So they heeded the Scripture.
Indeed they did. They knew who to fear, that being YHWH, rather than Muhammad and his alter-ego, the Quraish pagan's deity "Allah":
Ishaq:462/Tabari VIII:30 "The Jews said, 'We will never abandon the Torah or exchange it for the Qur'an.' Asad said, 'Since you reject this proposal of mine, then kill your children and your wives and go out to Muhammad and his Companions as men who brandish swords, leaving behind no impediments to worry you. If you die, you shall have left nothing behind; if you win you shall find other women and children.' The Jews replied, 'Why would we kill these poor ones? What would be the good of living after them?'"
Those peaceful, faithful farmers were more than willing to be martyred, and loose their lives in this world, rather than to be separated from God forever, by following Muhammad and prostrating themselves toward the Quraish pagan's black stone idol in Mecca. Their ancestors and a golden calf had aptly taught them that lesson.
YOUR REFERENCE IS INCORRECT: Please have the decency to actual read the Hadiths from the Books that They written in. Do not copy and paste fabrications posted on the web. I have detected that most if not all of the translations cited in this forum is mistranslations with no tafseer.
You are not reading the Hadith and the Quran from the Books itself, MORE PROOF OF THE GENERAL EVIL PERVADING THE JEWS AND CHRISTIANS.
`YOUR ENTIRE HISTORY IS BIASED IN FAVOR OF EUROPEANS, THE LIES ABOUT SPAIN IS ASTOUNDING AND ONLY BELIEVED BY IGNORAMUS.
As far as Jews fearing God the Bible disagrees with you
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! (From the KJV Bible, Matthew 23:37)"
"Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. (From the KJV Bible, Matthew 21:43)"
"You have heard these things; look at them all. Will you not admit them? "From now on I will tell you of new things, of hidden things unknown to you. They are created now, and not long ago; you have not heard of them before today. So you cannot say, 'Yes, I knew of them.' You have neither heard nor understood; from of old your ear has not been open. Well do I know how treacherous you are; you were called a rebel from birth. For my own name's sake I delay my wrath; for the sake of my praise I hold it back from you, so as not to cut you off. (From the NIV Bible, Isaiah 48:6-9)"
"So I will disgrace the dignitaries of your temple, and I will consign Jacob to destruction and Israel to scorn. (From the NIV Bible, Isaiah 43:28)"
"But now, all you who light fires and provide yourselves with flaming torches, go, walk in the light of your fires and of the torches you have set ablaze. This is what you shall receive from my hand: You will lie down in torment. (From the NIV Bible, Isaiah 50:11)"
WHAT ARE YOU DEFENDING THE JEWS FOR?
? WHY ARE YOU BUYING THE LIES OF THE ZIONISTS?
Why Ibn Ishaq can't be trusted/The Problems with Ibn Ishaq
"The Life of Muhammad" by Ibn Ishaq has been quoted by many critics of Islam. They get excited when Ibn Ishaq paints a bad picture of Prophet Muhammad and use it in their writings to attack Islam. Although Ibn Ishaq was the earliest of the traditionists to write a biography of the events that pertained to the time of Muhammad (p) there are several severe problems with his writings. As Bassam Zawadi says" just because something is early doesn't mean it is true". He has a good point. Not everyone back then was reliable and honest. Ibn Ishaq was known to be careless in him collecting stories about the Prophet, etc.
Several respected Muslim theologians rightly reject his (Ibn Ishaq's) authority for several reasons:
(A) That he was a Shi'i favouring Ali over all the other contenders to the Khilfa
(B) That he held the view that Man has free will, which is kind of contrary to the Quranic perception.
© That his Isnads (chains of transmissions) were defective, ie not 'iron' tight by naming all the reporters, which is important because this determines whether the transmitter of the story is trustworthy or not. Ibn Ishaq was not an eye witness to any of the events of Prophet Muhammad's life. Ibn Ishaq was writing about 150 years after the Prophet's death so this is very important. In Islamic sciences in order for a report of the Prophet (peace be on him) to be true is if the isnad is solid or not.
(D) He used reports of traditions gathered from Jewish sources. Jews made up a lot of false stories/legends of Prophet Muhammad (just like the early Christians living outside of Palestine made up a lot of myths and legends of Jesus and put them in the Gospels). Making up stories and legends about the Prophet are unnacceptable in the eyes of many Islamic scholars.
(E) Ibn Ishaq was (for lack of better term) a "suck up" to the Jews of Arabia. He said several complimentary reports of the Jews of Arabia, despite the fact that the Jews of Arabia were constatnly fighting with the Arabs and were charging interest when loaning money. The Jews of Madinah were constatly plotting againist the Prophet Muhammad. They were always trying to undermine his authority. In fact they sided with the Makkans in order to assinate the Prophet.
(F) Most important of all, his report about Laylat al Qadr (the first revelation), contradicts all the hadith versions. The hadith collectors Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, etc were more careful in collecting their hadith (their chains of transmission).
(G) There are several stories in Ibn Ishaq which are never found in the hadith. The reason why is because several hadith collectors such as Bukhari-- did not trust Ibn Ishaq.
Ibn Ishaq as an author was in fact subjected to devastating attacks by scholars, contemporary or later, on two particular accounts. One was his uncritical inclusion in his Sira of so much spurious or forged poetry [7] ;the other his unquestioning acceptance of just such a story as that of the slaughter of Banu Qurayza [8]. It gets worse for Ibn Ishaq though. First let's talk about what Imam Malk thought of Ibn Ishaq.
Malik bin Anas Bin Malik bin Abu Amir Al-Asbahi (715-801 C.E.) or Imam Malik-- lived cloest in the time to the life of Prophet Muhammad of all the collectors of the hadith (Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, etc). He was born more than 80 years after the death of the Prophet.
Imam Malik was a complier of a respected hadith collection, called Muwatta. Imam Malik was a hadith scholar. Imam Malik called Ibn Ishaq a liar and an imposter for writing false stories about Prophet Muhammad. Imam Malik has said that Ibn Ishaq "reports traditions on the authority of the Jews". Kadhdhab and Dajjal min al-dajajila. Uyun al-athar, I, 16-7. In his valuable introduction Ibn Sayyid al-Nas provides a wide-ranging survey of the controversial views on Ibn Ishaq. In his full introduction to the Gottingen edition of the Sira, Wustenfeld in turn draws extensively on Ibn Sayyid al-Nas.
