Someone is saying Muhammed pbuh's Hijrah was a hoax

[mendacium remedium]

Someone keeps telling me that Muhammed pbuh's followers in Mecca were not persecuted and he wrote this:

"Actually, the Muslim faith itself provides evidence that this wasn't the case, and that Muslims were not persecuted in Mecca, only Mohammed was, as he was attempting to wage war against them. (That's a really bad habit, he should have grown out of it...) Here are just two examples.

"The story of Fatima's sister, Muhammad's oldest daughter, is of acute embarrassment to those who insist Muslims were suffering in Mecca. Zaynab was married to Abu al-Aas ibn al-Rabee, one of Muhammad's arch enemies, and had no desire to leave. When Muhammad took her husband prisoner at the Battle of Badr, Zaynab tried to ransom him, but the prophet of Islam would not free the man until she promised to leave Mecca and live in Medina with him instead. She was actually forced to trade her marriage for her husband's life. It was not until Abu al-Aas agreed to "embrace" Islam (after being taken hostage again six years later following a Muslim caravan raid) that Muhammad allowed the two to live together."

I feel so compassionate to the poor Moslems....
She was suffering so much in Mecca...
And the Qu'ran teaches there is no compulsion in religion...

yea, right!

"The historical account also flatly contradicts the popular view that all Muslims had to flee Mecca following Muhammad’s declaration of war. In fact, it was only Muhammad himself whom the Meccans were interested in seizing. This is proven by the episode recounted in Ibn Ishaq/Hisham (326-328) in which Muhammad's own son-in-law, Ali, sleeps in his bed to trick his enemies into thinking that they had cornered him on the night they came to seize him.

Not only did the Meccans do no harm to Ali, even after finding out that he had fooled them, but he remained in the city for several days thereafter with Muhammad’s daughter Fatima in order to arrange the transfer of the family business to Medina.""



Is there a rebuttal for this brother?

[Tanveer]

Someone keeps telling me that Muhammed pbuh's followers in Mecca were not persecuted and he wrote this:

"Actually, the Muslim faith itself provides evidence that this wasn't the case, and that Muslims were not persecuted in Mecca, only Mohammed was, as he was attempting to wage war against them. (That's a really bad habit, he should have grown out of it...) Here are just two examples.

"The story of Fatima's sister, Muhammad's oldest daughter, is of acute embarrassment to those who insist Muslims were suffering in Mecca. Zaynab was married to Abu al-Aas ibn al-Rabee, one of Muhammad's arch enemies, and had no desire to leave. When Muhammad took her husband prisoner at the Battle of Badr, Zaynab tried to ransom him, but the prophet of Islam would not free the man until she promised to leave Mecca and live in Medina with him instead. She was actually forced to trade her marriage for her husband's life. It was not until Abu al-Aas agreed to "embrace" Islam (after being taken hostage again six years later following a Muslim caravan raid) that Muhammad allowed the two to live together."

I feel so compassionate to the poor Moslems....
She was suffering so much in Mecca...
And the Qu'ran teaches there is no compulsion in religion...

yea, right!

"The historical account also flatly contradicts the popular view that all Muslims had to flee Mecca following Muhammad’s declaration of war. In fact, it was only Muhammad himself whom the Meccans were interested in seizing. This is proven by the episode recounted in Ibn Ishaq/Hisham (326-328) in which Muhammad's own son-in-law, Ali, sleeps in his bed to trick his enemies into thinking that they had cornered him on the night they came to seize him.

Not only did the Meccans do no harm to Ali, even after finding out that he had fooled them, but he remained in the city for several days thereafter with Muhammad’s daughter Fatima in order to arrange the transfer of the family business to Medina.""



Is there a rebuttal for this brother?

Mendacium, is this debate by any chance on thestudentroom on the subject of "Muhammad (pbuh) letters to the monks of St catherin monastery"? If

And also, Ibn Ishaq was a good guy apparently and according to this article (http://www.onislam.net/english/ask-about-islam/ethics-and-values/muslim-character/450839-is-ibn-ishaqs-work-reliable.html) he puts za'ama or za'amu: he, they alleged in front of every statement which means he was skeptical of them.

Answering Christian claims also made an article titled "The problems with Ibn Ishaq".
http://www.answering-christian-claims.com/The-Problems-With-Ibn-Ishaq.html

Ask them to back up their claims with quotes from proper scholars and not people who are controversial characters. And also tell them not to pretty much copy and paste something from a hate site The religion of peace which is known to use decpetive tecniques like that laughable X number of terrorist attacks since 9/11 counter.

And just for good measure here's another article.
http://islamiat101.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/how-authentic-is-work-of-ibn-ishaq.html

[zulfiqarchucknorris]

How does he explain the killing of Sumayyah bint Khabbab, or his huband yasir. How does he explain the torture of Bilal bin Rabah and Ammar bin Yasir, how does he explain the beating of Saad bin Ubadah. The muslims migrated to abbysinia to escape persecution, isnt that evidence enough. A common scene in muslim history is that the while the prophet and his followers were going to the mosque, the meccans began thowing rocks at them and they huddled up to protect the prophet. Muhammad did NOT at first wage war with the meccans, but only after he AND HIS FOLLOWERS were persecuted, he excepted a delegation in medina called the bay'ah of agabah, or the pledge of aqabah, to become the leader of medina and help solve there problems with the unstable city, the only reason he survived mecca was because he had the protection of Abu Talib, his uncle, however when he died, he fled mecca for fear of being killed and did not return until he found a new guardian, however, that guardian was old and his successor was a huge enemy of islam, thats why he left medina.
In mecca, the prophet called for a reform of meccan society, such as getting rid of the harsh treatment of slaves, and the poor. Where is the war in that?
PLs. read these articles before you even respond to that person.
http://www.loonwatch.com/2012/03/when-they-almost-killed-muhammad-the-persecution-of-islams-earliest-followers/
http://www.loonwatch.com/2012/04/historys-first-jihad-was-it-justified/
http://www.loonwatch.com/2012/02/muhammad-is-the-99-percent/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Muslims_by_the_Meccans

please read my responce to anither post you wrote
http://www.answering-christianity.com/blog/index.php/topic,1030.msg3486.html#new

[mendacium remedium]

Ahsant brothers/sisters,

I will read the links and acquire all of this useful knowledge.

[Sama]

http://www.sunnipath.com/library/Books/B0033P0009.aspx#Persecutions

[zulfiqarchucknorris]

Gald to help, makesure to also read the reply to your other post that i have linked below.