Review- The First Muslim, By Lesley Hazleton

[BriansThoughtMirror]

Recently, I read Lesley Hazleton's "The First Muslim", a biography of Muhammad. I felt it would be helpful for me to examine another faith as an outsider, without a horse in the race, so to speak. It was absolutely fascinating! Not only was Muhammad's life story truly amazing, I had no idea that the histories of Islam and Mormonism had so many parallels! From ideas about apostasy and restoration through revelation to special rules about polygamy, I repeatedly felt like history had repeated itself. I think my jaw was often hanging open as I read on the train, haha. Hazleton is an agnostic Jew, and she makes a point of not passing judgement on religious ideas. This makes for a very accessible and enlightening read.

I talk more in detail in my full review:
https://briansthoughtmirror.wordpress.com/

I haven't been participating in online discussions about Mormonism for a while, and I think it's to my emotional benefit. However, I wanted to do something constructive, honest, and respectful with my thoughts, so I started a blog. I hope to occasionally post something of value. Wish me luck!

EDIT- feedback or other comments are welcome! Thanks!

[Culper Jr.]

I read that book a while back, and i agree, it was really good. I felt like she did a good job of presenting the facts about Mohammed in a respectful way, both the positive and the negative.

I also was amazed at the parallels with mormonism. The prayer leading to a vision, the "satanic verses" which I thought paralleled the lost 116 pages, polygamy, others fighting over the leadership, revelations as scripture, a succession crisis.

She did a second book called After the Prophet that was also really good. It covers the succession and the Shia/Sunni split.

[BriansThoughtMirror]

Yeah, I had pages of notes covering more parallels. I left out a lot. The "Satanic Verses" episode was super interesting, too. For those who haven't heard the story, at one point, under extreme pressure, Muhammad reveals some Quranic verses that honor the idols of Mecca. This, of course, pleased the Meccans who had been persecuting him. He realizes later that these verses must not have come from Allah, and a subsequent revelation erases them. Some more liberal Muslim scholars point to this episode as a learning experience for Muhammad- he had to learn how to have revelation, and to distinguish true revelation from false revelation (More conservative Muslim scholars claim it either never happened or in some other way make Muhammad seem infallible).

This reminded me more of Joseph Smith's Canadian copyright story. He receives a revelation that he is supposed to sell the copyright for the BOM to someone in Canada. It doesn't work out. Liberal scholars say it was a learning experience. Conservative scholars say it never happened. This was another fascinating similarity!

[Corsair]

This reminded me more of Joseph Smith's Canadian copyright story. He receives a revelation that he is supposed to sell the copyright for the BOM to someone in Canada. It doesn't work out. Liberal scholars say it was a learning experience. Conservative scholars say it never happened. This was another fascinating similarity!

One of my favorite ways to evaluate an LDS faith claim is to check if the apologetic works just as well for Muhammad as it works for Joseph Smith.

Both Joseph and Muhammad had plenty of learning experiences which confuse the faithful to this day. Can I claim "learning experience" if I drink alcohol? How about if I secretly take a second wife? You would think that Joseph Smith would have figured out the doctrine and policies of plural marriage after the first dozen or so wives. He clearly took a lot time in learning experiences and his next six successors took a lot of time (and wives) in similar experiences. The apologetics for LDS leaders are not available for the average member.

[redjay]

Joseph said he would be a second Muhammed.

[deacon blues]

Two thoughts. 1- If I remember correctly both the D&C and the Koran have a similar challenge, that is: If a person doubts it's verity, they should try producing a similar revelation. If they can't, that proves it is true. 2- If Mohammed's biographer is an agnostic Jew, that still implies some bias. I can't criticize the book, but as every good Mormon knows, if you want to know the truth about Joseph Smith, you should ask a believer. Of course this rule shouldn't be applied to anti-Mormons or critics.

[BriansThoughtMirror]

Deacon Blues,
Yes, I agree- an agnostic Jew definitely has a bias! She presents the facts as inconclusive, making agnosticism appear quite logical. It's just a bit more approachable and less heavy handed than someone who is overtly trying to convince you whether or not Muhammad is God's one true prophet. It was a great, low pressure way to learn something about another faith's history.

I believe you are right about the D&C/Quran challenge. I don't remember it being referenced in the book, but I've seen it referenced by Muslim apologists. I'm not sure how convincing it is to anybody. I think it can quickly create a No True Scotsman situation, though.

Also, if you want to ask what Mormons believe about their religion, you should definitely ask a Mormon. Likewise, if you want to know what an ex-Mormon believes, ask them! Same for Muslims, ex-Muslims, etc. When we ask someone about anything, all we are going to get is their perspective. You can ask a Mormon about Mormon history, and you'll get Mormon history from a Mormon perspective. If you ask an exmo, you'll get an exmo perspective. A Nevermo will have a different perspective still. Then, you can listen to what they say, verify or falsify what you can to your own satisfaction, and reinterpret it from your own perspective. I don't think anyone has special access to the objective truth. So, I guess that's my bias.

[Corsair]

Joseph said he would be a second Muhammed.

This is not a flattering claim in the 2st century.

[deacon blues]

I decided to get the book, and So far I like it. Thanks for the recommendation, Brains.

[BriansThoughtMirror]

Awesome! I hope you enjoy it as much as I did! You'll have to post your thoughts!

[deacon blues]

Awesome! I hope you enjoy it as much as I did! You'll have to post your thoughts!

My kindle crashed, and after messing with it for two weeks I finally got another one. I am still enjoying the book. As I reach the part where Muhammad returns to Mecca, I am amazed at his political prowess. I wonder if Joseph Smith knew enough about Muhammad to envision himself following in his footsteps, and gaining political control of the U.S. There are indications in some of his writings that that is what he intended to do.

[BriansThoughtMirror]

Fascinating, right? I couldn't say what Smith knew about Muhammad, but he certainly did some things very similarly. Muhammad seems like a super interesting guy, too, much like Joe. They are both very impressive, whether you like them or not!

[deacon blues]

They both used revelation to back up their previous actions. In the final analysis, polygamy was not a winning proposition for either Joseph or Muhammad.

[BriansThoughtMirror]

Haha, nope, it wasn't... It's also funny how similarly they handled polygamy. Some marriages were for love/attraction, some for "dynastic connections". Some very young, some older than he was. He alone was allowed as many wives as he wanted, but the Quran discouraged polygamy for everyone else. Neither he nor Smith had any children from their plural wives.