Islam Critiqued leaves his soup on the fire; Noah's people boiling in an oven?

Islam Critiqued "The Oven Boiled: From Eisegesis to History"

The nation of the prophet Nuh had reached such high levels of rejection and animosity towards their prophet, that a revelation informed him that most of his nation will not believe no matter what. He should therefore stop grieving for their sins 11:36. 

All prophets, including Moses or Nuh, are sent as relentless reformers of their nations, first and foremost. Not as usherers of destruction. They are repeatedly depicted, as is done throughout the book as regards Muhammad, as grieving for their nations' sins, doing all they can to bring them to the path of righteousness. They remain in that passionate empathy so long as the benefit of the doubt is there, in case their addresses still have a potential to desist from their rejection and reform themselves. But once it becomes clear that they will instead, only increase in rebellion and hatred towards God, the messengers cannot remain empathetic to them. Any believer facing an enemy of God, will treat that person as one's own enemy. 

Nuh then prayed for the spiritual blindess to be inflicted on the mischievous elite that kept opposing and leading people astray, so that they can swiftly become worthy of divine punishment. He prayed God to rid the land from them and those who follow them and thus corruption ceases to be spread 71:24-8. The word used for "land" is Al-ard. In the Arabic of the Quran it almost never means the whole globe, rather the land within one's activities. All the verses speaking of the divine punishment concern Nuh's people only, in accordance with the Quranic principle that destruction only befalls a nation of rejecters. Further, in the absence of authentic narrations depicting the scale of the flood, the commentaries endorsing the biblical view cannot be considered authorative. 

Nuh's prayer of destruction came after preaching and reasoning for a long time, with signs of sinfulness appearing even among the next generation. He had seen that falsehood would keep being transmitted to children's children despite all his efforts, and hence his request to wipe out all traces of it to prevent it perduring. Strangely, Nuh's tireless warning to his people does not appear in the HB. As if this

 Gen7:1"righteous among his generation" 

praised by later prophets the likes of Ezekiel for his urpightness Ezek14:14 was never confronted by a whole nation whose behavior was completely different than his, or that he, as a righteous did not go out of his way to admonish them. 

Only in the midrash do we find mention of his preaching and reforming efforts. It is even argued that part of the reason it took so long to build the ark was to give people time to ask Noah what he was doing and to repent. The flaw in that assertion is that if the order to build the Ark was issued then it means the fate of the nation was already sealed and the punishement bound to befall them. That it why the Quran states that it was towards the end of his preaching mission, when the prophet Nuh was informed through revelation that 

71:1-28,11:25-49"none of your people will believe except those who have already believed..And make the ark before Our eyes and (according to) Our revelation, and do not speak to Me in respect of those who are unjust; surely they shall be drowned". 

It is only at that culminating point of disbelief following long, tireless preaching that the command to start building the Ark was issued. The Quran adds that this project was performed under "God's watch" for he now needed protection from the hardenned disbelievers during the time needed. This is the precision of the Quran as it retells ancient stories obscured and confused throughout the ages. 

The Quran further adds a subtle detail. Because God leaves room for repentance until the absolute final moments prior to the punishment, Noah had to remain among his people, building the ark as a sign of imminent doom, until just prior to the flood. He could not just leave much ahead of time. That is why he had to receive some kind of signal that the massive deluge was imminent. This would leave him enough time to make the final preparations, such as gathering all pairs of animals within his reach. It would have allowed him to reestablish a sustainable colony elsewhere. Interestingly the Quran, contrary to the HB's depiction of the massive size and strength of the Ark that was needed to carry every kind of living thing in the world, downplays the toughness of that construction 54:13. Noah had no time to accomplish such a task and neither would this embarkation, purposefully belittled as a thing of "plancks and nails" would have been able to carry everything. The signal had thus to be such that Noah would be allowed enough time to gather all that was necessary, and embark along with his family and followers safely into the Ark. That signal was a geological phenomenon, such as of underground water gushing out gently, as a light geiser would. The Quran depicts that natural occurence as an overflowing oven

23:27"and when Our command is given and the oven gushes water, take into it of every kind a pair, two, and your family, except those among them against whom the word has gone forth, and do not speak to Me in respect of those who are unjust; surely they shall be drowned". 

The Arabic tannur is used for an underground type of oven, which closely parallels the geiser. This again, was only the signal, not the punishment. And it was a subtle signal as its implications were only obvious to Noah. Noah's people didn't drown in the hot water of that SINGULAR "overflowing oven". But then, when Noah had safely embarked

 54:12"We made the land explode with springs, so the water gathered together according to a measure already ordained". 

Suddenly and simultaneously, from multiple locations water gushed forth, came together and innundated the land, as a massive flash flood, while from above, heavy rainfall came down incessantly 

"So We opened the gates of the cloud with water pouring". 

This left the disbelievers no chance at hiding neither in lowground nor in high mountains, as here depicted with the dramatic scene between Noah and his son 

11:42-3"He said: I will betake myself for refuge to a mountain that shall protect me from the water. Nuh said: There is no protector today from Allah's punishment but He Who has mercy; and a wave intervened between them, so he was of the drowned". 

That nation among whom he was preaching was so corrupt that Nuh's own son would not heed his father's calls. He remained in denial even when the flood almost overwhelmed him, despite his father's pleas. His son was decreed to be of those to be drowned, along with the other rejecters, when the deluge began 11:40. Nuh knew it, but since he still considered his son as family, his instinct as a father took over when he saw his son perishing, cried out for the Lord to forgive his son while humbling himself and his incomplete knowledge in the face of divine justice. The sentence however could not be revoked, God even excluded him at that point from Nuh's family, and Nuh accepted God's all encompassing judgement 11:45-7. 

What follows is unrelated to that youtuber's comments, but provides good additional perspective on the story of Noah.

Contrary to the HB which states that Nuh's age was 950 years when he died, the Quran uses a peculiar construction to describe, not his total age, but the time that he spent among his people 

29:14-15"And certainly We sent Nuh to his people, so he remained among them a thousand SANA save fifty AAM. And the deluge overtook them, while they were unjust. So We delivered him and the inmates of the ark, and made it a sign to the nations". 

However this does not necessarily mean that the whole lifespan preceded the flood or that he died the same year, after being saved. The verse itself says, that this timespan was spent among his people, so this must include a period with those among his people that survived the flood with him. These people are Noah's household, besides his son, who survived the flood, along with an unspecified number of followers from among that very nation that was drowned 11:48. It says in addition that following the flood, Nuh and the survivors were made khalaaif 10:73 from the root kh-l-f meaning to leave behind. Khalifa is one that manages what is left behind, as in a successor. Nuh and those with him made khalaaif means that they were now in control of what those that were destroyed have left and were responsible with properly ruling over it. 

Later on, the only group that remained from those that were saved from the flood were his offspring, they survived both Nuh and the followers outside of his household carried upon the ark 37:75-7. It is interesting to note how the account of Noah ends with an emphasis on the fact that its details as recounted in the Quran were unknown to the prophet and its addressees. The story itself was well known all throughout the region, including by the prophet's addressees. The Quran takes the known references, including linguistic and formulates them in a manner that opens different perspectives and conclusions to the story

11:49"these are of the tidings of the Unseen which We reveal unto you. Before this, neither you nor your people knew them. Therefore, be you patient, verily the end is for the pious ones". 

This is in accordance with the Quranic pattern of laying stress on the truth of its own version of an event, whenever an alternative version exists, as is here the case with the convoluted Biblical version of Noah's story, more particularily the vile depiction of Noah's own character. As to the expression 

"a thousand SANA save fifty AAM"

 one cannot do a simple numerical deduction between 2 different units (sana/aam) and arbitrarily decide in which unit the result is to be expressed. This is all the more true if one considers the other instances where the Quran uses a similar construction but never constrasts 2 different units, as in 18:25,28:27,37:147. There is a purpose for this choice of words in the Quran, as is always the case. If the purpose was to retell the straightforward Biblical information, it could have repeated the 950 figure explicitly without the need for such an expression. The purpose cannot be anything else than creating a contrast between 2 concepts sana/aam. Sana denotes a time (not nessarily solar year) of hardship while aam is used for a time of abundance and ease. 

Adding to this the fact that the passage itself ends with a mention that what preceded was of parabolic nature 29:43 then this opens the possibility for the understanding that the minute details, such as the specific number of years, is purposefully formulated in a manner so as to convey a concept, rather than factual information; 1000 difficult periods in succession less 50 of ease, ie an extremely long struggle with a relatively short time of rest just as with the prophet Muhammad from the beginning to the end of his call. 

The indirect purpose is also to correct the literal interpretation of that figure, as it was orally transmitted through the centuries until put to writing in the biblical account 

11:49"these are of the tidings of the Unseen which We reveal unto you. Before this, neither you nor your people knew them. Therefore, be you patient, verily the end is for the pious ones".

Sam Shamoun "REFUTING ADNAN RASHID PT. 3" (3)

Sam Shamoun "REFUTING ADNAN RASHID PT. 3" (3)

The attempted attacks on the authenticity of the Quran have reached the time of the prophet Muhammad through the claim that Abdullah Ibn Sad Ibn Abi Sarh, one of his scribes, actually contributed to its creation by anticipating the revelation of the verse 23:14, before the prophet recited it. The prophet then allegedly told him to write it down as part of the Quran. He is said to have then apostatized and returned to Mecca for protection.

Al hafidh al iraqi in his sira in the form of a poetry and in the part speaking of the prophet's scribes, lists 42 names among them Ibn Abi Sarh, emitting reserves as to whether he was truly a scribe or not. He then says that Sarh, along with 2 other scribes apostized with only Sarh later returning to Islam. Nothing is said of the reason of his apostasy, nor of the supposed way in which Sarh "used to direct Muhammad to write this or that"etc. as claimed by modern polemicists. 

Before getting into a factual analysis of the report on sura 23, why would only 1 scribe out of more than 40 doubt Muhammad's truthfulness if all others like him were free to edit the text as they deemed it fit?
As to Abi Sarh's claims, assuming them to have been truly uttered, there are several internal factors exposing him as a liar. Abi Sarh embraced Islam after the hijra (the circumstances of his initial conversion are unknown) and joined the Muslims in Medina where his apostasy later occured. His conversion and apostasy thus occured in Medina. This means sura 23, which he supposedly contributed to and thus led him to leave Islam, must have been revealed there, in Medina, yet this sura is a known Meccan sura with no exception of any single verse. That alone is strong enough evidence to discard the claim, taking down with it the polemic on 6:93, also Meccan, which the polemicists try to depict as revealed in relation to Sarh following his "exposing" of Muhammad by "creating" a verse of sura 23. Disregarding the reports stating Sarh reverted to Islam before Mecca's conquest, meaning without any compulsion, after which he lived and died as a pious Muslim, the polemicists attempt using other reports stating Sarh was on an execution list and thus converted under duress after the Muslim invasion of Mecca.
If those reports are taken as true, the only information that can be drawn from them is that until the very last moment while his conversion could have made the difference between life and death yet he did not convert. He was forgiven and had thus no reason to "fear" anyone in his decision process in later reverting to Islam. 

Nothing is said in those reports of the sentence against him having anything to do with the (disproven) claims on suras 6 and 23. Some reports do however say that he, along with a few others were on an execution list for (among other crimes like murder) their war-inciting, devisive poetry and anyone familiar with the culture of the time knows what role a certain type of poetry played in initiating bloody conflicts. It is a type of offence falling under the Quranic category of fasad fil ard, crimes punishable by death. 

Some side arguments to keep in view is that, supposing the allegations concerning his contribution to sura 23 as true, followed by his apostasy and return to Mecca, then it would be very obvious for him to make such grandiose claims, since he now needed the sympathy and favors of the Quraysh whom he had previously betrayed in a time of war. He needed to allay their suspicions and resentment.

A similar case is that of al Rahhal Ibn Unfuwah. He was sent on a mission to Banu Hanifah, the people of Musaylimah the false prophet, whom he eventually joined. He then tried gaining the people's sympathy there by claiming the Prophet agreed to share the prophetic mission with Musaylimah, and some followed him. We even have cases of a whole Jewish delegation paying reverence to the Meccan idols by bowing to them, so as to forge an alliance with the prophet's enemies. The ahadith and the Quran in 4:51 refer to that shocking incident. These kinds of public renouncement of one's position in favour of a former enemy for political purposes were common. A similar case to abi Sarh is that of a Muslim in Medina who decided to betray the prophet, fearing for his relatives left behind in Mecca at the hands of the Quraysh

"I heard `Ali saying, "Allah's Messenger sent me, Az-Zubair and Al-Miqdad somewhere saying, 'Proceed till you reach Rawdat Khakh. There you will find a lady with a letter. Take the letter from her.' " So, we set out and our horses ran at full pace till we got at Ar-Rawda where we found the lady and said (to her). "Take out the letter." She replied, "I have no letter with me." We said, "Either you take out the letter or else we will take off your clothes." So, she took it out of her braid. We brought the letter to Allah's Messenger and it contained a statement from Hatib bin Abi Balta a to some of the Meccan pagans informing them of some of the intentions of Allah's Messenger. Then Allah's Messenger said, "O Hatib! What is this?" Hatib replied, "O Allah's Messenger, Don't hasten to give your judgment about me. I was a man closely connected with the Quraish, but I did not belong to this tribe, while the other emigrants with you, had their relatives in Mecca who would protect their dependents and property . So, I wanted to recompense for my lacking blood relation to them by doing them a favor so that they might protect my dependents. I did this neither because of disbelief not apostasy nor out of preferring Kufr (disbelief) to Islam." Allah's Messenger, said, "Hatib has told you the truth." `Umar said, O Allah's Apostle! Allow me to chop off the head of this hypocrite." Allah's Messenger said, "Hatib participated in the battle of Badr, and who knows, perhaps Allah has already looked at the Badr warriors and said, 'Do whatever you like, for I have forgiven you".

Another similar case is that of a Christian who joined Islam in Mecca and apostised later in Medina, then claiming he used to fabricate the revelations for Muhammad, again obviously to be more readily accepted by the prophet's enemies. Yet how could he remain Muslim for such a long time originally converting in sincere faith during the hardest time for the nascent Muslim community, until late in Medina and the revelations of suras baqara and aal imran which he used to read, and subsequent revelations he used to write, all the while knowing it to be a lie, deliberately fabricating information to include into the Quran which he used daily in his supplications? How credible is his testimony and how appropriate is it for his story to be included in the chapter about lying in Bukhari's collection? What is further inconvenient to those who attempt using that report to discredit the prophet, is the rest of it speaking of the divine punishment inflicted on him, witnessed by the narrator as a miracle.

There was a Christian who embraced Islam and read Surat-al-Baqara and Al-Imran, and he used to write (the revelations) for the Prophet. Later on he returned to Christianity again and he used to say: “Muhammad knows nothing but what I have written for him.” Then Allah caused him to die, and the people buried him, but in the morning they saw that the earth had thrown his body out. They said, “This is the act of Muhammad and his companions. They dug the grave of our companion and took his body out of it because he had run away from them.” They again dug the grave deeply for him, but in the morning they again saw that the earth had thrown his body out. They said, “This is an act of Muhammad and his companions. They dug the grave of our companion and threw his body outside it, for he had run away from them.” They dug the grave for him as deep as they could, but in the morning they again saw that the earth had thrown his body out. So they believed that what had befallen him was not done by human beings and had to leave him thrown (on the ground). 

People apostize from their religion, abandon their community or revert to a former state all the time, for many different personal reasons and in all religions and cultures. This happens especially in the times of the prophets, where people give up on their struggle and sacrifices, then seek to fight and undermine the legitimity of the prophet in their midst.

Waraqa the pre-Islamic hanif among others, is another of those candidates whom the critics like pointing to as a potential candidate for being an inspiration to Muhammad. In this one of many attempts at throwing all potentialities regardless of any logical, reasonable or contextual consideration, in the hope that a few will stick, these critics would have us believe that Waraqa was giving private lessons in scriptures to the prophet Muhammad and yet still believed in him prior to his death as a true messenger of God, wishing he could live on to support him in his difficult mission. The Quran itself testifies, and nobody ever came up to deny it, despite the various calumnies reported both in the Quran and hadith the likes of which almost all prophets were victims of, that the prophet knew nothing of the religion prior to his call. Nothing is known of the complete picture and signs which Waraqa saw that led him to believe in the prophet so strongly, but what is known is that he did, and that there was at the time great hope among the monotheist communities of the Hijaz, that a prophet and salvific figure fulfilling the prophecies of the HB and the NT would soon rise.

Historically, as stated earlier and as corroborated in the Quran itself, many people in the earliest days of Islam would convert, apostise, revert or remain non-Muslims, in some cases multiple times in a lifetime, guided by different reasons. They mostly did so to escape the Islamic justice system following a serious crime. 

In a time in Medina where the Jews did not spare any means, from deception to open hostility and war mongering, at opposing the rise of the nascent Muslim community, an incident occured involving both Jews and Muslims. A Muslim man, who had been absent from his house came back and saw that some of his precious belongings were gone. Circumstancial evidence immediately pointed to a particular household among the Ansar, who were at the time the main supporters of the prophet. When the culprit, from the bani Ubayriq clan, saw that suspicion was pointing to him, he decided to frame a neighboring Jew by entrusting him with the stolen property and then falsely accusing him. In light of the evidence, nobody, including the prophet could deny the Jewish man's guilt, despite his repeated claims of innocence, and even though the original circumstancial evidence pointing to the Ubayriq was still lingering in the Muslims' minds. Until revelation came on that occasion, pointing to deceiving appearances among so called Muslims and the importance of upholding justice impartially 4:105-113. The prophet, against all strategical and political wisdom, given the interests at play, judged in favor of the Jew and openly declared the Muslim's guilt. In his impartiality, he did not even resort to covering up the matter so as to safeguard the pride of his allies. The Muslim deceiver and hypocrite in question, some reports name him Bashir, others Tu'mah, then apostized, left Medina and joined the Meccan idolaters.

Others, that originally were drawn into the community out of immitation or interest, without deeper inquiries found themselves doubting the divine origin of the Quran, and this in no way constitutes an argument nor is relevant in determining the truth of Muhammad's prophethood. The opposite would mean that every single prophet of the Bible was a false prophet, since all of them were doubted, accused of all sorts of things, besides liars, madmen or demon possessed. All had people wavering in their faith among their addressees, some apostizing, others remaining hypocrites and others reverting back to faith. Jesus was eventually abandoned by his closest entourage, some of them doubting his truthfulness (Thomas) while others conspired to kill him (Judas).

Sam Shamoun "REFUTING ADNAN RASHID PT. 3" (2)

Sam Shamoun "REFUTING ADNAN RASHID PT. 3" (2)

The Arabic language, had several advantages as opposed to the dominant languages of commerce and intellectual discourse of the time; Latin, Greek, Persian, Hebrew. These were so interwoven as media for the communication of various thought systems that they became unsuitable for the transmission of Islamic concepts. The Abrahamic legacy prior to Islam was polluted by the integration of such languages in the course of its transmission. 

Only a language free from false theological notions could bring back the Abrahamic legacy to its original intent. It is known and argued by the masters of the language since al Farabi that the Qurayshi dialect, due to its centralizing position in Arabia, had reached the peak of eloquence by acquiring the best of other tribes' speech patterns and poems. The Quraysh used to deny the inclusion into their dialect, of expressions found among tribes bordering non-Arabic lands. Arabic in the time of the prophet counted many dialects, with the most dominant being his own language, that of the Quraysh. The Quran states about itself, over and over that it is in a clear Arabic language, devoid of any crookedness. It does not specifiy which Arabic. A study clearly reveals that it posesses mainly the features of the Qurayshi dialect, in addition to several others spoken in the Hijaz and Najd. It is this characteristic, the fact that it was expressed in the centralizing dialect of the most influencing tribe, but allowed enough flexibility so as to integrate other dialects, that made the Quran understandable to all tribes; clear Arabic. 

The Arabic of the Quraysh in particular had developed to such a level that it could transmit any verbalized message, no matter how abstract the idea.

The Quran therefore was in no need to borrow any word or concept to convey any of its themes.  That notion is in fact rejected, when it points in derogatory manner to the foreign tongue of one man who was at some point suspected of being the prophet's teacher 16:103. Not only was the accusation faulty from a linguistic perspective, his foreign tongue could never have inspired the matchless Arabic of the Quran, which the Arab masters of the language themselves recognized could not equal in eloquence, but was also faulty from a deeper cultural and theological viewpoint. None of the words and concepts conveyed in the Quran can be said to have been influenced by the ideological currents of the region. Even the foreign theologies and philosphies to the Arabs, those now deemed closest to Islam and that penetrated deep inside the peninsula, from Judaism's monolatry to Christianity's dying god incarnate, have no effect from near or far, to any of the tenets of the Quran.

Also, the accusation as quoted in the Quran is that this foreign person was actively interracting with the prophet, communicating and teaching him yet he was a non Arabic speaker so how could the two have such elaborate exchanges, in addition without ever being noticed? The Quran answers that accusation in a very appropriate way; given that the person they were pointing to spoke unintelligibly (aajami is used buy the Arabs for a language they could not understand) how could the prophet learn any of the stories found in the Quran from him, then reproduce that information accurately in a language they can understand? It is the same as saying that Einstein heard a toddler explaining the theory of relativity, then reproduced that information correctly in a language any physicist would recognize. This calumny was not grounded in any reality, like many other contradictory claims the prophet's opponents used in order to tarnish his well established integrity, in the same manner as prophets before him were unjustly targeted.

Sam Shamoun "REFUTING ADNAN RASHID PT. 3" (1)

Sam Shamoun "REFUTING ADNAN RASHID PT. 3" (1)

By the time of the prophet Muhammad, the assimilation of the Abrahamic legacy into the regional polytheistic systems was such that only a distant echo had remained in their minds from their spiritual connection to Abraham. Just as happenned to the Temple of Jerusalem that slowly became transformed into a pagan shrine and idols were introduced in it 2kings21 the prime symbol of monotheism in Mecca became thus radically transformed through pagan influence.

As the Ishmaelites, like the Israelites throughout their history, drifted from the original path of monotheism, the Hajj pilgrimage became a celebratory occasion, and the Kaaba was stocked with idols and false deities supposed to bring the worshipers closer to the One God, Allah, whom they believed in. Men and women would run naked throughout the holy precinct. Merchants from all over would travel to the Kaaba and set up shop during the pilgrimage.

People and tribes from all over Arabia would make the journey to Mecca to take part in the festivities. But this annual pilgrimage was in greater parts disconnected from the Abrahamic practice 22:26-7. It was simply a time to make money instead of being charitable, drink alcohol, and commit immoral acts. The importance of the annual event perdured despite the corruption. It was maintained by those that settled in Mecca, and the Arabs of the entire peninsula that got attracted to it with time. These are the points brought to attention in 2:196-7. And then until v203 great stress is laid on the spiritual dimension, forgotten and neglected, of that occasion.

No other nation can be compared to the Ishmaelites' handling of their spiritual legacy and sacred shrine, than their own Israelite brothers. They could not maintain the way of their forefathers despite the constant sending of prophets to them to bring them back to the right path. When the Arabs were admonished and urged to reform, they qualified the warnings as

16:24,27:68"stories of the ancients".

These Ishmaelites vaguely recalled the Abrahamic ways, but found no other constructive argument in their opposition but by denigrating it as old and useless stories, based on its ancienty and supposed obsolescence, inaplicability to the current circumstances. They never qualify these stories as "false". It was in fact one of the Quran's oft repeated functions, to "remind" the people of the truth they were still somewhat aware of but that had been supressed by falsehood. The Quran openly states that

26:196"most surely the same is in the scriptures of the ancients".

It repeats, time and again, its role as the guardian and preserver of the truth present in the past scriptures. Along with Abrahamic and monotheistic practices known in pre-islamic days, going back to previous prophets, was the Zakat which the people knew they had to give away to the poor but rarely practiced or misused 19:30-31,54-55,70:24,Deut14:28-29,26:12-14, fasting 2:51,183-187,7:142,Deut9:9,Ex24:18,34:28,Matt4:2,Lk5:33-6 prayer that continued after Ibrahim established it in the settlement of the Kaaba 14:37,19:55,Dan6:10,Ps55:18,1Chr23:30 until it was disfigured 8:35, animal sacrifice, circumcision. Other concepts propounded by previous prophets and which the Quran was reminding its addressees of, include the Resurrection, day of Judgement and accountability Matt13:24-43,1Kings17:17-24,2Kings4:17-37,13:20-1,1Sam2:6,Isa2:17,26:19,66:14,Ezek37:1-28,Ps71:20,Prov6:22,Prov31(see Rashi),Dan12:1-2,Quran29:36,54:36-9.

There are pre-islamic poems with clear eschatological connotation, some of them speaking of the resurrection of the soul, and Allah being the judge of mankind. One such poems is that of Zuhayr who wrote in his muallaqat

"Do not conceal from Allah what is in your souls, trying to hide it. Whatever is concealed from Allah, He knows. It is delayed and entered in a register and stored up for the day of reckoning, or it is brought forward and avenged".

Labid wrote

"every human will one day come to know his striving when it will be disclosed before the God what has been extracted".

See also the lines of al-A'sha evoking fear of the final accounting

"when the resurrected souls will shake of the dust".

The Quran and the traditions speak of the hanif remnants that tried preserving the monotheism of Ibrahim, and these lines of poetry might echo these marginal beliefs. The majority of the pre-islamic Arabs however rejected bodily resurrection and otherworldy accountability, the Quran repeatedly condemns this attitude. This phenomenon is clearly seen with the "talbiya", the invocations the pilgrims coming from all over Arabia made during their rituals.

Some of these have come down to us, referring to Allah as

"al wahid al qahhar rabb assamad",

while others clearly referred to the idols as subservient to him

"laa nabudul asnama hatta tajtahida li rabbiha wa tutabad"

or

"rabb al thalitha ukhra/Lord of the third goddess",

and others spoke of the One Lord of the last hour

"rabba assa'a".

All of this shows the multifaceted shades of idolatry among the pilgrims, some of them praising Allah alone, others associating with Him while maintaining Him above the intercessors, and others still referring to the day of judgement. This confirms the Quranic statement that the original religion established at the sanctuary was Abrahamic monotheism. It got disfigured with time, polluted with foreign concepts, although it maintained a recognizable foundation of truth, which the last prophet came to revive. Sura 87, after summing up the pillars of divine truth, such as monotheism, intelligent design, resurrection, God's all-encompassing, intricate knowledge and sway over His creatures' affairs, spiritual purification through prayer and constant remembrence of God as being the ways to success in the Hereafter, it says that these are all concepts known, written and transmitted by the prophets, from Ibrahim to Moses.

All of these things were known to the people whom Muhammad was addressing over 4000 years later but have been neglected for so long that only a dim remembrance of them remained 

23:83"Certainly we are promised this, and (so were) our fathers aforetime; this is naught but stories of those of old".

Muhammad revived the corrupted, obscured and forgotten way of Ibrahim

6:161"Say: Surely, (as for) me, my Lord has guided me to the right path; (to) a most right religion, the faith of Ibrahim the upright one, and he was not of the polytheists".

The climax of that revival occured when he entered Mecca triumphantly, cleansed the Kaaba of its idols and rededicated it to its monotheistic purpose.

The prophet used to answer the call of freeman, slave, maid servant and destitute alike, shortening his prayer anytime someone would visit his open house so much so that his opponents spread it as a form of weakness and credulity while the prophet knew very well who to trust 9:61. The verse absolutely doesnt come in the context of charges of plagiarism. They would literally reproach him of being "an ear" because of his empathy and readiness to patiently listen to what anyone had to say. But although at first glance that seemingly gave the impression of being credulous it in fact reveals a great leadership quality of keeping cohesion within a group. He knows very well the liars or people with ill intentions but does not immidiately expose them to the rest of the community so as to leave them the chance to reform themselves, as is commanded within the Quran itself. This passive attitude should however not leave any ambiguity as regards the prophet's intellectual and spiritual stance, as denoted in the rest of the verse.

Sometimes as reflected in 33:53, his leniency, kindess and forbearance to his folks would often lead to abuse. People would enter his house at anytime, preventing him and his wives from their spiritual duties and basic privacy requirements. This injunction taught them certain rules of behaviour bearing on the life of such particular society, based on a true feeling of brotherhood, mutual consideration, and respect for the sanctity of each other's personality and privacy.

Further reading answering Sam Shamoun "REFUTING ADNAN RASHID PT. 3"

Islam Critiqued praises the prophet; Muhammad's encyclopediac knowledge?