Go To Our Home Page at WWW.BRITISH-ISRAEL.CA
Click here for Islamic Links
The Plain Truth About Islam
By Peter Salemi
Many people believe that Islam, Judaism, and Christianity are connected in some way or another.. Judaism and Christianity are connected, there is no question about that. But what about Islam? It is true that the Koran (the Bible of the Muslims) mentions Jesus, Mary, John the Baptist etc... But did this information come from God? Is the God of Islam, and the God of the Bible, the same God?
Who is Allah?
The Muslims say that the God of the Bible, and the god of Islam, are one and the same God? But what are the origins of Allah. Did he come from the Bible? Or from ARABIAN PAGANISM?
The word "Allah" is a contraction of "Al-ilah," 'al' meaning "the" and "ilah" meaning 'god.' Early biographers said that "al-ilah" comes from 'El" or 'Elohim," meaning the God of the Bible but, "Early scholars attested the diffusion of this belief SOLELY TO CHRISTIAN AND JUDAIC INFLUENCES. BUT NOW a growing number of authors maintain that this idea [of Allah] had older roots IN ARABIA..." (Studies in Islam, Swartz, p.12, emphasis mine).
Ceasare Farah concludes: "There is NO REASON therefore, to accept the idea that Allah passed to the Muslim from the Christians and the Jews" (Islam, p.28, emphasis mine). We must look for the ORIGINS OF ALLAH AMONG THE ARABIAN DEITIES,and NOT from the Judeo-Christian Bible!
The Arabs had tribal gods in which they worshipped. Every tribe had their own God. "The Quraysh tribe into which Muhammad was born was particularly devoted to ALLAH..." (Islamic Invasion, Morey, p.51, emphasis mine). Before Muhammad was EVER BORN, his tribe worshipped Allah, and he was the CHIEF GOD OF MECCA: "Its been pointed out that Mecca was in the control of the Quraysh tribe into which Muhammad was born" (ibid., pp.39-40). Since they were in control of Mecca, it was only right that their God was chief of the Kaaba in Mecca.
"In pre-Islamic days, called the Days of Ignorance, the religious background of the Arabs was pagan, and basically animistic. Through wells, trees, stones, caves, springs, and other natural objects man could make contact with the deity... At Mekka, Allah was the chief of the gods and THE SPECIAL DEITY OF THE QURAISH, THE PROPHET'S TRIBE. Allah had three daughters: " (Van Ess, John, Meet the Arab, New York, 1943, p. 29)
Zwemer writes: "But history establishes beyond the SHADOW OF A DOUBT that even the PAGAN ARABS BEFORE MUHAMMAD TIME, knew the CHIEF GOD BY THE NAME OF ALLAH...ilah is used for any god and Al-ilah (contracted to Allah, i.e, the god), was the name of the SUPREME. Among the Arabs this term denoted the CHIEF GOD of three hundred and sixty idols...As final evidence, we have the fact that centuries BEFORE Muhammad the Arabian Kaaba, the temple at Mecca, was called Beit Allah, the House of God..." (Muhammad is Mecca, pp.25-26, 31-36, emphasis mine).
Collier's Encyclopedia under "Allah" writes "...there were among the Arabs, long BEFORE THE EMERGENCE OF ISLAM worshippers of a supreme god known as Allah, and the Koran (13:17; 29:61; 31:24 [These show that the Pagan Arab and Muhammad worshipped the same Deity]) LEAVES LITTLE DOUBT that Meccans...recognized the Allah was creator and provider" (p.570, emphasis mine).
The Encyclopedia of Religion of Ethics under "Allah" writes, "The origin of this [Allah] goes back to PRE-ISLAMIC TIMES as Prof. Nokleke has shown...Muhammad found the Meccans believing in a supreme god whom they called Allah...with Allah however they associated minor deities [called] the daughters of Allah. MOHAMMED'S REFORM WAS TO ASSERT THE SOLITARY EXISTENCE OF ALLAH. The first article of the Muslim creed, therefore 'La-ilaha illa-Llahu-means only as addresses by him to the Meccans 'There exist no god except the one whom you ALREADY CALLED ALLAH" (Hastings, p.326, emphasis mine).
"Islam owes the term 'Allah to the HEATHEN ARABS...Muhammad DID NOT find it necessary to introduce an altogether novel deity but CONTEND HIMSELF OF RIDDING THE HEATHEN ALLAH OF HIS COMPANIONS [known as the daughters of Allah...Had he not been accustomed from his YOUTH to the idea of Allah as the supreme god in particular IN MECCA, it may all be doubted whether he would have come forward as a preacher of monotheism" (Ibn Warraq, Why I Am Not A Muslim, p.42, emphasis mine).
"Historians like Vaqqidi have said Allah was actually the chief of the 360 gods being worshipped in Arabia at the time Mohammed rose to prominence. Ibn Al-Kalbi gave 27 names of pre-Islamic deities...Interestingly, not many Muslims want to accept that Allah was already being worshipped at the Ka'ba in Mecca by Arab pagans before Mohammed came. Some Muslims become angry when they are confronted with this fact. But history is not on their side. Pre-Islamic literature has proved this" (G. J. O. Moshay, Who Is This Allah?, Dorchester House, Bucks, UK, 1994, pg. 134, emphasis added)
And Ceasare Farah concludes: "There were hundreds of such deities in Pagan Arabia, of all those mentioned, four appear to be most popularly revered ON THE EVE OF ISLAM: AL-UZZA, ALLAT, AND MANAT. All three female deities, popularly worshipped by the tribes of Hijaz, they were regarded as the DAUGHTERS OF ALLAH, THE GOD WHO HEADED THE ARABIAN PANTHEON WHEN MUHAMMAD BEGAN TO PREACH ALLAH WAS THE PARAMOUNT DEITY" (Islam, emphasis mine).
So the Allah that the Meccans worshipped was
Chief god at Mecca in the Kaaba
The same god Muhammad was proclaiming and worshipped by him and the pagan Arabs.
He was worshipped centuries before Muhammad.
Allah was the tribal deity of Quraysh, Mohammed's tribe, and was the supreme god of Mohammed's youth.
But now we seem to have a contradiction in history about the chief of God the Kaaba? Even though history shows that Allah was the chief god of the Quraysh, and the Kaaba. We also see a god called HUBAL WHO WAS THE CHIEF GOD OF THE KAABA, AND OF THE QURAYSH TRIBE! How can this be? Is there a contradiction in history? Let's look at some quotes from historians and scholars about Hubal, and then let's answer this question logically and from the foundations of history.
"Among the gods worshipped by the Quraysh, the GREATEST WAS HUBAL...The Quraysh had several idols in and around the Kaaba. THE GREATEST OF THESE WAS HUBAL" (F.E. Peters, The Hajj, pp.24-25, emphasis mine).
"Hubal was the PRINCIPAL DEITY [in Mecca] THE GOD OF THE MOON..." (Concise Encyclopedia of Islam, p.179, emphasis mine).
"...of the 360 idols set up in the Kaaba, the MOST IMPORTANT WAS HUBAL, THE GOD OF THE MOON...IT WAS SET UP IN THE KAABA, and became the PRINCIPAL IDOL OF THE MECCANS..." (ibid., p.161, emphasis mine).
"HUBAL WAS THE CHIEF GOD OF THE KAABA" (George W. Braswell, JR, Islam, p.44, emphasis mine).
"...THE MAIN GOD OF THE SHRINE [was] HUBAL" (Neighboring Faiths, Winfried, Corduan, p.78, emphasis mine).
JUST LIKE ALLAH:
Hubal was the greatest god of the Kaaba
Supreme god of the Quraysh tribe.
Hubal was the chief god of Mecca.
How do we reconcile this obvious contradiction in history? Is this a contradiction? ABSOLUTELY NOT! We have found in our research that HUBAL IS ALLAH, THEY ARE ONE AND THE SAME GOD!
The Funk and Wignall's Dictionary of Folklore, Mythology and Legend says under "Allah," "The pre-Mohammedan Arabic god HUBAL HAD AS HIS TITLE ALLAHU meaning 'THE GOD'...As the PATRON OF THE KAABA AT MECCA, ALREADY SUPREME he was MAINTAINED IN MOHAMMEDAN THEOLOGY AS THE ONE GOD..." (vol.1, p.36, emphasis mine).
Under "Hubal," or "Hobal," the same dictionary says, "Some say that Hubal, was the REAL NAME OF ALLAHU, THE CHIEF GOD OF PRE-ISLAMIC TIMES, WHO BECAME THE ONE GOD OF ISLAM..." (ibid., p.499, emphasis mine).
"In Mecca, a god Hubal was worshipped, who may be IDENTICAL WITH ALLAH" (H. Ringgren and A.V Strom, Religions of Mankind, p.178, emphasis mine).
Muslims don't want to admit what history shows, the Hubal is Allah. Robert Morey writes: "Religious claims often fall before results of hard sciences such as archaeology...the hard evidences demonstrates that the god Allah was a pagan deity. In fact he was the MOON GOD[ Hubal]..." (The Moon God, Allah, p.1, emphasis mine). People of religion can say and believe anything they want, but it's what the facts show, that prove whether you are right or wrong! Hubal IS ALLAH!
In Ibn Warraq's book, Why I Am Not A Muslim, he writes about Hubal, and who he really is: "Hubal was worshipped at Mecca, and his idol...Hubal's position next to the black stone [ Muslims kiss this stone today] suggests there is some CONNECTION between the two..."Wellhausen thinks that HUBAL WAS ORIGINALLY THE BLACK STONE...Wellhausen also points out that God is called 'Lord of the Kaaba,' and 'Lord of the Territory,' of Mecca in the Koran. The prophet railed against the homage rendered at the Kaaba to the goddesses Allat, Manat, and Al- Uzza, when the pagans called them the daughters of God, but MUHAMMAD STOPPED SHORT OF ATTACKING THE CULT OF HUBAL. From this Wellhausen concludes that HUBAL IS NONE OTHER THAN ALLAH 'THE GOD' OF THE MECCANS" (p.39, emphasis mine). Why wouldn't Muhammad preach against the "CHIEF OF THE DEITIES," and say the ALLAH WAS THE GREATEST? Even the Dictionary of Islam had to admit: "ITS REMARKABLE that there is NO DISTINCT ALLUSION TO THE IDOL [Hubal] in the WHOLE QURAN" (Thomas Patrick Hughes B.D., p.181, under "Hubal," emphasis mine). He's RIGHT! It is quite remarkable that the chief of the Kaaba is not even mentioned in the Quran at all. How can MUHAMMAD TOTALLY EXCLUDE HIM?
In addition to the quote above about Allah being 'Lord of the Kaaba," Muhammad evidently said that he "received commandments to worship the 'Lord of the House' i.e. the Kaaba" (Muhammad, Tor Andrea, p.31). So its obvious he was talking about the pre-Islamic deity Hubal!
Well Muhammad did not exclude him for the simple reason: "There are stories in the sira of pagan Meccans praying to Allah while standing besides the IMAGE OF HUBAL" (Watt, Mohammed's Mecca, p.39, emphasis mine). They are one and the same! Remember The Allah of the Meccans is the same Allah that Muhmmad was proclaiming to them!
Robert Morey writes on his cultbusters website:
"Was the title al-ilah (the god) used of the moon god? YES!
"Was the word "Allah" derived from "al-ilah"? YES!
"Was the pagan "Allah" a high god in the pantheon of deities"? YES!
"Was he worshipped at the Kaaba? YES!
"Did they place the statue of Hubal on top of the Kabba? YES!
"At the time was Hubal considered the Moon god?YES!
"Was the Kaaba thus the "house of the moon god"? YES!
"Did the name "Allah" eventually REPLACE that of Hubal as the name of the Moon God? YES!"
"...Hubal the moon god, was the central focus of prayer at the KAABA and the people prayed to Hubal USING THE NAME ALLAH" (Morey at www.cultbusters.com, emphasis mine).
The origin of Allah and Allat were as sun and moon deities. (Zwemmer, (Ed) The Daughters of Allah, By Winnett, F V, MWJ, Vol. XXX, 1940, pg. 120-125).
This had to be the case that Hubal and Allah are one and the same as this source says: "What deity did the Quraysh represent? The Meccan shrine accommodated Hubal...but Hubal is NOT mentioned in the Quran...a building accommodating Hubal MAKES NO SENSE AROUND A STONE REPRESENTING ALLAH [as Warraq noted originally Hubal was the black stone] if Quraysh REPRESENTED ALLAH. What is Hubal doing in the shrine?...Naturally Quraysh were polytheists, but they [the different gods] were house separately. NO PRE-ISLAMIC SANCTUARY, STONE OR BUILDING IS KNOWN TO HAVE ACCOMMODATED MORE THAN ONE [chief] MALE GOD, as opposed to one male god and a female...if Allah was a pagan god [as we have seen he is] like any other QURAYSH WOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED HUBAL TO SHARE THE SANCTUARY WITH HIM...One who have to fall back on the view that ALLAH MIGHT SIMPLY BE ANOTHER NAME FOR HUBAL, as Wellhausen suggests; just as the Israelites knew Yahweh as Elohim, so the Arabs KNEW HUBAL AS ALLAH, MEANING GOD" (Muslim Trade and the Rise of Islam, pp.192-193, emphasis mine).
Origin of the Kaaba
The Kaaba is a cube like structure built for Allah, where Muslims go to kiss the black stone, and pray to Allah. It is the central shrine for all Muslims.
Muslims believe that the shrine was built by Abraham and Ishmael, and the instructions were given to them by God. But history shows a different story.
"It is virtually certain that Abraham NEVER reached Mecca" (Watt, p.136, Muslim and Christian Encounters, emphasis mine).
"According to Muslim Tradition, Abrah, and Ishmael built the Kaaba...But outside these traditions there is absolutely NO EVIDENCE for this claim-whether epigraphic, archaeological, or documentary. Indeed Snouck Hurgronje has shown that Muhammad INVENTED the story to give his religion an Arabian origin...at the same time incorporating into Islam the Kabah with all its historical and religious associations for the Arabs" (Warraq, Why I Am Not A Muslim, p.131, emphasis mine).
What is its real origins?
"In pre-Mohammedan times it was believed that the stone had fallen from the moon and was sacred to the OLD MOON GOD HUBAL. The stone was enclosed in a small square temple known as the KABAH, which contained many lesser gods..." (Robert Payne, The History of Islam, p.4, emphasis mine).
"...the Kabah was in fact built as a shrine for the MOON-GOD" (Morey; The Moon God Allah, p.9, emphasis mine).
Maxine Robinson Says, "The Kaaba at Mecca, which may have been INITIALLY A SHRINE OF HUBAL ALONE..." (Life of Muhammad, p.40, emphasis mine).
"At the time of Muhammad, the Kaaba was officially dedicated to the GOD HUBAL..." (Karen Armstrong, Muhammad, p.61, emphasis mine).
Mohammed's Religious Background
When you look into Mohammed's background we see that he was a WORSHIPPER OF HUBAL, the ALLAH OF THE KAABA! And when we understand his background, Islam becomes more and more clear.
The RELIGION OF HIS GRANDFATHER was the RELIGION OF HUBAL!
At Mohammed's birth, Mohammed's grandfather, who was the KEEPER OF THE KAABA, did this in front of HUBAL: "After his [Mohammed's] birth his mother sent to tell his grandfather Abd al-Muttalib that she gave birth to a boy...It is alleged that Abd al-Muttalib took him before (the idol) HUBAL IN THE MIDDLE OF THE KAABA,where he stood and PRAYED TO ALLAH, thanking him for his gift" (Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad, pp.66-68; see also F.E. Peters, A Reader of Classical Islam, p.45, emphasis mine). This confirms Watt's statement that: " "There are stories in the sira of pagan Meccans praying to Allah while standing besides the IMAGE OF HUBAL" (Watt, Mohammed's Mecca, p.39, emphasis mine)
It is interesting to note that Mohammed's father was called "Abdullah," meaning "the servant of Allah." Now if Mohammed's grandfather was worshipper of Hubal, and named his son and Hubal, Allah, then Hubal is Allah!
In this story about Mohammed's birth GJO Moshay writes: "In this revealing incident in the life of Mohammed's grandfather. Who was 'the Lord'? Was it Allah? What about Hubal?...From Ibn Ishaq's account here, praying to Allah was the SAME THING AS PRAYING TO HUBAL. They could practically mean the SAME THING. As HA-BAAL or HU-BAAL means 'the Lord' so Al-ilah' or 'Allah' means 'the god'''(Who is this Allah, p.136, emphasis mine). Hubal is ALLAH!
Here is another example: "For two years Muhammad remained in his [grandfather's] house overlooking the KAABA, while the old man TAUGHT HIM THE CEREMONIES ATTACHED TO THE WORSHIP OF THE MOON GOD, [Hubal] AND TOLD HIM THE LEGENDS OF THE PLACE: (Robert Payne, The History of Islam, p.11, emphasis mine).
"Muhammad was raised in the religion of the moon god, Allah" (Morey, The Moon god Allah, p.11, emphasis mine). THIS IS MUHAMMAD'S BACKGROUND
Here is an example of one of the legends that was taught to Muhammad by his grandfather.In the Koran we read about the Christian King of Abyssina who wanted to take over the Kaaba, and make it Christian. Look at what Muhammad says in the Koran: "Have you not considered how God [Allah] dealt with the army of the elephant? Did he not confound their stratagem and send against them flocks of birds which pelted them with clay stones..." (Surah 105). This happened in the year of his birth, and it was still fresh in the minds of the Meccans. Also his grandfather at the time witnessed it first hand, and taught Muhammad this story as a boy.
Look at what Robert Payne says in his book about this incident, for proof of who Allah really is, and what Muhammad learned from his grandfather: "Abd al-Muttalib offered a last prayer to the MOON GOD [Hubal] to preserve the Kaaba...The Meccans expected the Abyssinians to Advance but HUBAL HEARD THEIR PRAYERS, overnight, and epidemic perhaps an aggravated form of small pox swept through the army...No one could doubt the power of the MOON GOD [Hubal] who kept the army of the elephants at bay" (The history of Islam, p.7, emphasis mine). Now he told Muhammad that Allah, i.e Hubal was the one that saved them. This incident was still fresh in the minds of the Meccans at the time of Muhammad. Why is it in the Koran, you don't hear the Meccans rebuking Muhammad saying that Hubal saved them and not Allah if these two deities were different. Instead there is silence from the Meccans about Hubal because they already knew who ALLAH WAS, HUBAL, THE ALLAH OF THE MECCANS, AND Muhammad UNDERSTOOD IT THE SAME WAY, THAT'S WHY THERE IS NO DISPUTE!
The Religion of Allah and Hubal Are the Same
Payne noted that Muhammad was taught the "ceremonies" attached to Hubal. What are those ceremonies?
Here at the time of the new moon, following the summer solstice, at the hottest time of the year, the ancient pilgrims worshipped the Moon God [Hubal]...and then REVERENTLY KISSED IT [the Black Stone], AND AFTER THEY WALKED AROUND THE KAABA SEVEN TIMES" (ibid., p.4, emphasis mine).
"Allah is not a generic Arabic word for God but a name of a particular god among many deities traditionally honored in ancient times by nomadic tribes in Arabia. Allah was the chief god among the approximately 360 idols in the Kaaba in Mecca...Allah is a contraction of AL-ilah, the name of the Moon God [Hubal] of the local Quraysh, Mohammed's tribe...Allah' symbol was a crescent moon, which Muhammad carried over into Islam. This symbol is seen on Mosques, minarets, shrines, and ARAB FLAGS" (David Hunt, In Defense of the Faith, pp.37-38, emphasis mine).
In the book Behind the Veil, it notes the ceremony about kissing the stone: "Al-Burkhari records a famous statement made by Umar...which demonstrates the CONFUSION OF THE MUSLIMS. The Burkhari says: 'When Umar ibn al-Khattab reached the black stone, he kissed it and said, 'I know that you are stone that does not hurt nor benefit. If I had Not SEEN THE PROPHET KISS YOU, I would not have kissed you'...ALL scholars confirm this statement" (p.285, emphasis mine) Note: Authors of this Behind the Veil could not give their names for fear of their lives but you can find this book on line at: http://answering-islam.org/BehindVeil/index.html
Why did Muhammad kiss the stone? The stone that was sacred to Hubal. If Allah was different that Hubal, That would have been blasphemy "joining other gods with God" as the Koran says! Hubal and Allah are the same deity, there is no question about it!
What about the Pilgrimage?
"The Pilgrimage is a SURVIVAL OF THE ANCIENT ARABIAN PILGRIMAGES TO THE HOLY STONES. Almost none of the customs attended upon the pilgrimage DERIVE FROM MUHAMMAD TIMES...Muhammad changed the sevenfold tawaf or cicumambulation of the Kaaba only in one respect BEFORE HIS TIME it was performed naked" (Payne, The History of Islam, p.79, emphasis mine). These customs were done to Hubal long before Muhammad, and none of these customs started in Mohammed's time, they were already there. Muhammad just changed ONE thing, being naked that's all.
"...several pre-Islamic ritual practices ESPECIALLY THOSE CONNECTED WITH THE KAABA CULT IN MECCA WERE CONTINUED BY MUHAMMAD..." (Frederick Denny, An Introduction to Islam, p.56, emphasis mine).
"...important Muslim practices such as visiting the Kaaba, and the many details of the ceremony of Hajj, including visits of Safa and Marwa, and also throwing stones against the stone pillar symbolizing Satan, were ALL PRE-ISLAMIC PRACTICES OF PAGAN ARABIA" (Answering Islam, Norman Geisler, p.309, emphasis mine).
"Pagan ritualism also CONTRIBUTED to the religious world into which Muhammad was born...The PAGANS OF PRE-ISLAMIC ARABIA taught that everyone should bow and pray towards Mecca during certain times of the day. Everyone should make a pilgrimage to Mecca to worship at the Kaaba at least once in their life. Once they arrive at Mecca, the PAGANS RAN AROUND THE KAABA SEVEN TIMES KISSED THE BLACK STONE...The pagan rites comprised the religion into which MUHAMMAD WAS RAISED BY HIS FAMILY [who were worshippers of Hubal-the Allah of Mecca] IS ACKNOWLEDGED BY ALL. Thus it is no surprise to find that, as Arab scholar Nazar-Ali has observed: 'Islam RETAINED MANY ASPECTS OF THE PAGAN RELIGION''' (Morey, Islamic Invasion, pp.42-43, emphasis mine).
"Middle Eastern scholar, E.M. Wherry in his monumental work, A Comprehensive Commentary on the Quran shows that worship of Allah and the worship of BAAL (HUBAL) involved the worship of heavenly bodies, the moon, the stars and the sun" (Moshey, Who is this Allah, p.137, emphasis mine). Notice Allah and Hubal or Baal, the religions are exactly the same, because the deities are the same!
Here are some more quotes about the origins of the ceremonies in Islam:
"Islam owes many of its most superstitious details to old ARABIAN PAGANISM especially in the rites and rituals of the pilgrimage to Mecca (see suras 2:153; 22:28-30; 5:1-4; 22:37)...the superstitions connected with the jinn's [Genies] and old folk tales such as those of Ad and Thamud...The entire ceremony of the pilgrimage has been shamelessly taken over from PRE-ISLAMIC PRACTICE...Cicumambulation of a sanctuary was a very common rite practiced in many localities. The pilgrim during his circuit frequently kissed or caressed the Idol. Sir William Muir thinks that the seven circuits of the Kaaba 'were probably emblematical of the revolution of the planetary bodies.' While Zwemer goes so far as to suggest that the seven circuits of the Kaaba, three time rapidly and four times slowly were 'an imitation of the inner and outer planets.'...It UNQUESTIONABLE that the Arabs at a comparatively late period worshipped the sun and other heavenly bodies" (Warraq, pp.35-36, 40, emphasis mine).
Alfred Guillaume, Professor of Arabic, in London says, " THE CUSTOMS OF HEATHENISM has left an indelible mark on Islam, notably in the RITES OF PILGRIMAGE" (Islam, p.6, emphasis mine). Notice how all the sources note that the rituals are from Mecca, where the chief god of Mohammed's tribe dwelt and worshipped Hubal, the Allah of the Kaaba! The religion of Hubal and Allah are one and the same, because Hubal and Allah are one and the same!
Lastly Warraq writes: "Muhammad DID NOT find it necessary to introduce an altogether novel deity, BUT HAD CONTENTED HIMSELF WITH RIDDING THE HEATHEN ALLAH OF HIS COMPANIONS [the daughters of Allah]...Wellhausen also cites pre-Islamic literature where Allah is mentioned as a great deity. Had he not been ACCUSTOM FROM HIS YOUTH to the idea of Allah as the supreme go, in particular IN MECCA, it may be all doubted whether he would have come forward as a preacher of monotheism" (p.42, emphasis mine). Remember Muhammad did not say Allah was great, but that Allah was the GREATEST among the other Gods, acknowledging the pre-Islamic origin of Allah, and his religion.
Some authors don't think that Allah and Hubal are one and the same for the simple reason that Hubal is the god of the moon, and Allah is the creator of all these, and supreme ruler of the Universe. They say that the characteristics of the two are different. But as we have shown Hubal was called supreme and creator. There are more similarities than differences between the two. The only reason why there are some differences between the two, and that Allah NOW, as opposed to BACK THEN, resembles the God of the Bible in SOME NOT MOST WAYS, is for the simple reason that "...Judaic and Christian CONCEPTS abetted the TRANSFORMATION OF ALLAH FROM A PAGAN DEITY [Hubal] to the god of all monotheists...There is NO REASON therefore to accept the idea that Allah PASSED TO THE MUSLIMS FROM THE CHRISTIANS AND THE JEWS" (Ceasare Farah, Islam, p.28, emphasis mine). The Jews and the Christians influenced Muhammad, and changed some of the characteristics of Allah to more resemble the God of the Bible. Then he proclaimed that Allah was the supreme god of all religions. As Morey puts it, "Islam is Heathenism in monotheistic form" (Islamic Invasion, p.43, emphasis mine). Why do you think Muhammad destroyed the Idol of Hubal, when he took over Mecca? Because the influences of the Jews and Christians. He knew that the 2nd Commandment said you shall not make any idols to represent God, so because he heard that from the Jews and Christians he destroyed the idol. He also did not at first preach that all god's were false, but that Allah was the greatest among them. It was only later as he was more and more influenced by the Jews and Christians about the concept of God that began to preach that Allah was the only god. But in the beginning it was not so: "This is seen from the fact that the first of the Muslim creed is not 'Allah is Great' but 'Allah is the greatest' i.e., he is the greatest among the gods. WHY WOULD MUHAMMAD SAY THAT...EXCEPT IN A POLYTHEISTIC CONTEXT?" (The Moon God Allah, p.12, emphasis mine). In Morey's book Islamic Invasion he actually shows more DIFFERENCES THAN SIMILARITIES between the God of the Bible and the god of the Koran.
Some try and compare this version of reverence to the stone at the Kaaba to Jacob's pillar stone in the Bible see Genesis 28. But Jacob did not worship this stone, nor did he kiss it, or circle it. He set it up as a testimony to his faith. Also remember as we have seen time and time again these practices of kissing the stone ORIGINATED IN ARABIAN PAGANISM and Not the Bible! Robert Morey says: "This fact answers the questions. Why is Allah never defined in the Koran? Why did Muhammad ASSUME that the pagan Arabs already KNEW WHO ALLAH WAS?...While they [the pagans] believed that Allah, i.e. the moon god, was the greatest of all the gods and the supreme deity in the pantheon of deities, Muhammad decided that Allah was not ONLY the greatest god by the ONLY GOD" (The moon god Allah, p.11-12, emphasis mine). The pagans and Muhammad worshipped the same deity! Allah or Hubal!
Origins of Hubal
What are the origins of Hubal? Where did He come from?
"It has been suggested by Pockcock that the word Hubal could be from HUBAAL or Hobaal in Hebrew meaning 'the Lord'...God destroyed the Israelites for involving themselves in the worship of this god (Numbers 25:1-3)" (Moshey, Who is this Allah, p.136, emphasis mine).
Another source writes:"Hubal was associated with the Semitic god BA'L [Baal] and with Adonis or Tammuz" (Fabled Cities, Prices and Jinn from Arab Myths and Legends, by Khairat Al- Saleh, p.28, emphasis mine). Hubal is BAAL, that God condemns the worship of all over the Bible. But Baal's origins go back even further than this. He goes back to the BABYLONIAN RELIGION! The religion of Nimrod, see Genesis 10.
In his book the Two Babylon's, by Hislop, he has done a wonderful job of tracing all heathen religions back to Babylon and the Tower of Babel, see Gen 11. When the world was scattered, the people of the world kept their religion that originated with Babylon. This is how we find the Babylonian religion all over the world!
"Herodotus, world traveler and historian of antiquity, witnessed the mystery religions and its rites in numerous countries and mentions how Babylon was the PRIMEVAL SOURCE from which ALL SYSTEMS OF IDOLATRY FLOWED. Bunsen says: 'the religious system of Egypt was derived from ASIA, AND THE PRIMITIVE EMPIRE OF BABEL" (David Todd, The Origins of Easter, p.11, emphasis mine).
Hislop says that the Babylonian god Bel and Baal, are one and the same deity: "Belus or Bel...As BAAL or Beltus with the name of the great male divinity of Babylon...Belus was UNDOUBTEDLY BAAL 'The Lord'...the worship of the 'SACRED BEL' the mighty one who died a martyr for idolatry...the regeneration of his heart [was the new birth or reincarnation of NIMROD OR BEL...we learned that it was under Bel or Belus, THAT IS BAAL" (pp.20, 25, 190-191, 232, emphasis mine). Now notice this quote from the Encyclopedia of Religion and what is says about Allah, and really discovering the truth about who Allah is and who the Muslims today are worshipping: "Allah is a pre-Islamic name...corresponding to the BABYLONIAN BEL [Baal]" (Thomas O'Brian, 1:117, emphasis mine). Hubal, or Allah is Baal or Nimrod the first King of Idolatry, the MUSLIMS ARE WORSHIPPING A MAN NIMROD!
Is it any surprise that "The Daughters of BAAL are three in number...The triad of Baal's daughters is reflected in the triad of ALLAH'S DAUGHTERS according to pre-Islamic Arabs. There is some outside confirmation that the three goddesses ARE DAUGHTERS OF BAAL (see Moslem World 33, No.1 1943, for the daughters of Baal and Allah)" (Mythologies of the Ancient World, Samuel Noah Kramer, p.196, emphasis mine).
The Quraysh ADOPTED ALLAH AS BAAL, and added the goddesses to his cult the same way as Baal had three daughters in the Fertile Crescent. They venerated him and his three female companions in his new House, the Kaaba at Mecca. (Bergsson, Snorri G., Goddesses and Wica worship,'Neo-paganism at its most deceptive form, Islam and Goddess Worship Chpt. IV, pg. 15, 1998-2000)
"And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her,
[Babylon] my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye
receive not of her plagues" (Rev 18:4).
Click here for a very good article on the origins of Allah. http://www.geocities.com/queball23/Allah.html
The following verse in the Quran seems to call into question Hubal being Allah.
"Will ye cry unto Baal and forsake the Best of creators, Allah, your Lord and Lord of your forefathers?" S. 37:125-126 Pickthall
"Here, the author of the Quran distinguishes Allah from Baal which seems to imply that they are not one and the same entity. A couple of responses are in order. First, even though the text distinguishes Baal from Allah, it says nothing about HU-bal. In fact, the word Hubal never appears in the Quran. It seems that the author was unaware that Hubal and Baal were actually one and the same entity. The surrounding context seems to support this:
"And lo! Elias was of those sent (to warn), When he said unto his folk : Will ye not ward off (evil)? Will ye cry unto Baal and forsake the Best of creators, Allah, your Lord and Lord of your forefathers? But they denied him, so they surely will be haled forth (to the doom) Save single-minded slaves of Allah. And we left for him among the later folk (the salutation): Peace be unto Elias! Lo! thus do We reward the good. Lo! he is one of our believing slaves.' S. 37:123-132 Pickthall
"Since this is referring to the time of Elijah, presumably during his showdown with the prophets of Baal on Mt. Carmel (cf. 1 Kings 18), it may be that the author of the Quran didn't realize that the Baal of Elijah's day was none other than the Hubal worshiped at Mecca. Second, we are focusing on the identity of the pre-Islamic Allah, the Allah worshiped by the pagans prior to the advent of Islam. Hence, it is quite possible that through Muhammads influence Allah was transformed from a pagan high god to the true universal God worshiped by Jews and Christians. In other words, Muhammad tried to package Allah as a distinct Being from the false gods such as Hubal/Baal, purifying the pre-Islamic Allah from all pagan elements" (Article; Did the Meccans Worship Yahweh God, Sam Shamoun, emphasis added).
Again because of Christian and Jewish influence Muhammad tried to convert is god to more of the biblical God, but his god was still Baal. Unknown to him was the origins of Hubal. Notice, "
Muhammad A Prophet of God?
There are conflicting versions of the call of Muhammad in the Koran. Montgomery Watt says, "Unfortunately, there are several alternative versions of these events" (For a full treatment of this contradiction see W.Montgomery Watt, Mohammed's Mecca, pp.54-68).
There are four conflicting accounts of this original call to be a prophet.
We are told in Sura 53:2-18 and sura 81:19-24 that Allah personally appeared to Muhammad and did signs in front of him.
Later on we see sura 16:104 and sura 26:192-194, that the "holy Spirit" called him.
The third account of his call is given in sura 15:8 where we are told "the angels" came down and called him. Later on this account was amended and we are told the only Gabriel called him.
The last account of his call is the most popular one the angel Gabriel called him to be a prophet sura 2:92. In the Bible However ONLY GOD calls people to be prophets. So here we see the first of many differences between the Bible and the Koran.
Another problem that Muhammad creates for himself is, the prophethood according to Muhammad can ONLY come from the line of ISAAC AND JACOB. In the Koran we read: "And we bestowed on him Isaac and Jacob, and we ESTABLISHED THE PROPHETHOOD AND SCRIPTURE AMONG HIS SEED" (Sura 29:27). Yusuf Ali adds "Abraham" into the text so Muhammad can qualify, but "Abraham is not in the Arabic text, which the Muslims claim is perfectly preserved. So according to the Koran, Muhammad CANNOT BE A PROPHET. Prophets only come from Isaac and Jacob's seed, and no other race of people can claim the office of prophethood. Also the scriptures are eastblished with Isaac and Jacob. So according to the Koran the only ones who possess God's word in a book ARE THE ISRAELITES, so the Koran is NOT THE WORD OF GOD!
Norman Geisler in his book Islam, examines the call of Muhammad and he says, "Muhammad himself questioned the divine origin of the experience. At first he thought that he was being deceived by a jinn or evil spirit. One of the most widely respected biographers, M.H. Haykal, speaks vividly of Mohammed's plaguing fear that he was DEMON POSSESSED: 'Stricken with panic, Muhammad arose and asked himself, 'What did I see? Did POSSESSION OF THE DEVIL WHICH I FEARED ALL ALONG COME TO PASS...?Haykal notes that Muhammad had feared demon possession before, but his wife talked him out of it" (p.155, emphasis mine). Even in the Koran the people of Mecca knew about his possession. In sura 15:6 it reads "they [the people of Mecca] say: 'O thou to whom the warning hath been sent down, thou art surely possessed by a djinn [evil spirit]." See also Sura 81:23.
Geisler also writes that "Another characteristic often associated with OCCULT REVELATIONS is contact with the dead (CF. Deuteronomy 18:18:9-14; Isaiah 8:19, God condemns it). Haykal relates an occasion when 'the Muslims overheard him [Muhammad] asked, 'are you calling the dead?'and the prophet answered, 'They HEAR ME NO LESS THAN YOU DO, EXCEPT THERE ARE UNABLE TO ANSWER ME.' According to Haykal even frankly admits that 'There is hence no reason to DENY the event of the prophet's visit to the cemetery of Baqi AS OUT OF PLACE CONSIDERING MOHAMMED'S PSYCHIC POWER OF COMMUNICATION WITH THE REALMS OF REALITY AND HIS AWARENESS OF SPIRITUAL REALITY THAT SURPASS THAT OF ORDINARY MEN''' (Answering Islam, pp.155-156, emphasis mine). Muhammad was right, he was possessed by a demon!
Other proofs of soothsaying or the psychic ability of Muhammad are seen throughout his life, Mr. Ankerburg says: "Guillaume describes Mohammed's other spiritualistic contacts and revelations: 'On the way back to Mecca a number of JINN OR SPIRITS ARE SAID TO HAVE JOSTLED HIM...From the books of tradition we learn that the prophet was subject to ecstatic seizures. He has reported to have said that when an inspiration came to him he felt as it were the painful sounding of a bell...At other times visions came to him in sleep...in its early stages Mohammed's verses were couched in the SEMITIC FORM OF MANTIC ORACULAR UTTERANCE...VEILING OF THE HEAD AND THE USE OF RHYMED PROSE WERE MARKS OF THE ARABIAN SOOTHSAYER, WHILE THE FEELING OF PHYSICAL VIOLENCE AND COMPULSION...THE OUTWARD APPEARANCE OF 'POSSESSION'...SEEMED TO THE ONLOOKERS TO INDICATE MADNESS OF DEMON POSSESSION (Facts on Islam, p.12, emphasis mine). The seizures, the foaming at the mouth, the spirits hitting the person, can all be associated with the Occult and soothsaying.
This is also another form of Shamanism: "Muhammad was a SHAMAN who controlled the Jinn i.e. the spirits who lived in rocks, waters and trees (Hadith vol. 1, no 740; vol.5, no.199)" (Islamic Invasion, section 2, Appendix A, p.191, emphasis mine). Shamanism is another form of the Occult religion!
Muhammad in the Bible?
Muslims apologetics, such books like Muhammad in the Bible, by Abdu L-Ahad Dawud, claim that the Bible predicts the coming of Muhammad. Let's examine the evidence to see if that is so.
In Deuteronomy 18:15-18 God promised Moses: "I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him." Muslims believe this prophecy was fulfilled in Muhammad, as the Koran itself claims when it refers to the "unlettered prophet," whom they mention in their own scriptures, in the law and the Gospels" (Sura 7:156). Let see if this is true since the Koran claims to be free from error, see Sura 18:1.
This prophecy could not be a reference to Muhammad for several reasons. First it is clear that the term "from among their brethren" means fellow Israelites in the Bible and not gentiles.
The term "brethren" when read in context can only refer to the twelve tribes of Israel as the opening verses of chapter 18 show:
"The Levitical priests, that is, all the tribe of Levi, shall have no portion or inheritance with Israel ... They shall have no inheritance among their brethren." (vv. 1-2)
Once more, in chapter 17:14-15 the Israelites are told to put one of their "brethren" as king over them, never a foreigner. The fact is that Israel at no time in their history have ever put an Ishmaelite "brother" as king, but always an Israelite i.e. Saul, David, proving that the word does not refer to any nation outside of the twelve tribes of Israel.
Another scripture in Deut 15:12 says: "And if thy brother a HEBREW MAN OR A HEBREW WOMAN..." The word "brother" is the exact word in Deut 18:15 for "brethren." so God is being specific about which brethren he is talking about, and Muhammad is NOT a Hebrew!
Notice also in verse 15 in a newer version of the Bible that makes it clear: "YHWH your God will raise up for YOU a prophet like me from AMONG YOUR OWN PEOPLE...I will raise up for them a prophet like you from AMONG THEIR OWN PEOPLE...(V.15, 18 NRSV). The context is fellow Israelites.
As shown earlier the prophethood according to Muhammad can ONLY come from the line of ISAAC AND JACOB. In the Koran we read: "And we bestowed on him Isaac and Jacob, and we ESTABLISHED THE PROPHETHOOD AND SCRIPTURE AMONG HIS SEED" (Sura 29:27).
He did not speak to God face to face they way Moses did. He did not perform signs and wonders the way Moses did (Deut 34:11), in fact Muhammad admits he can't do miracles (see sura 2:111; 3:180-181, and he claimed to get his revelations from an angel not God, see sura 25:33-34; 17:106-107.
Finally, the Quran bears witness that Muhammad was not the Prophet like Moses, since he could not do what the latter did:
But (now) when the Truth has come to them from Ourselves, they say, "Why are not (signs) sent to him (Muhammad), like those which were sent to Moses?" Sura. 28:48
Even more amazing than the Quran bearing witness that Muhammad was unlike Moses, is the fact that the earliest Muslim biographer, Ibn Ishaq, in his Sira RasulAllah, testifies that Moses wrote of Jesus:
When the Christians of Najran came to the apostle the Jewish rabbis came also and they disputed one with the other before the apostle. Rafi said, `you have no standing,' and he denied Jesus and the Gospel; and a Christian said to the Jews, `you have no standing' and he denied that Moses was a prophet and denied the Torah. So God sent down concerning them: `The Jews say the Christians have no standing; and the Christians say the Jews have no standing, yet they read the Scriptures. They do not know on the day of resurrection concerning their controversy,' i.e., each one reads in his book the confirmation of what he denies, so that the Jews deny Jesus though they have the Torah in which God required them by the word of Moses to hold Jesus true; while in the Gospel is what Jesus brought in confirmation of Moses and the Torah he brought from God: So each one denies what is in the hand of the other. (Alfred Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad, p.258) .
The only person who fits this prophetic profile is Jesus Christ the Lord. This is due to the following reasons:
Duet 33:2. The prophecy of Sinai, Seir and Paran is not a prophecy of Judaism, Christianity and Islam as Badawi erroneously assumes. Paran and Seir are located near Egypt in the Sinai Peninsula, as any good Bible map will demonstrate. It is purely wishful thinking to claim that Seir refers to Jesus' ministry in Palestine, or that Paran is near Mecca, when Paran was thousands of miles away near southern Palestine in northeastern Sinai!
Proof of this can be found in the Holy Bible itself:
"And the children of Israel took their journeys out of the wilderness of Sinai; and the cloud (of God) rested in the wilderness of Paran." Numbers 10:12
"And afterward the people (Israelites) removed from Hazeroth, and pitched in the wilderness of Paran." Numbers 12:16
"And Moses by the commandment of the Lord sent them from the wilderness of Paran... And they went and came to Moses, and to Aaron, and to all the congregation of the children of Israel, unto the wilderness of Paran, to Kadesh..." Numbers 13:3,26
"These be the words which Moses spake unto all Israel on this side of Jordan in the wilderness, in the plain over against the Red sea, between Paran, and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Dizahab." Deuteronomy 1:1
All these verses prove that Paran could not possibly be Mecca but a locale near Sinai, since Moses and the Israelites never settled in that part of Arabia. Hence, Badawi's assertion fails in the light of the biblical evidence.
Furthermore the prophecy speaks of "Yahweh" coming not Muhammad. And he comes with ten thousand of his saints, not soldiers as Muhammad did to Mecca. There is no basis in this text for Mohammed's invasion of Mecca.
Finally, this prophecy was for a "blessing to Israel." (v.1) not for the Arabs.
For other Islamic Biblical references refuted go to Answering -Islam at this page for a full examination.
The Mad Prophet and Idol Shepherd
Yet The Bible does mention Muhammad, but as false prophet. The Bible mentions Buddha as well. That we will examine in another paper at a later time.
Cosmas Megalommitis writes that Zechariah prophesies of the true shepherd which is Jesus Christ, and the idol shepherd which is Muhammad, " And the LORD said unto me, Take unto thee yet the instruments of a foolish shepherd" (Zechariah 11:15–16), which is of great importance. This "Foolish shepherd” could be "identified as Mohammed. It is interesting that Zechariah later explains the cause of the failure of the mission initially foreseen for Mohammed:" “[he] does not care for the perishing, or seek the wandering, or heals the maimed, or nourishes the sound, but devours the flesh of the fat ones, tearing off even their hoofs. Woe to the IDOL shepherd, who deserts the flock! May the sword smite his arm and his right eye! Let his arm be wholly withered, his right eye utterly blinded!” (vv. 16–17) If all the difficulties and problems of Islam after the death of Mohammed and the assassination of the first Imam, Ali (“his arm”), are due to the “mistakes” of the Prophet, these consist of the omission of two of his tasks: the Prophet did not take care of “those who risk being struck down” and did not seek the wandering, i.e. scattered Israel.." Instead Muhammad pursued the Arabic peoples and their paganism. (by Cosmas Megalommitis his paper Elizabeth II on the Throne of David and Solomon).
Let's go through this prophecy verse by verse:
"And the LORD said unto me, Take unto thee yet the instruments of a foolish shepherd." A shepherd in the Bible is a Ruler. David was called to shepherd his people etc.. Muhammad came from the ruling family of Mecca and "he was distantly related to the Arab royal family of Hashim" (Morey p.69). The "foolish" part of this shepherd means, "Assume the character of a bad ("foolish" in Scripture is synonymous with wicked, Psa_14:1) shepherd ..." (JFB Commentary). This shepherd or ruler is totally ignorant of God's will and law therefore wicked which Muhammad was. "The Old Testament remained inaccessible to the early Muslims and the Prophet...[Muhammad] had no direct access to the Bible in Arabic" (Share your faith with a Muslim, Haqq, pp.28, 31, emphasis added).
" For, lo, I will raise up a shepherd in the land, which shall not visit those that be cut off, neither shall seek the young one, nor heal that that is broken, nor feed that that standeth still: but he shall eat the flesh of the fat, and tear their claws in pieces." (16). As a result of the Jews rejecting the true Shepherd, Jesus Christ, for "30 pieces of silver," verse 12, God raises up a foolish, wicked, or Idol Shepherd (v.17). This is to show the Jews the difference between being under the rule of the Good Shepherd, Jesus, and the false Shepherd, Muhammad.
This Idol Shepherd, "shall not visit those that be cut off, neither shall seek the young one, nor heal that that is broken, nor feed that that standeth still." He does the opposite of what Jesus does, see Isaiah 61:1. Instead of taking care of the flock which is the Jews, he " shall eat the flesh of the fat, and tear their claws in pieces." This means, "Flesh of the fat" "shall spoil the substance of the rich;'' (Gills Exposition of the Entire Bible), and "tears their claws in pieces" means, "expressing cruel voracity; tearing off the very hoofs (compare Exo_10:26), giving them excruciating pain, and disabling them from going in quest of pasture." (JFB Commentary). Did Muhammad do this to the Jews and the rich people of the Land? Yes he did!
Notice what history says, "The Muslims began raiding caravans for financial gain...An important battle for the prophet occurred at Badr in March 624. Muhammad had led three hundred men against a large caravan of merchants enroute to Mecca. The booty won by raiders was said to be worth the equivalent of 50, 000 dollars today-a needed infusion of wealth to carry forward their military task" (Unveiling Islam, Caner, pp.47. 49).
During these attacks on caravans he persecuted the Jews, "...the Jews continued to reject his claims of prophet hood and began criticizing him...he [Muhammad] realized that the Jews posed a real danger...Muhammad decided to attack the Jewish tribe of Nadir...The Prophet had been well aware of the wealth of the departing [Jewish tribe of] Nadir, whose land was divided between Muslims; Muhammad's share made him financially independent" (Warraq, pp.93, 95). Eventually all the Jews were expelled from the Land of Arabia. Their wealth and lands were gone thus fulfilling the first and second part of Zechariah's prophecy. This campaign continued against the Jews and Christians from Muhammad's time, through the expansion of the Islamic empire right down til today. Many verses in the Koran show the commands to kill Christians and the Jews (see below).
"Woe to the idol ["Idolatrous" Darby's Translation] shepherd that leaveth the flock! the sword shall be upon his arm, and upon his right eye: his arm shall be clean dried up, and his right eye shall be utterly darkened." (v.17). Muhammad since he preached to obey Allah who is Baal and told his followers to go and worship at an idolatrous shrine for Baal can be considered an "idolatrous shepherd."
He "leaveth the flock." Muhammad at first joined in the worship of the Jews trying to convert them to Islam and have them accept his prophet hood. Then , when it was obvious that the Jewish merchants were not going to become his disciples Muhammad decided to drop the observance of Jewish rites. He changed the direction of prayer from Jerusalem to Mecca, dropped the Saturday Sabbath and adopted the pagan Friday Sabbath. He once again adopted the pagan religious rites in which he had been raised by his family" (Morey, p.82).
"the sword shall be upon his arm, and upon his right eye." After Muhammad left the Jews and took their wealth. Then gathered enough followers that "his forces had grown sufficiently so that he now had a large army in the field...[he] then turned his attention again to Mecca...with an army of thousands of followers, forced Mecca to surrender to his leadership. Muhammad then became the undisputed political leader of Mecca as well as its undisputed religious head" (ibid, p.83, 84). The "Arm" means -" the secular power;" and the "right eye" means - the ecclesiastical state." (Clarke's Commentary), which Muhammad was the leader of them both! And so Mecca becomes "The center of Islam [and] was now and forever established" (Islam unveiled, p.60). Since then til now the Islamic faith has not changed, "Muhammad owned Arabia...His goal was firmly established-spiritual and governmental...and the community [was] solidified under the name of Allah...So Islamic life remains to this day" (ibid, p.60).
After this Muhammad died his doctrines lived on and the Islamic empire grew. Known as the "prophet of the sword" as Zechariah prophesied that the "the sword [war "Jihad"] shall be upon his arm his [government]" the governmental rulers called "caliphs" meaning "successors" of Muhammad's government that he established, "expanded the kingdom...[and] extended the Muslim empire" (ibid, p.69). In the name of "Jihad" which means, "DJIHAD, holy war. The spread of Islam by arms is a religious duty upon Muslims in general...So it must continue to be done until the whole world is under the rule of Islam.” (Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam, page 89, ). Then after Islam is spread by the sword through the Muhammad's government that he established, "his arm," "his right eye" the ecclesiastical rule Muhammad created as well was established (see below in Jihad section). So here we find in Zachariah the prophecy of the Islamic empire fulfilled to the letter.
In conclusion to Zechariah's prophecy he writes, "his arm shall be clean dried up, and his right eye shall be utterly darkened." This is shows the end of the Islamic empire never again to rise but is "dried up." "The secular power shall be broken, and become utterly inefficient." (Clarkes Commentary). The Islamic Sharia laws has proved to be totally inefficient, especially in these Modern Times. Warraq in his book, Why I Am Not A Muslim dedicates a whole chapter on Islam, Democracy and Human Rights to show its inefficiency in today's world. When we look at the Muslim countries today, if there is wealth it come mostly from the Christian West, and that poverty, discrimination, persecution against non-Muslims, and war plagues these nations that are still locked in the "dark ages."
"his right eye shall be utterly darkened." The ecclesiastical rule of Islam is in total darkness to the true light of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and they have totally rejected the truth of the Bible, and so it still remain in darkness today.
The book of Hosea is very interesting it actually names Muhammad by name and calls him a "mad prophet." Yair Davidy writes: "Regarding the future, some type of ill-fated bond between "Ephraim" and the followers of Islam is spoken of in the Biblical Book of Hosea. It is obvious that the same Biblical Prophecies may legitimately often be understood in several entirely different ways - as they were perhaps intended to be. The verses should be seen in their context The overall message is that the Prophet Hosea condemns Ephraim, uses a word which may be understood to be a form of the name "Mohammed", speaks of the region of Egypt and the east, and predicts a disaster which somehow involves a mad prophet also identified traditionally as "Mohammed": The quotations are from Hosea chapter nine: " Do not be happy Israel, do not rejoice like (other) peoples, for you have sinned (and gone) away from your God...(Hosea 9;1). Note that "Israel" is told not to be "happy" because they have departed from the truth. By "Israel" in this case Ephraim i.e. the Ten Tribes in their place of exile is intended.
Hosea continues: "THEY WILL NOT DWELL IN THE LAND OF THE LORD, EPHRAIM SHALL RETURN TO MITSRAYIM (EGYPT) AND EAT UNSANCTIFIED BROTH IN ASSYRIA (9;3).
"FOR BEHOLD THEY ARE GONE DUE TO LOOTING EGYPT
[Mitsrayim], MOPH [Memphis] GATHERS THEM,
MACHMAD [i.e. Mahomad] BURIES THEM,
THEIR SILVER ENSNARED, THE THORN IN THEIR TENTS [tabernacles]
INHERITS THEM (9;6).
"Note: the word we transliterated from the Hebrew as "Machmad" is the same as the Arabic for Mohammed. The KJ translates the Hebrew "machmad" (i.e. Mahommed) as "pleasant places" and such a rendition is also linguistically feasible. It should be repeated that the language of the Prophets often seems to deliberately allow itself of more than one meaning."
"THE DAYS OF VISITATION HAVE ARRIVED, THE DAYS OF
PAYMENT HAVE COME, ISRAEL SHALL KNOW, THE PROPHET IS EVIL, MAD
[Hebrew: "Meshuga"] A MAN OF SPIRIT [Muhammad
practiced the occult, see below] BECAUSE OF YOUR TRANSGRESSION
[Israel realized their ways are wrong] AND OF GREAT
HATRED [Muhammad's hatred towards Christians and Jews] (Hosea 9;7):
"THE WATCHMEN OF EPHRAIM WAS WITH MY GOD [God's true Followers] BUT THE PROPHET [Muhammad] , IS A HIDDEN SNARE ON ALL HIS PATHS, HATRED [for Israel] IN THE HOUSE OF HIS GOD [Mecca] (Hosea 9;8).
As mentioned above, "The mad prophet" in Hosea 9;7 was considered by some (e.g. Maimonides, 1135-1204, in his "Letter To Yeman") to be a reference to Mohamed and the name of Mohammed (in Hebrew and Arabic: "Machmad") does appear in the previous verse (Hosea 9;). The desert sun, sparse diet, and seclusion (as well as the possible use of hashish and various weeds smoked by some of the Arabs) are liable to play tricks on highly strung spiritually inclined individuals. If the people concerned also suffer from epileptic attacks (as Mohammed did) and delusions of grandeur so is the propensity for error compounded." (From Brit-Am 44 Yair Davidy, emphasis added).
"He (i.e. Muhammad) suffered from Hallucinations of his senses, and to finish his sufferings, he several times contemplated suicide...the majority [of people] took a less charitable view and declared he was insane... (Dictionary of Islam, p.393, emphasis added). Mclintock and Strong's Encyclopedia vol.6, p.406 writes, "...the oldest and most trustworthy narratives...[shows Muhammad] was considered to be possessed of evil spirits." As the Bible says Muhhamd was a mad and evil prophet which had a spirit meaning possession which can be verified in history and the Koran itself.
Ephraim which is Britain today has 3 million Muslims that live there. And many are known terrorists that live there. There has been race riots, and also the Muslims want the British Parliament to institute the Sharia law. Not to mention all the wars the British and the U.S.A. have been drawn into because of the Islamic Nations. The teachings and followers of Muhammad is really a "snare" for Britain in there own land.
Is the Koran the Word of God?
The Quran is at the heart of Islam. If its claims can be substantiated, then Islam is true, and all opposing religious claims, including Christianity, and Judaism, are false.
Of course the claims that the Muslims make for the Quran are, that the Quran is errorless sura 18:1, and there is a copy of it in a table in heaven preserved sura 85:21-22.
The Quran also claims that, "The revelation of this book is from God, The exalted in power, full of wisdom. It is we who have revealed the book to thee in truth" (sura 39:1-2).
Muslim commentators say that the Quran is the final revelation from God (see for more details, Geisler's book, Answering Islam, p.179-80).
Muhammad also makes the claim that, "Can they not consider the Koran? Were it from any other than God, they would surely have found in it many contradictions" (sura 4:84).
So according to the Quran, if there is contradictions in this book, then IT IS NOT THE WORD OF GOD!
Muhammad just helped us dig the grave for the Quran. THE QURAN IS LOADED WITH CONTRADICTIONS!
Let's examine some of the contradictions in the Quran.
The Quran differs whether a day is 1000 years, or 50,000 years see sura 32:4, and 70:4.
On the day of Judgment the infidels attempt to conceal something from God Sura 6:22-23. But in Sura 4"45 we see that the infidels don't attempt to conceal anything.
In sura 56 the people who follow Muhammad will be "a crowd of the former, and few of the latter generations" verse 14. But in verse 39 it says that the people of Muhammad will be "a crowd of the latter generations." Other translations have "multitude" as the word instead of "crowd." so which one is it, a few of the latter, or a crowd?
Commenting on the Exodus, God told the Israelites, "And it was said to them, "Dwell in this city, and eat therefrom what ye will, and say "Hittat" (forgiveness) and enter the gate with prostration's; then we will pardon your offences, we will give increase to the doers of good" (7"162).
Now look at this verse about the same subject: "And when we said, 'Enter this city, and eat therefrom plentiful at your will, and enter the gate with prostration's, and say, "Forgiveness," and we will pardon you your sins, and give an increase to the doers of good:' (sura 2:55). Now if the Quran is without error how do you explain the difference of these two statements? This is god talking to the Israelites, and both times God is quoted wrong. One could understand if this was two people witnessing what was going on and wrote it down, but this is not the case. the Quran is dictating what happened in the past.
5. In sura 22:40-41 God says that people who are persecuted because of believing in God can take up arms and defend themselves. But in Sura 66:9, God commands to make war with people who don't believe.
6. Because Judaism and Christianity were divided into sects, the Quran says that they were not of God, see Suras 30:30-32; 42:11-15.
Yet Islam is divided into many warring sects, and therefore Islam is false as well, according to the Quran.
7. In sura 11:45 we read that Noah's son "was among the drowned," that is he died in the flood. But sura 21:76 we read that God saved "all his kinsfolk from the great calamity..."
8. At first Muhammad was nice to the Christians and the Jews. The Quran says that if they try to convert you to "unbelief" to "forgive them." (sura 2:59, 103). Then Muhammad says to slay all unbelievers (sura 5:55;9:29-30;66:9).
9. There are conflicting views about how many days of creation. In sura 41:8-11 the Quran says that it took 8 days to create everything (4 days + 2 days + 2 days = 8 days). but it only took 6 days according to the Bible (Gen. 1:31). Also in the Quran in suras 7:52, 10:3; 32:3-4 it says God created everything in 6 days. Then it says that everything was created in a twinkling of an eye, see Sura 54:50 So the Quran conflicts with itself and the Bible.
10. In the creation of Adam, God told his angels to worship Adam, see sura 2:32. This breaks his own law , that you should only worship God, see sura 2:77
All over the Quran we read that God is AN ABSOLUTE ONE. Sura 112 says, "he is God alone: God the eternal!He begetteth not, and He is not begotten; and there is none like unto him" It also says that, "And they say God has a son.' No! ..sole Maker of the heavens and the earth!" (sura 2:111; 4:169). Problem is why does the Quran say that, "Have WE not made the earth a couch? And the mountains tent stakes?...And built above you seven solid heavens" (sura 78:8, 11).
"And as to the earth, WE have spread it out..." (sura 50:7).
"WE have not created the heavens and the earth and whatever is in between them in sport: We have not created them but for a serious end" (sura 44:39).
Question: If God is alone, has no son, sole maker of all things, they deny the Trinity saying God is one not three (see sura 5:77). So the question is who is "WE" IN THESE VERSES? Not Just in these verses, but this is all over the Quran. it talks about how "we parted the sea," and "we made a covenant with Israel." Some Muslim scholars say that this is the plural of majesty, like in Genesis 1:26, where God says "Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness." Problem is, recently historians are starting to discover that the plural of majesty was never known among the Hebrews, and it came to be during the Medieval times of the kings of England, in Europe. So who is "we?" Was Muhammad claiming divinity, even though he denied it?
11. To drink wine (sura 16:67; 2:219:4:43), or not to drink wine, (sura 5:92)?
12. Did Jesus die (Sura 19:33; 3:55), or not? (Sura 4:157-158).
13.One part in the Koran God says that you need a mediator to talk to him (Sura 42:51-52), and that it "biffitteth not a man," meaning all men. In another place it says that Moses spoke directly to God, (Sura 7:143; 4:164).
14. In one place it says that Abraham was not an idolater (Sura 3:67; 6:62). but in another place you see Abraham committing idolatry (Sura 6:75-78).
15. In one place Muhammad is told not to bother, in converting unbeliever (Sura 2:6-7), for their fate is sealed. In another place Muhammad is told to attempt their conversion by peaceful means anyway (Sura 24:54).
16. Muhammad first said that it does not matter where you are facing to pray because God is everywhere (Sura 2:109). Then he changed his mind and said that we should pray towards Jerusalem, and then changed his mind again and said we should face Mecca (Sura 2:119-121, 138-144). And this contradiction is all in the same chapter.
17. Finally, one huge contradiction in the Quran that actually is embarrassing to the Muslims. The Quran claims that the book is written in pure Arabic see suras 12:2; 13:37; 16:105; 41:44. Robert Morey says: "The Quran is not perfect Arabic. It contains many grammatical errors, such as suras 2:177, 192; 4:162; 5:69; 7:160; 13:28; 20:66; 63:10. etc..." (Islamic invasion, p.119).
In his book, The Foreign Vocabulary of the Quran, Authur Jeffery documents the fact that the Quran contains over 100 foreign (non-Arabic) words. There are Egyptian Hebrew, Greek, Syriac, Akkadian, Ethiopian and Persian words and phrases in the Quran.
Back to Mohammed's question, "Can they not consider the Koran? Were it from any other than God, they would surely have found it many contradictions." How would you answer Muhammad, if he were still alive today?
For a whole list of contradictions click here.
Does the Bible and the Koran Contradict?
The Koran says that the Bible and the Koran agree with one another, that there is no difference between the two: "We believe in God and that which has been sent down us [Koran], and sent down on Abraham and Ishmael, Isaac and Jacob, and the [Israelitish] tribes, and in that which was given to Moses [the law] and Jesus [the Gospel], and the prophets of their Lord; we make NO DIVISION between any of them..." (Sura 2:130; 3:78). But there are many differences between the two books.
As we have shown earlier, the Quran says creation took place in 8 days, the Bible says 6 days.
We showed you earlier that one of Noah's son died in the flood, but the Bible says all his sons were saved. Sura 11:4-6 says the ark landed on mount Judi, the Bible says it landed on the Mountains of Ararat, which was east of the land of Shinar, most likely in Iran!
The Koran says that Abraham's father was called Azar, sura 6:74, but the Bible says Terah Gen 11:27.
Abraham did not live and worship in Mecca, sura 14:38, but south of Bethel according to the Bible, see Gen 13:3. "It is virtually certain that Abraham NEVER reached Mecca" (Watt, p.136, Muslim and Christian Encounters, emphasis mine).
It was Abraham's son Isaac, not Ishmael that was sacrificed, see Sura 37:100-110 and Gen 22.
He did not build the Kaaba, as history has shown us and it is not in the Bible, see Sura 2:121-122
He was not thrown into the fire by Nimrod as the Koran claims, see Sura 21:60-69. This is a very serious error in Biblical and secular history. Nimrod was dead for centuries while Abraham walked this earth.
The Koran says Joseph was named Aziz Sura 12:21 ff, when his name was really Potiphar Gen 37:36.
It was not Pharaoh's wife that adopted Moses Sura 28:7-8, it was Pharaoh's daughter, Exodus 2:5.
Noah's flood did not take place in Moses day Sura 2:248-9; 7:130-132 compare 7:57 ff. This error cannot be easily swept aside.
The Koran says Haman lived in Egypt during Pharaoh's day in the time of Moses building the tower of Babel, Suras 28:5-7,:38; 29:38; 40:24-25, 38-39. But Haman actually lived in Persia 1000 years later, see the book of Esther. This contradicts secular as well as biblical history.
Crucifixion was not used in Pharaoh's time, the time of Moses, see Sura 7:121. This also contradicts secular history. The Carthaginians are the ones who invented crucifixion, and then the Romans took it from them.
Mary, the mother of Jesus, her father was not Imram Sura 66:12. Muslims say she was a descendant of Aaron, but Sura 3:30-43 plainly says that she gave birth to Mary and Imram said a prayer when she was born, and Zechariah took care of her when she was born. She is also called the "sister of Aaron" Moses' brother, see Sura 19:29. Mary and Aaron live thousands of years apart from each other! Muhammad confused her with Miriam the sister of Moses and Aaron.
She did not give birth to Jesus under a palm tree, but in a stable, see Sura 19:20-23; Luke 2:1-20
Muhammad made up fictional speeches of the people in the Bible, using such words as "Muslim" and "Islam" which were not used in the languages of those people at that time. These people did not call themselves Muslims, see Suras 2:122-126; 3:45-52, 60; 7:120-126; etc...
The test of how the soldiers would drink the water from the stream did not take place in the days of Saul when David defeated Goliath, but many years earlier with Gideon, compare Sura 2:250 with Judges 7:1-8
In Sura 20:87-88, 96 we are told that the Israelites built a golden calf at the suggestion of the "Samaritan." Muhammad did not know that Samaria was founded by the Israelites under King Omri, and then when Assyria took them away captive in 721 B.C. they put other races people into Samaria years after Moses in the wilderness. This also contradicts secular as well as Biblical history.
The Encyclopedia Britannica says, "The deviations [in the Koran] from the Biblical narratives are very marked, and can in most cases be traced back to the LEGENDARY ANECDOTES OF THE JEWISH HAGGADA AND THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPEL. Much has been written concerning the sources from which Muhammad derived his information;there is no evidence THAT HE WAS ABLE TO READ, and his dependence on ORAL COMMUNICATION may explain some of his misconceptions..." (see samples above 13:479, emphasis mine). This is true even in the Koran he called the "Unlettered Prophet" (7:156).
Arabic scholar Edward Sell says, "He certainly did not get them from the Old Testament. The confusion of names is quite remarkable" (Studies, p.225).
"As pagan, Jewish, and Christian traders sat around the fire telling each other favorite stories, they would get the names times and events all jumbled up and confused" (Morey, Islamic Invasion, p.141). The worst to preserve anything is through human memory. Our human memories are too fragile to remember details of history. This is why God commanded Moses and the prophets, and the whole Bible for that matter to be "written in a book," as EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY!
Does the Koran Contradict Secular History?
There are many historical mistakes in the Koran. If the Koran is the word of God then it should not contain any mistakes. Let go through some of them
In Sura 105 Muhammad claims that the army of the elephant was defeated by birds dropping stones of baked clay upon them. According to historical record, Arbah's army withdrew their attack on Mecca after small pox broke out among the troop, see Guilaume Islam p.21 ff.
The Kabba was not built by Abraham but by the pagan for Allah, or Hubal the moon god to encase the black stone that fell out of the sky as we have proved earlier in the book.
One of the greatest errors I have seen from a religious book, is the claim that Alexander the Great, who is called the "Two Horned one," in the Koran was a MUSLIM, he worshipped Allah and lived to a good OLD AGE, see Sura 18:82-98. This error is ironclad. History shows that Alexander the Great was a pagan sodomite, and died at a young age. Daniel 8 in the Bible gives you an accurate description of Alexander the Great. Now some try and dispute this account and say it wasn't Alexander the Great but someone else. The problem with that is, the Only person in ALL OF HISTORY who was called the "two horned one" was Alexander the Great. Also this story matches exactly to the myth of Alexander the Great in a book called the "Romance of Alexander." And Even Muslim scholars recognized that this is speaking of Alexander the Great, see Yusuf Ali's Translation of the Koran. Warraq says: "The account of Alexander the Great (Sura 18:82) is hopelessly confused historically, and we are certain it was based on the Romance of Alexander. At any rate, the Macedonian was NOT A MUSLIM, and he did not live to an OLD AGE, nor was he a CONTEMPORARY OF ABRAHAM, as Muslims contend" (Why I Am Not A Muslim, p.158-159, emphasis added). The Encyclopedia Britannica writes: "His [Mohammed's] account of Alexander introduced as the 'Two Horned One' (Sura 18:82), is derived from the ROMANCE OF ALEXANDER, which was current among the Nestorian Christians of the 7TH CENTURY IN A SYRIAC VERSION" (15:479, emphasis mine). How can we rely on a book that is filled with so many errors as the Koran! Go to this web site for absolute proof that its talking about Alexander the Great.
The Koran denies the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ (Sura 4:157-158). The crucifixion is an absolute historical fact. There are non-Christian, Roman, Christian, and Jewish sources that will testify that Jesus was actually crucified on that Passover day. Read Lee Strobel's book The Case for Christ. He has his Law degree at Yale, and was a former Journalist for the Chicago Tribune who denied Christianity, and put his Law skills to the test. When he was done his investigation he realized that the Bible is Historically accurate and Jesus did die and was resurrected! See also this web site for the crucifixion being a historical fact! http://answering-islam.org/Gilchrist/crucifixion.html and http://answering-islam.org/shamoun/documents.htm
Sources of the Koran
What are the sources of the Koran? Where did these versions of Biblical history and secular history come from? The answer PAGANISM, THE TALMUD, THE APOCRYPHA, AND OTHER BOOKS OF FABLES AND LEGENDS!
The Qur'an claims that it is the Book of God and that ; "falsehood comes not to it from before nor from behind it." It is the true word of God, the epitome of knowledge. Thus runs the myth of the Qur'an, which disproves itself through the occurrence of myth within it!
Whoever peruses the verses of the Qur'an find that they record things that have nothing to do with historical fact. The historical material in the Qur'an has gone beyond the bounds of reality to those of fairy-tales. This was the reason that prompted the unbelieving Arabs who opposed the Islamic dawa in Mecca to say that the Qur'an was nothing but the fairy-tales of the ancients (Sura al-An`am 6:25). One may indeed wonder: are there myths in the Qur'an?
Warraq writes: The prophet TRANSFERRED to ISLAM the beliefs and practices of the HEATHEN PAGAN ARABS, especially into the ceremonies of the pilgrimage to Mecca. And yet Muslims continue to hold that their faith came directly from Heaven, and that the 'Koran is held to be of eternal origin recorded in heaven, lying as it does there upon a preserved table suras 85:21; 6:19, 97...Perhaps Muslims have the unconscious fear that if we can trace the teachings of the Koran to a purely HUMAN AND EARTHLY SOURCE, then the entire edifice of Islam will crumble" (Why I Am Not A Muslim, p.34, emphasis mine).
Professor Jomier, one of Frances greatest Middle Eastern scholars says, " Muslims receive these narratives as the word of God, WITHOUT ENQUIRING ABOUT THEIR HISTORICAL BACKGROUND. In face we have here a popular poetic form of LEGENDS, VARIANTS OF RELIGIOUS THEMES KNOWN FROM OTHER SOURCES" (Morey, Islamic Invasion, p.147, emphasis mine).
Morey also notes that "Abraham Geiger in 1833, and further documented by another Jewish scholar, Dr. Abrahan Katsh, of New York University, in 1954, " that "Many of the stories in the Koran come from the JEWISH TALMUD, THE MIDRASH, AND MANY APOCRYPHAL WORKS" (ibid., pp.148-149, emphasis mine). The Britannica also documents the same thing (15:648)
And what is amazing is that, "In spite of all the evidences, it is interesting that Muslim authors have been most unwilling to address the issue of the human origins of the Koran, but have simply repeated their dogmatic assertions about its divine origin. In fact, in our research of Muslim authors we have not even come across an acknowledgment of such problems in the Koran to say nothing of Solutions" (Answering Islam, p.309, emphasis mine).
W. St. Clair-Tisdall is the best source for the origins of the Koran. He demonstrates the direct dependence of Koranic stories of the Bible from the Talmud, the Apocrypha (Jewish and Christian), Zoroaster Buddhism, and also Hinduism. To read his book on-line go to http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Sources/Tisdall/ Also this web site where he answers his critics at http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Sources/Tisdall/WW/
Here is a brief summary of the sources of the Koran:
The birth of Christ in Sura 19:22-34 come from the "The History of the Nativity of Mary and the Savior's infancy."
Alexander the Great as we have seen come from the "Romance of Alexander."
The Seven Heavens in Sura 17:46; 23:88; 41:11; 65:12, comes from the Indo-Iranian sources in both Hindu and Zoroastrian scriptures.
Sura 11:9 we find God's throne above the waters. This comes from the Jewish Rashi
In Sura 7:44, there is mention of a wall called Aaraf. This comes from the Jewish Midrash.
Suras 15:17; 37:7; 67:5 we find Satan listening stealthily and being driven away with stones. This story we find in Jewish writings, about Genii "listening behind the curtain in order to gain knowledge of what is to come."
Sura 1:29 talks about hell being full. In the Rabbinic book Othioth Derabbi Akiba 8:1, we find the same thing.
Sura 24:24 is found in the Jewish Talmud (Cheiga 16 Taanith 11).
The traditions of Mount Caf is a garbled and misunderstood version of the passage in Hagigah.
The Creation of Adam (sura 2:28-33) resembles the Midrash Rabbah on Leviticus, Parashah 19, and Genesis, Parashah 8 ; and Sanhedrin 38.
Various Suras also recount that God commanded the angels to worship Adam (Suras 7:10-26; 18:48; 20:115; 37:71-86). This agrees with the account in the Midrash of Rabbi Moses.
Cain and Abel (Sura 5:35) resembles the Mishna Sandhedrin 4:5. The conversation of Cain and Abel is taken from the Targrum of Jerusalem.
The conversations of Noah when they were building the ark is from the Sandhedrin 108
The story of Abraham being saved from Nimrod's fire (suras 2:260; 6:74-84; 21:52-72; 19:42-50; 26:69-79; 29:15-16; 37:81-95; 43:25-27; 60:4 etc... All stories about Abraham have been shown to be from the Jewish Midrash Rabbah, see Tisdall and Geiger.
Muhammad often refers to God as "rabb," meaning "Lord." Sometimes as "Lord of the Worlds, see sura 56:79; 82:29 83:6. Also at the head of each Sura we see God being called "The Merciful," (Sura 55:1, 78:3). This term was used before Islam, by the pagan Arabs. It has been found in South Arabian inscriptions.
The story of the Seven sleepers (sura 18:8-26) comes from the legend that arose around the 5th century, and spread all over Europe and Asia. It originated from a Syrian Bishop named James Sarug.
The denial of the crucifixion of Jesus, see Sura 4-157-158, comes from the "apocryphal book Travels of the Apostles," see Abdul-Haqq Sharing your Faith with a Muslim, pp.130-139 for a full study.
Warraq writes: "These old Testament Characters...mentioned in the Koran...as the Dictionary of Islam puts it: '[are] with strange want of accuracy and a LARGE ADMIXTURE OF TALMUDIC FABLE''' (Why...p.54, emphasis mine).
Even Muhammed admitted that he himself "I Am not apostle of new doctrines..." (Sura 46:8, Rodwell Transl) And we see that in all the stories in the Koran was nothing new. They were all borrowed from myths legends and paganism.
Interesting, the Koran in Sura 25:5 it says that the unbelievers say: "...tales of the ancients he hath put in writing! And they are dictated to him morn and even" Mohammed's response which of course was Allah's response? All they do is attack the character of those who made the accusations, "Of a truth, it is they who have put forward an iniquity and falsehood" (Sura 25:4).
"Say: 'He has sent it down who knoweth the secrets of the Heavens..." (25:6). Interesting, Muhammad did not deny the borrowing, but denied that these were myths. Warraq writes, "Two important passages in the Koran indicate that he may well have had a Jewish teacher, probably a rabbi. In sura 25.5f., the unbelievers accuse him of listening to old stories, dictated to him by someone else. Muhammad does not deny the human teacher, but insists his inspiration is divine. In sura 16.105, the angel of revelation tells us, "We know very well that they say: it is only a mortal man who has taught him. But the language of him to whom they refer is foreign, while this language is clear Arabic!" Torrey has argued this instructor must have been a Babylonian Jew from Southern Mesopotamia.
"Besides learning from particular individuals, by visiting the Jewish quarter, Muhammad learned from direct observation the rites and rituals of Jewish practice. In any case, the Arabs who came into contact with the Jewish communities had already acquired a knowledge of Jewish customs, stories, legends, and practice; much of this material is to be found in pre-Islamic poetry." (ibid, p.50, emphasis added). Sura 16 that says, "it is only a mortal man who has taught him" the context is that the Koran only came from mortal man and not God, but then he says, "this language is clear Arabic." Muhammad thought for some reason that Arabic was some sort of divine language, but he said this to proof not only was he borrowing from men, but that he was getting revelations from God as well in Arabic. The borrowing was never denied!
Muhammad thought these stories were divine in nature, and came from God, he never denied the borrowing. To him these were not "tales," but true histories. The Quran says, "And that we have related to thee of these HISTORIES of these apostles, is to confirm thy heart thereby. By these hath the truth reached thee..."(Sura 11:121). "Thus do We recite to thee histories of what passed of old; and from ourself have we given thee admonition." (20:99). Again the Koran confirms that these are not "inventions" but true histories, "When at last the Apostles lost all hope, and deemed that they were reckoned as liars, our aid reached them, and we delivered whom we would; but our vengeance was not averted from the wicked. Certainly in their histories is an example for men of understanding. This is no new tale of fiction, but a confirmation of previous scriptures, and an explanation of all things, and guidance and mercy to those who believe.." (12:110-111). Notice, first, these stories are NOT in the Bible. Second Muhammad is saying these stories are known they are not new. And third he believed that they are true and these events happened, but history shows that they are not, they are myths!
And if you did not believe what he said, he told people to ask the "people of the book" to confirm the things he was saying, "If thou art in doubt as to what we have sent down to thee, inquire at those who have read the scriptures before thee. Now hath the TRUTH come unto thee from thy Lord: be not therefore of those who doubt." (Sura 10:94). This proves that these stories WERE KNOWN, but these stories are not in the bible, but in legends and myths. Muhammad thought these were in the bible, and its not true!
Muhammad did not like questions about his faith. In the first chapter of the Koran it says, "No doubt is there about this book" (Sura 2:1). Why shouldn't we put it to the test. What is Allah afraid of?
Muhammad when he was asked questions, "The Holy Prophet himself forbade people to ask questions...so do not try to probe into such things" (The Meaning of the Koran, vol.11, pp.76-77). If you do not want people to investigate, there in itself raises questions to the validity of the faith of Islam. The Bible however says to "prove all things" (1 Thessalonians 5:21). God is challenging us to prove the Bible. That shows confidence in His word that God has, that the Bible is true unlike the Koran which tells us to do the opposite!
And the origins of these sources are nothing more than "...LEGENDARY and spurious...which began to appear in the 2nd century. They were mostly FORGERIES, and we so recognized from the first. 'They were so full of NONSENSICAL STORIES OF CHRIST and the Apostles, that they had never been regarded as DIVINE...Deliberate attempts to FILL THE GAPS of the New Testament story of Jesus in order to further heretical ideas by FALSE CLAIMS...It is said that MOHAMMED GOT HIS IDEAS OF CHRISTIANITY FROM THESE BOOKS" (Halley's Bible Handbook, p.747, emphasis mine).
The Bible says "For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when
we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were
eyewitnesses of his majesty" (2 Peter 1:16).
Read the book called THE INFLUENCE OF ANIMISM ON ISLAM AN ACCOUNT OF POPULAR SUPERSTITIONS BY SAMUEL M. ZWEMER, F.R.G.S. for more details!
See also Warraq paper on the Origins of the Koran and the Pagan sources of Islam
The Abrogater of Verses
In Sura 2:100, and 16:103 Muhammad says this, "Whatever verses we cancel, or cause thee to forget, we bring one better or like it." First, what's amazing is, in an earlier verse (v.20) he challenges people to "produce a sura like it." And here he is canceling them. Looks like God was violating his own law. But why would God have Muhammad cancel verses and bring other ones just like it or better? Isn't God's revelation good enough for all races and for all times, and to give it to us just once? Can't he produce a verse that's perfect ONE TIME? The Bible says, "...The word of the Lord endures forever" (1 Peter 1:25). In the Koran, this is not the case! In the Bible there is not one case where a prophet cancelled any verses.
Secondly, notice in this verse that Mohammed "forgot" something God told him. So now we have some of God's message lost because Muhammad has a bad memory.
Let's Go through some of the Verses that Muhammad cancelled to illustrate the change in the Koranic Text.
Let's start with the Satanic verses. According to one version of these verses Muhammad had an early revelation in Mecca, which allowed the intercession of idols: "Do you consider Allat and Al-Uzza and Al-Manat, the third the other? Those are swans exalted; Their intercession is expected..." Some time after Muhammad received another revelation canceling the last three lines and substituting them with what we find now in Sura 53:21-23., which omits the part about the Pagan gods interceding. According to Watt, both versions had been recited publicly. Mohammed's explanation was that Satan had deceived him and inserted the false verses WITHOUT HIM KNOWING IT! (see Watt, pp.60-61). Problem is, if Satan deceived him in this part of the Koran WITHOUT HIM KNOWING IT. How do we know that Satan did not deceive him in another place in the Koran WITHOUT HIM KNOWING, AND THAT VERSE IS STILL IN THE KORAN TODAY?
The command to stone adulterers was changed to 100 stripes sura 24:2
The "sword" verse Sura 9:5 supposedly annuls the 124th verse that originally encouraged tolerance (cf 2:256), yet in other places it urges Muslims to "fight those who believe not" (9:29). and fight and slay the pagans wherever you find them (9:5), of course here's a CONTRADICTION!
A contradiction can be found in the fact that the Koran claims that there can be "no changes to the word of God" (10:65). For there is none that can alter or change the words of God (6:34). But here Muhammad is canceling verses Sura 2:100. Geisler writes that most of the time you see the corrected verses near the ones being corrected. The reason for the abrogation of verse is quite clear. There are many contradictions in the Quran, and Muhammad said you can't find any or else its not God's word, ""Can they not consider the Koran? Were it from any other that God, they would surely have found in it many contradictions" (sura 4:84).
The Koran claims that Humans are responsible for their own choices (18:28), yet it also claims that God has sealed the fate of all in advance (17:14; 10:99-100)
Scientific Errors in the Koran
Some critics question just how scientific there Koran really is. Take for instance the statement that humans are made from a clot of blood: "Then we made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood; Then of that clot we made a (foetus) lump; then we made out of that lump bones clothed the bones with flesh (Sura 23:14). This is scarcely a scientific description of embryonic development. For a full explanation of this go to http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Science/embryo.html
Here are others
The Koran speaks of travelling west to "the setting of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring" (sura 18:84). Of course this is absolutely impossible.
The Koran claims the earth is flat! Yes Flat! Now the Bible says the earth is "round" (Isaiah 40:22 Moffatt Translation). The Koran however"...alludes to the fact that the earth is FLAT and its mountains are like poles which create a balance so that the earth does not tilt" (Unmasking Islam, p.175, emphasis mine). In "Sura 88:17, 20, it is recorded, 'Will they not regard the camels how they are created...and the earth how it is spread?'...In page 509, Jalalan says: "in his phrase, 'how it is spread' he denotes that the earth is FLAT. ALL SCHOLARS OF ISLAMIC LAW AGREE UPON THIS. IT IS NOT ROUND AS THE PHYSICISTS CLAIM''' (ibid, p.175) The Dawood Translation translates this verse As "The earth how it was LEVELED FLAT? (88:20). See also the Suras that show the mountains like poles hold the earth in place so it won't tilt, 21:32; 50:7. Sura 2:20 says that the earth is a "bed" for us Humans. Beds are flat, so in the Koran, the earth is Flat! But is the earth flat? Absolutely Not! And mountains do NOT hold the earth steady. Any geologist will tell you that Mountains actually CAUSE EARTHQUAKES! In fact one example of the persecution of scientists in the Arab world during the time of the Arab empire, was the case of Ibn al-Haitham, whose works were branded heretical and then forgotten in the Muslim East. "A disciple of Maimonides, the Jewish philosopher, relates that he was in Bagdad on business, when the library of a certain philosopher (who died in 1214) was burned there. The preacher, who conducted the execution of the sentence, threw into the flames, with his won hands, an astronomical work of Ibn al-Haitham, after he had pointed to a delineation therein given of the sphere of the earth, as an unhappy symbol of impious Atheism" (Warraq, pp.274-275, emphasis added)
The Koran also says that the sky is a solid dome or a roof, see Sura 2:20; 21:33. The New Commentary on the Whole Bible by JFB says, "...an allusion to the ancient Near Eastern cosmological thought that considered the earth flat with the sky A VAULT, sustained by pillars..." p.940, emphasis mine). Scientifically the Koran fails.
They also boast about the Koran when it talks about creating man in different "stages" of development, see Sura 71:14, and how science shows the evolution of man from its primitive form to our present day form. The problem here is, all the different bones like Cro-Magnon man, and Neanderthal man and so on, have all been DISPROVEN TO BE PROOF OF THE EVOLUTION OF MAN, see Bones of Contention by Marvin L. Lubenow! This book is one of many that show these theories to be false. There is NO EVIDENCE THAT MAN DEVELOPED IN STAGES!
But where did Muhammad get this theory that man was developed in "stages" as the Koran says? As we have noted above, the Muslims got their knowledge of science from the Greeks. The idea that man developed from "stages" is NOTHING NEW. THAT WAS AROUND LONG BEFORE MUHAMMAD WAS EVEN BORN, JUST LIKE THE EMBRYOLOGY IN THE KORAN WHICH CAME FROM THE GREEKS AS WELL!
"The Great Chain of Being...patterned after PLATO. According to this concept the Almighty had created a great ladder or chain of living things, from singled celled organisms all the way up to humans, each organism being a bit more complex than the one below it...the Great chain of being we are dealing not with biblical concepts but with PAGAN GREEK PHILOSOPHY" (Bones of Contention, pp.93-94, emphasis added). So again the Koran is scientifically inaccurate.
Now there is a myth being spread by the Muslims that the Muslims were great men of science due to the Koran. But Muslims got their science from "...the works of ancient GREEKS, and the Muslims are important as the PRESERVERS and Transmitters of Greek (and Hindu) learning ...[but] most of the credit [for science] must go to the Persians, CHRISTIANS AND JEWS...There is a persistent Myth that Islam encouraged science. Adherents of this view quote the Koran and Hadith to prove their point: "Say shall those who have knowledge and those who have it not be deemed equal?' (Koran 39:12); Seek knowledge in China if necessary;' 'The search after knowledge is Obligatory for every Muslim' THIS IS NONSENSE because the knowledge advocated...IS RELIGIOUS KNOWLEDGE. Orthodoxy has always been suspicious of 'knowledge for his own sake,' and UNFETTERED INTELLECTUAL INQUIRY IS DEEMED DANGEROUS TO THE FAITH" (Warraq, Why I Am Not A Muslim, pp.272-273, emphasis mine). Its interesting how the Islamic achievements hit its zenith between the 10-11th centuries when they were learning science math etc of the Greeks and other classical works. Then "When Islam went fundamentalist in the 12-13th centuries, Islamic science died. That is why the Muslim world today is the most backward in the world. Even with Muslims attending Western universities, they still fall behind because Islam..."(Lewis Loflin Science & Islam, emphasis added). Amazing! Because the Islamic empire returned to the religion of Islam, the empire went downward and eventually into oblivion!
Where did they get this Knowledge?-Very few Arabs at the time of Mohammad could read or write or know arithmetic's. Mohammad himself said we are a nation that does not know how to write or to do arithmetics (nahnu 'omah la takteb wa la tahseb). The Arabs used the local tradesmen, architects and scholars of the conquered countries and learned their skills from them. The scientific measure of the Arabs at the time of Mohammad is best reflected in the Hadith and the Qur'an, which when read is not very scientific at all.
It is the Jewish prisoners of war in early Islam that taught the early Muslims how to read and write etc. and in return they received their freedom.
Also, when it came to Greek science, "most of the translators were Christians" (Warraq, p.262). Its was the Christians that translated the Greek works of science to the Arabs. These were the great scholars that taught the Arabs about science and philosophy. And during that time, "Christians and Jews continued to make so active a contribution [science]..." (ibid, p.272).
After the Arabs conquered many territories an Islamic Renaissance began. They absorbed and extended the learning of all the dominions where their sword had been successful. They now learned paper making from the Chinese, mathematics from the Indians, commerce and banking from the Jews, astronomy from the Egyptians, poetry and literature from other parts. And wherever they went, they carried with them the results of their increasing knowledge.
The so called great Muslim thinkers and philosopher's of the time were actually " the least Moslem....The Moslem mainstream of this time, on the other hand, emphasized rigid Koranic orthodoxy and deployed Greek philosophy and science solely to buttress its authority....[and when] paying little attention to the authority of the Koran, they aroused suspicion of the rulers both in North Africa and Spain, as well as in the East. Persecution, exile, and death were frequent punishments suffered by the philosophers of Islam whose writings did not conform to the canon. (The Golden Age of Islam is a Myth By Serge Trifkovic, emphasis added). Most Historians will tell you that these Muslim thinkers practiced science and philosophy in SPITE of Islam, not because of it.
Go to Qur'an, Islam and Science web site for more fallacies from the Muslims about they being the originators of modern science, when in actuality, they borrowed from the Greeks, Romans, Hindu's and other countries they conquered. The whole Muslim religion and way of life has been plagiarized from other religions and cultures of this world, there is nothing to brag about. If anyone should brag it should be everybody else.
In Fact Physicist Frank Tipler notes in his book Physics and Christianity that, "There is a passage in the Qur'an (6:64) that has been interpreted by most traditional Muslims to mean that there cannot be any laws of physics because having unchangeable laws would limit God:
The Jews have said, "God's hand is fettered." Fettered are their hands, and they are cursed for what they have said. Nay, but His hands are outspread; He expends how He will."
"The word fettered can also be translated as "chained." In other words, if there exist laws of physics that are never altered, then God would be constrained by the very existence of these laws. Instead, the Will of God must be entirely unconstrained, and He must be viewed as free to change the laws of physics from moment to moment. Further, there is a curse on the head of anyone who dares to claim that the laws of physics are fixed and unchanging. Such a worldview does not encourage the search for unchanging physical laws.
"In fact, it actively discourages the very idea of physical laws. In 1982, the Institute for Policy Studies in Islamabad, Pakistan, recommended that science textbooks be modified to emphasize that all change was due not to the action of physical law but to God:
There is latent poison present in the subheading Energy Causes Changes because it gives the impression that energy is the true cause rather than Allah. Similarly it is un-Islamic to teach that mixing hydrogen and oxygen automatically produces water. The Islamic way is this: when atoms of hydrogen approach atoms of oxygen, then by the Will of God water is produced.
"The implication being that God may change His mind in the next instant. and water would not be produced. The Muslim theologian Abu Hamid Mohammed al-Ghazali (1058-1111), famous for making Sufism (Muslim mysticism) part of orthodox Islam, wrote a book, The Inconsistency of the Philosophers, attacking the idea of cause and effect, and hence arguing that scientific knowledge is impossible. Rather than follow natural philosophers (scientists) and say that fire burns cotton:
This we deny, saying: the agent of the burning is God, through His creating the black in the cotton and the disconnection of its parts, and it is God Who made the cotton burn and made it ashes either through the intermediation of the angels or without intermediation. For fire is a dead body, which has no action, and what is the proof that it is the agent? Indeed the philosophers (scientists) have no other proof than the observation of the occurrence of the burning, when there is contact with the fire, but observation proves only a simultaneity, not a causation, and, in reality, there is no cause but God.
"Sufi theologians followed al-Ghazali and insisted that physical laws did not exist because God destroys and re-creates the universe from one instant to the next. In my own rather extensive studies in Islam, I have never been able to find a single significant scientific discovery made in the entire history of Islamic civilization up to the twentieth century. The examples in the literature of Islamic scientific achievements are essentially trivial. All modem physics and astronomy descends from the work of the Christians Galileo (1564-1642) and Copernicus (1473-1543), who effectively ignored the "work" of Islamic "scientists" and instead started with the work of the Greeks Archimedes (290-211 b.c) and Ptolemy (a.d. 100-170), respectively. From the point of view of science, Islamic civilization did not exist. I attribute this fact to the Islamic theological doctrines against the idea of experimentally confirmed natural law just quoted, combined with the fact that, throughout Islamic history, anyone disagreeing with the prevailing theology has been regarded as an apostate, and the overwhelming number of Islamic jurists have agreed: the penalty for apostasy is death. No one is going to search for the laws of nature if even suggesting they exist makes him or her subject to the death penalty. A conference of seventeen Arab university presidents was held in Kuwait in 1983. The major topic of discussion was "Is science Islamic?" The Saudi delegation argued that science is not, being intrinsically secular and, hence, automatically against Islamic beliefs...Nevertheless, modern science was a creation of Christian civilization" (pp.113-115, 116, emphasis added)
Myth of the Golden Age-Many Muslims boast about the golden age of Islam when they ruled a vast part of the world, but actually this was due as noted above by other influences and not the religion of Islam. The religion of Islam only influenced the conquering and killing of people and spreading the religion all over the world. Once conquered, the influence of other cultures and sciences influenced the Arabs. Warraq writes: "We might distinguish three Islam's: Islam 1, Islam 2, and Islam 3. Islam 1 is what the prophet taught, that is, his teachings as contained in the Koran. Islam 2 is the religion as expounded, interpreted, and developed by the theologians through the traditions (Hadith); it includes the sharia and Islamic law. Islam 3 is what Muslims actually did do and achieved, that is to say Islamic civilization.
"If any general thesis emerges in this book it is that Islam 3, Islamic civilization, often reached magnificent heights DESPITE Islam 1 and Islam 2, and NOT because of them. Islamic philosophy...science...literature, and Islamic art would not have attained those heights had they rested on Islam 1 and Islam 2. Take poetry for example. At least early on, Muhammad despised the poets: 'Those who go astray follow the poets' (sura 26:224)...As for Islamic art, the Dictionary of Islam (DOI) says, Muhammad cursed the painter or the drawer of men and animals (Mishkat, 7, ch. 1, pt. 1), and consequently they are held to be unlawful...the Hadiths are full of condemnation for 'makers of figured pictures,' who are called the 'worst of men.'...Mercifully contact with older civilizations with rich artistic traditions induced converted Muslims to flout the orthodox position, and was responsible for such masterpieces of representational art...Thus the creative impulse underlying Islamic art...philosophy...science and ...literature came from outside Islam 1 and Islam 2 from contact with older civilizations with a richer heritage...[these] were totally lacking in Arabia...Without Byzantine art and Sussanian art there would have been no Islamic art, Islam 1 and 2 were hostile to its development. Similarly without the influence of Greek art and science there would not have been Islamic art and science, for Islam 1 and 2 were certainly ill-disposed to these 'foreign sciences.' For the orthodox, Islamic philosophy was a contradiction in terms, and Islamic science futile...Some of the greatest representatives in these fields, or those who played a crucial role in their development were either non-Muslim or actually hostile to some or even all of the tenets of Islam 1 and 2" (Why I am not a Muslim, pp.1-02, emphasis added).
For full detail go to this web site
See this paper about the Israelitish/Jewish Origin of Greek Science
See this paper about the Christians in Syria Given the Knowledge of Greek science to the Arabs
Muhammad and the Occult
We shown you earlier how Muhammad talked to the dead, and visited cemeteries, and Haykal, one of the best biographers of Muhammad admitted that he had Psychic ability, see Norman Geisler, Answering Islam, pp.155-56.
Mr. Ankerberg says: "Oxford educated Alfred Guilaume was a professor of Arabic at both Princeton and the University of London...He observes that Muhammad first considered himself as belonging to the category of shair'-man with mysterious esoteric knowledge which was generally attributed to a familiar spirit called a jinn or shaytan''' (Facts on Islam, p.11). He goes on to say, "Mohammed's inspiration and religious experiences are remarkably similar to those found in some forms of spiritism. Shamanism, for example, is notorious for fostering periods of mental disruption as well as spirit possession. Significantly Muhammad experienced Shaman-like encounters and phenomena. Further, many authorities have noted that spirit possession frequently leads to the kinds of experiences that Muhammad had" (ibid., p.10, see Author Jeffery's Islam, Muhammad and His Religion, p.16).
Geisler says: "Another authority describes the Quranic verse in this way: 'The shortest verses generally occur in the earliest Suras, in which the style of Mohammed's revelation comes very close to the RHYMED PROSE (saj) USED BY THE KAHINS, OR SOOTHSAYERS OF HIS TIMES..." (Answering Islam, p.93, emphasis mine).
Warraq writes: "The belief in angels and demons is said to have been acquired from the PERSIANS (the Koranic word 'ifrit' meaning 'demon' is of Pahlavi origin). If this is the case then it was acquired long ago, for the PAGAN ARABS BEFORE ISLAM ALREADY HAD CONFUSED THE NOTION OF A CLASS OF SHADOWY BEINGS everywhere resent yet nowhere distinctly perceived, the jinn or djinn...For the Heathen Arabs, the jinn were invisible but were capable of taking various forms, such as those of snakes, lizards and scorpions. If a jinn entered a man it rendered him mad or possessed [like Muhammad claimed] Muhammad...MAINTAINED A BELIEF IN THESE SPIRITS: 'in fact the prophet went so far as to RECOGNIZE THE EXISTENCE OF HEATHEN GODS, classing them among the demons (see sura 37:158)...these primitive superstitions...held their ground in [Muslim] Arabia...[and] spread over the rest of the [Muslim] world...Mohammed's own beliefs in jinns are to be found in the Koran...Sura 72 (entitled 'The Jinn') 6:100...6:128...37:158...55:14...The angel Gabriel is spoken of as a companion of Muhammad, just as though he were a jinni accompanying a poet, and the same word 'nafatha,' blow upon, is used of an ENCHANTER, OF A JINNI inspiring a poet and of Gabriel revealing to Muhammad" (Why..., pp.48-49, emphasis mine).
Muhammad also classed the Sabians and the people of Zoroaster as the "people of the book." Now these Sabians were those who were "...the people of the book...[who] worshipped the stars and admitted to the existence of astral spirits....Insofar as the Sabians may have influenced Muhammad, we may note the prevalence of oaths by stars and planets in the Koran (Sura 56:75: 'I swear by the falling of the stars...' Sura 53 entitled 'The Star,' verse 1: 'By the start when it plunges...')..." (ibid., p.65, emphasis mine). The God of the Bible condemns Astrological observations, see Deuteronomy 4:15, 19; 18:10-12
What is a soothsayer? One who practices divination, generally associated with the occult sciences. Hinduism Zoroasterism, Mithaism all have laments of astrology in them. We see in sura 15:16 "We set THE signs of the ZODIAC in the heavens..." Islam condones not condemns Astrology. In sura 53:45 Muhammad refers to "Sirius," the dog star worshipped by the pagan Arabs.
Here is a warning to Christians about false these prophets: "If
there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign
[In Mohammed's case the sign is the Koran] or a wonder,
"And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, [The Koran which teaches us to worship the Moon God Hubal] which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;" (Deut 13:1-2). Then God says it is a test to see if we love him and stay with his religion (v.3). Then it pronounces the death penalty on these false prophets (v.5).
Read the book called THE INFLUENCE OF ANIMISM ON ISLAM AN ACCOUNT OF POPULAR SUPERSTITIONS BY SAMUEL M. ZWEMER, F.R.G.S. for more details!
Jihad by By: Abdullah Al Araby
Why do Muslim extremists act this way?
Are Muslims inherently inhumane, savage and evil?- of course not. Muslims are ordinary people, just like anybody else. They are fathers, brothers and sons. They could be doctors, engineers and lawyers. They are your co-workers, and your next door neighbors. Violence is committed by a minority of Muslim extremists.
So, what goes on their minds when they act violently? To understand this one must understand an important and dangerous Islamic teaching called "Jihad" ( or Holy war).
It is important to understand that not every Arab is a Muslim , not every Muslim is an Arab, and not every Muslim is a extremist. We are not trying to attack a group of people here, nor are we trying to attack a religion. We are only exposing a teaching in a religion that could have a serious effect on society.
It is also important to know that in exercising Jihad, Muslim extremists may not think they are trying to maliciously hurt others, but rather they are only obeying God's commandments. And in doing so, they are assuring themselves a place in Paradise.
Jihad (Holy War)
Jihad is one of many sacred duties Muslims perform. The word "Jihad" is an Arabic word which means "struggle". Jihad can mean striving to be a better Muslim, but it can also mean fighting in the name of Allah. In this sense Jihad is the struggle for the cause of spreading Islam, using all means available to Muslims, including force. This kind of Jihad is often referred to as "Holy War".
In resorting to force, Muslims will not have any problem finding passages in the Quran (believed by Muslims to be Allah's word), and the Hadith (Mohammed's sayings as recorded by Al Bukhari), that will not only condone violence, but will also demand it.
Jihad in the "Quran"
Allah orders Muslims in the Quran to terrorize non-Muslims on His behalf:
Those who believe, fight in the Cause of Allah, and those who disbelieve, fight in the cause of Taghut (Satan, etc.). So fight you against the friends of Shaitan (Satan); Ever feeble indeed is the plot of Shaitan (Satan)(4:76).
“SAY to those Arabs of the desert, who took not the field, ye shall be called forth against a people of mighty valour. Ye shall do battle with them, or [other translations have "until"] they shall profess Islam.” (sura 48:16).
“O Prophet! Strive hard against the disbelieves and the hypocrites, and be harsh against them” (9:73),
“O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who are the Pious, (9:123).
"kill the disbelievers wherever we find them" (2:191),
"fight and slay the Pagans, seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem" (9:5).
"slay or crucify or cut the hands and feet of the unbelievers, that they be expelled from the land with disgrace and that they shall have a great punishment in world hereafter" (5:34)
"harsh with unbelievers", (48:29).
The quran also allows them to be "disobedient towards the disbelievers and their governments and strive against the unbelievers with great endeavour" (25:52).
Muhammad even prescribes fighting for Muslims and tells them that "it is good for us even if we dislike it" (2:216).
Then he advises Muslims to "strike off the heads of the disbelievers"; and after making a "wide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives" (47:4).
Jihad is mandatory and warns us that "Unless we go forth, (for Jihad) He will punish us with a grievous penalty, and put others in our place" (9:39).
"And He orders us to fight them on until there is no more tumult and faith in Allah is practiced everywhere (8:39).
"God has bought from the faithful their selves and their belongings against the gift of paradise; they fight in the way of Allah; they kill and get killed; that is a promise binding on Allah... (Repentance, 9: 110).
"And that God may test those who believe, and destroy the infidels." (3:141)
"Relent not in pursuit of the enemy" (4:104)
"O Prophet! MAKE WAR on the infidels and hypocrites, and deal rigorously with them" (sura 66:9)
World Domination and forced conversions: There are suras that show that Islam must prevail and dominate over all religions. "He it is Who hath sent His messenger with the guidance and the religion of truth, that He may cause it to prevail over all religion. And Allah sufficeth as a Witness." (48:28)
"He has sent His messenger with the guidance and the true religion, and will make it dominate all religions, in spite of the idol worshipers" (61:9, Rashad Khalifa.). This is to be done by warfare. "Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God’s religion reigns supreme. But if they desist, fight none except the evil doers. (2:193; 8:39).
Christians and Jews were forced to pay a tax if they did not convert, but even death was given as well. "O ye to whom the Scriptures have been given! believe in what we have sent down confirmatory of the Scripture which is in your hands, ere we efface your features, and twist your head round backward, or curse you as we cursed the sabbath-breakers: and the command of God was carried into effect." (4:47). Here Allah is threatening physical harm of twisting the heads off of Christians and Jews if they did not convert.
This other sura says that they should pay a tax til they are humbled. "Make war upon such of those to whom the Scriptures have been given as believe not in God, or in the last day, and who forbid not that which God and His Apostle have forbidden, and who profess not the profession of the truth, until they pay tribute out of hand, and they be humbled." (9:29) Was this Muhammad's idea of freedom of Religion?
The above Koranic verses delineate that Jehad is a binding contract between Allah and Muslims to the following effect:
1/. Whatever a Muslim possesses, including his life, belongs to Allah in return for paradise.
2/. Allah is bound by His promise to offer paradise to a Muslim provided he willingly kills and gets killed for His pleasure.
3/. The Muslims must fight non-Muslims.
*Note: Last 17 Suras added by Peter Salemi
Jihad in the "Hadith"
In the Hadith Mohammed also urges Muslims to practice Jihad.
Mohammed once was asked: what is the best deed for the Muslim next to believing in Allah and His Apostle? His answer was : "To participate in Jihad in Allah's cause" Al Bukhari vol. 1:25
Mohammed was quoted as saying : "I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, none has the right to be worshipped but Allah" Al Bukhari vol. 4:196
Mohammed also said, "The person who participates in (Holy Battles) in Allah's cause and nothing compels him to do so except belief in Allah and His Apostle, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty (if he survives) or will be admitted to paradise (if he is killed)." Al Bukhari vol. 1:35.
Having trained the Arabs militarily, the Prophet laid down the following rules (as found on p. 188-189 of Ibn-E-Majah, Vol. 2) to conquer the world:
When you meet an enemy (infidels) give them three choices:
1/. Invite them to embrace Islam (which actually means acknowledging the Lordship of Muhammad).
2/. If they do not accept the proposal, then they must surrender and pay tribute, and
3/. if they reject both alternatives, then fight them mercilessly:
"It is not for any Prophet to have prisoners until he make wide slaughter...Eat what you have taken as booty; it is lawful and good." (The Spoils, 8: 65)
Mohammed: an Example
When the prophet of Islam started preaching his new religion in Mecca, he was conciliatory to Christians and Jews. He told them: "We believe in what has been sent down to us and sent down to you, our God is the same as your God" Surah 29:45. This attitude changed completely after he gained strength. Allah then tells him to "Fight People of the Book (Christians and Jews), who do not accept the religion of the truth (Islam), until they pay tribute (penalty tax) by hand, being inferior. " Surah 9:29
Regarding Christians and Jews, it seems that Mohammed hated the Jews more. During his life time, Mohammed devoted much of his efforts to get rid of the Jews: "You (Jews) should know that the earth belongs to Allah and his apostle, and I want to expel you from this land (the Arabian Peninsula), so, if anyone owns property, he is permitted to sell it" Mohammed was quoted.
At that time there were in Medina three Jewish tribes. Two of them, the Qaynqa and the Bani-al-Nudair tribes, were besieged by Mohammed's men, blocking their access to food supplies, until they surrendered on Mohammed's terms, which were that their lives would be spared, that they must emigrate from Medina, and that they must deposit all their belongings at a certain place for distribution among Muslims.
The third tribe, Bani Qurayza, was not as lucky. After the War of the Trench , in which Mohammed was besieged by the Qurayshites led, by Abu Sofyan, it was alleged that Bani Qurayza agreed to provide help from within to Abu Sofyan's forces. Although the alleged help did not materialize and the siege eventually ended, nevertheless, Mohammed never forgave them for their willingness to help his enemies.
Muslims turned against Bani Qurayza and blocked their streets for twenty five days. The Jewish tribe expressed readiness to accept the surrender terms which had been conceded to the other two Jewish tribes, namely cession of their belongings and departure with safe conduct.
Mohammed, however, would not consent to this, and instead appointed as an arbiter Saad iben Moaz, a man who was known to be on bad terms with Bani Qurayza. Saad ruled that all Bani Qurayza's men should be beheaded, that the women and children should be sold as slaves, and that all their property should be divided among the Muslims. Trenches were dug in the bazaar of Medina for disposal of the nine hundred Jewish bodies whom Mohammed had spent the night slaughtering. (See Ibn Hisham: The Prophet's biography ; vol. 2 pages 40 & 41)
These are historical facts that happened 14 centuries ago, they represent a dangerous tendency for violence in the Muslim fundamentalist mentality. More serious is that Muslim fundamentalists are trying to repeat these acts of violence in this 21st century.
Guard our freedom and democracy. Let Jesus' message of tolerance and non-violence rules our land "Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword". Matthew 26:52 "
What Encyclopaedia's Say about Jihad
is “a religious war with those who are unbelievers in the mission of the Prophet
Muhammad [the Prophet]. It is an incumbent religious duty, established in the
Qur’an and in the Traditions as a divine institution, and enjoined specially for
the purpose of advancing Islam and repelling evil from Muslims"
(T.Hughes, Dictionary of Islam, entry “Jihad” ).
Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam, page 89, :
DJIHAD, holy war. The spread of Islam by arms is a religious duty upon Muslims in general. It narrowly escaped being a sixth “rukn”, or fundamental duty, and is indeed still so regarded by the descendants of the Kharidjis. The position was reached gradually but quickly. In the Meccan Suras of the Kur’an patience under attack is taught; no other attitude was possible. But at Madina the right to repel attack appears, and gradually it became a prescribed duty to fight against and subdue the hostile Meccans. Whether Muhammad himself recognized that his position implied steady and unprovoked war against the unbelieving world until it was subdued to Islam may be in doubt. Traditions are explicit on the point; but the Kuranic passages speak always of the unbelievers who are to be subdued as dangerous or faithless. Still, the story of his writing to the powers around him shows that such a universal position was implicit in his mind, and it certainly developed immediately after his death, when the Muslim armies advanced out of Arabia. It is now a “fard ‘ala ‘l-kifaya, a duty in general on all male, free, adult Muslims, sane in mind and body and having means enough to reach the Muslim army, yet not a duty necessarily incumbent on every individual but sufficiently performed when done by a certain number. So it must continue to be done until the whole world is under the rule of Islam.”
What Historians say About Jihad:
"Jihad is a religious obligation. It forms part of the duties that the believer must fulfill; it is Islam's _normal_ path to expansion. "
-- Bat Yeor, _The Decline of Eastern Christianity_
"Mahomet established a religion by putting his enemies to death; Jesus Christ by commanding his followers to lay down their lives."
-- Blaise Pascal, _Pensees_
"Muhammad, unlike Christ, was a man of violence, he bore arms, was wounded in battle and preached holy war, Jihad, against those who defied the will of God as revealed to him". -- John Keegan, _A History of Warfare_
"Jihad is a divinely ordained institution in Islam. By many authorities it is counted as one of the pillars of Islam. Theologically, it is an intolerant idea: a tribal god, Allah, trying to be universal through conquest. Historically, it was an imperialist urge masked in religious phraseology."
-- Ram Swarup, _Understanding Islam through Hadis_
"When accusing the West of imperialism, Muslims are obsessed with the Christian Crusades but have forgotten their own, much grander Jihad. In fact, they often denounce the Crusades as the cause and starting point of the antagonism between Christianity and Islam. They are putting the cart before the horse. The Jihad is more than four hundred years older than the Crusades. "
-- Paul Fregosi, _Jihad in the West: Muslim Conquests from the 7th to the 21st Centuries_
Of course not all the Muslims here are terrorists. Most Muslims living in America are either nominal Muslims or living just a devout personal piety without the essential political dimension of orthodox Islam, and are certainly not bent on terrorist actions. Many Muslims do not want the violence. They are people with a better moral code than Muhammad. But they are saddled with a system that has a spiritual force behind it, and violence as a systemic root. To be a Muslim is to be aligned with the same satanic spirit that choked and influenced Muhammad in the cave, the same spirit that caused Muhammad to wage war upon and massacre those that rejected him, the same spirit that caused Muhammad to teach his followers to continue to do the same. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but the fundamental, orthodox Muslims will teach and pressure the nominal Muslims towards obeying Muhammad’s commands to establish the rule of Islam, if necessary including the use of violence. Nominal Muslims only need to awaken to the actual call of the Quran, Hadith, and Sira, to violence for Islam’s sake. More and more they are awakening, and their violence increases.
Do you want to follow Muhammad in every respect – including his commands to violence against those who reject him as a prophet? If not, why entrust your eternal future to Muhammad, if you truly disapprove of the Muslim terrorist actions?” If a Nazi strongly disapproved of Hitler’s actions, I would ask him, “why follow Hitler?” If you truly believe that the Muslim terrorists were wrong, why follow Muhammad? He did and taught the same thing. A person who chooses to follow Muhammad and trust his eternal future to Muhammad’s word, approves of Muhammad’s brutal actions, and brutal teachings.
Promise of Paradise: He promises Muslims that in the fight for His cause whether they slay or are slain they return to the garden of Paradise (9:111). In Paradise he will "wed us with Houris (celestial virgins) pure beautiful ones" (56:54), and unite us with large-eyed beautiful ones while we recline on our thrones set in lines (56:20). There they are promised to eat and drink pleasantly for what they did (56:19). He also promises "boys like hidden pearls" (56:24) and "youth never altering in age like scattered pearls" (for those who have paedophiliac inclinations) (76:19). As you see, Allah has promised all sorts or rewards, gluttony and unlimited sex to Muslim men who kill unbelievers in his name. They will be admitted to Paradise where they shall find "goodly things, beautiful ones, pure ones confined to the pavilions that man has not touched them before nor jinni" (56:67-71).
Conclusion of Jihad
Islam is a violent religion and it allows the use of aggressive violence to spread its dominion over non-Muslims. The war that Muhammad launched long ago continues, but the stakes are getting higher. America, Europe, and other nations, will continue to be adversely affected by the actions of real Muslims – those that are obeying their god and prophet.
Jesus said "the time cometh, that
whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service" (John 16:2).
Read JEHAD AND PARADISE by Anwar Shaikh Part One
Did Muhammad Like Jews and Christians?
98: 1 Those who disbelieve from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and among Al-Mushrikun (polytheists) were not going to leave (their disbelief) until there came to them clear evidence.
98:6 Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islam, the Quran and Prophet Muhammad) from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikun will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures.
5:51 O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians as Auliya' (friends, protectors, helpers, etc.), they are but Auliya' to one another. And if any amongst you takes them as Auliya', then surely he is one of them. Verily, Allah guides not those people who are the Zalimun (polytheists and wrongdoers and unjust).
58:19. Shaitan (Satan) has overtaken them (the Jews). So he has made them forget the remembrance of Allah. They are the party of Shaitan (Satan). Verily, it is the party of Shaitan (Satan) that will be the losers!
4:76 Those who believe, fight in the Cause of Allah, and those who disbelieve, fight in the cause of Taghut (Satan, etc.). So fight you against the friends of Shaitan (Satan); Ever feeble indeed is the plot of Shaitan (Satan).
4:35 So be not weak and ask not for peace (from the enemies of Islam), while you are having the upper hand. Allah is with you, and will never decrease the reward of your good deeds.
Christians and Jews do not hold any special place in Islamic theology. In the end, they were regarded with contempt by Muhammad, and presented in a hateful manner in the Quran today. Thus another reason to make war upon them (refer to 9:29). And when the Muslims have the upper hand, they are not to seek peace, but the continued destruction of their enemies.
What about this verse? sura 2:256. "There is no compulsion in religion" Most people just stop there and say "oh, you see Islam is a tolerant religion." When examined closer it tell a different story:
" 2:256. There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allah is All-Hearer, All-Knower.
This verse is the most often quoted verse used to portray Islam as a religion of peace. On the surface it sounds good. However, investigation into how the early Muslim scholars viewed it, and the background and comments they ascribe to it cast it in a slightly different light.
From the Sunan of Abu Dawud, Book 14, Number 2676:
Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas:
When the children of a woman (in pre-Islamic days) did not survive, she took a vow on herself that if her child survives, she would convert it a Jew. When Banu an-Nadir were expelled (from Arabia), there were some children of the Ansar (Helpers) among them. They said: We shall not leave our children. So Allah the Exalted revealed; "Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth stands out clear from error."
Allah says: “There is no compulsion in religion”, meaning: do not force anyone to embrace Islam because it is clear, and its proofs and evidences are manifest. Whoever Allah guides and opens his heart to Islam has indeed embraced it with clear evidence. Whoever Allah misguides, blinds his heart and has set a seal on his hearing and a covering on his eyes cannot embrace Islam by force.
The reason for the revelation of this verse was that the women of Ansar used to make a vow to convert their sons to Judaism if the latter lived. And when the tribe of Bani an-Nadhir was expelled from Madinah, some children of Ansar were among them, so their parents could not abandon them; hence Allah revealed: “There is no compulsion in religion…” narrated by Ibn Jarir, on the authority of Ibn Abbas, Abu Dawud and an-Nasa’I, on the authority of Bandar, Abu Hatim, and Ibn Hiban from the Hadith of Shu’bah, Mujahid and others. However Muhammad Ibn Ishaq narrated that Ibn Abbas said: it was revealed with regard to a man from the tribe of Bani Salim Ibn Awf called al-Husayni whose two sons converted to Christianity but he was himself a Muslim. He told the Prophet: “Shall I force them to embrace Islam, they insist on Christianity”, hence Allah revealed this verse. But, this verse is abrogated by the verse of “Fighting”: “You shall be called to fight against a people given to great warfare, then you shall fight them, or they shall surrender” (sura 48:16). Allah also says: “O Prophet! Strive hard against the disbelieves and the hypocrites, and be harsh against them” (9:73), and He says, “O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who are the Pious, (9:123).
Therefore, all people of the world should be called to Islam. If anyone of them refuses to do so, or refuses to pay the Jizya they should be fought till they are killed. This is the meaning of compulsion. In the Sahih (al-Bukhari), the Prophet said: “Allah wonders at those people who will enter Paradise in chains”, meaning prisoners brought in chains to the Islamic state, then they embrace Islam sincerely and become righteous, and are entered among the people of Paradise.
Ibn Kathir presents two different stories as reasons behind 2:256. The first story has nothing to do with compelling people into Islam. The second story begins to go against compulsion, but, Ibn Kathir then says that this verse was abrogated by the verse of “fighting” i.e. 48:16. I add that the only Sahih Hadith material I’ve been able to find on the matter (Sunan of Abu Dawud) supports the story of the expulsion of the Banu Nadir Jews. Thus, either way, compulsion of people to convert to Islam is allowed.
Ibn Kathir does say at the beginning of this quote: Allah says: “There is no compulsion in religion”, meaning: do not force anyone to embrace Islam because it is clear, and its proofs and evidences are manifest. Whoever Allah guides and opens his heart to Islam has indeed embraced it with clear evidence. Whoever Allah misguides, blinds his heart and has set a seal on his hearing and a covering on his eyes cannot embrace Islam by force. But he goes on to contradict himself later in the next two paragraphs."(AMERICA, ISLAM, JIHAD, AND TERRORISM, Answering-Islam web site).
Woman in Islam
Woman in Islam are second class citizens. The Koran declares that "Men are superior to women on account of the qualities with which God gave them." (Sura 4:38).. Little does Muhammad know that women are stronger than men in the qualities that God gave them. The Bible teaches that men and women are equal (I Corith 11:11). That they should love one another. The Bible says "Husbands love your wives, even as Christ loved the church, and gave himself for it" (Eph 5:25). We should give our lives to the point of death to our wives. The Bible says that the husband is the head of the wife (Eph 5:23). But this has nothing to do with equality. The Prime minister of Canada is the Head of the country, is he superior to us? No he was appointed leader of the country, it has nothing to do with equality. And the Biblical definition of leadership is SERVICE Matthew 23:11.
Women in Islam are also looked upon as property in Islam see Bullough, The Subordinate Sex, p.139.
For a full study on women in Islam and violence against women in Islam go to http://answering-islam.org/Green/womenstatus.htm and http://answering-islam.org.uk/Silas/beating_badawi.htm Also read Warraq's book Why I Am Not A Muslim, pp.290-327, of the treatment against women in the Islamic world.
Origin of the Veil: "The Arabic word 'hijab' is sometimes translated veil...[used] to cover Muslim women in...throughout the Muslim world...The veil was adopted by the Arabs from the Persians, and the woman's obligation to stay closed in at home was a tradition copied from the Byzantines, who in turn had adopted an ancient Greek custom" (Ibid, p.315, emphasis mine).
"...Persian influence was in Arabia long time ago. (Zwemmer, Current Topics, p. 97, H G Wells..., By Zwemmer, MWJ, Vol. XXIX, 1939). This is a very important step for us to note since the Quran does contain many Persian words and Islam also has many Persian-like practices
Ibn Warraq on Women: "As for women the book of Allah says that they are inferior to men and their husbands have the right to scourge them if they are found disobedient (4:34). It advises to "take a green branch and beat your wife", because a green branch is more flexible and hurts more. (38:44). It teaches that women will go to hell if they are disobedient to their husbands (66:10). It maintains that men have an advantage over the women (2:228). It not only denies the women's equal right to their inheritance (4:11-12), it also regards them as imbeciles and decrees that their witness is not admissible in the courts of law (2:282). This means that a woman who is raped cannot accuse her rapist unless she can produce a male witness. Our Holy Prophet allows us to marry up to four wives and he licensed us to sleep with our slave maids and as many 'captive' women as we may have (4:3) even if those women are already married. He himself did just that. This is why anytime a Muslim army subdues another nation, they call them kafir and allow themselves to rape their women. Pakistani soldiers allegedly raped up to 250,000 Bengali women in 1971 after they massacred 3,000,000 unarmed civilians when their religious leader decreed that Bangladeshis are un-Islamic. This is why the prison guards in Islamic regime of Iran rape the women that in their opinion are apostates prior to killing them, as they believe a virgin will not go to Hell."( from his web site see link at top of this page).
Prostitution- Believe it or not, the Koran also allows prostituting female slaves girls if the owner wishes. In Sura 24:33 its says, "Do not force your slave girls into prostitution in order that you may enrich yourselves..." Most Muslims stop here and don't read the rest of the verse saying that prostitution is condemned here. But Muhammad added, "...if they [the slave girls] wish to preserve their chastisement." What did Muhammad mean? If a slave girl is unconcerned about chastity, then her owner may profit by prostituting her. Muhammad continues, "If anyone [i.e. slave owner] compels them [forces chastity-choosing slave girls to be prostitutes], God will be forgiving and merciful to them" (24:33). The slave girls compelled had no choice, so they cannot be the "them" needing forgiveness. Muhammad was blatantly committing his god to free Muslims from guilt who force their slave girls into prostitution.
It seems to Muhammad that, that's all women were good for, sex. In other suras we find women are there just for the sexual gratification for a man, "Your wives are your field: go in, therefore, to your field as ye will;" (2:223). Not to mention that polygamy is is lawful in the koran. I man is allowed up to four wives if he wishes, see sura 4:3. But he also has slave girls at his disposal as well and was allowed to take them into his bed and have sex with them, "O Prophet! we allow thee thy wives whom thou hast dowered, and the slaves whom thy right hand possesseth out of the booty which God hath granted thee, and the daughters of thy uncle, and of thy paternal and maternal aunts who fled with thee to Medina, and any believing woman who hath given herself up to the Prophet, if the Prophet desired to wed her - a Privilege for thee above the rest of the Faithful. We well know what we have settled for them, in regard to their wives and to the slaves whom their right hands hold, that there may be no fault on thy part: and God is Indulgent, Merciful!...Thou mayst decline [their turn] for the present whom thou wilt of them, and thou mayest take to thy bed her whom thou wilt, and whomsoever thou shalt long for of those thou shalt have before neglected; and this shall not be a crime in thee" (33:50-51). Notice a special privilege was given to Muhammad so he could add more wives to his harem, and how he could take turns with them in bed. The treatment of women has always been a sore spot in the religion of Islam and always will be with these kind of examples that they follow.
Homosexuality is it condoned or condemned in the Koran? There are two conflicting views of Homosexuality in the Koranic verses. There are many scriptures that condemn it, see Sura 4:16; 7:80-81; 26:165; 27:55. But there are also Suras that condone it!
Warraq explains: "A GREAT TOLERANCE FOR HOMOSEXUALITY IN THE ISLAMIC WORLD HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED FOR A LONG TIME. From the 19th century onward, many westerners have been going to Muslim north Africa to look for homosexual adventure that their own society [Christian] condemned" (Why...p.341, emphasis mine).
"However ambiguity creeps in, in the passage of the Koran describing the delights of paradise [Heaven]... (ibid., p.341).
Sura 52:24 says, "We shall unite the true believers with those of their descendants who follow them in their faith, and shall not deny them the reward of their good works...Fruits we shall give them, and such meats as they desire. They will pass from hand to hand a cup inspiring no idle talk, no sinful urge; and there shall wait upon them YOUNG BOYS OF THEIR OWN AS FAIR AS VIRGIN PEARLS" (see also 56:17; 76:19). In the book 99 names for God by Judith Miller she examines these scriptures about having sex with young boys. She demonstrates to you that these scriptures do mean Homosexual relations with these boys.
"...are these boys available for sexual dalliance, or are they only to serve? (Warraq, p.342)
Homosexual marriage were known among the Arabs: "We have enough historical and philological evidence to show homosexuality was known in pre-Islamic Arabia. Our evidence is RICHER FOR THE 7TH CENTURY...During the Abassid period there seems to have been many Caliphs who were Homosexual...As for Muslim Spain in the 11th century Henery Peres tells us: 'Sodomy is practiced in all courts of the Muluk Al-Tawaif" (ibid, p.342).
Mohammed could not make up his mind about Sodomy. He prohibits it on earth, but then he says that Muslims can enjoy homosexuality in Paradise. It is a well established fact that many famous Muslims were practicing homosexuals who looked towards the Koran to justify their actions. For example, Babar, the moghul king was madly in love with a young boy named Baburi. Kuttubuddin Aibak, another Muslim ruler of India used to dress up as a woman and dance in a vulgar manner.
Another example is Abu Nuwas--one of the greatest poets in Arabic language writes in the Perfumed Garden:
O the joy of sodomy! So now be sodomites, you Arabs.
Turn not away from it--therein is wondrous pleasure.
Take some coy lad with kiss-curls twisting on his temple
and ride as he stands like some gazelle standing to her mate.
-A lad whom all can see girt with sword and belt
not like your whore who has to go veiled.
Make for smooth-faced boys and do your very best
to mount them, for women are the mounts of the devils.
There are other such poems by Abu Nuwas and others which are more graphic in glorifying homosexuality and lesbianism.
Read this article sex and Islam and be shocked! http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/abulkazem/SexualityinIslam.htm
The Ishmael Myth
Many Arabs today claim to be descendant of Ishmael Abraham's son. Is this true? McClintock and Strong's a well known Encyclopedia of Religion comments: "There is a prevalent notion that the Arabs, both of the south and the north, are descended from Ishmael; and the passage Gen 16:12...is often cited as if it were a prediction of that national independence which, upon the whole, the Arabs have maintained more than any other people. But this supposition ...is founded on a misconception of the original Hebrew...these prophecies found their accomplishment in the fact that the sons of Ishmael being located ...EAST OF THE OTHER DESCENDANTS OF ABRAHAM whether by Sarah or by Keturah. But the idea of the southern Arabs being of the posterity of Ishmael is ENTIRELY WITHOUT FOUNDATION, and it seems to have originated in the tradition invented by Arab vanity that they, as well as the Jews, are of the seed of Abraham-a vanity which besides disfiguring and falsifying the whole history of the patriarch and his son Ishmael, has transferred the scene of it from Palestine to Mecca...The vast tracts of the country known to us under the name Arabia gradually became peopled by a variety of Tribes in different lineage" (Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, I:339, emphasis mine).
Robert Morey writes: "Most standard reference works on Islam REJECT the Arab claim to Abrahamic descent. ...[The] Encyclopedia of Islam traces the Arabs to non-Abrahamic origins. Even the Dictionary of Islam questions the whole idea that the Arabs are descendants of Ishmael" (Islamic Invasion p.24, emphasis mine).
Warraq writes: "As for the Historian, the Arabs are NO MORE descendants of Abraham, then the French are of Francus, son of Hector" (Why...p.131, emphasis mine).
Where are the Real Ishmaelites?-The Ishmaelites with the Midianites "formed a tribal league" (cf Judges 8:22-24)" JFB, p.52 see also Holman's Bible Dictionary, p.961. They went away to "the east" and became "interrelated" with Midian and "their main homeland seems to be east of the Jordan and south of Edom" (Ibid., under "Midian" p.961). You notice in the Bible that Midianites and Ishmaelites are used interchangebley, see Gen 37:25, 28 and Judges 8:22-24. These people lived in the Land of Midian that was right up against the land of Palestine to the east.. These people dwelt in Syria, Midian and Moab, and are "clearly DISTINGUISHED FROM THE DESCENDANTS OF JOKTAN WHO PEOPLED THE ARABIAN PENINSULA" (The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible, under "Ishamelites," p.749, emphasis mine). The Bible even shows that the Ishamelites, "...settled from Havilah to Shur, which is opposite of Egypt, in the direction of ASSYRIA..." (Gen 25:18 NRSV). Assyria was NORTHEAST, NOT IN THE SOUTH OF ARABIA!
This is also confirmed by secular History. The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible writes that when the Assyrians and the Babylonians conquered the Middle East they found the people of Ishmael North of Arabia dwelling near Assyria, see under articles "Ishmael and Kedar."
Josephus mentioned that one of Abraham's great-grandsons joined with the Assyrians. ("Antiquities", book I, ch. xv § 1.) His name was Asshur, the son of Dedan, the son of Jokshan. Jokshan was the son of Abraham. See Genesis 25:3. "And Jokshan begat Sheba, and Dedan. And the sons of Dedan were Asshurim, and Letushim, and Leummim." From Sheba have come the Swabian Germans. From Letushim are descended the Lettish people along the Baltic. Is it any surprise that we find in Psalm 83:1-8 we find the Ishamelites with "Asshur" in a "confederacy," meaning the United States of EUROPE, the ten nation combine called the Beast?
The Midianites-Ishmaelites are the modern day peoples of "White
Russians (Byelorussians)" (The Lost Races of
the Ancient World, Craig White).
Go to Russia in Prophecy for the Real Ishmaelites
One more note. How can the Arabs be descendants of Ishmael, for when Ishmael was born the ARABS ALREADY EXISTED!
The Arabians are actually the descendants of Joktan, and partly of Cush, see Gen 10:7, 26-30; 1 Chron 1:20-23.
"THE DESCENDANTS OF JOKTAN ARE WHO PEOPLED THE ARABIAN PENINSULA" (The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible, under "Ishamelites," p.749, emphasis mine).
Unger's Bible Handbook says, Seba is connected with South Arabia and is mentioned in the Assyrian inscriptions in the 8th century B.C. Havilah was ancestor to a people in central and southern Arabia partly Cushite and partly Semitic Joktanite..." (pp.53, 56).
The New Bible Commentary Says: "In so far as they can be identified Joktan and his descendants seemed to have lived in southern Arabia" (p.68).
Morey writes: "Nowhere in the Koran does it state that Ishmael is the progenitor of the Arab race. Since it is not taught in the Koran, it cannot be a true Islamic belief...Arabian literature has its own version of prehistoric times, but its entirely legendary" (Britannica, vol. 2:176)..."
"The pure Arabs are those who claim to be descended from Joktan or Qahtan,
whom the present Arabs regard as their principle founder...The 'Arabu 'l-Musta'ribah,
the mixed Arabs, claim to be descended from Ishmael.. They boast as much as the
Jews of being reckoned the children of Abraham. This circumstance will account
for the preference with which they uniformly regard this branch of their
pedigree, and for the many romantic legends they have grafted upon it...The
Arabs, in their version of Ishmael's history, have mixed a great deal of romance
with the narrative of Scripture."
(A Dictionary of Islam, pgs. 18-19)
The Bible plainly shows that the Arabs are the descendants of the Joktanites,
and says of their location as well. Genesis the tenth chapter says, "And
Joktan begat Almodad, and Sheleph, and Hazarmaveth, and Jerah,
"And Hadoram, and Uzal, and Diklah,
"And Obal, and Abimael, and Sheba,
"And Ophir, and Havilah, and Jobab: all these were the sons of Joktan.
"And their dwelling was from Mesha, as thou goest unto Sephar a mount of the east" (Gen 10:26-30). What is "Mesha"? R. Zacuth (s) "says, Mesha in the Arabic tongue is called Mecca; and it is a point agreed upon by the Arabs that Mesha was one of the most ancient names of Mecca; they believe that all the mountainous part of the region producing frankincense went in the earliest times by the name of Sephar; from whence Golius concludes this tract to be the Mount Zephar of Moses, a strong presumption of the truth of which is that Dhafar, the same with the modern Arabs as the ancient Saphar, is the name of a town in Shihr, the only province in Arabia bearing frankincense on the coast of the Indian ocean (In Juchasin, fol. 135. 2. (t) Universal History, vol. 18. p. 353., emphasis added) And "from Mecca till you come to the city of the eastern mountain, or (as in a manuscript) to the eastern city,'' meaning perhaps Medina, situate to the east; so that the sense is, according to this paraphrase, that the sons of Joktan had their dwelling from Mecca to Medina (In Pocock. Specimen Hist. Arab. p. 34. emphasis added). The Bible clearly identifies the people of Joktan dwelling in Mecca and Medina in the east, these are the Arabs today and NOT THE PEOPLE OF ISHMAEL.
"Muhammad was not informed about the family of Abraham."
(Encyclopedia of Islam) I:184. See also pages 544-546.
"There is a prevalent notion that the Arabs, both of the south and north, are descended from Ishmael; and the passage in Gen. xvi.12, "he (Ishmael) shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren," is often cited as if it were a prediction of that national independence which, upon the whole, the Arabs have maintained more than any other people. But this supposition is founded on a misconception of the original Hebrew, which runs literally, "he shall before the faces of all his brethren," i.e., (according to the idiom above explained, in which "before the face" denotes the east), the habitation of his posterity shall be "to the east" of the settlements of Abraham's' other descendants...These prophecies found their accomplishment in the fact of the sons of Ishmael being located, generally speaking to the east of the other descendants of Abraham, whether of Sara or of Ketuah. But the idea of the southern Arabs being of the posterity of Ishmael is entirely without foundation, and seems to have originated in the tradition invented by Arab vanity that they, as well as the Jews, are of the seed of Abraham--a vanity which, besides disfiguring and falsifying the whole history of the patriarch and his son Ishmael, has transferred the scene of it from Palestine to Mecca." (McClintock and Strong, Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, (Vol. I:339)
This source also states that the Southern Arabs come from Qahtan, not Ishmael (The Concise Encyclopedia of Islam, p. 48).
The Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol. 7, pg. 296 where the connection between the Midianites and the Ishamelites is noted.
The Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam, pgs. 178-179.
A Popular Dictionary of Islam, p. 127.
Muslims in America before Columbus?
Muslims brag that they were in America long before Columbus sailed to America. Now, a lot of their history on this is mixed with truth and legend, and many of their articles lacks evidence and references.
Now although IT HAS NEVER BEEN PROVEN let's suppose they were in America, where did they receive the knowledge to get there? From the CARTHAGINIANS!
The people of Carthage were sailing to the new world CENTURIES BEFORE THE BERBERS-MOORS. The Phoenicians as well came to America and Canada in the days of Solomon, about 1000 B.C.! This has now been established through archaeological finds in North America by Barry Fell.
The people of Carthage. established trading routes all over North Africa. They were the dominant nation at that time. These people became Christian in the first century by Simon: "Here, from the Greek records, is the route of his journey: Simon "directed his journey toward Egypt, then to Cyrene, and Africa ... and throughout Mauritania and all Libya, preaching the gospel .... Nor could the coldness of the climate benumb his zeal, or hinder him from whipping himself and the Christian doctrine over to the WESTERN Islands, yea, even to Britain itself. Here he preached and wrought many miracles ...." Nicephorus and Dorotheus both wrote "that he went at last into BRITAIN, and ... was crucified ... and buried there" (p. 203 of Cave's "Antiq. Apost."). All these lands were established Phoenician colonies. But to be more specific to who he preached we find Geoffrey of Monmouth making it clear that these were the "white nations" "Universal History" (1748-Vol. xviii, p. 194). "But this ... was to be understood only of the WHITE nations inhabiting some parts of western Barbary [Berber] and Numidia." So these people could only mean the Phoenician people of Carthage and other colonies and not the dark Berber native tribes.
The inscriptions found in America proves that the Carthaginians made their way there:""Some… [of the inscriptions] is of North African origin…[and it contains] letters of the Libyan (Numidian) alphabet…the letters are understood as spelling the name Y-S-W that is to say, Yoswa=Hebrew Joshua…that is JESUS. The next letters are understood…evidently spell the Berber-Arabic word H-M-N, Hamin, meaning ‘Protector.’…[this] represents JESUS THE PROTECTOR, and the tablet was made for, or by, a North African of the Christian Faith" (Fell, A Christian North African Inscription from Comalcalco, vol.17, 1988, pp.284-286, emphasis mine). "A Punic gravestone from the first and second century A.D. was found in Pennsylvania bearing a Christians inscription is quite remarkable..." (Collins, p.161).These inscriptions are also described as "Neopunic...in use at Carthage..." (ibid, p.282-283).Stephen Collins writes about this inscription and says: "The above inscribed bricks date to the early CHRISTIAN ERA…The presence of Punic and North African speakers were present when structures in Comalcalco were built offers strong evidence that Carthaginian refugees were present in the New World...DATING TO THE FIRST TO THIRD CENTURIES A.D." (Lost Ten Tribes…Found, p.162, emphasis mine). Long before Islam or Muhammad was even born! These dates can only mean the Phoenician peoples! The Majority of these people were white, and since Phoenicians were Semitic, and Semitic's were white, then again it could only mean the Phoenicians! And the "Punic language...is similar to the Hebrew" (Saga America Barry fell, p.237, emphasis mine). This shows again that they were a Semitic people! The Phoenicians also dwelt in these areas and as we have proved and came into contact with the natives,dwelt with them, built cities with them, and could have easily learned their language as the natives learned their language. And who else in the Old World had the Naval power to come to America? And Collin's shows that these people were fleeing the Romans in the Old world coming to the new, and the found an abundant amount of "Carthaginian coins in America", pp.159-163.
Carthage, after their fall fled to the other Phoenician trading posts all over North Africa and Britain as well as America.
"After the fall of Carthage., Punic cities (and the Punic Language) survived in North Africa for another half Millennium. Their inscriptions were 'written in the Hebrew language'...its was well noticed by St. Augustine and St. Jerome...as late as the fourth century..." (ibid, p.156).
"Where did most of the Carthaginians go when Carthage fell to the Romans? It is highly likely that all the Carthaginians stayed in Carthage...Carthage had a network of Colonies and trading posts. Many likely fled from the Romans...relocating elsewhere. Some may have sailed Carthage's old maritime routes to America. Historical facts support this conclusion" (ibid, p.159). So the Carthaginians had the knowledge for years to sail to America, and they were Christian.
But a minority of those refugees could have been Berbers who were as we have read "Punicized," and came to the New World with the Phoenicians. That's why we find "Moorish looking" people in some of the art of the Mayans.And some "Berber-Arabic" inscriptions. But again these things all happened centuries before Muhammed was ever born!
Now the Phoenician people when in North Africa came into contact with the Native people called the Berbers who were called Moors afterwards. "These Berbers were seldom MUCH INFLUENCED by Phoenician city life...[and] they allied themselves with Carthage and its sister states..." (Basil Davidson, Africa in History, emphasis mine). He also calls some towns "Phoenician-Berber towns" (p.55). Many "Berbers...became Punicized and adopted the Phoenician language, Punic as the Lingua Franca for trade [which was done by sea]" (Africans and Their History, p.71). So many of the Berbers became knowledgeable of the Punic way of life. As another author writes: Carthage and her satellites came to exert a considerable influence in the life of NATIVE BERBERS...Since the Phoenicians were quick to develop any opportunities for trade...even the smallest coastal settlement tended to become a local metropolis where Berber tribesmen could gain some KNOWLEDGE of a more ordered settled mode of living" (Roland Oliver A Short History of Africa, p.41, emphasis mine). So the Phoenicians taught the Native people their way of life, and as a result the Berbers had a, "...rich civilization...before the arrival of the Arabs" (Warraq, p.211, emphasis mine) And again these Punic people stayed in Africa until the 4th century A.D. So the knowledge was ingrained in the Native people for centuries. So there is no reason to doubt that the Moors-(Berbers) could have known about America FROM THE PHOENICIANS!
Barry Fell writes that these Beber people came on "Carthaginian ships" with the people of Carthage see America B.C. pp. 174-191.
Then the Berbers "…slowly converted to Islam,NOT from deep religious conviction, but rather from MATERIAL SELF INTEREST, in the hope of winning booty" (ibid., p.211, emphasis mine). Paul Fregolsi’s book "Jihad" documents the same motive of the Berber-Moors. They weren’t interested in Islam, but just getting rich. They learned this also from the Phoenicians! So they had knowledge of going to America LONG BEFORE THE MUSLIMS EVER CAME INTO CONTACT WITH THEM.
Notice, that Christians were in America before Muslims. Other people found America centuries BEFORE Muslims. The Phoenicians and the Carthaginians were Israelites of the Lost Ten Tribes read Collin’s book, The Lost Ten Tribes…Found for proof. Even the Vikings came to America before the Muslims! So what is there to brag about? Christians were in America long before the Muslims! If the Muslims claim to make all these incredible discoveries, (which as we have proved they did not), why aren't they the CHIEF OF THE NATIONS? WHY ARE THE CHRISTIAN NATIONS THE MOST BLESSED NATIONS ON EARTH? WHY ARE THE MUSLIM NATIONS "'BACKWARDS'" (Warraq, p.210) IN CIVILIZATION AND NOT ADVANCED?
The elephants that were found in America that Muslims claim came from the Muslims in America before Columbus is just not true. Yes there were elephants, but the Muslims did not bring them over from Africa, the CARTHAGINIANS DID! The bones of the Elephants that have been found were dated "...to 2000 YEARS"...[and]"a mammoth skeleton in the Mississippi river valley was once dated about 2000 YEARS" (Carter, A Note on the Elephant in America, and The Mammoth in American Epigraph, vol. 18, 1989, pp.90, 213, emphasis mine).
Collins writes, these "place elephants...at the approximate time of Christ...Where did these elephants originate?...We know that the CARTHAGINIANS specialized in the use of Battle elephants, and it is known that the elephants accompanied Carthaginian troops...The presence of North American elephants can be traced to the third century B.C.during the time of Carthage...The presence of the African elephants in ancient America is consistent with the evidence that the Carthaginians were present in ancient America. Who but the Carthaginians with their large maritime fleets could have transported African elephants to America?" (p.166, Lost Ten Tribes, emphasis mine). Muslims just claim that they found elephants in North America and that they had to be the Muslims! But the evidence shows otherwise. These elephants were here LONG BEFORE MUSLIMS EVER CAME TO AFRICA and converted people to Islam.
Any ways even the aboriginals who were PAGAN arrived before the Muslims. There is also evidence that the Egyptians who were PAGANS at the time arrived long before the Muslims! And there is evidence that these people, the Egyptians and Polynesians were from the Alliance that Solomon had with Tyre, Sidon and Egypt! So the discovery of America goes solely to the Israelites of the Bible!
Ancient Maps of the "Sea Kings"
Some Muslims claim that maps made by Muslims in the Middle Ages caused the Muslims to go to America. But History shows that these people just copied ancient maps from the Carthaginians!
In his book Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings, Charles H. Hapgood tells of the Piri Re'is map of 1513 A.D. Studies of this map show that it correctly gives latitudes and longitudes along the coasts of Africa and Europe, indicating that the original mapmaker must have found the correct relative longitude across Africa and across the Atlantic to Brazil. This amazing map gives an accurate profile of the coast of South America to the Amazon, provides an amazing outline of the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico (supposedly not yet discovered!), and -- incredibly enough -- shows a part of the coast of the Antarctic Continent which was not discovered, in modern times, until 1818!
This map does not stand alone. A world map drawn by Oronteus Finaeus in 1531 gives a truly authentic map of Antarctica, indicating the coasts were probably ice-free when the original map was drawn (of which Oronteus Finaeus' map was a later copy). The Oronteus Finaeus map was strikingly similar to modern maps of the Antarctic. How could this be?
Another fascinating map is the map of Hadji Ahmed of 1559. It is evident that the cartographer had some extraordinary source maps at his disposal. Says Hapgood: "The shapes of North and South America have a surprisingly modern look, the western coasts are especially interesting. They seem to be about two centuries ahead of the cartography of the time. . . . The shape of what is now the United States is about Perfect" (p.99).
Another map of the Middle Ages, the Reinel Chart of 1510 -- a Portuguese map of the Indian Ocean -- provides a striking example of the knowledge of the ancients. Studying the identifiable geographical localities and working out from them, Hapgood was astounded to find that "this map apparently shows the coast of Australia . . . The map also appeared to show some of the Caroline Islands of the Pacific. Latitudes and longitudes on this map are remarkably good, although Australia is shown too far north" (ibid., p.134).
How can such remarkable accuracy be explained on the basis of almost total ignorance of the earth during that time? Obviously, at an earlier period of earth's history, sea-faring nations must have travelled around the world and accurately mapped the major continents, and fragments and copies of their ancient maps survived into the Middle Ages and were copied again.
Concludes Hapgood: "The evidence presented by the ancient maps appears to suggest the existence in remote times . . . of a true civilization, of a comparatively advanced sort, which either was localized in one area but had worldwide commerce, or was, in a real sense, a worldwide culture" (p.193).
How advanced was this ancient culture? Says Hapgood, "In astronomy, nautical science, mapmaking and possibly ship-building, it was perhaps more advanced than any state of culture before the 18th Century of the Christian Era." He continues: "It was in the 18th Century that we first developed a practical means of finding longitude. It was in the 18th Century that we first accurately measured the circumference of the earth. Not until the 19th Century did we begin to send out ships for purposes of whaling or exploration into the Arctic or Antarctic Seas. The maps indicate that some ancient people may have done all these things" (Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings, p.193).
What ancient society could have been responsible? Is there really any doubt?
The evidence is overwhelming. The Semitic features discovered in Mexico and South America, the Hebrew and Phoenicians inscriptions, the Hebrew religious customs found in the Americas, and similar customs in far off New Zealand among the Maories of ancient times, all attest to the fact that worldwide oceanic travel, trade and commerce was occurring during the time of the Solomonic Empire! And everyone knows that the "ancient sea kings" are none other than the Phoenicians of the ancient world.
Hapgood says such mapmaking would indicate economic motivations and vast economic resources. Further, organized government is indicated, since the mapping of a continent such as Antarctica implies much organization, many expeditions, and the compilation of many local observations and maps into a general map under central supervision. He adds that it is unlikely that navigation and mapmaking were the only sciences developed by this ancient people. Such a comprehensive enterprise could only have been achieved during a relative time of world peace, and by a very powerful and extremely wealthy kingdom! What ancient kingdom could have accomplished this?
So the possibility was there, but again there is no significant proof of these claims that Muslims were in America before Columbus. I think that Muslims are just jealous because of all the accomplishments that the Christian nations have made, and they dream up these scenarios to make themselves seem bigger than they really are!But if this was true, Again we see Muslims riding on the backs of other peoples accomplishments as always!
If there is anyone who should brag, it is the Israelites, (Phoenicians and Carthaginians) and Religion wise, Christians and the Faith of the Old Testament, Because there were in inscriptions that read "Yahweh is our God," in America as well. Go to our Archaeology site for proof.
Why Muslims Don't Know?
Why don't Muslims know any of these things that we have written and researched? Simply because "...Muslim leaders are afraid of carrying out any thorough research into the origins of Islam, especially, the pre-Islamic Arabian religion, in case they discover anything that will cause their faith in Islam to wane" (Who is This Allah, p.136, Moshsay, emphasis mine).
They also follow what Muhammad commanded them to do, and that is to: "O ye who Believe ASK NOT QUESTIONS about things which if made plain to you, MAY CAUSE YOU TROUBLE...Some people before you did ask questions, and on that account LOST THEIR FAITH" (Sura 5:101-102). He also says: "This book is not to be doubted" (Dawood, Transl Sura 2:1). Why not? Why not put it to the test? God in the Bible actually challenges us to prove the Bible. God is confident that the Bible is true. "PROVE ALL THINGS" (1 Thess 5:21).
Maududi in his commentary warns Muslims not to probe deeply into Islam: "The Holy prophet himself FORBADE PEOPLE to ask questions...so do not try to probe into such things" (The Meaning of the Koran, vol.3, pp.76-77, emphasis mine).
Bukhari's Hadith tells us how Muhammad responded to those who asked questions: "The prophet was asked about things which he did not like, and when the questioner insisted, the prophet got angry" (vol.1, no.92). Muhammad just wanted people to believe on blind faith. "Take my word for it!" Muhammad implies.
The Myth of the Rise of Islam.
It is commonly believed that Islam is the world fastest growing religion. Many writers report great leaps forward in the number of Mosques in western countries, and they give numbers for immigration which would seem to sustain the terror that Muslims will soon control the US House, the Senate, and the British Parliament.
I beg to differ. While Islam is certainly of growing religion (mostly by force in the third world), it is not the fasted growing cult at all. The myth of Islam's rapid growth is moderated greatly by understanding how Mosques come and go. Outside the Middle east, the majority of mosques are in homes and rented buildings. They flourish for a while, then the congregation regroups, as some abandon Islam., while new members immigrate into the western world fresh from the Middle East. In this process, a new location is found for the house-mosque, and the old one is abandon. I have seen very little evidence that Americans and Britain's are being converted from Catholic, Baptist, or any other churches to Islam. Actually the immigration department in the U.S are having trouble finding out how many Muslims are in the U.S because many of them are converting to Christianity.
As far as the non-western world, the new converts to Islam are often very secular. In Egypt , Coptics "convert" by going to Friday prayers. This is done so they can be seen by the Imam, and the potential employers, thus enhancing their job hunting status. The Coptic Orthodoxy is of the cheap variety anyway. This kind of "convert" to Islam becomes secularized very quickly if he moves out of Egypt to a neutral or democratic nation.
This applies to the vast majority of Muslims that you would meet all over the world. The problem is that the media never tells you about these Muslims. They only show the mad mob frenzy bigots screaming for blood on the streets of Terhan or Khartoum.
Here is an excellent article that shows that Christianity is the religion that is rising in the world http://www.danielpipes.org/article/979
See these links that people are leaving Islam in droves
The people in Palestine are fighting over the land of Israel today. The Jews say its their land, the Palestinians say its theirs. Whose right? The Bible says its Israel's. And the Koran says its Israel's see Sura 5:25; 7 :133.
Salvation in Islam?
Is the Muslim certain that he has salvation in Islam. Absolutely not! Even Muhammad wasn't even sure if he was saved as we read in the Koran: "...nor do I know what will be done with me or you...(Sura 46:8) A religion that can't assure salvation of its own prophet will certainly disappoint its adherents in the last day.
The Koran Teaches salvation by works Sura 23:104-105, but the Bible is Salvation by Grace. The Koran teaches also that all Muslims go to hell first, see Sura 19:67-72.
Was Muhammad one to bring us new revelations? Absolutely not! He said himself "I Am not apostle of new doctrines..." (46:8) And we see that in all the stories that he has given, and all the ceremonies that he has given in the Koran, we have seen that it was nothing new. They were all borrowed from myths legends and paganism.
God's Word is Complete
The Bible is now complete. God's last book is the book of Revelation. There are many prophecies in the Old Testament that show you that the word of God would be complete in Jesus day, and the days of the Apostles.
In Isaiah 8:16 it says: "BIND up the testimony; SEAL THE LAW among my DISCIPLES..." Verse 20 says: "TO the law and to the testimony; if they speak not according to this word [The Bible], it is because there is no light in them." This prophecy is about Jesus Christ. It talks about the "rock of offense" in verse 14, this means Christ, see 1 Peter 2:8. Then it says to bind up the law "among my disciples." Who are the Disciples? The Disciples of Christ. The last one, who was John who wrote the last book of the Bible. The Bible is now SEALED. THERE IS NO MORE TO BE ADDED TO GOD'S WORD ITS COMPLETE. So the Mormons and the Muslims and everyone else that claims extra revelation from God are claiming a total LIE and going against scripture. Jesus is called the "...author and FINISHER OF OUR FAITH" (Hebrew 12:2).