Did Muhammad Perform any Miracles?

”A discussion between Ali Sina and Mark Darwish”

Muslims can see the errors of Christians Jews or Hindus, they are unable to see the absurdities in their own Faith”. You say that Muhammad united ignorant disbanded Arabs, who were constantly overwhelmed in tribal wars to pray, refrain from drug and alcohol, perform good duties to themselves, families and communities, defeat the two major empires of the times the Romans and Byzantines. First of all the Arabs were not as ignorant as they are depicted by Muslims. They owe their ignorance to Islam. The proof of the pudding is in eating it. Just look where Arabs and Muslims are in relation to other non-Muslims nations, in science, arts, culture and economy. Arabs did sometimes fight with each other. There is nothing exceptional about that. This is the nature of human beings. We always did that no matter which part of the world we lived. However, after the Arabs converted to Islam the killings intensified. Muhammad himself, during his own lifetime, raided and looted dozens of towns and villages. He massacred and enslaved thousands or people. After his death those killings continued. Ordinary people became mercenaries and bandits and kept enriching themselves by raiding new territories and living off the spoils of war. What is so extraordinary in a band of terrorist gaining power? Hasn’t this been the case throughout the history? So you believe that Islam’s achievements after Muhammad’s death is a miracle. What are these achievements? Defeating two major empires, the Romans and the Byzantines! Actually it was the Persian and the Byzantines. But is this a miracle? What is so miraculous in raiding and butchering people, looting them, enslaving them and raping their women? Except the Mongols, no one thinks Genghis Khan was a holy man. In fact he is regarded as one of the most barbaric an ruthless men ever lived and yet he vanquished mighty empires and his army conquered from China to Europe. You are engaging in a logical fallacy known as argumentum ad baculum or “might is right.” You are gravely mistaken. The fact that one wins in a battlefield is not proof of one’s truth. Muslims won, both at the time of Muhammad and after him because they were ruthless and determined. They were a bunch of savage ideologue zombies and marauding criminals. Their victims were civilized people, living their lives, much like we, the non Muslims do today. In September 11, 2001, four of Muhammadan ideologues managed to take control of planes full of non-combatant civilians and then caused the death of nearly 3000 people. Was that another miracle of Islam? I know that many Muslims think so. But that is not true. Truth can be determined in a debate, where ideas clash and not in battlefields? Is the fact that Muslims waste their time five times a day to pray to a bogus deity of hate and war a good thing? These prayers are to numb your brain and stop you from thinking. They are exercises in futility. If God exists he does not need our prayer. He would rather see us helping on another and making this world a better place for our future generations. Is prohibiting alcohol a good thing? Excess of everything is bad, including overeating. I lived in Italy. Italians drink wine every day and during all my years in Italy I never saw a drunk in the streets. There is no harm in drinking in moderation. There is more harm in overeating and smoking. Also use of drug is not prohibited in Islam. The Talibans, who live strictly by the rule of Islam, were the biggest producers of opium in Afghans and hashish is an invention of Muslims. So as you see, what Muhammad brought is either useless or evil. The evil part is the jihad and in order that “fighting is good for you.”

Another evidence of the truth of Islam, according to your Islamic reasoning, is your claim that the Qur’an has been preserved unchanged.  This is also a mistake. When Muhammad died the verses and suras of the Qur’an were scattered everywhere.

Ahmad b. `Ali b. Muhammad al `Asqalani, ibn Hajar, quotes Zaid who said, “Abu Bakr sent for me on the occasion of the deaths of those killed in the Yemama wars. I found `Umar b. al Khattab with him. Abu Bakr said, “`Umar has just come to me and said, ‘In the Yemama fighting death has dealt most severely with the qurra’ and I fear it will deal with equal severity with them in other theatres of war and as a result much of the Qur’an will perish [d h b]. I am therefore of the opinion that you should command that the Qur’an be collected.’” Abu Bakr added, “I said to `Umar, ‘How can we do what the Prophet never did?’ `Umar replied that it was nonetheless a good act. He did not cease replying to my scruples until God reconciled me to the undertaking.” Abu Bakr continued, “Zaid, you are young and intelligent and we know nothing to your discredit. You used to record the revelations for the Prophet, so pursue the Qur’an and collect it all together.” By God! had they asked me to remove a mountain it could not have been more weighty than what they would now have me do in ordering me to collect the Qur’an. I therefore asked them how they could do what the Prophet had not done but Abu Bakr insisted that it was permissible. He did not cease replying to my scruples until God reconciled me to the undertaking as He had already reconciled Abu Bakr and `Umar. I thereupon pursued the Qur’an collecting it all together from palm-branches, flat stones and the memories of men. I found the last verse of sura al Tawba in the possession of Abu Khuzaima al Ansari, having found it with no one else, “There has now come to you…” to the end of the sura.” [Ahmad b. `Ali b. Muhammad al `Asqalani, ibn Hajar, "Fath al Bari", 13 vols, Cairo, 1939/1348, vol. 9, p. 229].

He adds,

“The provision of a textus receptus (jam` al masahif `ala mushaf wahid, jam` al nas `ala mushaf) in which the root j m ` abandons the meaning ‘to collect’ to take on the force of ‘collating’, ‘reconciling’, is a different activity and has been attributed to only one of Muhammad’s successors, `Uthman b. `Affan (A.D. 644-56). (p. 139). The alternative jam` al masahif view requires our assent to the contrary proposition. Not only had the Qur’an texts been organized, preserved and collected at a much earlier date, but this had been done on innumerable occasions and by innumerable persons. On the accession of the Prophet’s third successor there existed such an unwieldy body of materials that it was not only possible but essential to establish a textus receptus ne varietur while many of those best qualified to bring this vital undertaking to a successful conclusion were still happily alive.” (p. 140). What happed to all that ‘unwieldy body of the material?”

Othman in his wisdom decided to choose one version of the Qur’an and burn the rest. How do we know that what he chose was the real Qur’an? Do you see the absurdity of this claim which is uncritically rehashed by every Muslim? Now, for the sake of argument let me agree with this bogus claim. Why the fact that a book has been preserved proves its truth? Who said the Bible is corrupted? The Bible was copied and translated to many languages since its early days and there is no discrepancy found in any old and dew version of the Bible. There are many ancient books, both religious and otherwise that are preserved. Does that mean these books are divine revelations? Muslims call it isteqrar. Its Latin name is argumentum ad antiquetatum. It is a logical fallacy. Things don’t become true just because they endure time. Islam is based on a series of logical fallacies. Every argument that Muslims present as evidence of the truth of Islam is a fallacy. The truth of an argument can be established only in a battle of ideas. An argument is true only if it can withstand the probing of its adversaries. You reluctantly read one of my articles and decided to write a rebuttal. If you had read more you probably would not feel offended, but rather enlightened and liberated. Islam is a lie. You should not be offended by the truth. Can you prove me wrong? I promise to admit my error publicly should you or anyone shows my errors. If no one can prove me wrong then perhaps, I am right and Islam is indeed a false and diabolic faith. Why then any sane person would want to cling to something like that?

Source: http://www.faithfreedom.org/2009/04/24/mark-darwish-vs-ali-sina/

IHS