They conspired against them. The reason this tribe in particular wasn't banished like the other Jewish tribes (Nadir and Qaynuqa') was because the trial was carried out on their terms and they failed.Originally Posted by PVC
The last part is not necessarily true. In the context of seventh century Arabia it was justice. They were given freedom over their own judgement and going back on that would have rendered the whole process and city law null. Do you blame Jews for the Jewish revolts preceding Christ btw? Judas of Galilee?No - the Muslims are responsible and most especially Muhammed as their leader. Surely as God's Prophet he could have chosen to be lenient in any case? The fact that he killed all the men and enslaved everyone else must mean God endorsed this course of action
Moses killed, Joseph broke apart his family, Saul and Solomon waged war. Makes more sense that their main purpose is showing their mistakes that people can learn from. Different methods of enacting God's will.A Prophet, per definition, enacts God's will
I think it's safe to say it's allegorical. If they weren't, than the Bible takes the cake in terms of historical fiction.Only if it's allegorical.
This is what makes him interesting. Muhammad was never the "messiah" or the "prophet," he was always called the messenger of Allah and the grounded culmination of this line. The totally "clean" prophets are always the most bland, except for the messiah Jesus. His politics and personal life weren't immune to criticism. It was already established there was a clear distinction between the man - the messenger and the message itself. This was a man who managed to create a morally superior society while he was alive.My point is not that Muhammed is a monster, my point is that his conduct in his life is fairly unremarkable. He leads his people, he makes war and peace, he takes slaves, he releases captives etc.
As revolutionaries they all have blood on their hands.
Bookmarks