Islam is an information control cult!
Although in the civilized world, Islam cannot enable their information control as they do in Muslim controlled countries, there is still significant misinformation that Muslims believe about the Bible and Christianity. As you can see from the three quotes above, Muslims are forbidden to question Islamic faith, and are expected to accept its truthfulness blindly without investigation. Muhammad understood that information was the main enemy of his newly invented religion. In many Muslim controlled nations, for example, young men are paid to learn NOTHING but the Koran to the exclusion of science and history and current world events. They are told this is all they need, but in reality they are brainwashed and basic world information is deliberately withheld from them.
Although Muslims in the civilized world will claim Islam is an open religion, the fact remains that they contradict the actions of their brethren in Muslim controlled nations. In other words, actions speak louder than words! Remember, if Islam is such an open religion, why are Christians harassed and murdered in all countries where Muslims are in control of the civil governments.
Muhammad, in our opinion, spoke truth when he described the first reaction people had to his new religion:
"This [Islam] is nothing but a lie which he [Muhammad] has forged, and other have helped him do it... Fairy tales of the ancients, which he has caused to be written; and they are dictated before him morning and evening." (Surah 25:4-5)
Even Yusuf Ali, a translator of the Koran into English makes this comment:
"In their misguided arrogance they say, ‘We have heard such things before: they are pretty tales which have come down from ancient times: they are good for amusement, but who takes them seriously? The answer is that the Qur'an teaches spiritual knowledge of what is ordinarily hidden from men's sight, and such knowledge can only come from God to Whom alone is known the Mystery of the whole Creation.’" [3058-9]
The 60 most dangerous Questions for Muslims to hear:
Abu’s Answer Desk
Abu gets mad if you ask too many questions!
Muhammad said: "Allah has hated you for asking too many questions."
"The Prophet then got angry and his cheeks and face became red."
Bukhari's Hadith
60 Questions to ask Muslims Now that you know Muslims will get mad easily by asking them too many questions they don’t want to answer, we suggest the following:
-Pick one or two questions.-Be very kind in your tone.-Be patient for their answer.-Do not condescend.-Pray for them to see the truth.
Muslims claim, that a proof the Koran was from God, is that it contains scientifically accurate information about Embryology before man discovered it for himself. However, all the information in the Koran regarding Embryology is copied from three sources, 1. A Greek doctor named Galen, who lived of 150 AD. 2. A Jewish doctor named Samuel ha-Yehudi who lived 150 AD. 3. the Greek father of medicine Hippocrates who lived 400 BC. My question is: in light of the fact that all the information contained in the Koran was already in print by these three doctors, will you retract the argument on Embryology? If not, will you supply one detail revealed in the Koran about Embryology, that was not already revealed or that was new?
Muslims claim, that a proof that the Koran was from God is that it contains scientifically accurate information about Embryology, yet in 86:6-7 the Koran says, "man was created from ejected liquid- Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs". This echoes the scientific error of Hippocrates who believed semen originates, from the brain down the spinal chord, before passing through the kidneys and finally out of the body. (Hippocratic Writings, Penguin Classics, 1983, p. 317) My question is: do you reject modern science and believe the Koran when it says sperm originates from the mid-gut section of a man's body.
Muslims quote an article written in 1957 by the Jehovah's Witnesses who stated there were 50,000 errors in the translation of the King James version. My question is: Even if this were true, (which of course it is not), how does this prove there is corruption in the original Greek MSS from which the King James version was translated?
Muslims claim, that the many different translations of the English Bible will render a single text with many different words and phrases. You said this was proof the Bible is corrupted and that the Koran reads exactly the same way everywhere in the world in Arabic. My question is: Since the many English translations of the Koran also render a single text with many different words, does that proof that the Koran is corrupted?
Muslims believe the word Allah was used by Jesus when he hung on the cross. The Bible records that Jesus said "Eli Eli lama sabachthani", but you say Jesus really cried out to Allah and said "Allah, Allah lama sabachthani" My question is: Would you please explain why you would use this argument when you don't believe Jesus ever hung on the cross? And second, since Jesus was quoting Ps 22:1 on the cross, isn't rather unlikely that both the Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek New Testament are wrong using Eli, a Hebrew word, rather than Allah, an arab word?
Muslims chide Christians because the earliest complete copies of the Bible were written 300 years after the originals of the first century. Yet Muslim scholars state the earliest copy of the Koran was written no earlier than 150 years after Muhammad died. My question is: in light of this fact, how could the Koran possibly be better than the Bible and would you please state the name and location and date of the earliest Koran you believe to be in existence?
Both the Samarqand MSS is in Tashkent, and the MSS housed in the Topkapi Museum in Istanbul are written in the script style called "Kufic". And not the earlier style known as Ma'il or Mashq. This fact is the reason Muslim scholars date these manuscripts no earlier than 200 years after Muhammad died. My question is: leaving aside blind faith and wishful thinking, what evidence do you supply that these MSS were written any earlier?
The British Museum in London has an ancient copy of the Koran written in the Ma'il style of script, but practicing Muslim scholar Martin Lings, who is the former curator for the manuscripts of the British Museum, dates this manuscript at 790 AD. My question is: Apart from just making the claim, what evidence do you supply that this MSS were written any earlier?
The text of the Koran in 37:103 reads "they had both submitted their wills (became Muslims)" while the Arabic text of the Tashkent MSS gives the exact opposite meaning, "they did not submitted their wills" (they did NOT become Muslims.) My question is: have you actually read the Tashkent MSS for yourself in this passage and how do you explain this textual variation given your comments on the miracle of the perfect Koran?
Qur’an 18:9, makes into real history, the second century myth of 7 Christian youths who were persecuted for their faith and went to sleep in a cave for 300 years and then woke up with no ill effects. In the original myth the hero is a Christian, but in the Koran the hero is a Muslim. My question is: in the absence of any copyright laws when the Koran was written, are you at least prepared to pay compensation to the living relatives of the author of this myth? If not, would you be in favor of going starting up a charity fund to compensate for damages of copyright infringement?
Koran 5:116, represents Christians as worshipping Mary which is a historical error. Given the fact that the pagan Arabs did worship Mary’s idol in the Kaba, and that history records no group of Christians had ever worshiped Mary at this time, my question is would you please name the sect of Christians who worshiped Mary at the time of Muhammad?
Muslim's reject the doctrine of inherited sin of Adam but teach the Immaculate Conception of Mary. The reason the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was invented was to remove inherited sin. My question is: since you reject the doctrine of inherited sin and believe all men are born without sin, why do Muslim's teach the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary?
In Koran 7:125, death by crucifixion is stated to exist at the time of Moses in 1500BC. Yet Encyclopedia Britannica, in harmony with all records of history, reports that crucifixion did not exist any earlier than 500 BC. My question is: to how do you explain this blaring historical error, and do you just disregard the history of the world merely because the Karen says otherwise?
Muslim scholar, Tabbarah, said in his book, The Spirit of Islam, "Moslems do not worship the Black Stone, but only show special reverence and veneration for its dignity and they kiss it only after the example of the Prophet and to keep their Covenant with God to obey His Will and avoid His disobedience." (Tabbarah, The Spirit of Islam, p. 173, Muslim). Focusing on Tabbarah’s key phrase of showing reverence and veneration to the Black Stone, My question is do you see any difference between the Muslim practice of kissing showing reverence and venerating the Black Stone and the Catholic practice of pope John Paul II kissing the statute of the Virgin Mary with reverence and veneration?
Informed Christians know there is no passage and the Koran that says the Bible is lost altered or corrupted. My question is would you please list all the passages you know where the Qur'an says the Bible that was in the hands of the Christians at the time of Muhammad had been corrupted?
Muslims will quote Quran 2:79 as a verse where the Koran says the canon of the Bible is corrupted, "Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say: "This is from God," to traffic with it for miserable price!" My question is: If this verse refers to the corruption of the Bible, then why did Muhammad command Christians to follow the Bible they possessed in 600 AD in Quran 2:89; 7:157? And is this the only verse in the Koran that says the Bible is corrupt? (see also Quran 2:40-42,126,136,285; 3:3,71,93; 4:47,136; 5:47-51, 69,71-72; 6:91; 10:37,94; 21:7; 29:45,46; 35:31; 46:11)
Muslims will quote Jer 8:8 as proof that the Old Testament canon is corrupt, "How can you say, ‘We are wise, And the law of the Lord is with us’? But behold, the lying pen of the scribes Has made it into a lie" Yet this verse is clearly speaking of the written scribal interpretations of the Bible as Jesus condemned in Mt 15:1-14. Here Jesus accused the Scribes of the same thing regarding washing of hands and Corban, "you invalidate the written word of God for the sake of your tradition." My question is: is this the only text in the Bible where you claim the canon was corrupted? If not quote the other texts.
How can Muslims claim there are no textual variations in the Koran, when the Tashkent MSS differs from the modern Egyptian Qur’an in 5 passages: 2:284, 2:283, 3:37, 3:109 and 5:119. The Tashkent MSS uses the word 'Allah' while the modern Egyptian Qur'an, uses the word 'huwa' (the pronoun 'he'). My question is: Which word do you believe are in the "preserved master tablet" and "mother of all books" in heaven?
The yearly Passover ritual began the same year it was initiated in the 10th plague and continued uninterrupted for 1500 years. The weekly Lord’s supper ritual began the same week that Christ was crucified and has continued ever since for 2000 years. The Islamic rituals just come out of nowhere, 2600 years after Abraham lived. Being as unbiased as you possibly can, My question is: are not the Jewish and Christian rituals more likely to be based on real history since the rituals of Islam that just pop out of nowhere 2600 years later?
The "Throw" is a reenactment ritual based upon Abraham and the "Run" is a reenactment ritual based upon Hagar. My question is: Did Adam perform the throw and the Run, and if not exactly when did they become part of Islamic ritual and do you have any actual historical evidence to support such?
Given the fact that Isaac Watt, said in his book, Islam and Christianity Today, "By the standards of modern historiography, the crucifixion of Jesus is one of the most certain events in past history" (Watt, Islam and Christianity Today, p. 144). My question is: What historical evidence do you give outside of the Qur'an that Jesus did not die on across?
If all Muslim's must reject the crucifixion of Christ based on the Koran and all Christians must reject Muhammad as a prophet based on the Bible, my question is: on exactly what basis do you believe Christianity and Islam are compatible religions?
Given the fact that the gospel of Barnabas is the 15th century forgery by Muslims, my question is: why do you quote this document as proof that early Christians denied the crucifixion of Christ and what proof do you offer that it is not a Muslim forgery?
Muslim's will quote Yusuf Ali’s comment in footnote 663, as proof that the three early Christian sects of Marcion, Docetism, Basilides, denied the crucifixion of Christ. Given the fact the three sects are condemned as false teachers, deceivers and the anti-Christ in six Bible passages (1 John 1:1,14; 2:22; 4:1-3; 5:6; 2 John 7) My question is: on what basis do you claim they are Christian sects and isn't it as much of a misrepresentation for you to quote these Gnostic sects as Christians who deny the crucifixion, as it would be a misrepresentation for Christians to quote the Baha'i faith as proof Muhammad was not the final Prophet? (The holy Qur’an, text, translation and commentary by Abdullah Yusuf Ali. 1872-1952, First published in 1938, 1973 ed., p. 230, footnote 663, commenting on 4:157)
The Koran says in 4:157, that God causes someone who looked like Jesus to die on the cross in his place, therefore tricking the apostles of Christ into thinking he was crucified. My question is: how can you escape the fact that the rise of Christianity to the largest religion in the world is ultimately the result of the divine action of Allah?
The deity of Jesus is affirmed four times in Hebrews chapter 1. Jesus Christ is called the son of God, worshiped by Angels, called God by the Father and stated to be the creator. Given the fact that you would say that this is a textual corruption of the original gospel message, my question is would you not agree that this corrupted text does indeed call Jesus God?
The Islamic religion teaches that Jesus Christ was a practicing Muslim. My question is: is this any less ridiculous than if Christians said Muhammad was a practicing Buddhist?
Muslim's claim that Isaiah 42 is a prophecy of Muhammad. Yet Isaiah 53 is one of the foremost prophecies of the crucifixion of Christ in the entire Old Testament. My question is: on what basis do you feel Isaiah 42 is uncorrupted which prophecies Muhammad, but Isaiah 53 is corrupted that prophesies the crucifixion of Christ?
My question is: If you feel the Bible is so corrupted, than why do you quote Deut 18:18 and John 16:13 as uncorrupted prophecies of Muhammad’s comment in the sixth century AD.
Acts 19:23-41 mentions a religion that worshipped the great goddess Artemis and her meteorite which fell down from heaven. Taking note that this religion centered around a meteorite, my question is: is it possible that this is a pagan corruption of the Black Stone and meteorite that fell at the foot of Adam and that at the time of Christ the Black Stone was actually in Ephesus Asia minor?
Galatians 1:6-9 Apostle Paul says "I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Christ for a different religion. But even if an angel from heaven, should preach to you a different religion, let him be accursed." My question is: Do you think it possible that this is a genuine text from God and he foresaw that both Muhammad and Joseph Smith would be taught a new religion by an angel?
Before the discovery of the dead sea scrolls in 1947 the earliest copy of the Old Testament was the Massoretic Text dated at 1000 AD. The dead sea scrolls are dated at 100 B.C. contain 19 copies of Isaiah, 25 copies of Deuteronomy and 30 copies of Psalms that are virtually identical to what we have in our Bible's today. My question is: since you believe the Old Testament was corrupted long before the dead sea scrolls were written in 100 B.C., will you at least admit that there has been no further corruption of the Old Testament since 100 B.C. right down to the present?
In Jude 3; 2 Peter 1:3; John 16:13 and 2 Tim 3:16 the Bible is called an all sufficient book with no need for anything else in regards to how we live our lives or worship God. You claim the same thing for the Qur'an. My question is: how can the Qur'an be all sufficient in our worship of Allah, if it does not even mention something as important as praying five times a day and does this not prove that the Koran without the Hadith is like a car without an engine?
The Huleatt Manuscript was written in 50 AD and is actually a prayer addressed to Jesus and calls Jesus "God". Therefore, Christians have in their possession archeological inscriptions within 20 years of Christ’s resurrection that say he is God. My question is: Do you know of any archeological inscription dated within 100 years of Muhammad's death where he is called a prophet? If so, please name it.
The Bible contains over 60 distinct prophecies of Jesus Christ 1000 years before hand. My question is: what is the single most remarkable prophecy that Muhammad made that was fulfilled?
Muslim's believe the Bible is corrupted. Yet in Isa 40:22 and three other passages. (Prov 8:27; Amos 9:6 Job 26:10) it says the earth is round and not flat. Job 26:7 says the earth is free-floating in space: "he hangs the earth on nothing." Both these facts are scientifically accurate, and revealed in the Bible long before man discovered it for himself. My question is: Are these passages scientifically accurate corruption's?
Muslims proudly quote several passages in the Koran 30:48; 24:43, as scientifically accurate explanations of the hydrologic water cycle. My question is: given the fact the Bible had already fully documented the hydrologic water cycle 1600 before the Koran in Job 36:27-28, and 3 other passages (Eccl 11:3; Job 26:8; Eccl 1:6-7), doesn't this proof Muhammad merely copied the scientific facts of the hydrologic water cycle directly from the Bible? (Clouds hold water: Eccl 11:3; Job 26:8; Rivers recycle water: Eccl 1:6-7; Evapouration: Amos 9:6)
The 66 books of the Bible were written by 40 different men over a period of 1600 years with multiple threads of unified themes that span cover to cover. My question is: would you not agree that in contrast to the Bible, that the Qur'an is a jumble of disjointed material, without order, continuity or unity of any kind?
Muslims authorities refuse to release photographs of the ancient Topkapi manuscript in Istanbul, one of the three oldest Korans in existence. My question is: do you have any idea why Muslim authorities refuse to release documentary photographs of the Topkapi manuscript in Istanbul and what they are afraid for the world to see?
Muslims have repeatedly claimed that Muslim women have more rights in Islam then Western women do in the civilized world. The proof you supplied with the fact that Islam gave women the right to vote 1400 years ago but women in the West only got the right to vote 100 years ago. My question is: would you please name one country in the world today that is ruled by a Islamic "Shariah" law where women are permitted to vote?
Muslim's claim that their growth rate is 235 percent and 47 percent for Christianity. This statistic came from the Readers Digest Almanac and Yearbook 1983, and represents 235 percent increase over 50 years. A simple review of the readers Digest study shows that the growth rate of Islam vs. Christianity is directly linked to the birth rate in Third World countries where Islam dominates and not actual conversions to each religion. My question is: do you have any more recent statistics on an annualized basis?
Muslims claim that Jesus prayed using the Muslim prayer posture, along with all the prophets. Yet Jesus instructed his disciples to pray while standing up. (Mark 11:25), King David prayed while sitting in (2 Sam 7:18), and Paul instructed prayer in church with hands lifted up in the air. (1 Tim 2:8) My question is: If Jesus was a Muslim, why would he instruct his disciples to pray standing up? And when it says Jesus fell on his face and prayed, how do you know he was not fully prostrate?
Muslims claim that Muhammad always worshipped Allah in a 100% correct way, without the need for any restoral. My question is: If this is true, then why did Muhammad pray towards Jerusalem for the first 5 years of his prophethood, and later redirected his prays towards Mecca? And did Jesus pray towards Mecca 5 times a towards Jerusalem or Mecca?
The Bible defines a miracle as something that defies the laws of nature. Muslims claim the Koran is a miracle merely because it was allegedly transmitted perfectly without alteration and flaw till the second coming. Since the Harry Potter books will certainly be transmitted perfectly without alteration or flaw, and be around until the second coming, my question is: does this make the Harry Potter books a miracle like the Koran?
Muslims claim that in Isa 42:1 Muhammad fulfilled the expression "bring forth justice to the nations" indicating that the immoral pagan Arabs before Muhammad’s time were reformed into a just moral society. My question is: Even though you believe the New Testament is corrupt, had the Immoral Pagan Arabs all become Christians and followed the moral standards revealed in the corrupted New Testament, would they not have also transformed into a just moral society? If no why not? And how is the moral standard in the Koran superior to the moral standard of the Bible?
Muslims claim that the Angel Gabriel is the Holy Spirit who came upon Mary and caused her to conceive based upon Luke 1:26:38. My question is: If this is true, then why did Gabriel say to Mary in verse 35, "the power of the Holy Spirit will come upon you" rather than "my power will come upon you"?
Muslims quote Luke 22:43 as proof that when Jesus cried out to God not to be crucified, that an angel came and saved him from crucifixion. However the next verses says that Jesus was arrested by the mob for crucifixion. My Question is: on what basis do you accept the first passage as uncorrupted scripture, but reject the next verse as corrupted scripture?
Muslims claim it was medically impossible for blood and water to come out of Jesus when his side was pierced with spear because all the blood in Jesus body would have been clotted. The universal opinion of forensic scientists say that blood takes days to clot. My question is: Is this another example of where you reject all known science simply because Islam says this?
Muslims quote liberal agnostic Bible trashes who claim that the four gospels were copied from a lost original gospel known as the "Q document". This is a mythological document invented by these skeptics who reject Christianity, because they simply cannot accept the Bible is a book inspired from God. My question is: are you aware that the "Q Document" is a purely theoretical document that has never been found and is a complete fabrication and invention of the mind? And what is the value of quoting those who reject Christianity and Islam equally?
Muslims claim that the heading at the beginning of the four gospels "Gospel according to John", for example indicated the words came from John alone and prove the Bible to be a book of human authorship? In fact, that this text, like chapter and verse numbers, was added much later and are not part of the Bible? My question is: where did you learn that this text was part of the Bible?
Muslims state that they believe that the Bible is a book filled with pornography, and quoted Gen 19:32 where Lot made his two daughters pregnant. My Question is: Do you feel that the Bible should be removed from every library in Canada? And are you comfortable with the fact that your prophet Muhammad married a six year old child, when he was 55 years old? Do you think this is a good story to tell children?
Muslims teach Muhammad was sinless. However the Koran specifically limits the number of wives a Muslim man can marry to 4. Yet Muhammad married at least 12 women. My question is: Is Muhammad above the very law he gave in the Koran and isn’t the definition of sin violating the law of God?
Muslims quote George Bernard Shaw who said, "The Bible is the most dangerous book in the world, keep it lock and keyed." My question is: What value is there for you to quote an atheist like Shaw who also said: "There is not one single established religion that an intelligent, educated man can believe." (George Bernard Shaw quoted in "2000 Years of Disbelief, Famous People with the Courage to Doubt", by James A. Haught, Prometheus Books, 1996) Shaw also said: "The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality. (George Bernard Shaw, Androcles and the Lion, Preface, 1916)
To prove the Bible text is corrupted, Muslims quote a newspaper article in the "Daily News" of Durban South Africa, Tues. May 22, 1990, where you claimed the Church of Scotland had deleted the virgin birth from the Bible. The article actually said that the church of Scotland had merely deleted the teaching from their local church creed and statement of faith. My question is: Would you please explain how a church deleting the virgin birth from their church doctrine books, in any way proves the Bible is corrupted?
Muslims quote Isa 42 as a prophecy of Muhammad and say that Christians teach it is a prophecy of the Holy Spirit. (In fact Christians apply the text to Christ.) You also said that Isa 42 can only be fulfilled by Muhammad because Jesus is never called "my servant". My question is: why did Matthew quote Isa 42 and apply the whole text to Jesus in Matthew 12:18?
Muslims claim that the prophecy of the coming prophet in Deut 18:18 cannot be fulfilled by Jesus but could be fulfilled by Muhammad because the text says the prophet must arise from among their own brethren. Muslims say that if a Hebrew was intended, that the Bible would have said, "from among yourselves" rather than the expression "from among their own brethren". Hence Muslims claim the expression, "from among their own brethren" excludes all Hebrews and specifically Jesus. My question is: Since Deut 17:15 uses exactly the same expression, when it said, "you shall surely set a king over you whom the Lord your God chooses, one from among your own brethren" why did God appoint Saul and David as King and not an Ishmaelite? And in Deut 18:2 it says, "The Levites shall have no inheritance from among their brethren." Did the Ishmaelites share the inheritance of the promised land of Palestine with the Hebrews?
The Koran says in 4:157, that God causes someone who looked like Jesus to die on the cross in his place, therefore tricking the apostles of Christ into thinking he was crucified. Apostle John wrote in1 John 1:1 concerning the crucifixion: "What we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life". My question is: Was not John accurately reporting the things he actually saw, things that Allah made appear to happen?
Muslims claim that the New Testament story of Jesus dying on the cross is a corruption of the truth and that Allah made it appear that Jesus died on the cross, as per Q4:157. My question is: How can Muslims claim that they believe any of the New Testament was originally revealed by God, since the corruption must have begun at the cross.
Muslims believe that the whole concept of blood atonement is an invention of the Christian church. My question is: What were the Jews doing since 1500 BC on the "day of atonement".
Muslims reject the gospel story of Jesus being a substitute for our sins, the just for the unjust. They use the illustration of a man having to pay for a speeding ticket he did not commit. My question is: How do you explain that in the Muslim view of the cross, someone completely innocent died in Jesus place, after God made him appear to be Jesus? Was not this a Substitutionary sacrifice?
Written by Brother Andrew
The 45 Bonus Questions for Muslims:
by Robert Morey
The outline below contains the very answers to the very questions Muhammad did not want his followers to know, namely that Islam is a sanitized version of ancient polytheistic moon worship which he invented to exercise military control.
Does the Qur’an define the word "Allah"? No.
Was the name "Allah" revealed for the first time in the Qur’an? No
Does the Qur’an assume that its readers have already heard of "Allah"? Yes
Should we look into pre-Islamic Arabian history to see who "Allah" was before Muhammad? Yes.
According to Muslim tradition, was Muhammad born into a Christian family and tribe? No
Was he born into a Jewish family or tribe? No
What religion was his family and tribe? Pagans
What was the name of his pagan father? Abdullah (Abd + Allah)
Did Muhammad participate in the pagan ceremonies of Mecca? Yes
Did the Arabs in pre-Islamic times worship 360 gods? Yes
Did the pagans Arabs worship the sun, moon and the stars? Yes
Did the Arabs built temples to the Moon-god? Yes
Did different Arab tribes give the Moon-god different names/titles? Yes
What were some of the names/titles? Sin, Hubul, Ilumquh, Al-ilah.
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 a pantheon of deities? Yes.
Was he worshipped at the Kabah? Yes.
Was Allah only one of many Meccan gods? Yes
Did they place a statue of Hubul on top of the Kabah? Yes.
At that time was Hubul considered the Moon-god? Yes.
Was the Kabah thus the "house of the Moon-god"? Yes.
Did the name "Allah" eventually replace that of Hubul as the name of the Moon god? Yes.
Did they call the Kabah the "house of Allah"? Yes
Did the pagans develop religious rites in connection with the worship of their gods? Yes.
Did the pagans practice the Pilgrimage, the Fast of Ramadan, running around the Kabah seven times, kissing the black stone, shaving the head, animal sacrifices, running up and down two hills, throwing stones at the devil, snorting water in and out the nose, praying several times a day toward Mecca, giving alms, Friday prayers, etc.? Yes.
Did Muhammad command his followers to participate in these pagan ceremonies while the pagans were still in control of Mecca? Yes (Yusuf Ali, fn. 214, pg. 78).
Did Islam go on to adopt these pagan religious rites? Yes. (Yusuf Ali: fn. 223 pg. 80).
Were al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat called "the daughters of Allah"? Yes.
Did the Qur’an at one point tell Muslims to worship al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat? Yes. In Surah 53:19-20.
Have those verses been "abrogated" out of the present Qur’an? Yes.
What were they called? "The Satanic Verses." Yes.
Was the crescent moon an ancient pagan symbol of the Moon-god throughout the ancient world? Yes.
Was it the religious symbol of the Moon-god in Arabia? Yes
Were stars also used as pagan symbols of the daughers of Allah? Yes
Did the Jews or the Christians of Arabia use the crescent moon with several stars next to it as symbols of their faith? No
Did Islam adopt the pagan crescent moon and stars as it religious symbol? Yes.
As Islam developed over the centuries, did it adopt pagan names, pagan ceremonies, pagan temples and pagan symbols? Yes
Is it possible that most Muslims do not know the pagan sources of the symbols and rites of their own religion? Yes.
Are they shocked to find out the true sources of their ceremonies and stories? Yes
Can Islam be the religion of Abraham if it is derived from paganism? No
What then is Islam? A modern version of one of the ancient fertility cults.
Is the "Allah" of the Qur’an, the Christian God of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? No
Do the Jews say that the Muslim "Allah" is their God too? No
Then whose god is Allah? Paganism
Allah's Daughters:The defrocked super goddesses of the 6th century AD!
Historical notes:
It is an undeniable fact of history that before Muhammed was born, the moon god "al-Ilah" (Allah) had three daughters named al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat. The first two were even named after their father. Each daughter had a separate shrine near Mecca, where Allah's shrine was located.
As Muhammad grew weary from evangelizing his new religion with little success, he was tricked by the devil into adding a verse in the Koran that commanded Muslims to pray to Allah's three pagan daughters Lat, Uzza and Manat. The pagan female trinity was immediately accepted without dissent and the passage was considered part of the revealed Koran. However some time later, Muhammad got a revelation from God that the verse should be removed. After repenting of the error, Muhammad was comforted by God.
Such "after the fact corrective revelations" are very common with cults. Joseph Smith, founder of the Mormons also received an "after the fact corrective revelation" from God retracted the previous "divine command" allowing polygamy.
The historical information confirming the "Satanic verses" is so vast and sure, only the desperate blind would deny the evidence. Undeniably factual information regarding the Satanic verses comes from respected Muslim scholars like at-Tabari and Ibn Sa’d who wrote biographical and historical accounts of the life of Muhammad.
Yet some Muslims actually reject the whole "daughter-gate" story as untrue. These are an extremist minority, you know, the ones who don't believe youth should be taught history or science, but spend 8 hours a day memorizing the Koran. Yet all Muslims are trained to habitually disregard factual world history when it conflicts with the Koran. Take the fact of Christ's crucifixion. Even the Jews agree he was crucified, but the Koran says it was a case of mistaken identity. So Muslims reject the universal record of history and the Bible, but believe the Koran is true. Amazingly, some Islamic apologists actually deny "daughter-gate" ever happened. Yet their only argument is, "The Koran says it cannot be tampered with and that Satan cannot interfere with the revelation process." So, these extremists must either admit that the final prophet revealed a Koranic passage whose origin was Satan, or simply rewrite their own history and deny the whole "daughter-gate" scandal itself.
Exactly what are the Satanic verses:
Here is how the Koran once read with the satanic verses:
Here is how it reads today in the Koran:
Near it is the Garden of Abode. Behold, the Lote-tree was shrouded (in mystery unspeakable!) (His) sight never swerved, nor did it go wrong! For truly did he see, of the Signs of his Lord, the Greatest! Have ye seen Lat. and 'Uzza, And another, the third (goddess), Manat?
Near it is the Garden of Abode. Behold, the Lote-tree was shrouded (in mystery unspeakable!) (His) sight never swerved, nor did it go wrong! For truly did he see, of the Signs of his Lord, the Greatest! Have ye seen Lat. and 'Uzza, And another, the third (goddess), Manat?
These are the exalted cranes (intermediaries) Whose intercession is to be hoped for.
[Words of Satan Deleted]
What! for you the male sex, and for Him, the female? Behold, such would be indeed a division most unfair! (an-Najm 53:19-22)
What! for you the male sex, and for Him, the female? Behold, such would be indeed a division most unfair! (an-Najm 53:19-22)
Here two passages in the Koran that comment on Muhammad's "daughters-gate" scandal:
Like King David of the Bible admonishing himself of his own adultery in Psalms 51, Muhammad discusses the "Satanic verses"
"And their purpose was to tempt thee away from that which We had revealed unto thee, to substitute in our name something quite different; (in that case), behold! they would certainly have made thee (their) friend! And had We not given thee strength, thou wouldst nearly have inclined to them a little. In that case We should have made thee taste an equal portion (of punishment) in this life, and an equal portion in death: and moreover thou wouldst have found none to help thee against Us!" (Koran 17:73-75)
"Never sent We a messenger or a prophet before thee but when He recited (the message) Satan proposed (opposition) in respect of that which he recited thereof. But Allah abolisheth that which Satan proposeth. Then Allah establisheth His revelations. Allah is Knower, Wise; That He may make that which the devil proposeth a temptation for those in whose hearts is a disease, and those whose hearts are hardened - Lo! the evil-doers are in open schism" (Koran 22:52-53)
What scholars say about Allah's Daughters:
Al-'Uzza, al-Lat and Manah, the three daughters of Allah, had their sanctuaries in the land which later became the cradle of Islam. In a weak moment the monotheistic Muhammad was tempted to recognize these powerful deities of Makkah and al-Madinah and make a compromise in their favour, but afterwards he retracted and the revelation is said to have received the form now found in surah 53:19-20. Later theologians explained the case according to the principle of nasikh and mansukh, abrogating and abrogated verses, by means of which God revokes and alters the announcements of His will; this results in the cancellation of a verse and the substitution of another for it (Koran 2 :100). (History Of The Arabs, Philip K. Hitti, 1937, p 96-101)
Allat, according to recent study of the complicated inspirational evidence, is believed to have been introduced into Arabia from Syria, and to have been the moon goddess of North Arabia. If this is the correct interpretation of her character, she corresponded to the moon deity of South Arabia, Almaqah, `Vadd, `Amm or Sin as he was called, the difference being only the oppositeness of gender. Mount Sinai (the name being an Arabic feminine form of Sin) would then have been one of the centers of the worship of this northern moon goddess. Similarly, al-`Uzza is supposed to have come from Sinai, and to have been the goddess of the planet Venus. As the moon and the evening star are associated in the heavens, so too were Allat and al-`Uzza together in religious belief, and so too are the crescent and star conjoined on the flags of Arab countries today. (The Archeology Of World Religions, Jack Finegan, 1952, p482-485, 492)
Prior to the rise of Islam, these three goddesses were associated with Allah as his daughters and all were worshiped at Mecca and other places in the vicinity. (The Archeology Of World Religions, Jack Finegan, 1952, p482-485, 492)
The Aus and Khazraj tribes of Medina were the most prominent worshipers of Manat, while the Quraish of Mecca paid much reverence to Allat and al-`Uzza, most of all to the latter. The Quraish were the tribe to which Muhammad belonged, and Ibn al-Kalbi states that before the prophet began to preach his own message he himself once offered a white sheep to al-`Uzza. Such was the "paganism" in which Muhammad was reared and which he later came to believe it was his mission to dispel. (The Archeology Of World Religions, Jack Finegan, 1952, p482-485, 492)
The same three goddesses appear -and then disappear-in an extremely curious and much-discussed place in Sura 53 of the Quran. The exact context is unknown, but Muhammad was still at Mecca and was apparently feeling the pressures of the Quraysh resistance to his message: "When the Messenger of God saw how his tribe turned their backs on him and was grieved to see them shunning the message he had brought to them from God, he longed in his soul that something would come to him from God that would reconcile him with his tribe. With his love for his tribe and his eagerness for their welfare, it would have delighted him if some of the difficulties which they made for him could have been smoothed, and he debated with himself and fervently desired such an outcome. Then God revealed (Sura 53) ... and when he came to the words "Have you thought al-Lat and al-Uzza and Manat, the third, the other?" (VV. 19-20) Satan cast on his tongue, because of his inner debates and what he desired to bring to his people, the words: "These are the high-flying cranes; verily their intercession is to be hoped for." When the Quraysh heard this, they rejoiced and were happy and delighted at the way in which he had spoken of their gods, and they listened to him, while the Muslims, having complete trust in their Prophet with respect of the message which he brought from God, did not suspect him of error, illusion or mistake. When he came to the prostration, having completed the Sura, he prostrated himself and the Muslims did likewise.... The polytheists of the Quraysh and others who were in the mosque [that is, the Meccan Haram] likewise prostrated themselves because of the reference to their gods which they heard, so that there was no one in the mosque, believer or unbeliever, who did not prostrate himself ... Then they all dispersed from the mosque. The Quraysh left delighted at the mention of their gods." (Tabari, Annals 1.1192-1193 = Tabari vi: 108-109) This is the indubitably authentic story-it is difficult to imagine a Muslim inventing such a tale--of the notorious "Satanic verses." (The Hajj, F. E. Peters, p 3-41, 1994)
And what precisely are we to understand by "exalted cranes"? The Muslim authorities were uncertain about the meaning of gharaniq, as are we. 65 But what they did know was that this was the refrain that the Quraysh used to chant as they circumambulated the Ka'ba: "Al-Lat, and al-Uzza and Manat, the third, the other; indeed these are exalted (or lofty, ‘ula) gharaniq; let us hope for their intercession." (The Hajj, F. E. Peters, p 3-41, 1994)
Even though their principal shrines lay north and east of Mecca, al-Lat, al-Uzza, and Manat were all worshiped by the Quraysh of Mecca, and at least al-Uzza numbered no less than Muhammad himself among her worshipers. (The Hajj, F. E. Peters, p 3-41, 1994)
However, in my opinion it is unthinkable that the men of the later tradition, who regarded Mohammed in every respect as a perfect example for the faithful, would have deliberately invented a story so seriously compromising their Prophet. We must therefore assume, as the historical kernel of the tradition, that Sura 53.19ff. once embodied a different wording, implying acceptance of the pagan conception of the gods, an implication which Mohammed subsequently felt to be incompatible with belief in the one God. In style and rhythm the two Satanic lines fit admirably into the original Sura, which is amongst the earliest revelations, so that it is impossible that they should have been added as late as the Abyssinian emigration. Mohammed often made additions to the older Suras, and in such cases he always employed the formal style which dominates every revelation, so that the added lines always stand out clearly from the original. Moreover, in the original version the Sura probably contained a polemic against paganism. Mohammed objected to the expression, 'Daughters of Allah,' Which his countrymen applied to the three goddesses, and declared that it was wrong to think of God as having daughters. However, he did not intend to deny that the goddesses were high heavenly beings who could make intercession to God. Such a position is really not unthinkable in the earliest period of the Prophet's career. He merely attributed to the heavenly intercessors the same position which the angels occupied in the popular religion of the Eastern Christian churches. Undoubtedly there existed at that time an actual angel cult. (Mohammed: The man and his faith, Tor Andrae, 1936, Translated by Theophil Menzel, 1960, p13-30)
And in Arabian paganism, as we shall see later, the idea of subordinate divine beings acting as mediators and intercessors is not at all unthinkable. That Mohammed actually once thought of the three goddesses as interceding angels is shown by his later addition to the aforementioned Sura 53.26-29: 'And many as are the angels in the Heavens, their intercession shall be of no avail until God hath permitted it to whomsoever He shall please, and whom He will accept. Verily it is they who believe not in the life to come, who name the angels with names of females: But herein they have no knowledge: they follow a mere conceit; and mere conceit can never take the place of acceptance of truth.' Here Mohammed implies that the goddesses are in reality angels, to whom the pagans in their ignorance have given feminine names (comp. 37, 149-50: 43.18). Albeit with strict reservations, the right of the angels to make intercession is here recognized. (Mohammed: The man and his faith, Tor Andrae, 1936, Translated by Theophil Menzel, 1960, p13-30)
Thus, some interpreter of the Koran who belonged to an older generation tried to explain the tradition concerning the original wording of the 53rd Sura to a later type of piety which found it obnoxious. He found the explanation in two passages of the Koran. The first was Sura 17, 75-6: 'And, verily, they had well-nigh beguiled thee from what we revealed to thee, and caused thee to invent some other thing in our name: but in that case they would surely have taken thee as a friend; And had we not confirmed thee, thou hadst well-nigh leaned to them a little.' The context shows that these words refer to a political intrigue by means of which the Quraish had hoped to drive Mohammed out of his native city (verse 78). The other passage was Sura 22, Si, where we read, amongst other things: 'We have not sent any apostle or prophet before thee, amongst whose desires Satan hath injected not some wrong desire, but Allah shall bring to nought that which Satan hath suggested. (Mohammed: The man and his faith, Tor Andrae, 1936, Translated by Theophil Menzel, 1960, p13-30)
"As well as worshipping idols and spirits, found in animals, plants, rocks and water, the ancient Arabs believed in several major gods and goddesses whom they considered to hold supreme power over all things. The most famous of these were Al-Lat, Al-Uzza, Manat and Hubal. The first three were thought to be the daughters of Allah (God) and their intercessions on behalf of their worshippers were therefore of great significance. Hubal was associated with the Semitic god Ba’l and with Adonis or Tammuz, the gods of spring, fertility, agriculture and plenty. (Fabled Cities, Princes & Jin from Arab Myths and Legends, Khairt al-Saeh, 1985, p. 28-30.)
"The Quran (22.52/I) implies that on at least one occasion ‘Satan had interposed’ something in the revelation Muhammad received, and this probably refers to the incident to be described. The story is that, while Muhammad was hoping for some accommodation with the great merchants, he received a revelation mentioning the goddesses al-Lat, al-Uzza, and Manat (53.19), 20 as now found), but continuing with other two (or three) verses sanctioning intercession to these deities. At some later date Muhammad received a further revelation abrogating the latter verses, but retaining the names of the goddesses, and saying it was unfair that God should have only daughters while human beings had sons." (The Cambridge History of Islam, Vol. I, ed. P.M. Holt, 1970, p 37)
Since the Arabs used words expressing kinship to denote abstract relationships, the banat Allah may be no more than 'divine beings' or 'beings with some divine qualities. (Muhammad's Mecca, W. Montgomery Watt, Chapter 3: Religion In Pre-Islamic Arabia, p26-45)
"19 - 30/1 The pagan goddesses: 19,2o El-Lat ... El-'Uzza ... Manat: these goddesses were specially connected with three shrines in the neighbourhood of Mecca, namely at at-Ta’if, Nakhla (on the road to at-Ta'if, and at a place on the road to Medina. The story is that when these verses were first recited, Muhammad was anxious to win over the pagan Meccans, and failed to notice when Satan introduced two (or three) further verses permitting intercession at these shrines. This story could hardly have been invented, and gains support from sura 22, v. 52/1 (see comment). At length Muhammad realized the substitution, and received the continuing revelation as it now is in the Qur'an." (Companion to the Qur’an, W. Montgomery Watt, p 244)
AI-Lat, AI-‘Uzza, and Manat. Among the Qur’an's references to its 7 th-century pagan milieu are three goddesses, called daughters of Allah: AI-Lat, AI-‘Uzza, and Manat; these are also known from earlier inscriptions in northern Arabia. Al-Lat ("the Goddess") may have had a role subordinate to that of El (Ilah), as "daughter" rather than consort (Britannica, Arabian Religions, p1057, 1979)
"Astral and tutelary goddess. Pre-Islamic northern and central Arabian. One of the three daughters of Allah." (Encyclopedia of Gods, Michael Jordan, Allat, p 12)
"Manat: Goddess. Pre-Islamic... One of the so-called daughters of Allah." (Encyclopedia of Gods, Michael Jordan, Manat, p 156)
Was Muhammad ready to compromise his monotheistic message to attract more converts? Was the Qu'ran even momentarily tainted by the influence of absolute evil? In context, we can see that, as Rodinson and Watt have both argued, the story does not present Muhammad as a cynical impostor. (Muhammad: A Western Attempt to Understand Islam, Karen Armstrong, Chapter 6: the Satanic verses, p 108-133, 1991)
The story, as it appears in the histories of Ibn Sa'd and Tabari, says that on one occasion Satan interfered with Muhammad's reception of the divine Word. While Sura 53 was being revealed, this tradition has it, Muhammad felt inspired to utter two verses which declared that the three goddesses al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat could be revered as intermediaries between God and man. But since the Quraysh considered the banat Allah divine beings, they wrongly believed that the Qu'ran had placed them on the same level as God Himself. Thinking that Muhammad had accepted their goddesses as having equal status to Allah, the pagan Qu'raysh bowed down to make the salat with the Muslims and the bitter dispute seemed at an end. Because the Qu'ran appeared to have endorsed the piety of their fathers and to have abandoned its monotheistic message, they no longer saw Islam as a sacrilegious threat that could bring a catastrophe on the people of Mecca. The story goes on, however, that Muhammad later received another revelation which indicated that his apparent acceptance of the cult of the banat Allah had been inspired by 'Satan'. Consequently, the two verses were expunged from the Qu'ran and replaced by others which declared that the three goddesses were figments of the Arabs' imagination and deserved no worship at all. (Muhammad: A Western Attempt to Understand Islam, Karen Armstrong, Chapter 6: the Satanic verses, p 108-133, 1991)
Surely any genuine prophet would be able to distinguish between a divine and a satanic inspiration? Would a man of God tamper with his revelation merely to attract more converts? Recently, however, scholars like Maxime Rodinson and W. Montgomery Watt have attempted to show that even as the story stands it does not necessarily bear such a negative interpretation. Nevertheless, the incident remained far more important in the Western than in the Islamic world; at least until 1988. (Muhammad: A Western Attempt to Understand Islam, Karen Armstrong, Chapter 6: the Satanic verses, p 108-133, 1991)
The other gods mentioned in the Quran are all female deities: Al-Lat, al-Uzza, and Manat, which represented the Sun, the planet Venus, and Fortune, respectively; at Mecca they were regarded as the daughters of Allah... As Allah meant ‘the god’, so Al-Lat means ‘the goddess’." (Islam, Alfred Guilaume, 1956 p 6-7)
"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: Al Uzzah (Venus) most revered of all and pleased with human sacrifice; Manah, the goddess of destiny, and Al Lat, the goddess of vegetable life. " (Meet the Arab, John Van Ess, 1943, p. 29)
"Ali-ilah; the god; the supreme; the all-powerful; all-knowing; and totally unknowable; the predeterminer of everyone’s life destiny; chief of the gods; the special deity of the Quraish; having three daughters: Al Uzzah (Venus), Manah (Destiny), and Alat; having the idol temple at Mecca under his name (House of Allah).; the mate of Alat, the goddess of fate. (Is Allah The Same God As The God Of The Bible?, M. J. Afshari, p 6, 8-9)
"It is certain that they regarded particular deities (mentioned in 1iii. 19-20 are al-‘Uzza, Manat or Manah, al-Lat; some have interpreted vii, 179 as a reference to a perversion of Allah to Allat) as daughters of Allah (vi. 100; xvi, 59; xxxvii, 149; 1iii, 21); they also asserted that he had sons (vi. 100) (First Encyclopedia of Islam, E.J. Brill, 1987, p. 302)
"The Quraysh tribe into which Mohammad was born was particularly devoted to Allah, the moon god, and especially to Allah's three daughters who were viewed as intercessors between the people and Allah." ... "The worship of the three goddesses, Al-Lat, Al-Uzza, and Manat, played a significant role in the worship at the Kabah in Mecca. The first two daughters of Allah had names which were feminine forms of Allah." (The Islamic Invasion, Robert Morey, 1977, p 51)
"This was especially true of Allah, 'the God, the Divinity', the personification of the divine world in its highest form, creator of the universe and keeper of sworn oaths. In the Hejaz three goddesses had pride of place as the 'daughters of Allah'. The first of these was Allat, mentioned by Herodotus under the name of Alilat. Her name means simply 'the goddess', and she may have stood for one aspect of Venus, the morning star, although hellenized Arabs identified her with Athene. Next came Uzza, 'the all-powerful', whom other sources identify with Venus. The third was Manat, the goddess of fate, who held the shears which cut the thread of life and who was worshipped in a shrine on the sea-shore. (Muhammad, Maxime Rodinson, p 16-17.)
"According to this version of the story, the Quraysh were delighted with the new revelation, which in al-Kalbi's words was the traditional invocation made by the Qura'sh to the goddesses as they circumambulated the Ka'aba (Faris 17). The gharaniq were probably Numidian cranes which were thought to fly higher than any other bird. Muhammad, may have believed in the existence of the banat - al-Llah as he believed in the existence of angels and jinn, was giving the 'goddesses' a delicate compliment, without compromising his message. ... The Quraysh spread the good news throughout the city: 'Muhammad has spoken of our gods in splendid fashion. He alleged in what he recited that they are the exalted gharaniq whose intercession is approved" (Muhammad: A Western Attempt to Understand Islam, Karen Armstrong, Chapter 6: the Satanic verses, p 108-133, 1991)
Although in the civilized world, Islam cannot enable their information control as they do in Muslim controlled countries, there is still significant misinformation that Muslims believe about the Bible and Christianity. As you can see from the three quotes above, Muslims are forbidden to question Islamic faith, and are expected to accept its truthfulness blindly without investigation. Muhammad understood that information was the main enemy of his newly invented religion. In many Muslim controlled nations, for example, young men are paid to learn NOTHING but the Koran to the exclusion of science and history and current world events. They are told this is all they need, but in reality they are brainwashed and basic world information is deliberately withheld from them.
Although Muslims in the civilized world will claim Islam is an open religion, the fact remains that they contradict the actions of their brethren in Muslim controlled nations. In other words, actions speak louder than words! Remember, if Islam is such an open religion, why are Christians harassed and murdered in all countries where Muslims are in control of the civil governments.
Muhammad, in our opinion, spoke truth when he described the first reaction people had to his new religion:
"This [Islam] is nothing but a lie which he [Muhammad] has forged, and other have helped him do it... Fairy tales of the ancients, which he has caused to be written; and they are dictated before him morning and evening." (Surah 25:4-5)
Even Yusuf Ali, a translator of the Koran into English makes this comment:
"In their misguided arrogance they say, ‘We have heard such things before: they are pretty tales which have come down from ancient times: they are good for amusement, but who takes them seriously? The answer is that the Qur'an teaches spiritual knowledge of what is ordinarily hidden from men's sight, and such knowledge can only come from God to Whom alone is known the Mystery of the whole Creation.’" [3058-9]
The 60 most dangerous Questions for Muslims to hear:
Abu’s Answer Desk
Abu gets mad if you ask too many questions!
Muhammad said: "Allah has hated you for asking too many questions."
"The Prophet then got angry and his cheeks and face became red."
Bukhari's Hadith
60 Questions to ask Muslims Now that you know Muslims will get mad easily by asking them too many questions they don’t want to answer, we suggest the following:
-Pick one or two questions.-Be very kind in your tone.-Be patient for their answer.-Do not condescend.-Pray for them to see the truth.
Muslims claim, that a proof the Koran was from God, is that it contains scientifically accurate information about Embryology before man discovered it for himself. However, all the information in the Koran regarding Embryology is copied from three sources, 1. A Greek doctor named Galen, who lived of 150 AD. 2. A Jewish doctor named Samuel ha-Yehudi who lived 150 AD. 3. the Greek father of medicine Hippocrates who lived 400 BC. My question is: in light of the fact that all the information contained in the Koran was already in print by these three doctors, will you retract the argument on Embryology? If not, will you supply one detail revealed in the Koran about Embryology, that was not already revealed or that was new?
Muslims claim, that a proof that the Koran was from God is that it contains scientifically accurate information about Embryology, yet in 86:6-7 the Koran says, "man was created from ejected liquid- Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs". This echoes the scientific error of Hippocrates who believed semen originates, from the brain down the spinal chord, before passing through the kidneys and finally out of the body. (Hippocratic Writings, Penguin Classics, 1983, p. 317) My question is: do you reject modern science and believe the Koran when it says sperm originates from the mid-gut section of a man's body.
Muslims quote an article written in 1957 by the Jehovah's Witnesses who stated there were 50,000 errors in the translation of the King James version. My question is: Even if this were true, (which of course it is not), how does this prove there is corruption in the original Greek MSS from which the King James version was translated?
Muslims claim, that the many different translations of the English Bible will render a single text with many different words and phrases. You said this was proof the Bible is corrupted and that the Koran reads exactly the same way everywhere in the world in Arabic. My question is: Since the many English translations of the Koran also render a single text with many different words, does that proof that the Koran is corrupted?
Muslims believe the word Allah was used by Jesus when he hung on the cross. The Bible records that Jesus said "Eli Eli lama sabachthani", but you say Jesus really cried out to Allah and said "Allah, Allah lama sabachthani" My question is: Would you please explain why you would use this argument when you don't believe Jesus ever hung on the cross? And second, since Jesus was quoting Ps 22:1 on the cross, isn't rather unlikely that both the Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek New Testament are wrong using Eli, a Hebrew word, rather than Allah, an arab word?
Muslims chide Christians because the earliest complete copies of the Bible were written 300 years after the originals of the first century. Yet Muslim scholars state the earliest copy of the Koran was written no earlier than 150 years after Muhammad died. My question is: in light of this fact, how could the Koran possibly be better than the Bible and would you please state the name and location and date of the earliest Koran you believe to be in existence?
Both the Samarqand MSS is in Tashkent, and the MSS housed in the Topkapi Museum in Istanbul are written in the script style called "Kufic". And not the earlier style known as Ma'il or Mashq. This fact is the reason Muslim scholars date these manuscripts no earlier than 200 years after Muhammad died. My question is: leaving aside blind faith and wishful thinking, what evidence do you supply that these MSS were written any earlier?
The British Museum in London has an ancient copy of the Koran written in the Ma'il style of script, but practicing Muslim scholar Martin Lings, who is the former curator for the manuscripts of the British Museum, dates this manuscript at 790 AD. My question is: Apart from just making the claim, what evidence do you supply that this MSS were written any earlier?
The text of the Koran in 37:103 reads "they had both submitted their wills (became Muslims)" while the Arabic text of the Tashkent MSS gives the exact opposite meaning, "they did not submitted their wills" (they did NOT become Muslims.) My question is: have you actually read the Tashkent MSS for yourself in this passage and how do you explain this textual variation given your comments on the miracle of the perfect Koran?
Qur’an 18:9, makes into real history, the second century myth of 7 Christian youths who were persecuted for their faith and went to sleep in a cave for 300 years and then woke up with no ill effects. In the original myth the hero is a Christian, but in the Koran the hero is a Muslim. My question is: in the absence of any copyright laws when the Koran was written, are you at least prepared to pay compensation to the living relatives of the author of this myth? If not, would you be in favor of going starting up a charity fund to compensate for damages of copyright infringement?
Koran 5:116, represents Christians as worshipping Mary which is a historical error. Given the fact that the pagan Arabs did worship Mary’s idol in the Kaba, and that history records no group of Christians had ever worshiped Mary at this time, my question is would you please name the sect of Christians who worshiped Mary at the time of Muhammad?
Muslim's reject the doctrine of inherited sin of Adam but teach the Immaculate Conception of Mary. The reason the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was invented was to remove inherited sin. My question is: since you reject the doctrine of inherited sin and believe all men are born without sin, why do Muslim's teach the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary?
In Koran 7:125, death by crucifixion is stated to exist at the time of Moses in 1500BC. Yet Encyclopedia Britannica, in harmony with all records of history, reports that crucifixion did not exist any earlier than 500 BC. My question is: to how do you explain this blaring historical error, and do you just disregard the history of the world merely because the Karen says otherwise?
Muslim scholar, Tabbarah, said in his book, The Spirit of Islam, "Moslems do not worship the Black Stone, but only show special reverence and veneration for its dignity and they kiss it only after the example of the Prophet and to keep their Covenant with God to obey His Will and avoid His disobedience." (Tabbarah, The Spirit of Islam, p. 173, Muslim). Focusing on Tabbarah’s key phrase of showing reverence and veneration to the Black Stone, My question is do you see any difference between the Muslim practice of kissing showing reverence and venerating the Black Stone and the Catholic practice of pope John Paul II kissing the statute of the Virgin Mary with reverence and veneration?
Informed Christians know there is no passage and the Koran that says the Bible is lost altered or corrupted. My question is would you please list all the passages you know where the Qur'an says the Bible that was in the hands of the Christians at the time of Muhammad had been corrupted?
Muslims will quote Quran 2:79 as a verse where the Koran says the canon of the Bible is corrupted, "Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say: "This is from God," to traffic with it for miserable price!" My question is: If this verse refers to the corruption of the Bible, then why did Muhammad command Christians to follow the Bible they possessed in 600 AD in Quran 2:89; 7:157? And is this the only verse in the Koran that says the Bible is corrupt? (see also Quran 2:40-42,126,136,285; 3:3,71,93; 4:47,136; 5:47-51, 69,71-72; 6:91; 10:37,94; 21:7; 29:45,46; 35:31; 46:11)
Muslims will quote Jer 8:8 as proof that the Old Testament canon is corrupt, "How can you say, ‘We are wise, And the law of the Lord is with us’? But behold, the lying pen of the scribes Has made it into a lie" Yet this verse is clearly speaking of the written scribal interpretations of the Bible as Jesus condemned in Mt 15:1-14. Here Jesus accused the Scribes of the same thing regarding washing of hands and Corban, "you invalidate the written word of God for the sake of your tradition." My question is: is this the only text in the Bible where you claim the canon was corrupted? If not quote the other texts.
How can Muslims claim there are no textual variations in the Koran, when the Tashkent MSS differs from the modern Egyptian Qur’an in 5 passages: 2:284, 2:283, 3:37, 3:109 and 5:119. The Tashkent MSS uses the word 'Allah' while the modern Egyptian Qur'an, uses the word 'huwa' (the pronoun 'he'). My question is: Which word do you believe are in the "preserved master tablet" and "mother of all books" in heaven?
The yearly Passover ritual began the same year it was initiated in the 10th plague and continued uninterrupted for 1500 years. The weekly Lord’s supper ritual began the same week that Christ was crucified and has continued ever since for 2000 years. The Islamic rituals just come out of nowhere, 2600 years after Abraham lived. Being as unbiased as you possibly can, My question is: are not the Jewish and Christian rituals more likely to be based on real history since the rituals of Islam that just pop out of nowhere 2600 years later?
The "Throw" is a reenactment ritual based upon Abraham and the "Run" is a reenactment ritual based upon Hagar. My question is: Did Adam perform the throw and the Run, and if not exactly when did they become part of Islamic ritual and do you have any actual historical evidence to support such?
Given the fact that Isaac Watt, said in his book, Islam and Christianity Today, "By the standards of modern historiography, the crucifixion of Jesus is one of the most certain events in past history" (Watt, Islam and Christianity Today, p. 144). My question is: What historical evidence do you give outside of the Qur'an that Jesus did not die on across?
If all Muslim's must reject the crucifixion of Christ based on the Koran and all Christians must reject Muhammad as a prophet based on the Bible, my question is: on exactly what basis do you believe Christianity and Islam are compatible religions?
Given the fact that the gospel of Barnabas is the 15th century forgery by Muslims, my question is: why do you quote this document as proof that early Christians denied the crucifixion of Christ and what proof do you offer that it is not a Muslim forgery?
Muslim's will quote Yusuf Ali’s comment in footnote 663, as proof that the three early Christian sects of Marcion, Docetism, Basilides, denied the crucifixion of Christ. Given the fact the three sects are condemned as false teachers, deceivers and the anti-Christ in six Bible passages (1 John 1:1,14; 2:22; 4:1-3; 5:6; 2 John 7) My question is: on what basis do you claim they are Christian sects and isn't it as much of a misrepresentation for you to quote these Gnostic sects as Christians who deny the crucifixion, as it would be a misrepresentation for Christians to quote the Baha'i faith as proof Muhammad was not the final Prophet? (The holy Qur’an, text, translation and commentary by Abdullah Yusuf Ali. 1872-1952, First published in 1938, 1973 ed., p. 230, footnote 663, commenting on 4:157)
The Koran says in 4:157, that God causes someone who looked like Jesus to die on the cross in his place, therefore tricking the apostles of Christ into thinking he was crucified. My question is: how can you escape the fact that the rise of Christianity to the largest religion in the world is ultimately the result of the divine action of Allah?
The deity of Jesus is affirmed four times in Hebrews chapter 1. Jesus Christ is called the son of God, worshiped by Angels, called God by the Father and stated to be the creator. Given the fact that you would say that this is a textual corruption of the original gospel message, my question is would you not agree that this corrupted text does indeed call Jesus God?
The Islamic religion teaches that Jesus Christ was a practicing Muslim. My question is: is this any less ridiculous than if Christians said Muhammad was a practicing Buddhist?
Muslim's claim that Isaiah 42 is a prophecy of Muhammad. Yet Isaiah 53 is one of the foremost prophecies of the crucifixion of Christ in the entire Old Testament. My question is: on what basis do you feel Isaiah 42 is uncorrupted which prophecies Muhammad, but Isaiah 53 is corrupted that prophesies the crucifixion of Christ?
My question is: If you feel the Bible is so corrupted, than why do you quote Deut 18:18 and John 16:13 as uncorrupted prophecies of Muhammad’s comment in the sixth century AD.
Acts 19:23-41 mentions a religion that worshipped the great goddess Artemis and her meteorite which fell down from heaven. Taking note that this religion centered around a meteorite, my question is: is it possible that this is a pagan corruption of the Black Stone and meteorite that fell at the foot of Adam and that at the time of Christ the Black Stone was actually in Ephesus Asia minor?
Galatians 1:6-9 Apostle Paul says "I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Christ for a different religion. But even if an angel from heaven, should preach to you a different religion, let him be accursed." My question is: Do you think it possible that this is a genuine text from God and he foresaw that both Muhammad and Joseph Smith would be taught a new religion by an angel?
Before the discovery of the dead sea scrolls in 1947 the earliest copy of the Old Testament was the Massoretic Text dated at 1000 AD. The dead sea scrolls are dated at 100 B.C. contain 19 copies of Isaiah, 25 copies of Deuteronomy and 30 copies of Psalms that are virtually identical to what we have in our Bible's today. My question is: since you believe the Old Testament was corrupted long before the dead sea scrolls were written in 100 B.C., will you at least admit that there has been no further corruption of the Old Testament since 100 B.C. right down to the present?
In Jude 3; 2 Peter 1:3; John 16:13 and 2 Tim 3:16 the Bible is called an all sufficient book with no need for anything else in regards to how we live our lives or worship God. You claim the same thing for the Qur'an. My question is: how can the Qur'an be all sufficient in our worship of Allah, if it does not even mention something as important as praying five times a day and does this not prove that the Koran without the Hadith is like a car without an engine?
The Huleatt Manuscript was written in 50 AD and is actually a prayer addressed to Jesus and calls Jesus "God". Therefore, Christians have in their possession archeological inscriptions within 20 years of Christ’s resurrection that say he is God. My question is: Do you know of any archeological inscription dated within 100 years of Muhammad's death where he is called a prophet? If so, please name it.
The Bible contains over 60 distinct prophecies of Jesus Christ 1000 years before hand. My question is: what is the single most remarkable prophecy that Muhammad made that was fulfilled?
Muslim's believe the Bible is corrupted. Yet in Isa 40:22 and three other passages. (Prov 8:27; Amos 9:6 Job 26:10) it says the earth is round and not flat. Job 26:7 says the earth is free-floating in space: "he hangs the earth on nothing." Both these facts are scientifically accurate, and revealed in the Bible long before man discovered it for himself. My question is: Are these passages scientifically accurate corruption's?
Muslims proudly quote several passages in the Koran 30:48; 24:43, as scientifically accurate explanations of the hydrologic water cycle. My question is: given the fact the Bible had already fully documented the hydrologic water cycle 1600 before the Koran in Job 36:27-28, and 3 other passages (Eccl 11:3; Job 26:8; Eccl 1:6-7), doesn't this proof Muhammad merely copied the scientific facts of the hydrologic water cycle directly from the Bible? (Clouds hold water: Eccl 11:3; Job 26:8; Rivers recycle water: Eccl 1:6-7; Evapouration: Amos 9:6)
The 66 books of the Bible were written by 40 different men over a period of 1600 years with multiple threads of unified themes that span cover to cover. My question is: would you not agree that in contrast to the Bible, that the Qur'an is a jumble of disjointed material, without order, continuity or unity of any kind?
Muslims authorities refuse to release photographs of the ancient Topkapi manuscript in Istanbul, one of the three oldest Korans in existence. My question is: do you have any idea why Muslim authorities refuse to release documentary photographs of the Topkapi manuscript in Istanbul and what they are afraid for the world to see?
Muslims have repeatedly claimed that Muslim women have more rights in Islam then Western women do in the civilized world. The proof you supplied with the fact that Islam gave women the right to vote 1400 years ago but women in the West only got the right to vote 100 years ago. My question is: would you please name one country in the world today that is ruled by a Islamic "Shariah" law where women are permitted to vote?
Muslim's claim that their growth rate is 235 percent and 47 percent for Christianity. This statistic came from the Readers Digest Almanac and Yearbook 1983, and represents 235 percent increase over 50 years. A simple review of the readers Digest study shows that the growth rate of Islam vs. Christianity is directly linked to the birth rate in Third World countries where Islam dominates and not actual conversions to each religion. My question is: do you have any more recent statistics on an annualized basis?
Muslims claim that Jesus prayed using the Muslim prayer posture, along with all the prophets. Yet Jesus instructed his disciples to pray while standing up. (Mark 11:25), King David prayed while sitting in (2 Sam 7:18), and Paul instructed prayer in church with hands lifted up in the air. (1 Tim 2:8) My question is: If Jesus was a Muslim, why would he instruct his disciples to pray standing up? And when it says Jesus fell on his face and prayed, how do you know he was not fully prostrate?
Muslims claim that Muhammad always worshipped Allah in a 100% correct way, without the need for any restoral. My question is: If this is true, then why did Muhammad pray towards Jerusalem for the first 5 years of his prophethood, and later redirected his prays towards Mecca? And did Jesus pray towards Mecca 5 times a towards Jerusalem or Mecca?
The Bible defines a miracle as something that defies the laws of nature. Muslims claim the Koran is a miracle merely because it was allegedly transmitted perfectly without alteration and flaw till the second coming. Since the Harry Potter books will certainly be transmitted perfectly without alteration or flaw, and be around until the second coming, my question is: does this make the Harry Potter books a miracle like the Koran?
Muslims claim that in Isa 42:1 Muhammad fulfilled the expression "bring forth justice to the nations" indicating that the immoral pagan Arabs before Muhammad’s time were reformed into a just moral society. My question is: Even though you believe the New Testament is corrupt, had the Immoral Pagan Arabs all become Christians and followed the moral standards revealed in the corrupted New Testament, would they not have also transformed into a just moral society? If no why not? And how is the moral standard in the Koran superior to the moral standard of the Bible?
Muslims claim that the Angel Gabriel is the Holy Spirit who came upon Mary and caused her to conceive based upon Luke 1:26:38. My question is: If this is true, then why did Gabriel say to Mary in verse 35, "the power of the Holy Spirit will come upon you" rather than "my power will come upon you"?
Muslims quote Luke 22:43 as proof that when Jesus cried out to God not to be crucified, that an angel came and saved him from crucifixion. However the next verses says that Jesus was arrested by the mob for crucifixion. My Question is: on what basis do you accept the first passage as uncorrupted scripture, but reject the next verse as corrupted scripture?
Muslims claim it was medically impossible for blood and water to come out of Jesus when his side was pierced with spear because all the blood in Jesus body would have been clotted. The universal opinion of forensic scientists say that blood takes days to clot. My question is: Is this another example of where you reject all known science simply because Islam says this?
Muslims quote liberal agnostic Bible trashes who claim that the four gospels were copied from a lost original gospel known as the "Q document". This is a mythological document invented by these skeptics who reject Christianity, because they simply cannot accept the Bible is a book inspired from God. My question is: are you aware that the "Q Document" is a purely theoretical document that has never been found and is a complete fabrication and invention of the mind? And what is the value of quoting those who reject Christianity and Islam equally?
Muslims claim that the heading at the beginning of the four gospels "Gospel according to John", for example indicated the words came from John alone and prove the Bible to be a book of human authorship? In fact, that this text, like chapter and verse numbers, was added much later and are not part of the Bible? My question is: where did you learn that this text was part of the Bible?
Muslims state that they believe that the Bible is a book filled with pornography, and quoted Gen 19:32 where Lot made his two daughters pregnant. My Question is: Do you feel that the Bible should be removed from every library in Canada? And are you comfortable with the fact that your prophet Muhammad married a six year old child, when he was 55 years old? Do you think this is a good story to tell children?
Muslims teach Muhammad was sinless. However the Koran specifically limits the number of wives a Muslim man can marry to 4. Yet Muhammad married at least 12 women. My question is: Is Muhammad above the very law he gave in the Koran and isn’t the definition of sin violating the law of God?
Muslims quote George Bernard Shaw who said, "The Bible is the most dangerous book in the world, keep it lock and keyed." My question is: What value is there for you to quote an atheist like Shaw who also said: "There is not one single established religion that an intelligent, educated man can believe." (George Bernard Shaw quoted in "2000 Years of Disbelief, Famous People with the Courage to Doubt", by James A. Haught, Prometheus Books, 1996) Shaw also said: "The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality. (George Bernard Shaw, Androcles and the Lion, Preface, 1916)
To prove the Bible text is corrupted, Muslims quote a newspaper article in the "Daily News" of Durban South Africa, Tues. May 22, 1990, where you claimed the Church of Scotland had deleted the virgin birth from the Bible. The article actually said that the church of Scotland had merely deleted the teaching from their local church creed and statement of faith. My question is: Would you please explain how a church deleting the virgin birth from their church doctrine books, in any way proves the Bible is corrupted?
Muslims quote Isa 42 as a prophecy of Muhammad and say that Christians teach it is a prophecy of the Holy Spirit. (In fact Christians apply the text to Christ.) You also said that Isa 42 can only be fulfilled by Muhammad because Jesus is never called "my servant". My question is: why did Matthew quote Isa 42 and apply the whole text to Jesus in Matthew 12:18?
Muslims claim that the prophecy of the coming prophet in Deut 18:18 cannot be fulfilled by Jesus but could be fulfilled by Muhammad because the text says the prophet must arise from among their own brethren. Muslims say that if a Hebrew was intended, that the Bible would have said, "from among yourselves" rather than the expression "from among their own brethren". Hence Muslims claim the expression, "from among their own brethren" excludes all Hebrews and specifically Jesus. My question is: Since Deut 17:15 uses exactly the same expression, when it said, "you shall surely set a king over you whom the Lord your God chooses, one from among your own brethren" why did God appoint Saul and David as King and not an Ishmaelite? And in Deut 18:2 it says, "The Levites shall have no inheritance from among their brethren." Did the Ishmaelites share the inheritance of the promised land of Palestine with the Hebrews?
The Koran says in 4:157, that God causes someone who looked like Jesus to die on the cross in his place, therefore tricking the apostles of Christ into thinking he was crucified. Apostle John wrote in1 John 1:1 concerning the crucifixion: "What we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life". My question is: Was not John accurately reporting the things he actually saw, things that Allah made appear to happen?
Muslims claim that the New Testament story of Jesus dying on the cross is a corruption of the truth and that Allah made it appear that Jesus died on the cross, as per Q4:157. My question is: How can Muslims claim that they believe any of the New Testament was originally revealed by God, since the corruption must have begun at the cross.
Muslims believe that the whole concept of blood atonement is an invention of the Christian church. My question is: What were the Jews doing since 1500 BC on the "day of atonement".
Muslims reject the gospel story of Jesus being a substitute for our sins, the just for the unjust. They use the illustration of a man having to pay for a speeding ticket he did not commit. My question is: How do you explain that in the Muslim view of the cross, someone completely innocent died in Jesus place, after God made him appear to be Jesus? Was not this a Substitutionary sacrifice?
Written by Brother Andrew
The 45 Bonus Questions for Muslims:
by Robert Morey
The outline below contains the very answers to the very questions Muhammad did not want his followers to know, namely that Islam is a sanitized version of ancient polytheistic moon worship which he invented to exercise military control.
Does the Qur’an define the word "Allah"? No.
Was the name "Allah" revealed for the first time in the Qur’an? No
Does the Qur’an assume that its readers have already heard of "Allah"? Yes
Should we look into pre-Islamic Arabian history to see who "Allah" was before Muhammad? Yes.
According to Muslim tradition, was Muhammad born into a Christian family and tribe? No
Was he born into a Jewish family or tribe? No
What religion was his family and tribe? Pagans
What was the name of his pagan father? Abdullah (Abd + Allah)
Did Muhammad participate in the pagan ceremonies of Mecca? Yes
Did the Arabs in pre-Islamic times worship 360 gods? Yes
Did the pagans Arabs worship the sun, moon and the stars? Yes
Did the Arabs built temples to the Moon-god? Yes
Did different Arab tribes give the Moon-god different names/titles? Yes
What were some of the names/titles? Sin, Hubul, Ilumquh, Al-ilah.
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 a pantheon of deities? Yes.
Was he worshipped at the Kabah? Yes.
Was Allah only one of many Meccan gods? Yes
Did they place a statue of Hubul on top of the Kabah? Yes.
At that time was Hubul considered the Moon-god? Yes.
Was the Kabah thus the "house of the Moon-god"? Yes.
Did the name "Allah" eventually replace that of Hubul as the name of the Moon god? Yes.
Did they call the Kabah the "house of Allah"? Yes
Did the pagans develop religious rites in connection with the worship of their gods? Yes.
Did the pagans practice the Pilgrimage, the Fast of Ramadan, running around the Kabah seven times, kissing the black stone, shaving the head, animal sacrifices, running up and down two hills, throwing stones at the devil, snorting water in and out the nose, praying several times a day toward Mecca, giving alms, Friday prayers, etc.? Yes.
Did Muhammad command his followers to participate in these pagan ceremonies while the pagans were still in control of Mecca? Yes (Yusuf Ali, fn. 214, pg. 78).
Did Islam go on to adopt these pagan religious rites? Yes. (Yusuf Ali: fn. 223 pg. 80).
Were al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat called "the daughters of Allah"? Yes.
Did the Qur’an at one point tell Muslims to worship al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat? Yes. In Surah 53:19-20.
Have those verses been "abrogated" out of the present Qur’an? Yes.
What were they called? "The Satanic Verses." Yes.
Was the crescent moon an ancient pagan symbol of the Moon-god throughout the ancient world? Yes.
Was it the religious symbol of the Moon-god in Arabia? Yes
Were stars also used as pagan symbols of the daughers of Allah? Yes
Did the Jews or the Christians of Arabia use the crescent moon with several stars next to it as symbols of their faith? No
Did Islam adopt the pagan crescent moon and stars as it religious symbol? Yes.
As Islam developed over the centuries, did it adopt pagan names, pagan ceremonies, pagan temples and pagan symbols? Yes
Is it possible that most Muslims do not know the pagan sources of the symbols and rites of their own religion? Yes.
Are they shocked to find out the true sources of their ceremonies and stories? Yes
Can Islam be the religion of Abraham if it is derived from paganism? No
What then is Islam? A modern version of one of the ancient fertility cults.
Is the "Allah" of the Qur’an, the Christian God of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? No
Do the Jews say that the Muslim "Allah" is their God too? No
Then whose god is Allah? Paganism
Allah's Daughters:The defrocked super goddesses of the 6th century AD!
Historical notes:
It is an undeniable fact of history that before Muhammed was born, the moon god "al-Ilah" (Allah) had three daughters named al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat. The first two were even named after their father. Each daughter had a separate shrine near Mecca, where Allah's shrine was located.
As Muhammad grew weary from evangelizing his new religion with little success, he was tricked by the devil into adding a verse in the Koran that commanded Muslims to pray to Allah's three pagan daughters Lat, Uzza and Manat. The pagan female trinity was immediately accepted without dissent and the passage was considered part of the revealed Koran. However some time later, Muhammad got a revelation from God that the verse should be removed. After repenting of the error, Muhammad was comforted by God.
Such "after the fact corrective revelations" are very common with cults. Joseph Smith, founder of the Mormons also received an "after the fact corrective revelation" from God retracted the previous "divine command" allowing polygamy.
The historical information confirming the "Satanic verses" is so vast and sure, only the desperate blind would deny the evidence. Undeniably factual information regarding the Satanic verses comes from respected Muslim scholars like at-Tabari and Ibn Sa’d who wrote biographical and historical accounts of the life of Muhammad.
Yet some Muslims actually reject the whole "daughter-gate" story as untrue. These are an extremist minority, you know, the ones who don't believe youth should be taught history or science, but spend 8 hours a day memorizing the Koran. Yet all Muslims are trained to habitually disregard factual world history when it conflicts with the Koran. Take the fact of Christ's crucifixion. Even the Jews agree he was crucified, but the Koran says it was a case of mistaken identity. So Muslims reject the universal record of history and the Bible, but believe the Koran is true. Amazingly, some Islamic apologists actually deny "daughter-gate" ever happened. Yet their only argument is, "The Koran says it cannot be tampered with and that Satan cannot interfere with the revelation process." So, these extremists must either admit that the final prophet revealed a Koranic passage whose origin was Satan, or simply rewrite their own history and deny the whole "daughter-gate" scandal itself.
Exactly what are the Satanic verses:
Here is how the Koran once read with the satanic verses:
Here is how it reads today in the Koran:
Near it is the Garden of Abode. Behold, the Lote-tree was shrouded (in mystery unspeakable!) (His) sight never swerved, nor did it go wrong! For truly did he see, of the Signs of his Lord, the Greatest! Have ye seen Lat. and 'Uzza, And another, the third (goddess), Manat?
Near it is the Garden of Abode. Behold, the Lote-tree was shrouded (in mystery unspeakable!) (His) sight never swerved, nor did it go wrong! For truly did he see, of the Signs of his Lord, the Greatest! Have ye seen Lat. and 'Uzza, And another, the third (goddess), Manat?
These are the exalted cranes (intermediaries) Whose intercession is to be hoped for.
[Words of Satan Deleted]
What! for you the male sex, and for Him, the female? Behold, such would be indeed a division most unfair! (an-Najm 53:19-22)
What! for you the male sex, and for Him, the female? Behold, such would be indeed a division most unfair! (an-Najm 53:19-22)
Here two passages in the Koran that comment on Muhammad's "daughters-gate" scandal:
Like King David of the Bible admonishing himself of his own adultery in Psalms 51, Muhammad discusses the "Satanic verses"
"And their purpose was to tempt thee away from that which We had revealed unto thee, to substitute in our name something quite different; (in that case), behold! they would certainly have made thee (their) friend! And had We not given thee strength, thou wouldst nearly have inclined to them a little. In that case We should have made thee taste an equal portion (of punishment) in this life, and an equal portion in death: and moreover thou wouldst have found none to help thee against Us!" (Koran 17:73-75)
"Never sent We a messenger or a prophet before thee but when He recited (the message) Satan proposed (opposition) in respect of that which he recited thereof. But Allah abolisheth that which Satan proposeth. Then Allah establisheth His revelations. Allah is Knower, Wise; That He may make that which the devil proposeth a temptation for those in whose hearts is a disease, and those whose hearts are hardened - Lo! the evil-doers are in open schism" (Koran 22:52-53)
What scholars say about Allah's Daughters:
Al-'Uzza, al-Lat and Manah, the three daughters of Allah, had their sanctuaries in the land which later became the cradle of Islam. In a weak moment the monotheistic Muhammad was tempted to recognize these powerful deities of Makkah and al-Madinah and make a compromise in their favour, but afterwards he retracted and the revelation is said to have received the form now found in surah 53:19-20. Later theologians explained the case according to the principle of nasikh and mansukh, abrogating and abrogated verses, by means of which God revokes and alters the announcements of His will; this results in the cancellation of a verse and the substitution of another for it (Koran 2 :100). (History Of The Arabs, Philip K. Hitti, 1937, p 96-101)
Allat, according to recent study of the complicated inspirational evidence, is believed to have been introduced into Arabia from Syria, and to have been the moon goddess of North Arabia. If this is the correct interpretation of her character, she corresponded to the moon deity of South Arabia, Almaqah, `Vadd, `Amm or Sin as he was called, the difference being only the oppositeness of gender. Mount Sinai (the name being an Arabic feminine form of Sin) would then have been one of the centers of the worship of this northern moon goddess. Similarly, al-`Uzza is supposed to have come from Sinai, and to have been the goddess of the planet Venus. As the moon and the evening star are associated in the heavens, so too were Allat and al-`Uzza together in religious belief, and so too are the crescent and star conjoined on the flags of Arab countries today. (The Archeology Of World Religions, Jack Finegan, 1952, p482-485, 492)
Prior to the rise of Islam, these three goddesses were associated with Allah as his daughters and all were worshiped at Mecca and other places in the vicinity. (The Archeology Of World Religions, Jack Finegan, 1952, p482-485, 492)
The Aus and Khazraj tribes of Medina were the most prominent worshipers of Manat, while the Quraish of Mecca paid much reverence to Allat and al-`Uzza, most of all to the latter. The Quraish were the tribe to which Muhammad belonged, and Ibn al-Kalbi states that before the prophet began to preach his own message he himself once offered a white sheep to al-`Uzza. Such was the "paganism" in which Muhammad was reared and which he later came to believe it was his mission to dispel. (The Archeology Of World Religions, Jack Finegan, 1952, p482-485, 492)
The same three goddesses appear -and then disappear-in an extremely curious and much-discussed place in Sura 53 of the Quran. The exact context is unknown, but Muhammad was still at Mecca and was apparently feeling the pressures of the Quraysh resistance to his message: "When the Messenger of God saw how his tribe turned their backs on him and was grieved to see them shunning the message he had brought to them from God, he longed in his soul that something would come to him from God that would reconcile him with his tribe. With his love for his tribe and his eagerness for their welfare, it would have delighted him if some of the difficulties which they made for him could have been smoothed, and he debated with himself and fervently desired such an outcome. Then God revealed (Sura 53) ... and when he came to the words "Have you thought al-Lat and al-Uzza and Manat, the third, the other?" (VV. 19-20) Satan cast on his tongue, because of his inner debates and what he desired to bring to his people, the words: "These are the high-flying cranes; verily their intercession is to be hoped for." When the Quraysh heard this, they rejoiced and were happy and delighted at the way in which he had spoken of their gods, and they listened to him, while the Muslims, having complete trust in their Prophet with respect of the message which he brought from God, did not suspect him of error, illusion or mistake. When he came to the prostration, having completed the Sura, he prostrated himself and the Muslims did likewise.... The polytheists of the Quraysh and others who were in the mosque [that is, the Meccan Haram] likewise prostrated themselves because of the reference to their gods which they heard, so that there was no one in the mosque, believer or unbeliever, who did not prostrate himself ... Then they all dispersed from the mosque. The Quraysh left delighted at the mention of their gods." (Tabari, Annals 1.1192-1193 = Tabari vi: 108-109) This is the indubitably authentic story-it is difficult to imagine a Muslim inventing such a tale--of the notorious "Satanic verses." (The Hajj, F. E. Peters, p 3-41, 1994)
And what precisely are we to understand by "exalted cranes"? The Muslim authorities were uncertain about the meaning of gharaniq, as are we. 65 But what they did know was that this was the refrain that the Quraysh used to chant as they circumambulated the Ka'ba: "Al-Lat, and al-Uzza and Manat, the third, the other; indeed these are exalted (or lofty, ‘ula) gharaniq; let us hope for their intercession." (The Hajj, F. E. Peters, p 3-41, 1994)
Even though their principal shrines lay north and east of Mecca, al-Lat, al-Uzza, and Manat were all worshiped by the Quraysh of Mecca, and at least al-Uzza numbered no less than Muhammad himself among her worshipers. (The Hajj, F. E. Peters, p 3-41, 1994)
However, in my opinion it is unthinkable that the men of the later tradition, who regarded Mohammed in every respect as a perfect example for the faithful, would have deliberately invented a story so seriously compromising their Prophet. We must therefore assume, as the historical kernel of the tradition, that Sura 53.19ff. once embodied a different wording, implying acceptance of the pagan conception of the gods, an implication which Mohammed subsequently felt to be incompatible with belief in the one God. In style and rhythm the two Satanic lines fit admirably into the original Sura, which is amongst the earliest revelations, so that it is impossible that they should have been added as late as the Abyssinian emigration. Mohammed often made additions to the older Suras, and in such cases he always employed the formal style which dominates every revelation, so that the added lines always stand out clearly from the original. Moreover, in the original version the Sura probably contained a polemic against paganism. Mohammed objected to the expression, 'Daughters of Allah,' Which his countrymen applied to the three goddesses, and declared that it was wrong to think of God as having daughters. However, he did not intend to deny that the goddesses were high heavenly beings who could make intercession to God. Such a position is really not unthinkable in the earliest period of the Prophet's career. He merely attributed to the heavenly intercessors the same position which the angels occupied in the popular religion of the Eastern Christian churches. Undoubtedly there existed at that time an actual angel cult. (Mohammed: The man and his faith, Tor Andrae, 1936, Translated by Theophil Menzel, 1960, p13-30)
And in Arabian paganism, as we shall see later, the idea of subordinate divine beings acting as mediators and intercessors is not at all unthinkable. That Mohammed actually once thought of the three goddesses as interceding angels is shown by his later addition to the aforementioned Sura 53.26-29: 'And many as are the angels in the Heavens, their intercession shall be of no avail until God hath permitted it to whomsoever He shall please, and whom He will accept. Verily it is they who believe not in the life to come, who name the angels with names of females: But herein they have no knowledge: they follow a mere conceit; and mere conceit can never take the place of acceptance of truth.' Here Mohammed implies that the goddesses are in reality angels, to whom the pagans in their ignorance have given feminine names (comp. 37, 149-50: 43.18). Albeit with strict reservations, the right of the angels to make intercession is here recognized. (Mohammed: The man and his faith, Tor Andrae, 1936, Translated by Theophil Menzel, 1960, p13-30)
Thus, some interpreter of the Koran who belonged to an older generation tried to explain the tradition concerning the original wording of the 53rd Sura to a later type of piety which found it obnoxious. He found the explanation in two passages of the Koran. The first was Sura 17, 75-6: 'And, verily, they had well-nigh beguiled thee from what we revealed to thee, and caused thee to invent some other thing in our name: but in that case they would surely have taken thee as a friend; And had we not confirmed thee, thou hadst well-nigh leaned to them a little.' The context shows that these words refer to a political intrigue by means of which the Quraish had hoped to drive Mohammed out of his native city (verse 78). The other passage was Sura 22, Si, where we read, amongst other things: 'We have not sent any apostle or prophet before thee, amongst whose desires Satan hath injected not some wrong desire, but Allah shall bring to nought that which Satan hath suggested. (Mohammed: The man and his faith, Tor Andrae, 1936, Translated by Theophil Menzel, 1960, p13-30)
"As well as worshipping idols and spirits, found in animals, plants, rocks and water, the ancient Arabs believed in several major gods and goddesses whom they considered to hold supreme power over all things. The most famous of these were Al-Lat, Al-Uzza, Manat and Hubal. The first three were thought to be the daughters of Allah (God) and their intercessions on behalf of their worshippers were therefore of great significance. Hubal was associated with the Semitic god Ba’l and with Adonis or Tammuz, the gods of spring, fertility, agriculture and plenty. (Fabled Cities, Princes & Jin from Arab Myths and Legends, Khairt al-Saeh, 1985, p. 28-30.)
"The Quran (22.52/I) implies that on at least one occasion ‘Satan had interposed’ something in the revelation Muhammad received, and this probably refers to the incident to be described. The story is that, while Muhammad was hoping for some accommodation with the great merchants, he received a revelation mentioning the goddesses al-Lat, al-Uzza, and Manat (53.19), 20 as now found), but continuing with other two (or three) verses sanctioning intercession to these deities. At some later date Muhammad received a further revelation abrogating the latter verses, but retaining the names of the goddesses, and saying it was unfair that God should have only daughters while human beings had sons." (The Cambridge History of Islam, Vol. I, ed. P.M. Holt, 1970, p 37)
Since the Arabs used words expressing kinship to denote abstract relationships, the banat Allah may be no more than 'divine beings' or 'beings with some divine qualities. (Muhammad's Mecca, W. Montgomery Watt, Chapter 3: Religion In Pre-Islamic Arabia, p26-45)
"19 - 30/1 The pagan goddesses: 19,2o El-Lat ... El-'Uzza ... Manat: these goddesses were specially connected with three shrines in the neighbourhood of Mecca, namely at at-Ta’if, Nakhla (on the road to at-Ta'if, and at a place on the road to Medina. The story is that when these verses were first recited, Muhammad was anxious to win over the pagan Meccans, and failed to notice when Satan introduced two (or three) further verses permitting intercession at these shrines. This story could hardly have been invented, and gains support from sura 22, v. 52/1 (see comment). At length Muhammad realized the substitution, and received the continuing revelation as it now is in the Qur'an." (Companion to the Qur’an, W. Montgomery Watt, p 244)
AI-Lat, AI-‘Uzza, and Manat. Among the Qur’an's references to its 7 th-century pagan milieu are three goddesses, called daughters of Allah: AI-Lat, AI-‘Uzza, and Manat; these are also known from earlier inscriptions in northern Arabia. Al-Lat ("the Goddess") may have had a role subordinate to that of El (Ilah), as "daughter" rather than consort (Britannica, Arabian Religions, p1057, 1979)
"Astral and tutelary goddess. Pre-Islamic northern and central Arabian. One of the three daughters of Allah." (Encyclopedia of Gods, Michael Jordan, Allat, p 12)
"Manat: Goddess. Pre-Islamic... One of the so-called daughters of Allah." (Encyclopedia of Gods, Michael Jordan, Manat, p 156)
Was Muhammad ready to compromise his monotheistic message to attract more converts? Was the Qu'ran even momentarily tainted by the influence of absolute evil? In context, we can see that, as Rodinson and Watt have both argued, the story does not present Muhammad as a cynical impostor. (Muhammad: A Western Attempt to Understand Islam, Karen Armstrong, Chapter 6: the Satanic verses, p 108-133, 1991)
The story, as it appears in the histories of Ibn Sa'd and Tabari, says that on one occasion Satan interfered with Muhammad's reception of the divine Word. While Sura 53 was being revealed, this tradition has it, Muhammad felt inspired to utter two verses which declared that the three goddesses al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat could be revered as intermediaries between God and man. But since the Quraysh considered the banat Allah divine beings, they wrongly believed that the Qu'ran had placed them on the same level as God Himself. Thinking that Muhammad had accepted their goddesses as having equal status to Allah, the pagan Qu'raysh bowed down to make the salat with the Muslims and the bitter dispute seemed at an end. Because the Qu'ran appeared to have endorsed the piety of their fathers and to have abandoned its monotheistic message, they no longer saw Islam as a sacrilegious threat that could bring a catastrophe on the people of Mecca. The story goes on, however, that Muhammad later received another revelation which indicated that his apparent acceptance of the cult of the banat Allah had been inspired by 'Satan'. Consequently, the two verses were expunged from the Qu'ran and replaced by others which declared that the three goddesses were figments of the Arabs' imagination and deserved no worship at all. (Muhammad: A Western Attempt to Understand Islam, Karen Armstrong, Chapter 6: the Satanic verses, p 108-133, 1991)
Surely any genuine prophet would be able to distinguish between a divine and a satanic inspiration? Would a man of God tamper with his revelation merely to attract more converts? Recently, however, scholars like Maxime Rodinson and W. Montgomery Watt have attempted to show that even as the story stands it does not necessarily bear such a negative interpretation. Nevertheless, the incident remained far more important in the Western than in the Islamic world; at least until 1988. (Muhammad: A Western Attempt to Understand Islam, Karen Armstrong, Chapter 6: the Satanic verses, p 108-133, 1991)
The other gods mentioned in the Quran are all female deities: Al-Lat, al-Uzza, and Manat, which represented the Sun, the planet Venus, and Fortune, respectively; at Mecca they were regarded as the daughters of Allah... As Allah meant ‘the god’, so Al-Lat means ‘the goddess’." (Islam, Alfred Guilaume, 1956 p 6-7)
"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: Al Uzzah (Venus) most revered of all and pleased with human sacrifice; Manah, the goddess of destiny, and Al Lat, the goddess of vegetable life. " (Meet the Arab, John Van Ess, 1943, p. 29)
"Ali-ilah; the god; the supreme; the all-powerful; all-knowing; and totally unknowable; the predeterminer of everyone’s life destiny; chief of the gods; the special deity of the Quraish; having three daughters: Al Uzzah (Venus), Manah (Destiny), and Alat; having the idol temple at Mecca under his name (House of Allah).; the mate of Alat, the goddess of fate. (Is Allah The Same God As The God Of The Bible?, M. J. Afshari, p 6, 8-9)
"It is certain that they regarded particular deities (mentioned in 1iii. 19-20 are al-‘Uzza, Manat or Manah, al-Lat; some have interpreted vii, 179 as a reference to a perversion of Allah to Allat) as daughters of Allah (vi. 100; xvi, 59; xxxvii, 149; 1iii, 21); they also asserted that he had sons (vi. 100) (First Encyclopedia of Islam, E.J. Brill, 1987, p. 302)
"The Quraysh tribe into which Mohammad was born was particularly devoted to Allah, the moon god, and especially to Allah's three daughters who were viewed as intercessors between the people and Allah." ... "The worship of the three goddesses, Al-Lat, Al-Uzza, and Manat, played a significant role in the worship at the Kabah in Mecca. The first two daughters of Allah had names which were feminine forms of Allah." (The Islamic Invasion, Robert Morey, 1977, p 51)
"This was especially true of Allah, 'the God, the Divinity', the personification of the divine world in its highest form, creator of the universe and keeper of sworn oaths. In the Hejaz three goddesses had pride of place as the 'daughters of Allah'. The first of these was Allat, mentioned by Herodotus under the name of Alilat. Her name means simply 'the goddess', and she may have stood for one aspect of Venus, the morning star, although hellenized Arabs identified her with Athene. Next came Uzza, 'the all-powerful', whom other sources identify with Venus. The third was Manat, the goddess of fate, who held the shears which cut the thread of life and who was worshipped in a shrine on the sea-shore. (Muhammad, Maxime Rodinson, p 16-17.)
"According to this version of the story, the Quraysh were delighted with the new revelation, which in al-Kalbi's words was the traditional invocation made by the Qura'sh to the goddesses as they circumambulated the Ka'aba (Faris 17). The gharaniq were probably Numidian cranes which were thought to fly higher than any other bird. Muhammad, may have believed in the existence of the banat - al-Llah as he believed in the existence of angels and jinn, was giving the 'goddesses' a delicate compliment, without compromising his message. ... The Quraysh spread the good news throughout the city: 'Muhammad has spoken of our gods in splendid fashion. He alleged in what he recited that they are the exalted gharaniq whose intercession is approved" (Muhammad: A Western Attempt to Understand Islam, Karen Armstrong, Chapter 6: the Satanic verses, p 108-133, 1991)
No comments:
Post a Comment