Muhammed never existed, so says Islamic Professor?

Melensdad

Jerk in a Hawaiian Shirt & SNOWCAT Moderator
Staff member
Interesting reading in the Wall Street Journal, then I stumbled upon this. Uh oh, going to be some problems for this guy. . .

Professor Hired for Outreach to Muslims Delivers a Jolt
Islamic Theologian's Theory: It's Likely the Prophet Muhammad Never Existed

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122669909279629451.html#articleTabs=article
By ANDREW HIGGINS

MÜNSTER, Germany -- Muhammad Sven Kalisch, a Muslim convert and Germany's first professor of Islamic theology, fasts during the Muslim holy month, doesn't like to shake hands with Muslim women and has spent years studying Islamic scripture. Islam, he says, guides his life.

So it came as something of a surprise when Prof. Kalisch announced the fruit of his theological research. His conclusion: The Prophet Muhammad probably never existed.

Muslims, not surprisingly, are outraged. Even Danish cartoonists who triggered global protests a couple of years ago didn't portray the Prophet as fictional. German police, worried about a violent backlash, told the professor to move his religious-studies center to more-secure premises.

"We had no idea he would have ideas like this," says Thomas Bauer, a fellow academic at Münster University who sat on a committee that appointed Prof. Kalisch. "I'm a more orthodox Muslim than he is, and I'm not a Muslim."

When Prof. Kalisch took up his theology chair four years ago, he was seen as proof that modern Western scholarship and Islamic ways can mingle -- and counter the influence of radical preachers in Germany. He was put in charge of a new program at Münster, one of Germany's oldest and most respected universities, to train teachers in state schools to teach Muslim pupils about their faith.

Muslim leaders cheered and joined an advisory board at his Center for Religious Studies. Politicians hailed the appointment as a sign of Germany's readiness to absorb some three million Muslims into mainstream society. But, says Andreas Pinkwart, a minister responsible for higher education in this north German region, "the results are disappointing."

Prof. Kalisch, who insists he's still a Muslim, says he knew he would get in trouble but wanted to subject Islam to the same scrutiny as Christianity and Judaism. German scholars of the 19th century, he notes, were among the first to raise questions about the historical accuracy of the Bible.

Many scholars of Islam question the accuracy of ancient sources on Muhammad's life. The earliest biography, of which no copies survive, dated from roughly a century after the generally accepted year of his death, 632, and is known only by references to it in much later texts. But only a few scholars have doubted Muhammad's existence. Most say his life is better documented than that of Jesus.

"Of course Muhammad existed," says Tilman Nagel, a scholar in Göttingen and author of a new book, "Muhammad: Life and Legend." The Prophet differed from the flawless figure of Islamic tradition, Prof. Nagel says, but "it is quite astonishing to say that thousands and thousands of pages about him were all forged" and there was no such person.

All the same, Prof. Nagel has signed a petition in support of Prof. Kalisch, who has faced blistering criticism from Muslim groups and some secular German academics. "We are in Europe," Prof. Nagel says. "Education is about thinking, not just learning by heart."

Prof. Kalisch's religious studies center recently removed a sign and erased its address from its Web site. The professor, a burly 42-year-old, says he has received no specific threats but has been denounced as apostate, a capital offense in some readings of Islam.

"Maybe people are speculating that some idiot will come and cut off my head," he said during an interview in his study.

A few minutes later, an assistant arrived in a panic to say a suspicious-looking digital clock had been found lying in the hallway. Police, called to the scene, declared the clock harmless.

A convert to Islam at age 15, Prof. Kalisch says he was drawn to the faith because it seemed more rational than others. He embraced a branch of Shiite Islam noted for its skeptical bent. After working briefly as a lawyer, he began work in 2001 on a postdoctoral thesis in Islamic law in Hamburg, to go through the elaborate process required to become a professor in Germany.

The Sept. 11 attacks in the U.S. that year appalled Mr. Kalisch but didn't dent his devotion. Indeed, after he arrived at Münster University in 2004, he struck some as too conservative. Sami Alrabaa, a scholar at a nearby college, recalls attending a lecture by Prof. Kalisch and being upset by his doctrinaire defense of Islamic law, known as Sharia.

In private, he was moving in a different direction. He devoured works questioning the existence of Abraham, Moses and Jesus. Then "I said to myself: You've dealt with Christianity and Judaism but what about your own religion? Can you take it for granted that Muhammad existed?"

He had no doubts at first, but slowly they emerged. He was struck, he says, by the fact that the first coins bearing Muhammad's name did not appear until the late 7th century -- six decades after the religion did.

He traded ideas with some scholars in Saarbrücken who in recent years have been pushing the idea of Muhammad's nonexistence. They claim that "Muhammad" wasn't the name of a person but a title, and that Islam began as a Christian heresy.

Prof. Kalisch didn't buy all of this. Contributing last year to a book on Islam, he weighed the odds and called Muhammad's existence "more probable than not." By early this year, though, his thinking had shifted. "The more I read, the historical person at the root of the whole thing became more and more improbable," he says.

He has doubts, too, about the Quran. "God doesn't write books," Prof. Kalisch says.

Some of his students voiced alarm at the direction of his teaching. "I began to wonder if he would one day say he doesn't exist himself," says one. A few boycotted his lectures. Others sang his praises.

Prof. Kalisch says he "never told students 'just believe what Kalisch thinks' " but seeks to teach them to think independently. Religions, he says, are "crutches" that help believers get to "the spiritual truth behind them." To him, what matters isn't whether Muhammad actually lived but the philosophy presented in his name.

This summer, the dispute hit the headlines. A Turkish-language German newspaper reported on it with gusto. Media in the Muslim world picked up on it.

Germany's Muslim Coordinating Council withdrew from the advisory board of Prof. Kalisch's center. Some Council members refused to address him by his adopted Muslim name, Muhammad, saying that he should now be known as Sven.

German academics split. Michael Marx, a Quran scholar at the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences, warned that Prof. Kalisch's views would discredit German scholarship and make it difficult for German scholars to work in Muslim lands. But Ursula Spuler-Stegemann, an Islamic studies scholar at the University of Marburg, set up a Web site called solidaritymuhammadkalisch.com and started an online petition of support.

Alarmed that a pioneering effort at Muslim outreach was only stoking antagonism, Münster University decided to douse the flames. Prof. Kalisch was told he could keep his professorship but must stop teaching Islam to future school teachers.

The professor says he's more determined than ever to keep probing his faith. He is finishing a book to explain his thoughts. It's in English instead of German because he wants to make a bigger impact. "I'm convinced that what I'm doing is necessary. There must be a free discussion of Islam," he says.​
 
Can we move this to a area of the forum where I can debate this without being banned?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Okay Chico. Bob beat me to moving the thread. Now you are keeping us in suspense of what you are going to debate.
 
My issue with items like this is my abiding contempt for being told how to think. This three-card-monte ruse of using religion or race for fomenting negative public opinion to chill debate is tantamount to censure by way of the back door.

Whether Muhammed existed or not is moot. If there is new information, in the guise of archaeology records or by the exposure of falsified text for example, then I want to view the treatise and formulate my own opinion.

When the book and movie "The Da Vinci Code" first came to the headlines, the claim was made that it "bashed catholics." Does "Easy Rider" bash Harley-Davidson? Does the "Dukes of Hazzard" bash 1968 Dodge Chargers? Do the Keebler elves bash little people?

Of course not. We are adults and we should be able to filter information through our own research and freely voice the discourse.

In my community little children cannot celebrate Halloween in schools because it is claimed that the open depiction of evil spirits offends the Hmong culture. What part of the concept of "free speech" is not understood?

Unless my study of recent history is in error, the Hmong came to this country to avoid communist oppression. They return the favor by oppressing me.

Openly I admit that I have little, if any, respect for Islam, catholicism, the Hmong or even mung beans. I am a free, white American. I study, I vote and I do not need any amateur to parse The Constitution for me.

As the song goes, "My eyebrows ain't plucked, there's a gun in my truck." If you do not like the disposition of open, unfettered criticism, then take your voodoo gods, your outrage, and my boot up your ass and walk back through the revolving door of Ellis Island.

Maybe Allah has to listen, but I don't.
 
Tourist,
Sometimes I have a hard time following your posts. We know you are a biker, so slow that down.
Anybody that criticize the Muslim religion is hunted down and very bad things happen.
We also know you are a tuff guy. God I hope you don’t end up being a paper tiger. Please don’t show any of your trophies, if you have any.
Nobody is going to get you here if you prove to be a wimp.
Just chill out as you could be among friends, it’s up to you buddy.

 
You have nothing to fear from us.

Yes, I know.

But I live by an old Sicilian adage that my Aunt Minnie told me. She said, "Friends and lovers come and go, but a good enemy is a joy forever."

In the end, my detractors will be famous for knowing me.
 
But he has imaginary enemies. Seems to think that Catholics have done something to him to become his enemies. :pat:
 
Actually, I'm pretty much down on all witch-doctors.

To give you some idea on just how ridiculous the entire matter truly is, the best oratory I've seen lately came from ventriloquist Jeff Dunham--out of the mouth of a dummy.
 
I suppose I'm missing it.

The article posted by Bob said:
So it came as something of a surprise when Prof. Kalisch announced the fruit of his theological research. His conclusion: The Prophet Muhammad probably never existed.

How is that telling anyone how to think? I understand you are at odds with some religions. No problem, we understand that. Are you bothered that religious leaders take freedoms and tell their followers what to think or do? If so, the followers are their by choice. At this point in time they must feel they need that in their lives. Why does that upset you Chico? You are not a follower, so they are not talking to you. Are you bothered that other 'sheep' as you call them choose to follow? :confused:
 
It is unfortunate that there is intolerance in religion regarding the questioning of the faith. Isn't what this professor doing tantamount to apologetics? In the christian faith, some of the most compelling writings have come from those who set out to disprove Christianity and in their quest to do so became devout believers. C.S. Lewis comes to mind. His book Mere Christianity is the result of his quest to disprove.
 
One issue ( and I have many) with organized religion is that people opt to be told what to believe and don't take personal responsibility for developing a personal faith. They adopt a group faith. It is no wonder so many are disillusioned. If you are following the interpretations of man.....weel, what do you expect? I believe we were to told "Seek and ye shall find". That implies a personal action which goes way beyond darkening church doors on Sunday and being involved in the multitudes of activities churches host to entertain the masses.
 
It is unfortunate that there is intolerance in religion regarding the questioning of the faith. Isn't what this professor doing tantamount to apologetics? In the christian faith, some of the most compelling writings have come from those who set out to disprove Christianity and in their quest to do so became devout believers. C.S. Lewis comes to mind. His book Mere Christianity is the result of his quest to disprove.

Very good point CG. I've wondered if that would eventually happen to CB. He has played devils advocate many times in our religious discussions and at one point I had a feeling he was searching for himself and that he might just find it. As usual, good post!!!!! :thumb:

One issue ( and I have many) with organized religion is that people opt to be told what to believe and don't take personal responsibility for developing a personal faith. They adopt a group faith. It is no wonder so many are disillusioned. If you are following the interpretations of man.....weel, what do you expect? I believe we were to told "Seek and ye shall find". That implies a personal action which goes way beyond darkening church doors on Sunday and being involved in the multitudes of activities churches host to entertain the masses.

Again you are so right. So many want to take the 'easy' way out. Do the obligatory Sunday service and the bare minimum otherwise and then move on. They do not put themselves into it. It's as if they are fulling what they believe to be an obligation ... what they don't realize is that they are cheating themselves in the process IMHO. The phrase "You only get out of something what you have put into it" comes to mind.
 
It is unfortunate that there is intolerance in religion.

I understand your attempt to be fair. However, in the overall scheme of human interaction that's like saying "It is unfortunate that some people like chocolate cake."

The real issue is the chill of debate. Letting OJ Simpson free because some blacks felt we "owed them one" is about the dumbest thing I heard uttered in my life. Freeing a murderer in exchange for lynching is tantamount to setting fire to Disneyland because a mouse ran across your kitchen floor.

This is a very big deal. If your read these posts, you'll see that one member here warned me about being killed for disagreement. I'm sure he was very sincere. But if there is any intolerance perceived in a debate of an entire sect, it's because of the singular act of murder by a misguided idiot.

Let me give you an example in the extreme. I live in an upwardly mobile suburban community. Last year I talked with the driver of one of those ricer cars. Little plastic Subaru, huge bass speakers set on "stun," and the driver slouched in the front seat, hat backwards.

I asked him about his behavior. He stated that his music, his attitude on life and even his style of dress was a statement on youth, upheaval and basic angst. He was miffed I was openly intolerant.

I responded, "You're a white kid in a rich neighborhood. Your folks bought you this car for turning sixteen."

Crap is crap. It could be this kid, a death decree by a voodoo witch doctor or an established sect that bilks its faithful.
 
I understand your attempt to be fair. However, in the overall scheme of human interaction that's like saying "It is unfortunate that some people like chocolate cake."

The real issue is the chill of debate. Letting OJ Simpson free because some blacks felt we "owed them one" is about the dumbest thing I heard uttered in my life. Freeing a murderer in exchange for lynching is tantamount to setting fire to Disneyland because a mouse ran across your kitchen floor.

This is a very big deal. If your read these posts, you'll see that one member here warned me about being killed for disagreement. I'm sure he was very sincere. But if there is any intolerance perceived in a debate of an entire sect, it's because of the singular act of murder by a misguided idiot.

Let me give you an example in the extreme. I live in an upwardly mobile suburban community. Last year I talked with the driver of one of those ricer cars. Little plastic Subaru, huge bass speakers set on "stun," and the driver slouched in the front seat, hat backwards.

I asked him about his behavior. He stated that his music, his attitude on life and even his style of dress was a statement on youth, upheaval and basic angst. He was miffed I was openly intolerant.

I responded, "You're a white kid in a rich neighborhood. Your folks bought you this car for turning sixteen."

Crap is crap. It could be this kid, a death decree by a voodoo witch doctor or an established sect that bilks its faithful.

Going out on a limb, here.....I'd respond but I've read and reread the above and I'm not getting your point(s).
 
Going out on a limb, here.....I'd respond but I've read and reread the above and I'm not getting your point(s).

In a word, there are no sacred topics. I do not believe you get to hide behind status, gender, religion or race when debate arises in a free society.

In a very short time some member here is going to discuss how his Yamaha Vmax is superior to my Harley. I'm surprised it hasn't happened already. It is his birthright under our system to speak openly and honestly--whether I wish to hear it or not.

Let me give you an example on how serious this becomes.

About ten years ago the Armed Forces decided that there wasn't enough female pilots. To promote gender equity, female pilots were promoted over more admittedly skilled candidates.

To openly verbalize this new policy was considered disrespectful and sexist.

That is, until an unskilled female crashed her multimillion dollar aircraft into the rear of an aircraft carrier, and instantly died.

No one had the cojones to verbalize the honest truth. No one was permitted to ask the question everyone was secretly thinking.

Whether you believe in a voodoo god or an ashram pole or The New York Yankees, that is your right under our law.

However, my right to demonstrate your folly should also be protected under that same set of enumerated guarantees.
 
:dizzy:help me out here but in AMERICA doesnt everyone have a right to voice his own ideas i think they do and as far as i am concerned i will defend your right to voice your opinion even if i think you are right or if i think your are wrong LETS ALL DISCUSS AND ENJOY THE DIFFERENCES
 
:dizzy:help me out here but in AMERICA doesnt everyone have a right to voice his own ideas i think they do and as far as i am concerned i will defend your right to voice your opinion even if i think you are right or if i think your are wrong LETS ALL DISCUSS AND ENJOY THE DIFFERENCES

Right on bpp. That is what Forums Forums is all about. :thumb:
 
Oh, I believe someone named Mohammad existed and I believe he was a prolific scribe. I also believe Joseph Smith existed and he too was really keen on writing and must have been a dynamic public speaker. Do I believe what either of them had to say? Well, let me put it this way, do you believe we all came from the planet Kolob, that the moon is populated by men and women who are just like us, that you'll be a god of your own planet? I could go on for pages on both of these people but see no reason. Here is how I see it; I don't seek to be your leader, but I also don't make a good follower who won't ask questions.
 
OK, way off the flow of this thread, but am I the only one who read the title too fast on thought this was a TBN thread?
 
but in AMERICA doesnt everyone have a right to voice his own

No, you don't.

Perhaps in the distant past you did. However, now you have 'hate crimes,' even the concept of 'hate speech.'

Let me give you an example. I'll use myself as an example so no one gets his feelings hurt.

You're an employer utilizing multi-million dollar equipment, and I apply for a job. In Wisconsin we have "employment at will." You turn to a subordinate employee and state, "I'm not going to hire Chico because he rides a Harley. Anyone utilizing primitive machinery obviously doesn't have the brains to work here."

No prob. That's your call.

Same scenario, except this time it's my ethnicity. You turn to that subordinate and say, "I'm not going to hire Chico because he's part Polish. Any pollock obviously doesn't have the brains to work here."

That may indeed be your honest feeling. It's your company. You're the guy risking the capital investment and care of the assets of the corporation. Your subordinate might even agree.

However, honest assessment or not, you might get sued (not by me because I believe "free speech" means what it says) and you will certainly be branded a racist from that moment on.

This is the political climate now in this country. And it's bias.

You are allowed to say, "Republican representatives don't care if their environmental platforms kill children."

But you don't dare say, "Black gang bangers don't care if their lifestyle kills children."

You might laugh, but would you say the same type of thing at a wedding or at a party?

I believe most organized religions are crap. You put a guy into a funny hat, and create a position where all he does all day is generate donations, and I smell a scam. Get a frakken job. Heal the sick, comfort the dying, do your vocation. Bilk folks for indulgences and I'll put you up against the wall myself.

That's my honest opinion. One member here warned me my life was danger.

Does that sound like "free speech" to you?
 
<snip>
One member here warned me my life was danger.

Does that sound like "free speech" to you?

Who said your life was in danger? I believe Darroll was talking about the Muslim professor mentioned in the story who cast doubt on the origins of Islam. I'm sure many of his fellow Muslims want a piece of his hide. Your statement was simply a non-believer stating that he didn't believe in Islam. The Muslims who would want your hide for that are the same ones that want everyone dead who isn't a Muslim (most of us).

As far as free speech, that's a protection from our government, not from your fellow citizen. As your employer, I can tell you to shut up at work where you must comply or seek employment elsewhere. But outside of work you might pop me in the nose for the same thing. The admin and mods can tell you to shut up on FF and you must comply or move on to another site.

You didn't think this thread was about you, did you? :rolleyes: :poke:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kO4caNnGq6c"]YouTube - 70s video Carly Simon You're so Vain[/ame]
 
Last edited:
[
That's my honest opinion. One member here warned me my life was danger.

Does that sound like "free speech" to you?

Tourist, This is the 2nd time you have referred to being warned by a member on this forum your life was in danger. Unless this warning took place in a PM, I'm not seeing it.
 
Gotcha. In that case, the majority of citizens in this country are in the boat with you. I believe we are safe... for a while, anyway. Stay out of the middle east.
 
Top