[nicollo]

It’s likely that Mohammad did not exist, at least not as personified by later accounts.

Either way, the religion justified the outcomes not the other way around, which is why early Arabian warlords used crosses and other Judeo-Christian traditions and symbols as they expanded into the Levant.

The best analogy I can make is to the uneducated who use “I” in the objective form as pretense for sophistication.

Between you and I, Mohammad was a fabrication of expansionist Arabs who seized upon local traditions without understanding them.

[Cronos]

I agree with you. The texts by Tom Holland and Robert Spencer along with the archaeological, historical and linguistic evidence seems to me to be very clear that no one person called “Mohammad” existed.

Mohammad is a title meaning “praiseworthy one” - not a name. No one had that as a name prior to the alleged prophet’s time

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks, nicollo and Cronos, for those posts. Mohammed may have written some of it, but didn't write all of it, and much of what he did write he cribbed from other sources without attribution or even any kind of critical thinking about what he was including.

• The Sacred City of Mecca: Have We Got It Wrong? [FR topic]
• dan gibson [FR keyword]
• 72 white raisins [FR keyword]

[AdmSmith]

@nicollo: Between you and I, Mohammad was a fabrication of expansionist Arabs who seized upon local traditions without understanding them.

Probably correct:
Watch this by Thomas Alexander
WHERE do the Germans say the Qur’an was compiled?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZWI68mWDkk

More here
The Origins of Islam - 1.1 The Koran: Critical Koran Studies
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXq4AK562L0&list=PL1zJ2LUq92EkBQpJlVHK2vb7YigCcmzP7