English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

If they do not believe that, why need to lie? Why not to say "the charlatan muhammad"? Hypocrisy? Cowardice?

2007-02-25 20:45:26 · 11 answers · asked by spring 2 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

11 answers

Maybe they still refer to him as a prophet because that is how Islam sees him. It's a respectful gesture on the part of atheists to do this. Even if you don't agree that he is a prophet, there is no reason to be offensive to those who do.

2007-02-25 20:48:56 · answer #1 · answered by ♥ terry g ♥ 7 · 7 0

Just because you don't think someone is right does not mean you have to be rude about them. Mohammed has a well-known title which is easy enough to use. I save the word "charlatan" for real charlatans like self-styled psychics and television evangelists.

2007-02-25 20:50:37 · answer #2 · answered by tentofield 7 · 6 0

I think some are doing it out of respect for the Islamic Belief & others are saying it for maybe better clarification on which Prophet of Islam they are refering to.

2007-02-25 20:56:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

would have been ANY of the above motives. each and each so-called "prophet" would have had a thoroughly distinctive reason than any of those in the previous them. i think of they have been ALL loopy to a definite ingredient. some extra advantageous than others. (I recommend, think of roughly it. you would be a minimum of incredibly loopy to think of ways those human beings concept and act they way they acted. lol.) people who have been extra loopy would have had reasons that have been extra organic than the less loopy ones. (i'm not saying they have been superb or their claims have been actual, I in basic terms recommend the extra loopy they even have been, the extra in my opinion user-friendly they have been as human beings because of the fact they easily believed what they have been conversing approximately.) there have been a super sort of them that have been outright liars, too. i think of Joseph Smith replace into an outright liar. i think of he observed an danger to get a super sort of money and intercourse by skill of manipulating human beings's theory in "God" and their have confidence in him as a non secular chief. He replace into sort of the 1st of the kind of religious leaders we see in modern circumstances...the evangelists who're funds-grubbing, follower-molesting crooks. the human beings who pontificate morals and hurl judgement on anybody else, yet on a similar time are the main in all probability human beings on earth to be caught snorting meth out of a prostitute's navel. The final variety are people who have been "drugged". outdoors of planned drug use, up till approximately one hundred years in the past, there replace into certainly a fungus that ought to advance on some wheat vegetation that brought about hallucinations, seizures, and delusional habit. It happened incredibly oftentimes, and is seen to be a significant explanation for a super sort of so-called "possessions", and so on. as a remember of actuality, that's seen to be between the reasons of the "witch" scare in Salem, Massachusettes. (they think of the extra youthful females who concept they have been being attacked and cursed by skill of witches have been certainly stricken by the outcomes of this fungus, which they ingested by using their bread.) one in each and every of those non-planned drugging is the kind of subject that must be in charge for a number of the extra loopy issues you examine interior the Bible, like Moses seeing burning, conversing trees.

2016-10-16 12:33:46 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I do not believe in Islam but I live in a moslem country, but I have friends who are moslems, some of them know that I do not believe , some do not... But either way I wouldn't want to say something that would hurt their feelings . . .And they tolerate me also from their point of view... Believe me if we cannot tolerate eachother, a 3rd party will benefit from the conflict, not us!!!!

2007-02-25 20:55:43 · answer #5 · answered by e077168 2 · 4 0

Oh, I agree. It's all a matter of technicality. I never address Muhammad as a "prophet", ever.

2007-02-25 20:51:59 · answer #6 · answered by Loathe thy neighbor. 3 · 1 3

I agree with Summer. I think it's to clarify and out of respect.

2007-02-25 21:04:44 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Probably, because that's how he is known, as "the prophet Muhummad". Just because I'm atheist, doesn't mean that I'm not respectful of other's religions and beliefs. I refer to Jesus Christ with respect, not because I believe in him, but because others do. As far as the reference to "Christ", well, that's how he is known. Like I said, just because I don't believe in religion, doesn't mean that I don't respect those that do.

2007-02-25 20:49:50 · answer #8 · answered by rita_alabama 6 · 6 0

Good question! I often wonder the same about atheists or agnostics who say "Jesus Christ" (by saying "Christ," they are basically stating that He is their savior).

I think it's ignorance most of the time...they don't even see the contradiction. The rest of the time, yeah, I think it's the politically correct way to say it.

Awesome question.

2007-02-25 20:49:54 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 7

Because they know it's right, but they are stubborns, like Mules or Much more; The Holy Quran says...

2007-02-25 20:49:32 · answer #10 · answered by Lawrence of Arabia 6 · 1 7

fedest.com, questions and answers