Best to view on the website page at "Prophet of Doom"
http://web.archive.org/web/20140126002116/http://prophetofdoom.net/Prophet_of_Doom_Islams_Terrorist_Dogma_in_Muhammads_Own_Words.IslamAudio book link
http://web.archive.org/web/20140126002116/http://prophetofdoom.net/Prophet_of_Doom_Islams_Terrorist_Dogma_in_Muhammads_Own_Words.IslamChapter 1 part 1
Would You Believe? "When Allah wants to frighten his slaves, the sun falls out of its chariot. This is a full eclipse, a misfortune for the sun."An overview might be helpful before we begin. Islam started when Muhammad, a seventh century Arab, purported to be the Messenger of God. That much we know for sure. The Qur'an, he claimed, was a series of revelations he received directly from a nameless Lord.
The inspirational experience was described by Muhammad to be like a bell, clanging in his head, causing him to shake and sweat profusely. These rather nasty experiences continued, he said, until he was able to decipher the message. Thus the Qur'an, Muslims believe, is God’s revelation to man through his final and most important prophet.
Yet only Muhammad heard these "revelations." He offered no evidence of his divine inspiration - we take the Qur'an solely on his word. The Bible, by comparison, had forty authors, all literate, who told a consistent story over the course of fifteen centuries. Muhammad, who was admittedly illiterate, acted alone in the formation of Islam and is alleged to have invented his religion over the course of twenty-two years.Over a billion people live in nations controlled by Islamic principles. Thus to many, Muhammad was a rousing success. Yet these very same nations are among the world's most destitute, least free, and most violent. And they are the fountain of terror, providing the money, men, motive, and means for murder. In that light, Muhammad’s legacy is considerably more tarnished.There were no miracles to prove Muhammad’s claim of being a godly conduit. There were no healings, walking on water, parting seas, raising folks from the dead, or feeding multitudes. And there are no fulfilled prophecies, like the exacting and detailed predictions that Biblical prophets routinely made to demonstrate their divine authority. But the most troubling part about our absolute reliance on Muhammad’s testimony that he and his Qur'an were divinely inspired is that the prophet's character was as deficient, and his life was as despicable, as anyone who has ever lived.
That's not flattering, but it's the only rational conclusion that can be drawn from the original source material. According to the Qur'an and Sunnah Muhammad founded Islam to rule over Arabs, Persians, and Byzantines, and through conquest, to steal their treasures. I will identify and quote thousands of verses from the Islamic scriptures to prove this, but for now, I want you to be an informed skeptic - one with a global view of Muhammad and his creation. This introductory summary will serve as a handrail in what is otherwise a topsy-turvy and disjointed realm. As we move through Muhammad’s tortured Genesis accounts and convoluted recastings of Biblical patriarchs, you will need this perspective to comprehend his motives and agenda.
Over the course of these pages you will discover that the prophet's "ministry" in Mecca was filled with troubling episodes. Following his first Qur'anic revelation, Muhammad claimed to have been demon possessed. By his own admission, he tried to commit suicide. Those who knew him best, his family and neighbors, said that he had gone mad.
"He is a demon-possessed sorcerer fabricating scripture," they said, accusing him of plagiarism and of having purely selfish motives. They mocked his prophetic claims, ridiculed his Qur'an, and said that his preposterous notion of turning many pagan idols into the one God was insane. As a result of this verbal abuse, all chronicled in the Qur'an, Muhammad pledged to slaughter his kin.
With the Quraysh Bargain, the Meccans proved that Muhammad had established Islam to garner what he craved: power, sex, and money. The Satanic Verses, which followed, demonstrated that he was inspired by Lucifer, the Biblical Satan.
Muhammad’s hallucinogenic Night's Journey to the nonexistent Temple in Jerusalem, confirmed that he could not be trusted. This flight of fancy was followed by the Pledge of Aqaba, where Islam turned political and declared war on all mankind.Ninety Qur'an surahs were revealed during this period. They open with a score that mirror the style and content of Hanif poetry composed by Zayd, a contemporary of Muhammad. At this point, the prophet's revealing spirit was an unnamed "Lord." When we're finally introduced, we learn that the Islamic god's name is Ar-Rahman. And he is a dark and demented spirit, one who spends his days in hell. He deceives men, leads them astray, shackles them, dragging them to their doom. Ar-Rahman personally participates in hell's torments, turning men on a spit, tearing them apart, forcing them to eat thorns, pitch, and boiling water. His paradise is a brothel. Its rivers flow with wine, and multiple virgins satiate the carnal desires of the faithful.
As you might imagine, Muhammad’s contemporaries, the Quraysh tribe in the little berg of Mecca, thought he was nuts. The Qur'an contains over 400 iterations of the never-ending argument between Muhammad and his tribe. Those who knew this "prophet" best called him a charlatan. They charged him with the very offenses the Qur'an and Hadith confirm he was guilty of perpetrating. Then, demonstrating the maturity and discipline of a schoolyard bully, the Islamic god struck back. He slandered the Meccans with an exhaustive list of hateful slurs and threatened them with a painful doom.
When I first read the Qur'an, I was surprised to find the endless regurgitation of spiteful attacks. The Meccans shouted:
"Muhammad, you are an insane, demon-possessed sorcerer, forging the Qur'an." Allah answered:
"My Messenger is not insane, nor is he demon-possessed." I found this perplexing. Why didn't some enterprising scribe edit these incriminating charges out before codifying the Qur'an? Then I realized that without the raging feud, there was no justification for
the scripture's single most repetitive rant: "If you reject Muhammad, Muslims will kill you so that his god can roast you alive."I recognize that this is the antithesis of what you expected to see during the formative years of a great religion. Yet the evidence - the only evidence - is irrefutable. The Qur'an takes us into a demented and violent realm. It’s a bad job of plagiarizing held together by a childish rant. Paradise and hell are both decadent and disgusting, more satanic than divine. And the Sunnah, which professes to be inspired scripture, is no better. Stroke by stroke they present an ugly picture of an abused child who became an abuser.
Having destroyed the "religion" of Islam in Mecca, Muhammad created the political doctrine of "submission" in Medina. He became a pirate, dictator, and terrorist leader. He used Qur'anic scripture to justify some of the most horrific behavior imaginable: pedophilia, incest, rape, torture, assassinations, thievery, mass murder, and terror - all in an unbridled orgy of sex, power, and money. Again, this summation simply reflects the portrayal documented in the Islamic Sunnah and confirmed in the Qur'an.
When he was fifty, Muhammad married a six-year-old child. Then he stole his son's wife. After forcing young girls to watch his men execute their fathers, Muhammad raped them. He tortured his victims to make sure no booty escaped his grasp. He committed mass murder, slaughtering Jews in genocidal rage. In ten years, he ordered a score of assassinations and conducted seventy-five terrorist raids. He used the sword to force Arabs into submission and used the slave trade to finance Islam. He was more interested in collecting girls and taxes than anything else. He ruled through fear. And his god condoned it all.This harsh portrayal does not represent my interpretation of the most negative Islamic scriptures or even a view derived from some jaundiced document crafted by an enemy of the religion. It is the only authentic picture; it's the original. By reading the Qur'an and Hadith you'll see Muhammad embarrass himself and deceive his compatriots - all with his god's blessing. And this portrait of prophet and god was painted by the first Muslims. More shocking still, one does not have to cull out the bad from the good to render this verdict. It’s really hard to find good - in their scripture or their behavior.
To provide some objectivity to this startling portrayal, recognize that nothing is known about Muhammad and his creation, Islam, apart from five books. They represent the only surviving written record scribed within 250 years of the prophet's life. They, and only they, represent fundamental Islam. They are the authority, the "gospel truth." Any statement not derived from these sources is conjecture, speculation, and opinion.
To firmly establish the validity, nature, and appropriateness of these Islamic scriptures, I want to combine what the Islamic scholars said in the preface to the most revered Hadith collection with what others wrote on the opening page of the Qur'an.
"Sahih Bukhari is a Collection of sayings and deeds of Prophet Muhammad, also known as the Sunnah. The reports of the Prophet's sayings and deeds are called Hadith. Bukhari lived a couple of centuries after the Prophet's death and collected his Hadith. Each report in his Collection was checked for compatibility with the Qur'an, and the veracity of the chain of reporters, or isnad, had to be established." Then...
"The Qur'an is one leg of two which form the basis of Islam. The second leg is the Sunnah of the Prophet. What makes the Qur'an different from the Sunnah is its form. Unlike the Sunnah, the Qur'an is quite literally the Word of Allah, whereas the Sunnah [which is composed exclusively of Hadith]
was inspired by Allah but the wording and actions are the Prophet's. The Qur'an has not been expressed using any human words. Its wording is letter for letter fixed by Allah. Prophet Muhammad was the final Messenger of Allah to humanity, and therefore the Qur'an is the last Message which Allah has sent to us. Its predecessors such as the Torah, Psalms, and Gospels have all been superceded."The most respected Islamic scholars tell Muslims that the
"Qur'an is literally the word of Allah" and that the
"Sunnah was inspired by Allah." They say this because there are hundreds of commands in the Qur'an ordering Muslims to obey Muhammad, to believe in him, to follow his example. Since the Qur'an is supposed to be "Allah" speaking, the only way to obey Muhammad, to believe in and follow him, is to know what he said and did. The Hadith represents the sole repository of these words and deeds. So, despite all evidence to the contrary, Muslims believe what you are going to read from the Qur'an and Hadith is divinely inspired scripture directly from Allah.
The preponderance of this "scripture" is presented in Prophet of Doom . To provide some perspective on the scope of the coverage you should know that the Qur'an, formatted like this book, would be 200 pages. Pared of its redundancy, it would be a quarter of that length. We will analyze nearly ninety percent of that material.
Turning to the Sunnah, the Hadith in Bukhari's Collection represent 800 pages of Muhammadisms. The majority are duplicated several times in various sections. Most have multiple lines of transmitters, or isnads, for virtually identical Traditions. Further, half of Bukhari's Collection includes laws, procedures, or meaningless anecdotes that fall outside the scope of this study. Without this redundant and extraneous material there are fifty pages of prime and pertinent reports. I'll cover fifty percent of this directly and reveal thirty percent indirectly through redundancy in Ishaq and Tabari.
Much of Muslim's work is duplicated in Bukhari. He has some unique Traditions, though, and many important insights into the nature of Jihad. Wherever we can glean fresh information from Imam Muslim, we will.
The events presented by Tabari, the first Islamic historian, mirror those contained in Ishaq's biographical account. There's a seventy percent overlap in their coverage of Muhammad’s life and the formation of Islam. Devoid of this overlap, extraneous poetry, and footnotes, their combined 1,500 pages of Islamic Traditions over the period we will be studying could be distilled to 250 pages of Hadith not memorialized elsewhere. Prophet of Doom analyzes eighty percent of these, as they provide the most valuable insights into Islam.
Ishaq's biography and Tabari's history are composed entirely by Hadith. They are Sunnah and thus Islamic scripture. Their Hadith feature chains of reporters, and they are in sync with other Collections and with the Qur'an. The sole difference is the arrangement. Ishaq and Tabari chose Hadith that could be presented in the order they occurred. In fact, without Ishaq and Tabari, Islam would not exist and Muhammad would be unknown. They alone provide the religion's skeleton, its context and chronology. Without this grounding in place and time, the Qur'an is indecipherable, and the remaining Hadith are raped of their meaning. It would be like being a Christian without the Gospels. The Tabari translators tell us:
"Muhammad Ibn Ishaq was the most influential and earliest biographer of the Prophet. His Sira became the standard treatment of the events of Muhammad’s life."Ishaq collected Islamic scripture a century before others. The four generations of oral transmission of Hadith that followed his Collection could have done nothing but degrade the material. But sadly, Ishaq's original has been lost. What remains was edited by Hisham sixty-five years later. And Hisham said: Ishaq:691 "I am omitting things which Ishaq recorded in this book. I have omitted things which are disgraceful to discuss and matters which would distress certain people." That is why Tabari is essential. He had a copy of Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah when he composed his monumental history. Rather than editing it, he referenced Ishaq's Sira each time his Hadith shed additional light on any subject - especially Islamic creation and the Satanic Verses.By the time you have completed this review, you will know much more about Muhammad and fundamental Islam than most Muslims. And you will understand him and his doctrine better than most scholars and clerics. You will see Muhammad as he saw himself. His motives and agenda will be as transparent as his methods and means. Islam will no longer be a mystery. The only conundrum that will remain is why anyone believed this "prophet."
Muhammad and his deity created very little original material. Team Islam was into plagiarism. Most of the Qur'an was lifted from the Torah and Talmud. (Apparently God ran out of good material when he finished the Bible.) Muhammad aside, there are only four non-Biblical characters in the Qur'an. Two represent mythical leaders of mythical lands. The third was Muhammad’s biggest critic, his uncle Abu. The fourth was Alexander the Great - a Muslim prophet, according to Allah.
While all the other names are the same - Adam, Noah, Satan, Gabriel, Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, Joshua, Lot, Moses, Aaron, Jonah, David, Solomon, Mary, and Jesus - their stories are not. The historical events surrounding these lives so meticulously detailed by the Jewish scribes were purposefully convoluted - ripped out of context and time - to justify Muhammad’s thinly disguised agenda. I share this now so you might know that without the inclusion of Bible characters and stories, the Qur'an and Hadith would be very thin on spirituality. We would be left with little more than temper tantrums, threats, and terror. No one would confuse it for a religion.
As for the gross variance between the Bible and Qur'an, the Ar-Rahman/Allah/Muhammad team claimed that the forty literate Jews who lived and witnessed these events, performed the miracles, and recorded the prophecies, got them wrong; well, except for the overwhelming number of passages they copied. Then Muhammad claimed that he, an illiterate Arab, an enemy of the Jews living 900 miles distant and six to twenty-six centuries after the fact, revealed the "truthful" account, having corrected their deceptions. In an ignorant world, it must have sounded plausible.
It is interesting, however, that neither Muhammad, Ar-Rahman, nor Allah bothered to explain how or when these gross deceptions crept into the Bible. And this task becomes increasingly difficult for Muslims because their god said in Qur'an 80:13 that the Judeo-Christian scriptures were in good hands: Qur'an 80:13
"In honored books, exalted in dignity, kept pure and holy, written by the hands of scribes - honorable, pious and just, noble and righteous."The general consensus among Islamic scholars is that the Hebrew Bible, the Old Covenant, was corrupted when Jews failed to accept the Messiah. And the Christian Bible, the Renewed Covenant, was corrupted when Christians failed to accept Muhammad. The following Hadith from their Traditions forms the basis of this doctrinal view. It comes from Bukhari's Book of Hiring, Volume 3, Book 36, Number 471. It can also be found in the Noble Qur'an attached to surah 41:46. Bukhari:V3B36N471
"The Prophet said, 'The example of the Jews, Christians, and Muslims is like the example of a man who employed [Jewish] laborers to work for him from morning till night for specific wages. They worked till midday and then said, "We do not need your money which you have fixed for us and let whatever we have done be annulled." The man said, "Don't quit, complete the rest and take your full wages." But they refused and went away. The man employed another batch after them and said [to the Christians]
, "Complete the rest and yours will be the wages I had fixed for the first batch." So they worked till the time of Asr [afternoon]
prayer. Then they said, "Let what we have done be annulled and keep the wages you have promised." The man said, "Complete the rest of the work, as only a little remains," but they refused. Thereafter, he employed others [Muslims this time]
and they worked till sunset. They received the wages of the two former batches. So, they represented the example of the Jews and Christians, and then Muslims who accepted Islam, the Qur'an, and Sunnah which the Prophet brought.'"Recognizing this wasn't a very good explanation, and knowing that the story was a twisted rip off of one of Yahshua's parables, the Islamic scholars who translated the passage added this footnote:
"The Jews refused to believe in the Message of Jesus, so all their work was annulled. Similarly, the Christians refused to accept the Message of Muhammad and thus their work was annulled too. Such people were not rewarded, because they refused true faith and died unbelievers. They should have accepted the latest Message. Their insistence on keeping their old religion deprived them of any reward. On the other hand, Muslims accepted the new religion and believed in all three Messages. They deserved a full reward for their complete surrender to Allah."Unfortunately for Muslims, this scenario is impossible. How can one believe "all three Messages" if they are radically different? More importantly, if Judeo-Christianity is a true message, what's the justification for a new religion? And as difficult as these questions are, the most troubling still lingers: how and when did the Judeo-Christian scriptures get corrupted?
Fact is, they didn't The Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, survives to this day. It serves as irrefutable proof that nothing was changed. It was translated 275 years before the Christian era. It matches today’s Old Testament with astonishing fidelity. Then you have the Dead Sea scrolls. They were found by a Bedouin shepherd boy in the caves of Qumran. They date between 250 B.C. and 70 A.D., and were thus written during the very period Muhammad claims the Bible was corrupted. These 2,000-year-old scrolls prove that the foundation of Islam is fictitious. They are virtually indistinguishable from today’s text.
The New Testament condemns Islamic theory as well. By the time Muslims said it was corrupted, there were hundreds of translations and as many as a hundred thousand copies distributed throughout the civilized world. Do you suppose that they were all brought together and altered in identical fashion just to spite Muhammad? Or is it more likely that Allah doesn't know what he is talking about? That's the crux of the issue. If the Bible wasn't corrupted in a massive and conspiratorial fashion, Islam can't be trusted. Correcting the Torah and Gospels, setting the record straight, returning to the true religion, were central to Muhammad’s mission. If the scripture wasn't garbled, Islam loses its justification. If the Bible wasn't massively degraded - to the point that it would be unrecognizable - the cornerstone of Islam is a lie.
To believe that team Islam was right and the Hebrew prophets were wrong, one has to dismiss the fact that most of the Qur'anic stories and characters were lifted from Jewish oral traditions in the Talmud. Additionally, the Medina surahs say that Muhammad had to pay Jews for access to their scriptures during the formation of his religion.
"O Children of Israel, call to mind My [Allah’s]
. favor which I bestowed on you....and believe in what I have revealed, verifying [the Torah]
which is with you. Be not the first to deny [the Qur'an]
, neither take a mean price in exchange for My scriptures. [Don't sell Bible stories to Muhammad - give them to him.]
Do not mix up the truth with the falsehood, nor hide the truth while you know it." [Qur'an 2:40] There are a dozen more verses like this, all designed to demean the Jews for charging Muhammad when he needed more scripture to call his own.
The Jews recognized the discrepancies between the accounts they had read to Muhammad and his convoluted revisions. It was obvious that the alterations were attributable to crises in his life rather than consistent with the lives of the Biblical characters they had described. So, they mocked Muhammad, as you and I might have done had we been in their shoes.
Had Muhammad invented his religion independent of the Bible, comparisons would be unnecessary. If Muslims were not killing us while shouting "Allahu Akbar" they would be unimportant. But he did, and they are, so it is.
The Judeo-Christian faiths are wholly independent and separate from Islam. They neither gain nor lose any authenticity from a comparison. The Bible doesn't mention Muhammad, Muslims, Islam, Allah, Mecca, or the Ka'aba, although there are some foreboding predictions about these people, their doctrine, and spirit.
But the reverse is not true. For reasons we shall discuss, Muhammad fancied himself a Jewish prophet - the Messiah even. He claimed that Islam was the original religion of Abraham. He professed that Adam, Noah, Moses, and Jesus were really Muslims. And as we have seen, he claimed that the Hebrew Bible and Christian Gospels were inspired scripture, directly from his god. Then he said that they were corrupt, which made his message necessary.
This is underscored in the 163rd verse of the 4th surah: Qur'an 4:163
"Surely We [Allah]
have revealed to you [Muhammad] as We revealed to Noah, and the prophets after him, and We revealed to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and their offspring and the tribes [of Israel]
, and Jesus and Job and Jonah and Aaron and Solomon. We gave to David the Book of Psalms, and We sent apostles...and Moses, to whom Allah spoke His Word directly. All of these apostles of good news and warners were sent so that people should not have a plea against Allah." None of these men were apostles. Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, Job, Aaron, and Solomon weren't even prophets. David was one of many writers of Psalms. And Moses spoke to Yahweh, not Allah.
In Qur'an 3:3 we read: Qur'an 3:3
"He [Allah]
has verily revealed to you this Book [the Qur'an]
in truth and confirmation of the Books revealed before, as indeed He had revealed the Torah and the Gospel." This is reconfirmed: Qur'an 5:46
"Later, in the train of the prophets, We [Allah] sent Jesus, son of Mary, confirming the Torah which had been sent down before him, and gave him the Gospel containing guidance and light, which corroborated the earlier Torah." Then... Qur'an 5:47
"Let the people of the Gospel [Christians]
judge by what has been revealed in it by Allah." And... Qur'an 5:48
"To you We have revealed the Qur'an containing the truth, confirming the earlier revelations [Torah, Psalms, and Gospels]
, and preserving them from change and corruption. So judge between them by what has been revealed by Allah."We will judge between them because Muhammad gave us no choice. Yet I will not attempt to validate the Biblical account. It isn't the purpose of this study, and the Bible gains nothing from repudiating the Islamic corruptions of its scriptures. Islam, however, has no credibility unless Muhammad can disprove the Biblical accounting, as he based Islam on his variant of the Torah.
Allah wasn't the least bit ambiguous when he said that the Torah, Psalms, and Gospels were his divinely inspired scriptures. But that's not possible since the Torah and Qur'an contradict each other on most every page. The message of salvation proclaimed in the Gospels is the antithesis of Islam. To say that they were all inspired by the same God is irrational, a logical impossibility.
In Qur'an 2:59 Allah lambasted the Jews: Qur'an 2:59
"The wicked [Jews]
changed and perverted the word We [Allah]
had spoken to a word distorted." Because of their egregious behavior, the Jews "became like apes despised." But then, in the 5th surah, Allah says of the "earlier revelations," the "Torah and Gospels," that he "preserved them." So which is it? Why correct that which has been preserved from change? And more importantly, why are they so different if they are from the same God? All this makes you wonder why someone didn't have the presence of mind to edit the Qur'an before they claimed it was divine.
The Qur'an acknowledges that the Bible is ancient history's most detailed and accurate account of a people and their relationship with their Creator. The Hebrew Scriptures are not only the Qur'an's most frequently quoted resource, its characters and stories dominate each of Islam’s holy books. And up to the point Muhammad corrupted them, he was on solid ground for the vast majority of the places and events described in the Bible have been shown by archeologists to be valid historical depictions. None have ever been shown to be inaccurate. Each time an attempt is made, and there have been thousands, the critic finds himself impaled on the archeologist's spade.
Yet apart from the Bible, there is no such evidence in the Qur'an. Not a single historical artifact has been found to justify its claims. There is no reference to Allah, Muhammad, Mecca, or the Ka'aba independent of the Qur'an or Hadith. And the Qur'an itself is a disjointed hodgepodge. It’s not even chronological, much less historical. Unrelated subjects are strung together without intelligible transitions, rhyme or reason.
