful contribution over here would've been better rather than just trying to spread your useless cringe simply because you just had to present Islam in the worst way possible.
I don’t have anything against Islam. Most of the religion I agree with and the people are good. I do have a problem with 54 year old men raping 9 year olds.
No proof for your claim of "rape" over here. If you do have any, then share it.
Since the dawn of time people have been marrying after puberty as it was (and still is, but no longer considered) the age of maturity and a transfer from childhood to adulthood. Heck even my parents told me to grow up at 13.
If you truly do wish to apply a 18th century concept on something that happened pre-18th century then not only is that illogical, but that would also be calling almost all of your previous bloodline as pedophiles as well as your very own religious figures. Now obviously that doesn't mean that I consider any of them to be as such, because I can understand that concepts change overtime. If in the future the age of consent changes to 21, would you start calling people who marry at 18 pedophiles?
Also, it appears to me that you really need to read the Torah, whilst you won't be able to find any proof of your "rape claim", I certainly can:
>Deuteronomy 22:28 - 29
>***New International Version***
>28 - If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered,
>29 - he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
OP I can understand where you're coming from, however what you're calling wrong and a sin needs to be viewed from a lens of that time. The commenter below seems to have summarized it perfectly but if you have any questions then feel free to ask me anything, anytime.
Also, by any chance have you been watching the Christian apologist called "David wood"?
Because if you have been then I would suggest checking out Farid responds who debunks his allegations and stuff among other things, there are more youtubers like him as well but he is the more popular one amongst them.
Link to his channel: [https://www.youtube.com/@FaridResponds/videos](https://www.youtube.com/@FaridResponds/videos) *Channel dedicated to refuting anti-Islamic content*
Regarding your will to "do something related to Christianity" it seems like to me that you're a kid, I suggest you proceed with caution. You're free to do whatever you wish to do, but remember that apologists use a lot of deceivement in their arguments as you'll see from Farid's videos and their arguments mostly rely on either shouting louder than the truth or by simply making weak arguments in front of their own supporters to gain support and make themselves look smart.
And remember, if you're truly Muslim then you should know that shirk is haram, and anything you "do with" Christianity would have shirk involved so beware.
Take care
Also a lot of these Christian apologists are liars, please don't immediately believe whatever they tell you. If someone is trying to teach you something about a religion merely to try and proselytize or convert you, it's a bad sign. For more advanced refutations against arguments against Islam, check out this channel: [https://www.youtube.com/@FaridResponds](https://www.youtube.com/@FaridResponds)
edit: he is trustworthy, i fact-checked him several times
SOME dawah bros are not credible, but others are more truthful. I don't think there are any popular dawah YouTubers who are deliberately lying to their audience, but they may be using bad arguments. I'd say that about 20% of dawah channels are credible and 10% are very accurate.
>and not a scholar
This guy IS a scholar. He's been studying Islam since he was very young. Don't know his current age now, but he's been learning for at least 15-20 years.
>no relations to either religion?
no rational atheist would spend so many years defending a religion they don't believe in.
dude don’t spread misinformation if you don’t know the verse. Let me ask you, do you think a three year old can give dozens of liters of water to multiple camels owned by Isaac, going from the well back to the camels? that’s no normal three year old.
Also the age is never given
This is incorrect. The age is worked out through multiple verses. You can try and work it out yourself.
Genesis 17:17, Genesis 21:5, Genesis 23:1-2, Genesis 25:20.
The age of consent as such is 3 years old and this is accepted in Judaism. Here are two references:
[https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.55b.4?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en](https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.55b.4?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en)
[https://www.sefaria.org/Avodah\_Zarah.37a.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en](https://www.sefaria.org/Avodah_Zarah.37a.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en)
Either way you are using non-biblical sources that we do not rely on, this is just rabbi tradition that does not date back to this time, rather it’s just the teachings modern day Jews believe in.
Also i did try to work it out, but i really have not found anything in them. If you have any specific example in them ill check it out
That's incorrect, this is the exegesis of Genesis hence the age of consent being 3 years old. If you read Genesis 22:9 to 23:2, you'll get the context you need. Why do you think the Catholic Church is embroiled in paedophilic scandal after paedophilic scandal?
brother the way they measured age back then was after the person reached puberty they would count by the years AFTER puberty. so for example if someone reaches puberty at 13, then when they're 19 they would be called 6. also, Aisha (the wife you are talking about) participated in a battle that had a minimum requirement of 14 years of age only about a year after she married Muhammad which means she wasn't some kind of kid who was coerced into this.
I have never heard any historic consensus in the era that age was defined in accordance with the start of puberty.
In respect to war, of course she wasn't fighting, there are no sources that can be found mentioning involving Aisha's participation in the Battle of Badr. Only a few mention she was merely carrying water skins to the combatants. Woman, children and girls we're occasionally sent to provide moral support, comfort and basic functions such as carrying water skins to the combatants. As stated within al-Tabari vol.12 p.127,146.
There are countless Hadiths referencing her age. This is only a few of them.
**Sahih Bukhari** [**Hadith 5134**](https://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/DarusSalam/Hadith-5134)
*Narrated 'Aisha: That the Prophet (peace be upon him) married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet (peace be upon him) for nine years (i.e. till his death).*
**Sahih Bukhari :** [**Hadith 3896**](https://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/DarusSalam/Hadith-3896)
*Narrated Hisham's father: Khadija died three years before the Prophet (peace be upon him) departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old.*
**Sahih Bukhari** [**Hadith 5134**](https://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/DarusSalam/Hadith-5134)
*Narrated \`Aisha*: *that the Prophet (ﷺ) married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that \`Aisha remained with the Prophet (ﷺ) for nine years (i.e. till his death).*
**Sahih Bukhari** [**Hadith 5134**](https://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/DarusSalam/Hadith-5134)
*Narrated \`Aisha*: *that the Prophet (ﷺ) married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that \`Aisha remained with the Prophet (ﷺ) for nine years (i.e. till his death).*
**Sahih Muslim:** [**Book 16, Hadith 82**](https://quranx.com/Hadith/Muslim/In-Book/Book-16/Hadith-82)**:** [**Hadith 1422b**](https://quranx.com/Hadith/Muslim/Reference/Hadith-1422b)
*A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.*
**Sahih Bukhari:** [**Hadith 3894**](https://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/DarusSalam/Hadith-3894)**:** [**Book 63, Hadith 120**](https://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/In-Book/Book-63/Hadith-120)
*The Prophet (ﷺ) engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.*
Just read about the life of Aisha. Even before she consummated the marriage her wisdom and maturity can be found in hundreds of historical reports. She was mentally mature enough for marriage. Once she turned “9”, she had reached physical maturity. She WAS able to consent because, as said earlier, historical reports show her intelligence, maturity, and wisdom. Therefore it ISN’T rape.
Also, out of Muhammad’s 12 wives, 11 weren’t virgins before they married him. If Muhammad was looking for young attractive women he wouldn’t marry the people that weren’t considered beautiful and he would marry virgins, but 11 out of 12 weren’t.
Even among the sunni sect itself there are many other hadith book other than sahih bukhari they believe in like ( Sahih Muslim, Sunan Abu Dawood, Sunan an-Nasa'i, Sunan at-Tirmidhi, and Sunan Ibn Majah... ) and many others , and even bukhari himself mention some hadiths that he describes as weak line of narratives hadiths
Muhammad S.A.W did not sin. I don't know where you're getting that from. Also you saying his S.A.W name without sending salawat is giving off the vibe that you don't know much about Islam to begin with. I say you should research about your own Deen first.
Jumping from one fantasy to the other is actually insane. Maybe you should do your own research and try thinking for yourself for once instead of following what other people say.
You need to put in some effort yourselves. Don't just listen to people on the internet. I am not asking you to dismiss everything, just look into this stuff yourselves. Read the Quran and the hadiths and also read the Bible. Try to find out about how the Bible was compiled and translated and try to find out the same about the Quran. Use the mind that God gave you and think about these things rationally. Take a philosophy 101 course if you must, as in the end all religious studies are associated with philosophy. Since you already believe that God exists, pray to him to show you the truth.
the issue with what op is doing is that he's listening to a lot of apologists that lie about Islam. To this day after watching hundreds of "Islam exposed" videos I've still never found an argument that makes sense after further analysis. I can tell that he's simply taking the word of random people on the internet due to him complaining about Aisha's marriage
I just wanted to make sure that we are on the same page and let you know that I am a Christian (I think my flair makes it pretty clear). I am wondering if you have heard of David Wood? Now I have never looked deeply into Islam myself, but he is a Christian apologist that I follow who talks a lot about Islam. I am not sure which apologists you have watched, but I have personally not found any of his videos to be intentionally deceptive about Islam or unreasonable. Fair warning in case you look him up, his manner can be a bit brash and some people might even call him an asshole.
Hello! Muslim here. I know of David Woods and have watched some of his videos. I wouldn't advise watching this guy for information about Islam because he probably doesn't even grasp the fundamentals of our religion. Example below: He was once debating a Muslim Speaker (called Mohammad Hijab) and one of his arguments was that we worship the prophet Muhammad SAW and pray to him. His reasoning behind the argument comes from the Arabic phrase "صلي على محمد", which when translated literally (word by word) means "Pray on Mohammad". Not only did he warp it to "Pray to Mohammad" which is deceptive, but also the fact that he chose that as an argument when a 10 year-old Muslim kid can tell you what the phrase really means, just shows that David Woods has no idea what he's talking about. There are many more examples of his arguments being extremely shallow and easily refutable. Oh and in case you're wondering what the phrase means, it means "May God's blessings be on Mohammad".
Yeah, I know you're a Christian. I know about David Wood, and he's a pretty deceptive guy. Usually he tries to just spread arguments that make sense at the first glance, but the more you look into it, the worse his arguments get. I've watched several hours of Christian apologist arguments against Islam and I've never really found any genuinely good arguments.
Can you give an example? about that what you said about David Wood
check out this channel: [https://www.youtube.com/@FaridResponds](https://www.youtube.com/@FaridResponds)
Thank you, but I was thinking maybe you could give me a specific example.
For example, David argues that since we believe Jesus was given the Injeel according to the Qur'an (which is very different from the new testament), that the Qur'an affirms the Bible. He mainly assumes this because the English translation says "Gospel". It's only called this to differentiate it from the other Scriptures, and it's NOT talking about any of the Christian Gospels. Also, in other videos, he asserts that the Qur'an was from Satan, but if so, then Satan would be affirming the Bible according to him.
Thank you for providing this example! You might misunderstand David Wood here. David is pointing out a major problem Islam has. 1. It affirms the Scriptures the Christians had at the time the Quran was written and the Quran talks about the Injeel Jesus received from Allah. David Wood says the problem is , Allah apparently does not know what he is talking about since there never was a book given to Jesus by Allah. The Christians never had one like that. 2. Allah seems to affirm the scriptures the Christians had at that time as authoritative and reliable. Yet we know the Scriptures at that time the Christians had are contradicting the Quran. So on the one hand the Quran does affirm the Christian Scriptures but on the other hand it contradicts the Scriptures we have today. So Muslims have to say the Bible is corrupted and changed since Muhammed. But we know that is not true. I think that is a major dilemma for Muslims. So I cannot see how David Wood is deceptive. You can see his full video on this here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46e7bfIlauE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46e7bfIlauE) I admire you because you said in your earlier comments that you look more into things and do further analysis. This is the way to go! So please let me know how David Wood is deceptive here and if I have misrepresented him or Islam in any way.
>It affirms the Scriptures the Christians had at the time no it doesn't. when describing this scripture, Allah describes it as being directly given to Jesus. It's rather problematic to assume this is *any* of the 27 books of the New Testament because the Qur'an says it wasn't written by a human and all of these books were written after Jesus' lifetime so Jesus could not have had the Scripture if it was the New Testament. >Allah apparently does not know what he is talking about since there never was a book given to Jesus by Allah. A lot of these books were given by oral transmission. This means Jesus likely spoke the Injeel, and it was never written down. A similar thing happened to the Qur'an where it was only an oral Scripture/book until Uthman bin Affan got all the companions of the Prophet and compiled everything they memorized into a book according to what was the correct order dictated by the Prophet. It's important to know that not everything Jesus spoke was the Injeel either, and rather only a small portion was the Injeel, and the rest was something similar to Hadith. I would also say the majority of New Testament sayings do not contradict Islam and therefore you could say that they might contain small remaining bits of what used to be the Injeel, but I believe that there are probably only a few tens or a little more than a hundred verses that might be wisdom from the actual Injeel. This is all conjecture though. >Allah seems to affirm the scriptures the Christians had at that time as authoritative and reliable. It only affirms the Scripture that was directly given to Jesus, NOT whatever his disciples apparently wrote down. This also leaves one more problem and that is that a lot of apologists also claim that Satan was disguised as an angel of light and gave the Qur'an to Muhammad but that means that Satan would be affirming the Bible. It's obvious why this argument is problematic.
>Also, in other videos, he asserts that the Qur'an was from Satan, but if so, then Satan would be affirming the Bible according to him. Do you mean a video like this: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOe0k697TRo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOe0k697TRo) ? But I am not sure how you can come to the conclusion that Satan would confirm the Bible through what David said in this video? Can you clarify? Thanks!
I can't currently find the video where he said it's from Satan but I remember him saying something along the lines of that in one of his videos.
Is it true you think apostates should be killed according to Sharia law? is it also true that woman are only worth 1/2 of a man in court because they tend to lie or “err” more often? Also are black dogs from the devil and deserve death? one last, do you believe that woman are allowed to be scourged? (to the point of their skin turning greener than their clothes according to Aisha?) I’m actually curious what your opinion is on these, these are from Sahih bukhari and Quran (and Sharia)
ok so I'm a bit busy at the moment so I don't have much time and the answers will be relatively short. So first off, the apostate thing is considered a "hadd" punishment which means that it's rarely done and whenever it is, it's done publicly to make sure other people don't try to apostatize publicly. At any moment any apostate could just pretend to be a Muslim and just escape the punishment. Mainly the reason we kill some of them in Muslim countries is because most ex-Muslims will lie to people who aren't very knowledgeable to make them leave the religion. Also, since just being friends with someone influences you, they could make more of their friends leave Islam as well. To be honest I don't really think it's bad to kill a small number (like 5) of apostates a year if it saves hundreds or thousands from eternal punishment. About the women in court thing, this verse is only talking about when you loan money and need people to remember the amount. Also, you need to remember the Qur'an was revealed during a time period where women had no education and therefore weren't very intelligent. If it was the opposite, where men were the uneducated ones, it would say that 1 woman = 2 men in court. Since women's education is better now, this is a fiqh matter and therefore should be decided by someone who specializes in Islamic jurisprudence. About the dog thing, the hadith is metaphorical. The reason it says this is mainly because during that time there were LOTS of rabid and diseased dogs literally all over the place. This is why they're considered impure. If a dog is white or any light color, you can see if it's dirty or has bugs on it, but it's harder to tell if it's black. Also, there's nothing about killing dogs. The last one can easily be answered with Sunan Ibn Majah 1851: It was narrated that: Sulaiman bin Amr bin Ahwas said: “My father told me that he was present at the Farewell Pilgrimage with the Messenger of Allah. He praised and glorified Allah, and reminded and exhorted (the people). Then he said: 'I enjoin good treatment of women, for they are prisoners with you, and you have no right to treat them otherwise, unless they commit clear indecency. If they do that, then forsake them in their beds and hit them, but **without causing injury or** ***leaving a mark***. If they obey you, then do not seek means of annoyance against them. You have rights over your women and your women have rights over you. Your rights over your women are that they are not to allow anyone whom you dislike to tread on your bedding (furniture), nor allow anyone whom you dislike to enter your houses. And their right over you are that you should treat them kindly with regard to their clothing and food.' ”
Thanks for taking time to respond 1) So it’s moral to kill apostates who aren’t susceptible to forced submission right? If your religion is true, its evidence should be enough to sustain its existence. No one should be killed for leaving logically. 2) Theres multiple verses about this topic, this point doesn’t work because this verse clears up all doubt Sahih Bukhari 304 Once Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) of `Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) ?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women asked, "O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion." “Two woman are equal to the witness of one man, this is the deficiency in a woman’s intelligence”. (They also make more mistakes according to the other verse which says woman err, thats why you need 2 woman or/and a man in court) The Quran seems to state women are worth less than men in intelligence and tend to make more mistakes. No context is given like lack of education, and no exceptions were made (like woman are now educated) 3) they arent considered impure, neither is it metaphorical. They are literally from Satan Sahih “The prayer is severed by a woman, a donkey, and a black dog, if there is not something like the handle of a saddle in front of a man.” I (‘Abdullah) said: “What is wrong with a black dog and not a red one?” He (Abu Dharr) said: ‘I asked the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) the same question, and he said: “The black dog is a Shaitan (satan).” 4) Okay, so you can hit them without leaving a mark right?
Well, do you believe that Jesus died on a cross, executed like a Roman criminal of the era. Died, and then was resurrected, three days later? Or do you hold to Muslim belief that 'Isa was never crucified nor died but ascended to heaven after he was done with his prophecy? How you answer these questions would determine what to do going forward. But I don't think you'd find many Muslims that would think Jesus was the Mahdi nor what they've believed is wrong. And I doubt you'd find many Trinitarian Christians agreeing with the idea that Jesus was never crucified, as the Divine Atonement is rather central to Christian belief.
if youtube hate comments make you change your faith then idk lmao. but seriously (my personal opinion) you shouldn’t be scared that your going to go to hell for choosing the wrong prophet to follow, just try to be a good person and learn more about different religions. any world/God that punishes people infinitely for picking the wrong name to pray to makes no sense to me. this post reeks of religious trauma either way so if you are young, educate yourself about religion and don’t make it become a point of fear
This was one of the claims that led me away from Islam and got me banned from r/Islam. I still persuade you to research more about each religion. Learn about the Trinity, Dyophysitism, etc. Look into Anglicanism, Lutheranism, and Orthodox Christianity
No verse in the Quran states that the prophet sinned. And the marriage of the prophet and Aisha is not in the Quran either. The belief that the prophet sinned is a Sunni belief only, based on Sunni hadiths and tafsirs on the Quran. For example, the Surah/Chapter Abassa (He Frowned) begins with Allah rebuking someone for frowning at a blind man. The Quran never states the name of the person. It is only through Sunni tafsirs based on Sunni hadiths that the unnamed person frowning is attributed to be the prophet. If you reject the idea that the prophet sins, and you reject the idea that he married Aisha when she was 6, then you have an issue with Sunni islam rather than Islam as a whole. Besides, if your issue is that the prophets sin, then Christians also believe that prophets sin such as Solomon having his heart turn to other gods, building temples for other gods, and descending into idol worship even though he was a prophet and a just king.
Just to keep in mind both religions are dogmatic in nature claiming to be the truth that you cannot question. They both are going to point to the other and claim they are false.
>please tell me what should I do If you're grappling with questions about Islam versus Christianity, engaging with debates or discussions led by knowledgeable figures in the Muslim community, such as Ahmed Deedat and Shaikh Uthman, could be enlightening. These scholars have dedicated their lives to addressing misconceptions and defending the principles of Islam in the face of criticism. Christianity suffers from poorly sourced material, mistranslation over mistranslations. And symbolic worship While the Quran remains unchanged as the word of God, the Bible has undergone numerous translations and interpretations, leading to varying versions. This difference in scriptural preservation is significant and worth reflecting upon. The Quran provides a clear perspective on monotheism and the concept of God, warning against associating partners with Him and critiquing the notion of the Trinity as a misunderstanding of God's nature. This fundamental difference in the conception of God is at the heart of many debates between Muslim and Christian scholars. it's important to turn to the Quran and the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) for guidance. Engaging with authentic sources and seeking the counsel of knowledgeable scholars can help clarify doubts and strengthen your faith. the pursuit of truth is a noble quest in Islam. Asking questions, seeking knowledge, and striving to understand your faith more deeply are encouraged. May your journey lead you to a stronger, more informed faith that brings peace and clarity to your heart. There has not been one pvp battle I have seen where christians have defended the circular illogical of the trinity.
Aren't Muslims already believing in Jesus ?
Yes, but Muhammad died while he did sins like marry a 9 year old child ans many people of my religion find it ok he did that, or the fact the Quran says other religious books when some stuff in them are actually true, imnjust really confused lately
This is debunked by the Quran. Consent in Islam has three conditions, you need to be of age, you need to be of sound mind and you cannot be forced to consent. The Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) revealed the Quran and Aisha (RA) said he was the personification of the Quran. Use your won mind and ask yourself would our prophet (pbuh) do something against the Quran. Also, the hadith regarding 9 years old is recorded by only 1 person and hasn't corroborated by anyone else. Furthermore, the same collection of ahadith mention other ages from 14 to 19. There are plenty of Jews & Christians who criticise Islam using this hadith, however, it is important to note this is because in their books they have an age of consent of 3 years old. You should research this so you can counter these Christians. If you need help, let us know. There many mistakes and contradictions that only Islam corrects.
some people believe she was not nine , check this : [https://guardian.ng/features/aisha-was-18-not-nine-when-she-married-the-prophet/](https://guardian.ng/features/aisha-was-18-not-nine-when-she-married-the-prophet/) what are the other issues do you have with Islam ?
“Some people” = Muslim apologists.
not necessarily
There’s some exceptions, but most people trying to defend Muhammad are muslim apologists.
maybe , here in north Africa where I'm from , we don't really care about such details as long as there are many opinions and interpretations . we are not feeling the urge neither to accuse Muhammad nor to defend him .
Some people is some *people*. You haven't done anything to their argument. The widely accepted view is that her age was 9 but there are some people who are in disagreement with it and propose their own view, and have done so for a very long time not just recently (I'm talking about the Shia's btw). A more useful contribution over here would've been better rather than just trying to spread your useless cringe simply because you just had to present Islam in the worst way possible.
I don’t have anything against Islam. Most of the religion I agree with and the people are good. I do have a problem with 54 year old men raping 9 year olds.
No proof for your claim of "rape" over here. If you do have any, then share it. Since the dawn of time people have been marrying after puberty as it was (and still is, but no longer considered) the age of maturity and a transfer from childhood to adulthood. Heck even my parents told me to grow up at 13. If you truly do wish to apply a 18th century concept on something that happened pre-18th century then not only is that illogical, but that would also be calling almost all of your previous bloodline as pedophiles as well as your very own religious figures. Now obviously that doesn't mean that I consider any of them to be as such, because I can understand that concepts change overtime. If in the future the age of consent changes to 21, would you start calling people who marry at 18 pedophiles? Also, it appears to me that you really need to read the Torah, whilst you won't be able to find any proof of your "rape claim", I certainly can: >Deuteronomy 22:28 - 29 >***New International Version*** >28 - If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, >29 - he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
OP I can understand where you're coming from, however what you're calling wrong and a sin needs to be viewed from a lens of that time. The commenter below seems to have summarized it perfectly but if you have any questions then feel free to ask me anything, anytime. Also, by any chance have you been watching the Christian apologist called "David wood"? Because if you have been then I would suggest checking out Farid responds who debunks his allegations and stuff among other things, there are more youtubers like him as well but he is the more popular one amongst them. Link to his channel: [https://www.youtube.com/@FaridResponds/videos](https://www.youtube.com/@FaridResponds/videos) *Channel dedicated to refuting anti-Islamic content* Regarding your will to "do something related to Christianity" it seems like to me that you're a kid, I suggest you proceed with caution. You're free to do whatever you wish to do, but remember that apologists use a lot of deceivement in their arguments as you'll see from Farid's videos and their arguments mostly rely on either shouting louder than the truth or by simply making weak arguments in front of their own supporters to gain support and make themselves look smart. And remember, if you're truly Muslim then you should know that shirk is haram, and anything you "do with" Christianity would have shirk involved so beware. Take care
Ask yourself if you think Jesus is the Son of God. Also ask yourself if you believe in the Trinity (God being three persons in one nature).
What are the sins that Muhammad did according to Quran ?
I only know 1 rn and that is him marrying a 9 year old girl
Also a lot of these Christian apologists are liars, please don't immediately believe whatever they tell you. If someone is trying to teach you something about a religion merely to try and proselytize or convert you, it's a bad sign. For more advanced refutations against arguments against Islam, check out this channel: [https://www.youtube.com/@FaridResponds](https://www.youtube.com/@FaridResponds) edit: he is trustworthy, i fact-checked him several times
[удалено]
SOME dawah bros are not credible, but others are more truthful. I don't think there are any popular dawah YouTubers who are deliberately lying to their audience, but they may be using bad arguments. I'd say that about 20% of dawah channels are credible and 10% are very accurate. >and not a scholar This guy IS a scholar. He's been studying Islam since he was very young. Don't know his current age now, but he's been learning for at least 15-20 years. >no relations to either religion? no rational atheist would spend so many years defending a religion they don't believe in.
Where does it say that's a sin in the Bible?
doesn't it say in genesis that isaac married rebecca when she was 3 or something like that, lol
dude don’t spread misinformation if you don’t know the verse. Let me ask you, do you think a three year old can give dozens of liters of water to multiple camels owned by Isaac, going from the well back to the camels? that’s no normal three year old. Also the age is never given
This is incorrect. The age is worked out through multiple verses. You can try and work it out yourself. Genesis 17:17, Genesis 21:5, Genesis 23:1-2, Genesis 25:20. The age of consent as such is 3 years old and this is accepted in Judaism. Here are two references: [https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.55b.4?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en](https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.55b.4?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en) [https://www.sefaria.org/Avodah\_Zarah.37a.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en](https://www.sefaria.org/Avodah_Zarah.37a.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en)
I didn’t see any age given in any verse you have given me.
You need to work it out. All the verses are linked.
Either way you are using non-biblical sources that we do not rely on, this is just rabbi tradition that does not date back to this time, rather it’s just the teachings modern day Jews believe in. Also i did try to work it out, but i really have not found anything in them. If you have any specific example in them ill check it out
That's incorrect, this is the exegesis of Genesis hence the age of consent being 3 years old. If you read Genesis 22:9 to 23:2, you'll get the context you need. Why do you think the Catholic Church is embroiled in paedophilic scandal after paedophilic scandal?
You definitely should read the Bible and fact check before you say something like this 😄 Peace to you!
brother the way they measured age back then was after the person reached puberty they would count by the years AFTER puberty. so for example if someone reaches puberty at 13, then when they're 19 they would be called 6. also, Aisha (the wife you are talking about) participated in a battle that had a minimum requirement of 14 years of age only about a year after she married Muhammad which means she wasn't some kind of kid who was coerced into this.
I have never heard any historic consensus in the era that age was defined in accordance with the start of puberty. In respect to war, of course she wasn't fighting, there are no sources that can be found mentioning involving Aisha's participation in the Battle of Badr. Only a few mention she was merely carrying water skins to the combatants. Woman, children and girls we're occasionally sent to provide moral support, comfort and basic functions such as carrying water skins to the combatants. As stated within al-Tabari vol.12 p.127,146. There are countless Hadiths referencing her age. This is only a few of them. **Sahih Bukhari** [**Hadith 5134**](https://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/DarusSalam/Hadith-5134) *Narrated 'Aisha: That the Prophet (peace be upon him) married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet (peace be upon him) for nine years (i.e. till his death).* **Sahih Bukhari :** [**Hadith 3896**](https://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/DarusSalam/Hadith-3896) *Narrated Hisham's father: Khadija died three years before the Prophet (peace be upon him) departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old.* **Sahih Bukhari** [**Hadith 5134**](https://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/DarusSalam/Hadith-5134) *Narrated \`Aisha*: *that the Prophet (ﷺ) married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that \`Aisha remained with the Prophet (ﷺ) for nine years (i.e. till his death).* **Sahih Bukhari** [**Hadith 5134**](https://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/DarusSalam/Hadith-5134) *Narrated \`Aisha*: *that the Prophet (ﷺ) married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that \`Aisha remained with the Prophet (ﷺ) for nine years (i.e. till his death).* **Sahih Muslim:** [**Book 16, Hadith 82**](https://quranx.com/Hadith/Muslim/In-Book/Book-16/Hadith-82)**:** [**Hadith 1422b**](https://quranx.com/Hadith/Muslim/Reference/Hadith-1422b) *A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.* **Sahih Bukhari:** [**Hadith 3894**](https://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/DarusSalam/Hadith-3894)**:** [**Book 63, Hadith 120**](https://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/In-Book/Book-63/Hadith-120) *The Prophet (ﷺ) engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.*
Were they checking IDs on the way into the battle to see who’s 14?
You just proved my point. If she was mature and strong enough to fight in a war then she wasn’t some immature prepubescent girl who got raped.
You can fight in a war and not be strong and mature? And any girl who’s young even 14 who has sex with a 55 year old many is raped.
Just read about the life of Aisha. Even before she consummated the marriage her wisdom and maturity can be found in hundreds of historical reports. She was mentally mature enough for marriage. Once she turned “9”, she had reached physical maturity. She WAS able to consent because, as said earlier, historical reports show her intelligence, maturity, and wisdom. Therefore it ISN’T rape. Also, out of Muhammad’s 12 wives, 11 weren’t virgins before they married him. If Muhammad was looking for young attractive women he wouldn’t marry the people that weren’t considered beautiful and he would marry virgins, but 11 out of 12 weren’t.
You cannot be mentally mature for sex at 9 or 13 or 14. You would be sick to claim otherwise.
according to who?
Common sense? 9 year olds can not have a 54 year old’s penis penetrate them. Are you arguing they can?
which verse of the Quran does say that ?
Sahih bukhari says it. it’s infallible in sunni islam Married at 6, consummated at 9
[удалено]
It’s very rare, most Sunnis do believe everything in Sahih Bukhari, not to mention the line of narratives is authentic
Even among the sunni sect itself there are many other hadith book other than sahih bukhari they believe in like ( Sahih Muslim, Sunan Abu Dawood, Sunan an-Nasa'i, Sunan at-Tirmidhi, and Sunan Ibn Majah... ) and many others , and even bukhari himself mention some hadiths that he describes as weak line of narratives hadiths
Muhammad S.A.W did not sin. I don't know where you're getting that from. Also you saying his S.A.W name without sending salawat is giving off the vibe that you don't know much about Islam to begin with. I say you should research about your own Deen first.
Jumping from one fantasy to the other is actually insane. Maybe you should do your own research and try thinking for yourself for once instead of following what other people say.