69 million page views

Can Muslims accept historically researched differences about Islam?

Reader comment on item: Jews and the Qur'an

Submitted by Dave (United States), Mar 15, 2022 at 14:04

The canonical versions of Muhammad and his early followers greatly differ from the scientific research on actual seventh century events by modern scholars. Books like "Did Muhammad Exist?" by Robert Spencer or "A Prophet Has Appeared" by Stephen Shoemaker are good references.
Without going into the details, the actual Muhammad (or whoever actually was in charge at the time) emerges as religiously inclusive (his "Believer" then was just a monotheist), not a Muslim or a founder of Islam, not from Arabia, and did very favorable things for Jews and others, such as kicking the Romans (Byzantine Christians) out of Jerusalem so that Jews were no longer excluded, rebuilding Solomon's Temple for all monotheists and was truly respectful of the region's Christians despite battling the Byzantines. Thus, Muhammad was an appealing person from a 21st century perspective (he liked diversity), and was hardly the narrow-minded religious fanatic that many of his contemporary followers claim to emulate. And it makes sense: No Khomeini or ISIS-like wacko would have been able to achieve his incredible military successes. He won big by forming a broad coalition of the willing, not by terror and intimidation.
Can modern Muslims change their views based on this research, or are they hopelessly wedded to the mythology created by the inventors of Islam from the Abbasid Caliphate a century after Muhammad lived? I'm pessimistic, but at least we infidels aren't so committed to gory fairy tales concocted by bloodthirsty medieval potentates.
Given that we are stuck with the primacy of the canonical Islam, it's worthwhile to have books like these to investigate it. Thanks for the review.

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Submit a comment on this item

Reader comments (13) on this item

Title Commenter Date Thread
Question about "Muslim Zionism" [356 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
DavidMay 27, 2022 19:20281967
1Number of Muslim "protesters" at Temple Mount does not impress me [272 words]PrashantMay 29, 2022 00:55281967
reply to reply [400 words]DavidMay 30, 2022 18:05281967
author ignores "powerful revisionism" but the book is still a gem? [54 words]danteApr 29, 2022 14:01280324
3It hardly matters ! [114 words]vcragainApr 28, 2022 15:12280267
2Vcragain said it right [76 words]PrashantApr 28, 2022 23:07280267
Can Muslims accept historically researched differences about Islam? [268 words]DaveMar 15, 2022 14:04279346
Revisionist vs conventional history? [60 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
IgnoramusMar 14, 2022 14:18279336
3Muhammad and the Jews [211 words]dhimmi no moreMar 14, 2022 14:05279335
2627: Muhammad massacred 700 Jews of Medina for refusing to convert to his [177 words]SaulMar 14, 2022 17:37279335
Islam Did Not Replace the Cross - Could Not Replace that Over Which It Does Not Have Power [203 words]M ToveyMar 14, 2022 19:38279335
Why Religious Contentions of the Quran Fail to Quell the Legitimacy of the Torah [87 words]M ToveyMar 14, 2022 13:12279334
1What are your thoughts on Ukraine? [10 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Debanjan BanerjeeMar 14, 2022 01:59279330

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2024 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)