<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The five pillars of Islam</title>
	<atom:link href="http://fallingawake.wordpress.com/2007/07/02/the-five-pillars-of-islam/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://fallingawake.wordpress.com/2007/07/02/the-five-pillars-of-islam/</link>
	<description>Moderately Informed and Pleasantly Outraged</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Oct 2009 22:41:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: mohamed</title>
		<link>http://fallingawake.wordpress.com/2007/07/02/the-five-pillars-of-islam/#comment-746</link>
		<dc:creator>mohamed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Aug 2007 15:28:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fallingawake.wordpress.com/2007/07/02/the-five-pillars-of-islam/#comment-746</guid>
		<description>Actually there is 2 ways to look at this. His book &quot;The truth about Muhammad&quot; focussed on what sects in Islam said about him and not the Quran. He focussed on hadiths and not Quran. He seems to rely on Sunni accounts and not shia. He did not tell us why. So he is really relying on gossip and hearsay compiled 2 to 3 centuries after Muhammad during the Abbasid era because he finds in them a more autucratic and intolerant Islam then he would find in the Quran and then use that to blaspheme the character of Muhammad hoping that this woul lead more public support for the Jews and Israel. Its therefore not an academic book.

But he can not say that he talked about the truth about Muhammad because the only truth about Muhammad is he came with the Quran. Either it was revealed to him or he came up withit himself. In both cases it is what he claimed to have been revealed to him. But Spencer does not judge Muhammad by what the Quran is saying.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually there is 2 ways to look at this. His book &#8220;The truth about Muhammad&#8221; focussed on what sects in Islam said about him and not the Quran. He focussed on hadiths and not Quran. He seems to rely on Sunni accounts and not shia. He did not tell us why. So he is really relying on gossip and hearsay compiled 2 to 3 centuries after Muhammad during the Abbasid era because he finds in them a more autucratic and intolerant Islam then he would find in the Quran and then use that to blaspheme the character of Muhammad hoping that this woul lead more public support for the Jews and Israel. Its therefore not an academic book.</p>
<p>But he can not say that he talked about the truth about Muhammad because the only truth about Muhammad is he came with the Quran. Either it was revealed to him or he came up withit himself. In both cases it is what he claimed to have been revealed to him. But Spencer does not judge Muhammad by what the Quran is saying.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
