Refuting WhoWasMuhammad

A refutation of the anti-Islamic website created by an
ignorant Christian who also indirectly exposed to all

Muslims that Christianity is a false religion thanks to
their fallacious reasoning.
By Spreading the truth
A REFUTATION
REFUTATION OF WHOWASMUHAMMAD(‫)ﷺ‬.ORG
CONTENTS
BEFORE I BEGIN ................................................................................................................................ 5
A THANKYOU .................................................................................................................................... 6
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 7
DISCLAIMER ...................................................................................................................................... 8
THE SEXUAL PERVERSIONS OF MUHAMMAD PBUH – A RESPONSE .................................................. 9
CLAIM 1 AISHA AND MUHAMMAD PBUH MARRIAGE AND CONSUMATION................................. 9
CLAIM 2 PARADISE BEING A BROTHEL ........................................................................................ 13
CLAM 3 VISIT ALL 9 OF HIS WIVES IN ONE NIGHT ........................................................................ 17
CLAIM 4 SEX SLAVES ................................................................................................................... 17
CLAIM 5 SUCKED ON TOUNGE .................................................................................................... 21
CLAIM 6 AISHA WOULD WASH SEMEN FROM THE CLOTHES OF PROPHET PBUH........................ 22
CLAIM 7 BREASTFEEDING ............................................................................................................ 22
CLAIM 8 TEMPORARY MUTAH .................................................................................................... 23
CLAIM 9 MARRIED ADOPTED WIFES SON.................................................................................... 24
CLAIM 10 REFUSING SEXUAL INTERCOURSE................................................................................ 25
HYPOCRISY – LETS LOOK AT CHRISTIANITY ................................................................................. 26
CONCLUSION - WHAT HAVE WE LEARNT FROM THIS SECTION ................................................... 28
MUHAMMAD PBUH PLAGARISED – A RESPONSE ........................................................................... 30
DID MUHAMMAD ‫ ﷺ‬PLAGARISE? .............................................................................................. 30
LOOKING AT THE POINTS OF THE AUTHOR ................................................................................. 31
SOURCES YOU CAN CHECK RELATED TO THIS SECTION ............................................................... 33
CONCLUSION – WHAT HAVE WE LEARNT FROM THIS SECTION................................................... 34
CORRUPTION OF THE QURAN - A RESPONSE .................................................................................. 37
ADDRESSING THE CLAIMS ........................................................................................................... 37
HYPOCRISY – LETS LOOK AT CHRISITIANITY ................................................................................ 41
CONCLUSION – WHAT HAVE WE LEARNT FROM THIS SECTION................................................... 43
MUHAMMAD'S ‫ ﷺ‬OPPRESSION AND MISTREATMENT OF WOMEN - A RESPONSE ....................... 44
CLAIMS........................................................................................................................................ 44
WHAT MUHAMMAD ‫ ﷺ‬SAID ABOUT WOMEN THAT THE AUTHOR DOESN’T WANT YOU TO
KNOW? ....................................................................................................................................... 73
CONCLUSION – WHAT HAVE WE LEARNT FROM THIS SECTION? ................................................. 75
MUHAMMAD'S ‫ ﷺ‬VIOLENCE, INTOLERANCE, HATE, AND RACISM – A RESPONSE ......................... 77
MUHAMMAD ‫ ﷺ‬VIOLENT AND INTOLERANT – RESPONSE TO CLAIMS ................................... 77
1
MUHAMMAD ‫ ﷺ‬RACIST – A RESPONSE.................................................................................. 92
FINAL POINTS – ADDRESSING THE CLAIMS IN THE POTENTAL OBJECTIONS ............................ 94
HYPOCRISY – LETS LOOK AT CHRISTIANITY ............................................................................. 96
CONCLUSION – WHAT HAVE WE LEARNT FROM THIS SECTION ............................................... 97
MUHAMMAD'S ‫ ﷺ‬UNDENIABLE LIES: MUHAMMAD VS. SCIENCE, HISTORY, AND REALITY – A
RESPONSE ....................................................................................................................................... 98
WRONG ABOUT SCIENCE – A RESPONSE ................................................................................. 98
MUHAMMAD PBUH AND SCIENCE – WHAT THE AUTHOR DID NOT TELL YOU ...................... 108
MUHAMMAD ‫ ﷺ‬AND HISTORY ............................................................................................ 109
OTHER LIES – A RESPONSE .................................................................................................... 115
HYPORCISY – LETS LOOK AT CHRISTIANTIY ........................................................................... 119
CONCLUSION – WHAT HAVE WE LEARNT .............................................................................. 120
MUHAMMAD ‫ﷺ‬: IMPEACHED BY HIS OWN TEACHINGS – A RESPONSE....................................... 120
WHAT THE AUTHOR DID NOT TELL YOU? .............................................................................. 136
HYPOCRISY LETS LOOK AT CHRISTIANTIY .............................................................................. 136
CONCLUSION – WHAT HAVE WE LEARNT FROM THIS SECTION ............................................. 137
MUHAMMAD'S ‫ ﷺ‬DISGUSTING HYGIENE INSTRUCTIONS – A RESPONSE .................................... 138
MUHAMMAD ‫ ﷺ‬WRONG ABOUT PERSONAL HYGIENE - RESPONSE ..................................... 138
MUHAMMAD ‫ ﷺ‬SEEMED OBSESSED WITH URINE - RESPONSE ............................................ 140
ISLAM AND HYGEINE – WHAT THE AUTHOR DID NOT TELL YOU ........................................... 143
HYPOCRISY – LET’S LOOK AT CHRISTIANITY .......................................................................... 143
MUHAMMAD’S ‫ ﷺ‬SUPERSTITION AND THE PAGAN ORIGINS OF ISLAM – A RESPONSE............... 145
MUHAMMAD'S ‫ ﷺ‬SUPERSTITION – RESPONSE TO CLAIMS .................................................. 145
ISLAM IS A COPY OF MANY PAGAN TRADITIONS – RESPONSE TO CLAIMS ............................ 150
HYPOCRISY – LET’S LOOK AT CHRISTIANITY .......................................................................... 151
IT'S ALL ABOUT MUHAMMAD ‫ﷺ‬: WAS HE SERVING ALLAH OR VICE VERSA? – A RESPONSE ....... 153
MUHAMMAD'S ‫ ﷺ‬CONVENIENT, SELF-SERVING REVELATIONS – A RESPONSE .................... 153
WAS MUHAMMAD ‫ ﷺ‬SERVING ALLAH, OR WAS ALLAH SERVING MUHAMMAD ‫ – ?ﷺ‬A
RESPONSE ............................................................................................................................. 160
THE HIGHLY CONVENIENT AND QUESTIONABLE TIMING OF HIS SUPPOSED REVELATIONS – A
RESPONSE ............................................................................................................................. 160
MUHAMMAD'S ‫ ﷺ‬NARCISSISM – A RESPONSE .................................................................... 163
MUHAMMAD'S ‫ ﷺ‬HYPOCRISY – A RESPONSE ...................................................................... 165
CONCLUSION WHAT HAVE WE LEARNT FROM THIS SECTION ............................................... 170
2
RANDOM FACTS AND CRAZY TEACHINGS: ODD AND RANDOM THINGS MUHAMMAD DID AND
SAID – A RESPONSE....................................................................................................................... 172
RESPONSE ................................................................................................................................. 172
HYPOCRISY – LETS LOOK AT CHRISTIANITY ........................................................................... 189
CRAZY AND DISTURBING THINGS MUHAMMAD SAID ABOUT GOD AND SATAN – A RESPONSE .. 192
ABOUT GOD- A RESPONSE .................................................................................................... 192
ABOUT SATAN – A RESPONSE ............................................................................................... 195
MUHAMMAD: DISTURBED AND DECEIVED – A RESPONSE ........................................................... 200
MUHAMMAD WAS A DISTURBED INDIVIDUAL – A RESPONSE .............................................. 200
MUHAMMAD WAS DECEIVED ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS – A RESPONSE ............................. 204
THE VIOLENT AND OPPRESSIVE HISTORY OF ISLAM – A RESPONSE .............................................. 209
TERRORISM – A RESPONSE.................................................................................................... 209
WOMEN – A RESPONSE ......................................................................................................... 210
CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE WORLD – A RESPONSE .................................................................. 211
CONCLUSION – WHAT HAVE WE LEARNT FROM THIS SECTION? ........................................... 212
MUHAMMAD PBUH AND THE BIBLE – A RESPONSE ..................................................................... 213
ADDRESSING THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM .......................................................................... 213
MUHAMMAD PBUH BOTH AFFIRMED AND CONTRADICTED THE BIBLE - A RESPONSE ......... 214
THE RELIABILITY OF THE BIBLE – A RESPONSE ....................................................................... 214
MUHAMMAD PBUH MAKES IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR MUSLIMS TO REJECT WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS –
A RESPONSE .......................................................................................................................... 216
BECAUSE OF THE BIBLE, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE QURAN TO BE TRUE – A RESPONSE ........ 217
ABOUT MUHAMMAD PBUH INCORRECTLY SAYING HE WAS WRITTEN ABOUT IN THE TORAH
AND THE GOSPELS – A RESPONSE ......................................................................................... 218
CONCLUSION - WHAT HAVE WE LEARNT FROM THIS SECTION ............................................. 232
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES .............................................................................................................. 233
TURNING THE TABLES ................................................................................................................... 234
ENDING TO RESPONSE .................................................................................................................. 236
CLOSING REMARKS ............................................................................................................... 236
NON-MUSLIM’S ON MUHAMMAD PBUH .............................................................................. 236
.............................................................................................................................................. 237
3
MESSAGE TO THE INDIVIDUAL AND CHRISTIANS WHO FOLLOW THE SITE ............................ 238
SEEKING THE TRUTH? ............................................................................................................ 239
FINAL POINT I HAVE TO SAY.......................................................................................................... 239
4
BEFORE I BEGIN
I start this document by saying “In the name of God the most beneficent the most merciful”
All praise is due to Allah. The creator of the Heavens on the Earth. The one who gives life and takes it.
I ask Allah to forgive us of all of our sins and grant us paradise.
I ask Allah to grant to commendation and protection to Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬and to all of the Prophets and
messengers before Muhammad pbuh. Muhammad pbuh is the last and final Prophet the seal of the
Prophets sent as a mercy to mankind.
I ask him to grant me the knowledge and the patience to write this document. I ask him to grant the
author of the website I am responding to an open mind and patience to go through my whole response
checking all the evidences and links provided.
I hope that this document will be very beneficial to all who read it. InshAllah, it will refute many
allegations people make against Muhammad pbuh and Islam.
If this document does benefit you and clears up doubts to those who are Muslim or helps you revert
to Islam then remember to thank Allah. Indeed “Allah guides whom he wills”
Any good I have done in this refutation is all thanks to Allah so again thank Allah and say Alhumdulillah,
and any mistake I have made is due to my ignorance. May Allah cure us all of ignorance.
5
A THANKYOU
Whenever you write anything in life such as an article or a response like this it is always good to get
a second set of eyes to look over it. As any mistakes you make you may miss out and others will spot.
So, I want to thank the brothers who reviewed some of my responses.
MAY ALLAH BLESS THEM ALL FOR DOING THIS.
6
INTRODUCTION
Welcome to my response to the website WhoWasMuhammad(‫)ﷺ‬.org. This is hateful website which

slanders the human whom I, and almost 2 billion people love the most Muhammad (pbuh. I decided
that I am going to make a full response this time. So, sit back and take your time reading through this.
The motive of the user is very clear
“Many people, especially in the West, are told that Islam is a religion of peace, but a look at the best
and earliest Islamic sources show something disturbingly different. The purpose of Who Was
Muhammad is to shed a light on the darkness of Muhammad, the founder of Islam, while
simultaneously letting the light of who Jesus is shine in the darkness.”
Interestingly the author of the site says the below in the about us section
“Unless otherwise noted, the numbering system used for the Hadith is the USC-MSA web (English)
reference. The first number will be the book/chapter number, and the second number will be the Hadith
number. Please go to quranx.com or sunnah.com to be able to easily verify and see for yourself most
of the facts that are contained on this site. Please note that some of the facts are repeated, as some
of them can fall into more than one category…..”
Ok, well thank you for that this is something that we will do. I am going to verify what you have said.
I am now going to go over what my claim is with this response and my plan for this response as well.
This response will be going over some of the articles on that website. I believe that the website I am
responding too is a gross misrepresentation of what Islam and Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬is. I intend to
demonstrate this thoroughly. The owner of the site is and the site is used by ignorant Christians who
regard it as a “credible” source. For that reason, I am going to also draw logical inferences from the
individual’s articles then use the same logic against Christianity. The reason for this is for the purpose
of consistency. I am going to expose the clear and blatant hypocrisy. I personally have many reasons
why I reject Christianity and you can read these reasons by going to the below link. You will notice that
I am respectful in that article and in general I am a polite person.
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/why-i-reject-christianity/
But logically I should update that article with what I am going to say throughout this response.
Christians will reject it and so will the author this is the whole point. I will say it again many times in
this response to make it categorically clear. I am going to refute your arguments and then use your
logic against you to criticise your own religion so that you can see the error in your ways.
The attitude of some Christians is appalling and an absolutely disgraceful representation of what
Christianity is. The author is clearly trying to make Muslims leave Islam by presenting arguments that
they believe prove Islam is false. If I point out the hypocrisy by using their same logic against them
does that mean Christianity is false. Yes, according to the logic of the author of the website and also
according to any Christian who regards the authors site as “credible”. You will soon realise how the
logic of the author is ridiculous as it can be turned and used to critique Christianity. This combined
with the evidence that I will provide refuting the claims put against Islam by the author, will God
Willing make you realise that the individual is ignorant, rude and very dishonest.
I will be exposing hypocrisy but the primary purpose of this document is to simply refute what the
individual has said. I already know from experience that some people won’t listen so I have
7
deliberately put myself in the shoes of the author of the site to make the same claims against
Christianity.
So please read this with an open mind and an open heart. REMEMBER TO READ EVERYTHING AND
CHECK THE EVIDENCES THAT I LINK THROUGHOUT. THIS IS CRITICAL.
DISCLAIMER
Throughout this response I will link things such as YouTube videos or websites. It is of paramount
importance that you visit these links as they will support my points or refute the individual entirely as
always ‫هللا أعلم‬. God knows best. At the end of this response, I will provide you with a list of resources
in which you can visit to learn about Islam properly. This will include websites and YouTube channels
that provide education and refute critics and clear up misconceptions.
I am no Scholar. I am no Mufti. I am no Imam. I am no Da’ee. I am simply someone who has the ability
to think and reflect. The ability to research and to understand. I fact check. If someone who was any
of those titles, I mentioned at the beginning saw the authors site and decided to produce a refutation
they would naturally produce a much better response than me. Nevertheless, I believe I have done a
decent job InshAllah. However, I will leave that for you to decide. Bear in mind the author repeats
many points and I mean many. In some instances, I will simply paste past evidences when they repeat
claims, provide even more evidence and in other situations I will just ignore when they repeat claims.
Also, you can choose how you would like to go through this document. I would recommend if you can
to open the authors article (the one I respond too) then read my refutation of it side by side. Or have
the authors article open on one tab and my response on another. Every response I do I cite the relevant
article from the authors site that I am responding too. Take your time with this it is a very long
response and check all the evidences I provide I want you to do this so you can see how I refute the
claims the author has made.
Some of the responses as I have said I have listed URL’s for you to check out I have copied and pasted
responses from articles in some instances. Full credit goes to the people whose work I have copied
and pasted. May Allah reward them.
At the end of this response, I will provide you with a list of resources that you can refer too which clear
up many misconceptions about Islam and if you think I have not covered some claims in enough detail
then you can refer to “additional resources” section.
I do plan on producing YouTube videos relating to specific misconceptions in the future as well.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKtCxYXlBYBmEwYBFDKXwPw/videos - My channel
8
THE SEXUAL PERVERSIONS OF MUHAMMAD PBUH – A RESPONSE
Here is the URL for this https://www.whowasmuhammad.org/muhammad-s-sexual-perversions

Below is my response
The author makes many claims throughout this article some of which are similar. So, when you read
through this you will see how I address a couple of his points under one claim heading. Before we
begin, I recommend you go through the below point in italics. Some points I will be refuting in this
section have already been brought up by David Wood and refuted. I will reference this again in the
response in the relevant sections.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWWGA_607MI – I recommend you watch through this David

Wood made a video “Top 5 most disgusting facts about Muhammad” he challenged Farid to respond
and Farid did and he refuted it. Then David backtracked see this as well
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EB95o7cPcMs How ridiculous.
The inference we can draw from this article is that the user is someone who does not like perversion
of sexual misconduct. If we find any example of this in the Bible, then according to the Bible
Christianity must be false.
CLAIM 1 AISHA AND MUHAMMAD PBUH MARRIAGE AND CONSUMATION
CLAIM - Muhammad married a girl named Aisha that was only 6 or 7 years old: and consummated it
at 9
The author of the site references Muhammad pbuh marriage to Aisha. The author claims that
Muhammad pbuh was a pervert and although not mentioned in this article in others and on their
social media they call the Prophet pbuh a paedophile. I have written an article on this on my website.
I have linked this below for you. You need to check every link throughout this article. I provide plenty
of evidence.
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/age-of-aisha/ - I wrote this it is well referenced

and refutes all the allegations also exposes the hypocrisy of the author.
https://twitter.com/RioPedro2/status/1324667117845778434?s=19 – Also here are some additional

resources for you
In my website, I also provide evidence in regards to the biblical age for marriage looking at the
examples of Mary and Rebekah. Whilst some Rabbis and Scholars say Rebekah was 3 years old, I
believe the evidence suggesting she was 10-12 to be far more convincing. The author of
WhoWasMuhammad.org should logically have an issue with this as they criticise Muhammad pbuh.
We will explore the hypocrisy more throughout my whole response. They are blatantly ignorant and
the article from my website exonerates Muhammad pbuh. Also, biblically Muhammad pbuh did
nothing wrong. This is something you will see when you read my full article and check all the evidences
throughout.
The first person who criticised the Prophet pbuh for his marriage with Aisha RA was Morgoliouth in
1905 in his book "Mohammed and the Rise of Islam " on pages 234-235 where he wrote :
9
"How parsimonious the Prophet was compelled to be is shown by the fact that when, seven months
after his arrival, he married Ayeshah, there was no wedding feast. Since her father, the faithful Abu
Bakr, provided the bridegroom with the indispensable gift to the bride, perhaps this ill-assorted union
(for as such we must characterise the marriage of a man of fifty-three to a child of nine, dragged from
her swing and her toys) was accelerated by the desire to obtain some ready money "
So it's a very recent criticism. During the time of the Prophet Muhammad pbuh, none of his enemies
criticised him for this marriage. And after his death , John of Damascus who was one of the Christians
who criticized Islam and attacked the Prophet pbuh the most didn't even attack him for this marriage.
The reason is that it was the norm during this time to marry early ,especially considering the fact that
the life expectancy was much lower than today .
The context of the marriage is that after the death of Khadidja RA ,the Prophet pbuh was saddened
by his death and his companions were afraid about his health .Therefore , Khawlah ,one of the female
companions of the Prophet , asked him if he wanted to marry Aisha RA .The Prophet pbuh agreed .
Khawlah then told Aisha's parents that the Prophet pbuh wanted to marry their daughter .Tge thing
is that Abu Bakr RA (Aisha's father ) had no problem with this marriage .His 2 problems was that Aisha
RA was already engaged to a non-muslim called Jubayr Ibn Mut’im Ibn Adi who was a non-muslim .
But the parents of Jubayr broke the engagement because they would fear that Aisha RA would convert
their son to Islam .And his second problem was that he thought that it was forbidden to marry the
daughter of your brother .However , the Prophet pbuh explained to him that they were only brothers
in religion and that Aisha RA was lawful to him . So Aisha RA was engaged to the Prophet pbuh when
she was 6-7 years old and the marriage was consummated when she was 9-10 years old. Now you
have to remember that the Arabs during the time of the Prophet pbuh didn't have any calendar and
the age of people was based on events. They also used to round numbers . Therefore, when Aisha RA
talked about his age, it’s very approximate .This paper talks more about this subject of the
determination of age of the Arabs during the time of the Prophet pbuh:
Prideaux who wrote a book attacking the Prophet pbuh called "The True Nature of Imposture fully
displayed in the Life of Mahomet" trying to prove that Muhammad pbuh was an impostor and a false
prophet in 1697 . He actually defended the Prophet pbuh about this marriage and tried to make sense
of it .He wrote :"For it is usual in those hot countries as it is all India over, which is in the same clime
with Arabia, for women to be ripe (reach the puberty) for marriage at that age, and also to bear
children the year following.”
There is an interesting Hadith in Sahih Bukhari 465 who read as follows:
Narrated 'Aisha:
(the wife of the Prophet) I had seen my parents following Islam since I attained the age of puberty.
Not a day passed but the Prophet visited us, both in the mornings and evenings. My father Abii Bakr
thought of building a mosque in the courtyard of his house and he did so. He used to pray and recite
the Qur'an in it. The pagan women and their children used to stand by him and look at him with
surprise. Abu Bakr was a Soft-hearted person and could not help weeping while reciting the Quran.
The chiefs of the Quraish pagans became afraid of that (i.e. that their children and women might be
affected by the recitation of Quran)."
In this Hadith, we learn that Aisha RA reached puberty and physical maturity before the consummation
of the marriage .
10
The word "Alaq "in this Hadith translated as Puberty means more reasonable; brighter, smarter, more
intelligent | … a’qal al’umr the most reasonable time of life, the years of reason and Maturity " So the
age of Maturity !
Also in Sunan Abu Dawud book 41 ,Hadith 4915 , we learn that Aisha RA experienced alopecia " before
the consummation of his marriage who is a term used for hair loss .It happens as early as the Puberty
begins . This Hadith is also interesting : Narrated Aisha: "When the girl becomes 9 years old, she has
become a woman."Jami at-Tirmidhi 1109
Imam Shafi narrated "I have seen many girls in Yemen undergo menses (reach the age of puberty) at
the age of nine.” Dhahabi, Siyar A’lam an-Nubala’, Vol. 10, p. 91
Bayhaqi narrated In San‘aa’ I saw a grandmother who was twenty-one years old; she reached puberty
at the age of nine and gave birth at the age of ten, and her daughter reached puberty at the age of
nine and gave birth at the age of ten.
As-Sunan al-Kubra by al-Bayhaqi (1/319)
The fact that Girls doesn't reach physical maturity at the onset of puberty today doesn't mean that it
applies to the past also .The endocrinologists Peter Gluckman and Mark Hanson clarified the point
between biological and psychosocial maturation as it’s a relatively recent phenomenon and the onset
of puberty does not decide the adulthood of a given person today, this same judgment does not apply
to people of the past.
Also ,you have to remember that it was Abu Bakr who urged the Prophet to consummate his marriage
with Aisha and not the Prophet himself and Aisha's mother took care of Aisha's physical growth
Aisha RA narrated :The Prophet married me when I was six years old. He was then urged by my parents
for consummating the marriage (three years later )Al-Isbahani, Abu Nu‘aim, Al-Tibb al-Nabawi, Ed.
Mustafa Khezr Dönmez (Beirut: Dar Ibn Hazm, 2006) Vol.2, 732 No. 82
So Aisha's parents were looking at Aisha's growth and when she reached physical maturity ,they urged
the Prophet pbuh to consummate his marriage with Aisha .
And as Prideaux mentioned , at the age of 9 , Girls in hot countries such as India and Arabia used to
be ripe for marriage at this age .
Now let's look at the benefits of this marriage and its divine wisdom .
Firstly, Aisha RA narrated 2210 hadith and was one of the most important narrators of Hadith and was
the greatest scholar of her time . Abu Musa al-Ash‘ari narrated: Never had we (the companions) any
difficulty for the solution of which we approached Aisha and did not get some useful information from
heral-Tirmidhi, al-Sunan/ al-Jami’ al-Kabir, Hadith 3883
Without her ,Islam would have been very different .Evidences of a lot of rulings came from her
narrations because she was very close to the Prophet and knew him better than everyone else
.Mahmud b. Labid said: “Prophet’s wives remembered a large number of hadith reports with no one
[remembering them] like ‘Aisha and Umm Salama. ‘Aisha used to give legal opinions in the time of
‘Umar and ‘Uthman and till her death;
After the Prophet his senior companions ‘Umar and ‘Uthman would ask about the Prophetic role
model on various issues"
Ibn Sa‘d, al-Tabaqat al-Kubra, Vol.2, 286

11
Let's mention also that no serious non-Muslim Scholar thinks that this marriage was immoral or that
it is a good argument against Islam .
Colin Turner wrote about this issue in his book "Islam: the basics, Routledge 2006, p. 34-35. :
"A marriage between an older man and a young girl was customary among the Bedouins, as it still is
in many societies across the world today. It was not unheard of in Muhammad’s time for boys and
girls to be promised to each other in marriage almost as soon as they were born, particularly if the
union was of direct political significance to the families concerned. However, such marriages were
almost certainly not consummated until both parties had entered adulthood, which Arabs in the 7th
century tended to reach at an earlier age than Westerners today. It is highly unlikely that Muhammad
would have taken Aisha into his bed until she was at least in her early teens, which was wholly in
keeping with the customs of the day, and in context not in the least improper."
And Karen Armstrong in Muhammad: a prophet for our time, Harper Collins 2006, p. 105. wrote :
"There was no impropriety in Muhammad’s betrothal to Aisha. Marriages conducted in absentia to

seal an alliance were often contracted at this time between adults and minors who were even
younger than Aisha. This practice continued in Europe well into the early modern period. There was
no question of consummating the marriage until Aisha reached puberty, when she would be married
off like any other girl. "
To finish, I would like to quote Asadullah Ali and Jonathan AC Brown on this issue. So Asadullah Ali
debunked the objection that the Prophet pbuh did something considered as unacceptable according
to modern standards. He wrote :
"False dichotomy. Muhammad is always perfect because he dealt with the conditions of his time in
a perfectly moral way. The problem here is that you seem to believe conditions for society are always
static. If the average life expectancy was like 30 1400 years ago, it's perfectly rational to marry as
early as possible. Saying we don't follow that today is not an admission to his lack of perfection, but
a basic understanding of human development and history. Condemning him for this action is
evidence of a lack of education. And anyone who claims this is "subjective morality" is even
dumber."
And Jonathan AC Brown discussed about this issue on his Facebook here
https://www.facebook.com/jonathanacbrown/posts/10156589119079850 and he wrote :
"1.In Islam, within the outer bounds of Shariah (there has to be mahr, no anal sex, you can't marry a
duck, etc.), what's right and wrong in marriage, what makes good conduct for husbands and wives,
and when it's appropriate to get married, is all determined by 'urf (normative custom).
2.The Prophet married Aisha at 9 because that was normatively fine in that 'urf, as it was in most
societies until the last century or so and still is in some today.
3.If you find that hard to believe, then start with this axiom: your understanding of sexual propriety is
not the be-all and-end of universal morality. Read Peter Stearn's Sexuality in World History or the first
chapter of Syrett's American Child Bride. Stop being prisoner to such a narrow view of human history!
4.According to the Shariah, there is no reason on earth why we have to/should marry people that
young, since [see point 1].
12
5.As I discussed at length in my book Misquoting Muhammad, it's entirely acceptable under the
Shariah to pass administrative laws prohibiting marriage under certain ages... it's a type of legislation
called 'taqyid al-mubah (restricting the permissible)', done in pursuit of legitimate communal goods
(masalih).
6.To summarize: You don't have to feel okay about someone marrying a 9 year old because you're a
product of your society and in your society it's not ok. So don't marry a 9 year old! It would be against
the Shariah to do so in the US or other developed countries. But you feeling uneasy about something
doesn't somehow make it disappear from history. You're not the center of the universe. Relax!"
The information’s I used are from a thread a brother of mine made months ago on Twitter here:
https://twitter.com/RioPedro2/status/1334114494772109318?s=20
And also those articles :
https://icraa.org/prophet-muhammad-marriage-with-nine-year-old-aisha-a-review-of-contentions/ -
of this does not work https://icraa.org/ - Go to their homepage and search for it.
https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2008/07/why-prophet-muhammad-married-aisha-
when.html?m=1
https://www.reddit.com/r/MuslimsRespond/comments/7uk1tg/prophet_muhammad_sawss_marri
age_to_aisha_at_young/
https://abuaminaelias.com/was-prophet-muhammad-pedophile/
And If you have serious doubts about the marriage between the Prophet Muhammad pbuh and Aisha
RA ,don't forget to check this thread where a brother of mine compiled a lot of articles and videos
about this topic :
https://twitter.com/RioPedro2/status/1324667117845778434?s=20
CLAIM 2 PARADISE BEING A BROTHEL
CLAIM - His description of Paradise is an eternal brothel for men to satisfy their sexual lusts. He said
that in Paradise, men will have an eternal erection, will have 72 wives with desirable privates.
Imagine making a point and one of the hadith you reference is Da’if. The individual uses Sunan Ibn
Majah 4337. Below is the evidence of it being Da’if.
13
But wait some of you will accuse me of doctoring this so here is the link
https://sunnah.com/urn/1294400
If you still do not believe me you can go to the link to the article that I am refuting which is pasted at
the top and you will see that the individual referenced the Sunan Ibn Majah hadith. They too include
the fact that it is daif. Below is the screenshot from their website. Remember what we showed in the
introduction the user says to go check Sunnah.com. This shows that they were fully aware of the fact
that it was an inauthentic hadith that it was Da’if. Yet they still used it.
I find it very strange how the individual resorted to using a weak hadith to make a point. This shows
very nefarious intentions. A Christian apologist by the name of Christian Prince uses this exact same
hadith except he hides it. Why would he do that? Imagine I started quoting inauthentic Christian
sources. You should logically have no issue at all with this. Can I quote from the Gospel of Baranbas
despite it being regarded as medieval forgery? The author of the site should not care. This just shows
you how the author is very deceptive.
Just stop and reflect for a second. The individual acknowledges the fact that it is Da’if even at the
beginning of the article they put a disclaimer of some sort stating that Da’if means weak yet they still
quoted a weak hadith.
14
Watch the below video of a Muslim youtuber (who has studied deeply and to my knowledge is
qualified in hadith sciences) responding to Christian Prince regarding the claim on the same hadith
(Sunan Ibn Majah 4337) you can watch the below video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BJ-F_mukK8
To know more about Christian Prince and the lies he has told which includes lying about who he
debates creating a fake Imam refer to the link below
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/refuting-christian-prince/
https://abuaminaelias.com/seventy-two-virgins-in-paradise/ - I recommend you go through this

article as well. It will explain things to you clearly God Willing.
Also, one has to remember that the Hadith about 72 virgins are for Martyrs only. However, those are
inauthentic and Jonathan Brown explained it why in his book "Misquoting Muhammad "page 302-305
:
"This Hadith has the Prophet promising that,
The martyr receives six features with God: he is immediately forgiven, he sees his seat in Paradise, he
is protected from the torment of the grave and the greatest terror of the Resurrection, he is given the
crown of honor, whose ruby is greater than the world and all in it; he is given seventy-two heavenly
beauties (ḥūr al-‘īn) as wives and allowed to intercede on behalf of seventy of his relatives. This Hadith
appears in the Sunans of al-Tirmidhī and Ibn Mājah as well as the Musnad of Ibn Ḥanbal and the
Muṣannaf of his teacher ‘Abd al-Razzāq al-Ṣan‘ānī. These sources generally record this Hadith through
a number of Isnāds converging on the Syrian Ismā‘īl bin ‘Ayyāsh and continuing to his teacher, the
widely respected scholar Baḥīr bin Sa‘d, then to Khālid bin Ma‘dān, then continuing to the Prophet via
a number of varied chains. Ismā‘īl, however, waswell known as a problematic transmitter who, though
he was honest, frequently erred in transmitting Hadiths. He often confused Isnāds or turned
Companion opinions into prophetic Hadiths and vice versa. This is certainly the case for the Hadith of
the Seventy-Two Virgins.
Ismā‘īl is recorded as transmitting it via five contrasting paths:
1. Baḥīr ← Khālid ← Miqdām bin al-Ma‘dīkarab ← Prophet
2. Baḥīr ← Khālid ← Kathīr bin Murra ← ‘Ubāda bin Ṣāmit
* ← Prophet
3. Baḥīr ← Khālid ← Kathīr bin Murra ← Nu‘aym bin Hammār (sic) ← Prophet
4. Baḥīr ← Khālid ← Kathīr bin Murra ← ‘Uqba bin ‘Āmir (not a prophetic Hadith)
5. Sa‘īd bin Yūsuf ← Yaḥyā bin Abī Kathīr ← Abū Sallām ← Abū Mu‘āniq al-Ash‘arī ←
Abū Mālik ← Prophet.
Amid this confusion of Ismā‘īl’s varied narrations of the Hadith, there is only one source that confirms
that his teacher Baḥīr transmitted the Hadith at all, namely the Hims Hadith scholar Baqiyya bin Walīd,
who was generally favored as a source over Ismā‘īl by leading critics such as Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī.
15
Baqiyya, though, was just as problematic as Ismā‘īl, meriting unusually lengthy entries in leading
Hadith critical dictionaries like the Mīzān al-i‘tidāl and the Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb. Although he was
praised as upstanding and reliable (thiqa) by some leading Hadith critics ofthe ninth century, he was
more often and more extensively criticized. He was lambasted in particular for narrating unselectively
from many transmitters and, much more seriously, dropping the names of his immediate sources and
insinuating that he received the material from figures earlier in the Isnād (tadlīs). Both Ibn Ḥanbal and,
later, Ibn Ḥibbān al-Bustī engaged in extensive research into Baqiyya’s infractions in this area,
expressing great concern and regret for previous confidence in him. Ibn Ḥibbān observed that ‘for less
than this a person loses their upstanding status (‘adāla).’ Both Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī and the leading Shāfi‘ī
jurist and Hadith scholar Ibn Khuzayma declared Baqiyya unfit for use as proof (ḥujja), a conclusion
that al-Bayhaqī later described as a consensus position. Al-Jūzajānī declared that Baqiyya could not be
used as proof if he narrated a report from a source uncorroborated, and al-Nasā’ī concluded that he
should not be heeded if he did not specify that he heard material directly from his source.
All of these warnings apply exactly to the Hadith of the Seventy-Two Virgins. Besides Ismā‘īl’s confused
tangle of narrations, only Baqiyya transmits the Hadith from Baḥīr, and he does so by the ambiguous
phrase ‘from’ – not evidence of direct audition. Al-Fasawī observed that one of Baqiyya’s faults was
that he enjoyed ‘entertaining and bawdy (milaḥ wa ṭarā’if)’ – and unreliable – Hadiths too much. Al-
Dhahabī called him ‘a man of anomalous, surprising and unacceptable Hadiths’ (al-Dhahabī, Mīzān,
1:339; Ibn Ḥajar, Tahdhīb, 1:435–37). Taken together, these criticisms mean that any narrations
coming through Baḥīr cannot be accepted as reliable.
There is another Hadith cluster with a very similar text narrated from the Companion
Abū Hurayra. It quotes the Prophet as saying:
The martyr is forgiven upon the first shedding of his blood. He is married to theheavenly beauties and
is made an intercessor for seventy of his family. He who mans a fort on the frontier, if he dies there,
the rewards of all his deeds till the Day of Judgment are written for him, a breeze comes to him every
morning with his sustenance, he is given seventy Huris as companions, and it is said to him ‘Stand and
intercede’ until the Hour of Accounting is done.
This Hadith is found in the works of al-Ṭabarānī (al-Mu‘jam al-kabīr, 3:326) but inspires little
confidence. Even the notoriously lax critics al-Suyūṭī and al-Munāwī only rate it as ḥasan and weak
respectively. The weakest point in the Isnād is al-Ṭabarānī’s own teacher, Bakr bin Sahl, who is
criticized by some as unreliable and as having inexact narrations (muqārib al-ḥadīth) in the eyes of al-
Dhahabī (al-Suyūṭī, al-Jāmi‘ al-ṣaghīr, 305, no. 4963; al-Munāwī, Fayḍ al-qadīr, 7:3691-92; al-Dhahabī,
Mīzān, 1:345–46).
There are also other versions of this overall tradition that do not include the specificationof seventy-
two heavenly beauties and come via chains of transmission unrelated to those mentioned above; one
in the Musnad of al-Bazzār (7:143) and one in Ibn Ḥanbal’s Musnad (4:200).
The presence of ‘heavenly beauties’ in Paradise is established by the Qur’an, as are the accolades and
place in Heaven awarded to martyrs. Moreover, the collection of all the above transmissions, whether
or not they can be accurately traced back to the Prophet or just to a Companion or other members of
the early Muslim community, strongly indicate that reports were circulating among the first Muslim
generations enumerating several heavenly compensations given to martyrs and including the
companionship of huris. This lies behind al-Albānī’s decision to rate these narrations collectively as
16
ṣaḥīḥ (al-Albānī, Silsilat al-aḥādīth al-ṣaḥīḥa, 7, part 1:647–50, no. 3213). As for the specific number of
seventy or seventy-two huris for each martyr, however, this hinges on the reliability of 1) the
narrations via Baḥīr, and 2) the solitary narration from Abū Hurayra in al-Ṭabarānī’s works. Baḥīr’s
narrations fell victim to Ismā‘īl bin ‘Ayyāsh’s confusion and are only otherwise known by the unreliable
and inaccurate Baqiyya, who was known to take liberties with precisely such extravagant contents.
The narration from Abū
Hurayra collected by al-Ṭabarānī is unreliable due to the questions surrounding Bakr bin Sahl, its
solitary narrator. This collection of evidence does not seem to merit any rating higher than ‘weak’
(ḍa‘īf) for both of the Hadith clusters above "
CLAM 3 VISIT ALL 9 OF HIS WIVES IN ONE NIGHT
CLAIM - It was said that Muhammad had the sexual strength of 30 men, which enabled him to visit
all 9 of his wives in one night: Sahih Al-Bukhari 5:268 (268).
I mentioned this at the beginning. The video from Farid refutes David. David references the same
reports that the author of this website has. Watch from 8.55 – 11.14. Farid addresses the report
mentioning the narrator Hisham bin Sa’ad being weak he addresses the Arabic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EB95o7cPcMs How ridiculous is David’s response. Essentially,
he doesn’t care.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hLRNEmiVCo – This video also addresses this claim as well
https://icraa.org/the-if-when-and-why-of-Prophets-visits-to-all-his-wives-in-a-single-night/ - Read
through this as well.
CLAIM 4 SEX SLAVES
The author makes many claims regarding this. I will paste the claims they make and the references
they cite and go over them.
Before we begin, I will ask to go through these links
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvR2F7SfpiI - Slavery and Right-Hand Possession in Islam
https://abuaminaelias.com/islam-and-concubines/ - What does Islam teach about concubines?
https://abuaminaelias.com/consent-marriage-concubines/ - Sexual consent, marriage, and

concubines in Islam
Right let us go back to going over the claims that the author of this site has made.
CLAIM - He owned sex slaves: Surah 33:50.
The individual makes the claim the Prophet pbuh had sex slaves and then cites Chapter 33 verse 50.
The verse is pasted below
17
O Prophet! We have made lawful for you your wives to whom you have paid their ˹full˺ dowries as
well as those ˹bondwomen˺ in your possession, whom Allah has granted you.1 And ˹you are
allowed to marry˺ the daughters of your paternal uncles and aunts, and the daughters of your
maternal uncles and aunts, who have emigrated like you. Also ˹allowed for marriage is˺ a
believing woman who offers herself to the Prophet ˹without dowry˺ if he is interested in marrying
her—˹this is˺ exclusively for you, not for the rest of the believers.2 We know well what ˹rulings˺
We have ordained for the believers in relation to their wives and those ˹bondwomen˺ in their
possession. As such, there would be no blame on you. And Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
The verse refers to the Prophet pbuh being able to marry without paying the dowry.
Read more about this verse via this link https://discover-the-truth.com/2017/01/22/tafseer-on-

quran-3350/
https://twitter.com/Talhawaqas98/status/1302199353528983552?s=19 – Go through this thread as

well
CLAIM - He had sex with a female slave, which resulted in his wives Aisha and Hafsah pressuring him
to stop. However, Muhammad had a "revelation" saying he could have sex with the female slave:
Surah 66:1; Sunan An-Nasa'i 3411 (Dar-us-Salam Reference);
Here is a video regards to Surah 66 verse 1. Watch it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfW4F5lXgR8
We will also go to the Tafsir. I have looked at the tafsir of this verse and the video mentions this as
well. The verse talks about honey. For your reference I used Tafsir Ibn Kathir which you can read
here http://www.recitequran.com/tafsir/en.ibn-kathir/66:1
The author uses Tafsir al Jalalyn who talks about Maryia the Copt. This begs the question is the verse
referring to honey or bed? The author decided to avoid this part out. Why is this the case? To further
prove that this is what the individual did check out the below hadith which for some reason the
author decided to conveniently ignore.
Sunan an-Nasa’i: Ubaid bin ‘Umair said: I heard ‘Aishah say: “The Prophet used to stay with Zainab
bint Jahsh and drink honey at her house. Hafsah and I agreed that if the Prophet came to either of
us, she would say: ‘I detect the smell of Maghafir (a nasty-smelling gum) on you. Have you eaten
Maghafir?’ He went to one of them and she said that to him. He said: ‘No, rather I drank honey at
the house of Zainab bint Jahsh, but I will never do it again.’ Then the following was revealed: ‘O
Prophet! Why do you forbid (for yourself) that which Allah has allowed to you’ up to: ‘If you two
turn in repentance to Allah’ -‘Aishah and Hafsah- ‘And (remember) when the Prophet disclosed a
matter in confidence to one of his wives.’ refers to him saying: ‘No, rather I drank honey.'” (Sunan
an-Nasa’i volume 4, Book 35, Hadith 3826)
Same author in Sunan an Nasai this time the report is different. Here is the link to the hadith
https://sunnah.com/nasai/27/33
You can click the below link to go over commentaries for chapter 66 verse 1 and 2.
https://discover-the-truth.com/2015/01/24/commentary-on-quran-661-2/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfWZ62f4chA – David Wood uses this argument as well.
18
CLAIM - A man named Dihyah asked Muhammad for a slave girl, so Muhammad told him to pick one
out. After Muhammad found out how pretty she was, he told Dihyah to take another slave girl and
then he married her himself: Sunan Abu Dawud 2998
So, I read this hadith I have pasted it here https://sunnah.com/abudawud/20/71 No were does it say
what the author interprets. If you want to know more about the marriage to Saffiyah and how she
actually wanted to marry Muhammad pbuh click the below article. You will see when you read this
article that the Prophet (p) gave Safiyya a choice to stay on her religion and set free or accept Islam
and be the Prophet’s wife, she accepted the latter. The author is clearly ignorant of the facts.
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/07/04/safiyyah-huyayy-kinana-and-khaybar-affair/
CLAIM - He impregnated one of his slave girls: Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, page 653
Ibn Ishaq is someone who is widely criticised. If the author was educated this was something they
would know and that they would tell you. If you are interested as to why Ibn Ishaq is criticised read
the below article
http://www.answering-christian-claims.com/The-Problems-With-Ibn-Ishaq.html
Once you read the above you will understand how Ibn Ishaqs work is scrutinised more. I suggest you
watch this as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vvs-ylOpbKE - Can we be Lenient with Historical Reports? In

other words, each case needs to be studied properly. Case by case. Look at the isnad etc the people
in the isnad. Is it chainless? This is why there is a science of hadith. This is why people do qualifications
in this to learn about in depth now I do not have such qualifications I have no issue admitting this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXMNOOEUuQ4 – You can watch this video where the individual

talks about page 653 of Ibn Ishaq Sirat Rasul Allah.
CLAIM - After a man raped a slave girl, Muhammad said he was entitled to it: Sahih Al-Bukhari
59:637 (4350).
For the refutation of this please check the link below.
https://abuaminaelias.com/ali-ibn-abi-talib-rape-girl/
Also in Islam Slaves are considered brothers .
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (‫ )ﷺ‬as saying:
None of you should say: My bondman, for all of you are the bondmen of Allah, but say: My young
man, and the servant should not say: My Lord, but should say: My chief.
Sahih Muslim 2249
The Relationship between a Slave and the servant is like a Boss and his employee. Islam orders us to
have good manners with Slaves .I will quote some Hadith highlighting the good manners we need to
have in regards to Slaves in Islam :
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬said, "If somebody manumits a Muslim slave, Allah will save from the Fire every
part of his body for freeing the corresponding parts of the slave's body, even his private parts will be
saved from the Fire) because of freeing the slave's private parts."
19
Sahih Bukhari 6715
Narrated Abu Musa:
Allah's Messenger (‫ )ﷺ‬said, "He who has a slave-girl and educates and treats her nicely and then
manumits and marries her, will get a double reward."
Sahih Bukhari 2544
Narrated Al-Ma'rur bin Suwaid:
I saw Abu Dhar Al-Ghifari wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a cloak. We asked him
about that (i.e. how both were wearing similar cloaks). He replied, "Once I abused a man and he
complained of me to the Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬. The Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬asked me, 'Did you abuse him by slighting
his mother?' He added, 'Your slaves are your brethren upon whom Allah has given you authority. So,
if one has one's brethren under one's control, one should feed them with the like of what one eats
and clothe them with the like of what one wears. You should not overburden them with what they
cannot bear, and if you do so, help them (in their hard job).
Sahih Bukhari 2545
Abu Mas'ud reported that he had been beating his slave and he had been saying:
I seek refuge with Allah, but he continued beating him, whereupon he said: I seek refuge with Allah's
Messenger, and he spared him. Thereupon Allah's Messenger (‫ )ﷺ‬said: By Allah, God has more
dominance over you than you have over him (the slave). He said that he set him free.
Sahih Muslim 1659
Sahih Muslim 1659 is under the Chapter: Treatment of slaves, and the expiation of one who slaps his
slave . So whoever beats his slave must free him . So clearly Islam orders us to have good manners
with Slaves . So How can the Islamophobes says that we can rape Slave girls ? By the way ,Rape is
punishable by death in Islam .
Islam does not permit rape. & what about the 4 witnesses? Is it required to prove rape?
The Prophet PBUH said, “Do not cause harm or return harm”
No theology of rape in Islam: https://abuaminaelias.com/no-theology-of-rape-in-islam/
Does marital rape exist in Islam?: https://abuaminaelias.com/marital-rape-domestic-violence/
Marital Rape in Islam debunked: https://www.dar-alifta.org/Foreign/ViewFatwa.aspx?ID=6033
Marital Rape debunked: https://qurananswers.me/2017/01/14/hadith-of-angels-cursing-the-wife-

explained/
Can you rape slave girls? https://www.call-to-

monotheism.com/does_islam_permit_muslim_men_to_rape_their_slave_girls_
Rape is two crimes, 1) Adultery & 2) Using force and intimidation.
Both corners of the crime should be proven for it to count as rape. (Only the rapist is punished, not
the raped). For this to be proven
20
then there must be evidences for the rape. Which means rape investigations do exist in Islam, and
they can include any of these:
1) Eyewitnesses, and this is totally not a problem because a raped woman will scream for help.
2) Confession of the Rapist
3) Pregnancy
4) Video recording
5) DNA Profiling
and really any supporting evidence that can prove the rape like a physical examination. [ Proofs:
https://pastebin.com/4GmGwyue ]
CLAIM 5 SUCKED ON TOUNGE
CLAIM - He let a child suck on his tongue, and he also sucked on a child's tongue and/or lips: Al-Adab
al-Mufrad al-Bukhari 48:1183

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EB95o7cPcMs How ridiculous is David’s response. Essentially
he doesn’t care.
This is why you need to learn from people who are actually qualified in hadith sciences people who
know things such as this. Farid is qualified and has experience.
21
CLAIM 6 AISHA WOULD WASH SEMEN FROM THE CLOTHES OF PROPHET PBUH
CLAIM- He would go to prayer with water spots visible on his clothes from where his child bride,
Aisha, would clean off his semen stains
reports that the author of this website has. Watch from 11.22– end Farid addresses the report

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EB95o7cPcMs How ridiculous is David’s response. Essentially
he doesn’t care.
How does semen get onto one clothes? Perhaps some semen leaked after he had sex with one his
wives? Maybe he had a wet dream. A lot of men have wet dreams they are natural. However,
Muslim Scholars have pointed out that the Messenger of Allah can't have wet dream because he's
too pure.
This is not a big deal and does not prove anything your clear hatred prevents you from looking at
things at normally.
Plus, David Wood (who the person clearly watches) is trying to prove that the Prophet pbuh was
always covered in semen. However, in the Sunan Ibn Majah 537, Aisha RA uses the word "rugbama "
meaning that it was a rare occurrence. So, it was very rarely that Aisha RA scraped the semen from
the garment of the Prophet pbuh with his hand. Check this video: https://youtu.be/p7ikWxJwqwc
CLAIM 7 BREASTFEEDING
CALIM - In order to remove the temptation of sex between an unmarried couple, Muhammad told a
woman (named Sahla bint Suhail) to put her breasts into the man's mouth (named Salim) and
breastfeed him, which would then, according to Muhammad, technically make the man the foster
child of the woman: Sahih Muslim 8:3424 (3600), 3425 (3601), 3426 (3602), 3427 (3603), 3428
(3604).
If we go to the “Answers to potential objections” section of the website we see that the author has
commented more on this see below
“Some may say this verse was just for Sahla bint Suhail, Abu Hudhaifa's wife (they may reference Sahih
Muslim 8:3429). First, even if this was true, it is still an insane command from Muhammad. Second,
this command was not just for Abu Hudhaifa's wife. The verse about breastfeeding 10 times was
revealed before the situation with Sahla bint Suhail and Abu Hudhaifa, which was for 5 times: Muwatta
Malik 30:12, 17.”
They didn’t feel the need to mention that in the article, instead they put it in a objections article where
they knew not many people would click on. Very nefarious. So, the real reason why the individual
made this point is made clear in the objections. “it is still an insane command from Muhammad” It is
the authors opinion. We will address their claim though.
22
So, this point is in regards to adult breastfeeding. You can go through the below resources and
question why didn’t the author tell you this? I have provided you with plenty of resources which go
through plenty of evidences and they explain the Sahla bint Suhail incident.
https://abuaminaelias.com/islam-adult-breastfeeding/
https://islamqa.org/hanafi/daruliftaa/8424
https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2011/06/there-is-no-adult-breastfeeding-in.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=291IcZ0OEOM
https://www.bismikaallahuma.org/hadith/nursing-of-adults/
Clearly Adult breastfeeding doesn't exist in Islam .
CLAIM 8 TEMPORARY MUTAH
CLAIM – “He gave his men a loophole to engage in prostitution & adultery by allowing them to have
temporary marriages" (called "nikah mut'ah") so they could satisfy their sexual desires when they were
away from their wives: Surah 4:24, 5:87 (the context for Surah 5:87 is found in Sahih Al-Bukhari and
Sahih Muslim); Sahih Al-Bukhari 60:139 (4615), 62:13 (5075); Sahih Muslim 8:3243 (3410).”
Again, if we go to the “Answers to potential objections” section of the website we see that the author
has commented more on this see below
“Some will say this isn't allowed today because Muhammad eventually forbade temporary marriages
(Sahih Al-Bukhari 59:527, 86:81), but that doesn't change the fact that Muhammad allowed it. It may
be forbidden now, but he still at some point allowed his men to engage in prostitution and adultery by
giving them a loophole through "temporary marriages".
So, the individual acknowledges that Muhammad pbuh forbade it but again they didn’t feel the need
to mention that in the article, instead they put it in a objections article where they knew not many
people would click on. Very nefarious. The individual also cited two Quran verses as well. I recommend
you read the two articles below which go over mut’ah and explain it. This is an irrelevant point that
the user has made and you will realise this as you go through the resources below. As you go through
these resources you will question why didn’t the individual tell you this. This is a common theme
throughout. To the Christians reading this who think the authors site is good imagine someone did the
exact same thing with the Bible. Since the author is a Christian, I will be displaying how the individual
is hypocrite as well.
https://www.discoveringislam.org/mutah.htm - Article 1
https://abuaminaelias.com/dailyhadithonline/2012/04/11/hadith-on-marriage-it-is-forbidden-to-
contract-a-temporary-marriage/ - Article 2
You should also watch the two below videos as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPDlcQnhQxA – Video 1 address Quran verse 4.24.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWIoN3Msj44 – Video 2 on Islamic slavery.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIB7-KqmOdA – Video 3 on slavery.

23
Some other articles about the topic of Mutah :
https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/84187/mutah-marriages
https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/124722/ruling-on-mutah-marriage
https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/82221/mutah-temporary-marriage
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/20738/mutah-marriage-and-refutation-of-those-raafidis-who-
permit-it
CLAIM 9 MARRIED ADOPTED WIFES SON
CLAIM - He married his adopted son's divorced wife (named Zaynab), who was also his cousin: Surah
33:37; al-Tabari, Volume VIII, pages 2-4.
Yes, Muhammad (pbuh) did do this. He married Zaynab bt. Jahsh. However, the individual however
is quoting from Tabari.
When we check what report is being quoted specifically who it is being narrated by it is Abdullah b
Amir Al Aslami Abu Amir Al Madadni. See below
This is not the only issue with the report. But also, Muhammad b Yahya b Habban. The report is
disconnected. There is also the issue with Umar al Waqadi as well. You can find out more about this
by watching the link below. It is important to note that the marriage between Muhammad pbuh and
Zaynab was not incestuous. The author of the site though is trying to indirectly argue this. According
24
to the Google definition Incest is defined as “sexual relations between people classed as being too
closely related to marry each other. the crime of having sexual intercourse with a parent, child, sibling,
or grandchild.” Muhammad pbuh didn’t do this you know who did? We will explore this in the
hypocrisy section.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5K7r8DDM24 – More information on this
Refer to this as well where you can learn more about David’s deception
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/refuting-david-wood/
So, the author has used a weak inauthentic report. Not surprised
Zaynabs Marriage to the Prophet explained & “the love story” fabrication debunked.
Love story debunked: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGG-UiResb4
Background to Prophet’s Marriage with Zainab: https://icraa.org/muhammad-marriage-zainab-

analysis-reports/
Zaynab’s Marriage to the Prophet: https://www.islamweb.net/en/article/158070/the-prophet-

marries-zaynab-bint-jahsh-i
The Marriage Of Zaynab To The Prophet https://www.bismikaallahuma.org/muhammad/narratives-

marriage-zaynab-prophet/
Refuting Claims Regarding the Prophet’s Marriage to Zaynab:

https://rasoulallah.net/en/articles/article/5640
Fabrications And Lies debunked: https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/08/18/zayd-zaynab-and-

muhammed-fabrications-and-lies/
Why the Prophet married Zainab:

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://archive.islamonline.net/20271
Detailed commentary about the story and refutation of lies against it.
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/96464/detailed-discussion-about-the-verse-but-you-did-hide-in-
yourself-ie-what-allaah-has-already-made-known-to-you-that-he-will-give-her-to-you-in-marriage-
that-which-allaah-will-make-manifest-al-ahzaab-3337
CLAIM 10 REFUSING SEXUAL INTERCOURSE
CLAIM - He said if a woman spends the night forsaking her husband's bed, angels will curse her until
morning: Sahih Muslim 8:3366 (3538), 8:3368 (3541). He said if a man wants to have sex with his
wife and she refuses, Allah will be displeased with her until she sexually satisfies his desire: Sahih
Muslim 8:3367 (3540).
What does this mean? Does this verse refer to all women? We will explain this. A man has obligations
to his wife just as a wife has obligations to her husband. This is marriage after all. It is partnership. I
will link some videos at the end of this claim which will explain this to you.
A husband and wife safeguard the chastity of one another by providing one another a legitimate
means of satisfying the sexual urge. This protection of chastity is essential for the preservation of the
25
family unit – the very institution on which the stability of a society hinges. Hence anything which puts
chastity in jeopardy is disliked by the Almighty.
Secondly, a man is an addressee of the directive mentioned in this Hadith on an equal basis. This is
evident from the directive of ila mentioned in the Qur’an (2:226-7) in which the Arabs of the pre-
Islamic period would swear to sever sexual relationship with their wives because of anger. Although
the husbands were prescribed a period of four months to decide the fate of their wives by either
resuming these relations or divorcing her, it is evident from the directive that in normal circumstances
a husband is not allowed to sever sexual relations from his wife without a valid reason. So much so, if
a person swears such an oath, he must break it. Such relations are the right of a wife and if a husband
does not fulfil them, then he can be regarded a criminal both in the eyes of the law and before the
Almighty in the Hereafter.
Thirdly, the basis of refusal by the husband or wife must also be taken in consideration. If either of
them is tired, sick or simply not in the proper mood and in the appropriate frame of mind then it does
not entail any wrath of the Almighty. It is only when a spouse starts to deliberately evade such natural
needs of the other that the attitude becomes questionable. (Answer by Shehzad Saleem)
Sources to check out
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDaYOIVaNhU - Can Your Wife Reject Sexual Intercourse in

Islam?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1XVLo9c8Tw - What Are the Rights of the Wife?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ0WnatSPSc - Can a Wife refuse intimacy with her husband?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTfpmfv79Yk – Husband does not fulfil her sexual desires.
https://abuaminaelias.com/marital-rape-domestic-violence/?s=0 – Martial Rape is a sin.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sVo_-j2THE - Slavery & Rape in Islamic Law Q&A with Omar

Suleiman
You see how the Husband has to fulfil the needs of his wife just as she should fulfil his. As I stated at
the beginning marriage is a partnership. Something that couples work on. They have obligations to
each other.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEEVPMjxW3hnTxaIIWNNZuSth8pFpjkNC – You can go

through this playlist as well. It will inform you.
Why didn’t the author of the site mention any of this? Have you noticed a pattern? This is the first
article that I have responded too. There are plenty more that I will go through. Now though we are
going to move onto applying the same logic and mindset of the author to their religion, Christianity.
What will we find?
HYPOCRISY – LETS LOOK AT CHRISTIANITY

Now let’s move on to hypocrisy. We will be using the same arguments and the same logic that this
person has by looking at the Bible. I mentioned at the very beginning in the introduction, I will use the
arguments of this individual against them by applying the same standards to the Bible. I will then
explore some common objections and then I will arrive at a conclusion. I hope that you have gone
through each claim and checked the evidence I linked as well. I hope it has educated you.
Example of incest in the Bible

26
Genesis 19:30-36 (ESV)
“Now Lot went up out of Zoar and lived in the hills with his two daughters, for he was afraid to live
in Zoar. So he lived in a cave with his two daughters. And the firstborn said to the younger, “Our
father is old, and there is not a man on earth to come in to us after the manner of all the earth.
Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve offspring
from our father.” So, they made their father drink wine that night. And the firstborn went in and
lay with her father. He did not know when she lay down or when she arose. The next day, the
firstborn said to the younger, “Behold, I lay last night with my father. Let us make him drink wine
tonight also. Then you go in and lie with him, that we may preserve offspring from our father.” ...
(ESV)
The user makes the comparison between Jesus and Muhammad peace be upon both of them. Now I
assume that the author believes Jesus is God. So, this means that the author believes that Christ is
God of the OT this means he condoned of incest. Why does the author not have an issue with this? In
fact, one can infer that Lot of the Bible’s daughters sexually assaulted their own father and I use the
following part of the verse to argue this “So they made their father drink wine that night.” This too me
is quite frankly shocking. Why would I want to be a Christian now? In this article which I have in my
opinion refuted you try to argue that Muhammad pbuh was immoral for marrying his adopted Son’s
ex-wife. Yet you have no issue with your God condoning sexual relations between a father and a
daughter. Can anyone see the blatant hypocrisy here?
Marriageable age in the Bible
What is the age of marriage in the Bible? How old was Mary and Rebekkah? The author should have
an issue with this if they are consistent with their critiques.
If you have not already then go and read my Age of Aisha article
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/age-of-aisha/
In this I provide evidence of what I am talking about age of marriage in the Bible, Mary’s age and
Rebekah’s age.
Jesus condones putting your mouth upon a child’s?
In the article the author mentions a report about what he claimed that Muhammad pbuh sucked on
boys tounges. Yet I have shown with the evidence that I listed how the author is very dishonest in fact
I showed this throughout this response. So, is it fair for me to twist the Bible? See below
“And he went up, and lay upon the child, and put his mouth upon his mouth, and his eyes upon his
eyes, and his hands upon his hands: and he stretched himself upon the child; and the flesh of the
child waxed warm.” 2 Kings 4.34
Jesus is God according to some Christians and I believe the author holds this view due to them making
articles on the divinity of Jesus. Well I am going to conclude and that Jesus condones putting your
mouth upon children’s mouths. The verse by the way is talking about the Prophet Elisha.
I am simply using the same logic as the author of the article used. Is there context? Does it need
explaining? Christians will more than likely say yes. Yet context or an explanation does not matter
when it comes to Islam? Be consistent and be fair.
Sex Slavery in the Bible
27
The Biblical account of Moses pbuh differs completely with that of the Quran. We read Numbers
31.17-18 which is pasted below.
Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man
intimately. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for
yourselves.
Why isn’t the author criticising this verse from their own Bible? This is pure hypocrisy. The user tries
to argue Islam is false by bringing up sex slaves. Yet when we go to the Bible, we find verses such as
the above. Also, the verse below 1 Kings 11.3.
He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him
astray.
Remember everyone the individual believes that Jesus is God. So again, using their same ignorant
mindset the individual believes that the Jesus they believe in condoned forced child sex slavery as per
Numbers 31.18 and also condoned Solomon having 700 wives and 300 concubines.
(Message to the author of the site) If you dare even suggest I need to study more; look into context
you will only make yourself look even worse. I have demonstrated over the course of this response
and no doubt the other responses that you are uneducated, ignorant and you are not fair. So, by me
doing what I am doing using your logic against you, should not trouble at all and in fact you should
accept this, am I right? No, you will say I am wrong. You lack the ability to be consistent, don’t you?
Objections
The individual is clearly trying to prove Islam is false and Muhammad pbuh was a bad person yet when
I use the same logic against them by applying the same arguments against Christianity that should
surely show that the Jesus of the Bible is bad and that Christianity is false. Therefore, to the author of
the site, why are you still Christian? To the Christians use this site, why are you still Christian? If you
say to me in response “This is Old Testament” “Out of context” This is hypocrisy. Maybe there is
context I do not know I am not going to look into to the context of daughters coercing their father to
get drunk then sleep with him. Why does context matter? Why does an explanation matter? The
author of this site had no issue attacking Muhammad pbuh. The only difference is I have used the
Bible which Christians believe is in the inspired word of God. The author of the site used Quran verses
as well as hadith and used inauthentic sources. What is the logic of quoting an inauthentic source?
Again, I reiterate what said earlier if the author wants to use inauthentic Islamic sources why shouldn’t
I use inauthentic Biblical sources. The author should have absolutely no issue all with Muslims doing
this since this is what they did. If the author does then this hypocritical and any Christian who believes
what the author has said about Muhammad pbuh is a hypocrite too.
CONCLUSION - WHAT HAVE WE LEARNT FROM THIS SECTION
The individual is incredibly ignorant. They have no issues at all using inauthentic sources. They are
ignorant to their own religion and they lack consistency. They do not like to tell you context. I have
shown this and linked the evidence of this. This is the first article that I am refuting and I am shocked
at the arguments and the evidence he provided. It makes me question what else will I see throughout.
What sort of person willingly uses inauthentic sources? Someone with nefarious intentions. Shall I
quote from inauthentic biblical sources. According to the standard set out by the author they should
have no issue with me doing this. This is the person that you are trusting to tell you about Muhammad
28
pbuh. How can we trust anything this person says and I am sure as we go throughout their other
articles, we will notice similar things as to what I have shown in this response? You may sit there and
say how can you trust me. Have I not been transparent throughout?
Read on and throughout the rebuttal of the WhoWasMuhamamd.org. I will provide you with my
recommendations of what to study and if you do what I say with an open mind you will probably God
Willing come to a conclusion like Dr Craig Considine has or Michael Hart. Both non-Muslim’s but both
respect the Prophet pbuh.
I would like to finish by saying that I advise everyone to check this Drive file who contains a lot of
articles and videos debunking almost all the allegations against Islam and refuting other ideologies
and Faiths. Check this out:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QHuzR1AwFctItMCTuhD6i2FcN96i7djo/view?usp=drivesdk – I will
refer to this later so come back to it
29
MUHAMMAD PBUH PLAGARISED – A RESPONSE
This will be a response to this article https://www.whowasmuhammad.org/muhammad-s-plagiarism
The plagiarism argument is absolutely ridiculous. I will refute this. Then I will use the same ignorant
logic the author uses, the same mindset to expose how uneducated they are. We will look into
whether or not Christianity has plagiarised from some sources. The author has committed a genetic
fallacy. When you read this section, you will realise how uneducated the author is and when you read
the hypocrisy section you will realise if you haven’t already how ridiculous the author’s logic is.
The inference here is that since some things in Islam are similar to other sources Muhammad pbuh
plagiarised therefore Islam is false. If we look through Christian history and history in general and find
similarities then that means Christianity copied from that source and thus it is a false religion.
DID MUHAMMAD ‫ ﷺ‬PLAGARISE?

Ask yourself logically why would Muhammad pbuh plagiarise. We are going to assess reasons why and
come to a logical conclusion. What is the benefit to Muhammad pbuh plagiarising? If he did surely, he
would not have made major changes. The Quran makes major claims that differ from Christianity
surrounding Jesus Christ (pbuh). They are that Jesus was not crucified and that he was a Prophet and
not what Christians say he is. We will expand on this later. I am simply making some simple points that
need to be addressed before we get into this area.
Oh, and who could forget that Muhammad pbuh was illiterate. Do you know what this means? It
means he could not read or write. Why doesn’t the author mention this in their article? So, the author
is arguing that an illiterate man plagiarised from other sources, in their words plagiarised from. “False
Heretical Teachings, and Jewish Fables.”
Anyway, it is important to note as well that a lot of the content of the Quran refers to Prophets such
as Moses pbuh, Abraham pbuh, Lot pbuh, Yusuf pbuh etc. In other words, a lot of the content of the
Quran relates to stuff that is similar to what is in the Old Testament (OT). Now does that mean that
Muhammad pbuh copied from there? No, he didn’t. The OT wasn’t available in Arabic at the time plus
the accounts of the Prophets in the Quran differ to that in the Bible for example the Moses pbuh of
the Bible is different to that of the Quran in the Bible the God of the Bible who according to the author
of the site is Jesus instructed Moses pbuh to kill children.
Numbers 31.17 “Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath
known man by lying with him.”
In the Quran in Chapter 18 verse 74 we see that Moses pbuh is horrified that a boy was killed. “So they
proceeded until they came across a boy, and the man killed him. Moses pbuh protested, “Have you
killed an innocent soul, who killed no one? You have certainly done a horrible thing.”
If the author suggests that I cherry picked then this is hypocrisy. Throughout this section I am simply
refuting the claim that the author has made.
Ernst Wertheim informs us in his book, The Text of The Old Testament: “With the victory of Islam the
use of Arabic spread widely and for Jews and Christians in the conquered lands it became the language
of daily life. This gave rise to the need of Arabic versions of the Bible, which need was met by a number
of versions mainly independent and concerned primarily for interpretation.” (Ernst Würthwein, The
Text Of The Old Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1988,
30
pp. 104.) Thus, the first translations of the Hebrew Bible in Arabic appeared after the advent of Islam.
In fact, the oldest dated manuscript of the Old Testament in Arabic dates from the first half of the
ninth century.
The Quran does not claim to be something new but rather the final revelation. It says it’s confirming
what has come before. Essentially correcting what was revealed before it. We believe that the Bible
and the Torah have been corrupted and I will provide you evidence of this in later sections.
Back to the point let question why would Muhammad pbuh plagiarise. Surely for power right and
money. This is a completely logical assumption. Very early on Islam. The Quraysh made Muhammad
pbuh many offers. If you read “The Sealed Nectar” page 103 to 104. Where Utbah approached
Muhammad pbuh and offered him riches “Oh nephew if you are doing all this with a view to getting
wealth, we will join together to give you greater riches than any Qurayshite has possessed. If ambition
moves you, we will make you our chief. If you desire kingship, we will readily offer you that.”
Muhammad pbuh then replied reciting from the Quran chapter 41 verse 1-5. He then told Utbah “You
have heard my reply. You are now free to do whatever you please” You can look at Ibn Hisham 1/293,
294 and Tafsir Ibn Kathir 6/159-161 (those are the references provided in the Sealed Nectar.
https://ia601906.us.archive.org/31/items/TheSealedNectar-Alhamdulillah-
library.blogspot.in.pdf/TheSealedNectar-Alhamdulillah-library.blogspot.in_text.pdf - This is a link to
The Sealed Nectar in PDF format just in case you do not have the book the page number to look for is
114 -115
So, Muhammad pbuh evidently was not motivated by the worldly affairs. Remember this is early Islam
this event occurred shortly after Umar RA converted to Islam. So, this happened when there were very
few Muslims. He rejected the offers made. So clearly Muhammad pbuh himself believed in Islam and
others around him believed as well.
LOOKING AT THE POINTS OF THE AUTHOR
This to me is an article of pure desperation. I am not even going to address all the points because as I
mentioned at the beginning the author has committed a genetic fallacy. Just because something is
similar the author believes that is plagiarism. This logic is ridiculous. I have shown the claim that
Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬plagiarised is illogical.
At the end of the authors article, they say the below
Are you serious? Again, you are quoting weak sources. Why? Then you attempt to end your article off
in an arrogant patronising manner. I find it strange how anyone can take you seriously.
Going into some of the points. Funnily enough the author mentions the Nag Hammadi scrolls. They
use this to suggest that this is where Muhammad pbuh got the idea that Jesus was not crucified from.
I find this funny because, this is one of the reasons why I reject Christianity. The Nag Hammadi scrolls
31
predate the NT canon and it shows that people believed Jesus was not crucified. For an event that
Christians say was witnessed by 500 people this surely begs the question of whether or not Jesus was
really crucified. You can watch the below video to learn more about the Nag Hammadi scrolls.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCiVhai5V94 – This is a very interesting video.
Now the simple question is were the Nag Hammadi scrolls available to Muhammad pbuh. The answer
is no.
That is not Arabic. It is Greek. Does the author seriously believe that Muhammad pbuh knew Greek?
Of course, he did not. He only knew Arabic. The real question the author should ask why is it that this
document which predates the NT say Christ was never crucified when the main focus of the NT is the
crucifixion? I find it interesting as well how Christians believe it was a fact. The Quran says it was made
to appear like Jesus was crucified. Clearly the early Christians who believed he was not crucified as
shown in the Nag Hammadi scrolls are correct according to what Islam believes. So, in short, the
crucifixion of Christ is NOT a fact.
The above hadith it is clear that the Torah was not available in Arabic. What is the logical inference
you can draw from this hadith? That the Quran has come to correct what was revealed before. This
hadith is just proof that the Torah was not available in Arabic at the time of the Prophet pbuh.
There is also the case of Jews of Madinah. Why were they there in the first place?. They were waiting
for a Prophet to come and the reason why they went to Arabia is because they knew that the Prophet
was coming from there. Which Prophet came to them? Muhammad pbuh. Abdullah bin Salam who
was a Jewish Rabbi in fact he was the most learned Rabbi among the Jews of Madinah went to the
32
Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬when he first arrived and asked him certain questions in order to ascertain his real
Prophethood. He converted to Islam. He did not accuse Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬of plagiarising from Jewish
sources. Remember he was the most learned Rabbi out of all the Jews in Madinah. So, we can conclude
he knew his stuff. So, who knows more a Rabbi who was regarded as learned or the author of the site?
In case you are not satisfied, after he accepted Islam, Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬sent for some Jews and asked
them about Abdullah bin Salam, they testified to his scholarly aptitude and virtuous standing after
Muhammad pbuh told them Abdullah accepted Islam they changed their mind. That speaks volumes
about how ignorant people were. In another narration, Abdullah even pleaded to the Jews saying “O
Jews! Fear Allah. By Allah is the only one you know that he (Muhammad ‫ )ﷺ‬is the messenger of Allah
sent to people with the Truth” The Jews however rejected this. This is the from “The Sealed Nectar
page 170-171.This event goes to show that the most learned Jew knew that Muhammad pbuh was a
Prophet and that Muhammad pbuh did not plagiarise from Jewish sources.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5r1Fuh7XZU – You can learn more about Abdullah bin Salam
https://www.manyProphetsonemessage.com/2014/03/18/ten-reasons-muhammad-could-not-have-
authored-the-quran/ - Read through this article.
https://iera.org/how-do-we-know-the-quran-is-from-god/ - Another good read
SOURCES YOU CAN CHECK RELATED TO THIS SECTION
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JsopboCx9w – Watch from 4:00 – 9:50.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m01Z06Eda0s - Ex-Muslim: Quran plagiarized Arabic Gospels!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZcOVKX6eqw - Qur'an EXPLICITLY mentions corruption of Injil
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdlpSuhf2Fc – Part 1 on trinity. This video and the next address

the trinity. Verses in the Quran are addressed such as Surah Maidah verse 116 which is a verse that
the author quotes and tries to suggest the Quran is wrong.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKtHJddu4-4 – Part 2 on trinity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfotutYEauI – Syriac infancy Gospel.
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/04/18/surah-532-sanhedrin-talmud-plagiarism/ - Talmud
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2ovILc_sKY – A must watch. See how Bible is wrong and Quran

is right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3FmcWR1M-0 – Interesting right?
https://www.islamic-awareness.org/quran/sources/bibindex -This is a good link
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QHuzR1AwFctItMCTuhD6i2FcN96i7djo/view - Check page 47 and 48
So now that I have, in my opinion, refuted the individual I am going to look at Christianity now and see
if there are arguments and evidences that can be used to show how it has plagiarised from other
sources. I am going to use the same logic and adopt the same mindset as the individual and the author
33
should have no problem with me doing this at all. If they do this is hypocrisy. We have established the
author believes that if something is similar the latter plagiarised the former.
Mithraism is a belief that predates Christianity and it too has a trinity. Mithra died for the sins of
humanity, had 12 apostles, a last supper and most of the other tenets that Christianity copied. This is
very similar if not a direct parallel to the teachings in the New Testament. Using the logic of the
individual Christianity is false because it copied from Mithraism. Constantine was a Mithra as well. To
me it seems Christianity is a carbon copy of Mithraism, I assume the author shares my view?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scg52WVelZk
Horus was born of a virgin on December 25th, that he was baptized at the age of thirty by Anup the
Baptizer, that he was killed via crucifixion, and that he subsequently came back to life three days later.
Christians believe Christ died by crucifixion and rose 3 days later. Using the logic of the individual
Christianity is false because it copied from earlier beliefs.
Christians believe the Bible is the preserved inspired Word of God and that Jesus died for our sins
however it clearly copied from pagan beliefs that predate it. In the words of the author “Strange isn’t
it.?”
Again, I am simply using the logic of the author who as I said before committed a genetic fallacy. By
me using their logic it will expose to the Christians how the logic of the author is imprudent. I hope
you see this anyway by simply reading through the refutations.
CONCLUSION – WHAT HAVE WE LEARNT FROM THIS SECTION
Simple. Muhammad pbuh did not plagiarise. If you have read through this section as a whole and
checked what I linked throughout you will realise this.
Again, the author is uneducated and adopts a flawed mindset. I have refuted their points and shown
you evidence of how Christianity copied from other sources. The simple proof to refute this is that
Muhammad pbuh was illiterate he could not read or write. If you read the Quran you will see that
most of the content refers to history specifically stuff related to the OT. I have already mentioned
this. The OT just like the NT were not available in Arabic at the time. I have shown this as well.
Another important point to note is that Muhammad’s enemies accused him of many things such as
being a poet or a soothsayer yet I could not find an evidence of him being accused of plagiarising from
Christianity and Judaism. I am going to now end on what some of the Jews and Christians said to him
or regarding him throughout his life.
In Bukhari the Book of Revelation hadith no 3. It talks about the first revelation. We learn here about
a man called Waraqa bin Naufal a Christian. This man would write the Gospels in Hebrew letters.
Khadijah took the Prophet pbuh to see Waraqa and Muhammad pbuh explained his encounter with
Angel Jibril. Waraqa confirmed that this was the same angel who Allah sent to Moses pbuh. Waraqa
also made a comment that his people (Quraysh) would drive him out. Waraqa died shortly after this
not before he stated he believed in one God and that Muhammad pbuh was a messenger. In other
words, Waraqa was an example of an early Christian who confirmed that Muhammad pbuh was a
Prophet. This is not the only example. https://hamariweb.com/islam/hadith/sahih-bukhari-3/
The King of Abyssinia stated that there were hardly any differences between Muslims and Christians.
He would have surely accused Muhammad pbuh of plagiarism logically. After all the first verses that
the king heard was that of Surah Maryam. Many years later, a letter that was written by the scribes of
34
Islam dictated by Muhammad pbuh invited the King to Islam and he accepted. You can read more
about this in “The Sealed Nectar” pages 310 – 312.
library.blogspot.in.pdf/TheSealedNectar-Alhamdulillah-library.blogspot.in_text.pdf - If you do not
have the book this it in pdf format the page number you are looking for is 351 to 352.
You can actually read the letter that was sent to the King speaking about Jesus pbuh. Again, the king
accepted Islam out of free will because he knew it was the truth. The king was someone who did not
see Muhammad pbuh and also had the ability to understand the Quran and he did not accuse
Muhammad pbuh of plagiarism. Why? Because he was logical and had an open mind. He and was not
blinded by misplaced hatred and ignorance.
One final one. In Bukhari the Book of Revelation hadith no 7. It talks about how Abu Sufyan who at
the time was Kafir and an enemy of Islam went to the Byzantine emperor Heraclius. Abu Sufyan went
there with some of his companions. Heraclius wanted to ask questions to Abu Sufyan regarding
Muhammad pbuh since he was the closest relative to him. The emperor asked Abu Sufyan that if he
told a lie then would his companions contradict him. Abu Sufyan said yes. Heraclius asked him many
questions such as if Muhammad pbuh ever lied Abu said “No” the emperor asked what he
(Muhammad pbuh) orders the people to do and Abu Sufyan replied to worship God alone. Many more
questions which you can read in the full hadith which I linked. The emperor then after asking all these
questions summarised. Here is an excerpt of that the emperor said/did after hearing Abu Sufiyan’s
answers.
“If what you have said is true, he will very soon occupy this place underneath my feet and I knew it
(from the scriptures) that he was going to appear but I did not know that he would be from you, and
if I could reach him definitely, I would go immediately to meet him and if I were with him, I would
certainly wash his feet.'”
“Heraclius then wrote a letter to his friend in Rome who was as good as Heraclius in knowledge.
Heraclius then left for Homs. (a town in Syrian and stayed there till he received the reply of his letter
from his friend who agreed with him in his opinion about the emergence of the Prophet and the fact
that he was a Prophet.”
https://hamariweb.com/islam/hadith/sahih-bukhari-7/
So like Waraqa, like the Abyssinian king and the Byzantine emperor all recognised that Muhammad
pbuh was a Prophet.
(Genesis 17:20) In the Stone edition Chumash commentary on page 76 we read
“we see from this prophecy in this verse that 2337 years elapsed before the Arabs Ishmaels
descendants became a great nation (with the rise of Islam in the 7th century) Throughout this period
Ishmael waited anxiously, until finally the promise was fulfilled and they dominated the world”
Moving on, the author doesn’t think that the Quran is the word of God. The author doubts it. In this
case let us go to 2.23
“And if you are in doubt about what We have revealed to Our servant,1 then produce a sûrah like it
and call your helpers other than Allah, if what you say is true.”
More on the Quranic challenge
35
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6VU9_TLmvk – The challenge of the Quran part 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHwI8439y9U – Part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjEZSlXWHlc - Part 3
People have tried this see below
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9vuXIg5kE8 – Response to someone who attempted the

Quranic challenge
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPgy6zb0oKI – Quran challenge copycat in 1800s America
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjQBsriK-uc – Another one refuted
You should watch the above and also Raymond Farrin has this to say on the Quran
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2kw90KApW4 - Structure and Quranic Interpretation - Dr.
Raymond Farrin.
Again, the claim of plagiarism is absolutely ridiculous. I have shown this in different ways and provided
plenty of proof of this. I used the same logic as the author and showed how Christianity according to
the authors logic plagiarised pagan beliefs.
The author who’s ignorant of Arabic and eloquence ignorantly cites “al Furqan al Haqq”. I sighed when
I saw this. Do you know what it takes to meet the Quranic challenge? I hope you watched through
the videos above you will see right there how the work you cited fails miserably. The fact is right away
they ripped off the title of a chapter of the Quran. The “attempt” starts off with a copyright message.
I mean seriously? This is an insult to anyone of intelligence. I am not even a native Arab I can read
Arabic yet I can see how poor this is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvtPoEiYOO4 - Did ' the True Furqan ' meet the Qur'anic
challenge? It fails miserably. From the video, I noticed straight away that it rips part of the Quran
straight away. Once you understand what constitutes the Quranic challenge. Once you realise what
conditions you have to abide be you will concede defeat realising that no one can produce a chapter
like it. If your argument is “oh it sounds like the Quran therefore it meets it” you need to study.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjM_Csibz7M – Another video on it.
To the author of the site, read carefully! The people who could have best attempted this challenge
failed these people existed 1400 years ago. Once you wake up and see past your own ignorance you
will see how the challenge set out by the Quran can’t be met. Again, watch the videos above and on
the previous page relating to Quranic challenge.
36
CORRUPTION OF THE QURAN - A RESPONSE
I am going to enjoy writing this one as the individual is just further exposing their ignorance. Due to
their blatant ignorance, they are actually proving how the Quran is in fact preserved. The author uses
hadith pertaining to the Qiraat and Ahruf thinking that this proves Islam wrong. This is a topic which
requires deep study hence why there is a whole science in it called Ulum Al-Quran. I will be providing
you with a lot of links in this section.
Of course, we will expose how the Bible too has been changed. A lot of these claims have been refuted
by people who have qualifications in hadith sciences and Ulum-Al Quran (Quranic sciences) I will
provide you with the relevant video response. One simple thing you need to remember before we
begin is this verse 2.106
“If We ever abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten, we replace it with a better or similar one.
Do you not know that Allah is Most Capable of everything?
https://www.whowasmuhammad.org/quran-revelation-corruption
The author concludes this article with the following “The evidence overwhelmingly shows that the
Quran has not been perfectly preserved as Muslims claim.” I will provide you with the evidence which
will educate you regarding these claims then the author, well perhaps not them but a logical open
minded person will realise how yet again the author has demonstrated their ignorance.
The inference here is the author claims the Quran has been corrupted therefore Islam is false. If we
find any evidence of Biblical corruption then according to the logic of the author Christianity is false.
ADDRESSING THE CLAIMS
In regards to a sheep eating the Quran this is simply not the case.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEguur02tPg – Response to David Wood who made this claim.

You will learn a little bit about hadith sciences here by a QUALIFIED student of hadith.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oW-parWKs7s – Here is another video on the same topic.
In short it is not authentic.
Variances in Quranic manuscripts. Read an article from my website. Check the sources on there
too.
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/variances-in-quranic-manuscripts/
The author makes the claims about the 7 modes. Thankyou. Do you even understand what this is?
You don’t. This has to do with Quranic sciences.
Read this hadith https://sunnah.com/urn/631900
"The Messenger of Allah (‫ )ﷺ‬met Jibra'il and said: 'O Jibra'il! I have been sent to an illiterate
nation among whom are the elderly woman, the old man, the boy and the girl, and the man who
cannot read a book at all.' He said: 'O Muhammad! Indeed, the Qur'an was revealed in seven
modes.'"
37
THE QURAN WAS REVEALED IN 7 MODES! I have written an article on this as well which you can
read. Be sure to check out all the sources I provide in my article as well. It will explain it to you very
simply.
Want some more?
“Ibn ‘Abbas reported Messenger of Allah ‫ ﷺ‬as saying: Gabriel taught me to recite in one style. I
replied to him and kept asking him to give more (styles), till he reached seven modes (of
recitation)..” Sahih Muslim Book 4, Hadith 1785
“..and said (to Allah’s Messenger (‫))ﷺ‬, “I heard this person (Hisham bin Hakim) reciting Surat Al-
Furqan in a way which you haven’t taught me!” On that Allah’s Apostle said, “Release him, (O
Ùmar!) Recite, O Hisham!” Then he recited in the same way as I heard him reciting. Then Allah’s
Messenger (‫ )ﷺ‬said, “It was revealed in this way,” and added, “Recite, O Ùmar!” I recited it as he
had taught me. Allah’s Messenger (‫ )ﷺ‬then said, “It was revealed in this way. This Qur’an has
been revealed to be recited in seven different ways, so recite of it whichever (way) is easier for
you (or read as much of it as may be easy for you).” Bukhari 4992.
The Bukhari 4992 hadith shows clearly how Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬taught the seven modes. Muhammad ‫ﷺ‬
confirms that the Quran “Has been revealed to be recited in seven different ways” The purpose of
this is explained in the same hadith “Recite of it whichever way is easier for you”
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/the-standard-narrative-has-holes-in-it-
quranic-preservation/
The author makes the claim that some of the Quran has been lost.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smS4XeiywU8 – You can watch this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVh4DYGqSZs – This video addresses the references what the

author brings up.
If we look to the hadith and study, you will see that the verse which the hadith in Sahih Muslim 2286
refers to was memorised by 15 companions that we know of. All those people forgot it? When we
look at the language specifically the Arabic it is in line with Surah Baqarah verse 106. The verse we
mentioned right at the beginning. This is the basics. There are other sources as well which you can
look at. Read the below.
38
Uthman (RA) and the burning of Quran
There was a unanimous consensus from every single Muslim living during Uthmans time that the
contents of his texts were perfectly portraying the preserved Qur’an. Ali (ra), the Prophets paternal
cousin, son-in-law, major companion and fourth Caliph, assures us that there was a consensus in
agreement regarding Uthmans actions, Ali (ra) said: “By Allah, he did not do what he did regarding the
Qur‟an, except by agreement from us.” (Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani in Fathul Baari, Volume 8, page 634 said
that Ibn Abi Dawud collected this statement using an authentic chain of narrators) The companions of
the Prophet (pbuh) all eventually agreed with Uthmans burning of the manuscripts. Ibn Abi Dawud
collected in his al-Masahif, Volume 1, page 45, from Mus’ab bin Sa‟d who said: I found overwhelming
support for Uthman‟s (compilation) from the people, however it surprised them, but none rebuked
him for it‟. (Ibn Kathir quoted it in Fada'il al-Qura'an p. 39 and said that its isnad is sahih.)
German Orientalist Theodor Noldeke said: “when we consider all this, we must regard it as a strong
testimony in favor of , Uthman's Qur‟an that no party – including that of Ali - repudiated the text
formed by Zaid, who was one of the most devoted adherents of Uthman and his family...‟ (Nöldeke,
Theodor. "The Qur‟an," Sketches from Eastern History. Trans. J.S. Black. London: Adam and Charles
Black, 1892.)
This is another lovely Christian missionary trick, in which they try to attack the Quranic textual
integrity, and to throw doubts on its authenticity and preservation. For starters the missionaries leave
out major info, the Muslims always had an original copy of the Quran, which was collected and put
together during Abu Bark's rule, yet this Quranic copy was not a standardized Quran, it was not sent
out and made into copies. Yet when Uthman came into power, Islam had greatly expanded into other
Arab and non-Arab territories, and as a result some differences arose in DIALECT, this basically means
in the way Quran was recited, not an issue of textual differences, rather dialect differences, and this
led to competition, one group would say our dialect is better than yours and eventually this would
lead to problems and confusion. So, Uthman decided to make copies of the official complete Quranic
manuscript which was made during the time of Abu Bakr which was also done in the Qurayshi dialect,
that of the Prophet Muhammad himself, after Uthman made copies of them, he sent them out to each
major Muslim province and the process continued and continued. The material which Uthman burnt
were not even OFFICIAL ORIGINAL STANDARDIZED QURANIC TEXTS, some of the texts which were
burnt were mere personal fragments, hence it is false to say Uthman went around burning Qurans.
Secondly these burned? Qurans' were not even for general use, they were only made for specific tribes
etc, and most times they were simple personal collections, hence again it is false to say Uthman went
around burning Qurans, what Uthman did was burn texts that were not complete Qurans, that were
not completely original, and rather he replaced this doubtful text with the REAL ORIGINAL COPY.
(Answer from http://muslim-responses.com/Top_Ten/Top_Ten_/ it is tactic 3)
Go through these sources below for more information,
https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2011/06/quran-compilation-uthman.html
https://seekersguidance.org/answers/general-counsel/the-compilation-of-the-quran-and-why-
uthman-ordered-that-some-copies-be-burned/
The individual also made points regarding chapters of the Quran. Here are the resources which you
can go through regarding this
https://thedebateinitiative.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/refuting-missionary-attacks-against-the-
preservation-of-the-quran-mdi-pamphlet.pdf
39
https://icraa.org/surahs-mushaf-ibn-masud/
https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2011/10/ibn-masud-mushaf-last-surahs-fatiha.html
Just remember the Prophet pbuh said that Surah 113 and 114 are part of the Quran and that Surah 1
which is read during every Rakat in prayer was part of the Quran. Moreover one of the chains that Ibn
Masud reading was transmitted to us was Ibn Hazam and he said “And as for their saying that
Abdullah ibn Mas‟ud‟s manuscript differs from ours, this is invalid, a lie and slander.” (Ibn Hazm, Al
Fasl Fil Milal wal Ahwaa’ wal Nihal, Volume 2,page 212) So the author is a liar.
The author makes a claim about a blind man who changed a qur’anic revelation. The verse in
question is 4.95. You can read the below for information on this.
Refer to the below. The Quran was a progressive revelation.
It was this backdrop that perturbed Ibn Umm Maktum who had earlier remained behind the Prophet
(‫ )ﷺ‬on a number of campaigns due to his blindness. While he must have known the general rule that
“Allah does burden one more than his capacity” he sought explicit exemption and concession on this
occasion to remain free from any suggestion of hypocrisy and loss in terms of reward compared to
others. Whereas, narrations of the incident in most well-known works relate the events in summary
way, there are reports that give us further information enabling us to have better insight of the issue.
Collating the scattered information about Ibn Umm Maktum’s reaction we get the following picture.
Ibn Umm Maktum – who was a blind man – stood up when he heard the superiority of those who fight
in the way of Allah, and said: ‘O Messenger of Allah! What about those believers who are not able to
fight such as the blind and others like them?[O Messenger of Allah, what do you command me? I am
a blind man. If I could fight I would have fought. I love fighting in the way of Allah. You have known for
years that I have lost my eyesight and I cannot fight. Where is my fault? Is there a dispensation for me
from Allah if I sit back? The Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬said: “I have not been ordered anything (specific) with regard
to you. I do not know whether there is a dispensation for you and the like of you.” Ibn Umm Maktum
said, “O Allah! I beseech you for (restoring) my eyesight.” He was told that the Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬was
receiving the revelation. Fearing something may be revealed about him (by the way of condemnation),
he cried standing there and said, I see refuge from the anger of Allah’s Messenger; I turn to the Allah
and His Messenger. Zaid said, “By Allah, Ibn Umm Maktum had hardly completed his words that
(something like) trance overtook the Messenger of Allah (‫)ﷺ‬. His thigh fell down on my thigh, and I
felt the heavy weight for the second time as I had felt it the first time. Then the Messenger of Allah
(‫ )ﷺ‬regained his composure, and said: ‘Read O Zaid.’ So I read: Not equal are those of the believers
who sit (at home). The Messenger of Allah (‫ )ﷺ‬said: Except those who are disabled’ (reciting) the
complete Verse (4:95).” 3.3 Seeking correction or consolation? One needs to reflect whether this is
story of a man telling or reminding the Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬to make an exception, or is it about him pleading
for a favor in view of his circumstance? The man was perturbed that he would lose the highest reward
without any negligence on his part and asked if he and his likes could get a dispensation. He was told
there was no specific instruction about him by then. He cried out to Allah requesting that alternatively
his eyesight may be restored enabling him to fight in the way of Allah and earn the greatest reward.
Just then, the Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬again began to experience the physical concomitants of revelation he had
undergone a while earlier. The poor blind man was told by the others present around that revelation
had begun to come. Perhaps realizing that he had reacted too much he feared having offended the
Messenger of Allah (‫ )ﷺ‬and began to pronounce his repentance. The revelation did come but it was
no reprimand or anything to that effect rather a context specific confirmation of a known principle
that he and others among the true believers having genuine excuse were in no loss compared to those
who went to fight in the way of Allah. Accordingly, it was reported; ‫ أن رسول‬،‫عن أنس بن مالك رض هللا عنه‬
40
‫ وال قطعتم واديا إال كانوا‬،‫مسيا‬
‫ ما رستم ر‬،‫إن بالمدينة أقواما‬: « ‫ فقال‬،‫هللا صىل هللا عليه وسلم رجع من غزوة تبوك فدنا من المدينة‬
‫ حبسهم العذر‬،‫وهم بالمدينة‬: « ‫ وهم بالمدينة؟ قال‬،‫يا رسول هللا‬: ‫ قالوا‬،» ‫ »معكم‬Anas ibn Malik related that the
Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, returned from the Tabuk expedition
and approached Madina and said, “In Madina there are people who have been with you whatever
distance you have travelled and whatever valley you crossed.” They said, “Messenger of Allah, even
though they are in Madina?” He replied, “They are in Madina and a valid excuse prevented them from
coming.” The above elaboration makes it abundantly clear that the revelation came not as a correction
but for consoling of a poor blind man and lighten his heart by reiterating an already known principle
of not burdening one beyond his capacity. This dispensation giving revelation was thus a simple
manifestation of the scheme whereby Qur’an was revealed piecemeal; for strengthening the hearts
of the believers.
Source: https://icraa.org/correction-consolation-quran-495-exemption-blind-man/
Additional Resources – Check these out
I recommend that you work your way through the two resources below which cover more arguments
that are made against the Quran with the author has not made and also discuss arguments that the
author has made.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEEVPMjxW3hn99WIZ1fFCqMaEHGbDCTVJ – Watch
through this and you will learn something.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QHuzR1AwFctItMCTuhD6i2FcN96i7djo/view - Go to page 39 and

work your way through that section it ends at page 49. This addresses many arguments it even
addresses more arguments that are related to the previous article that I refuted regarding plagiarism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n281Zyywyn4 – A good video.
HYPOCRISY – LETS LOOK AT CHRISITIANITY
The user wrongly believes that the Quran has been changed. So therefore, is it logical to conclude that
the author believes that a religious text has to be preserved? I would say that this is a logical inference.
Has the Bible remained the same throughout history? Are there discarded Gospels? So many
questions! We will go through this. Remember as I have done throughout in the hypocrisy sections I
am using the same logic of the author and I am using the same arguments against Christianity. We
must be consistent.
Now the Bible is not preserved. I will provide some evidences of this. Now the author will make the
argument that the Bible does not claim to be preserved. That is ridiculous it should be an unwritten
rule that scripture that claims to be from God or the inspired word of God should remain preserved. I
will reiterate what the argument is from the user they believe Islam is false due to their wrong belief
(as I have shown) that the Quran has been changed. Again, that is the opinion of the author and I have
shown how the author is wrong. Anyway, in that case if the Bible has been changed surely this means
Christianity is false.
Below is an interesting Bible verse. Does this mean the Bible has not been changed? It would seem
like it. If you accuse me of context that is again hypocrisy. The author has consistently demonstrated
41
throughout their blatant disregard for context so how can you expect others to offer you the same
courtesy?
“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in
righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God[a] may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”
2 Timothy 3.16 – 17 NIV
If there is context to the above Bible verse it does not change the fact that the Bible should be
preserved. Is this the case? No, it is not. I will provide you with just some examples.
1 John 5.7 is added into the Bible. I have a copy of the KJV Bible at home and this verse can be found
in there. This verse if you look it would seem to support the trinity however can’t be found in early
manuscripts. According to Dr Daniel B. Wallace it was added to the Bible in 1522. I think one can
logically conclude why this was done. The concept of the trinity is very confusing and not every
Christian believes in it, in an attempt to make it easier to understand this verse was added. However,
this just shows how you can’t trust the Bible. If that verse was added could others have?
If I ever met the author of the site in real life, I would take them to extract the venom of the most
poisonous snakes in the world. I would then ask the author if they would drink it. After all Mark 16.18
says “they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall
lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.” Jesus says these things according to what I have seen in
the red letter KJV Bible. Would the author drink the poison? I hope they wouldn’t because they would
die. After all the ending of Mark 16 is not even authentic. Even David Wood admits this. He was offered
poison as well and he admitted Mark 16.18 isn’t authentic. Many ignorant Christians listen to Wood
when he attacks Islam listen to him here where he admits that the verse from Mark is inauthentic.
What else is inauthentic in the Bible?
One of the authors claims against the Quran was variances in manuscripts. The author blatantly
ignores the fact of scribal errors. This claim of variances surged in popularity in 2020 with Daniel
Brubakers book which by the way has been thoroughly refuted. I found it hilarious that Christians were
endorsing Brubaker when their Biblical manuscripts have variances too. Are these scribal errors?
Perhaps some of them are from what I have seen but it is amazing how they accept the scribal errors
in their manuscripts and how they essentially mean nothing but not when it comes to Islam, they think
it changes everything. They ignore things like dittography etc. If you have not read my article, I linked
previously in this article then I have linked it again below.
What about the apocryphal gospels? You will mention the fact that they are apocryphal but remember
I am using the same mindset and logic as the author. Using the authors mindset these apocryphal
gospels prove Christianity false. Why were they rejected? Something must be included in there which
Christians do not like. Again, just so you know, I am using the same logic and mindset as the author.
In regards to the Gospels themselves the actual ones that are part of the NT can they be critiqued.
Yes, and they have by people such as Bart Ehrman. I have briefly looked into his work but he has done
plenty of work on the Gospels like who actually wrote them, if they are historically reliable,
contradictions etc? Again, using the logic of the author everything Ehrman has said regarding his
criticism of the Bible must be true. Before you mention that Ehrman believes that Christ was crucified
we are not talking about that rather if the Bible has been preserved. Ehrman has said “There are more
variations among our manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament” How interesting.
Are there other examples of Biblical corruption? Maybe. This section is not meant to list all of them
though but just a couple to expose how hypocritical the author is.
42
Evidence
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JulqQ-cV8GQ - 1 John 5.7 Dr Daniel B. Wallace
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Slq6KA5alGw – David Wood on Mark – he was offered poison as

well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWGwl1eT2Fk – Scribal errors in the Bible
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/variances-in-quranic-manuscripts/ - Go
through this and check the evidences at the end including a link to see the refutation of Brubakers
book.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLlakCKN1elFQCyvjpLOhkQZG2ZeKBMP9Z – A good playlist
We have consistently shown so far throughout this rebuttal that the author lacks integrity, they are
ignorant and they are hypocritical. This section further affirms this. No doubt in the remaining
responses this trend will continue. If you have gone through the links properly you will see this. I plan
on studying Quranic sciences a lot more as well. In fact, after I publish this rebuttal and take a break,
I will pursue Islamic qualifications InshAllah.
I have provided evidence throughout this response which refutes the individual and will God Willing
educate them. I used their same logic and mindset against their religion and showed how Christianity
must be false according to the logic of the author.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1i3JfEsbVGO4t3sXwphsVlMH1BCWbYBe4/view - This is a critique to

Shady Nasser’s view of the Ahruf. Certain Christian apologists that the author watches have used
Shady’s argument but due to their ignorance they can’t see how ridiculous it is.
In regards to the Qiraat articles and videos will be released for now refer to this channel
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNC4-VGazZV1ZLuofEoy1jQ - Refutes Jay Smith and co
The Quran is preserved and study Ulum Al Quran for yourself do a course in it as well.
43
MUHAMMAD'S ‫ ﷺ‬OPPRESSION AND MISTREATMENT OF WOMEN - A
RESPONSE
https://www.whowasmuhammad.org/treatment-of-women
Again, many claims are put forward here some of which have already been refuted in prior sections
but I will provide the evidences again. I am simply going to copy and paste what I have said in the
past section.
The inference here is the author believes Islam and Muhammad pbuh is sexist. If we find any claims
that the author uses against Islam in the Bible then that means according to the logic of the author
Christianity is a sexist religion.
CLAIMS
Claim – Marriage and consummation to Aisha
The author of the site references Muhammad pbuh marriage to Aisha. The author claims that
Muhammad pbuh was a pervert and although not mentioned in this article in others and on their
social media they call the Prophet pbuh a paedophile. I have written an article on this on my website.
I have linked this below for you. You need to check every link throughout this article. I provide plenty
of evidence.
The Britannica definition of a paedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to prepubescent

children. The definition of prepubescent is someone who has not yet attained puberty. Taking this
into account we will now use an authentic hadith from Bukhari narrated by Aisha herself where she
says she had attained puberty. Please read below
“(the wife of the Prophet) I had seen my parents following Islam since I attained the age of puberty.
Not a day passed but the Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬visited us, both in the mornings and evenings” (Sahih Al
Bukhari 476/ Book 8 Hadith 124)
From the above hadith it is very clear that Aisha had attained puberty. Now simply applying the
modern-day definition to a 1400-year-old society exonerates the idea that Muhammad (pbuh) was a
paedophile. The Arabic used in this hadith is ‫ أعقل‬now this can be translated as wise, intellectual,
reason, most prudent etc. So, the hadith attests to the fact that Aisha had attained puberty and that
she was intellectually mature.
a’qal more reasonable; brighter, smarter, more intelligent | … a’qal al’umr the most reasonable
time of life, the years of reason and MATURITY.” Hans Wehr A Dictionary of Modern written Arabic
[Edited by John Milton – Spoken Language Services, Inc. 1976], page 737
We can also look to the Quran as well for more proof.
“And test the orphans until they attain puberty; then if you find in them maturity of intellect, make
over to them their property, and do not consume it extravagantly and hastily, lest they attain to full
age…”Surah Nisa verse 6
44
There is no set minimum age for marriage in Islam but there are conditions that vary dependent on
the individual. The verse above from Surah Nisa shows this. The prophet pbuh advised us to get
married young so by today’s standards this would seem to be late teens at a push early 20s. The reason
for this is it will help prevent Zina which means unlawful sexual intercourse. Aisha had attained
puberty.
Here is another hadith as well that further refute the allegation of the Prophet marrying a
prepubescent girl.
Narrated ‘Aisha: We set out with the Prophet for Hajj and when we reached Sarif I got my menses.
When the Prophet came to me, I was weeping. He asked, “Why are you weeping?” I said, “I wish if
I had not performed Hajj this year.” He asked, “May be that you got your menses?” I replied, “Yes.”
Bukhari 305/Vol 1 Book 6 hadith 302
An interesting point includes the broken-down marriage to Jubayr. Imam Ahmad narrates the
circumstances of Aisha’s marriage to the Prophet (pbuh). He says that al-Mut’am b. A’dy proposed
to her for his son Jubayr. When the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) approached Abu-Bakr asking for her
hand in marriage, he told him that another family already approached him about the same thing
and that he had to honor that. Later, Abu Bakr met al-Mut’am and his wife. He sensed hesitate from
ُ ُ
the mother of Jubayr. She said: “‫جبيا‬‫ ”أخش أن تصبأ عائشة ر‬or “I worry Aisha would convert my son
Jubayr to Islam“. Abu Bakr asked the father about it, and he said that he had a similar concern as
his wife. The marriage was called off and Abu Bakr told the Prophet (pbuh) That Aisha was available.
How old must she have been in order to have this kind of influence? She must have been a
charismatic, eloquent adult for Jubayr’s family to be concerned that she might convert their son to
Islam. She definitely was not a child. She surely would have been mature and as it seems very wise.
Do you think today that even a 14 year old or even a 16 year old can convert someone of the same
age or older to a religion? No. Yet the parents of Jubayr expressed their deep concerns so much so
that they called off the marriage all together.
In the 11th century, Urraca Queen of Leon, Castile and Galicia was married before the age of 12. In
the 12th century, Philip Augustus II, King of France married Isabella of Hainut when she was 10-12
years old. Joan of England, Queen of Consort of Sicily married William II when she was 11 years old. In
the 13th century Joan I of Navarre married Phillip IV at the age of 11. Also Isabella of Valois was
married at the age of 8 to Richard II of England. Until 1885 the minimum age for consensual sex was
10 years of age for more than half the states in the USA. In Delaware it was 7. In 1576 the minimum
age for consensual sex was reduced from 12 to 10 in Britain and this continued for 3 centuries.
(References at the end of this chapter to a playlist which cites al these)
What about the modern day? Today a teenager aged 13 in Minnesota can have consensual sex by law
as long as the age difference does not exceed 4 years. In Spain the minimum age for consensual sex in
Spain is 13. In Italy, Germany and Austria it is 14. In France, Sweden, Denmark and Greece it is 15.
For more information refer to this https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/age-of-

aisha/ - I wrote this.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QI3yb3dchZwJXzcxM_FEZnCpf9SYCJbJ/view
I also provide evidence in regards to the biblical age for marriage looking at the examples of Mary and
Rebekah. Whilst some Rabbis and Scholars say Rebekah was 3 years old, I believe the evidence
suggesting she was 10-12 to be far more convincing. The author of WhoWasMuhammad.org should
logically have an issue with this as they criticise Muhammad pbuh. We will explore the hypocrisy more
45
throughout my whole response. They are blatantly ignorant and the article from my website
exonerates Muhammad pbuh. Also, biblically Muhammad pbuh did nothing wrong. This is something
you will see when you read my full article and check all the evidences throughout.
https://twitter.com/RioPedro2/status/1324667117845778434?s=19 – Also here are some additional

resources for you
Claim - 65.4 of the Quran
The author then cites 65.4 of the Quran. They claim it says you can have sex with prepubescent girls
this is not the case as you will see when you read through the article linked below.
There are three types of females the verse refers to. The first type of female we will examine, are
older women who sometimes due to a body disorder have had their menstrual cycles ceased. This
may be due to stress, diet or heavy athletic training. In the Book ‘The New Harvard Guide to
Women’s Health’, it says:
Amenorrhea means the absence of menstruating in a pre-menopausal woman. During pregnancy or

breastfeeding amenorrhea is perfectly normal and is called physiologic amenorrhea. Abnormal or
pathologic amenorrhea comes in two forms: primary and secondary. Primary amenorrhea is a term
used if menstruation has not began by the age of 16. Secondary amenorrhea is a term used if
previously normal menstrual period stop for more than 6 months in a woman who is not pregnant or
breastfeeding and is not nearing menopause.”
In the book ‘Integrated Women’s Health: Holistic Approaches for Comprehensive Care’, Professor
Ellen Frances Olshansky writes:
46
“Three broad types of amenorrhea have been identified. If menstruation has not stared in a woman
by the age of 16, this is referred to as primary amenorrhea. If menstruation stops after at least one
period has occurred, this is referred to as secondary amenorrhea. Women frequently experience this
second type of amenorrhea due to stress, loss or gain of weight, breast-feeding, excessive exercise,
change in lifestyle, or physical ailments, and may be due to menopause. The third type of
amenorrhea is known as irregular or erratic menstruation. In this case, menstruation may occur a
few times a year.”
Professor Ian Richard Netton –
Idda
The Arabic word Idda (number) is used for the period of waiting prescribed in Islamic law during
which newly widowed and recently divorced women are prevented from entering into a new
contract of marriage. The Qur’anic authority for the different prescriptions is found in Q. 2:228 and
Q. 2:234. In the case of divorced woman, the time of waiting is three menstrual peroids. For non-
menstruating women or those past the age of menstruation the time is three months (Q.65:4). This
is intended to provide sufficient time to ascertain whether or not there is unborn child of the
dissolved marriage. In the case of a widow the Idda is four months and ten days. The longer period
of waiting in this case provides additional time for mourning. In either case, however, an unborn
child is taken to term before another marriage. This establishes paternity and ensures that provision
is made by the former husband, or from the estate of the deceased husband, for the welfare of
mother and child
Refer to the below links for more information
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/03/12/quran-654-the-child-marriage-claim/
https://abuaminaelias.com/verse-65-4-child-marriage/ - Check this one as well.
Claim - Surah Nisa verse 34 wife beating and the allegation Muhammad pbuh hit Aisha
The author references Surah Nisa verse 34 and says it means men can beat their wives I have written
an article on this. We are going to look to the Tafisr. Below is Tafsir ibn-Kathir.
(beat them) means, if advice and ignoring her in the bed do not produce the desired results, you are
allowed to discipline the wife, without severe beating. Muslim recorded that Jabir said that during
the Farewell Hajj, the Prophet said;
َّ ُ ُ ْ َ َ َ َ ْ َ َ ْ َ ُ َ ُ َ ْ َ ً َ َ ْ ُ َ ُ ُ َ ْ ُ َ ْ َ َّ ْ َ َ ْ ُ َ َ َ ُ َ ْ َّ َّ َ ِّ َ ‫َو َّات ُقوا‬
«‫اضبوهن‬ ِ ْ ‫ف ْإ ُن فعلن ذل ُك ف‬،‫ونه‬ ‫ ولكم عليهن أن ل يوطئ فرشكم أحدا تكره‬،‫ فإن ُهن عندك ْم ع َو ٍان‬،‫للا ِف الن َساء‬
َّ َّ ُ َ َ َّ َ َ ًْ َ
‫ َول ُهن عل ْيك ْم ِرزق ُهن َوك ْس َوت ُهن بال َم ْع ُروف‬،‫ضبا غ رْ َي ُم َ َ ِي ٍح‬ »
(Fear Allah regarding women, for they are your assistants. You have the right on them that they do
not allow any person whom you dislike to step on your mat. However, if they do that, you are
allowed to discipline them lightly. They have a right on you that you provide them with their
provision and clothes, in a reasonable manner.) Ibn Àbbas and several others said that the Ayah
refers to a beating that is not violent. Al-Hasan Al-Basri said that it means, a beating that is not
severe.
ُ ‫ َو ر‬means.
We are now going to look at the Arabic ‫اضبوه‬
ِ
Daraba (darb) to beat, strike, … to play … (to play musical instrument)l to make music; to type ( on
a type writer); to sting (scorpion); to separate, part (… people); to impose (… on s.o. s.th.). to turn
47
away from, leave, forsake, abandon, avoid, or shun s.o. or s.th.; – (darb, … daraban) to pulsate. …
to move, stir, to rove, roam about, travel. …” (M…” (Hans Wehr A Dictionary of Modern written
Arabic [Edited by John Milton – Spoken Language Services, Inc. 1976, 4th edition], page 629)
It is evident therefore that this word has many different meanings. Now let us look at the historical
context of this. It was pointed out by the earliest scholars of Islam that the husband is not allowed to
hurt, bruise, break any part of her body and must avoid the face. Prophet Muhammad (p) stated in
his farewell pilgrimage as we showed earlier:
“Treat women kindly, they are like captives in your hands; you do not owe anything else from
them. In case they are guilty of open indecency (Fahishah Mubayyinah), then do not share their
beds and beat them lightly but if they return to obedience, do not have recourse to anything else
against them. You have rights over your wives and they have their rights over you. Your right is
that they shall not permit anyone you dislike to enter your home, and their right is that you should
treat them well in the matter of food and clothing.” (Jami at-Tirmidhi, volume 1, Book 7, Hadith
1163. Eng. Tran., Sahih Darussalam)
It is evidently a last resort. This last resort was understood by Prophet Muhammed in the above
َ ً‫َ ر‬
Hadith and scholars as ‘beat lightly’ or “non-violent strike’ (“‫ضبا غ رر َي ُم ََ ِّيح‬ ”), touching her in such a way
as to not leave a mark, nor hurt her. Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari (838 – 923 AD) who is
one of the earliest commentators of the Quran writes on Surah 4:34. Tabari has a tradition going
back to one of the Companions of the Prophet (p) explains the word ‘beat’ as:
“I asked Ibn Abbas: ‘What is the hitting that is Ghayr Al-Mubarrih?’ He replied [with] the siwak
(toothbrush like a twig) and the like’. [Narrated by al-Tabari in his tafsir [Dar al-fikr] volume 5,
page 68) this on my website which you can read. Be sure to go through all the links.
Refer to the below for more information
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/does-islam-permit-wife-beating/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVjMAr1oO7Q - David Wood makes this claim watch him

literally lie to you yet you still believe him.
He says that Aisha was hit by Muhammad pbuh. I find this funny because not only does this further
expose how ignorant the author is but I knew someone would make this claim which is why in 4.34
article I provided proof how this was not the case. Have a read of this here.
https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/12/23/refuting-the-allegation-that-muhammed-hit-his-wife-
aisha-and-more/
Claim – Semen on the clothes of Muhammad pbuh
reports that the author of this website has. Watch from 11.22– end Farid addresses the report

he doesn’t care.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7ikWxJwqwc – Watch this as well.
48
How does semen get onto one clothes? Perhaps some semen leaked after he had sex with one his
wives?
This is not a big deal and does not prove anything your clear hatred prevents you from looking at
things at normally.
Claim – Sex slaves
The author makes many claims regarding this. I will paste the claims they make and the references
they cite and go over them.
Before we begin, I will ask to go through these links
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvR2F7SfpiI - Slavery and Right-Hand Possession in Islam
https://abuaminaelias.com/islam-and-concubines/ - What does Islam teach about concubines?
https://abuaminaelias.com/consent-marriage-concubines/ - Sexual consent, marriage, and

concubines in Islam
Right let us go back to going over the claims that the author of this site has made.
The individual makes the claim the Prophet pbuh had sex slaves and then cites Chapter 33 verse 50.
The verse is pasted below
O Prophet! We have made lawful for you your wives to whom you have paid their ˹full˺ dowries as
well as those ˹bondwomen˺ in your possession, whom Allah has granted you.1 And ˹you are
allowed to marry˺ the daughters of your paternal uncles and aunts, and the daughters of your
maternal uncles and aunts, who have emigrated like you. Also ˹allowed for marriage is˺ a
believing woman who offers herself to the Prophet ˹without dowry˺ if he is interested in marrying
her—˹this is˺ exclusively for you, not for the rest of the believers.2 We know well what ˹rulings˺
We have ordained for the believers in relation to their wives and those ˹bondwomen˺ in their
possession. As such, there would be no blame on you. And Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
The verse refers to the Prophet pbuh being able to marry without paying the dowry.
Read more about this verse via this link https://discover-the-truth.com/2017/01/22/tafseer-on-

quran-3350/
CLAIM - Surah 66:1; Sunan An-Nasa'i 3411 (Dar-us-Salam Reference);

49
Prophet! Why do you forbid (for yourself) that which Allah has allowed to you’ up to: ‘If you two
turn in repentance to Allah’ -‘Aishah and Hafsah- ‘And (remember) when the Prophet disclosed a
matter in confidence to one of his wives.’ refers to him saying: ‘No, rather I drank honey.'” (Sunan
an-Nasa’i volume 4, Book 35, Hadith 3826)
Claim – Impregnated slave girl
Ibn Ishaq is someone who is widely criticised. If the author was educated this was something they
would know and that they would tell you. If you are interested as to why Ibn Ishaq is criticised read
the below article. The author made a few claims which included ibn Ishaq as their source. So refer to
this link for that.
Once you read the above you will understand how Ibn Ishaqs work is scrutinised more. I suggest you
watch this as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vvs-ylOpbKE - Can we be Lenient with Historical Reports? In

other words, each case needs to be studied properly. Case by case. Look at the isnad etc the people
in the isnad. Is it chainless? This is why there is a science of hadith. This is why people do qualifications
in this to learn about in depth now I do not have such qualifications I have no issue admitting this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXMNOOEUuQ4 – You can watch this video where the individual

talks about page 653 of Ibn Ishaq Sirat Rasul Allah.
Claim – Breastfeeding
If we go to the “Answers to potential objections” section of the website we see that the author has
commented more on this see below
“Some may say this verse was just for Sahla bint Suhail, Abu Hudhaifa's wife (they may reference Sahih
Muslim 8:3429). First, even if this was true, it is still an insane command from Muhammad. Second,
this command was not just for Abu Hudhaifa's wife. The verse about breastfeeding 10 times was
revealed before the situation with Sahla bint Suhail and Abu Hudhaifa, which was for 5 times: Muwatta
Malik 30:12, 17.”
They didn’t feel the need to mention that in the article, instead they put it in a objections article where
they knew not many people would click on. Very nefarious. So, the real reason why the individual
made this point is made clear in the objections. “it is still an insane command from Muhammad” It is
the authors opinion. We will address their claim though.
50
So, this point is in regards to adult breastfeeding. You can go through the below resources and
question why didn’t the author tell you this? I have provided you with plenty of resources which go
through plenty of evidences and they explain the Sahla bint Suhail incident.
Abu Hudhayfa’s wife returned and she said, “I fed him with breast milk (in a cup) and the disturbance
in Abu Hudhayfa’s heart disappeared.”
In this situation, Salim grew up in the household of Abu Hudhayfa as a member of the family, although
he was not directly related to them. When Salim reached manhood, Abu Hudhayfa was bothered that
an unrelated man was coming and going into his house where his wife resided. In order to make him
feel better, the Prophet (s) ordered that Salim drink the breast milk of his wife and thus he would
become similar to a blood relative.
Salim did not touch the wife of Abu Hudhayfa or drink directly from her breast, because that would
have defeated the purpose of the act from the start.
Ibn Hajar comments on this tradition, saying:

َ ‫رسب ُه م رن َغ رري َأ رن َي َمس َث رد َي َها َق‬
‫ال الن َووي َو ُه َو ر‬
‫اح ِت َمال َح َسن‬ َ َ ُ ُ ‫احت َم َ َ َ َ َ ر‬
‫ر‬ َ ‫َ ً ََ َ َ ر ر‬ َ
ِ ِ ِ ِ َ ‫ال أنها حلبته ثم‬ ِ ِ ‫ال ِب‬
ِ ‫ف ِإن ِعياضا أجاب ع ِن ِاْلشك‬
Al-Qadi ‘Iyad answers the question with the interpretation that the milk was put into a cup and he did
not drink it from her breast. Al-Nawawi said: This is interpretation is best.
Source: Fatḥ al-Bārī 4814
Moreover, this was a special concession given to Salim and Abu Hudhayfa, because of their unique
cultural and social situation. The companions of the Prophet (s) did not understand this case to be a
general rule or permissible in other circumstances.
Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her, said:

َ َ َ َ َ َ َ ُ َ َ ّ َ ُ ّ ّ َ ّ ُ ُ َ َ َ َ ‫ُ ر َ َر‬ َ َ َ ّ َ
‫اع ِة َوَل‬ ‫اَلل َعل ري ِه َو َسل َم ِل َس ِالم خاصة ف َما ه َو ِبد ِاخل َعل رينا أ َحد ِب َه ِذ ِه الرض‬ ِ ‫اَلل َما ن َرى هذا ِإَل رخصة أرخصها رسول‬
‫اَلل صىل‬ ِ ‫و‬
َ َ
‫را ِئينا‬
By Allah, we do not view this but as a concession that the Messenger of Allah (s) granted to Salim
specifically. No one with this type of feeding may enter our homes, and it is not our view.
Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 1454, Grade: Sahih
In sum, the incident was a product of the unique cultural and social conditions that faced Abu
Hudhayfa and his household at the time. The Prophet (s) devised a clever way to put Abu Hudhayfa at
ease with Salim, his freed slave who lived in their home together with his wife. Due to the very specific
nature of this case, it is not a general rule and cannot be extracted to other cases by analogy.
https://abuaminaelias.com/islam-adult-breastfeeding/
https://islamqa.org/hanafi/daruliftaa/8424
https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2011/06/there-is-no-adult-breastfeeding-in.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=291IcZ0OEOM
https://www.bismikaallahuma.org/hadith/nursing-of-adults/
51
Claim – Mut’ah
Again, if we go to the “Answers to potential objections” section of the website we see that the author
has commented more on this see below
“Some will say this isn't allowed today because Muhammad eventually forbade temporary marriages
(Sahih Al-Bukhari 59:527, 86:81), but that doesn't change the fact that Muhammad allowed it. It may
be forbidden now, but he still at some point allowed his men to engage in prostitution and adultery by
giving them a loophole through "temporary marriages".
So, the individual acknowledges that Muhammad pbuh forbade it but again they didn’t feel the need
to mention that in the article, instead they put it in a objections article where they knew not many
people would click on. Very nefarious. The individual also cited two Quran verses as well. I recommend
you read the two articles below which go over mut’ah and explain it. This is an irrelevant point that
the user has made and you will realise this as you go through the resources below. As you go through
these resources you will question why didn’t the individual tell you this. This is a common theme
throughout. To the Christians reading this who think the authors site is good imagine someone did the
exact same thing with the Bible. Since the author is a Christian, I will be displaying how the individual
is hypocrite as well.
Sabrah al-Juhanni reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, prohibited
temporary marriage and he said, “Behold, it is forbidden from this day of yours until the Day of
Resurrection”
Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 1406
Grade: Sahih (authentic) according to Muslim
Al-Maziri said, “It is confirmed that temporary marriage was permissible in the beginning of Islam,
then it was confirmed by many authentic narrations mentioned here that it was abrogated. Consensus
was formed over its unlawfulness.”
Source: Sharḥ al-Nawawī ‘alá Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 1406

ْ َ َ َ ُ َ َ َ ََ َ‫َ َ َ ُْر‬ ّ َ ُ َ َ ‫َ ر‬
‫ال أل ِإن َها َح َرام ِم رن َي رو ِمك رم هذا ِإل َي رو ِم ال ِق َي َام ِة‬ ‫اَلل صىل هللا عليه وسلم نه ع ِن المتع ِة وق‬
ِ ‫ول‬ ‫سية الجهن أن رس‬
َ ‫عن‬
1406 ‫صحيح مسلم كتاب النكاح باب نكاح المتعة وبيان أنه أبيح ثم نسخ ثم أبيح ثم نسخ واستقر تحريمه إل يوم القيامة‬
َ ُ ‫َ َْر ُ َ َُ َ ُ ُ َ ر َ َ ر‬ ََ‫ر ر َ ُ ََ َ ر‬ َ ً َ َ َ َ‫ََ َ َ َ َ ْ ُر‬ َْ َ َ
‫ور ِة هنا أنه ن ِسخ َوان َعقد ِاْل رج َماع َعىل‬‫يث الص ِحيح ِة المذك‬
ِ ‫قال الم ِاز ِري ثبت أن ِنكاح المتع ِة كان جا ِئزا ِف أو ِل ِاْلسَل ِم ثم ثبت ِباْلح ِاد‬
َ
‫ت رح ِر ِيم ِه‬
َ ‫صحيح مسلم‬
1406 ‫بشح النووي‬
https://www.discoveringislam.org/mutah.htm - Article 1
https://abuaminaelias.com/dailyhadithonline/2012/04/11/hadith-on-marriage-it-is-forbidden-to-
contract-a-temporary-marriage/ - Article 2
You should also watch the two below videos as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPDlcQnhQxA – Video 1 address Quran verse 4.24.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWIoN3Msj44 – Video 2 on Islamic slavery.
52
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIB7-KqmOdA – Video 3 on slavery.
Claim – Woman refuses sexual intercourse
What does this mean? Does this verse refer to all women? We will explain this. A man has obligations
to his wife just as a wife has obligations to her husband. This is marriage after all. It is partnership. I
will link some videos at the end of this claim which will explain this to you.
A husband and wife safeguard the chastity of one another by providing one another a legitimate
means of satisfying the sexual urge. This protection of chastity is essential for the preservation of the
family unit – the very institution on which the stability of a society hinges. Hence anything which puts
chastity in jeopardy is disliked by the Almighty.
Secondly, a man is an addressee of the directive mentioned in this Hadith on an equal basis. This is
evident from the directive of ila mentioned in the Qur’an (2:226-7) in which the Arabs of the pre-
Islamic period would swear to sever sexual relationship with their wives because of anger. Although
the husbands were prescribed a period of four months to decide the fate of their wives by either
resuming these relations or divorcing her, it is evident from the directive that in normal circumstances
a husband is not allowed to sever sexual relations from his wife without a valid reason. So much so, if
a person swears such an oath, he must break it. Such relations are the right of a wife and if a husband
does not fulfil them, then he can be regarded a criminal both in the eyes of the law and before the
Almighty in the Hereafter.
Thirdly, the basis of refusal by the husband or wife must also be taken in consideration. If either of
them is tired, sick or simply not in the proper mood and in the appropriate frame of mind then it does
not entail any wrath of the Almighty. It is only when a spouse starts to deliberately evade such natural
needs of the other that the attitude becomes questionable. (Answer by Shehzad Saleem)
Sources to check out
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDaYOIVaNhU - Can Your Wife Reject Sexual Intercourse in

Islam?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1XVLo9c8Tw - What Are the Rights of the Wife?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ0WnatSPSc - Can a Wife refuse intimacy with her husband?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTfpmfv79Yk – Husband does not fulfil her sexual desires.
https://abuaminaelias.com/marital-rape-domestic-violence/?s=0 – – Martial Rape is a sin.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sVo_-j2THE - Slavery & Rape in Islamic Law Q&A with Omar

Suleiman
You see how the Husband has to fulfil the needs of his wife just as she should fulfil his. As I stated at
the beginning marriage is a partnership. Something that couples work on. They have obligations to
each other.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEEVPMjxW3hnTxaIIWNNZuSth8pFpjkNC – You can go

through this playlist as well. It will inform you.
Why didn’t the author of the site mention any of this? Have you noticed a pattern? This is the first
article that I have responded too. There are plenty more that I will go through. Now though we are
53
going to move onto applying the same logic and mindset of the author to their religion, Christianity.
What will we find?
Claim – Man raped a slave and Muhammad pbuh allowed it
Ali had taken a ritual bath to prepare himself for prayer after consummating the marriage to his
concubine-wife, who had been a prisoner of war. While the text itself is relatively short, there are
three salacious and inappropriate allegations made against Islam on the basis of this narration: 1) Ali
had ‘raped’ the maid-servant, 2) Ali had intercourse with her while she was underage, and 3) Ali had
acted treacherously by taking war spoils without permission.
These allegations are based upon an unwarranted reading of subtext into the narration, an
imposition of modern concepts on the pre-modern historical context, and in disregard of other
teachings in Islam to the contrary. Moreover, the forums which publicize such claims are
transparently biased against Islam, beginning with the false premise that Islam is inherently evil and
then mining classical texts for ‘evidence’ in support. Each claim will be answered in this article.
First, it is not permissible in Islam to mistreat prisoners of war, especially women, children, and
those who are not part of the enemy army. Prisoners of war have basic human rights, whether they
are Muslims or not. They must be clothed and fed, not abused or tortured.
Abu Aziz ibn Umair reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said:
َ ُ َ ‫ر‬
‫است رو ُصوا ِباْل َس َارى خ رر ًيا‬
I enjoin you to treat prisoners well.
Source: al-Mu’jam al-Kabīr 18444, Grade: Hasan
And specifically, the Prophet (ṣ) said:

َ ِّ َ ‫ر‬
‫است رو ُصوا ِبالن َس ِاء خ رر ًيا‬
I enjoin you to treat women well.
Source: Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 3153, Grade: Muttafaqun Alayhi
Al-Qurtubi writes:
َ ُ ُ ُ َ َ ‫َ َ َ ُ َ ر‬ َ َ ‫رَر‬ َ َ ََ ّ َ ُّ ّ َ َ َََ
‫يق الت َواض ِع َح ّن َل َي َر روا‬ِ ‫وك َط ِر‬ ِ ‫ان و ِإل سل‬
ِ ‫ارم اْلخَل ِق َو َحض ُه رم َعل ري َها َوأ ررشده رم ِإل ِاْل رح َس‬
ِ ِ ‫اَلل َعل ري ِه َو َسل َم السادة ِإل َمك‬ ‫فندب صىل‬
َ
َ ‫ْل رن ُفسه رم َمزية َع َىل‬
‫يد ِه رم‬ ‫ب‬
ِ ِ ‫ع‬ ِ ِ ِ ِ
The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, recommended a master to have good character and
he emphasized it upon them. He directed them to behave in the best manner and to traverse the
path of humility, such that they do not see any privilege for themselves over their slaves.
Source: Tafsīr al-Qurṭubī 4:36
The institution of concubinage was similar to marriage in pre-modern Muslim society. The Arabic
word for ‘concubinage’ (al-sirr) is linguistically related to ‘marriage’ (al-nikah):
ُ ‫الن َك‬
ِّ َ ُ َ ِّ َ َ ِّ ُ ‫َك َما َق ُالوا‬
‫اح‬ ‫رسية واْلصل ِمن الش وهو‬
As they say ‘a concubine,’ the origin is from the word ‘concubinage,’ which is marriage.
Source: Lisān al-‘Arab 4/304
54
A female prisoner of war could become incorporated into a household as a concubine-wife, with
rights and privileges that improved her social status. If she gave birth to children, her children would
be free and entitled to equal parental care, and as ‘mother of the child’ (umm walad) she could not
be sold to anyone else or separated from her children.
In this case, Ali was bringing the maid-servant into his household by consummating his marriage to
her as a concubine-wife and member of the family.
In another version of this tradition, a man wrote to the Prophet (ṣ) asking him to send someone to
set aside a fifth of the spoils:
َ ُ ْ َ َ َ َ َ َ ‫ر‬ َ ‫َ َر‬ َ َ َ ًّ َ َ ‫َ َ َ َ َ ر‬
‫س َوق َس َم فخ َر َج َرأ ُسه ُمغ ًّط‬ ‫ه أفض ُل ِم رن الس َ ِن فخم‬ ِ ‫فبعث ِإلينا ع ِليا و ِف الس َ ر ِن و ِصيفة‬
He sent Ali to us and among the prisoners was a maid-servant (wasifah), who was the best of the
prisoners. He set aside a fifth, distributed the rest, and he came out to us with his head dripping wet
(from a ritual bath).
They said, “O Abu al-Hasan, what is this?” Ali said:

َ ُ ّ ّ َ ِّ ‫َر‬ ‫ر‬ ُ ُ ُ ْ ‫ر‬ َ ُ َ ُ َ ِّ َ ‫َ ّ َ َ ر‬ ْ َ َ ََ
‫اَلل َعل ري ِه‬ ‫س ثم َص َارت ِف أه ِل َب ري ِت الن َِن صىل‬
ِ ‫أل رم ت َر روا ِإل ال َو ِصيف ِة ال ِ ّن كانت ِف الس َ ر ِن ف ِإن ق َس رمت َوخم رست ف َص َارت ِف الخم‬
ُ َ ‫َ ي‬ ‫َ َ َّ ُ َ َ ر‬
‫ىل َو َوق رعت ِب َها‬ِ ‫آل ع‬
ِ ‫وسلم ثم صارت ِف‬
Have you not seen the maid-servant among the prisoners? Indeed, I have divided the spoils and set
aside a fifth. She became part of the fifth, then she became part of the household of the Prophet,
peace and blessings be upon him, then she became part of the family of Ali, and I have
consummated it with her.
Source: Musnad Aḥmad 22458, Grade: Hasan
The young woman is described as a ‘maid-servant’ or ‘lady-in-waiting,’ indicating that she already
had a high standing as the servant of a wealthy master or royal court.
By consummating her as a concubine-wife, Ali was ensuring that her privileged social status would
remain and prosper. She would be treated like a wife, part of his family. This arrangement was
ultimately in her best interests and infers that the relationship was consensual. Although maid-
servants were ‘owned,’ they were not treated as mere property. Their right to fair and kind
treatment was acknowledged the same as family members.
In this pre-modern socio-historical context, what Ali did was ordinary according to the widely-
practiced customs of many societies. Today, the institution of concubinage has been abolished with
the unanimous abolition of slavery by Muslims, with the understanding that it was intended to be
phased out of society, making these practices obsolete in the modern context.
There is no evidence at all that Ali harmed her in any way, but rather this was a beneficial
arrangement for her. It is not plausible that he would rape her, which is to harm her, in direct
contradiction of the Prophet’s (ṣ) order to treat prisoners well and the prophetic maxim:
َ ِ ‫ض َر َو َل‬
‫ض َار‬ َ َ ‫َل‬
Do not cause harm or return harm.
Source: Sunan Ibn Mājah 2340, Grade: Sahih
If a master strikes his maid-servant and causes an injury, that maid-servant must be set free and the
concubinage annulled.
55
Ibn Umar reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessing be upon him, said:
ُ َ ‫َ ر َ َ ُ َ َ ُ ًّ َ ْ َ َ ُ َ َ َ ُ َ ر‬
‫ض َب غَل ًما له َحدا ل رم َيأ ِت ِه أ رو ل َط َمه ف ِإن كف َارته أن ُي رع ِتقه‬ ‫من‬
Whoever strikes his slave sharply or slaps him, then the expiation for the sin is to emancipate him.
Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 1657, Grade: Sahih
It is not permissible in Islam to harm a maid-servant with harsh words, let alone physical violence.
Al-Razi writes:
ُ َِ ‫ان إ َل ريه رم ِم رن ُو ُجوه َأ َح ُد َها َأ رن ََل ُي َك ِّل َف ُه رم َما ََل َط َاق َة َل ُه رم ب ِه َو َثا ِن َيها َأ رن ََل ُي رؤذيه رم ب ْال َك ََلم ْال َخ ِشن َب رل ُي َع‬
َ ََ ‫ارس ُه رم ُم َع‬
‫ارسة‬
َ َ ‫َ رَر َ ر ر‬
‫واعلم أن ِاْلحس‬
َ َ ُ َ ‫َ َ ُْ ر َ َ َ ر‬ ِ ِ ِ ِ ِ َ ِ ِ ِ
‫ر‬ َ ‫ر‬ ُ َ ‫ر‬ ُ ‫َ َ َ ََ َُ ر‬
‫حسنة وث ِالثها أن يع ِطيهم ِمن الطع ِام والكسو ِة ما يحتاجون ِإلي ِه‬
Know that good treatment towards servants is from several perspectives: First, that they are not
held responsible for what they are incapable of doing. Second, that they are not harmed with rude
words. Rather, he should live with them in good company. Third, that they are provided with food
and clothing as they need.
Source: Tafsīr al-Rāzī 4:36
If it is not permissible for a master to physically or emotionally harm a maid-servant, then how could
it be permissible for him to rape her?
Second, there is the question of why Ali did not apply the mandatory ‘waiting period’ (istibra’a) to
discover whether or not she was already pregnant. The most likely explanation is that she had not
previously had intercourse with anyone, or she had just recently finished her menstruation cycle.
Ibn Hajar writes:

َ َ ُ َ َ َ ‫ر‬ ُ ُ َ َ ُ‫َ َ ُ ُ َ ر َ ُ َ َ َ ر َ َ َ ر‬
‫ورِت َها له ثم َط ُه َرت َب رعد َي روم َول ريلة ثم َوق َع َعل ري َها‬‫ويجوز أن تكون حاضت ع ِقب ص ري‬
It is possible that she was menstruating at the end of her arrival with him, then she became ritually
pure after a day or a night, and then he consummated (the marriage) with her.
One interpretation offered by classical commentators is that she ‘had not reached maturity,’ by
which they meant she had not begun her regular menstruation cycles.
Al-Khattabi said:
‫اد ُه َأ رن ََل ر‬
‫اس ِت َر َي َاء ِف َيها‬
ُ َ ‫ر َ َ ر َ ُ َ َ ر َ َ َر ُ َ ُُْ َر َ ُ ر‬
‫وغ أو أداه اج ِته‬
ِ ‫ال أن تكون عذراء أو دون البل‬
ِ ‫ِالح ِتم‬
For it is possible that she was a virgin, or had not reached maturity, or he used his reasoning in not
applying the waiting period for her.
Some anti-Muslim commenters have seized upon the phrase ‘not reached maturity’ to imply that she
was a prepubescent girl. Rather, it refers to the uncommon but possible scenario that she was old
enough to be considered an adult but had experienced delayed or late menarche. Moreover, this was
only one of various interpretations they offered, as there could have been other legitimate reasons,
he did so that are not mentioned in the text.
56
For some young women, menstruation can occur as late as 16 years of age and still be considered
physiologically normal. In the pre-modern world, such a young woman might be socialized as an
adult even though she had not menstruated yet. The maid-servant had not been described in the
narration with an Arabic word meaning ‘child,’ such as tifl or sabbi, implying that she was considered
an adult by their social standards.
Lastly, Islam has rules and guidance for uncomfortable realities in life, such as warfare. An inevitable
part of warfare is the acquisition of spoils and treatment of prisoners of war. International law today
has regulations for distributing spoils and handling prisoners of war. Similarly, classical Islamic law
developed regulations for these matters based upon the teachings of the Prophet (ṣ).
One-fifth of the spoils of war, which was the property left over by defeated enemies, was to belong
to the Prophet (ṣ) and his household for the purpose of redistributing it as charity. It was included in
later jurisprudence as the share of spoils belonging to the military commander or Caliph.
Allah said:
ّ ُ َ ‫ُ ُر‬ ْ َ َ ََْ َ َ ‫ُْ ر‬ ُ ُ ّ َ َ ‫َ ر َ ُ َ َ َ ر ُ ِّ َ َ ر‬
‫اَلل َو َما‬
ِ ‫آمنتم ِب‬ ‫يل ِإن كنتم‬ِ ‫ي َو راب ِن الس ِب‬ ِ ‫ول َو ِل ِذي القر َ ىن واليت ى‬
‫ام و َال َم َس ِاك ر‬ ِ ‫َلل خ ُم َسه َو ِللر ُس‬
ِ ِ ‫واعلموا أنما غ ِنمتم من شء فأن‬
َ ‫ر‬ َ ْ َّ َ ْ َ ‫َ ْ َ َ َ َ ر َ َ ر َ ْ ُ ر َ َ ر‬
‫ان‬
ِ ‫ان يوم التق الجمع‬ ‫ى‬
ِ ‫أنزلنا عىل عب ِدنا يوم الفرق‬
Know that anything you take of spoils, one-fifth is for Allah and the Messenger, and for relatives,
orphans, the poor, and the wayfarers, if you have faith in Allah and what He revealed to His servant
on the decisive day that the two armies met.
Source: Surat al-An’fal 8:41
This share of the spoils was not for the purpose of enriching the Prophet (ṣ) and his family in a
worldly sense. It would be reinvested in the community through various charitable donations.
Ubadah ibn al-Samit reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said:
ُ َ ُ ُ ُ ُ ْ َ ُ ُ ُ ْ َ ‫ََ َ ُّ َ ُ َ ر‬ َ ُ ُ َ
‫س َم رردود َعل ريك رم‬ ‫اَلل َعل ريك رم قد ُر ه ِذ ِه ِإَل الخمس والخم‬ ‫اس ِإنه َل َي ِحل ِل ِمما أفاء‬ ‫َيا أي َها الن‬
O people! Verily, it is not lawful for me to take from the spoils that Allah bestowed upon you so
much as the amount of this (hair), except for a fifth and it will come back to you.
Source: Sunan al-Nasā’ī 4138, Grade: Sahih
That it will ‘come back to you’ means it would be redistributed for the benefit of the community. The
Prophet (ṣ) would only kept a fraction of it for himself and his family.
Yahya ibn al-Jazzar, may Allah be pleased with him, was asked, “How much of the fifth did he take
for himself?” Yahya said:
‫س‬ ُ ُ ْ ُ ُ ُ
ِ ‫خمس الخم‬
One-fifth of the fifth.
Source: Sunan al-Nasā’ī 4144, Grade: Sahih
Hence, the Prophet (ṣ) sent Ali to collect and distribute this fifth as he saw fit. Buraida disliked Ali
because he thought Ali was doing so treacherously without permission, but the Prophet (ṣ) told him
that Ali, in fact, had acquired less for himself than he had a right to take.
Abu Dharr al-Harawi said:
57
ُ َ ِّ ََ َ َ َ ُ َ ّ َ ُّ ّ َ ُ َ َ ََ َ ُ َ َ َ َ‫ْ ر‬ َ َ َ ُ َ ُ َ ًّ َ َ ‫إن َما َأ رب َغ‬
‫اَلل َعل ري ِه َو َسل َم أنه أخذ أقل ِم رن َحق ِه أ َحبه‬ ‫آه أخذ ِم َن ال َمغن ِم ف ظن أنه غل فلما أ رعل َمه الن َِن صىل‬ ‫ض الص َح َِان ع ِليا ِْلنه ر‬ ِ
Indeed, the companion only hated Ali because he saw him take from the spoils and he suspected
him of acting treacherously. When the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, let him know that
he had taken less than he deserved, he loved him.
In this light, Ali had not acted treacherously or immorally in any sense. He had brought the maid-
servant into his household as a concubine-wife, as a family member, which ensured the continuation
of her privileged social status. She was not a child and she was not raped, nor was she harmed in any
way.
Furthermore, the institution of concubinage is no longer valid because of the general abolition of
slavery by Muslim jurists, based upon indications in classical Islamic law that slavery, as an
aberration of a human being’s natural free state, was intended to be gradually removed from
society.
https://abuaminaelias.com/ali-ibn-abi-talib-rape-girl/ - This is where I got the above from
Claim – Muhammad pbuh married a slave girl for himself
So, I read this hadith I have pasted it here https://sunnah.com/abudawud/20/71 No were does it say
what the author interprets. If you want to know more about the marriage to Saffiyah and how she
actually wanted to marry Muhammad pbuh click the below article. You will see when you read this
article that the Prophet (p) gave Safiyya a choice to stay on her religion and set free or accept Islam
and be the Prophet’s wife, she accepted the latter. The author is clearly ignorant of the facts.
“When Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) reached Khyber while Safiya was a bride at her place. She saw in her
dream that a sun came into her lap. She mentioned it before her husband. He said; ‘By Allah you do
not wish for anyone except the King who has come upon us.’ Allah’s Messenger conquered Khyber
and her husband was killed. From that time (of dream) she loved that the Prophet (pbuh) may marry
her. (Tabarani Kabeer, Hadith 19667)
Ibn Umar narrates: In the eye of Sayyidah Safiya was a scar. Holy Prophet (pbuh) said to her, ‘What is
this scar in your eye?’ She said, ‘I mentioned before my husband that I saw a moon falling into my lap
in a dream so he slapped me and said; ‘Do you long for the King of Yathrib [i.e. Holy Prophet pbuh]’
(Tabarani Kabeer, Hadith 19668. Albani classified it as Sahih in his Silsala Sahiha H. 2793)
When Safiya came to the Holy Prophet (pbuh), he said to her; ‘Among the Jews your father did not
stop in his enmity towards me until Allah destroyed him.’ She said: ‘O Allah’s Messenger! Indeed Allah
says in His book, ‘No one will take anyone else’s burden’. So the Holy Prophet (p) said to her: ‘MAKE
YOUR CHOICE, if you will chose Islam I’ll select you for myself and IF YOU CHOSE JUDAISM, I WILL SET
YOU FREE AND SENT YOU TO YOUR PEOPLE.’ She said; ‘O Allah’s Messenger indeed I longed for Islam
and testified for you even before you gave me this invitation when I came to you. I have no guardian
among the Jews, neither father nor brother and I prefer Islam over disbelief. Allah and His Messenger
are dear to me then freedom and to return to my people.” (Ibn Saad volume 8, page 123)
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/07/04/safiyyah-huyayy-kinana-and-khaybar-affair/
58
Claim – Killing of Umm Qirfa
The author talks about the killing off Umm Qirfa. The author even acknowledges that Muhammad
pbuh did not do this but a follower. But why was Umm Qirfa killed. What is important to know is that
Umm Qirfa was the leader of Badr of Fazara and guess what? They attacked Zaid Bin Harith and the
people he was with. They stole all their possessions that they had on them. Zaid was wounded and
some of the people he was with were murdered by these people. This dramatically changes things
now doesn’t it? Watch the below video which goes into a lot of detail and cites plenty of sources.
The narration the author used is weak because it contains Ibn Humayd. There are other versions of
this story but they contain broken and weak chains.
Umm Qirfah was the chief leader of Tribe of Badr of Fazara. According to two reports above, Zaid Ibn
Haritha went out on a journey to Syria and with them was Merchandise for the Companions of the
Prophet (p). While they were near Wadi al-Qura, they were ambushed by men of the Tribe of Banu
Fazara whose leader was Umm Qirfa herself. The reports tell us that they were left for dead, which is
what they thought. The things they were carrying (the merchandise) was all stolen from them. Another
thing it tells us from the report is the only person to survive in this ambush was Zayd Ibn Harithah. The
rest were killed.
Zaid Ibn Harithah with all the wounds inflicted on him returned to Madinah to tell the Prophet (p)
what had happened. After a while (weeks or months, the report doesn’t tell exactly when) Zayd Ibn
Harithah recovered from his wounds and asked for permission to take revenge on the Tribe of Badr of
Fazara what they had did to him and his Companions. Permission was granted.
As expected Zayd Ibn harithah raided the people of Fazara and killed those who were involved in killing
his Companions and robbing the merchandise. Umm Qirfa, according to the above reports was also
killed for being the leader.
Besides the above, Safi-Ur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri tells us that Umm Qirfa wanted to kill the Prophet
(P):
An expedition led by Abu Bakr As-Siddiq or Zaid bin Haritha was despatched to Wadi Al-Qura in
Ramadan 6 Hijri after Fazara sept had made an attempt at the Prophet’s life. Following the Morning
Prayer, the detachment was given orders to raid the enemy. Some of them were killed and others
captured. Amongst the captives, were Umm Qirfa and her beautiful daughter, who was sent to
Makkah as a ransom for the release of some Muslim prisoners there. Umm Qira’s attempt at the
Prophet’s life recoiled on her, and the thrity horsemen she had gathered and sustained to implement
her evil scheme were all killed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-p1e0FpyOo – Killing of Umm Qirfa
https://discover-the-truth.com/2015/03/24/was-umm-qirfa-innocent/ - Have a read of this
Claim – Hijab
The author refers to the Hijab. My response is so what? Do men have a form of Hijab? Yes, which we
will get on too. Women are told to wear the Hijab. This does not prove anything. Men have to cover
up as well as they have an awrah too. What do men have to cover? Have to cover below their knees
so basically, men can’t wear shorts that show our knees. We can’t wear gold or silk. You can’t force
the woman to wear a hijab. If she chooses to do this what is the problem?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvwBHL4-WVs – Watch this video

59
Claim women can’t be alone with non-related males
Again, does the author not realise that both men and women are meant to lower their gaze.
Tell the believing men to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things), and protect their
private parts (from illegal sexual acts, etc.). That is purer for them. Verily, Allah is All-Aware of what
they do. 24.30
So, this point is useless and the author has evidently just included it to further push their agenda. In
Islam there is something called Zina. Zina is unlawful sexual intercourse. “And do not approach
unlawful sexual intercourse. Indeed, it is ever an immorality and is evil as a way.” 17.32. The Quran
instructs the believers to not even go anywhere near it. Do you understand the significance of this?
Something what you may seem insignificant as a second look or even stare could lead to a person
transgressing against the limits whether that means masturbation or Zina.
It was narrated that Ma’qil ibn Yassaar said: the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah
be upon him) said: “For one of you to be stabbed in the head with an iron needle is better for him
than that he should touch a woman who is not permissible for him.” Narrated by al-Tabaraani in al-
Kabeer, 486. Shaykh al-Albaani said in Saheeh al-Jaami’, 5045, that this hadeeth is saheeh.
Just reflect on the significance of that. In short both men and women have to lower their gaze. Both
men and women should not interact with members of the opposite sex that are not mahram or family.
Its for protection and if practiced it would nullify completely the chances of someone transgressing
against the limits.
Claim – Intellectually deficient and in charge of a nation
The below articles address the claims made by the author. So have a read of them.
It is incorrectly claimed that women are ‘deficient in intelligence and religion’ or ‘lacking common
sense’ according to Islam, and that for this reason restrictions are placed upon a women’s testimony
and intellectual activity. This unfortunate misconception is based upon a misinterpretation or poor
translation of the following prophetic tradition:
Abu Sa’id al-Khudri reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said:
‫ر َ ِّ ُ ُ ُ َ ْ َ َ ر‬ َ ِّ َ ََ ‫َ َ ر‬
‫ش الن َس ِاء ت َصدق َن ف ِإن أ ِريتكن أك َي أه ِل الن ِار‬ ‫يا مع‬
O gathering of women! Give in charity, for I have seen you as a majority of people in Hellfire.
They said, “Why is that, O Messenger of Allah?” The Prophet said:

ُ َ
‫ازم ِم رن ِإ رحداكن‬ َ ْ ُ ِّ ُ َ َ ‫َ ر‬ َ ‫َر‬ َ َ ‫َ َ َر ُ ر‬ َْ َ ََُْ َ ‫ُْ َ ّر‬
ِ ‫تك ِ رين اللعن وتكف ررن الع ِش ر َي ما رأيت ِمن ن ِاقص‬
ِ ِ ‫ات عقل و ِدين أذهب ِلل ب الرج ِل الح‬
You curse others often and you are ungrateful for your livelihood. I have not seen anyone with
reductions in mind and religion more capable of removing reason from a resolute man than you.
They said, “What are our reductions in mind?” The Prophet said:
َ َ ‫ََ ر َ َ َ ُ ْ َ ر‬
‫س ش َهادة ال َم ررأ ِة ِمث َل ِن رص ِف ش َهاد ِة الر ُج ِل‬ ‫ألي‬
Is not the testimony of a woman like half of a man?
They said, “Of course.” The Prophet said:

َ َ ُ َ ‫َ ر‬ َ َ ‫َ ر َ ََ ر‬ َ ‫ر ُر‬ ََ
‫س ِإذا َحاضت ل رم ت َص ِّل َول رم ت ُص رم‬ ‫ان عق ِلها ألي‬
ِ ‫فذ ِل ِك ِمن نقص‬
60
That is the reduction in your mind. Is it not that when you menstruate you do not pray, nor fast?
They said, “Of course.” The Prophet said:

َ ‫ر ُر‬ ََ
‫ان ِدي ِن َها‬
ِ ‫فذ ِل ِك ِمن نقص‬
That is the reduction in your religion.
Source: Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 298, Grade: Sahih
There are two important points that are misunderstood in this tradition: the reason why there is a
majority of women in Hellfire, and the meaning of a ‘reduction’ in intellect and religiosity. The first
misconception has been answered in a separate article.
The ‘reduction’ (nuqsan) in mind and religion is related to a woman’s legal obligations. It is not an
ontological statement that women are always less intelligent or religious than men. As applied to
religion, women are not obligated to pray or fast while menstruating or enduring post-natal bleeding.
As applied to mind, women are not obligated to perform some functions such as testifying before a
judge in a criminal case.
Some authors have mistranslated nuqsan by using derogatory terms like ‘deficient in intelligence,’ or
‘lacking common sense.’ This rendition is inappropriate because the word in this context means a
‘reduction,’ as it is used in the Quran:
َ ُ َ َ ‫َ َ َ ر َ َ ر َ َ ْ ّ ر َر‬
‫ض ننق ُص َها ِم رن أ رط َر ِاف َها‬ ‫أولم يروا أنا نأ ِن اْلر‬
Have they not seen that We set upon the land, reducing it from its borders?
Surat al-R’ad 13:41
And again:
َ ُ َ َ ‫َ َ َ َ َ ر َ َ َ ْ ّ ر َر‬
‫ض ننق ُص َها ِم رن أ رط َر ِاف َها‬ ‫أفَل يرون أنا نأ ِن اْلر‬
Then do they not see that We set upon the land, reducing it from its borders?
Surat al-Anbiya 21:44
The reduction for women is a manifestation of Islam’s leniency towards women, by not burdening
them with the same obligations as men while they have their own particular duties and concerns.
In the case of testimony, women in early Islam did not customarily involve themselves in business
contracts, debts, and other matters. They were usually doing other important work, caring for their
children and elderly parents, and so on. As a result, the verse was revealed to lessen a woman’s
obligation to testify in such matters.
Allah said:
َ ُ َ َ ُ ‫َ ر َ ر‬ ‫ْ ر‬ َ َُ ُْ ْ ُ ُُْ َ ً َ َ َ َ ُ ََ َ َُ َ ّ َ َ َ
‫استش ِهدوا ش ِهيد ري ِن ِمن ِّر َج ِالك رم ف ِإن‬‫وه َول َيكتب ب رينك رم كا ِتب ِبال َعد ِل …و‬ ‫آمنوا ِإذا تد َاينتم ِبد رين ِإ ىل أ َجل مسًم فاكتب‬ ‫يا أيها ال ِذين‬
ُ
‫اه َما راْل رخ َرىى‬
ُ َ ‫ر َ ُ َ َ ُ َ ِّ َ ر‬ َ َ َ َ َ َ ‫َر َ ر‬ َ
َ َ ‫ّ ر َ ُ َ َ ُ َر ََ ُ َ ر‬
‫ان ِممن ترضون ِمن الشهد ِاء أن ت ِضل ِإحداهما فتذكر ِإحد‬ ِ ‫ي فرجل وامرأت‬ِ ‫لم يكونا رجل ر‬
O you who believe, when you contract a debt for a specified term, write it down, and let a scribe write
it between you in justice… and bring two witnesses from among your men. If there are not two men
available, then a man and two women from those whom you accept as witnesses, so that if one of the
women errs, then the other can remind her.
61
Surat al-Baqarah 2:282
The purpose of this rule was a practical matter to achieve justice in business by having two women
support each other’s memories in matters outside of their regular duties. It is not a universal rule that
women are half as intelligent as men or that their testimony is always half of a man.
By default, men and women are equal to each other in terms of honesty and piety, but because
women in this context were afraid that they might forget some details of the contract, they were told
to include another woman to help one another remember. In fact, the testimony of two women
outweighs the testimony of one man.
Ibn al-Qayyim writes:

‫ُ َر‬ ‫َ َ َر‬ ‫ُ َ ر ر‬ ِّ َ َ َ َ َ ِّ َ َ‫ر‬ ‫ِّ ر‬ َ ‫ْ َُ ْ ر‬
‫يف ُ َعل ري َها الس ره ُو ُ َوالن رس َيانَ ق ِو َيت ِب ِمث ِل َها َوذ ِلك قد َي رج َعل َها أق َوى ِم رن‬‫ق َواْل َمان ِة َوالد َيانة إَل أن َها لما ِخ‬
َ ِ ‫الصد‬ ‫َوال َم ررأة ال َعد ُل َكالر ُج ِل ِف‬
ََ ْ ّ ‫َ ر‬ َ ‫َ َ ر‬ َ ََ ْ ّ َ ُ َ‫ر‬ ْ
‫الر ُج ِل ال َو ِاح ِد أ رو ِمثله َوَل َرريب أن الظن ال ُم رستفاد ِم رن ش َهاد ِة ِمث ِل أ ِّم الد ررد ِاء َوأ ِّم َع ِطية أق َوى ِم رن الظ ِّن ال ُم رستف ِاد ِم رن َر ُج َل َو ِاحد‬
َ َ ُ َ ُ
‫دون ُه َما َودون أ رمث ِال ِه َما‬
The woman is equal to the man in truthfulness, honesty, and piety; otherwise, if it is feared that she
will forget or misremember, she is strengthened with another like herself. That makes them stronger
than a single man or the likes of him. There is no question that the benefit of the doubt given to the
testimony of Umm Darda and Umm ‘Atiyyah is stronger than the benefit of the doubt given to a single
man without them or the likes of them.
Source: al-Ṭuruq al-Ḥukmīyah 1/136
The increased possibility of error, due to customary gender roles in society, necessitated the addition
of another woman’s testimony. But if there is no fear of error, the testimony of men and women
return to the default position of equality, because the intention of the rule is to achieve fairness
between business partners and truthful witness, not to devalue women’s intelligence.
Ibn Taymiyyah writes:

َ
‫يه َعىل ِن رص ِف َر ُجل‬ ‫َْ َ َر َُ ر‬ ُ َ ُ َ ُ َ ‫اد‬ َ َ ‫َ َ َ َ ر‬
ِ ‫يه الضَلل ِف العاد ِة لم تكن ِف‬
ِ ‫ات َل يخاف ِف‬
ِ ‫فما كان ِمن الشه‬
Whatever there is among the testimonies of women, in which there is no fear of habitual error, they
are not considered as half of a man.
This dynamic can be seen in the way early jurists approached women’s testimony. They mostly did not
accept, or obligate, a woman to testify in criminal investigations, legal punishments, and other matters
outside of their customary purview, but they accepted a woman’s testimony as equal in her ordinary
duties.
Ibn Rushd writes

‫ر‬ َ ُ َ ِّ َ ‫ّ ّ َ َ ُ َ َ ر‬ َ َ‫ر‬ ُ ْ َ ‫ِّ َ َ ُ َ ِّ َ َ َ ر َ ر‬ َ َ ‫ر‬ ِّ ُ َ َ َ
‫ال غ ِال ًبا ِمث َل‬ ‫وق اْل ربد ِان ال ِن َل يط ِلع عليها الرج‬
ِ ‫ور ِف ُحق‬
ِ ‫ه َمق ُبولة ِعند ال ُج رم ُه‬ِ ‫ال ف‬
ِ ‫َوأما ش َهادة الن َس ِاء ُمف َردات أ رع ِن النساء دون الرج‬
ِّ
‫وب الن َس ِاء‬ ُُ َ َ ‫ْ َ َ َ ر ر‬
ِ ‫ال ِوَلد ِة و ِاالس ِتهَل ِل وعي‬
As for the testimony of individual women, meaning women without men, it is accepted by the majority
in personal rights which are usually not the purview of men, such as pregnancy, consummation, and
ailments affecting women.
Source: Bidāyat al-Mujtahid 4/248
62
In this regard, the classical rules were largely based upon the customary gender roles of the time and
were not indicative of an universal deficiency in women’s intelligence, testimony, or truthfulness.
In other cases, a woman’s testimony was accepted in important matters of family law without any
men present at all.
Ibn al-Qayyim writes:

َ ِّ َ َ َ ْ َ ‫َ َ َ ُ َر‬ َ َ ِّ َ َ َ ُ َ َ ُ َ ِّ ُ ُ ‫وض َو ََل َي رح‬ ُ َ ‫َ َ ر‬
‫اه ُر هذا أنه أث َبت ال َو ِصية ِبش َهاد ِة الن َس ِاء َعىل‬ ِ ‫ال أ ِج ر ُي ش َهادة الن َس ِاء فظ‬ ‫ض ُه إَل النساء ق‬ ِ ‫ال ِاْل َم ُام أ رح َمد ِف الر ُج ِل ُي‬ ‫ق‬
‫ِاال رن ِف َر ِاد َإذا َل رم َي رح ُ ر‬
ِّ ‫ض ُه‬
ُ‫الر َجال‬
Imam Ahmad said regarding a man who writes his will and none are present except women: I permit
the testimony of women. Thus, this shows that he affirmed the will by the testimony of individual
women even if no men were present.
By analyzing the sources and appreciating their historical contexts, we find that the classical rules
related to women’s testimony are not a statement about her inherent intelligence or truthfulness.
Perhaps the single most important fact to contradict this claim is that women excelled in narrating the
traditions of the Prophet (s).
In particular, Aisha (ra) was considered to be a scholar by the righteous predecessors. Even the most
senior male companions would come to her seeking religious and legal verdicts.
Abu Musa reported:

ْ ُ‫رَ رَ َ ر‬ َ َ َ َْ َ َ ّ َ ُّ ّ َ ّ ُ َ َ َ ‫َ َ ر َ َ ََرَ َ ر‬
‫اَلل َعل ري ِه َو َسل َم َح ِديث قط ف َسألنا َعا ِئشة ِإَل َو َجدنا ِعندها ِمنه ِعل ًما‬ ‫اَلل صىل‬
ِ ‫ول‬ِ ‫ما أشكل علينا أصحاب رس‬
We never had a problem occur to us, the companions of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings
be upon him, and asked Aisha about it but that we found her knowledgeable of it.
Source: Sunan al-Tirmidhī 3883, Grade: Sahih
Masruq reported: He was asked, “Was Aisha knowledgeable of the religious obligations?” Masruq
said:
‫ض‬ َ َ ْ ‫َ ّ ّ ُ َ َ ر َ َ ّ َ ر َ َ َ َ ر َُ َ َ َ ر‬ َ ُ َ ‫َ َ َ ر َ َر ُ َ ر َ َ َ َ ر‬ ‫َر‬ ّ َ
ِ ‫اب محمد صىل اَلل علي ِه وسلم اْل ك ِابر يسألونها عن الفرا ِئ‬ِ ‫وال ِذي نف ِس ِبي ِد ِه لقد رأيت مشيخة أصح‬
By the one in whose hand is my soul, I saw the learned elders among the companions of Muhammad,
peace and blessings be upon him, ask her about the religious obligations.
Source: Muṣannaf Ibn Abī Shaybah 30387, Grade: Hasan
Many more women, not to mention wives of the Prophet (s), were scholars of the prophetic traditions
known for their honesty and reliability.
Al-Dhahabi writes:
‫وما علمت ف النساء من اتهمت وال من تركوها‬
I do not know among women narrators anyone accused of lying, nor anyone abandoned.
Source: Mīzān al-I’tidāl 4/604
Al-Dhahabi then lists over one hundred and twenty women who narrated prophetic traditions.
63
If a woman’s testimony were always half of a man or she was always less intelligent than him, that
would have applied even more so to narrating prophetic traditions. After all, relating the words and
actions of the Prophet (s) is an awesome responsibility requiring the foremost intelligence, memory,
and trustworthiness, yet many women excelled in this field just as men did.
Moreover, women have unique and complementary perspectives, in their own right, that can inform
men of their blind spots. For instance, the Prophet (s) once consulted his wife Umm Salamah (ra) on a
serious matter, and she provided him with a key insight into his problem
Marwan reported: After the treaty of Hudabiyyah was concluded, the Messenger of Allah, peace and
blessings be upon him, said to his companions:
ُ ‫ُ ُ َ ر َ ُ ُ ر‬
‫اح ِلقوا‬ ‫قوموا فانحروا ثم‬
Get up and offer your sacrifices, then shave your hair.
None of them stood up, and the Prophet repeated his order three times. When none of them stood
up, the Prophet left them and went to Umm Salamah, and he told her about their attitude. Umm
Salamah said:
َ َ َ َ َ ُ ‫رَ َ َر‬ ‫َر‬ َ ‫ُ َ ُ َ ِّ َ ً ر‬ ‫َ َ ر‬ َُ ّ َ َ
‫اَلل أت ِحب ذ ِلك اخ ُر رج ثم ل تكل رم أ َحدا ِمن ُه رم ك ِل َمة َح ّن تن َح َر ُبدنك َوتدع َو َح ِالقك ف َي رح ِلقك‬
ِ ‫يا ن َِن‬
O Prophet of Allah, would you like your order to be carried out? Go out and do not speak to them until
you have offered your own sacrifice and have called the barber to shave your head.
Source: Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 2731, Grade: Sahih
The Prophet (s) followed the advice of his wife and made his preparations to end the pilgrimage. The
companions would soon follow his lead.
In this example, it was his wife whose exceptional intelligence provided him with guidance and
resolution. Intelligence is not simply a linear matter of more or less. There are varieties of intelligence,
such as emotional and personal intelligence, which women can excel at and benefit men with their
advice.
Ibn Hajar writes:

َ َ ُ ‫ر‬ ََ ْ ‫َ ََ ر‬ َ َ َ ‫َ َ َ ُ ُ َ َ َ ْ َ ر َ ْ َ َ َ َ ر ُ ُ ِّ َ َ َ َ َ ُ ُ ُ َ ر َ َ ّ َ َ َ ُ ْ َ َ َ ر‬
‫ي َل ن رعل ُم رام َرأة أش َارت ِب َرأي فأ َص َابت ِإَل أم َسل َمة‬
ِ ‫اضل ِة وفضل أم سلمة ووفور عق ِلها حن قال ِإمام الحرم ر‬
ِ ‫وجواز مشاور ِة المرأ ِة الف‬
It is permissible to consult a meritorious woman, and the merit of Umm Salamah and her abundant
intelligence were such that Imam al-Haramayn said: We do not know of a woman expressing her
opinion and being correct as much as Umm Salamah.
Source: Fatḥ al-Bārī 5/347
In sum, the claim that women are ‘deficient in religion’ is based upon a misinterpretation or a poor
translation of a prophetic statement. The ‘reduction’ in a woman’s intelligence is a reduction in her
legal responsibilities related to it, not in her inherent intelligence itself. The preponderance of other
evidence indicates that women can be just as intelligent as men and, therefore, they should be
consulted and their perspectives respected.
https://abuaminaelias.com/women-deficient-reason-religion/ - Credit goes to this brother.
https://abuaminaelias.com/can-women-take-positions-of-leadership-and-authority-in-islam/
64
Claim – two women = one man’s testimony
I have written an article regarding misconceptions regarding women in Islam.
“O you who have believed, when you contract a debt for a specified term, write it down. And let a
scribe write [it] between you in justice. Let no scribe refuse to write as Allah has taught him. So let
him write and let the one who has the obligation dictate. And let him fear Allah, his Lord, and not leave
anything out of it. But if the one who has the obligation is of limited understanding or weak or unable
to dictate himself, then let his guardian dictate in justice. And bring to witness two witnesses from
among your men. And if there are not two men [available], then a man and two women from those
whom you accept as witnesses – so that if one of the women errs, then the other can remind her. And
let not the witnesses refuse when they are called upon. And do not be [too] weary to write it, whether
it is small or large, for its [specified] term. That is more just in the sight of Allah and stronger as
evidence and more likely to prevent doubt between you, except when it is an immediate transaction
which you conduct among yourselves. For [then] there is no blame upon you if you do not write it.
And take witnesses when you conclude a contract. Let no scribe be harmed or any witness. For if you
do so, indeed, it is [grave] disobedience in you. And fear Allah.” And Allah teaches you. And Allah is
Knowing of all things. Surah Baqarah verse 282
Inshallah we will now explain. Firstly, the Quran talks about witnesses in the in other places as well
When we look to this verse 2.282, we are told of the context straight away. “when you contract a debt
for a specified term” So the verse is referring to financial transactions only. The financial burden in
Islam is put on the man. The woman does not need to worry about this, it makes things easier for her.
Before a woman gets married, the responsibility of her welfare when it comes to housing etc falls
upon her brother (if she has one) and her father have when she is married this then becomes the
husband’s responsibility. Based on the responsibilities a man is more financially aware than a woman
especially when it comes to specific financial terms.
If we look to other verses in the Quran which talk about witnesses such as Surah Talaq verse 2. Which
َ
use the Arabic ‫ ذ َو‬which better translates to person or peoples. You can also look to Tafsir Ibn Kathir
for this too which just says people. 24.4 too mentions witnesses but no gender is specified. Now if we
go to verses 6 -9 in the same chapter, we see that 1 male is worth to 1 female.
So, we can now see that Surah Baqarah verse 282 is only for financial transactions and the reason
being is because there is no financial burden on her but rather her husband if she is married or her
father and brother (if she has one) if she is not married. Since she is therefore not familiar and has
little experience with such transactions two women are required. Since the financial responsibility is
on the males, they are familiar with such transactions and therefore only one person is needed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZqz-6OY_fc – Video 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxDwhplw8aE – Video 2 should watch as well as they go into

more detail.
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/are-men-and-women-equal-in-islam/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bcpm0MFj3U
Claim – encouraged and allowed rape
Wow. I have already refuted part of this in past sections but I want to address some of the evidences
the user cited.
65
They cite Bukhari 4138, 5210, Sahih Muslim 3544. This mentions nothing about rape at all. It mentions
intercourse the word used in the translation is “coitus interruptus” which means “sexual intercourse
in which the penis is withdrawn before ejaculation.” Other sources they cite 3608 which again proves
nothing. Have a read of this yourself don’t take my word for it.
The author knew someone would question this but they didn’t feel the need to mention this in this
article rather in the potential objections.
Ahhh. So again, this is the authors interpretation. Why didn’t they feel the need to mention this in
their article? Have you figured it out? The author has an agenda. They are dishonest and lack integrity.
When you go through the evidences at the end you will see this.
We will check out Sahih Muslim 8:3432 as they say. Below is an excerpt from that hadith.
“Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's Messenger (may peace
be upon him) seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their
husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that:" And women already
married, except those whom your right hands possess (iv. 24)" (i. e. they were lawful for them when
their 'Idda period came to an end).” https://muflihun.com/muslim/8/3432
So, what we learn from the hadith that the author cited is that the Muslims waited. They refrained. If
Muhammad pbuh encouraged rape as the author claims he would have surely told them to essentially
“go ahead” You may then respond to me saying well the verse in the Quran was revealed after. Again,
it does not encourage rape. This is simply the authors interpretation. As we have shown they are no
authority at all when it comes to Islam.
In Islam is rape allowed? What do you reckon? No. We will get onto the history of slavery in Christianity
in the hypocrisy part, and as I have done throughout, I will be using the exact same logic and mindset
as the author for you to see how ignorant the author is.
What is the punishment for rape in Islam? Death. Check the below evidences out and maybe you will
learn something. The evidence I provide refutes the author categorically. It also mentions plenty of
hadith Islam has forbidden rape and sexual abuse since the time of the Prophet until today. Allegations
by anti-Muslim activists are only buttressed by the appalling criminal behavior of terrorist groups
acting in the name of Islam, who use rape as a weapon of war. Rape by itself is an atrocity, but it is
made even worse, tantamount to idolatry, when it is falsely justified in the name of Allah and His
Messenger.
The basic principle in Islamic law is that a Muslim is forbidden from harming another person or animal
unless it is necessary to repel a greater harm.
Ubaida ibn al-Samit reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, issued a
decree:
َ ِ ‫ض َر َو َل‬
‫ض َار‬ َ َ ‫َل‬
66
Do not cause harm or return harm.
Source: Sunan Ibn Mājah 2340, Grade: Hasan
Al-Suyuti expressed the legal principle as follows:
‫الضر ُي َزال‬
َ
Harm should be removed.
Source: al-Ashbāh wal-Naẓāʼir 1/7
Since it is well-established that rape causes innumerable harms to mind, body, and spirit, without any
rational justification of preventing a greater wrong, it follows that rape is absolutely forbidden in Islam.
This by itself is enough to establish the prohibition of rape. Even so, the Prophet further set the
precedent that rape should not be tolerated in Muslim society. A man in Medina was caught after he
raped a woman and the Prophet applied legal punishment on him, the maximum of which is the death
penalty.
Abu Alqama reported: A woman went out to pray during the time of the Prophet and she was met by
a man who attacked her and raped her. She said, “This man has molested me!” The Messenger of
Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said:
ُ ‫رار ُج ُم‬
‫وه‬
He is condemned to death.
Source: Sunan al-Tirmidhī 1454, Grade: Sahih
The righteous Caliphs who succeeded the Prophet continued this policy of legal punishment for the
crime of rape. The victim of rape would not be punished regardless of the circumstances.
Ibn Umar reported:
‫ض رب ِاْل َم َاء‬ ‫َ َ َ َ َ َ ْ َْ َ ََر َ ر‬ َْ ‫ر‬ َْ َُ ََْ ‫َ َ ر‬ َ ‫ر‬ َ َُّ ََ ُ َ

ِ ‫ان ِاْلمار ِة فضب ال ِغلمان ولم ي‬
ِ ‫أن عمر رض هللا عنه أ ِن ِب ِإماء ِمن ِإم ِاء ِاْلمار ِة استكرههن ِغلمان ِمن ِغلم‬
Umar ibn al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, was presented with a servant girl among those
who served the leadership. She was forced upon by one of the young men, so Umar flogged the man
and he did not flog the woman.
Source: Muṣannaf Ibn Abī Shaybah 29012
Nafi’ reported:
ََ ْ ‫َ َ ُ َ َ َ َ ر َ َر َ ر َ ْ َ َ رُ َ ر ََ َ ُ َ َ َ َ َ َ ْ َ َ ََ ُ َ َ َ ُ ََ ر َ ر‬
‫ض رب ال َم ررأة‬
ِ ‫أن رجل أضاف أهل بيت فاستكره ِمنهم امرأة فر ِفع ذ ِلك ِإل أ َِن بكر فضبه ونفاه ولم ي‬
A man was invited as a guest of the family of a household, then he forced himself upon a woman
among them. It was referred to Abu Bakr, so he flogged him and expelled him, and he did not flog the
woman.
Source: Muṣannaf Ibn Abī Shaybah 29013
Hajjaj reported:
ْ
‫يز ال َحد‬‫ز‬ َ ‫اس َت ْك َر َه رام َرَأة م رن ُه رم َف َأ َق َام َع َل ريه ُع َم ُر رب ُن َع رب ِد ْال‬
‫ع‬ ‫َأن َح َبش ًّيا ر‬
ِ ِ ِ ِ ِ
67
An Abyssinian forced himself upon a woman among them. It was referred to Umar ibn Abdul Aziz and
he applied legal punishment on him.
Source: Muṣannaf Ibn Abī Shaybah 29014and instances of what happened to rapists during the time
of the Prophet pbuh.
https://abuaminaelias.com/no-theology-of-rape-in-islam/ - Credit goes to this brother.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPDlcQnhQxA - [DEBUNKED] Mohammed's Rape Culture: Sex

Slavery in Islam - ft. Abu Amina Elias – Also address the “silence is her consent hadith.”
https://abuaminaelias.com/consent-marriage-concubines/ - Article 2
https://abuaminaelias.com/islam-and-concubines/ - Another article.
https://abuaminaelias.com/marital-rape-domestic-violence/ - I have linked this before but check

again.
Claim – Men can sow their seeds Quran 2.223
What does this mean. Well first of all read the verse below.
“Your women are like a tilth for you (where you plant seed to obtain produce), so come to your tilth
as you wish, and send ahead (good issue) for (the future of) your souls. Act in due reverence for God,
keeping within the bounds of piety and obedience to Him (both in your relations with your women
and bringing up offspring, as in all other matters). And know that you are to meet with Him; and
give glad tidings to the believers (of what they will find in His Presence).”
Now I will explain this verse to you. The verse refers to sexual intercourse in marriage. A brother called
Anis Khan who is a student of Quran and Hadith elaborates below.
Comparison of a wife with tilth is a euphemism to talk about a sexual position. The Arabic wording is
ُۡ َٰ
‘anna shittum’ (‫ )ان ِشئت ۡم‬which doesn’t mean ‘whenever you wish and however you wish.’ It means
‘as you wish’ It is a euphemistic way of saying that all kind of sexual positions that the couple may
enjoy are allowed. The following hadith clarifies that the mention of ‘the way you like’ was to dispel a
superstitious belief among Jews:
Jabir reported the Jews would say: "Whoever goes into his wife's vagina from behind her, then his
children will be cross-eyed." So Allah revealed: Your wives are a tilth for you, so go to your tilth when
or how you will (2:223). https://sunnah.com/muslim/16/138
This verse establishes Islamic principle that Allah broadly tells do’s and don’ts in the marital relation
(such as prohibition of anal sex, prohibition of sex during menstruation, fasting and Haj) and it is not
religion’s role to be intrusive in the affairs of a couple. They should seek to please each other the way
they like.
The example of tilth is not disrespectful for women, but scientifically the most important attraction of
a couple is the desire to reproduce. We list of attributes desired in a potential partner, whether they
are social, economic, physical or behavioral, are basically driven to ensure better progeny, even
though we may not be consciously aware of it. Our sexual hormones which make us desire the
opposite sex and also make us attracted towards each other are linked to the capacity and cycles of
reproduction. Men who are castrated have no desire for women. They will not even feel protective
towards the women of their tribe they way regular men do. Even though we are living in age where
children per family are declining, yet the most common concern in the societies is ‘what is the future
68
of our next generation?’ This has been obsession of mankind in all cultures, ages and societies. The
bonding factor for genes between man and woman is so strong that at times even after divorce the
husband and wife agree to cooperate for the sake up healthy upbringing and well-being of their
children.
https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2008/06/why-quran-calls-women-tilth-for-men.html - Read
through this as well.
So, as you can see there is nothing really controversial with this verse at all. This becomes even more
apparent when you read the below verse. Treat women fairly.
O believers! It is not permissible for you to inherit women against their will or mistreat them to make
them return some of the dowry ˹as a ransom for divorce˺—unless they are found guilty of adultery.
Treat them fairly. If you happen to dislike them, you may hate something which Allah turns into a
great blessing. 4.19
Claim – women are harmful to men, they are an evil omen, crooked, bad luck and they annul prayers
Women are bad luck and an evil omen. https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2009/11/is-there-any-

bad-omen-in-woman.html
Some evil hearted people often use certain narrations to argue that Islam looks down upon women
and consider them evil or something of that sort. They use narrations like the following.
‫س‬ ََْ َ َ َ‫ْ َر‬ ُ ‫ر‬ َ ‫اَلل َع رن ُه َما َأن َر ُس‬

َ َ َ ّ َ َ ‫ول ّ ِ َ ّ ّ ُ َ َ ر‬ ُّ ‫ض‬ ّ ‫َ ر َر‬
َ ِ ‫اَلل ربن ُع َم َر َر‬
ِ ‫اَلل صىل اَلل علي ِه وسلم قال الشؤم ِف المرأ ِة والد ِار والفر‬ ِ ِ ‫عن عب ِد‬
Narrated Abdullah bin 'Umar (RA): Allah's Messenger (pbuh) said, "Evil omen is in the women, the
house and the horse." (Bukhari, Hadith 4703)
Same has been narrated through some other companions as well including Sayyidina Abu Huraira (RA)
in Mu'jam Tabarani al-Awst Hadith 7710.
Truth about these narrations:
But the fact remains that these pious companions only heard a part of Holy Prophet's (pbuh) saying.
This is clarified through some other narrations. Read below:
َ ‫اَلل َع َل ريه َو َس ّل َم َأن ُه َق‬
‫ال‬ ُ ّ ‫ن َص ّىل‬ َ َ َ ََ ‫َ َ َ َ َ َ َ ر‬
ِّ َ ‫اها أن أ َبا ُه َر ري َر َة ُي َح ِّد ُث َع رن الن‬ ‫ي‬َ ‫خ‬ ‫أ‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ة‬ ‫ش‬ ‫ئ‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ىل‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ام‬ َ ‫ال َد َخ َل َر ُج ََلن م رن َبن‬
‫ع‬ َ ‫ان َق‬َ
‫س‬ ‫ح‬َ ‫َع رن َأن‬
ِ ِ ِ ِ ِ ِ َِ
َ َ َ ُْ ‫َر‬ ّ ِ‫َ َ ر‬ َ‫ر‬ َ ‫ت َف َط َار رت شقة م رن َها ف الس َماء‬ ‫ََ َ ر‬ َْ َ َ‫َ ْ َر‬ ‫ي ُة م ر‬
‫ض َوقالت َوال ِذي أن َز َل الف ررقان َعىل ُم َحمد‬ ِ ‫ر‬‫اْل ر‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ة‬
ِ ّ ِ َِ ‫ق‬ ‫ش‬ ‫و‬ ِ ِ ِ ‫ب‬ ‫ض‬ِ ‫غ‬‫ف‬ ‫س‬ ِ ‫ر‬َ ‫ف‬‫ال‬‫و‬ ‫ة‬ِ ‫أ‬
‫ر‬ ‫م‬ ‫ال‬‫و‬ ‫ار‬
ِ ‫الد‬ ‫ن‬ َ ِّ
ِ َ ‫الط ر‬
َ َ َ َ ْ ‫ر‬ َ َ َ َ َ ّ ّ ّ َ َ
‫اه ِلي ِة َيت َط ر ُيون ِم رن ذ ِلك‬ َ ُ َ َ َ َ َ ‫ُ َ ر‬
ِ ‫اَلل صىل اَلل علي ِه وسلم قط ِإنما قال كان أهل الج‬
َ
ِ ‫ول‬ ُ ‫َما قال َها َر ُس‬
Abu Hassan narrated: Two men from Banu Aamir came to Sayyidah Aisha and told her that Sayyidina
Abu Huraira narrates that the Prophet (pbuh) said; 'Bad omen is in a house, a woman and a horse.'
She was enraged, full of anger and said; 'By the One Who Revealed Quran on Muhammad, Allah's
Messenger (pbuh) did not say that, what he actually said was that in the days of ignorance people
used to take bad omen in these things.'
(Musnad Ahmad Hadith 24841. Shu'aib 'Arna'ut said the Hadith is Sahih on the conditions of Sahih
Muslim. Albani also authenticated it in Sahiha H.993)
‫ف الدار والمرأة والفرس »فقالت عائشة‬: ‫الشؤم ف ثالثة‬: « ‫قال رسول هللا صىل هللا عليه وسلم‬: ‫ يقول‬، ‫قيل لعائشة إن أبا هريرة‬
: ‫ف الدار‬: ‫ يقولون إن الشؤم ف ثالثة‬، ‫قاتل هللا اليهود‬: « ‫ يقول‬، ‫لم يحفظ أبو هريرة ْلنه دخل ورسول هللا صىل هللا عليه وسلم‬
‫والمرأة والفرس »فسمع آخر الحديث ولم يسمع أوله‬
69
It was mentioned before Aisha that Abu Huraira narrates that Allah's Messenger (saaw) said; 'Bad
omen is in three things; house, woman and horse.' So Aisha said; "Abu Huraira does not remember it
for he entered and Allah's Messenger (pbuh) said; 'May Allah destroy the Jews as they say bad omen
is in three things; in a house, a woman and a horse.' So, he heard the last part of the saying and did
not hear the first part."
(Musnad Tiyalsi Hadith 1630. Albani classified it as Hasan in Silsala Sahiha 3/67).
So, we can see that it was not the Holy Prophet (pbuh) who declared women to have bad omen, infact
he only mentioned that people in ignorance thought this way, he rather rebuked Jews for such an
idea. It was only that some of the Companions heard a part of his saying and a confusion emerged
which was cleared by the emphatic words of Sayyidah Aisha (ra), the Mother of the Believers.
Infact this is what Islam has to say about the issue in general and women in particular;
‫قال سمعت رسول هللا صىل هللا عليه وسلم يقول ال شؤم وقد يكون اليمن ف ثالثة ف المرأة والفرس والدار‬
Makhmar bin Muawiyah said: I heard Allah's Messenger (pbuh) say: "Do not believe in omens, and
good fortune is to be found in three things: A woman, a horse and a house."
(Sunan Ibn Majah Hadith 1993. Albani classified it as Sahih)
https://seekersguidance.org/answers/general-counsel/houses-women-and-horses-a-clarification-
on-bad-omens-and-an-often-misunderstood-hadith/
Women annul prayers. The author yet again has deliberately been unclear. Read the answer on the
following link as it addresses this claim very clearly.
https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2008/08/does-islam-consider-women-like-donkeys.html
Claim – Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬viewed as a womaniser – Tabari again
Is this actually the case? Lets go to Tabari the exact reference the author gave.
Firstly, notice how the woman offered herself to Muhammad pbuh and when she sought annulment
he accepted. Would a womaniser do this? No. The other two important points to note is that there
are footnotes and how this has been translated from Arabic.
70
There is the footnote. So, we read here the contention of family of Layla (the woman who offered
herself in marriage to Muhammad pbuh) was that Muhammad pbuh had other wives and they felt
Layla would feel jealous. Her family knew what she was like.
This is the Arabic. The Arabic part which I have circled in red for you translates to “the Prophet has
women” Not “womaniser.” The author didn’t include the footnote nor did they mention the Arabic.
Why? Because they are dishonest and they have an agenda. Have I not showed this already?
Claim – took women and children as captives sold them as well
Yes, women were taken captive. I have already addressed the point of women who were taken captive
many times in fact. The author also says children were taken captive. I am going to focus on that.
Firstly, I am going to use logic here women who were taken captive and had children what would
happen to those kids? The Muslims wouldn’t leave them behind. Naturally, they would have stayed
with their mothers. This is nothing like the Numbers 31.18 of the Bible where the Biblical Moses pbuh
and his tribe were told to keep women and children for themselves. Nothing like that at all. Strangely
the author has no issue with a passage like that from the Bible. This further shows their hypocrisy.
Anyway, we will touch more on hypocrisy later. Why did the Muslims “sell”?
The word is trade. The Muslims would return captives back to the enemies in return for their Muslim
people back
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWIoN3Msj44 – Watch this video as well as it addresses the

claim
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIB7-KqmOdA - How Islam abolished pre-Islamic & Western

colonial chattel slavery [Abdullah al Andalusi]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W28a6xU0bb4
Claim – Do not lash your wife like your slave because you might have sex with her that evening
71
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWIoN3Msj44 – Watch this video it addresses this claim and
other ones as well. I have linked this video before but I am pasting it again just to show you how this
video addresses multiple claims that the author has made.
Claim – women marriage arranged by male
Why doesn’t the author actually look at how marriage in Islam works. The process? For example, the
man and the woman can’t meet each other alone (pre-marriage) they have to meet with someone
present another family member. I will link a video playlist for you about marriage in Islam.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEEVPMjxW3hnTxaIIWNNZuSth8pFpjkNC – This playlist is

informative.
Claim – Infertile women have no hope of marriage
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_kME_tMxJM – Watch this video
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/73416/is-it-haraam-to-marry-a-woman-who-cannot-have-children
- Read this.
https://aboutislam.net/counseling/ask-about-islam/does-islam-discourage-marrying-infertile-
women/ - Also read through this as well.
Also aren’t kids what many people want? Yes. So logically speaking why would you marry someone
who is infertile? You would not. This is another ridiculous point made by the author.
Claim – Muslim women suffered more than non-Muslim women.
Here is a link to it for you. https://sunnah.com/bukhari/77/42. Read it first. I have already addressed
Quran 4.34 in other sections and the rulings regarding this. I provided plenty of evidence for that so if
you haven’t seen it scroll up and read it. I will now address this hadith.
So, if you have read my 4.34 section you will see how the man failed to follow 4.34 of the Quran and
he transgressed against the limits. The hadith in question is a reaction from Aisha who is clearly
emotionally shocked of what happened to the woman in question. However, as we know Aisha herself
who narrated many hadith and is regarded as perhaps the greatest scholar of all time was well aware
of the Quranic teachings of 4.34 and remember she narrated that Muhammad pbuh never hit a
woman.
'A'isha reported that Allah's Messenger (‫ )ﷺ‬never beat anyone with his hand, neither a woman nor
a servant, but only, in the case when he had been fighting in the cause of Allah and he never took
revenge for anything unless the things made inviolable by Allah were made violable; he then took
revenge for Allah, the Exalted and Glorious. Sahih Muslim 2328
The whole hadith has more to it. The woman was trying to get back with her first husband. But there
are criteria for divorce in Islam. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNEb1hCkwU4
Remember hadith such as
Messenger of Allah, how should we approach our wives and how should we leave them? He replied:
Approach your tilth when or how you will, give her (your wife) food when you take food, clothe when
you clothe yourself, do not revile her face, and do not beat her. Abu Dawud said: The version of
Shu'bah has: That you give her food when you have food yourself, and that you clothe her when you
clothe yourself. https://sunnah.com/abudawud/12/98
72
Again, ask yourself why didn’t the author mention this to you?
For more information regarding this hadith check the below link
http://www.systemoflife.com/muhammad-recommended-wife-beating-and-also-beat-wife-
ayesha/#ixzz4X5uOxCbD
WHAT MUHAMMAD ‫ ﷺ‬SAID ABOUT WOMEN THAT THE AUTHOR DOESN’T WANT
YOU TO KNOW?
The author has an agenda I have shown this. Here are some things that Muhammad pbuh said and
how Islam gave women rights. Before Islam women were not allowed inheritance. If a baby daughter
was born, they were buried alive. Islam put an end to practices like this.
The author did not want to mention this hadith Sahih Muslim 2328
“'A'isha reported that Allah's Messenger (‫ )ﷺ‬never beat anyone with his hand, neither a woman
nor a servant, but only, in the case when he had been fighting in the cause of Allah and he never
took revenge for anything unless the things made inviolable by Allah were made violable; he then
took revenge for Allah, the Exalted and Glorious.” https://sunnah.com/muslim/43/108
Why didn’t the author feel the need to tell you this? They made the claim that Muhammad pbuh
beat Aisha which I refuted. Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬wife Aisha confirms that he never beat anyone with his
hand.
Mother being worth 3 times.
“A person came to Messenger of Allah (‫ )ﷺ‬and asked, "Who among people is most deserving of my
fine treatment?" He (‫ )ﷺ‬said, "Your mother". He again asked, ''Who next?" "Your mother", the
Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬replied again. He asked, "Who next?" He (the Prophet (‫ ))ﷺ‬said again, "Your
mother." He again asked, "Then who?" Thereupon he (‫ )ﷺ‬said," Then your father." In another
narration: "O Messenger of Allah! Who is most deserving of my fine treatment?" He (‫ )ﷺ‬said,
"Your mother, then your mother, then your mother, then your father, then your nearest, then
nearest".
Last time I checked your mother is a woman. Clearly the position of a woman is high in Islam. But the
author does not want to tell you these things. Think to yourself why they have purposely done this.
Daughter key to paradise
“Jabir ibn Abdullah reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said,
“Whoever has three daughters and he cares for them, he is merciful to them, and he clothes them,
then Paradise is certainly required for him.” It was said, “O Messenger of Allah, what if he has only
two?” The Prophet said, “Even two.” Some people thought that if they had said to him one, the
Prophet would have said even one.”
https://abuaminaelias.com/dailyhadithonline/2012/10/15/caring-even-one-daughter-bint/
Isn’t this amazing. Does this say son? No, it focuses on a daughter. Now a daughter is a female. Does
this surprise you? Why didn’t the author tell you all this? Is not clear by now. They have an agenda.
They are dishonest.
When you see a woman, you see happiness
73
“It was narrated that Abu Hurairah said: "It was said to the Messenger of Allah: 'Which woman is
best?' He said: 'The one who makes him happy when he looks at her, obeys him when he
commands her, and she does not go against his wishes with regard to herself nor her wealth.'"
Beautiful. When you see a woman, you see happiness.
Speak to educated Muslim women they will tell you all about how Islam is beautiful and how they like
it. People tend to mix culture with religion. Due to this people associate something cultural with the
religion.
I suggest you watch this is as well https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tjs053a59hg – this debunks

misconceptions about women in Islam. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTKFPXdE6f4 – Watch
this too
The logical inference drawn here is that the author believes that Islam is a sexist religion due to the
actions of Muhammad pbuh and what the Quran says. Therefore, the author must have an issue if
there is sexism in the Bible. I have responded to the claims that they have made and if you go through
this section including what I linked you will see this. Now I have repeated this part many times. Why
didn’t the author tell you any of this? I am going to adopt the exact same approach as them. Your
response to me will be context etc but why does that matter? It doesn’t matter to the author when it
comes to Islam. Anyway, let’s begin.
“Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the
head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as
the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.” Ephesians
5:22 24 NIV
Can one interpret this as the woman has no free will? Yes, they can. Is it ignorant? Yes. Should the
author care? No.
a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are
discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for
he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NIV
So, hang on a second. If a woman is raped, she gets nothing and she has to marry her abuser. So Jesus
condoned force marriage and abusive relationships.
The Biblical account of Moses pbuh differs completely with that of the Quran. We read Numbers
31.17-18 which is pasted below.
Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man
intimately. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for
yourselves.
Why isn’t the author criticising this verse from their own Bible? This is pure hypocrisy. The user tries
to argue Islam is false by bringing up sex slaves. Yet when we go to the Bible, we find verses such as
the above. Also, the verse below 1 Kings 11.3.
He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him
astray.
74
Remember everyone the individual believes that Jesus is God. So again, using their same ignorant
mindset the individual believes that the Jesus they believe in condoned forced child sex slavery as per
Numbers 31.18 and also condoned Solomon having 700 wives and 300 concubines.
https://www.call-to-monotheism.com/the_testimony_of_women_in_the_bible_ - Testimony of a
woman. The hypocrisy of the author is immense.
(Message to the author of the site) If you dare even suggest I need to study more; look into context
you will only make yourself look even worse. I have demonstrated over the course of this response
and no doubt the other responses that you are uneducated, ignorant and you are not fair. So, by me
doing what I am doing using your logic against you, should not trouble at all and in fact you should
accept this, am I right? No, you will say I am wrong. You lack the ability to be consistent, don’t you? I
will provide another example in the Bible Jesus called a woman a dog.
Are there verses in the Bible which tell women to cover up? Mary the mother of Jesus, the mother of
the authors God covered her hair. She guarded her chastity. She covered herself. Yet the author has
an issue with the hijab.
13 Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14 Does
not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, 15 but
that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. 16 If anyone
wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God. 1
Corinthians 11 13-16
Wow. So, women in the Bible have to cover their hair too. It is a disgrace for a man to have long hair.
For if a woman does not cover her head, she might as well have her hair cut off; but if it is a disgrace
for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should cover her head. 1
Corinthians 11.6
Again. Women should cover her hair or shave it off. Is the author a female? If she is I expect her to
have either a shaved head or a head covering. I will share one more verse.
if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her, you may take her as
your wife. Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails Deuteronomy 21:11-
12
The above verse refers to slaves which the author should have an issue with since they used it as an
argument against Islam. But as you can see you have to shave the slave girls head and trim her nails.
Why doesn’t the author have an issue with this?
As I have stated throughout, I am simply using the same logic of the author to critique their own
religion to show the hypocrisy and the lack of consistency throughout the authors website.
CONCLUSION – WHAT HAVE WE LEARNT FROM THIS SECTION?
The question some of you will want to know is, are men better than women in Islam? The below
article examines this. Have a read of it.
https://abuaminaelias.com/are-men-better-than-women-in-islam/
75
Did you go through this whole response? Did you check the evidences properly? Do you see how yet
again the author has lied? I expect an apology from the author and all of you reading this should too.
We are well into the refutation and how dishonest have I shown them to be.
I used the same logic and mindset to the Bible so therefore according to the author Jesus of the Bible
who the author regards as God endorses or endorsed child sex slavery and sex slavery, rapists getting
off free and they could marry their rape victims and many more things which the author should find
atrocious. I will keep hammering this point I am using the exact same logic as the author and mindset
to critique their own religion to show how ridiculous they are. I do not hate Christianity. The reason I
did this is to show to the ignorant Christians who think the authors site is good and to the author
themself that their logic is flawed.
Time to refute another article.
76
MUHAMMAD'S ‫ ﷺ‬VIOLENCE, INTOLERANCE, HATE, AND RACISM – A
RESPONSE
Here is the link to the article from the author
https://www.whowasmuhammad.org/actions-of-muhammd
Remember the method we have done throughout? We will refute the individual then use their logic
to critique Christianity. This article from the author is ridiculous I know I have said this for other ones
but I am truly shocked at how dishonest and unintelligent the author is. You too will see this.
The inference which we can draw from the article is that the author is a pacifist. They are against
violence thus we should find no instances of violence in the Bible if we do this means according to
the logic of the author Jesus was violent and intolerant.
MUHAMMAD ‫ ﷺ‬VIOLENT AND INTOLERANT – RESPONSE TO CLAIMS
Claim – A terrorist made victorious with terror.
A youtuber has already addressed this topic in detail and addresses other claims the author has
made throughout their article and you can watch the below and you will learn something.
The context refers to war and the battles against the pagans.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rEb8NfMPuc – Video 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zo-VRMEY-ic – Video 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDshE-aKXIA – Video 3
Claim – Attacked unarmed Jews
The author cites this hadith https://sunnah.com/bukhari/10/8 yet when we go to it no where does it
say they were unarmed. It’s the interpretation of the author. Why doesn’t the author tell about
Khaybar? Why doesn’t the author tell us what they did? Because if they did they would have no
argument. You can refer to the below.
This is from “The Sealed Nectar” Page 324. “The conquest of Khaibar” “The Reasons for the Battle”
“After the Hudaibiyah Treaty, the major party of the anti-Islam tripartite coalition, the Quraish, was
neutralized. Therefore, the Prophet considered it an appropriate time to settle his affairs with the
other two wings - the Jews and the Najd tribes - in order that peace and security could prevail and
the Muslims may devote their time and effort in propagating the Message of Alláh and calling
people to embrace it. Khaibar itself had always remained a hotbed of intrigue and conspiracy, and
the Jews had always used it as a source of military provocation and an instigation centre, so it was
given top priority on the Prophet's agenda of the affairs requiring urgency. The Jews of Khaibar,
united by an ancient alliance with the Confederates. provoked Bani Quraizah to practice treachery,
maintained contacts with Ghatafan and the Arabians and they even devised an attempt on the
Prophet's life. In fact, the continual afflictions that the Muslims sustained were primarily
attributable to the Jews. Envoys were repeatedly sent to them for peaceful settlement, but all in
77
vain. Consequently, the Prophet came to the conclusion that a military campaign was a must in
order to solve this problem.”
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/03/18/scholars-on-khaybar-incident/ - Read this as well
Claim – Battle of Badr offensive attack on caravan
Did the Muslims intercept a caravan? Yes, but why they were forced out of Makkah and lost their
possessions as a result. If you have gone through the above links you will know that chapter 8 refers
to the Battle of Badr. The Muslims were persecuted just for being Muslim go through the below links
and you will learn something.
Muslims were persecuted for years and years by the pagans. They had to flee Makkah leaving behind
all their belongings and wealth when they heard Abu Sufyans caravan was travelling to Makkah a small
team was sent to intercept the caravan in an attempt to get their belongings back.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9T5JUaR2TU – This is a short video explaining it.
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/03/07/review-of-the-battle-of-badr/
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/04/09/quran-838-48-battle-of-badr/
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/04/08/quran-861-75-battle-of-badr/
Claim – Fight unbelievers
Imagine I cherry picked the Bible. I am going to later so you can realise the stupidity of the argument
that the author is presenting. Check the below articles from my website and others which explain
some of the violent verses to you.
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/violence-in-the-quran/
https://discover-the-truth.com/2014/06/03/examining-quran-929-does-islam-sanction-the-killing-
of-christians-and-jews/
https://discover-the-truth.com/2014/03/04/quran-95-sword-verse/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3J7ylALFXUE – Chapter 9 verse 1-5.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biZFuWyB4lk – Here is a light hearted video about context. See

how ridiculous the author is.
Claim – Praised Jihad, best deed etc
Jihad can also mean struggle within something the author acknowledges in the potential objections.
Notice how they put some stuff in there but they do not feel the need to tell you that in the actual
article. Anyway, we will talk about war. If you die in war in Islam you do go to heaven but there are
strict conditions in Islam for war. For example, peace treaties the Quran makes it abundantly clear in
verses like the below that peace must be obtained
8.61. And if they (the enemies) incline to peace, incline to it also, and put your trust in God. Surely,
He is the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing.
78
The author should also be aware of the rules of war in Islam. Women and children can’t be harmed.
As per 8.61 of the Quran peace must be obtained. The other side have to instigate it. Old people
cant hurt. Property including places of worship can’t be harmed.
Interesting how the author didn’t mention this hadith. Why? Evidently Jihad is not the best deed.
The link to this hadith is here https://hamariweb.com/islam/hadith/sahih-bukhari-2782/
Watch this video regarding the subject of Jihad https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8qNLbBfcko
If you watched the videos under the “made victorious with terror subheading” then you will see how
Jihad has been addressed as well.
Claim – Fighting prescribed
“Fighting has been made obligatory upon you ˹believers˺, though you dislike it. Perhaps you dislike
something which is good for you and like something which is bad for you. Allah knows and you do
not know. 2.216”
In short when applicable and necessary then fighting is allowed. As I said when applicable and
necessary.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xujI8BsnB-U – Watch this video which talks about the topic.
Claim – Banu Quraydah quotes Ibn Ishaq again
The author is obsessed with Ibn Ishaq. By now you should have read the article that I have pasted
throughout regarding Ibn Ishaq. I will be providing you with information relating to the Banu
Quraydah. Firstly, read this hadith
79
The different Jewish tribes violated their agreements with the Muslims. It is important to note that
the Banu Quraydah CHOSE Sa’ad Bin Muadh to decide their punishment. They did not want
Muhammad pbuh to decide who might of (Allah hu Alim) exiled them like he did with the Banu Nadir.
Sa’ad who used to be friends with Banu Quraydah gave them their punishment according to their own
law. Read the below article which talks about this incident in great detail.
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/01/01/re-examining-banu-qurayzah-incident/ - This is very

detailed and provides plenty of sources.
Claim – Umm Qirfa
The author talks about the killing off Umm Qirfa. The author even acknowledges that Muhammad
pbuh did not do this but a follower. But why was Umm Qirfa killed. What is important to know is that
Umm Qirfa was the leader of Badr of Fazara and guess what? They attacked Zaid Bin Harith and the
people he was with. They stole all their possessions that they had on them. Zaid was wounded and
some of the people he was with were murdered by these people. This dramatically changes things
now doesn’t it? Watch the below video which goes into a lot of detail and cites plenty of sources.
The narration the author used is weak because it contains Ibn Humayd. There are other versions of
this story but they contain broken and weak chains.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-p1e0FpyOo – Killing of Umm Qirfa
https://discover-the-truth.com/2015/03/24/was-umm-qirfa-innocent/ - Have a read of this
Claim – Women and children captives sold them as well
Yes, women were taken captive. I have already addressed the point of women who were taken captive
many times in fact. The author also says children were taken captive. I am going to focus on that.
Firstly, I am going to use logic here women who were taken captive and had children what would
happen to those kids? The Muslims wouldn’t leave them behind. Naturally, they would have stayed
with their mothers. This is nothing like the Numbers 31.18 of the Bible where the Biblical Moses pbuh
and his tribe were told to keep women and children for themselves. Nothing like that at all. Strangely
the author has no issue with a passage like that from the Bible. This further shows their hypocrisy.
Anyway, we will touch more on hypocrisy later. Why did the Muslims “sell”?
The word is trade. The Muslims would return captives back to the enemies in return for their Muslim
people back.
80
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWIoN3Msj44 – Watch this video as well as it addresses the
claim

Claim – Allah prefers those who fight over those who don’t.
The author cites 4.95 of the Quran and Tirmidhi 3032. The hadith references the Quran verse. What
the author does not tell you is how this refers to the Battle of Badr and how when war breaks out if
you are able to you should fight.
“Those who stay at home—except those with valid excuses—are not equal to those who strive in
the cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has elevated in rank those who strive
with their wealth and their lives above those who stay behind ˹with valid excuses˺. Allah has
promised each a fine reward, but those who strive will receive a far better reward than others—"
4.95
As you should know by now, war is a last resort in Islam and the author is desperately trying to push
this narrative of war in Islam and how it constantly calls people to fight. This is not the case and anyone
who possesses a rational logical mind who studies Islam will tell you this. Remember 8.61 of the
Quran? This verse talks about inclining towards peace.
“If the enemy is inclined towards peace, make peace with them. And put your trust in Allah. Indeed,
He ˹alone˺ is the All-Hearing, All-Knowing.”
Claim – 9.29 the Jizya
There is context for chapter 9 verse 29. You can read about the context here.
https://discover-the-truth.com/2014/06/03/examining-quran-929-does-islam-sanction-the-killing-
of-christians-and-jews/
As you will see when you read this the jizya is simply a tax that the non-Muslims paid under the
Muslim state. The person reading this will likely pay a tax of some kind now. You will counter me and
say this is a tax paid by non-Muslims. The Muslims too paid tax called the Zakat and the Zakat
payment is greater than the Jizya. So, the non-Muslims paid less tax. Who doesn’t want that? Go
through the below links which go into detail about the Jizya.
https://www.dar-alifta.org/Foreign/ViewArticle.aspx?ID=208&CategoryID=6
https://www.call-to-monotheism.com/the_status_of_non_muslims_in_the_islamic_state
https://web.archive.org/web/20190602052043/https:/www.bismikaallahuma.org/history/jizya-in-
islam/
http://www.muslimtents.com/shaufi/b17/b179.htm
https://www.call-to-monotheism.com/non_muslims_paying_jizyah_in_a_state_of_humiliation
Claim – To not be friends with disbelievers.
The author cites the below verse from the Quran
81
“Oh you who be believe! Do not take the Jews and the Christians as protecting allies [lit. awliya –
plural of wali, mistranslated often here as “friends” ]! Each of them are protecting allies within
their own. And the one amongst you who turns to them as protecting allies, then he is one of
them. And truly, Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people.” [al-Quran, 5:51]
They fail to explain context to you again. After being forced out of Makkah the Muslims went to
Madinah. the Prophet (peace be upon him) established a constitution of mutual respect and religious
tolerance with the People of the Book who already resided there. However, after Badr political leaders
of some of the non-Muslim tribes in Medina, their fellow citizens, had began to have talks with Meccan
chiefs to violate their agreement of mutual protection with the Muslims and turn against them in the
next confrontation they would have with the pagans. Many of the Muslims at the time, especially
those originally from Medina, had strong bonds with people from the non-Muslim tribes dating back
before their Islam. This became a conflict of interest, where at one hand Muslims had individual
alliances with individuals from the other groups, but on the other hand, their own community faced a
serious internal existential threat from those same treacherous contacts. One noble Companion,
‘Ubadah ibn Samit (may Allah be pleased with him), publicly cancelled all of his personal alliances,
while the leader of the hypocrites, Abdullah ibn Ubayy, who himself was not inwardly loyal to the
Muslims but pretended to be one of them, declared that he would not cancel his alliances with people
threatening his community, since if the Muslims ever lost to their enemies, his personal ties would
save him from any persecution while his people could suffer. It was during this display of loyalty and
reliance in Allah, versus a show of fickleness and hypocrisy, that Allah Most High revealed this verse.
There is no problem with Muslims keeping casual friendships and cordial acquaintances with people
of different faiths, as long as those people do not oppose or dislike Islam and Muslims, do not engage
in or wrongly influence Muslims towards immoral behaviour, and are not unjust and oppressive to
anyone, especially Muslims. This is established by the words of Allah Most High Himself when He says:
“Allah does not forbid you from showing kindness and dealing justly with those who have not fought
you due to your faith or driven you out of your homes. Allah loves those who deal justly. Allah only
forbids you from those people that fought you because of your faith, drove you out of your homes
and helped in your expulsion, that you take them as intimate associates. And whosoever takes them
as intimate associates, then it is they who are the wrongdoers.” [al-Quran, 60:8-9] And we have
examples of this such as the Abyssinian king a Christian man who despite having good relations with
the Pagans protected the Muslims from them and offered protection in their land. He acknowledged
the Quran was divine. Quranic verses referring to the righteous Jews and Christians: 7.159 5.46 3. 113-
114 3.199.
You can also refer to Tafsir like Tafsir ibn Kathir who provides explanation as to the hypocrisy of the
CERTAIN Jews and Christians and how it is THOSE ones that 5.51 refers too.
These hypocrites pretended to be believers, swearing to their faithfulness, yet their claims were all
lies and deceit. This is why Allah said in the SAME CHAPTER verse 53
ْ ُ َ ‫ّ َ َ ر َ ُ ْ ّ َ ر َ َر َ ر ُ ر َ َ َ ُ ر َ َ ر َ ر َ ُ ُ ر َ َ ر‬
َ ‫وا َخـش‬ ُ َُ ْ َُ َ ّ ُ ََُ
‫ين‬ ِ ِ ‫اَلل جهد أيمـ ِن ِهم ِإنهم لمعكم ح ِب طت أعمـلهم فأصبح‬ ِ ‫ويقول ال ِذين َءامنوا أهـؤ‬
ِ ‫الء ال ِذين أقسموا ِب‬
(And those who believe will say, "Are these the men who swore their strongest oaths by Allah that
they were with you'' All that they did has been in vain, and they have become the losers.) During the
time of the Prophet when the Jews and Christians were in open conflict with the Muslims, there were
some Muslims who were more concerned about maintaining their alliances with the Jews and
Christians at the expense of the Muslim community. The above verse is referring to such situations
where Muslims with doubts in their hearts will ally themselves with the enemy. Chapter 5 Verse 57 of
82
the Quran makes it clear again, who are not to be taken as friends; O you who believe! take not for
friends and protectors those who take your religion for a mockery or sport,- whether among those
who received the Scripture before you, or among those who reject Faith; but remain conscious of God,
if you are (truly) believers. (Quran 5:57)
Evidently, 5.51 refers to specific people.
Claim – Fight until they believed in Allah.
The author cites Surah 8.39, Bukhari 25 and Muslim 129.
“Fight against them until there is no more persecution—and ˹your˺ devotion will be entirely to Allah.
But if they desist, then surely Allah is All-Seeing of what they do.” 8.39
The hadiths are here
https://sunnah.com/bukhari/2/18
https://hamariweb.com/islam/hadith/sahih-muslim-129/
Both hadiths have the phrase
“Allah's Messenger (‫ )ﷺ‬said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they
testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Messenger
(‫”)ﷺ‬
I will now provide you with the evidence which will address this.
https://abuaminaelias.com/fight-people-until-they-become-muslims/
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/12/25/the-hadith-fight-until-they-say-there-is-no-god-but-
allah-explained/
https://www.discoveringislam.org/killing_infidels.htm - This link focuses on other verse that the

author has cited in their article
Claim – Expel Jews and Christians from Arabia
This does not refer to the whole of Arabia. Check the below links which go into more detail regarding
this matter.
https://abuaminaelias.com/expel-jews-christians-arabian-peninsula/
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/01/10/did-jews-get-expelled-from-arabia/
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/07/06/holy-ground-jews-and-christians-expelled-from-arabia/
Claim – Apostasy Law
The author makes a lot of points regarding apostasy. So, I am going to provide you with a lot of
information regarding it.
One needs to understand the historical context and meanings of this Hadith before jumping into
conclusions.
The punishment for apostasy originated due to the dangerous phenomena of hypocrisy (nifaq) that
threatened the community in Medina. Hypocrisy in this sense is not simply failing to live up to one’s
83
stated moral standards, but rather this form of hypocrisy was the deliberate attempt by the enemies
of Islam to pretend to be Muslims in order to infiltrate and harm the community.
A faction of the People of the Book say to each other: Believe in that which was revealed to the
believers at the beginning of the day and reject it at its end that perhaps they will abandon their
religion.Quran 3:72
Some of the Jews of Medina pretended to be Muslims outwardly with the intention of later
publicizing their rejection of Islam in an attempt to shake the faith of newly converted Muslims. This
was at a time when Medina was threatened with a war of extermination by the Quraish aristocracy.
Ibn Kathir writes:
Mujahid said this verse is regarding Jews who prayed the dawn prayer with the Prophet, peace and
blessings be upon him, and they disbelieved at the end of the day as a plot to turn people away, such
that it appeared as if they saw misguidance after entering the religion.
Tafseer Ibn Kathir 3:72
Likewise, other hypocrites in Medina were spreading lies and rumours among the Muslims at a time
when their unity was most needed. Such acts constituted a serious threat to the security of the
community.
If the hypocrites and those in whose hearts is disease and those who spread rumours in Medina do
not cease, We will surely let you overpower them. Then they will not remain your neighbours
therein except for a little while. Quran 33:60
https://abuaminaelias.com/freedom-of-religion-apostasy/
https://muslimallegationhunters.home.blog/2019/09/28/explanation-of-the-apostasy-punishment-
in-islam/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9xMR-TbQAo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDE0z42wpr4
http://fiqhcouncil.org/is-apostasy-a-capital-crime-in-islam/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHLjgaQsyg8 – this is an Ex – Muslim who wants to kick

Muslims out and force them to leave Islam. Do you not think this is bad?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOvBBiw0TBw – This is very disturbing. An Ex-Muslim wants

to kill all Muslims and in his own words do what Hitler did to the Jews to Muslims but worse. Do you
not think that this is bad?
Claim – Jews and Christians worst of creatures
The verse clearly refers to specific people who reject faith, NOT all non-Muslims, as can be seen from
the context, Arabic wording and grammar.
Again, the author has taken the verse completely out of context, like roughly 99% of Qur’anic
criticisms.
What you translated as “non-Muslims” is “latheena kafaroo” - which means “those who reject” (the
faith). It certainly doesn’t refer to all non-Muslims, only those who know Islam is the truth but reject
84
it (which is made even clearer by the name of the surah itself - called Bayyinah or “The clear sign”).
There are clear examples of this from the time of the Prophet (SAW):
Some of the polytheists of Arabia admitted in private that they knew Islam was the truth but were too
proud to follow a religion that poor people and slaves followed, or too proud to follow Muhammad
(SAW) because he was poor, an orphan or from another tribe.
Some of the Jewish religious leaders in Arabia looked down of Muhammad (SAW) because he could
not read while they were scholars; others rejected him because they saw Arabs as inferior.
The grammar tells us that the verse isn’t even referring to all rejecters of faith, but to specific people.
Take these two sentences for example: “I hate doctors from hospitals” vs “I hate the doctors from
those hospitals.” One sentence is clearly referring to all doctors from hospitals, while the other is
clearly specific to some doctors from specific hospitals. Similarly, this verse is NOT “Verily they who
reject faith from people of the book and polytheists”, but rather “Verily those who reject faith from
the people of the book and the polytheists”. It’s obvious that not even all “latheena kafaroo” or
rejecters of faith are being referred to.
Summary:
Context tells us the verse is talking about specific people
Not non-Muslims, but those who reject faith, shown by the word choice
Emphasised by the name of the Surah - “The Clear Sign”
Not even all who reject faith, but specific people, shown by the grammar
Claim – Cursed Christians and Jews on his deathbed
Did he curse all of them? Or was it certain ones? If you go to the authors twitter, they have this
image
85
The hadith which talks about cursing the Jews and Christians for they built places of worship at the
graves of their Prophets, the author then tries to say that look at Muhammad’s grave and tries to
indirectly argue that Muslims are now cursed.
The mosque you see has been expanded many times throughout history. It is massive I have been
there I have been to the grave Alhumdulillah and been around the whole Masjid. The question is who
built the mosque initially? It was Muhammad pbuh. Muhammad pbuh was buried in his wife Aisha’s
house which is located on the side of the Mosque but as I have stated already it has been expanded
many times. So nice try author but this is yet another example of your ignorance and dishonesty.
Moreover, if you go to pg 409 of “The Sealed Nectar” you will see that Muhammad pbuh said “Do not
make my grave a worshipped Idol” The reference provided is from Mutta Imam Malik p65.
library.blogspot.in.pdf/TheSealedNectar-Alhamdulillah-library.blogspot.in_text.pdf - PDF page
number is 473
The author also argues that this was Muhammad pbuhs last words. Interesting because they
contradict themselves on another post on their twitter page. So, the author refutes themselves. Makes
my life easier.
The above reference refers to the expelling of Jews and Christians from Arabia which I have provided
evidence of earlier in this response. Let me tell you Muhammad pbuh’s last words not what he said
a couple of days before his death which is what the author has told you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkqHerLGoRw - Some people say he said the Shahadah. Watch

this video.
Were those Jesus’s last words. What do the other Gospels say? All the Gospels give different accounts
therefore how do we know what was actually said. Someone should test the historicity of the Gospels
oh wait people have. Bart Erhman for one. The below channel goes over the Bible and tests the
historicity of it.
86
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCx420FfPBbEboBvnYjIemzw - I challenge the author to join one
of their streams under their name WhoWasMuhammad and then we can see them actually defend
their religion. Will they? I doubt they have even made it this far in the response.
Claim – People pretended to be Muslim out of fear of death
The author cites Surah 9.56-7 and then says people pretended to be Muslims out of fear for death.
Is this really the case? Or is it yet another example of the authors dishonesty and ignorance. Below is
Tafsir Ibn Kathir for the verses.
Exposing Hypocrites' Fright and Fear
Allah describes to His Prophet the fright, fear, anxiety and nervousness of the hypocrites,
‫َي ْح ِل ُفونَ بِال َّل ِهإِ َّن ُه ْم َل ِمنكُ ْم‬

(They swear by Allah that they are truly of you), swearing a sure oath,
‫َو َما هُم ِمنكُ ْم‬

(while they are not of you), in reality,
َ‫َو َلـ ِك َّن ُه ْم َق ْومٌ َي ْف َر ُقون‬

(but they are a people who are afraid), and this is what made them swear.
‫َل ْو ي َِجدُونَ َم ْلجَئا‬

(Should they find a refuge), such as a fort in which they hide and fortify themselves,
‫َأ ْو َم َغـ َرات‬

(or caves), in some mountains,
‫َأ ْو ُم َّد َخل‬

(or a place of concealment), a tunnel or a hole in the ground, according to the explanation given by
Ibn Àbbas, Mujahid and Qatadah,
َ‫َّل َو َّل ْو ْا إِ َل ْي ِه َو ُه ْم َي ْج َم ُحون‬

(they would turn straightway thereto with a swift rush) away from you because they associate
with you unwillingly, not because they are fond of you. They prefer that they do not have to mix
with you, but necessity has its rules! It is because of this that they feel grief, sadness and sorrow,
seeing Islam and its people enjoying ever more might, triumph and glory. Therefore, whatever
pleases Muslims brings them grief, and this is why they prefer to disassociate themselves from the
believers. Hence Allah's statement,
َ‫َل ْو ي َِجدُونَ َم ْلجَئا َأ ْو َم َغـ َرات َأ ْو ُم َّد َخل َّل َو َّل ْو ْا إِ َل ْي ِه َو ُه ْم َي ْج َم ُحون‬
(Should they find a refuge, or caves, or a place of concealment, they would turn straightway
thereto with a swift rush.)
ْ ‫ت َفإِنْ ُأ ْع ُطو ْا ِم ْنهَا َرضُو ْا َوإِن َّل ْم ُي ْع َط ْو ْا ِمنهَا إِ َذا ُه ْم َي‬

َ‫س َخ ُطون‬ ِ ‫ص َد َقـ‬
َّ ‫َو ِم ْن ُه ْم َّمن َي ْل ِمزُكَ فِي ال‬
The verses refer to hypocrites. The Quran references hypocrites a lot. There is literally a whole
chapter called the hypocrites. Chapter 63, read it. Also, this verse 2.14
87
“When they meet the believers they say, “We believe.” But when alone with their evil associates
they say, “We are definitely with you; we were only mocking.”
If you want examples of hypocrites in Islamic history, Abu Lulu'ah who said he was a Muslim but
during a congregational prayer he stabbed Umar Bin Al-Khataab in the back and the front. You can
do more research as well into this to find out about the munafiqs in the early days of Islam when
Muhammad pbuh was alive.
Claim – Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬killed one person for leaving Islam
The author cites Bukhari 6899. It is a very long report. Read it here https://sunnah.com/bukhari/87/38
I have just pasted an excerpt of the hadith below that is very important in addressing the claim that
the author has made.
"By Allah, Allah's Messenger (‫ )ﷺ‬never killed anyone except in one of the following three
situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person
who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle
and deserted Islam and became an apostate."
So, the above is established at the beginning. Now reading this do I have an issue with it? No. We
read on in the Hadith that people who were “Muslim” killed an innocent man.
They killed the shepherd of Allah's Messenger (‫ )ﷺ‬and took away all the camels. This news
reached Allah's Messenger (‫ )ﷺ‬, so he sent (men) to follow their traces and they were captured
and brought (to the Prophet). He then ordered to cut their hands and feet, and their eyes were
branded with heated pieces of iron, and then he threw them in the sun till they died." I said, "What
can be worse than what those people did? They deserted Islam, committed murder and theft."
Harsh? No, these people killed an innocent man they stole they were criminals and thus got the
punishment they deserved. Before I knew what the punishment for murder was in Islam, I was pro
death penalty. It makes logical sense. If you are someone who is against it, if someone murdered your
parents, siblings, spouse or kids would you want them to be given the death penalty?
The rest of the hadith refers to Blood money and oaths.
Claim – Kill anybody who doesn’t really have faith in Islam
The author cites Bukhari 6930 you can read this here https://sunnah.com/bukhari/88/12
This hadith has been related by both Bukhari and Muslim in their compilations of rigorously
authenticated hadiths. Imam Nawawi explains in his commentary on Sahih Muslim that the people
being referred to in the hadith are seemingly pious Muslims who rebel against the rightful ruler of the
Muslims by taking up arms against him. The most prominent historical example was the Khawarij, an
early Muslim sect that declared major companions and their rightful supporters to have left Islam, and
used this as a justification to take up armed struggle against them. The hadith is a true prophecy with
respect to the Khawarij, and, as explained by Imam Nawawi, applies to other similar groups of Muslims
who oppose the mainstream Muslims and take up arms against them. The instruction in the hadith to
kill such people is an instruction to Muslim rulers to gather an army to forcibly quell such rebellions.
This is how classical scholars have understood the above hadith. This hadith does not in any way justify
individual Muslims’ causing civil discord by taking the law into their own hands and go about spilling
blood, nor does it justify the terrible acts of violence and terror that are committed in the name of
Islam by the ignorant.
88
Congratulations to the author for refuting themselves. They quote a report which can be found in
Sahih Muslim 1066. Same hadith. Who does it refer too? Well, the chapter title tells us Chapter:
Exhortation to kill the Khawarij. Who are the Khawarij? Groups like ISIS are. The author who also has
a section called violent and oppressive history tries to say ISIS is Islam. However, they have shown a
command directly from Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬telling people to kill the Khawarij. Basically. We Muslims
should be against them. In the violent and oppressive history section I link a whole book for you. Well
done author.
Claim – Cut hands and feet of people/tortured
The author cites Bukhari 6802 - 6805. Muslims 4353, Nasa’i 307.
Before we get into this if you have read the section regarding the claim Muhammad pbuh killed one
person for leaving Islam you will have seen a hadith, Bukhari 6899. The author out of their ignorance
of the basics of hadith sciences quotes the hadiths above. If you actually read them. They are all
from the same report. The Bukhari 6899 hadith. The reason the author has done this is ignorance
and to try deceive you into thinking that the above hadiths are separate instances. This is why you
need to fact check. Fact check me as well if you like. Here is the screenshot from the authors
website. I have highlighted the relevant parts for you. Have a look at it.
https://sunnah.com/bukhari/87/38 - Bukhari 6899. This is a large report the hadiths the author
references all refer to the same event. You will bring up camel urine I know I will address this claim
later in the response under the appropriate article.
89
The cutting off hands etc refers to Hudud in Islam which is Islamic Law. The punishment is normally
for theft. However not for little theft but major theft and even then, there are various conditions which
need to be met. I am no expert on Islamic Law. I will link for you some videos that you can go through
that will educate you.
https://abuaminaelias.com/who-implements-hudud-punishments/
https://abuaminaelias.com/application-of-hudud-punishments-in-sharia-law/
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QHuzR1AwFctItMCTuhD6i2FcN96i7djo/view -if you open this link

then press ctrl F and then type Hudud and click the arrow till you get to 5 out of 8 you will see a lot of
links on this issue. It is on page 59 at the bottom. Choose whatever method is easier for you.
Why were these people punished the way they were? I will address this. Why were their eyes
gouged out
"The Prophet [SAW] only had the eyes of those people gouged out, because they had gouged out
the eyes of the herdsmen." Sunan an-Nasa'i 4043
In the Quran chapter 16 verse 126 we read
“If you retaliate, then let it be equivalent to what you have suffered. But if you patiently endure, it
is certainly best for those who are patient.”
This is justice. You may ask why were their hands and feet cut off. In Surah Maidah verse 33 we read
“Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and spread
mischief in the land is death, crucifixion, cutting off their hands and feet on opposite sides, or exile
from the land. This ˹penalty˺ is a disgrace for them in this world, and they will suffer a tremendous
punishment in the Hereafter.” 5.33
Did the criminals wage war? yes, they did!
Abu Qilaba said, "Those people committed theft and murder, became infidels after embracing
Islam and fought against Allah and His Apostle. Bukhari 233
Christians should have no issue with this verse as in 2 Samuel 4.12 it says
“And David commanded his young men, and they killed them and cut off their hands and feet and
hanged them beside the pool at Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-bosheth and buried it in the
tomb of Abner at Hebron.”
Will the author come out and criticise this? Their God condoned it; David is a prophet by the way
come on show some consistency.
Claim – Beat and tortured a slave for information
The hadith cited is Sahih Muslim 4621 https://hamariweb.com/islam/hadith/sahih-muslim-4621/ .

When you read it. Muhammad pbuh doesn’t beat him and in fact he actually says “By Allah in Whose
control is my life, you beat him when he is telling you the truth, and you let him go when he tells you
a lie.” This to me indicates that Muhammad pbuh was against it by making this remark and we know
from other hadith of Muhammad pbuh’s treatment to slaves. For example this hadith,
“I saw Abu Dhar Al-Ghifari wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a cloak. We asked him
about that (i.e. how both were wearing similar cloaks). He replied, "Once I abused a man and he
90
complained of me to the Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬. The Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬asked me, 'Did you abuse him by slighting
his mother?' He added, 'Your slaves are your brethren upon whom Allah has given you authority.
So, if one has one's brethren under one's control, one should feed them with the like of what one
eats and clothe them with the like of what one wears. You should not overburden them with what
they cannot bear, and if you do so, help them (in their hard job).”
See what Muhammad pbuh said? Slaves are like brothers and treat them well.
Ibn Umar reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Whoever
strikes his slave-boy sharply without right, or punches him, the expiation for the sin is to
emancipate him.”
Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 1657
https://abuaminaelias.com/islam-and-slavery/ - Read through this
Claim – People and their houses burned if they had not left for prayer
The author cites Sahih Bukhari 657 https://hamariweb.com/islam/hadith/sahih-bukhari-657/.
The hadith references those who did not pray, the hypocrites. I have addressed hypocrites already
but I will address this hadith as well.
https://questionsonislam.com/question/burning-house-Prophet-pbuh-if-prayer-congregation-not-
attended
The author is the first person I have seen who thinks this hadith is to be taken literally.
Claim – Beat a drunk and commanded beating of drunks
The author cites Bukhari 6773, 6674, 6675 6776, 6780, 6781.
The consumption of alcohol is a sin. Hence why the people were lashed. Now the author has cited
Bukhari 6774 and 6775 and the impression to the layman is that these are two separate incidents
but when you read them it is the same case with the same individual. The same could be said for
6773 and 6776. Have a read of them and see for yourself. Now the author conveniently leaves out
some hadith and the reason why this is convenient is because they left out Bukhari 6777, 6778,
6779.
Now I will address 6779 first as it refers to drunks who were disobedient and mischievous, they were
lashed more. I am surprised the author did not use this. Now I will move on to Bukhari 6777 and
6778.
After a drunk was lashed “someone said to him, 'May Allah disgrace you!' On that the Prophet (‫)ﷺ‬
said, 'Do not say so, for you are helping Satan to overpower him.' "
This shows the compassion of Muhammad pbuh as the punishment was more so a warning and an
incentive not to commit the crime again.
Bukhari 6778 Ali (RA) narrated “I would not feel sorry for one who dies because of receiving a legal
punishment, except the drunk, for if he should die (when being punished), I would give blood money
to his family because no fixed punishment has been ordered by Allah's Messenger (‫ )ﷺ‬for the
drunk.”
Again, as you can see this certainly clarifies things doesn’t it. Now the author does cite Bukhari 6780
which does mention something similar to 6777 “The Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬said, "Do not curse him, for by
91
Allah, I know for he loves Allah and His Apostle." But the ending part of the hadith offers an insight
into Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬compassion.
Now I ask myself why would the offer leave out those hadith especially since it is from the same Book
of Bukhari and close together in terms of number. Based on what I have shown you so far, I can only
conclude they did this to further their agenda.
MUHAMMAD ‫ ﷺ‬RACIST – A RESPONSE
The author really doesn’t help themselves. I will InshAllah, be refuting the claims the author has made
but first I am going to tell you something the author did not want to tell you. The reason why should
be abundantly clear. During his final farewell speech Muhammad pbuh said.
“All mankind is from Adam and Eve; an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has
any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over black nor does a black have any
superiority over a white except by piety and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to
every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood. Nothing shall be legitimate to a
Muslim which belongs to a fellow Muslim unless it was given freely and willingly. Do not, therefore,
do injustice to yourselves.”
Ask yourself why the author did not tell you this. In the eyes of a Christian man called Dr Craig
Considine Muhammad pbuh was “arguably the first person in human history to declare in no uncertain
terms that no person is above another by virtue of race or ethnicity”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTwft2KX9xE – Here is the video. Dr Craig is how Christians

should act not like this author who as I have consistently shown is rude, ignorant and dishonest.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dDiNGBnYh4 – Were there Black Prophets?
The author also disregards Bilal and Wahshi both of whom were black. Now I will begin addressing
the claims that the author has made. Note some of the evidence I will link were published by a black
man and he explains how Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬is not racist.
Claim – On day of judgement people’s faces will be light and others dark
This is the last point the author makes and I laughed when I read this. The author thinks this is racist.
Why? Simply because the word dark/gloomy/black is used. This shows the unhealthy obsession and
how the author is not fair. Below are the verses.
“on the day when [some] faces will turn white and [some] faces will turn black. As for those whose
faces turn black [it will be said to them], ‘Did you disbelieve after your faith? So taste the punishment
because of what you used to disbelieve.’ But as for those whose faces become white, they shall
dwell in Allah’s mercy, and they will remain in it [forever]. ” Surah 3:106-107
The verses refer to the Day of Judgment. Some people the ones who are going paradise will have
bright faces and the ones that are going to hell, they’re faces will be black, dark and gloomy. This is
not the only instances where the faces of people on the day of judgment is mentioned in the Quran.
There is a literally a whole chapter on the Day of Judgement. Chapter 75. Read it, it is not that long
َ ‫ َو ُو ُجوه َي ْو َمئ ٍذ َب‬verse 24 of chapter 75 translated as And ˹other˺ faces will be gloomy,
‫اِسة‬
As you can see there is nothing racist at all about these verses and the author only included it as it
contains the word “black.”
92
Claim – was a white man who owned black slaves
The author says that Muhammad pbuh was a white man who had black slaves. The reason they chose
to word it this way is to make the author think to slavery in America. They are indirectly trying to argue
that it is similar. It is firstly important to establish that Muhammad pbuh was light skinned not white
this is Arabia we are talking about unless the author is going to lie and say Muhammad pbuh was
Albino. The below article addresses this claim and also addresses many hadith that critics often cite.
In order to portray the Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬as a racist, special emphasis has been laid on the contrast between
colours where he is shown as a very whitish white man as compared to the dark slaves he owned.
Firstly, his (‫’)ﷺ‬s colour was not what we consider today as white i.e. of European origin. That white
was referred to as yellow by the Arabs (either due to the blonde hair or the skin colour) and what the
Arabs meant by white was a light skinned person from the Arabic skin tone.
Secondly, the Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬did not own only black slaves. Slavery was common in those days and slaves
came in all colours and races. He (‫ )ﷺ‬came as a prophet in a society where racism was rampant and
slaves existed from before who were black as well as Arab. To say that he only owned black slaves
would be a deceit. One may ask as to why he continued to own slaves even if slavery was rampant
instead of letting them free? Here is a quote from a historical book on slavery:
The Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬was furthest from racism. He categorically rejected and condemned racism,
tribalism, nationalism and pride over skin colour, race, language, ethnicity in very explicit
statements. Furthermore, the Prophet (‫)ﷺ‬:
Appointed a black man to be a Mu’adhin (Saheeh Muslim, Book 004, Hadith Number 0741), said
that his footsteps were ahead of his in paradise (Saheeh Bukhari, Volume 002, Book 021, Hadith
Number 250) and gave him the honor to enter the Ka’bah with him (Saheeh Bukhari, Volume 004,
Book 052, Hadith Number 231)
Prayed at the grave of a dead black person. (Saheeh Bukhari, Volume 001, Book 008, Hadith
Number 448)
Supported and respected the testimony of a black woman when he could have easily encouraged
the man to ignore it. (Saheeh Bukhari, Volume 007, Book 062, Hadith Number 041)
Forbade a man from disowning his dark complexioned son. (Saheeh Muslim, Book 009, Hadith
Number 3575)
Reprimanded a companion for derisively calling Bilal, ‘son of a black woman’, then he went on to
say, “Look! Surely you are not better than a brown man nor a black man except by fearing Allaah
more than them.” (Reported by ‘Abdullaah ibn ‘Amr and collected by Ahmed)
Refer to the below for more information.
https://qurananswers.me/2016/03/05/black-slaves-of-the-white-Prophet/
If you have already gone through the past sections relating to slavery you would have learnt a few
things already.
Claim – Compared black people’s heads to raisons, Devil looks like a black man, Black woman sign
of disease, Black man from Ethiopia will destroy the Kabbah
The below videos address many claims the author made. I grouped them all together for this reason.
The links also refute more claims some which the author did not bring up
93
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ipxmlwsllg - Refuting David woods (Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬was a
Racist)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19bEgYN-u64 - Refuting David wood on “The Islamic view of

black slaves “
Claim – Black dogs are the devil
https://qurananswers.me/2018/09/17/black-dog-is-a-devil/ -This article addresses this claim
Additional sources for you to check out
I have shown how Muhammad pbuh was not a racist and how Islam is not racist. Here are some
additional evidences which further refute allegations of Racism.
https://qurananswers.me/2017/06/28/is-islam-racist/
https://qurananswers.me/racism/
https://abuaminaelias.com/islam-against-racism-bigotry/
https://abuaminaelias.com/are-arabs-master-race-in-islam/
https://abuaminaelias.com/the-ignorance-of-tribalism-and-racism-in-islam/
https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/4713562/40HadithLectureNotes/40onSocialJustice-Week-32.pdf
FINAL POINTS – ADDRESSING THE CLAIMS IN THE POTENTAL OBJECTIONS
The author makes many claims in the potential to objections article. I have highlighted them and we
will address them.
https://www.whowasmuhammad.org/answers-to-potential-objections
94
The author assumes that Muslims will use two verses to try prove Islam is a religion of peace. If you
had gone through all the evidence in this section you will realise in the very first, I provided you with
videos which relate to 5.32 of the Quran. The author is evidently ignorant of all the other verses of
the Quran and hadith too which command us to be kind and peaceful. I have cited them throughout
this response. The author also makes the claim of plagiarism again in an indirect way. I have already
refuted this. The author has no choice but to accept what I said unless they are going be consistent
and use the same logic and admit the trinity comes from pagan beliefs.
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/04/18/sanctity-of-life-if-anyone-kills-a-person-it-would-be-as-
if-he-killed-all-mankind-surah-532/
I want to address in this section the doctrine of abrogation in Islam and chapter 9 being the chapter
we should follow Nabeel Qureshi who I am sure the author knows made this claim too. So now I will
address this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gei_pvN0il4 – You can watch this video it addresses claim

Nabeel has made and it is very similar to what the author has said in this section and in their articles.
https://abuaminaelias.com/abrogation-and-specification-in-the-quran/ - This article explains the

doctrine of abrogation in Islam it refers to the two verses from the Quran the author cites
The article I linked above ends with an interesting point
“When interpreting the Quran, we must be careful not to take isolated verses out of context. The
phenomenon of abrogation requires us to compile all the verses and traditions on a given subject
95
and to refer to their scholarly commentaries before issuing a judgment from the Quran and
Sunnah.”
The author cherry picks. If you have read the article and you have read my responses to chapter 9
you will realise how the author has ground here in their claim.
https://questionsonislam.com/article/abrogation-naskh-quran-and-wisdom-behind-abrogation -
Another article on abrogation
https://yaqeeninstitute.org/justin-parrott/abrogated-rulings-in-the-quran-discerning-their-divine-
wisdom - Another article
I have provided you with plenty of information here that educate you as to what the doctrine of
abrogation in Islam is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dLJGoiwyPI - "There is no compulsion in Religion" Abrogated?
We have already established that context does not matter at all to the author. So, let see if there is
any violence in the Bible. Remember some Christians like this author regard Jesus as God. So,
everything I show is what Jesus condoned/condones. Before we start here is an interesting statistic.
"Killing and destruction are referenced slightly more often in the New Testament (2.8%) than in the
Quran (2.1%), but the Old Testament clearly leads—more than twice that of the Quran—in mentions
of destruction and killing (5.3%)."
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/violence-more-common-bible-quran-
text-analysis-reveals-a6863381.html
Now I know you will mention how this does not refer to the hadith and how the Quran is smaller. This
is irrelevant, remember I am using the same logic as the author. Let’s show some specific verses.
Samuel 15.3 “3Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare
them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’ Kill
everything?
Numbers 31.17-18 “17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that
hath known man by lying with him. 18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying
with him, keep alive for yourselves.” I have mentioned this verse before.
Deuteronomy 13:6 “If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your
closest friend secretly entices you, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" (gods that neither you
nor your ancestors have known,” The author has an issue with the apostasy law in Islam. Yet it is in
their Bible.
2 Kings 2:23-25 NIV Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out
of the town and jeered at him. "Get out of here, baldy!" they said. "Get out of here, baldy!" He turned
around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears
came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys.
96
2 Kings 23:20-25 NLT “He [Josiah] executed the priests of the pagan shrines on their own altars, and
he burned human bones on the altars to desecrate them.... He did this in obedience to all the laws
written in the scroll that Hilkiah the priest had found in the LORD's Temple. Never before had there
been a king like Josiah, who turned to the LORD with all his heart and soul and strength, obeying all
the laws of Moses pbuh. And there has never been a king like him since.”
Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT “You may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who
live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who
have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children
as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your
relatives, must never be treated this way.”
Exodus 21. The whole of that. It talks about selling your daughter into slavery.
The apostasy law in the Bible. “ If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you
love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods
that neither you nor your ancestors have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or
far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no
pity. Do not spare them or shield them. You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be
the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone them to death,
because they tried to turn you away from the Lord your God,” Deuteronomy 13:1-10
I could quote more but I am not going to. Instead watch these social experiments they are
interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZi1juNrR0Q – Bible disguised as Quran
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZppqskp8rs – Holy Swap
I did what the author did, not nice isn’t it. So why is it ok when the author does it to Islam? Do you
see how the author is illogical and how using their logic and mindset they should not be Christian?
Is this the longest section so far? The author certainly made many claims in this section. I think I
responded to them and refuted them or provided evidence which refutes the author. I drew a logical
inference at the beginning and then we applied this to the Bible and what we found the author should
be shocked and disgusted by. They do not care about context as I have shown so why do the Bible
verses need explaining?
It should be clear to you the author has grossly misrepresented Islam. We are not done yet as well as
there are still more articles left to refute.
97
MUHAMMAD'S ‫ ﷺ‬UNDENIABLE LIES: MUHAMMAD VS. SCIENCE,
HISTORY, AND REALITY – A RESPONSE
The author starts of their article with the following
“Muhammad was wrong about biology, microbiology, embryology, astronomy, meteorology,

climatology, entomology, bacteriology, and psychology”
https://www.whowasmuhammad.org/science-and-history
The logical inference that is drawn here is that since Muhammad pbuh made errors (according to the
author) Islam is false. Are there errors in the Bible? We will get on to that in the hypocrisy section. If
there are then according to the premise given by the author Christianity is false. I will be providing a
lot of links in this section as the links I will provide will go into plenty of detail.
WRONG ABOUT SCIENCE – A RESPONSE
Claim – Backbone and Ribs
The Qur’an used the words, “Khuliqa minm Maain Daafiq”, that was translated by Sir Zafrullah Khan
as, “created from a fluid poured forth” and by Maulvi Sher Ali as, “created from a gushing fluid”. These
four words mean the ejaculate, which consists of 2-5% sperms and 95-98% other ingredients.
Therefore only 2-5 % of the fluid is produced in testes. The majority of the other ingredients, including
prostaglandins, Zinc, lipids, steroid hormones, enzymes, amino acids and minerals, are produced and
stored the seminal vesicles, and prostate glands, both of which are located very close to the backbone.
Furthermore, we should try to discover what is that present in between the backbone and the ribs
that causes the seminal fluid to be issued or expelled. In order to understand this verse, we must
recollect the anatomy and the physiology of the spinal cord, vertebral column, and the autonomic
nervous system. Briefly, without going into biological and physiological details, the reflex centres in
the spinal cord begin to send nerve signals or emit rhythmic sympathetic impulses that leave the cord
at lumbar segments L1, L2 and pass to the genitalia. Next, the last wave of reflex nervous mechanism
takes place. Rhythmic parasympathetic impulses from the sacral segment S1, S2 leave the cord
resulting in the expulsion or ejaculation or forcing out the “gushing fluid”.
The spinal cord ends at the level between first and second lumbar vertebrae. The spinal segments, L1,
L2 and S1, S2 are enclosed within the first and second lumbar vertebrae, which are below the thoracic
ones where the ribs meet the backbone. Thus, we have seen that the nerve signals to expel the
ejaculate or the “gushing fluid” is issued from the lumbar and sacral segments of the spinal cord, which
lie below the level of the 12th ribs on either side and above L3 vertebra or “between the backbone
and the ribs,” as the Qur’an says.
https://asadullahali.com/2020/01/23/backbone-ribs/
https://www.call-to-
monotheism.com/alleged_contradiction_between_qur_an__86_5_7__and_embryology__by_islamt
oday
https://quranisright.wordpress.com/2016/04/30/does-the-quran-say-sperm-come-from-the-back-
and-ribs/
98
Claim – physical characteristics determined by discharge
This narration goes along with the genetic science that resemblance of children is explained through
the theory of dominance where superior genes prevail over the child. It is also known that sperm is
alkaline whereas women’s ejaculated fluid is acidic. In order for sperm to reach the woman’s egg it
has to go through the woman discharge. Thus, when acidic and alkaline fluids meet, alkaline fluids
either neutralize, or overpower acidic fluid and hence cause sperm to preserve its nature [i.e. man’s
genes become weak] or that alkaline discharge effects the fluid and makes it weak. This can be one of
the interpretations and understanding.
One may argue that though it may be possible, it is not convincing. However, as this is supposed to be
scientifically examined, we only can reach this decision based on facts and certainty. One major point
that causes all this confusion about this Hadith, and hence some people find it problematic, is that
they tend to immediately understand the word water of women to mean ejaculated fluid that happens
due to intimacy or arousal.
If we pay attention to the words used in this Hadith, we find great findings i.e. He (‫ )ﷺ‬used the word
water (maa’) in reference to the liquid of women and he did not specify it any further. We have to
understand what the Prophet ‫ صىل هللا عليه وسلم‬meant with water of women as he did not specify it. It
is true that he did not specify it but he actually described it when he said in another narration the
water of women is yellow and thin. So, what is that fluid that has such a description?
It is known that ejaculated discharge due to arousal or intimacy is white. The only liquid that is yellow
is actually called follicular fluid which is discharged without a relation to copulation or arousal and it
is directly related to pregnancy. It comes out with a thin layer called follicle of which inside there is a
small egg that combines with the sperm of man during fertilization and this has to happen in order for
a child to be created.
Go through the below links which answer the claims which the author made in their articles
https://qurananswers.me/2017/08/26/gender-determination-hadith/ - Read this first, then the

article below.
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/175100/views-of-the-scholars-and-doctors-on-the-role-of-the-
mans-water-and-the-womans-water-in-determining-the-gender-of-the-foetus - Now have a read of
this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Z4kN8Q-8yk – it is in Arabic but with the way the author has

portrayed themselves they should understand this video.
Claim - Women are intellectually deficient
The author mentioned this already in another article but they have repeated it so read the below
The claim that women are ‘deficient in religion’ is based upon a misinterpretation or a poor translation
of a prophetic statement. The ‘reduction’ in a woman’s intelligence is a reduction in her legal
responsibilities related to it, not in her inherent intelligence itself. The preponderance of other
evidence indicates that women can be just as intelligent as men and, therefore, they should be
consulted and their perspectives respected.
https://abuaminaelias.com/women-deficient-reason-religion/
https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2009/06/why-hadith-says-that-women-are.html
99
http://en.alukah.net/Shariah/9/9/
Claim – Shooting stars are missiles
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fHpyxcBmJg -This video addresses this claim
If you are not satisfied with the above then here is some more links that you can go through
http://www.al-mawrid.org/index.php/questions/view/quran-says-shooting-stars-are-missiles-for-
the-jinn
monotheism.com/rebuttal_to_ali_sina_s_article__shooting_stars__allah_s_missiles_to_scare_the_ji
ns__1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4ZgFrcUSgc
Claim - embryology wrong in the Quran
The author believes that the Quran is wrong about embryology. I will provide you with some links that
will educate you. The links also address claims that Muhmmad pbuh got this from other people
specifically the Greeks.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3068791/
https://web.archive.org/web/20130329051118/http:/www.onereason.org/wp-
content/uploads/2012/02/Embryology_in_the_Quran_v2.pdf - This is a free book have a look at the
table of contents and you will see how it addresses many claims the author has said in their article.
https://www.hamzatzortzis.com/did-the-Prophet-muhammad-plagiarise-hellenic-embryology/
Claim – Water is not defiled by anything
With regard to the hadith you quoted, the following remarks are not out of place.
Imam al-Khattabi said that it should not be understood that the companions were not the ones who
used to throw dead dogs or menstrual clothes into the well of Budaàh. The companions were the
cleanest ever people. It is not even accepted that non-Muslim people of that time used to do that.
(Maàlim al-Sunan, 1/37)
Further, it was the heavy rain that throw these things into the well of Budaàh; the well itself is pure.
Scholars held that much water is not affected by little impurities according to the hadith which states
if the water reaches two qullahs in volume, it will not become impure due to impurities. The exact
quantity of the qullah is a controversial issue. Several estimates were given to this quantity. One
opinion holds that the qullah is equivalent to 375 milliliters. Of course, the well of Budaàh is so large
that it wouldn't be impure if there was such filth in it.
Moreover, the hadith is talking about ablution and nothing more since Muslims have to purify
themselves before the five daily prayers. So the Prophet (peace be upon him) never claimed that
Muslims can drink impure water.
Imam al-Tahawi said that the well of Budaàh was like a rive leading to a garden. This means that the
water is always running and it is not stagnant. Therefore, the Prophet declared it to be a pure source
of water.
100
Other scholars maintained that when the Prophet said: “Water is pure”, he was referring to the water
of the well of Budaàh. This means that the Prophet was confirming the purity of this well as it is too
large to be contaminated by the impurities that were thrown into it by the heavy rain.
The below links address this claim.
https://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2014/03/explanation-for-hadith-of-well-of.html
https://wedefendislam.wordpress.com/2019/05/12/explanation-for-hadith-of-the-well-of-budaah-
and-its-water-sunan-abu-dawud-67/
https://yahyasnow.wordpress.com/2014/04/25/islamophobe-refuted/
Claim – Seasons are hell breathing and fevers are from hell
Certain scholars like Hafiz Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani and al-Manawi have said that the Hadith means, heat
of fever is like the heat of hell and it works as an admonition to the people against its torment.
Zainuddin Muhammad al-Manawi (d. 1031 A.H.) wrote:
“And it is in the likeness of hell fire in that it torments and afflicts the body. And its significance is in
its being a reflection and a shadow of the archetype from hell which is brought as evidence unto
people (to be mindful of the life hereafter). And they are asked to reflect on it just like joy and
pleasures are brought to show the blessings of the Paradise.” (Faidh al-Qadir fi Sharah Jami’ al-
Saghir, 3/409 Hadith 3838)
This is the significance for everyone. However, another Hadith narration highlights a meaning of this
Hadith specifically relevant to true believers.
Especially for the believers:
The Messenger of Allah –may Allah bless him- said: “Fever is from the bellows of the Hell. So, whatever
of it afflicts a believer is his share from the hellfire.” (Musnad Ahmad, Hadith 22328. Authenticated by
Shu’aib Arnaut)
One can understand this better if he reads it along with the following narration.
Umayyah asked Aisha –may Allah be pleased with them both- to explain the verses, “If you disclose
what is in your hearts or conceal it, Allah shall hold you accountable for it” (2: 284) and “Whoever
does evil shall be requited for it” (4: 123) Aisha said that no one had asked her about these verses
since she had asked Allah’s Messenger –may Allah bless him- about these. He said: “This is how Allah
afflicts His slaves in difficulties, like fever or misfortune - even loss of something that he places in his
shirt pocket and grieves for it. Thus, the slave comes out of his sins just as gold comes out the bellows.”
(Jami’ al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 2991. Classified as Hasan by al-Tirmidhi)
Cooling with water:
The mention of cooling with water is to do away with the physical effect of fever only.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the Hadith tells us that physical effect of fever is simply a reflection of the hellfire and
the purpose is to warn people against transgressing Allah’s commandments.
101
And for the true believers the significance is that it is a source of expiation of their sins so that when
they meet their Lord on the Day of Recompense, they are pure, free from sins like pure gold free from
all dross. And thus, they will not be subjected to any punishment in the hell.
The below links address the claim which the author has made. Go through them all and they will
educate you.
https://seekersguidance.org/answers/general-counsel/how-to-understand-the-hadith-about-hell-
and-the-seasons/
https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2011/07/fever-hell-hadith-connection.html
https://www.call-to-monotheism.com/explaining_the_hadith__fevers_are_from_the_fire_of_hell
Claim – Adam pbuh height
This is what the author has said. Just because we have no remains does that mean that is false? I will
use this same premise to critique the authors religion later, remember the author believes in Goliath
but I will touch more on this later after I deal with the rest of their claims. Read the below to learn
more about the hadith.
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/20612/he-is-amazed-by-the-height-of-adam-peace-be-upon-him
Claim - Drinking the fat of a Bedouin sheep's tail cures sciatica
Like the point I made in the camel urine they did not have modern medicine back then. Plus, as I am
sure the author is aware diseases can mutate and new strains could develop that are harder to get rid
of. To address the claim the author has made you can read the below article.
http://www.tib-e-nabi-for-you.com/ram.html
Claim - Indian aloeswood cures pleurisy
Like the point I made in the camel urine they did not have modern medicine back then. Plus as I am
sure the author is aware diseases can mutate and new strains could develop that are harder to get rid
of.
Indian alosewood/ agarwood can actually be good for things such as asthma and chest infections
which is what pleurisy is
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/pleurisy/
https://www.pure-incense.com/agarwood-incense-interesting-information/
Now again things you have to take into account is what I have said in past points like the one prior to
this and also the language used. Perhaps Muhammad pbuh is highlighting the medical benefits of
agarwood and used emphasis to convey this to his companions. This is similar to his comments on
black cumin and black seeds.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeHb-Fxx7iY -7.30 mins – 8.48 mins
Claim – Fly falls in your drink and camel Urine (authors opinions)
102
Truly amazing. I am going to have fun with this one. In regards to the fly hadith
https://www.call-to-monotheism.com/fly_in_a_drink__by_islamtoday
https://seekersguidance.org/answers/general-counsel/does-modern-science-confirm-the-hadith-
that-says-there-is-an-antidote-in-the-wing-of-a-fly/
https://yahyasnow.wordpress.com/2015/10/11/fly-hadith-discussed/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeHb-Fxx7iY – From 4 mins – 6.55
I want to focus on the camel urine. The author says it did not work again just to push their narrative
this is not the first time the author has provided their own opinion and as we have shown their opinion
is irrelevant. The reports on this matter confirm that the camel urine worked. So why is the author
giving their opinion when the sources on this matter show that it worked.
103
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeHb-Fxx7iY – watch from 1.50 – 3.47
https://bit.ly/3od9pDZ - The drug Premarin is made from horse urine and guess what it works. If the
author is a female and has taken Premarin then you have taken horse urine. How inconsistent of the
author? criticises Muhammad pbuh for prescribing a specific group of people to drink camel urine
which cured those people and even in the modern-day horse urine is used in medication.
Even more interesting camel poo was the first probiotic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDJho-
H42oc . Even science confirms this.
Here are some more links on this topic
https://abuaminaelias.com/camels-urine-as-medicine/
https://questionsonislam.com/question/did-Prophet-pbuh-advise-drinking-camels-urine
https://www.islamawareness.net/FAQ/faq1000.html
https://www.bismikaallahuma.org/hadith/camel-milk-and-urine-hadiths/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrNmy7RmhB4 - Strange Medieval Medicines that Actually

Worked!
Obviously today we have modern medicine but did they have things like paracetamol, ibuprofen and
penicillin 1400 years ago, now they didn’t.
So, thanks to the author for proving the intelligence of Muhammad pbuh simply because the author
is ignorant.
Claim – Poison and magic won’t harm someone on the same day they eat 7 dates in the morning
The unfortunate fact is that most people in our time think that just reading any translation of Hadith
texts, they can lay hands upon, is quite enough to have a full grasp of it and they find themselves
worthy enough to comment. The practice might have had some justification if Hadith -or for that
matter any classical Islamic text- was in some dead language hardly known to even the followers of
the religion as it happened with Judaism and Christianity.
A basic principle in studying any historical narration is to understand the environment and context in
which it originated. While it may not be possible to find details as to when and why was some
particular words were uttered, another reasonable way is to see the complementing narrations
before looking to reach a conclusion.
Sa’d told of hearing Allah’s Messenger say, “He who has a morning meal of seven ‘ajwa dates will not
suffer harm that day through toxins or magic.” (Bukhari, Hadith 5327 and Muslim, Hadith 3814)
‘Aisha reported Allah’s Messenger as saying, “The ‘ajwah dates of al-‘Aliya contain healing, and they
are an antidote (when taken as) first thing in the morning.” (Muslim, Hadith 3815)
‘Aisha reported Allah’s Messenger as saying, “The ‘ajwah dates of al-‘Aliya taken as the first thing in
the morning, in the state of fasting; contain healing for all (kinds of) magic or toxins.” (Musnad
Ahmad, Hadith 23592)
Al-‘Aliya is the named applied to some villages a few miles east of Medina.
104
Narrated ‘Urwah: ‘Aisha used to order to make a habit of or taking in regular intervals seven ‘ajwah
dates, in the state of fasting for seven mornings. (Musannaf Ibn Abi Shayba, Hadith 23945)
Now considering all these narrations it becomes clear that the benefits mentioned are for link to
certain specifics.
1- It is about 'Ajwa dates from al-Aliya, a particular locality near al-Medina
2- The benefit is for eating them early in the morning breaking the night fast with it
3- It is for the one who eats them regularly as Aisha (RA) used to instruct people. Her instruction
matters for she is one of the narrators of the Hadith in question.
Now let me explain a few things:
"The Poison/Toxin": The word actually used is "summ" which means, poison or toxin. The problem is
some people think it is about instantly killing poisonous stuff. However, the fact mentions in Hadith
that it benefits when taken as the first thing early in the morning and on regular basis itself
establishes that it is about toxins, which are indeed poisonous and harmful to the body. Also see the
following evidence.
Al-Mawarid Arabic-English Dictionary Dar el-Elm Lilmalayin, Beirut 1995 p.642
Ibn Qayyim in his Tibb al-Nabawi writes: "For the people of al-Medina, dried dates are their staple
like wheat is to other people. In addition, dried dates from the area of al-Aliyah in al-Medina are
one of the best kinds of dates ... Dates are a type of fruit that is also used for its nutritional and
medicinal value, being favorable for most bodies and for their role in strengthening the natural
heat. Moreover, dates do not produce harmful wastes or excrement like other types of food and
fruits. Rather, dates preserve the body wastes from being spoiled and from rotting, especially for
those who are used to eating dried dates." (Healing with the Medicine of the Prophet, Translated
by Abd el-Qader bin Abd el-Azeez, Dar al-Ghadd al-Gadeed, al-Mansoura (Egypt), 2003 p.121)
https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2011/07/hadith-ajwa-dates-and-science.html
Go through the above link, it will educate you.
What is funny is that a Muslim who debated a Christian who you will know when you click the link …
Hatun the screecher who screams and interrupts. Hatun said to the Muslim drink poison and eat a
date and he drank poison https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucB_ovdB5tU Asrar makes points in
here that I am going to make in my hypocrisy section.
Claim – He said a bad dream can be warded off by spitting on the left side of the bed. Same for
blowing on your left
There is nothing wrong with this at all. The significance is what matters. It is about seeking refuge in
God from Satan.
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/144942/if-he-notices-the-whisper-of-the-shaytaan-during-the-
congregational-prayer-how-should-he-spit-dryly-to-his-left
Claim – Earth flat

105
How can you take the author seriously when they literally say this? Below is the claim from the
authors site
So, the author who is no scholar isn’t even firm in their point. By the way I am expecting that there is
absolutely no indication at all of a flat earth in the Bible if there is well the author is reaching new
levels of hypocrisy.
The verse (interpretation of the meaning) “And Allah has made for you the earth wide spread (an
expanse)” [Nooh 71:19] indicates that it is spread out and shaped so that people can feel settled in it
and be able to live and prosper in it. Ibn Katheer said:
That is, He spread it out, prepared it, made it stable and made it firm by means of the mountains.
Tafseer Ibn Katheer, 8/247
Similarly, the verse (interpretation of the meaning) “Have We not made the earth as a bed” [an-
Naba’ 78:6] means that it is spread out and prepared for you and for your benefit, so that you can
cultivate it, build dwellings in it and travel through it.
Ibn Katheer said:
That is, it is prepared for people in such a way that they can live in it, and it is firm, stable and steady.
Tafseer Ibn Katheer, 8/307
And the verse (interpretation of the meaning) “And the earth We spread out, and placed therein
firm mountains, and caused to grow therein all kinds of things in due proportion” [al-Hijr 15:19]
means We spread it out and placed firm mountains therein. This is like the verse in which Allah says
(interpretation of the meaning): “And it is He Who spread out the earth, and placed therein firm
mountains and rivers” [ar-Ra‘d 13:3].
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/118698/consensus-that-the-earth-is-round
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/211655/reconciling-between-the-view-that-the-earth-is-round-
and-the-verse-and-allah-has-made-for-you-the-earth-wide-spread-an-expanse-nooh-7119
https://qurananswers.me/2017/06/24/criticism-religion-western-thought/ - This link has index’s to

other articles related to other claims made against Islam in regards to science.
monotheism.com/rebuttal_to_sam_shamoun_s_article__the_qur_an_and_the_shape_of_the_earth
_
Claim – All things were made in pairs.
The author is seriously clutching at straws. Go through the below and it will educate you
https://www.exploring-islam.com/everything-created-in-pairs.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RTehKGfdCU – You can watch this whole video. Check the

description for timestamps.
106
Claim – Sun sets in muddy spring
No, it is not worth noting. What you have done throughout your whole site is focused on quantity
rather than quality. If you possessed even an ounce of intellect you would not have included half the
points including this one in your article.
What does this image look like to you? If someone on a boat or shore saw this is it logical to say that
it looks like the sun is setting in the water? Yes, it is. As you can see the author even acknowledges
this but does not really accept it but then suggests that their whole claim is irrelevant. This is pure
jahil.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bO5BYhVOh_0 – Watch this video on the topic
Claim – mountain goats
I am at a loss now. This is what the author has said.
Yet again another weak hadith. Why are you quoting weak sources? This is not the first time the
author has done this. If you are going to criticise at least ensure you pick authentic sources or Hasan
and above. The reason why this is weak is because
This is a weak chain of transmission because of Abdullah bin Umayrah, mentioned by Ibn Abi Hatim
in “Al-Jarrah and Al-Taìlil” (5/124), and Al-Bukhari in “Al-Tarikh Al-Kabir” (5/159), and they did not
narrate it as a wound or a modification. Rather, Al-Bukhari said: We do not know him to hear from
the Hanaf. Ibrahim Al-Harbi said: I do not know Abdullah bin Omairah. As in “Completing Tahdheeb
al-Kamal” (8/102), so al-Dhahabi said in al-Mughni (1/350): “He does not know” Ibn Hajar said:
Anonymous. Expediting the Benefit (2/274).
107
Hence, Ibn Al-Jawzi said about this hadith: “Al-Illal al-Muhtaiya” (1/9) is not valid. Al-Busiri said: It is
weak and discontinued, as it says in “Ithaf Al-Khayrah Al-Mahrah” (6/165). And Sheikh Ahmad Shakir
said in Tahqeeq al-Musnad: It is very weak. Likewise, the investigators said in the edition of the Al-
Risalah Foundation, and it was classed as weak by al-Albani in “Weak al-Tirmidhi”.
https://sunnah.com/abudawud/42/128 - Here is the link see for yourself.
Claim - Non-Muslims have 7 intestines
Read the below for the answer to this.
https://icraa.org/hadith-eating-one-seven-intestines/
MUHAMMAD PBUH AND SCIENCE – WHAT THE AUTHOR DID NOT TELL YOU
We are going to address the claims the author made in the rest of their article but I want to focus on
the Prophetic Sunnah and what he told us to eat, drink, stay away from etc. Then you can see the
benefit in this. This is not meant to act as a proof of Prophethood but rather an indication of his
intelligence.
Also, I want to point out the Quran does not claim to be a book of science. The Quran is the final
revelation for mankind. Refer to the below lecture by Asadullah Ali
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJs5tuFw-UY - The Qur'an & Science: A Forced Marriage | MSA

OSU
Now let us focus on the Sunnah of eating and drinking.
108
Muhammad pbuh emphasised the importance of black seeds and the below study shows its
importance and significance
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ptr.6895
Before you try and counter that with a hadith from Bukhari etc watch the below
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeHb-Fxx7iY – 7.34mins – 8.50 mins
Muhammad pbuh advised to drink water whilst sitting down and to do so slowly. Check the below to
see the benefits of drinking whilst sat down.
https://www.awaaznation.com/lifestyle-news/health-tips/benefits-of-drinking-water-while-proper-
sitting/
Muhammad pbuh also emphasised how important foods such as dates, fruits, honey are. If you want
to learn more about his diet watch this short video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YKUowrE3QM
Muhammad pbuh was also a very physically fit person. He would run and wrestle with his companions
etc.
https://theislamicworkplace.com/2011/12/01/follow-the-sunna-of-the-Prophet-s-how-exercise-
benefits-the-brain-and-overall-performance/
So, in summary Muhammad pbuh encouraged us to have a good diet that was balanced and to
exercise. You may argue this is common sense and yes you are right the point I am making is that this
was a man in the 7th century whose Sunnah we are trying to emulate.
Jean Claude Van Damme who some of you may know if not google him he even acknowledges it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EeglaYVlCjM – Watch this video here where he says that Prophet

Muhammad was “very smart” and he “knew what’s good for the future, for the body”
Over-eating is also not liked. Have a read of the below
https://abuaminaelias.com/the-perils-of-overeating-in-islam/
Like I said all I am trying to show you is the wisdom of Muhammad pbuh. Maybe this section surprised
you and will encourage you to study his life properly and honestly. Let us continue with the response
now.
https://twitter.com/RioPedro2/status/1323584331932160000?s=19 – This provides plenty of

evidences which refutes critics who claim the Quran has “Scientific Errors”
MUHAMMAD ‫ ﷺ‬AND HISTORY
The author makes a massive mistake in this section. They assume that their religion is correct and
thus anything Islam says is false. This is prevalent in this part and the other subheading which you
will read later. The author yet again commits a fallacy. I will now go onto responding to their claims.
Claim – Crucifixion wrong
109
The author believes the Quran is historically inaccurate because it denies the crucifixion. They cite
4.157 of the Quran. This verse says,
“and for boasting, “We killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of Allah.” But they
neither killed nor crucified him—it was only made to appear so.1 Even those who argue for this
˹crucifixion˺ are in doubt. They have no knowledge whatsoever—only making assumptions. They
certainly did not kill him.”
The Quran makes the very bold claim that Jesus was not crucified. The author says this is false because
the Bible says it did happen (fallacy) and atheists agree on the crucifixion. So? One has to question
are the Gospels and the Bible itself reliable and the answer is no. Bart Erhman argues that they are
not reliable, the author will say but Bart says the crucifixion happened. This does not negate all the
work Bart has done showing how the Gospels are unreliable.
Lets brainstorm. Someone who looked like Jesus was crucified therefore people believe that it was
Jesus when it was not. A crucifixion happened but it was not Jesus who was crucified, this is what we
believe.
The author may bring up eyewitnesses again, unreliable. Moreover, The Nag Hammadi scrolls affirm
that early Christians did not believe in the crucifixion of Christ. This document also predates the New
Testament Canon.
I will now provide you with some resources in regards to what I have said above. I have also provided
initial videos such as common responses such as the crucifixion prophesised in the OT.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCiVhai5V94 – Nag Hammadi Scrolls
https://www.youtube.com/c/EFDawah/videos - This channel goes over the Bible testing its historicity.
Check the streams out. Perhaps the author should go on and defend their faith.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aeOX8tLQKo – The Messiah will be saved
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ok600aJ9o8g – Witnesses
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXc570f6V-k – OT prophecies
I do not want to focus on arguments against Christianity too much I only want to talk about it to show
the double standards of the author.
Claim – Abraham pbuh built the Kabba
In short, the hadith is talking about the very first time both the Bait ul Muqadas (Temple of
Jerusalem) and the Bait Ullah (Kaabah in Mecca) were constructed ... and this was before both
Abraham pbuh and Solomon. Both mosques have been lost and rebuilt multiple times.
Regarding the Kaabah we have narrations in tradition that it was first built by Adam and possibly
even before that by the angels. Similarly, there are narrations that the Bait ul Muqadas was
previously built by others and then rediscovered / rebuilt in the time of Solomon.
110
In the Torah there is mention of Melchizedek, a priest and ruler of Jerusalem in the time of Abraham
pbuh who was on the true religion of Allah.
bn Hajar writes the following in Fath Al Bari:
‫ ومستنده‬، ‫ ألن إبراهيم بن الكعبة وسليمان بن بيت المقدس وبينهما أكي من ألف سنة انتىه‬، ‫فيه إشكال‬: ‫قال ابن الجوزي‬
‫النسائ من حديث عبد للا بن عمرو بن العاص مرفوعا‬ِ ‫ِف أن سليمان عليه السالم هو الذي بن المسجد األقىص ما رواه‬
‫ائ من حديث رافع بن‬ِ ‫الطي‬
َ ‫وف‬
ِ ، ‫الحديث‬ " ‫ثا‬ ‫ثال‬ ‫خالال‬ ‫تعاىل‬ ‫بإسناد صحيح "أن سليمان لما بن بيت المقدس سأل للا‬
‫وف الحديث‬ِ " ‫ألقىص بناءه عىل يد سليمان‬
ِ ‫إئ‬
ِ : ‫ ثم أوح للا إليه‬، ‫عمية "أن داود عليه السالم ابتدأ ببناء بيت المقدس‬
‫ر‬
‫قصة‬
Ibn Jawzi said: The problem with this is that Abraham pbuh built the Kaabah, and Solomon built
the Bait ul Muqadas, and the time between them is more than a thousand years. It is narrated by
Nisai: "Solomon built the Bait ul Muqadas ... " And it is narrated by Tibrani that: "David started the
construction of Bait ul Muqadas and then Allah revealed that it would be built by Solomon"
He writes in reply:
‫وجوابه أن اإلشارة إىل أول البناء ووضع أساس المسجد وليس إبراهيم أول من بن الكعبة وال سليمان أول من بن بيت‬
‫ فجائز أن يكون بعضهم قد وضع بيت‬، ‫ ]فقد روينا أن أول من بن الكعبة آدم ثم انتش ولده ِف األرض‬471: ‫المقدس [ص‬
‫إن الحديث ال يدل عىل أن إبراهيم وسليمان لما بنيا‬: ‫القرطن‬
َِ ‫ وكذا قال‬، ‫المقدس ثم بن إبراهيم الكعبة بنص القرآن‬
‫غيهما‬ ‫ بل ذلك تجديد لما كان أسسه ر‬، ‫المسجدين ابتدءا وضعهما لهما‬
The reply is that this is talking about the first construction and laying of the foundation of the
masjids, and it is not Abraham pbuh who first built the Kaaba, nor was it Solomon who first built the
Bait ul Muqadas. The Kaabah was first built by Adam and then his progney spread through the earth.
Hence it is valid that someone laid the foundation of Bait ul Muqadas and then it was again built
later. The Quran associated the building of the Kaaba with Abraham pbuh, and it was similarly said
by Qurtubi that hadith doesn't provide evidence that Abraham pbuh and Solomon were the first to
build them, and their foundations were laid by others.
He goes on to narrate various narrations about who could have been the first to build Bait ul
Muqadas, and mentions traditions about the following:
‫يشبه أن يكون المسجد األقىص أول ما وضع بناءه بعض أولياء للا قبل داود وسليمان ثم داود وسليمان فزادا‬: ‫الخطائ‬
َِ ‫وقال‬
‫فيه ووسعاه فأضيف إليهما بناؤه‬
It is similar to Masjid Al Aqsa, which was first built by some Awliya (guardians / friends / pious
people) of Allah before David and Solomon, and then David and Solomon expanded it.
And:
‫المالئكة وقيل سام بن نوح عليه السالم وقيل‬: ‫لغيه أن أول من أسس المسجد األقىص آدم عليه السالم وقيل‬ ‫وقد رأيت ر‬
‫األخيين يكون الواقع من‬
‫ر‬ ‫ وعىل‬، ‫األولئ يكون ما وقع ممن بعدهما تجديدا كما وقع ِف الكعبة‬
‫ر‬ ‫ فعىل‬، ‫يعقوب عليه السالم‬
‫إبراهيم أو يعقوب أصال وتأسيسا ومن داود تجديدا لذلك وابتداء بناء فلم يكمل عىل يده حن أكمله سليمان عليه السالم‬
The narrations about who built the Masjid Al Aqsa first. By Adam, and it was said by the angels, ... by
Shem son of Noah ... by Abraham pbuh ... by Jacob ... the new construction was started by David and
by Solomon it was completed.
Another narration about Adam:
‫السي إىل‬
‫ فذكر ابن هشام ِف "كتاب التيجان "أن آدم لما بن الكعبة أمره للا ب ر‬، ‫إن آدم هو الذي أسس كال من المسجدين‬
‫ وبناء آدم للبيت مشهور‬، ‫بيت المقدس وأن يبنيه فبناه ونسك فيه‬
111
[Both the Masjids (Kaabah and Temple of Jerusalem) were built by Adam. He first built the Kaabah
in Mecca, then went to Jerusalem and built the Masjid ul Aqsa ...]
The above is taken from https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/36054/how-can-the-masjid-al-

aqsa-temple-of-jerusalem-be-built-40-years-after-the-kaa
If you study the history of the Kabba you will know. Moreover, if Muhammad pbuh said this as the
author has interpreted it then there would be people like the pagans and the Jews who would have
said that Muhammad pbuh was wrong. However, I can’t find such a report. By using logic and looking
at sources you can see what the hadith means. In short, the Kabbah has been rebuilt before and
Ibrahim and Ishmael peace be upon both of them rebuilt it. The Quran says in 3.96
“Indeed, the first House [of worship] established for mankind was that at Makkah - blessed and a
guidance for the worlds.”
This should now be clear for you.
The author does not believe that Abraham pbuh built the Kabba. What the author does not
understand is the Kabba has been rebuilt before as well.
When the Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬entered the Ka`ba and found in it the pictures of (Prophet) Abraham pbuh
and Mary. On that he said’ “What is the matter with them ( i.e. Quraish)? They have already heard
that angels do not enter a house in which there are pictures; yet this is the picture of Abraham
pbuh. And why is he depicted as practicing divination by arrows?” Bukhari 3351
Have a read of my “Is Makkah in the Bible article”

https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/is-makkah-in-the-bible/
Claim – Samaritan led the Israelites astray with a Golden calf
The below link addresses the so-called Samaritan error in the Quran.
https://www.islamic-awareness.org/quran/contrad/external/samaritan
Claim – Wrong stories in the Quran
I have already refuted the plagarism argument the author put forward. Essentially, what the author is
saying here the Quran is wrong because the Bible is right. Great logic. The author has commited a
fallacy they have assumed that everything in the Bible is correct and that anything apocrphyl is weak.
The concpet of how weak sources work in Islam is entirely different. In Islam it is only applicable to
hadith and focuses on Isnad.
So in short. This claim is meaningless.

112
Claim – Alexander the Great
This video will address the author’s claims in regards to Alexander the Great in the Quran based on
the verses Surah Kahf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taW1dn5Bn0k - Abdullah Sameer: Alexander is Dhu Al-

Qarnayn
Claim – Jesus disciples were not Muslims
The author has cited verses such as 3.52, 4.171 to show how the Quran says Jesus’s disciples were
Muslims. The author says its false because Gospels say so. The author also says early documents
show this is not true as well. What documents? You have not provided any? Are they reliable? Have
they been carbon dated?
A Muslim is someone who submits their will to the one true God. A Muslim can also be someone
how follows the religion of Islam. Yet again another meaningless point.
Claim – Muhammad pbuh in the Bible and Torah
I have already mentioned in the past the early Christians who affirmed that he was a Prophet like
Waraqa, the Abyssinian king, Byzantine emperor and his friend. Jews such as Abdullah Bin Salam
affirmed his Prophethood. No matter what I say and provide in this section the author will reject it.
Nevertheless, the fact early people of the Jewish and Christian faith affirmed his Prophethood. You
can watch the below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1T7AuTbv3E - Public Debate: Is Muhammed Prophesised in

the Bible? James White vs Zakir Hussain
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cv9BS-1ks4 - Public Debate: Is the line of Ishmael under the

covenant? - Zakir Hussain vs David Wood
Claim – Wrong about trinity
113
The author says the Quran got the trinity wrong. The author makes the claim the trinity is also
explicit as well. It’s not if it was there would not be this unitarian v trinitarian debate. What the
author does not tell you is that 5.73 of the Quran refers to the trinity and it says
“They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One
Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the
blasphemers among them” (5:73)
“O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah aught but the truth.
Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He
bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His messengers. Say
not "Trinity" : desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah: Glory be to Him: (far exalted is
He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah
as a Disposer of affairs.” (4:171)
Where is Mary mentioned in the above verses it isn’t. Go through the below and educate yourself. If
one person at any time throughout history has in anyway shape or form worshipped Mary then the
Quran is not wrong and calling upon her besides God like some Catholics do can be seen as worship.
http://muslim-responses.com/Mary_and_the_Trinity/Mary_and_the_Trinity_/
https://callingchristians.com/2012/01/21/refutation-the-qurans-inaccurate-description-of-the-
trinity/
https://www.call-to-monotheism.com/does_the_qur_an_misrepresent_christian_beliefs_
Claim – Forbidden fruit from the tree of life
The author says the Quran is wrong because the Bible is right. They then quote verses from the
Quran to say that Muhammad pbuh affirmed the Bible and past scriptures. This argument is loved by
Christians however if they were too just use their brain they would see that The Quran says God had
revealed the past scriptures and trusted it with the people who changed it. When the Quran says
none can change his words in Surah Kahf. What does this mean? Well when you read the full verse it
says,
“Recite what has been revealed to you from the Book of your Lord. None can change His Words,
nor can you find any refuge besides Him.”
Who is the above Quran verse addressed too? Muhammad pbuh? Could Muhammad pbuh read the
Bible and Torah. No, he was illiterate and they were not available in Arabic. What scriptures is meant
to be recited? The Quran. For more information regarding what the Christians call “The Islamic
Dilemma” Refer to the below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MilBXYCYEzw The Islamic Dilemma: does the Quran endorse

the Bible? [DEBUNKED]
114
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoArXuDJ7cQ – Here is the response from FMT before you
even consider sending Wood’s response
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZcOVKX6eqw NO EXCUSES now David! Qur'an EXPLICITLY

mentions corruption of Injil
https://mustafasahin33.wordpress.com/2016/08/26/does-the-quran-approve-the-bible-vs-does-
christians-approve-the-bible/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqCYN_T_WIU – A response to Wood and Shamoun’s

argument
The above 3 sources I believe provide enough proof to educate anyone who still believes this
ridiculous notion that is the so called “Islamic Dilemma”
OTHER LIES – A RESPONSE
Claim – Poison
I have a question for the author what is the difference between al-wateen and al-abhar? Also if what
the author has said is true why aren’t there any reports after his death saying he was a false Prophet
due to the poison? If this is true then many people and I mean many would have left Islam. Finally,
why didn’t Muhammad pbuh die straight away after consuming the poison? His companion who also
took the poison died more or less straight away. Yet Muhammad pbuh died years later? Do you
know how poison works? David Wood uses the poison argument. Read the below for a thorough
refutation of this subject.
monotheism.com/Prophet_muhammad__peace_be_upon_him__and_the_taking_of_poison
Claim – Quran has been matched
I have addressed this already.
like it. If your argument is “oh it sounds like the Quran therefore it meets it” you truly are devoid of
intellect.
failed these people existed 1400 years ago. Once you wake up and see past your own ignorance you
115
What an embarrassment? The author may say why was it banned in India? Provide proof it was first.
Secondly so what if it was it does not disprove how bad it is. Not everyone mainly the layman are not
aware of the criteria set out by the Quran regarding the challenge. Ignorant people think if it sounds
like the Quran then it is the Quran. I can’t even begin to fathom how devoid of intellect people must
be to think like that. I myself am no scholar or anything like that I can only read Arabic yet I know this.
Claim – Quran corrupted
I have already responded to this claim the author has made. I have refuted this section and provided
you sufficient evidence.
Claim – Command by Gospels
If you literally read the verse after 5.48 it says
“We have revealed to you ˹O Prophet˺ this Book with the truth, as a confirmation of previous
Scriptures and a supreme authority on them. So judge between them by what Allah has revealed,
and do not follow their desires over the truth that has come to you. To each of you We have ordained
a code of law and a way of life. If Allah had willed, He would have made you one community, but
His Will is to test you with what He has given ˹each of˺ you. So, compete with one another in doing
good. To Allah you will all return, then He will inform you ˹of the truth˺ regarding your differences.”
In other words, the parts that match agree on the contradictory parts reject. Read the below it is the
exact same as what I have said in a previous response.
The author says the Quran is wrong because the Bible is right. They then quote verses from the Quran
to say that Muhammad pbuh affirmed the Bible and past scriptures. This argument is loved by
Christians however if they were too just use their brain, they would see that The Quran says God had
revealed the past scriptures and trusted it with the people who changed it. When the Quran says none
can change his words in Surah Kahf. What does this mean? Well, when you read the full verse it says,
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQQf3BIrtEfIg8YkO0fsTCa7GXkIo0YK9 – Playlist refuting the

claim
116
The above source I believe provide enough proof to educate anyone who still believes this ridiculous
notion that is the so called “Islamic Dilemma”
Claim – Evil eye bath
Says who? The author. This is not the only thing in Islam one can do to seek protection from the evil
eye. Have a read of this blow.
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/20954/the-evil-eye-and-protection-against-it
Claim – Lied about what Allah would do to him
Is the author aware of the term humility? Is the author also aware of chronology and the progressive
revelation?
https://www.call-to-monotheism.com/was_Prophet_muhammad_uncertain_of_his_own_salvation_
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ei8cgmTvPI
Claim - People who look up during prayer will have their eyesight taken away
Is the author aware of metaphorical or even figurative language? If they are not how did you
manage to be successful in school? Prayer in Islam is very important and concentration should be
maintained throughout. The book of hadith the author has quoted from is literally called the book of
prayers. You should read a book called “Developing khushu in the prayer” You will learn the
importance of concentration in prayer and it talks about how the early Muslims prayed. The author
must think that when people say “its raining cats and dogs” it is literally raining cats and dogs. They
can’t seem to comprehend metaphors, figurative language and emphasis.
Claim – Prayer recited 7 times would save someone
117
The authors opinion again? This is amazing how many times has the author provided their own
opinion and has tried to twist it as a fact? There is nothing wrong with this. Remember as well
everything will happen according to Allah’s will. For example, go through the below
https://bit.ly/3giVWrs
This is a meaningless point by the author who yet again has chosen to focus on quantity rather than
quality and their ignorance of Dua and thing such as Istighfar.
Claim – Wrong about the hour
The author has continously surprises me. Here they are talking about the day of judgement.
Interestingly I tried looking for the reference the author provided and all I have found is the arabic for
it below
َ َ َ ْ َ َ ْ َ ْ َ ْ َُ ْ َ َ ْ ْ ُ ْ ُ ْ َ ُ َ َ َّ َ ُ َ ْ َ َ ُ ْ َ َ َْ ْ َ ُ َ َ َّ
‫ئ بن ال ُمكتب عن بدي ٍل عن أ َ ِئ ال َج ْوزاء عن عائشة‬ ‫يد قال إسحاق حدثنا حس ر‬ ٍ ‫َحدثنا إ ْس َحاق ي ْع ِن األز َرق َوي ْح ر َن بن َسع‬
َ َ َ َ َ َ َ َ ْ ِّ َ َ ُ ْ َ ْ ْ ْ َّ َ َ َّ ُ ََْ َ ََ َُ َ َ ُ ُ َ َ َ ْ َ َ
‫ئ َوكان إذا َرك َع ل ْم‬ ‫الصَلة بالتكب ري َوالق َر َاءة ب الحمد ّلل رب العالم‬ ‫اّلل عل ْيه َو َسل َم يفتتح‬ ‫ول اّلل َصىل‬ ‫قالت كان رس‬
َ َ ً َ َ َ ْ َ َّ ‫ُ َ ْ َ ُ َ َ ْ ُ َ ِّ ْ ُ َ َ ْ َ ْ َ َ َ َ َ َ ِ َ َ َ َ َ ْ َ ُ ْ ُّ ُ َ ْ َ ْ ُ ْ َ ر‬ ْ ُ َ ْ َ َ َ َ ُ َ َْ ْ َ َْ
‫وع لم يسجد حن يست ِوي قائما وإذا‬ ‫ك‬‫الر‬ ‫ن‬ ‫م‬ ‫ه‬ ‫س‬ ‫أ‬
‫ر‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ف‬‫ر‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ذ‬‫إ‬ ‫ان‬ ‫ك‬‫و‬ ‫ك‬ ‫ل‬‫ذ‬ ‫ئ‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ب‬ ‫ن‬‫ك‬ ‫ل‬‫و‬ ‫ه‬ ‫ب‬‫و‬ ‫ص‬ ‫ي‬ ‫م‬ ‫ل‬‫و‬ ‫ه‬ ‫س‬ ‫أ‬
‫ر‬ ‫ص‬ ‫خ‬ ‫ش‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ح‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ال‬ ‫يرفع رأسه وق‬
َ ََ َ ْ َّ َ ْ َ َ ْ َ َ َ ِ َ َ َّ َّ ْ َ َ ْ َ ِّ ُ ُ ُ َ َ َ َ ْ َ َ ً َ َ َ ْ َ َّ َ ْ ُ ْ َ ْ َ ُ ُّ ْ ُ َ َْ َ ََ
‫ئ التحية وكان ينىه عن عقب الشيطان وكان‬ ِ ‫رفع رأسه من السجود لم يسجد حن يست ِوي جالسا ق َالت وكان ي َقول َ ِف كل ركعت ر‬
َ َ َ َّ َ َ َّ ُ ْ َ َ َ َ ْ َ ْ َ ْ َ َ ُ َ ‫ان َي ْن َىه أ ْن َي ْف َي‬ َ َ َ َ ْ ُْ ُ َ ْ ُ َْ َ َ ْ ُْ ُ َ ْ ُ ََْ
‫ال ي ْح ر َن‬ ‫الصَلة بالت ْسليم ق‬ ‫ش أ َحدنا ذراعيه كالكلب وكان يختم‬ ‫يفيش رجله اليشى وينصب رجله اليمن وك‬
َ َ َ ْ َ َ ْ َ ْ َ ْ َ ْ َ ُ ْ َ ُ ِّ َ ُ ْ ْ َ ُ َ َ َّ َ َ ْ َ ِ ُ ْ ُ َّ َ ُ َ َ َّ َ ُ َّ َ َ ِ ْ ْ َ َ َ َ ْ َ ْ َ ُ ِ َ ْ َ َ ِ َ َ
‫ن أ َ ِئ الجوزاء عن عائشة‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ل‬‫ي‬‫د‬‫ب‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ع‬ ‫م‬ ‫ل‬‫ع‬ ‫م‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ئ‬ ‫ر‬ ‫س‬ ‫ح‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ث‬ ‫د‬ ‫ح‬ ‫ر‬ ‫ف‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ج‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ب‬ ‫د‬ ‫م‬‫ح‬ ‫م‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ن‬‫ث‬ ‫د‬ ‫وكان يكره أن يف ِيش ذراعيه افياش السبع ح‬
ُ َّ َ َ ْ َ َ َ ُ َ ْ َ ُ ٍ ْ ُ َ َ َ ُ َ ْ َ َ َ َ َ َ َ َ ْ ٍ َ َ ُ َ َ َ َ ُ ُ َ ِ َ َ ْ َ َ َ َّ َ
‫أنها قالت كان رسول اّلل صىل اّلل عليه وسلم فذكر مثله وقال يشخص رأسه وقال افياش السب ِع‬
The above translates as
It is narrated on the authority of Ayesha Siddiqah that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be
upon him) used to start the prayer with a takbeer and recite the Qur'aan with Surah al-Faatihah. When
he bowed, he would not do the second prostration until he had sat up straight and recited "Al-
Tahyaat" on every two rak'ahs. He used to forbid any of us to spread our arms like a dog and used to
say salaam at the end of prayers.
http://equranlibrary.com/hadith/musnadahmad/815/22947;jsessionid=8X_griZ9pU1_7x9ptHTZWn5
Bnw_tqKYydn4M07-K.vps217591 – Use Chrome and look for the translate symbol.
Maybe the author made a mistake? Or perhaps they haven’t actually checked the reference
themselves.
In regards to judgement day. Muhammad pbuh essentially saying that it is soon doesn’t mean that
since it has not happened in 1400 years Islam is false. This is stupid. There are many signs of the day
od judgement such as the death of the Prophet pbuh. In fact many of these signs have happened and
are happening here is a video explaining a few
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAohpT1toKs - 40 SIGNS OF THE JUDGEMENT DAY HAPPENING

NOW!
So in short it is another meaningless point made by the author. We do not know the last hour Jesus
does not know it either neither does the Holy Spirit. The author believes that the Father is the one
who knows the hour. In Islam we believe that only God knows the hour as shown by the below verse
118
“Verily, the Hour is coming and My Will is to keep it hidden that every person may be rewarded for
that which he strives.” 20.15
How the author ends their article
This is how the author ends their article
Is this the case? Have you gone through what I have linked throughout? If you have you will know
this is not the case. The only one who has lied is the author and I have shown this not just in this
section but throughout this whole document. Don’t you agree?
If I have missed anything or not provided enough detail for one of you then check this link and see if
is in there. Now it is time to look at Christianity.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QHuzR1AwFctItMCTuhD6i2FcN96i7djo/view
HYPORCISY – LETS LOOK AT CHRISTIANTIY
I am expecting to not find a single error at all in the Bible. If I find one then it must mean according
to the authors logic, Christianity is false.
I will stress this again; I am using the exact same mindset and logic of the author. The reason is to
prove the ridiculous nature of the authors logic. You will notice this is what I have done
throughout this response when looking at the authors religion.
Earthquakes are caused by God’s anger. Job 9:5 and Psalms 18.7. This is false. We know from
geologists that earthquakes are caused by a sudden slip on a fault. ... When the stress on the edge
overcomes the friction, there is an earthquake that releases energy in waves that travel through the
earth's crust and cause the shaking that we feel. In California there are two plates - the Pacific Plate
and the North American Plate.
119
Genesis 2.13 says “And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the
whole land of Ethiopia.” This is false.
Matthew 4.8 refers to a mountain where you can see all kingdoms of the world. This is false no such
mountain exists.
The Bible doesn’t specifically mention how old the earth is but doing some calculations based on
Genesis we see that the earth is 6000 years old Adam was created on day 6, so there were five days
before him. If we add up the dates from Adam to Abraham pbuh, we get about 2,000 years, using the
Masoretic Hebrew text of Genesis 5 and 11.3 Whether Christian or secular, most scholars would agree
that Abraham pbuh lived about 2,000 B.C. (4,000 years ago). 2000+4000 = 6000 years old. This is false.
We know the earth is way older than that.
Isiah 11.12 says that the earth has 4 corners. Other verses like Psalms 24.2, Jeremiah 10:13, Daniel
4:10-11, Zechariah 9:10, Matthew 4:8, Revelation 1:7. Some may say that the Bible is not suggesting
that the Earth is flat but that is certainly what is implied.
I do not want to provide loads of examples; I have just provided 5. Perhaps the author can explain
these. But as I have said I am simply using the same logic as the author. They do not have the decency
to study Islam properly as shown by their whole website so how can the author expect people to study
their religion properly.
The author mentioned ajwa dates. Mark 16.18 says “they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any
deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.” Jesus says
these things according to what I have seen in the red letter KJV Bible. Would the author drink the
poison? I hope they wouldn’t because they would die. After all the ending of Mark 16 is not even
authentic. Even David Wood admits this. He was offered poison as well and he admitted Mark 16.18
isn’t authentic. The author believes in a book with inauthentic parts in it. That’s what they want you
to believe in as well.
CONCLUSION – WHAT HAVE WE LEARNT
The author titled the article Muhammad pbuh’s “undeniable lies” Is this really the case after
everything I have shown you? No, it is not. The author’s logic is ridiculous I have shown this by
critiquing their religion with the same approach they took to Islam. Therefore, the author must accept
Christianity is a lie unless they realise their logic is ridiculous and they go through the evidence I have
provided. This point is something that the author should do with every one of my responses to their
articles. When I get to the end of this response, I will list the options that the author has. Then we will
see how they respond to this.
It is time to refute another article.
MUHAMMAD ‫ﷺ‬: IMPEACHED BY HIS OWN TEACHINGS – A RESPONSE
Here is the URL to the article that I am responding to
120
https://www.whowasmuhammad.org/impeached-tricked
This will be very interesting. Some of the claims are repeated so I will provide the same evidence as I
have in prior responses. The author has included 6 claims which they have mentioned before in other
articles. They also repeated the same point twice within this article. In relation to poison and
discharge. Also, some of the points are very similar. The author has once again focused on quantity.
They do mention on their website that “some of the facts are repeated, as some of them can fall into
more than one category.” I however find it ridiculous how within the same article they repeat their
points. You will see this if you click on the URL. They have clearly focused on quantity to subconsciously
deceive their audience that due to the amount of claims they have made they are right.
The inference here is that the author believes they have found errors within Islam’s teachings that
contradict each other. Therefore, I am expecting to find no contradictions at all in the Bible as well as
no claims in Christianity that the author used against Islam.
Claim – Muhammad pbuh poisoned
I have already provided you with the evidence that refutes this here it is again.
I have a question for the author what is the difference between al-wateen and al-abhar? Also, if
what the author has said is true why aren’t there any reports after his death saying he was a false
Prophet due to the poison? If this is true then many people and I mean many would have left Islam.
Finally, why didn’t Muhammad pbuh die straight away after consuming the poison? His companion
who also took the poison died more or less straight away. Yet Muhammad pbuh died years later? Do
you know how poison works? David Wood uses the poison argument. Read the below for a thorough
refutation of this subject.
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/muhammad-pbuh-poisoned/ - Backup link
Claim – Spoke bad about bells but revelation came to him via bells
This is false. Muhammad pbuh did not commit shirk. Read this article first
https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2010/10/tough-physical-consditions-revelation.html?m=1
If you were honest you would not make such a claim, the below is an excerpt from the article
Some refer to the Ahadith which say that “Bell is the instrument of Devil” and relating to the Ahadith
in which Prophet (PBUH) said that at the time of revelation he listens to voice like ringing of the bell,
they argue that it means the experience of revelation had Satan’s rule in it.
This is over simplification! We have in detail discussed the narration about revelation and sound like
ringing of the bell. The very fact that Prophet (PBUH) termed the voice he heard LIKE the voice of
ringing bells. The word ‘LIKE’ is significant which proves the absurdity of the parallel drawn between
different Ahadith. Ringing of the bells is by no means so novel a phenomenon that Prophet (PBUH)
would fail to describe it with certainty instead of making it just an object of simile.
Claim – Committed Shirk.
121
The author refers to the Al-Laat, Uzza, Manaat argument many times this misconception has been
dubbed as the Satanic verses. It is a really silly argument check the below links for the refutation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1ylgiVAc6I – refutes the satanic verses
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/moon-god-al-laatuzzamanaat/ - This talks

about these idols
Also refer to this.
Western academia know that this is fabrication. John Burton states that it has no historical basis. The
above is an excerpt from his book.
122
It is inauthentic. As shown in past sections even western Academia refute this. John Burton was the
one I showed, Angelica Neuwirth who is a professor of Quranic studies from Freie University, Berlin
Germany and Nicolai Sinai who is a professor of Islamic Studies at the Oriental Institute Oxford
University and a fellow of Pembroke College, Oxford.
Imam Razi in his commentary states that the hadith scholars have declared this story to be weak. Ibn
Khuzayama declared it to be forged from heretics (Fakhar as-Din ar-Razi Tafsir Al Kabir commentary
on Surah 22:52)
Ibn Hazm also declared the Satanic verses is a forgery and there is no reliable transmission for it (Ibn
Hazm, Al Fasl Filmalal 2/308 – 309,311)
Ibn Hajar admits himself that mursal narrations are not accepted at all. Imam Muslim in his
introduction to Sahih Muslim said that mursal narration can’t be held narrative.
123
The author says the below what do they demonstrate a complete lack of understanding. I do not think
that a Christian who believes faith alone gets you to heaven should be speaking about repentance
when in their religion a blood sacrifice was needed for sins to be forgiven. They think they have
discovered a contradiction.
Allah does NOT forgive shirk:
Indeed, Allah does not forgive association with Him, but He forgives what is less than that for whom
He wills. And he who associates others with Allah has certainly fabricated a tremendous sin. — Sura
4:48
124
Indeed, Allah does not forgive association with Him, but He forgives what is less than that for whom
He wills. And he who associates others with Allah has certainly gone far astray.— Sura 4:116
The sin of shirk will NOT be forgiven by itself,WITHOUT repentance while all other sins COULD be
forgiven by Allah for whom He wills.
The fact that shirk will not be forgiven is in the Hereafter.
In this world, if one asks for forgiveness, if one is repenting, all sins, including shirk would be forgiven
Insha Allah.
See the invitation for repentance,
Say, “O My servants who have transgressed against themselves [by sinning], do not despair of the
mercy of Allah . Indeed, Allah forgives all sins. Indeed, it is He who is the Forgiving, the Merciful.”
And return [in repentance] to your Lord and submit to Him before the punishment comes upon you;
then you will not be helped.(39:53-54)
So in case of repentance, all sins, including shirk, could be forgiven by Allah
Now the confusion of the critic regarding those Israelites who had worshiped calf.
And the people of Moses made, after [his departure], from their ornaments a calf – an image having
a lowing sound. Did they not see that it could neither speak to them nor guide them to a way? They
took it [for worship], and they were wrongdoers.
And when regret overcame them and they saw that they had gone astray, they said, “If our Lord
does not have mercy upon us and forgive us, we will surely be among the losers.”(7;148-149)
So, it is clearly mentioned that they repented…
if anyone asks for repentance, every single sin is forgivable, by the will of Allah
And finally about Prophet Ibrahim a.s, whose strong opposition and hatred for those who are
associated with Allah,is clearly mentioned in Quran
See (6:74-79) and specially (26:77)
And when he saw the sun rising, he said, “This is my lord; this is greater.” But when it set, he said, “O
my people, indeed I am free from what you associate with Allah .
Indeed, I have turned my face toward He who created the heavens and the earth, inclining toward
truth, and I am not of those who associate others with Allah .”(6:78-79)
And note His words for those who were associated with Allah
Indeed, they are enemies to me, except the Lord of the worlds (26:77)
So it was all to clarify the concept of One God, before His people. The stars, moon and sun were all
SAID to be god, just SAID by Him once but later He clearly denied to consider them as God, because
of their weakness or defect and He also mentioned the reason publicly, so it was all to make his
people understand. Not his personal views
https://nocontradictionsinquran.wordpress.com/2015/01/23/response-54/
https://nocontradictionsinquran.wordpress.com/2015/01/23/response-59/
125
The above links refute the author.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-pSv9w32FY – A very short video on repentance
Claim – Affirmed Jesus pbuh as at true Prophet of God
A fallacy again. The author pre supposes that their Bible is 100% correct. You can’t do that this is a
fallacy. The author should know that Muslims believe that the Bible has been changed and that the
Quran says scripture was revealed to past nations and we believe in WHAT WAS REVEALED. I have
already discussed this in past sections. The author continues with this though in the very same
article.
Claim –Affirmed Moses pbuh pbuh as a Prophet then talks about satanic verses
Another repeated claim which I have addressed. Look at this hadith
The people of the Scripture used to read the Torah in Hebrew and explain it to the Muslims in
Arabic. Then Allah's Messenger (‫ )ﷺ‬said, "Do not believe the people of the Scripture, and do not
disbelieve them, but say, 'We believe in Allah and whatever has been revealed...' (3.84)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqCYN_T_WIU – You can watch this video
Very clear isn’t it? I have already provided evidence regarding this in past sections here it is again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoArXuDJ7cQ – Here is the response from FMT before you

even consider sending Wood’s response
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZcOVKX6eqw NO EXCUSES now David! Qur'an EXPLICITLY

mentions corruption of Injil
https://mustafasahin33.wordpress.com/2016/08/26/does-the-quran-approve-the-bible-vs-does-
christians-approve-the-bible/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqCYN_T_WIU – A response to Wood and Shamoun’s

argument
The author refers to the Al-Laat, Uzza, Manatt argument many times this misconception has been

about these idols
126
Also refer to this.
127
on Surah 22:52)
Claim – Moses pbuh a true Prophet. Muhammad pbuh affirmed the Torah.
Refuted this already. Check the evidences under “Claim – Affirmed Moses pbuh pbuh as a Prophet
then talks about Satanic verses”
Claim – Judge by the Gospels 5.47
Another repeated claim. I will provide the same response as I did when the author first made this
claim.
128
If you literally read the verse after 5.48 it says
“We have revealed to you ˹O Prophet˺ this Book with the truth, as a confirmation of previous
Scriptures and a supreme authority on them. So judge between them by what Allah has revealed,
and do not follow their desires over the truth that has come to you. To each of you We have ordained
a code of law and a way of life. If Allah had willed, He would have made you one community, but
His Will is to test you with what He has given ˹each of˺ you. So, compete with one another in doing
good. To Allah you will all return, then He will inform you ˹of the truth˺ regarding your differences.”
In other words, the parts that match Muslims agree with and the contradictory parts we reject. Read
the below it is the exact same as what I have said in a previous response.
The author says the Quran is wrong because the Bible is right. They then quote verses from the
Quran to say that Muhammad pbuh affirmed the Bible and past scriptures. This argument is loved by
Christians however if they were too just use their brain, they would see that The Quran says God had
revealed the past scriptures and trusted it with the people who changed it.
Claim – Quran has been matched
Another repeated claim. Here is what I said before. I will just repeat my response.
like it. If your argument is “oh it sounds like the Quran therefore it meets it” you truly are devoid of
intellect.
failed, these people existed 1400 years ago. Once you wake up and see past your own ignorance you
Claim – Gabriel prayed for healing yet Muhammad pbuh died
https://abuaminaelias.com/dailyhadithonline/2018/10/29/ruqyah-jibreel-dua-Prophet/ - Read this
Muhammad pbuh was a man and died there is nothing wrong with this at all. The hadith the author
quoted refers to when he was dying and there is no mention of Gabriel.
Claim - Physical characteristics determined by discharge
Go through the below links which answer the claims which the author made in their articles
129
https://qurananswers.me/2017/08/26/gender-determination-hadith/ - Read this first, then the
article below.
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/175100/views-of-the-scholars-and-doctors-on-the-role-of-the-
mans-water-and-the-womans-water-in-determining-the-gender-of-the-foetus - Now have a read of
this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Z4kN8Q-8yk – it is in Arabic but with the way the author has

portrayed themselves they should understand this video.
Claim – Had to be convinced he was a Prophet
This is talking about the revelation story. Muhammad pbuh did not know what happened in the cave
when he came back to his wife, she took him to Waraqa a Christian who after listening to what
Muhammad pbuh said he affirmed that he was Prophet. I have already mentioned this in past sections.
Abdullah Bin Salam a Jew affirmed his Prophethood as did the King of Abyssinia and so did the
byzantine emperor and his friend.
Claim – Muhammad pbuh possessed
Ibn Ishaq again. Can you guess the authenticity of the report? That’s right inauthentic, it is
disconnected. Its narrated by someone who was not even there by a man called Ubaid bin Umayr Al
Laythy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPvZ_xNePzo – Watch this whole video it addresses the claim

and addresses many other claims as well
Claim – Muhammad pbuh had magic worked on him
You can read this article which refute the authors claim.
http://muslim-responses.com/Black_Magic_on_the_Prophet/Black_Magic_on_the_Prophet_/
If anything, the claim the author referred to before regarding Gabriel praying for Muhammad pbuh
is evident here.
Aisha reported: If the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, was afflicted by
something, the Angel Gabriel would supplicate over him, saying, “In the name of Allah, may he
cure you, may he heal you from every ailment, from the evil of the envier when he envies, and
from the evil of every eye.”
Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 2185
Claim – Mountain into Gold to prove his Prophethood but did not do it
Irrelevant he proved himself in many other ways.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QHuzR1AwFctItMCTuhD6i2FcN96i7djo/view - Press ctrl + f and

search for Prophethood.
https://iera.org/downloads/forbidden-prophecies/ - A free book
https://www.hamzatzortzis.com/the-Prophetic-truth-why-muhammad-is-gods-final-messenger/
Claim – Tie a demon to the Masjid
130
Again irrelevant. This has no relevance at all the title of the authors article. The hadith the author
cites is below
The Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬said, "A strong demon from the Jinns came to me yesterday suddenly, so as to spoil
my prayer, but Allah enabled me to overpower him, and so I caught him and intended to tie him to
one of the pillars of the Mosque so that all of you might see him, but I remembered the invocation
of my brother Solomon: 'And grant me a kingdom such as shall not belong to any other after me.'
(38.35) so I let him go cursed."
There is nothing wrong with this at all. If you have gone through this you would know it is irrelevant.

Claim – The hour was close
Repeated claim.
The author has continously surprises me. Here they are talking about the day of judgement.
Interestingly I tried looking for the reference the author provided and all I have found is the arabic for
it below
َ َ َ ْ َ َ ْ َ ْ َ ْ َُ ْ َ َ ْ ْ ُ ْ ُ ْ َ ُ َ َ َّ َ ُ َ ْ َ َ ُ ْ َ َ َْ ْ َ ُ َ َ َّ
‫ئ بن ال ُمكتب عن بدي ٍل عن أ َ ِئ ال َج ْوزاء عن عائشة‬ ‫يد قال إسحاق حدثنا حس ر‬ ٍ ‫َحدثنا إ ْس َحاق ي ْع ِن األز َرق َوي ْح ر َن بن َسع‬
َ َ َ َ َ َ َ َ ْ ِّ َ َ ُ ْ َ ْ ْ ْ َّ َ َ َّ ُ ََْ َ ََ َُ َ َ ُ ُ َ َ َ ْ َ َ
‫ئ َوكان إذا َرك َع ل ْم‬ ‫ر‬ ‫الصَلة بالتكب ر ِي َوالق َر َاء ْة ب الحمد ّلل رب العالم‬ ‫اّلل عل ْيه َو َسل َم يفتتح‬ ْ ‫ول اّلل َصىل‬ ‫قالت كان رس‬
َ َ ً َ َ َ ْ َ َّ َ ْ ُ ْ َ ْ َ ُ ُّ ْ ُ َ َ َ َ َ َ َ َ َ َ َ َ ْ َ ْ َ َ ُ ْ ِّ َ ُ ْ َ َ ُ َ َ ُ ْ ُ َ ْ َ َ َ َ ُ َ َْ ْ َ َْ
‫وع لم يسجد حن يست ِوي قائما وإذا‬ ‫يرفع ْرأسه وقال يح رن يشخص رأسه ولم يصوبه ولكن ب رئ ذلك وكان إذا رفع رأسه من الرك‬
َ َ َ َّ َ ْ َ َ ْ َ َ َ ِ َ َّ ْ ‫ول ف ُك ِّل َر ْك َع َت‬ َ َ َ ْ َ َ ً َ َ َ ْ َ َّ َ ْ ُ ْ َ ْ َ
ُ ‫ان َي ُق‬ ُّ ‫َر َف َع َرأ َس ُه م ْن‬
ُ ‫الس‬
‫ئ التح َّية َوكان ينىه عن عقب الش ْيطان َوكان‬ ِ ‫ر‬ ِ ‫ك‬‫و‬ ‫ت‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ق‬ ‫ا‬ ‫س‬ ‫ال‬ ‫ج‬ ‫ي‬‫و‬ِ ‫ت‬‫س‬ ‫ي‬ ‫ن‬ ‫ح‬ ‫د‬‫ج‬ ‫س‬ ‫ي‬ ‫م‬ ‫ل‬ ‫ود‬ ‫ج‬
َ َ َ َّ َ َ َّ ُ ْ َ َ َ َ ْ َ ْ َ ْ َ َ َ ُ َ َ َ َ ْ َ ْ َ َ ْ َ َ َ َ َ ْ ُ ْ ُ َ ْ ُ ْ َ َ َ ْ ُ ْ ُ َ ْ ُ َ ْ َ
‫ال ي ْح ر َن‬ ‫الص ََلة بالت ْسليم ق‬ ‫يف ِيش ِرجله اليشى وينصب ِرجله اليمن وكان ينىه أن يف ِيش أحدنا ذراعيه كالكلب وكان يختم‬
َ َ َ ْ َ َ ْ ْ َ ْ َ ُ ْ َ ُ ِّ َ ُ ْ ْ َ ُ َ َ َّ َ َ ْ َ ُ ْ ُ َّ َ ُ َ َ َّ َ ُ َّ َ َ ْ ْ َ َ َ َ ْ َ ْ َ ُ َ ْ َ َ َ َ
‫ن أ َ ِئ ال َج ْوزاء عن عائشة‬ ‫ع‬ ‫ل‬‫وكان يكره أن يف ِيش ذراعيه افياش السبع حدثنا محمد بن جعفر حدثنا حسئ المعلم عن بدي‬
ُ َّ َ َ ْ َ َ َ ُ َ ْ َ ُ ٍ ْ ُ َ َ َ ُ َ ْ َ ‫َ َّ َ َ َ ْ َ َ ِ َ ُ ُ َ َ َ َ ُ َ َ ٍ ْ َ َ َ َ َ َ َ ر‬
‫أنها قالت كان رسول اّلل صىل اّلل عليه وسلم فذكر مثله وقال يشخص رأسه وقال افياش السب ِع‬
The above translates as
It is narrated on the authority of Ayesha Siddiqah that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be
upon him) used to start the prayer with a takbeer and recite the Qur'aan with Surah al-Faatihah. When
he bowed, he would not do the second prostration until he had sat up straight and recited "Al-
Tahyaat" on every two rak'ahs. He used to forbid any of us to spread our arms like a dog and used to
say salaam at the end of prayers.
http://equranlibrary.com/hadith/musnadahmad/815/22947;jsessionid=8X_griZ9pU1_7x9ptHTZWn5
Bnw_tqKYydn4M07-K.vps217591 – Use Chrome and look for the translate symbol.
Maybe the author made a mistake? Or perhaps they haven’t actually checked the reference
themselves. Either way they can address this in their response if they do decide to respond.
In regards to judgement day. Lets take the author at their word Muhammad pbuh essentially said that
it is soon . It doesn’t mean that since it has not happened in 1400 years Islam is false. This is stupid.
There are many signs of the day of judgement such as the death of the Prophet pbuh. In fact many of
these signs have happened and are happening here is a video explaining a few
131
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAohpT1toKs - 40 SIGNS OF THE JUDGEMENT DAY HAPPENING
NOW!
So in short it is another meaningless point made by the author. We do not know the last hour Jesus
does not know it either neither does the Holy Spirit. The author believes that the Father is the one
who knows the hour. In Islam we believe that only God knows the hour as shown by the below verse
“Verily, the Hour is coming and My Will is to keep it hidden that every person may be rewarded for
that which he strives.” 20.15
Claim – Not to ask questions
The author makes many claims here. So I have pasted it and highligted it and we will address the
authors points. The Quran verses the author cites are below
(5:101) “Believers! Do not ask of the things which, if made manifest to you, would vex you; for, if
you should ask about them while the Qur'an is being revealed, they will be made manifest to you.
Allah has pardoned whatever happened in the past. He is All-Forgiving, All-Forbearing.”
(5:102 “Indeed some people before you had asked such questions and in consequence fell into
unbelief.”
The author cherry picks these verses ignores commentary on it and instead tries to argue that it is
suspicious and indirectly argues that Muhammad pbuh was a con artist. As you can guess, this is yet
another example of the authors lies.
For verses 101 read the below
People used to ask the Prophet (peace be on him) many questions which were of no practical
relevance to either religious or day-to-day affairs. Once, for instance, a person asked the Prophet
(peace be on him) in the presence of a crowd: 'Who is my real father?' Likewise, many people used
to ask unnecessary questions about legal matters. By these uncalled-for inquiries, they sought
knowledge of matters which had for good reasons, been deliberately left undetermined by the Law-
giver. In the Qur'an, for example. Pilgrimage had been declared obligatory. A person who became
aware of this came to the Prophet (peace be on him) and inquired: 'Has it been made obligatory to
perform it every year?' To this the Prophet (peace be on him) made no reply. When he inquired for
the second time the Prophet (peace be on him) again stayed silent. On being asked for the third
time, he said: 'Pity on you! Had I uttered "Yes" in reply to your question, it would have become
obligatory to perform it every year. And then you would not have been able to observe it and would
have been guilty of disobedience.' (See Bukhari, 'Riqaq', 22; 'Zakah', 53; I'tisam', 3; 'Adab', 6;
132
Muslim, 'Aqdiyah', 10, 11, 13, 14; Darimi, 'Riqaq', 38; Muwatta', 'Kalam', 20; Ahmad b. Hanbal,
Musnad, vol. 2, pp. 327, 360, 367; vol. 4, pp. 246, 249, 250, 251, 255 - Ed.)
The Prophet (peace be on him) discouraged people from being over-inquisitive and unnecessarily
curious about every question. We find in the Hadith the following saying from the Prophet (peace
be on him): 'The worst criminal among the Muslims is the one who inquired about something which
had not been made unlawful, and then it was declared so, because of his inquiry.' (Bukhari, I'tisam',
3; Muslim, Fada'il', 132, 133; Abu Da'ud, 'Sunnah', 6 - Ed.) According to another tradition the Prophet
(peace be on him) said: 'God has imposed upon you certain obligations, do not neglect them; He has
imposed certain prohibitions, do not violate them; He has imposed certain limits, do not even
approach them; and He has remained silent about certain matters - and has not done so out of
forgetfulness - do not pursue them.' (See Towards Understanding the Qur'an, vol. I, (Surah 2, n. 110
- Ed.)
In both these traditions an important fact has been called to our attention. In matters where the
Law-giver has chosen to lay down certain injunctions only broadly, without any elaborate details,
or quantitative specifications, He has done so not because of neglect or forgetfulness. Such seeming
omissions are deliberate, and the reason thereof is that He does not desire to place limitations upon
people, but prefers to allow them latitude and ease in following His commandments. Now there are
some people who make unnecessary inquiries, cause elaborately prescribed, inflexibly determined
and restrictive regulations to be added to the Law. Some others, in cases where such details are in
no way deducible from the text, resort to analogical reasoning, thereby turning a broad general rule
into an elaborate law full of restrictive details, and an unspecified into a specified rule. Both sorts of
people put Muslims in great danger. For, in the area of belief, the more detailed the doctrines to
which people are required to subscribe, the more problematic it becomes to do so. Likewise, in legal
matters, the greater the restriction, the greater the likelihood of violation.
For verse 102 read the below
Some people first indulged in hair-splitting arguments about their laws and dogma, and thereby
wove a great web of credal elaborations and legal minutiae. Then they became enmeshed in this
same web and thus became guilty of dogmatic errors and the violation of their own religious laws.
The people referred to here are the Jews, and the Muslims who followed in their footsteps and left
no stone unturned, despite the warnings contained in the Qur'an and in the sayings of the Prophet
Muhammad (peace be on him).
Source used - https://islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php?sura=5&verse=101&to=104
You can refer to this article as well which provides more references for you
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/187398/commentary-on-the-verse-o-you-who-believe-ask-not-
about-things-which-if-made-plain-to-you-may-cause-you-trouble
The author then cites Bukhari 24:555 which I have pasted below
The clerk of Al-Mughira bin Shu`ba narrated, "Muawiya wrote to Al-Mughira bin Shu`ba: Write to
me something which you have heard from the Prophet (p.b.u.h) ." So Al-Mughira wrote: I heard the
Prophet saying, "Allah has hated for you three things: -1. Vain talks, (useless talk) that you talk too
much or about others. -2. Wasting of wealth (by extravagance) -3. And asking too many questions
(in disputed religious matters) or asking others for something (except in great need). (See Hadith
No. 591, Vol. Ill)
133
The hadith refers to disputed religious matters. What constitutes this? Well, if you have gone through
the above it gives you an idea of what it refers too. Read the below too
https://abuaminaelias.com/dailyhadithonline/2018/02/22/unnecessary-questions-arrogance/
The author then cites a hadith Bukhari 3.91 and 3.92 to show that Muhammad pbuh got angry. If
you read tafsir ibn Kathir on 5.101 this is addressed here. I have pasted it for you
(You will not ask me about anything today but I will explain it to you.) So the Companions of the
Messenger of Allah feared that it was the commencement of a momentous event, and I looked to
my right and left and found only people who covered their faces, crying. An argumentative man who
was said to be the son of someone other than his true father asked, "O Allah's Messenger! Who is
my father The Prophet said, `Your father is Hudhafah.'' Ùmar stood up (when he saw anger on the
Prophet's face) and said, "We accept Allah as our Lord, Islam as our religion and Muhammad as our
Messenger, I seek refuge with Allah from the evil of the Fitan (trials in life and religion).'' The
Messenger of Allah said,
ْ َ ُ ُ ْ َ َّ َّ ُ َّ َ ْ ُّ َ ْ َ ِّ َّ َ ْ َ ْ َ َ
«‫الجنة َوالن ُار َحن َرأيت ُه َما دون ال َحائط‬ ‫ ُص ِّو َرت ِىل‬،‫الش كال َيوم قط‬ ‫»ل ْم أ َر ِف الخ ر ِي و‬
So the man was known to be argumentative, Muhammad pbuh dealt with assertively.
https://quranx.com/Tafsirs/5.101 - Read the commentary on verse 5.101 it addresses the instance

where the Prophet pbuh got angry.
In relation to Umar RA. Umar RA was not afraid of the Prophet pbuh. Umar RA was a feared man
who was a lot taller and bigger than Muhammad ‫ﷺ‬. Read this to see the sort of man he was.
“One day 'Umar (RA) saw a camel that was clearly either exhausted or ill. 'Umar (RA) approached
the camel and inspected it, hoping to find out what was wrong with it. As he looked closely at the
camel, he (RA) said repeatedly, "I am afraid that I will be questioned about you [on the Day of
Resurrection]." Akhbar 'Umar, P:126
That should speak volumes to you about the sort of man Umar RA was. He was a very humble guy
who had a lot of humility
The author said that the companions were excited when an outsider asked questions and they
referenced Jami Al Tirmizi 5: Chapter 7, Hadith 619. Have you read this hadith? The Bedouin asks
questions to the Prophet pbuh and he answers them normally. This does not prove anything. Read
the hadith yourself.
“Anas narrated: We used to hope that an intelligent Bedouin would show up to question the
Prophet while we were with him. So one while we were with him, a Bedouin came, kneeling in
front of the Prophet, and he said: 'O Muhammad, your messenger came to us and told us that you
say that Allah sent you.' So the Prophet say: 'Yes.' He said, 'So, (swear) by the One who raised the
heaves, and spread out the earth, and erected the mountains; has Allah sent you?' The Prophet
said, 'Yes.' He said: 'Your messenger told us that you say that there are five prayers required from
us in a day and a night.' The Prophet said, 'Yes.' He said, 'By the One Who sent you, has Allah
ordered that you you?' He said, 'Yes.' He said, 'Your messenger told us that you say that we are
required to fast for a month out of the year.' He said, 'He told the truth.' He said, 'By the One Who
sent you, has Allah ordered that you?' The Prophet said, 'Yes.' He said, 'Your messenger told us
that Zakat is required from our wealth.' The Prophet said, 'He told the truth.' He said, 'By the One
Who sent you, has Allah ordered you that?' The Prophet said, 'Yes.' He said, 'Your messenger told
134
us that you say that we are required to perform Hajj to Allah's House if able to undertake the
journey.' The Prophet said, 'Yes.' He said, 'By the One Who sent you, has Allah Commanded you
that?' (The Prophet said:) 'Yes.' So he said: 'By the One Who sent you with the Truth, I will not
leave any of them, nor surpass them.' Then he got up quickly (leaving). The Prophet said: 'If the
Bedouin told the truth, then he will enter Paradise.”
The author also suggests that claims companions were afraid of asking questions to Muhammad
pbuh and cites Tirmidhi 3203. This is not true and the hadith itself refutes the author.
The hadith says “respect and reverence” The ruling about questions was from God. Why would the
companions disobey God? This Bedouin was he a Muslim? I do not know I can’t find an answer to
this. Either way Muhammad pbuh answered his question. Did he get angry, no he did not?
The companions of the Prophet loved Muhammad pbuh. If they were fearful of him, they easily
could have killed him.
The author cites Bukhari 54.496 pasted below
Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle said, "Satan comes to one of you and says, 'Who created so-
and-so? 'till he says, 'Who has created your Lord?' So, when he inspires such a question, one should
seek refuge with Allah and give up such thoughts."
I have no issue with this at all, but if you have an issue with it go through the below article.
https://abuaminaelias.com/who-created-allah-the-creator/
In short then what the author cited has context and in fact the Quran encourages us to think and
reflect on it
“Then do they not reflect upon the Qur'an, or are there locks upon [their] hearts?” 47.24
“Then do they not reflect upon the Qur'an? If it had been from [any] other than Allah , they would
have found within it much contradiction.” 4.82
“This is the Book! There is no doubt about it—a guide for those mindful ˹of Allah˺,” 2.1
135
Speak to people of knowledge. Muhammad pbuh encouraged people to seek knowledge. How do
you gain knowledge, by asking questions.
“Seeking knowledge is an obligation upon every Muslim” Sunan Ibn Mājah 224
https://abuaminaelias.com/forty-hadith-on-knowledge/
As per usual the author has simply cherry picked and ignored context.
WHAT THE AUTHOR DID NOT TELL YOU?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEa09pRumR4 – Watch this video it’s a story of Bedouin who

came to the Prophet pbuh and it was the companions who got angry but Muhammad pbuh remained
calm and he was worried himself that the companion’s may critique the Bedouin.
The companion’s loved Muhammad pbuh and he loved them. Watch these 3 videos
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZulWYQUIvJY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ltVDHjL_kA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yl2NSquu3w4
The author desperately is trying to paint Muhmmad pbuh as a tyrant that people feared. This is not
true at all.
I pasted this already but why doesn’t the author try to tell you the prophecies of Muhammad pbuh

The author would never tell you this. They have an agenda and I have shown you this, haven’t I? If you
do not believe me in what I have said then I invite you to fact check me. I have no issue with this. I
created this response because I noticed the authors blatant dishonesty, ignorance, hypocrisy and lies.
HYPOCRISY LETS LOOK AT CHRISTIANTIY
As always, I want to point out the hypocrisy of the author. Remember I will use the exact same logic
as the author. I want to firstly look at Mark 3:21
“When his family[a] heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, “He is out of
his mind.””
Who is the above verse referring too?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPvZ_xNePzo – 3 mins – 4:55
So, the author references a disconnected report which is inauthentic to try and say Muhammad pbuh
was possessed. The report the author referenced does not even say possessed but rather the word
136
used is ‫ مجنون‬Majnun. A synonym can also be someone who is out of his mind or beside themselves.
So, it is therefore fair to say that Mark 3.21 shows Jesus was ‫مجنون‬. The difference is that this is in the
scripture of the Bible that the author claims to follow whereas the author who yet again used an
inauthentic source to try and say that Muhammad pbuh was possessed. It displays a lack of integrity,
their ignorance of Arabic and the hypocrisy of the individual.
“… I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.” — Genesis 32:30 “No man hath seen God
at any time…”– John 1:18. Isn’t this a contradiction? Perhaps there is context but why does that
matter. The author shows a complete blatant disregard of context when it comes to Islam. I will show
some more supposed contradictions in the Bible as well.
“This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man
child among you shall be circumcised.” — Genesis 17:10“…if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you
nothing.” — Galatians 5:2. Paul wrote Galatians and he is directly contradicting the teachings of
scripture.
“…he that goeth down to the grave shall come up no more. ” — Job 7:9 “…the hour is coming, in which
all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth….” — John 5:28-29. The author talks
about the hour in Islam. This is evidence of a contradiction in the Bible. There are many more as well.
The same thing which we have learnt in other sections the author is a disingenuous person. Do you
agree? I will be refuting more articles but the author is repetitive with their ignorance, lies and their
hypocrisy.
Muhammad pbuh is not impeached by his own standards if you have gone through my response to
the authors claims you will see this.
137
MUHAMMAD'S ‫ ﷺ‬DISGUSTING HYGIENE INSTRUCTIONS – A
RESPONSE
Here is a link to the author’s article
https://www.whowasmuhammad.org/hygiene
The author believes Muhammad pbuh was unhygienic and obsessed with urine. I will refute this article
and provide you with information that shows how the author has yet again lied to you. It will be
interesting to see what the Bible says about hygiene.
MUHAMMAD ‫ ﷺ‬WRONG ABOUT PERSONAL HYGIENE - RESPONSE
The author makes six points here most of which is repeated again so I will provide you the same
evidence as I did in previous sections.
Claim – Camel Urine and fly in drink
Truly amazing. I am going to have fun with this one. In regards to the fly hadith
https://www.call-to-monotheism.com/fly_in_a_drink__by_islamtoday
https://seekersguidance.org/answers/general-counsel/does-modern-science-confirm-the-hadith-
that-says-there-is-an-antidote-in-the-wing-of-a-fly/
https://yahyasnow.wordpress.com/2015/10/11/fly-hadith-discussed/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeHb-Fxx7iY – From 4 mins – 6.55
I want to focus on the camel urine. The author says it did not work again just to push their narrative
this is not the first time the author has provided their own opinion and as we have shown their opinion
is irrelevant. The reports on this matter confirm that the camel urine worked. So why is the author
giving their opinion when the sources on this matter show that it worked.
138
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeHb-Fxx7iY – watch from 1.50 – 3.47
https://bit.ly/3od9pDZ - The drug Premarin is made from horse urine and guess what it works. If the
author is a female and has taken Premarin then you have taken horse urine. How inconsistent of the
author? criticises Muhammad pbuh for prescribing a specific group of people to drink camel urine
which cured those people and even in the modern-day horse urine is used in medication.
Even more interesting camel poo was the first probiotic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDJho-
H42oc . Even science confirms this.
Here are some more links on this topic
https://abuaminaelias.com/camels-urine-as-medicine/
https://questionsonislam.com/question/did-Prophet-pbuh-advise-drinking-camels-urine
https://www.islamawareness.net/FAQ/faq1000.html
https://www.bismikaallahuma.org/hadith/camel-milk-and-urine-hadiths/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrNmy7RmhB4 - Strange Medieval Medicines that Actually

Worked!
Obviously today we have modern medicine but did they have things like paracetamol, ibuprofen and
penicillin 1400 years ago, now they didn’t.
So, thanks to the author for proving the intelligence of Muhammad pbuh simply because the author
is ignorant.
Claim – Water not defiled by anything
The below links address this claim.
https://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2014/03/explanation-for-hadith-of-well-of.html
https://wedefendislam.wordpress.com/2019/05/12/explanation-for-hadith-of-the-well-of-budaah-
and-its-water-sunan-abu-dawud-67/
https://yahyasnow.wordpress.com/2014/04/25/islamophobe-refuted/
Claim – Drop food remove and eat it
It seems as if this is more of a message to people. It is not obligatory. Some scholars share this view
the ones who see it as obligatory caveat it with the report from Malik and Ibn Majah in which
Muhammad pbuh said “The Prophet, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, said: "There should be neither
harm nor reciprocal harm.” [Maalik and Ibn Maajah]”
Refer to the below link for more information
https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/273826/eating-food-that-fell-on-floor-is-good-conduct-not-an-
obligation
Claim – Lick finger after food or let other people lick it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWWGA_607MI – Watch from 2.50 – 5.47
139
When you finish your food, you should link your own fingers. The video above with the time stamps I
stated show multiple hadith about this. The people used to eat with their fingers not spoons or forks
etc naturally they may have remains of food on their fingers hence why it says lick your fingers. Islam
is a religion which teaches you not to waste food.
Claim – Let child suck on his tongue


and Farid did and he refuted it. Then David backtracked see this as well. Watch from 5.50 – 8.46

he doesn’t care.
This is why you need to learn from people who are actually qualified in hadith sciences people who
know things such as this. Farid is qualified and has experience.
MUHAMMAD ‫ ﷺ‬SEEMED OBSESSED WITH URINE - RESPONSE
Claim – Hell for urine on clothes
The individual yet again has been watching David Wood I know because he did not fact check David
who is a liar below is the Sunan Ibn Majah hadith. Tell me where it says hell. It does not it refers to
the punishment of the grave.
140
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBurS2vjjqc – Watch till 10 minutes you can watch the whole
thing if you like.
Claim – Most of the torment of the grave is due to Urine
What is amazing is the author literally quotes the hadith after the previous one and now says it is the
punishment of the grave. You just contradicted yourself. The hadith is below
If you have watched the video, I pasted it explains it. Cleanliness is a massive part of faith in Islam.
Moreover, the author seems to try and make you think that this is the only thing you will be
punished in the grave for. Check the below link.
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/46068/detailed-reasons-for-the-punishment-in-the-grave
Claim – Drink Camel Urine
I have already refuted this. Refer to above or in past sections where I have addressed this.
Claim – Reward on judgment day for dung and urine of a horse
141
This is the hadith the author cited
This if anything shows God’s mercy. Read the hadith carefully. “A horse in Allah’s caused motivated
by his faith in Allah and his belief in His Promise” So if you are as the hadith says doing it for Allah’s
cause and if you know animals in Islam should be treated well you will be rewarded for what the
horse as eaten or drunk and for its dung and urine. The author included this simply because it
contained the word urine.
Claim – Allah doesn’t accept prayer of someone who urinates until he performs ablution
This is amazing. The author firstly showcases their deception. This is what they say. They make it
seem like it is only urine that invalidates ones Wudu.
This is what the hadith says
The hadith is from the Book of Ablutions read this whole book. The hadith says that urinating, pooing
or passing wind (farting) invalidates one’s wudu (ablution). Ejaculation invalidates wudu as well and
the person should perform Ghusl. Ghusl refers to a bath.
The author did not tell you this. Why?
142
ISLAM AND HYGEINE – WHAT THE AUTHOR DID NOT TELL YOU
Cleanliness is a massive thing in Islam. I will tell you all these things and then question why the author
did not tell you. The ablution first of all. We have to be in the state of purity when we pray and this is
achieved via ablution. If you are interested in what you have to do for ablution refer to the video
below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1AyRBejDVk – How hygienic is this? The author would not tell

you this as it does not suit their agenda
When we urinate it is advised to do it squatting? Not standing. Guess what it is healthier to pee while
squatting.
https://bhls.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/it-is-wise-and-healthy-always-pass-urine-peacefully-in-
squatting-posture/amp/
https://www.womensweekly.com.sg/beauty-and-health/scared-sit-public-toilet-seat-instead/
https://www.shape.com/lifestyle/mind-and-body/is-it-safe-to-squat-when-you-pee
Also, we are obliged to clean ourselves properly using water after urinating. How many people who
pee while standing avoid cleaning their private parts after? Yet Islam tells us to clean ourselves
properly. Why didn’t the author tell you this? Even when we wake up in the morning, we are told to
wash our private parts, after waking up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvZyIN2nGTg – Refer to this video as well which explains it.
So, after defecating we have to use water. If the author doesn’t wash after defecating, they are in no
position to tell Muslims anything when they can’t even clean themselves properly.
We are told to have regular baths although showers are fine as well. Told to keep the environment we
are in clean, our clothes clean. Clean our teeth regularly and the author is trying to criticise Islam when
it is the Quran and the Hadith which outline these things for us? Another example of how the author
is ridiculous. Do you see the author’s deceptiveness yet again? You have to question why have they
done this? It is not the first time as well they have not provided you with the full story, is it? Refer to
the below article if you like, you can learn more about how cleanliness is important in Islam.
http://www.quranreading.com/blog/importance-of-cleanliness-in-islam-quranic-verses-and-ahadith-
on-purity/
HYPOCRISY – LET’S LOOK AT CHRISTIANITY
In the article the author mentions a report about what he claimed that Muhammad pbuh sucked on
boys tounges. Yet I have shown with the evidence that I listed how the author is very dishonest in
fact I showed this throughout this response. So, is it fair for me to twist the Bible? See below
“And he went up, and lay upon the child, and put his mouth upon his mouth, and his eyes upon his
eyes, and his hands upon his hands: and he stretched himself upon the child; and the flesh of the
child waxed warm.” 2 Kings 4.34
143
Jesus is God according to some Christians and I believe the author holds this view due to them
making articles on the divinity of Jesus. Well, I am going to conclude and that Jesus condones putting
your mouth upon children’s mouths. The verse by the way is talking about the Prophet Elisha.
I am simply using the same logic as the author of the article used. Is there context? Does it need
explaining? Christians will more than likely say yes. Yet context or an explanation does not matter
when it comes to Islam? Be consistent and be fair.
I could not find much in the Bible about hygiene as Christianity is different to Islam in the sense that
Islam is a complete way of life. Listen to Sam Shamoun he explains it for you. This is only thing he has
said about Islam which is correct from what I have seen. He has lied many times in the past.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtRgeb6Sezo&feature=youtu.be – Watch this video
Yet again we have seen from this section the authors ignorance, lies and their deception. They are
desperate to try and suggest that Muhammad pbuh and Islam is unhygienic. They repeated many
claims in this section. I have responded to these claims and in my opinion, I have refuted him. I have
also shown you the importance of cleanliness in Islam.
144
MUHAMMAD’S ‫ ﷺ‬SUPERSTITION AND THE PAGAN ORIGINS OF
ISLAM – A RESPONSE
Here is a link to the article
https://www.whowasmuhammad.org/superstition-idolatry-myths
I will be responding to the claims made in here. The inference here is that Islam is false because
Muhammad pbuh was superstitious and because Islam has pagan origins. As I said I will respond to
the claims but I am expecting to find none of this in Christianity if I do the author would have yet again
exposed their hypocrisy.
MUHAMMAD'S ‫ ﷺ‬SUPERSTITION – RESPONSE TO CLAIMS
The author has repeated many claims again like I have done before I will simply paste the same
evidence as before when I come across a repeated claim.
Claim – Bad dream warded off by spitting three times on the left
There is nothing wrong with this at all. The significance is what matters. It is about seeking refuge in
God from Satan.
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/144942/if-he-notices-the-whisper-of-the-shaytaan-during-the-
congregational-prayer-how-should-he-spit-dryly-to-his-left
Claim – See something you do not like in dream blow three times on left
If you have clicked on the article above. You will be able to use your logic to understand this claim.
The hadith the author cited says
I heard the Prophet saying, "A good dream is from Allah, and a bad dream is from Satan. So if
anyone of you sees (in a dream) something he dislikes, when he gets up he should blow thrice (on
his left side) and seek refuge with Allah from its evil for then it will not harm him.
https://muflihun.com/bukhari/71/643
It is all to do with seeking refuge in God from Satan. There is nothing wrong with this at all the author
probably used it as they think it is strange this is due to their ignorance which they have consistently
shown throughout their website.
Claim – Take a bath to cure the influence of the evil eye
This is not the only thing in Islam one can do to seek protection from the evil eye. Have a read of this
blow.
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/20954/the-evil-eye-and-protection-against-it
Claim – poison and magic and ajwa dates.
Go through the above link, it will educate you.

145
What is funny is that a Muslim who debated a Christian who you will know when you click the link …
Hatun the screecher who screams and interrupts. Hatun said to the Muslim drink poison and eat a
date and he drank poison https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucB_ovdB5tU Asrar makes points in
here that I am going to make in my hypocrisy section.
Claim – containers and utensils should be covered at night
There are different reports surrounding this idea. There are variations in the report. So, when one
reads through them all it is clear to understand what the hadith means. You can click on the link
below which addresses this and it includes the hadith which the author cited from Bukhari.
https://www.understanding-islam.com/hadith-regarding-covering-food-during-the-night/
Claim – Squeeze penis three times after urinating
I could not believe this firstly let’s address the obvious issue with the hadith the author cited.
The hadith is not even authentic. So yet again the author cites an inauthentic report. Either way
what is the issue with the hadith. I will assume the author is a female hence why they do not
understand that males after urinating squeeze or shake their penis in order to get rid of remaining
drops for the purpose of cleanliness. If the author is a male then either they do what the hadith says
in that case they are a hypocrite or they do not do this and in that case are dirty and unhygienic.
What does this show you?
Claim – Satan eats with left hand so do not eat with left
This is an irrelevant point. So what? We are just told to eat with our right hand. What is the issue
here? Does it prove Islam wrong? I assume the author just thinks it is strange.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eq1MzzTZn0E – Watch this video.
146
Claim – clean their private parts with odd number of stones
Again, so what. The hadith refers to cleaning oneself. This contradicts the message of the authors
whole article. Does the author seriously have an issue because it says odd number?
Claim - He said people shouldn't wipe with their right hand
Yet again irrelevant. Also, contradictory of the message of the authors article. Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬said
wipe with your left hand. There is nothing wrong with this at all.
Claim - He said men shouldn't touch their penis with their right hand
Yet again irrelevant. Also, contradictory of the message of the authors article. Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬said
one should not hold ones penis in their right hand. There is nothing wrong with this at all.
Claim - forbade the use of green jars
The author cited the following hadiths. Check them all. Sahih Al-Bukhari 69:501; Sahih Muslim 1:25;
Sunan Abu Dawud 26:3686, 3688; Sunan Abu Dawud 3690. They are the same more or less right.
Interestingly, the first one from Bukhari says
“I heard Àbdullah bin Abi Àufa saying, "The Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬forbade the use of green jars." I said,
"Shall we drink out of white jars?" He said, "No."
Interestingly, the hadith refers to white jars. What does this mean though? Well, if the author had
studied a bit, they would find out the history and why it was forbidden to drink from such jars.
The point in this hadith, is that the use for these kinds for jar's was known (for drinking nabidh or
alcohol). So, the Prophet basically didn't forbid a colour or kind of jar, but he forbad drinking alcohol
That is what can be understood from the commentary of al-Qastalani in his Irshad as-Sari ‫إرشاد الساري‬.
Another Interpretation is that these kinds of jars either accelerate the process of fermentation or
they hinder a person to smell the odour of alcohol if something inside was fermented and if nabidh
becomes alcohol it certainly is haram.
For example, in 'omdat al-Qari ‫ عمدة القاري‬of the hanafi scholar al-'Ayni you may read (My own
translation take it carefully:
ْ َ ْ َ ََ
‫ َو ِإن َما يعلق باْلسكار‬،‫لم يعلق الحكم ِف ذ ِلك بخضة ال َج ير وبياضه‬: ‫خطان‬
‫ي‬
َِ ‫ال ال‬ ‫وق‬
Al-Khattabi said: the verdict here is not related to the greenness or whiteness of the jars, but with
intoxication (from what is inside it)
َ ‫َ ر‬ َ َ ‫َو َذ ِل َك َأن الجرار أوعية ُم رن ِت َنة قد َيت َغ ري ِف َيها‬
‫الشاب َوَل يشعر ِب ِه فنهوا عن االنتباذ ِف َيها‬
that is because the jars are vessels with a strong (bad) smell, where a liquid may change (ferment)
without them being able to realize that this happens, that's why they have been prohibited from
using them.
they have been asked to use other kind of vessels -for nabidh- instead (water skins):
Prepare Nabidh in small waterskins. (sahih Muslim)
This because the fermentation can easily be observed in these kinds of vessels.
147
Back to the comment of al-Khattabi:
َ َ َ َ َ ُ َ ّ َ َ
‫يه واآلنية َل تحرم ش ريئا َوَل تحلله‬ ً
ِ ‫خضا واْلبيض بمثابته ِف‬ ‫َوأما ذكر الخضة فمن أجل أن الجرار ال ِ ّن كانوا ينتبذون ِف َيها كانت‬
The quoting of greenness was because the jars they used to use to make nabidhah was green and
white and the vessels itself don't make any thing halal nor haram.
Thank you to Saif for this answer https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/43313/explanation-of-

hadith-forbidden-from-drinking-from-green-jars
So, as you can see there is nothing strange about this at all due to the authors deception and
ignorance, they didn’t feel the need to tell you this. At this point you have to be asking why the author
has consistently decided to be deceptive and ignorant.
Claim – Dog barking, donkey braying shut doors mention name of Allah
This is the hadith that the author referenced. See below
Important notes about this hadith. It is about seeking refuge in God from Satan. Nothing wrong with
that right?
This is not superstitious but rather cautious and the message that can be learnt is to simply seek
refuge in God from evil.
Dogs do seem like they can see things humans can’t. You can watch more videos like the one below
if you like but it just shows 5 examples.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9km04Q_Vw_0
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/125922/when-the-wings-of-the-night-spread-keep-your-children-
in-for-the-devils-come-out-at-that-time - Refer to this link as well for more information on this
hadith
Claim – Keep Children inside when night falls after one hour let them go
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/125922/when-the-wings-of-the-night-spread-keep-your-children-
in-for-the-devils-come-out-at-that-time - The same link addresses the same claim as above
The words “then let them go” – Ibn al-Jawzi said: Rather there is fear for children at that hour,
because the najaasah (impurity)that the shayaateen (devils) seek is usually present with them at that
time, and the dhikr (remembrance of Allah) that would protect them is usually absent from children,
148
and when the shayaateen spread out they hang on to whatever they can hang on to. Hence there is
fear for children at that time.
The reason why they spread out at that time is that they are more able to move about at night than
during the day, because darkness is more conducive to devil forces coming together than any other
time.
Fath al-Baari, 6/341
al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
This hadeeth includes a number of types of goodness and etiquette which combine the interests of
both this world and the Hereafter. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) enjoined
these etiquettes which are the cause of safety from the harm of the shaytaan (devil) , and Allah has
made all of these means causes of being safe from his harm. He is not able to uncover vessels or untie
waterskins or open doors or harm children or others if these means are followed. This is like what it
says in the saheeh hadeeth, (authentic narration) that if a person says Bismillah when entering his
house, the shaytaan (devil) says “No place to stay” i.e., we have no authority to stay overnight with
these people. And if a man says when having intercourse with his wife, “O Allah, keep the shaytaan
away from us and keep the shaytaan away from what You bestow upon us (of offspring),” that will be
a cause of the child being kept safe from the harm of the shaytaan. This is similar to this hadeeth,
which is well known among saheeh ahaadeeth.
This hadeeth encourages us to remember Allah in these cases and other similar situations. Our
companions said: It is mustahabb (preferred) to mention the name of Allah over everything that
matters, and to praise Allah at the beginning of everything that matters, because of the well-known
hasan hadeeth (sound narrations).
The words “wings of the night” is a well-known phrase that refers to the darkness of the night. And it
was said that it refers to when the darkness of night comes.
The words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) “Keep your children in” mean:
prevent them from going out at that time.
The words “for the devils come out at that time” mean that there is the fear at this time that
children may be subjected to the devils’ harm because there are so many of them at that time. And
Allah knows best. End quote.
Sharh Muslim (13/185).
The Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas was asked the following question:
In the saheeh hadeeth narrated by al-Bukhaari, it says: “When the wings of the night spread, or
when evening comes, keep your children in.” Then it says: “And extinguish your lamps.” Does this
command mean that it is obligatory? If it is mustahabb, what is the evidence to show that it is not
obligatory?
They replied: The commands mentioned in this hadeeth are to be understood as recommendations
and advice, according to most scholars, as was stated by a number of scholars, such as Ibn Muflih in
al-Furoo’ (1/132), al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Baari (11/97)..
149
ISLAM IS A COPY OF MANY PAGAN TRADITIONS – RESPONSE TO CLAIMS
The main theme of this section of the authors article is that the Islamic pilgrimage of Hajj, Kabbah,
Black stone are a copy of pagan origins. Thus, this section is slightly different as I will collectively refute
the claims relating to the things I just mentioned. The other claims which the author made i.e., fasting
and prayer I will address separately.
The claim by the author is yet again baseless. Islam is not a copy of pagan roots and Islam came to
convince the people that paganism is wrong and that people should worship one God. Yes, we face
towards the Kabbah when we pray. Do we worship it. No of course not. It is simply the direction that
we pray towards.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5pXT8y_N7w – The truth about the pilgrimage. This video

addresses the circumambulation, Safa Marwa, Ihram and shaving off the head.
This is important to note. So, at one stage throughout history Christians and Jews regarded it as a holy
place.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYzTV_Q-nh0 – The truth about the Kabbah
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Leud7hKXiuE – The truth about the black stone. Addresses the

claims regarding the black stone
https://en.islamway.net/article/13021/hajj-pagan-worship-of-a-black-stone-or-moon-god - An article
to read on this subject
https://www.bismikaallahuma.org/history/kaaba-and-Abraham pbuhic-tradition/ - Another article to

read this on subject
If you are not satisfied with the above use below link and go to page 100 and this provides you with
even more evidence.
150
Claim - Muhammad ordered Muslims to fast on the 10th day of Muharram (which eventually
became optional when Ramadan was enjoined), which is what the pagans of Arabia did before the
rise of Islam
The author cites Sahih Al-Bukhari 58:172. This hadith says that the pagans pre-Islam fasted on this
day. The author argues that Islam copied it. Fasting on Ashura is not obligatory but you can do it if
you want as the hadith says “when the fasting of Ramadan” was enjoined it became optional. There
is no argument here. It is Sunnah to fast Monday’s and Thursday’s. Is the author going to try and
argue this is copied as well?
Claim – Prayers Muslim have 5 Zoroastrianism has 7. 5 conflict
An amazing claim and this will further show you the incompetence of the author they cite the below
link as their evidence.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Zoroastrianism
If you read it, it literally says “Zoroastrianism contains both monotheistic and dualistic features. It
likely influenced the other major Western religions—Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.” So, does the
author want to be consistent and admit their religion is influenced from Zoroastrianism? They
should do.
It is also important to note that Zoroastrianism as per the link the author links says “Zoroastrianism
contains both monotheistic and dualistic features.”
Anyway, I will address the claim. So just because some prayers conflict Islam copied? That is the logic
of the author. Yet again the author like they did in their plagiarism section has committed a genetic
fallacy. Someone I know has a Zoroastrian friend and he has researched Islam and he would not make
such a ridiculous claim. This same Zoroastrian said that if there was a country governed like Umar Bin
Al-Khattab governed when he was Caliph, he would move to such a country. I find it hilarious how a
Christian is trying to argue that a religion has pagan roots/practices when Trinitarianism and the
modern-day version of Christianity is deep rooted in paganism. I will explore this in the hypocrisy
section. Remember what I have consistently said, I will be using the exact same logic as the author.
HYPOCRISY – LET’S LOOK AT CHRISTIANITY
Using the exact same logic. Read the below. I mentioned some of the below already in the plagiarism
section.
Mithraism is a belief that predates Christianity and it too has a trinity. Mithra died for the sins of
humanity, had 12 apostles, a last supper and most of the other tenets that Christianity copied. This is
very similar if not a direct parallel to the teachings in the New Testament. Using the logic of the
individual Christianity is false because it copied from Mithraism.
Horus was born of a virgin on December 25th, that he was baptized at the age of thirty by Anup the
Baptizer, that he was killed via crucifixion, and that he subsequently came back to life three days later.
Christians believe Christ died by crucifixion and rose 3 days later. Using the logic of the individual
Christianity is false because it copied from earlier beliefs.
The celebration of Christmas is not a Christian festival but rather has pagan origins yet Christians
celebrate this. The birth date of most of the sun-gods is December 25. This is the date of the Winter
151
solstice and the date adopted by the church as the date of the birth of Jesus Christ. The December 25
date is given despite the fact that the Bible says the shepherds were in their fields when Jesus was
born which means that Jesus had to have been born in the Spring (Luke 2:8).
The pagan gods often had titles like the “The Light of The World,” “The Way”, “The Good Shepherd,
etc. These names were also used for Jesus Christ.
https://owlcation.com/humanities/The-Mythic-Origins-of-Christianity-True-or-False - Check more on

this website.
Christians believe the Bible is the preserved inspired Word of God and that Jesus died for our sins
however it clearly copied from pagan beliefs that predate it.
It is like a broken record, we have yet again seen the authors ignorance, their lies and their blatant
hypocrisy
Notice how I used the exact same logic as the author and applied it to their religion? I am expecting
the author to denounce many arguments they have made, release a proper apology and remove
their webpage. Have I not refuted their claims and exposed their dishonesty, ignorance and
hypocrisy? I will touch more on this later in this document.
152
IT'S ALL ABOUT MUHAMMAD ‫ﷺ‬: WAS HE SERVING ALLAH OR VICE
VERSA? – A RESPONSE
A link to the authors article that I will be responding too
https://www.whowasmuhammad.org/all-about-muhammad
A lot of these claims are repeated so I will be providing the same evidence as I have in past responses.
The author also makes the same claims within the same article. I do believe based on what I have
shown so far this is yet again another act of the authors deception. I will use the same responses I
have given in other responses but I will tailor it when applicable to suit this section.
MUHAMMAD'S ‫ ﷺ‬CONVENIENT, SELF-SERVING REVELATIONS – A RESPONSE
Claim – Aisha said that “it seemed like Allah hastened to satisfy his desire
A baseless allegation. Read the full narration and just think.
The background to the statement/ the hadith
"Imam Ahmad recorded that A'ishah, may Allah be pleased with her, used to feel jealous of the
women who offered themselves to the Prophet. She said, "Would a woman not feel shy to offer
herself without any dowry!'' Then Allah revealed the verse, (You can postpone whom you will of
them, and you may receive whom you will.) She said, "I think that your Lord is hastening to confirm
your desire.' “And whomsoever you desire of those whom you have set aside, it is no sin on you (to
receive her again)”. Others said that what is meant by: (You can postpone (the turn of) whom you
will of them), means, `your wives: there is no sin on you if you stop dividing your time equally
between them, and delay the turn of one of them and bring forward the turn of another as you wish,
and you have intercourse with one and not another as you wish.' This was narrated from Ibn Abbas,
Mujahid, Al-Hasan, Qatadah, Abu Razin, Abdur-Rahman bin Zayd bin Aslam and others.
The background to the statement
"Imam Ahmad recorded that A'ishah, may Allah be pleased with her, used to feel jealous of the
herself without any dowry!'' Then Allah revealed the verse, (You can postpone whom you will of
them, and you may receive whom you will.) She said, "I think that your Lord is hastening to confirm
your desire.' “And whomsoever you desire of those whom you have set aside, it is no sin on you (to
receive her again)”. Others said that what is meant by: (You can postpone (the turn of) whom you
will of them), means, `your wives: there is no sin on you if you stop dividing your time equally
between them, and delay the turn of one of them and bring forward the turn of another as you wish,
and you have intercourse with one and not another as you wish.' This was narrated from Ibn Abbas,
Mujahid, Al-Hasan, Qatadah, Abu Razin, Abdur-Rahman bin Zayd bin Aslam and others.
Even after the verse was revealed, Prophet Muhammad -on him be the peace and blessings of Allah-
used to divide his time equally as mentioned by the pious mother of the believers herself:
153
‘Aisha said: "O my nephew, the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him) did not prefer one of us to
other in respect of his division of time of his staying with us. It was very rare that he did not visit any
of us any day. He would come near each of his wives without having any intercourse with her until he
reached the one who had her day (i.e. her turn) and passed his night with her...."
Furthermore, Ibn Kathir states:
Nevertheless, the Prophet used to divide his time between them equally, hence a group of the scholars
of Fiqh among the Shafiìs and others said that equal division of time was not obligatory for him and
they used this Ayah as their evidence.
https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2013/05/aisha-allah-hastens-desires-explained.html - Read
more here.
Claim – Revelation allowing sex with Aisha
The author cites Sahih Al-Bukhari 58:235, 62:18. The second hadith shows nothing. Read below
“The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother."
The Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful
for me to marry.”
I have already shown how Aisha was mature and ready for marriage. Read the article again I
provided if you haven’t. I wrote the below article.
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/age-of-aisha/
Addressing the other hadith Sahih Al-Bukahri 58:235. This hadith I have pasted for you below
“That the Prophet ‫ ﷺ‬said to her, "You have been shown to me twice in my dream. I saw you
pictured on a piece of silk and some-one said (to me). 'This is your wife.' When I uncovered the
picture, I saw that it was yours. I said, 'If this is from Allah, it will be done."
Nothing wrong with this in my opinion. Notice the caveat at the end. “IF this is from Allah, it will be
done” essentially if this is God’s will it will happen.
In his commentary on this hadeeth, Ibn Hajar (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: This dream came
after his mission had started, and it was a wahy (revelation) that had implications in real life. (Its
implication was that he did indeed marry her later on). His words and it was you indicate that he had
seen her before and knew what she looked like. (See Fath al-Baari)
There is nothing in the hadeeth to indicate that his marriage to Aaishah was as a result of that
dream. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) asked her father for her hand in
marriage, and her father Abu Bakr gave her in marriage, in the usual fashion, as is indicated in the
following hadeeth:
Urwah reported that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) asked Abu Bakr for
Aaishahs hand in marriage, and Abu Bakr said to him: But I am your brother. He said: You are my
brother according to the religion and Book of Allaah (i.e., my brother in Islam), and she is permissible
for me (to marry). (Bukhaari, 4691).
In his commentary Ibn Hajar (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: Ibn Abi Aasim reported via
Yahyaa ibn Abd al-Rahmaan ibn Haatib from Aaishah that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah
be upon him) sent Khawlah bint Hakeem to Abu Bakr to ask for Aaishahs hand in marriage. Abu Bakr
154
asked her, Is she right for him? Because she is the daughter of my brother. Khawlah went back and
mentioned this to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). He told her: Go back and
tell him: You are my brother in Islam, and your daughter is right for me. She went back to Abu Bakr
and told him, and he said: Call the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).
So he came and the marriage was performed.
The phrase You are my brother according to the religion and Book of Allaah (i.e., my brother in
Islam) was referring to the aayah (interpretation of the meaning): The believers are nothing else
than brothers (in Islamic religion) [al-Hujuraat 49:10] and other similar aayaat. The phrase she is
permissible for me (to marry) means it is permissible to marry her even though she is the brothers
daughter, because the kind of brotherhood that would prevent such a marriage is the brotherhood
of descent (same parent) or of radaaah (by being breastfed in infancy by the same woman), not the
brotherhood of faith.
As regards the woman to whom the Prophets marriage was arranged in heaven, as it were, by
Allaah, and not in the customary fashion, this was Zaynab bint Jahsh (may Allaah be pleased with
her), as is indicated by the hadeeth of Anas (may Allaah be pleased with him), who said: Zaynab used
to boast (to her co-wives) about how she had got married to the Prophet (peace and blessings of
Allaah be upon him), saying: Your families arranged your marriages but Allaah arranged my marriage
from above the seven heavens. (al-Bukhaari, 6870). No other wife except Zaynab was married to the
Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in such a unique fashion; Aaishahs marriage
was arranged as described in the reports quoted above.
Claim – Quran allows 4 wives Muhammad pbuh had at least 9 and was given a revelation
Again, nothing with this. The author makes the same claim as a famous youtuber. Watch the below
refutation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h57MSyPD970 – The video also addresses the first
claim the author made.
Muhammad pbuh did not marry out of his physical desires. Who was the only virgin he married?
Aisha. However other women were older than him like Khadija and Sawda.
Stanely Lane Poole, himself a bitter critic of Islam, had to acknowledge the absurdity of such an
assertion. He writes;
“An attempt has been made to explain away Mohammad's fidelity to Khadija, by adducing the
motive of pecuniary prudence. Mohammad, they say, was a poor man, Khadija rich and powerfully
connected; any affaire de Coeur on the husband's part would have been followed by a divorce and
the simultaneous loss of property and position. It is hardly necessary to point out that the fear of
poverty — a matter of little consequence in Arabia and at that time — would not restrain a really
sensual man for five-and- twenty years; especially when it is by no means certain that Khadija, who
loved him with all her heart in a motherly sort of way, would have sought a divorce for any cause
soever. And this explanation leaves Mohammad's loving remembrance of his old wife unaccounted
for. If her money alone had curbed him for twenty-five years, one would expect him at her death to
throw off the cloak, thank Heaven for the deliverance, and enter at once upon the rake's progress.
He does none of those things.” (Studies in a Mosque p.79, pub. W. H. Allen & Co. London, 1883).
Go through the below links which further explain this topic.
https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2008/06/why-Prophet-muhammad-married-more-times.html
155
monotheism.com/why_did_Prophet_muhammad__peace_be_upon_him__have_more_than_four_
wives__1
http://www.hajij.com/en/q-a/item/797-why-was-the-Prophetpbuhallowed-to-have-more-than-four-
wives
Claim – Told men treat wives equally 33.51 said Muhammad pbuh didn’t have to
The Prophet pbuh had to treat his wives fairly in regards to being fair to them and fulfilling his rights.
Below is Ibn Kathir on 33.51 You will see he references the same hadith that the author referenced
in the past claim.
The Prophet has the Choice of either accepting or rejecting Women who offer Themselves to Him
Imam Ahmad recorded that À'ishah, may Allah be pleased with her, used to feel jealous of the
herself without any dowery'' Then Allah revealed the Ayah,
َ َ َ َ ‫ُر‬ ‫ر‬ َ َ ُ
‫ت رر َِج َمن تش ُآء ِمن ُهن َوتؤ ِوى ِإل ريك َمن تش ُآء‬
(You can postpone whom you will of them, and you may receive whom you will.) She said, "I think
that your Lord is hastening to confirm your desire.'' We have already stated that Al-Bukhari also
recorded this. This indicates that what is meant by the word:
ُ
‫ت رر َِج‬
(postpone) is delay, and

‫ر‬ َ َ
‫َمن تش ُآء ِمن ُهن‬
(whom you will of them) means, òf those who offer themselves to you.'
َ َ َ َ ‫ُر‬
‫َوتؤ ِوى ِإل ريك َمن تش ُآء‬
(and you may receive whom you will.) means, `whoever you wish, you may accept, and whoever you
wish, you may decline, but with regard to those whom you decline, you have the choice of going
back to them later on and receiving them.' Allah says:
َ َ َ َ ُ َ َ َ َْ َ ‫ر‬ َ ََ
‫اح َعل ريك‬ ‫َو َم ِن رابتغ ريت ِممن عزلت فل جن‬
(And whomsoever you desire of those whom you have set aside, it is no sin on you (to receive her
again).) Others said that what is meant by:
‫ر‬ َ َ ُ
‫ت رر َِج َمن تش ُآء ِمن ُهن‬
(You can postpone (the turn of) whom you will of them,) means, `your wives: there is no sin on you if
you stop dividing your time equally between them, and delay the turn of one of them and bring
forward the turn of another as you wish, and you have intercourse with one and not another as
you wish.' This was narrated from Ibn Àbbas, Mujahid, Al-Hasan, Qatadah, Abu Razin, Àbdur-
Rahman bin Zayd bin Aslam and others. Nevertheless, the Prophet used to divide his time
between them equally, hence a group of the scholars of Fiqh among the Shafiìs and others said that
equal division of time was not obligatory for him and they used this Ayah as their evidence. Al-
Bukhari recorded that À'ishah said: "The Messenger of Allah used to ask permission of us (for
changing days) after this Ayah was revealed:
156
َ َ َ َ ُ َ َ َ َْ َ ‫ر‬ َ ََ َ َ َ َ ‫ُر‬ ‫ر‬ َ َ ُ
‫اح َعل ريك‬ ‫ت رر َِج َمن تش ُآء ِمن ُهن َوتؤ ِوى ِإل ريك َمن تش ُآء َو َم ِن رابتغ ريت ِممن عزلت فل جن‬
(You can postpone whom you will of them, and you may receive whom you will. And whomsoever
you desire of those whom you have set aside, it is no sin on you.)'' I (the narrator) said to her: "What
did you say'' She said, "I said, Ìf it were up to me, I would not give preference to anyone with regard
to you, O Messenger of Allah!''' This Hadith indicates that what is meant in this Hadith from À'ishah
is that it was not obligatory on him to divide his time equally between his wives. The first Hadith
quoted from her implies that the Ayah was revealed concerning the women who offered themselves
to him. Ibn Jarir preferred the view that the Ayah was general and applies both to the women who
offered themselves to him and to the wives that he already had, and that he was given the choice
whether to divide him time among them or not. This is a good opinion which reconciles between the
Hadiths. Allah says:
ُّ ُ َ َ َ ‫َذل َك َأ رد َن َأن َت َقر َأ رع ُي ُن ُهن َو َل َي رح َزن َو َي رر َض ر‬
‫ي ِب َمآ َءات ريت ُهن كل ُهن‬ ‫ر‬ ِ
(that is better that they may be comforted and not grieved, and may all be pleased with what you
give them.) meaning, ìf they know that Allah has stated that there is no sin on you with regard to
dividing your time. If you wish, you may divide you time and if you do not wish, you need not divide
your time, there is no sin on you no matter which you do. Therefore, if you divide your time between
them, this will be your choice, and not a duty that is enjoined upon you, so they will feel happy
because of that and will recognize your favor towards them in sharing your time equally among
them and being fair to all of them.'
ُ ُ َ َُ‫َ ُّ َر‬
‫وبك رم‬
ِ ‫واَلل يعلم ما ِف قل‬
(Allah knows what is in your hearts.) means, `He knows that you are more inclined towards some of
them than others, which you cannot avoid.' Imam Ahmad recorded that À'ishah said: "The
Messenger of Allah used to divide his time between his wives fairly and treat them equally, then he
said:
َ َ ُ َ َ َُ ََ ُ َ َ َ َ ّ
«‫يما ت رم ِلك َوَل أ رم ِلك‬ ‫فَل تل رم ِن ِف‬،‫يما أ رم ِلك‬‫»الل ُهم هذا ِف رع ِىل ِف‬
(O Allah, I have done as much as I can with regard to what is under my control, so do not blame me
for that which is under Your control and not mine.)'' It was also recorded by the four Sunan
compilers. After the words "so do not blame me for that which is under Your control and not mine,''
Abu Dawud's report adds the phrase:
َ َ ُ َ َ َُ ََ
«‫يما ت رم ِلك َوَل أ رم ِلك‬‫»فَل تل رم ِن ِف‬
(So do not blame me for that which is under Your control and not mine.) meaning matters of the
heart. Its chain of narration is Sahih, and all the men in its chain are reliable. Then this phrase is
immediately followed by the words,
ً َ ََ
ُ ّ ‫ان‬
‫اَلل َع ِليما‬ ‫وك‬
(And Allah is Ever All-Knowing,) i.e., of innermost secrets,

ً
‫َح ِليما‬
(Most Forbearing.) meaning, He overlooks and forgives.
Where does this say about not treating wives equally. It mentions about dividing time equally. The
part I highlighted in yellow shows how Muhammad pbuh divided his time equally.
157
https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2013/05/aisha-allah-hastens-desires-explained.html - Same
link but goes over the topic.
Claim – 66.1 of the Quran

Prophet! Why do you forbid (for yourself) that which Allah has allowed to you’ up to: ‘If you two turn
in repentance to Allah’ -‘Aishah and Hafsah- ‘And (remember) when the Prophet disclosed a matter
in confidence to one of his wives.’ refers to him saying: ‘No, rather I drank honey.'” (Sunan an-Nasa’i
volume 4, Book 35, Hadith 3826)
Claim – Caused Zayd to divorce Zaynab.
Yes, Muhammad (pbuh) did do this. He married Zaynab bt. Jahsh. However, the individual however
is quoting from Tabari.
When we check what report is being quoted specifically who it is being narrated by it is Abdullah b
Amir Al Aslami Abu Amir Al Madadni. See below
158
This is not the only issue with the report. But also, Muhammad b Yahya b Habban. The report is
disconnected. There is also the issue with Umar al Waqadi as well. You can find out more about this
by watching the link below. It is important to note that the marriage between Muhammad pbuh and
Zaynab was not incestuous. The author of the site though is trying to indirectly argue this. According
to the Google definition Incest is defined as “sexual relations between people classed as being too
closely related to marry each other. the crime of having sexual intercourse with a parent, child, sibling,
or grandchild.” Muhammad pbuh didn’t do this you know who did? We will explore this in the
hypocrisy section.
David Wood makes this claim too here watch the refutation video of David
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5K7r8DDM24 – I am sure the author is well aware of Wood
Refer to this as well where you can learn more about David’s deception
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/refuting-david-wood/
Claim – annoyed with people lingering at his house given revelation to stop this
159
Where does it say annoyed? Yet again it is the authors opinion. They are trying to argue that
Muhammad pbuh was annoyed to try to justify their ridiculous argument of Muhammad pbuh’s
revelation was “self-serving.” This is not the first time the author has provided their own opinion
without fact checking you would simply think that that the sources the author cites says what the
author says.
There is no issue with this verse being revealed though. The Quran was a progressive revelation events
occurred and verses were revealed so that the lesson was learnt after the event had taken place.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qI4ZMm0frRY – This video addresses this verse directly.
WAS MUHAMMAD ‫ ﷺ‬SERVING ALLAH, OR WAS ALLAH SERVING MUHAMMAD ‫ – ?ﷺ‬A

RESPONSE
The author says the below
“So, was Muhammad really serving God, or was Muhammad just using his status as a way to
abuse people and to get whatever he wanted? I think the facts speak for themselves.”
Is this the case? Have you gone through everything I have said? I will respond to the other claims the
author made but you should watch this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FIBCLIVnpM –
This refutes the “self-serving” claim.
The author is right when they say “I think the facts speak for themselves” you are right. The facts are
you are a liar who provides their own opinions and tries to mask it as what Islam teaches. You
misquote, use weak sources, lie and cherry pick. I have demonstrated this throughout my whole
response to your website. No doubt, as you read through the rest of my responses the trend of your
ignorance and lies will continue.
THE HIGHLY CONVENIENT AND QUESTIONABLE TIMING OF HIS SUPPOSED REVELATIONS – A

RESPONSE
Claim – Revelation about poisoned food
I will refute this another way. So, I have already refuted the poison point before. Here it is again
I have a question for the author what is the difference between al-wateen and al-abhar? Also, if what
due to the poison? If this is true then many people and I mean many would have left Islam. Finally,
why didn’t Muhammad pbuh die straight away after consuming the poison? His companion who also
took the poison died more or less straight away. Yet Muhammad pbuh died years later? Do you know
160
how poison works? David Wood uses the poison argument. Read the below for a thorough refutation
of this subject.
The author said someone else had the poison. They are right. Remember why the woman poisoned
the sheep? Well, the author provided the hadith which says why Sunan Abu Dawud book 39 hadith
4498. In this hadith when the woman is asked why she did what she did she said “If you were a
Prophet, it would not harm you; but if you were a king, I should rid the people of you.”
Now some may translate it as kill. So, in other words if Muhammad pbuh was a false Prophet then it
would have killed him. Did it? As we now the companion of the Prophet pbuh who consumed the
poison as well died shortly after. How did Muhammad pbuh die? He contracted a fever and then died
just as Allah had willed.
Therefore, since the poison did not kill him, we can conclude that he was a Prophet. Thank you to the
author for indirectly proving this and contradicting your entire website.
Claim – Satanic verses 22.52 a convenient revelation
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/moon-god-al-laatuzzamanaat/ - This talk

about these idols
Also refer to this.
161
on Surah 22:52)
162
MUHAMMAD'S ‫ ﷺ‬NARCISSISM – A RESPONSE
The definition of a narcissist from Oxford Languages is “a person who has an excessive interest in or
admiration of themselves.” The author believes that Muhammad pbuh was and cites the below as
proof.
“He said he will be chief of all the people on the day of resurrection: Sahih Al-Bukhari 60:236.
He said he would be the first one to enter Paradise: Sahih Muslim 1:384.
He said he is the example for all Muslims: Surah 33:21.
He encouraged his followers to fight and die one after the other by giving them promises of
Paradise in order to protect himself from his enemies: Sahih Muslim 19:4413.
He claimed that a revelation from God said that God and Angels bless him and that people should
also bless him: Surah 33:56.
He said if someone doesn't send blessings upon him after his name is mentioned in their presence
then may they be humiliated: Jami At-Tirmidhi 3545 (Dar-us-Salam Reference).”
First of all, Muhammad pbuh claimed to be a Prophet of God as you will all know and he claimed he
was chosen to reveal the Quran. There are different ways to refute the author in regards to this. I am
going to show the opposite whilst addressing the claims and then coming to a logical conclusion.
163
In regards to him being chief and first to enter paradise so what? This is logical surely Muhammad
pbuh claimed to be a Prophet and revealed the final revelation. It is logical to assume even without
this hadith that Muhammad pbuh would be chief/enter paradise. If he was narcissistic like the author
said then he surely would have said that Jesus would not return at the end times but himself. That is
what a narcissistic person would do. In regards to him being the example for all Muslims, again so
what? Have you actually studied his life honestly? Looking at the authentic sources. You will see why
he is the example for all mankind. Remember Muhammad pbuh claimed that the Quran was God’s
word. We have already refuted plagiarism argument/satanic argument so unless the author can prove
how an illiterate man authored the Quran, I will continue with this argument from the perspective
that the Quran is from God and Muhammad pbuh was simply the one who was chosen to reveal it.
The author cites Sahih Muslim 19:4413. The author does not tell you how it refers to the Battle of
Uhud. A battle that was very difficult for the Muslims. Muhammad pbuh was left with very few people
around him. The people around Muhammad pbuh his companions etc loved him dearly. A lot of them
would have given their life for him the hadith mentions how people fought against the enemy
defending the Prophet pbuh. So, this command seems to be specific for that battle. The author from
their wording in their claim does not suggest this. Now if a Muslim died fighting in the cause of Allah
properly, I do not mean these ISIS scum today I mean like the Battle of Badr and Uhud then that person
would be guaranteed paradise.
The author references Surah Ahzab verse 56. Yes, we send blessings upon the Prophet. When we pray
and we recite Durood Sharif we also ask for blessings to be sent to Ibrahim pbuh. When Muslims greet
each other, we say “peace and blessings be upon you” Have a look at this hadith below.
Interesting isn’t it? So, this is a meaningless point that the author has made. Whilst we do send salawat
upon the Prophet pbuh we do this because God has commanded us too. We also ask God to bless
others as well. This includes other Prophets.
Finally, the author cites Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3545. This refers to saying peace be upon him after his name.
We have to say ʿalayhi s-salām which means the same. This is out of respect. It is like after we sneeze,
we are told to say Alhumdulillah. Now read below where I will show Muhammad pbuh’s humility.
In Surah Al-Araf verse 158 it says “Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ “O humanity! I am Allah’s Messenger to you all.
To Him ˹alone˺ belongs the kingdom of the heavens and the earth. There is no god ˹worthy of
worship˺ except Him. He gives life and causes death.” So believe in Allah and His Messenger, the
unlettered Prophet, who believes in Allah and His revelations. And follow him, so you may be
˹rightly˺ guided.”
164
Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬is claiming to be nothing more than a Prophet or messenger. He was sent with a simple
message to worship one God. Surely if he was a narcissist like the author says he would claim to be
more. He was extremely humble and had a lot of humility. Look at what is written in Bukhari 3445
“I heard the Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬saying, "Do not exaggerate in praising me as the Christians praised the
son of Mary, for I am only a Slave. So, call me the Slave of Allah and His Apostle."
Immediately he is humbling himself regarding himself as a slave of God. Would a narcissist do that?
No of course not.
A man said: I will slaughter it, another one said: I will skin it out. A third said: I will cook it. So the
Messenger of Allah [pbuh] said: I will collect wood for fire. They said: "No. We will suffice you that
work." "I know that you can do it for me, but I hate to be privileged. Allah hates to see a slave of his
privileged to others." So he went and collected fire-wood. (Khulasa As- Siyar p.22)
https://www.islamweb.org/en/article/134455/the-Prophets-humbleness - More examples
http://muslim-responses.com/Narcissist/Narcissist_/
MUHAMMAD'S ‫ ﷺ‬HYPOCRISY – A RESPONSE
Claim – More wives
I have already responded to this within this section. Go through it again if you have too.
Claim – Caught urinating facing towards Qiblah despite telling people not to
This is the hadith the author cited
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfjWVKbw8r0 – So as you can see this is not hypocrisy.
Hadiths grading more authentic than this show the Prophet pbuh used to face Bait Al Maqdis NOT the
Qiblah.
https://hadeethenc.com/en/browse/hadith/3023
Ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) mentions that one day he went to the house of his sister
Hafsah, the Prophet's wife. He went up on the roof of her house and saw the Prophet (may Allah's
peace and blessings be upon him) answering the call of nature while facing the direction of the
Levant and his back was toward the Qiblah. Ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with them) said this in
response to those who said that one should not face the direction of Jerusalem, while answering the
165
call of nature, and that is why the author mentioned the other version which adds: "...facing Bait al-
Maqdis." So, if someone faces the Qiblah while praying within a building, there is nothing wrong
with that.
Claim - He said a prayer offered while sitting down is only half a prayer, but when he got caught
praying while sitting down, he tried to justify it by saying he is not like any other person (so it's okay
for him but not for anybody else)
The author cites Sahih Muslim 4:1600. They provide their own opinion again. Firstly, he was not
caught. The author seems to be painting a picture like he was caught do something wrong just like you
would say you caught a thief. The hadith says Abdullah b Amr came to the Prophet pbuh. Why would
he go there? He logically must have been invited or he simply came to visit. The author says “It’s ok
for him but not for anybody else” Does the author mean ok to prayer sitting? I assume so, this is a
false claim yet again.
Prophet Muhammad saw said, “Pray standing; if you cannot, then sitting; and if you cannot, then lying
on your side.”
It was also narrated by al-Bukhaari, Abu Dawood and al-Nasaa’i, who added: “If you cannot, then lying
on your back, and Allaah does not burden any soul beyond its scope.”
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/67934/when-is-it-permissible-for-a-person-to-pray-sitting-in-
obligatory-prayers - Have a read of this as well. So Muhammad pbuh was likely ill or injured which
resulted in him praying whilst sitting.
Claim - He said after he sleeps, he didn't have to perform wudu (ritual washing) before prayer
because he said his "eyes sleep but his heart did not sleep":
The author cites Sahih Al-Bukhari 32:230; Sahih Muslim 4:1676. I will paste both hadiths for you and
highlight relevant parts but read it all.
There is nothing in this hadith about ablution other than the quote which I have provided
166
So, the parts near the end refer to what the author has claimed but as you can see from the first part,
he got up performed short ablution as did Ibn Abbas and prayed. In regards to the second part which
is what author has claimed. The author has indirectly yet again proved Muhammad pbuh’s
Prophethood and I will show this. So, the hadith says “It was a special prerogative of Apostle of Allah”
Why? Well, when we go to Bukhari 3570 we read
All the Prophets were like that. Interesting, right? So, thank you to the author for indirectly admitting
this.
There are different views as to what sort of sleep breaks Wudu. An example of this is
“That sleep does not invalidate wudoo’ in all cases, because of the hadeeth of Anas ibn Maalik,
according to which the Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them) used to wait for ‘Isha’ at the
time of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) until their heads
drooped, then they prayed and they did not do wudoo’. Narrated by Muslim, 376. According to the
report of al-Bazzaar: they would lie on their sides.”
167
The hadeeth of Anas is to be interpreted as referring to light sleep in which a person can feel that
he has broken his wudoo’ if that takes place, and the hadeeth of Safwaan is to be interpreted as
referring to deep sleep in which a person does not feel if he breaks his wudoo’.
That is one explanation to answer the claim the other one is his Prophethood. As you know he was
not unconscious meaning he knew whether or not be had broken his Wudu. This is shown in the hadith
which the author cited. When he got up the first time he did his Wudu meaning he knew he had broken
it however the second time he did not need to do his Wudu as he knew he had not broken it.
Claim – Satanic verses

about these idols. This is my website by the way.
Also refer to this.
168
on Surah 22:52)
169
Claim – treat wives equally but he did not have too
Have you read my response to this, within this section? The author has repeated themselves again.
They do provide other evidences now. I will address these. The Prophet pbuh loved Khadijah is it
strange to love your wife even after she passed away? He was very sad after she passed yes it occupied
his mind but this does not mean he did not treat his wives equally. The other simply has just cherry
picked and instead of using logic they have let their agenda cloud their rationale.
In relation to Saffiya the logical conclusion I have drawn is that Muhammad pbuh waited until she had
one menstrual cycle as per the Quran verse regarding waiting periods. Saffiya was freed as you should
know.
https://aboutislam.net/reading-islam/about-muhammad/11-wives-of-the-Prophet-who-are-they/
https://aboutislam.net/reading-islam/about-muhammad/the-Prophets-wives-who-was-the-most-
beloved-to-him/
Read through above
CONCLUSION WHAT HAVE WE LEARNT FROM THIS SECTION
This whole topic revolves around Muhammad pbuh faking being a Prophet, lying for his own personal
gain. One must ask why would he do such a thing the logical conclusions we draw are he either did it
for money, fame, women, he was a madman or he was in fact a Prophet.
170
Muhammad pbuh was offered plenty of money if we go to “The Sealed Nectar” Pages 103 – 104 we
learn that Muhammad pbuh was offered money to be the richest Qurayshite he was also offered
power. This was when Islam was still few in number. If Muhammad pbuh was in it for materialistic
purposes he would have jumped at this but he did not. The references provided by “The Sealed
Nectar” are Ibn Hisham 1/293, 294 and Tafsir Ibn Kathir 6/159-161. Muhammad pbuh was focused
on delivering God’s message.
library.blogspot.in.pdf/TheSealedNectar-Alhamdulillah-library.blogspot.in_text.pdf - This is a link to
The Sealed Nectar in PDF format just in case you do not have the book the page number to look for is
114 -115
In regards to women. The source where the author tried to say Muhammad pbuh was a womaniser
(which I refuted) shows how a woman offered herself to Muhammad pbuh and he accepted but when
she wanted to cancel Muhammad pbuh could have said no but what did he say? He said Ok. All his
wives were non-virgins except Aisha RA. Prophet first got married first at the age of 25 with a widow
who was 15 years elder to him. All the marriages that he did were non virgins except one. He also
commanded women to cover their body after maturity. Will a man with lust do that? Also, he
prohibited illegal sex. People believed he was a Prophet and he could have easily allowed that.
He was not crazy. The author has already tried arguing this. Moreover, that discounts all the miracles
he performed including the Quran itself? People like Umar Bin Al-Khattab who was very clever and
deep into haram actions converted. This claim is ridiculous to be honest. He was not crazy at all.
Also, can we use our brains for a second. Why would he endure the years of hardship and pain and
suffering if he was a false prophet? He would have surely just accepted the money and power at the
beginning. Interestingly Tom Holland, no not spiderman the historian says that if you accept the
Muslim account of how the Quran came etc then it must be a miracle. He however thinks Makkah was
not in Hejaz and that Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬was not illiterate. For more information refer to this which is a
response to his claims. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3FmcWR1M-0
A liar. He was known as As-Siddiq. The truthful one. Abu Sufyan his enemy before he reverted testified
that Muhammad pbuh never told a lie.
Is it possible that he was a Prophet, yes! Considering what I have mentioned throughout. Abdullah bin
Salam a Jew, the most learned Jew knew he was. Waraqa knew he was. Byzantine emperor and his
friend knew he was. I can go on and on.
The claims the author has made here are just weak repeated nonsense. I believe I have responded to
their claims and refuted them. At the end of this whole response I will provide you with a lot of
resources if you think I have not covered a point well you can consult those resources.
171
RANDOM FACTS AND CRAZY TEACHINGS: ODD AND RANDOM THINGS
MUHAMMAD DID AND SAID – A RESPONSE
Here is a link to the author’s article
https://www.whowasmuhammad.org/random
The author has said as per title odd and random things Muhammad pbuh did and said. I do not expect
to find any random things in the Bible but if I do then this just further shows the author’s hypocrisy.
So now I will respond to the claims raised by the author.
They have repeated themselves again, and some points are absolutely irrelevant thus I will not
respond to everything the author has said. Once you read their article and my responses you will see
why.
RESPONSE
This is not the first thing the author states in their article but I want to show you something.
Claim – Fish pray for forgiveness
As you can see the author has said this. I went to the hadith. Notice how they did not tell you it’s
grade. Why? Because when you go to it, what do you see?
https://sunnah.com/ibnmajah/introduction/239
Shocking isn’t it? Yet again they have used another inauthentic source. They did not tell you it is
inauthentic. Ask yourself why? Is this the only weak source they provide in their article. We shall see.
Claim – Allah does not like Backgammon
The author provides two sources. Sunan Ibn Majah 3762 and 3763. Guess what? Yet again both
inauthentic. This is ridiculous. Here is the proof proof. The author says
172
https://sunnah.com/ibnmajah/33/107
https://sunnah.com/ibnmajah/33/108
Why is the author using inauthentic sources and not telling you this? You have to ask yourself why.
Claim – Poison and dates
A repeated claim. Muhammad pbuh did not die from poison as I have shown
I have a question for the author what is the difference between al-wateen and al-abhar? Also if what
due to the poison? If this is true then many people and I mean many would have left Islam such as
the companians. Finally, why didn’t Muhammad pbuh die straight away after consuming the poison?
His companion who also took the poison died more or less straight away. Yet Muhammad pbuh died
3/4 years later? Do you know how poison works? David Wood uses the poison argument. Read the
below for a thorough refutation of this subject.
Claim - Muhammad pbuh was a sinner and asked for forgiveness
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUj5lkGNlKw – You can watch this it will explain it. Muhammad

pbuh like other Prophets was free from major sins but he was prone to minor shortcomings. The
author provided an example in other sections : Sunan an-Nasa'i 3421 and the honey.
Claim – Seal of Prophethood looked like a mole
173
Irrelevant. The evidences cited shows that it was his seal of Prophethood. We have already established
he was a Prophet and I provided you with Christians and a Jew who recognised that he was a Prophet.
So, who cares what it looks like?
Claim – never saw anyone suffer more than Muhammad pbuh
Yes, this is an authentic hadith
The author shows their ignorance again they should know that sickness is a gift from Allah. So, this is
an irrelevant point as all it shows is God rewarding Muhammad pbuh. Since Muhammad ‫ ﷺ‬is the best
example and beloved by Allah he was sick.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3auBqiDHs4
Claim – People turned into pigs, monkeys and rats
So what? What is the author trying to argue here? It is irrelevant and does not take away from anything
Muhammad pbuh did.
https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2011/06/muhammad-hadith-israelites-rats.html
Claim – condemned pictures and people who make them
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AZZax6zixE – You can watch this video. It will explain it for

you.
Claim – Muhammad pbuh is the best example to follow
Yes, he is. The author says the below
But I have refuted them so far. Also, the time Muhammad pbuh lived in is completely different to
now. As Muslims we are told to follow the Sunnah which is the Prophet pbuh his life, mannerisms
and characteristics etc. We can’t follow his life literally? Here is why. He lived in Makkah and
Madinah. Should we all move there? He travelled by camel or by walking. Does this mean we can’t
drive in cars, bikes, go on trains, go on aeroplanes? No. In other words the time he lived in is
dramatically different to the one we live in now. Most definitely the life 1000 years into the future
will be dramatically different to the one we are in now.
174
So, when we talk about the Sunnah of the Prophet pbuh we mean thing such as saying bismillah
before eating and drinking. Entering the mosque with the right foot. Dusting off your bed before you
go to sleep. In regards to marriage the Sunnah is to marry older women, widows or single women
with kids.
I will provide you with resources where you can study his life honestly and you too will see how he is
the best example for all of mankind.
Read these articles:
http://muslim-responses.com/Narcissist/Narcissist_/
http://muslim-responses.com/The_Generous_Prophet/The_Generous_Prophet_/
http://muslimresponses.com/Interesting_Hadiths_on_the_Prophet/Interesting_Hadiths_on_the_Pr
ophet_/
http://muslim-responses.com/No_killing_women_and_children_/No_killing_women_children_/
http://muslim-responses.com/Prophet_Muhammads_Intention/Prophet_Muhammads_Intention_/
Claim – Quran says Muhammad pbuh isn’t crazy
The author is trying to make it seem like that’s the only verses we repeat. Have a read of the verses
the author cited. The people of Makkah levied claims against Muhammad pbuh that he was a poet,
soothsayer, mad etc. The Quran exonerates him saying he was not those things which the people
claimed and the Quraysh themselves knew this. In some of those verses cited it literally says
Muhammad pbuh is sent as a warner, sent with a message. This is a message consistent with the past
Prophets as we read in 16.36 of the Quran.
“We surely sent a messenger to every community, saying, “Worship Allah and shun false gods.” But
some of them were guided by Allah, while others were destined to stray. So travel throughout the
land and see the fate of the deniers!”
Claim - Dogs should be killed
A wild dog that is undomesticated than can cause harm can be killed
https://abuaminaelias.com/is-it-permissible-to-kill-dogs-in-islam/
https://www.call-to-monotheism.com/islam_and_the_killing_of_dogs
https://seekersguidance.org/answers/halal-and-haram/killing-dogs-islamic-command/
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/12/06/muhammed-a-mercy-analysing-dogs-killed-in-madinah/
Claim – People who keep Dog as a pet will be punished
I do not know if the author is trying to say Islam is against animal rights.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3c__FmQDPuA – Watch this video
175
Dogs are not permissible in the houses. The only thing that it is considered haram in Islam is to grew
up the dog inside the house because of its saliva. The saliva of dogs often contains microscopic
worms, science has shown. Dogs are not to be kept inside the house at all times. They should be
kept outside.
"The Prophet, peace be upon him, said: 'A man felt very thirsty while he was on the way, there he
came across a well. He went down the well, quenched his thirst and came out. Meanwhile he saw a
dog panting and licking mud because of excessive thirst. He said to himself, "This dog is suffering from
thirst as I did." So, he went down the well again and filled his shoe with water and watered it. Allah
thanked him for that deed and forgave him.'"—Bukhari https://sunnah.com/bukhari/46/27
Some say you can keep a dog outside i.e a guard dog or even a dog for hunting but it should be trained.
Claim – Hated Lizards
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/289055/the-reason-for-killing-wazagh-lizards-and-the-harm-they-
cause
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZDdyIU3MJA – Refutation of David Wood who made this claim.

you will see how it refers to vermin once you go through it you will see how it is logical.
Claim - Black Dogs the devil
https://qurananswers.me/2018/09/17/black-dog-is-a-devil/
Claim – Squeeze penis 3 times
I could not believe this firstly let’s address the obvious issue with the hadith the author cited.
The hadith is not even authentic. So yet again the author cites an inauthentic report. Either way
what is the issue with the hadith. I will assume that the author is a female hence why they do not
understand that males after urinating squeeze or shake their penis in order to get rid of remaining
drops of urine for the purpose of cleanliness. If the author is a male and they do what the hadith
says in that case they are a hypocrite or if they do not do this (what the hadith says) they are dirty
and unhygienic. What does this show you?
Claim – Urinating while squatting. Author says he peed like a girl
176
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBurS2vjjqc – Watch this video. Guess what
Da’if hadith again.
Urinating while squatting is not only cleaner but healthier. So well done author. Also why are they
stereotyping?
https://bhls.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/it-is-wise-and-healthy-always-pass-urine-peacefully-in-
squatting-posture/amp/
Claim – he owned slaves
Repeated claims. I provided many evidences in past sections. So, go back and check that.
https://qurananswers.me/2016/03/05/black-slaves-of-the-white-Prophet/
https://abuaminaelias.com/islam-and-slavery/ - Read through this

Slavery in Islam and Christianity – https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2011/03/slavery-in-islam-

and-christianity.html
Claim - Taqiyya
177
https://abuaminaelias.com/muslims-allowed-to-lie-taqiyya/
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/178975/what-is-taqiyyah-dissimulation-is-it-used-by-ahl-as-
sunnah-sunnis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVeDwm-3ft4 – Watch this as well
I never heard of this before till a Christian accused me of it, I was confused as I had never heard of it
before.
Claim – Bargained number of payers down
This was during the Miraj.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klNBUuVZJy0 – There is significance of this and a meaning

behind it. Ponder and reflect
Research the Miraj it shows Allah’s mercy.
Claim – cursed Christians and Jews for graves.
Addressed this already, here it is again. Did he curse all of them? Or was it certain ones? If you go to
the author’s twitter, they have this image
The hadith which talks about cursing the Jews and Christians for they built places of worship at the
graves of their Prophets, the author then tries to say that look at Muhammad’s grave and tries to
indirectly argue that Muslims are now cursed.
The mosque you see has been expanded many times throughout history. It is massive I have been
there I have been to the grave Alhumdulillah and been around the whole Masjid. The question is who
built the mosque initially? It was Muhammad pbuh. Muhammad pbuh was buried in his wife Aisha’s
house which is located on the side of the Mosque but as I have stated already it has been expanded
many times. So nice try author but this is yet another example of your ignorance and dishonesty.
Moreover, if you go to pg 409 of “The Sealed Nectar” you will see that Muhammad pbuh said “Do not
178
make my grave a worshipped Idol” The reference provided is from Mutta Imam Malik p65. If you do
not have access to the book here is the pdf go to page 473 in the pdf you will see what I am talking
about
library.blogspot.in.pdf/TheSealedNectar-Alhamdulillah-library.blogspot.in_text.pdf
The author also argues that this was Muhammad pbuhs last words. Interesting because they
contradict themselves on another post on their twitter page. So, the author refutes themselves. Makes
my life easier.
Claim – Angels ask for Allah to be merciful to people except when one farts.
Here is the hadith
This is what the author said
The author didn’t tell you what the hadith fully said. If you have made it this far and have read past
sections you would know when praying you have to be in a state of ablution. If you pass wind you
break your ablution.
Claim – Wine is of Satan but there will be rivers of wine in paradise
Is the author aware paradise is different to earth? Whilst it is a sin for us now while we are on earth,
paradise is different. Also, it won’t be the same type of wine which is on earth.
https://musliminspire.com/alcohol-prohibited-muslims-rewarded-rivers-wine-heaven/
Claim – Do not verbally abuse the dead if a Muslim does this, they disobey Muhammad pbuh
This is the hadith that the author cited.
179
I can’t find anything in there that says do not verbally abuse the dead. Here is what the author said,
This is yet another example of the authors dishonesty. But let’s say such a hadith existed and Muslims
verbally abused the dead. Muslims are not perfect we are human we make mistakes, next thing we
can expect is the author will say pre-marital sex in Islam is haram yet some Muslims do this. This is
such an irrelevant point and I am struggling to comprehend why the author would include such a point.
It again displays their lack of intellect.
Claim – next two generations of Muslims are the best
This is what the author has said.
So what? This is known as a sect called Salafism, it is a branch of Sunni Islam that follows Islam as the
early generations did. Nothing wrong with this. Unless the author will cherry pick verses from the
Quran and hadith as they have done throughout their entire website.
Claim – Destroy snakes as they can destroy eyesight and abortions
What is wrong with this? Some snakes can cause this. Just have a look yourself on Google if the
author doesn’t believe it then perhaps, they should allow a venomous snake to put venom in their
eye and see what happens.
I am no snake expert or venom expert so I can’t tell you how it works. If you are interested in what
snake venom does to the blood watch this. Now imagine this was fresh venom and it was in your
eye/ bit a pregnant woman.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1Nyc8X8Ru8 - Human Blood vs. Snake Venom!
Claim – Trim moustaches and keep beard
The author says other things before they make this point but I have already refuted those points in
past sections so you can refer to that. In regards to the way men are advised as per the Sunnah to
trim their moustaches and let the beard grow.
I do not know why this is relevant and how it impacts Muhammad pbuh in anyway. If you want to
know more about this refer to this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAoBSyM3u64
This is just a meaningless point made by the author.
Claim – Man and Prostitute entered paradise because they fed dog water
The author separates this into two separate points but I don’t know why they even mentioned it in
the first place. They have tried to paint Islam and Muhammad pbuh as evil they tried to make it seem
Islam is cruel to animals yet they cite two examples which display how amazing Allah’s mercy is. So
thank you to the author.
180
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNj0xbohjLY – Have a look at this.
Claim – Agricultural equipment
The scholars may Allah have mercy upon them have different interpretations for this narration.
Some interpreted it to mean that the farmers will be humiliated because of the taxes which the
rulers ask them to pay, and because of the unjust way rulers treat them. Some other scholars may
Allah have mercy upon them interpreted it to refer to the farmers who live near the enemy
borders, and they remain busy ploughing instead of chivalry, so the enemy dominates them and they
become humiliated. Some other interpretations were also reported about this narration. There is
nothing that confirms what the Prophet sallallaahu àlayhi wa sallam ( may Allah exalt his mention
) exactly meant.
However, this narration does not contradict other narrations about the excellence of sowing and
planting. Anas may Allah be pleased with him narrated: "The Prophet sallallaahu àlayhi wa
sallam ( may Allah exalt his mention ) said: "There is no Muslim who plants a tree or cultivates a
crop, then whenever a bird or a man or an animal eats from it, except that it will be considered as an
act of charity for him." [Al-Bukhari 2320] https://sunnah.com/bukhari/41/1
The two narrations could be interpreted as follows: Planting and sowing is in principle something
praised because Allah mentioned it in the Quran as a blessing and a bounty, Allah Says (what
means): {And have you seen that [seed] which you sow? Is it you who makes it grow, or are We the
grower?}[Quran 56:63-64]. Of course, Allah does not consider something as a blessing or a bounty
except that it is something permissible and allowed, and in which there is good. However, if a person
is preoccupied by sowing to the extent that he does not fulfil other obligations and rights on him, or
that he exceeds the limits due to being busy sowing, or that he is near the enemy, and instead of
preparing for Jihad (fighting in the path of Allah), he remains busy with sowing until the enemy
overcomes him, then such people deserve the dispraise which is mentioned in the Prophetic
narration.
Hence, it becomes clear that the humiliation which is mentioned in the narration is not for solely
owning the device of sowing and ploughing, but for other things which are already discussed.
Claim – Sitting in-between sun and shade is seat of Satan
Yet again nothing wrong with this.
It was reported that a Muslim is not allowed to sit with one half of his body in the shade and the
other half in the sun. “The Prophet, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, forbade sitting between the shade
and the sun.” [Ibn Maajah 3722, Al-Albaani: Saheeh] https://sunnah.com/ibnmajah/33/67
Scholars said the reason for this prohibition is that the person is badly harmed due to the different
opposite effects on him. However, it is more worthy to give the reason that was narrated i.e., this is
the way the devil sits, for the Prophet, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, forbade sitting partially in the
sun and partially in the shade, and said: “This is how Satan sits.” [Ahmad, Al-Albaani: Saheeh]
https://theislamissue.wordpress.com/2018/12/31/the-prohibition-on-sitting-between-the-sun-and-
shade-in-islam/
Claim – Souls in green birds
https://abdurrahman.org/2018/01/08/the-souls-of-the-martyrs-are-within-the-bellies-of-green-
birds/ - Read this
181
Claim – Eating from edges
It is important to note that some Arabs used to eat together, go through the link i gave you below
and you will see an image of a large plate. They used to eat from a large plate. This is an irrelevant
point again.
https://www.ahlanwasahlan.co.uk/good-etiquette-and-manners-of-eating-in-islam/
Claim – Seek refuge from semen
This is the hadith. Tell me if you can figure it out what the hadith is referring too without me telling
you.
It is protection from lust from desires. The author is trying to push this sex narrative across. Truly
disgusting.
In this Hadīth, Shakl ibn Humayd (may Allah be pleased with him) went to the Prophet (may Allah's
peace and blessings be upon him) searching for the good of this world and the Hereafter. He did not
ask the Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) for a perishable worldly pleasure, a
handful of money, or a measure of food. Rather, he went seeking supplication. He asked the Prophet
(may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) to teach him a supplication that would benefit him in
his religion and his worldly affairs. That was the attitude of the Companions; seeking bounty from
Allah and His good pleasure. So the Prophet (may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) directed
him to this splendid sublime supplication, saying to him: Say 'O Allah', invoking Allah using His Name
that comprises all of His Most Beautiful Names. "I seek refuge in You from the evil of my hearing",
meaning I seek Allah's protection from the evil of hearing, which includes the forbidden things that a
person might hear, such as false testimony, heresy, slander, disparaging the religion, and all other
forbidden things that reach a person's hearing. "From the evil of my sight", meaning the sin of using it
to look at forbidden things, such as indecent movies and shameless scenes. "From the evil of my
tongue", meaning from every forbidden speech that can be uttered, such as false testimony, insults,
cursing, disparaging Islam and Muslims, speaking about others' affairs or abandoning speaking about
what should concern one. "From the evil of my heart", meaning filling the heart with anything other
than the remembrance of Allah, the Almighty, or devoting heart-related acts of worship to others than
Allah, the Almighty, like hope, fear, awe, and exaltation, or refraining from devoting the heart-related
acts of worship to the Lord, Glorified and Exalted. "From the evil of my semen", meaning from the evil
of my private parts by using them to commit what Allah has forbidden, or that they lead me to the
preludes of adultery, like the (forbidden) look, touch, walk to the place of sin, determination to commit
182
sin, and things of that nature. This blessed supplication includes preservation of the senses, which are
among the blessings of Allah, the Exalted, upon His creation. The Prophet (may Allah's peace and
blessings be upon him) ordered him to seek refuge in Allah only from the evil of these blessings, not
from these blessings themselves by saying for example: "I seek refuge in Allah from my hearing",
because these are blessings by means of which one worships Allah, the Almighty. They are not evil in
the absolute sense such that refuge is sought from them; rather, refuge is sought from the evil that
they might produce. Their preservation is achieved by using them in what they were created for and
not using them to approach any act of disobedience or spread any vice, because one is held
responsible for these blessings on the Day of Judgment, as Allah, the Exalted, says: {And do not pursue
that of which you have no knowledge. Indeed, the hearing, the sight and the heart - about all those
(one) will be questioned.} [Sūrat al-Isrā': 36
Claim – Interest
This is what the author says
Rape is not allowed. This was your opinion. I have refuted this.
Beat your wife. This refers to 4.34 I have explained this and refuted it
Kill apostates. I have explained the apostasy law and provided plenty of evidences
Marry and have sex with prepubescent girls. The author is clearly confused here this in the Bible not
in Islam. I have provided evidence to refute the 65.4 claim of the Quran and I provided the author with
a link to an article to my website regarding the Age of Aisha. She was pubescent by her own admission.
In regards to interest. It is a sin yes. The concept of interest is unethical. If you want to know why it is
a sin have a look at this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBbZ7lbNAbE
Claim – Curse women who plucked their eyebrows
The author cited Sunan An-Nasa’I 5112. Where are eyebrows mentioned explicitly as the author has
suggested. When it says “change creation” eyebrows come under this category but I wanted to
mention this as the author did not. It also refers to plastic surgery etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okTHgE_-JKw – Thinning the eyebrows is not allowed. Watch

this video as it explains it.
Claim – Israelites were destroyed because their women used hair extensions
183
What does this prove. Hair extensions are haram in Islam as is altering Allah’s creation The Israelites
committed many transgressions.
“The Messenger of Allah (‫ )ﷺ‬cursed the woman who adds some false hair and the woman who
asks for it, the woman who tattoos and the woman who asks for it.” Sunan Abi Dawud 4168
Claim – Puss and Poetry
The hadith is about Sihr. Wasting time memorizing vain poetry.
“Sa’d reported: The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “That one of you fills his belly
with puss is better than filling it with vain poetry.”
Source: Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 5802, Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 2258
What is wrong with this exactly. Nothing yet again.
The philosophy is really something like this: "whatever drives you away from the remembrance of
God and knowledge of your Religion and practicing your religion, would be condemned."
Claim – Whip those who drink whine
Drinking is a sin in Islam. Does the author think it is too harsh? Have a read of this which mentions
the whipping. Read below
https://www.al-islam.org/alcohol-allamah-sayyid-saeed-akhtar-rizvi/islams-approach-problem-drink
Claim – India invasion
This video addresses this claim
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVkFy8DiLIo
Claim – Every creature except humans fear the end of the world on Friday
https://muflihun.com/nasai/14/1431 - Read the hadith yourself
We as Muslims know that there are many signs for the end of times have all these signs happened yet.
No. Are we told to prepare ourselves for the next life. Yes. So, this point yet again is meaningless. We
humans are not like animals we are different.
Claim – Dead people speak in coffins
Yes, they do. Does the author think this is new? Well guess what, in Islam we believe that in the grave
we will be asked questions. I have some sad news for the author when you get asked these questions.
Two angels will come to you and will ask you.
Who is your Lord, who did you submit too?
What was your way of life?
What do you say about the man (Muhammad ‫ )ﷺ‬who was sent?
Look at what the author has said about Islam and Muhammad pbuh. I hope the author reverts to
Islam. I pray they do but if they do not…. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Hj-W9p5ILg
184
Claim – New born babies cry because they have been pricked by Satan
This is an authentic hadith. I do not see an issue with this. You know the Azan (call to prayer) is
recited in the new born babies ear.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qR_YvR95T7Y – Watch this and be amazed at how the baby

calms down and stops crying almost immediately after hearing the Azan (call to prayer) and you can
hear a feint laugh like the baby is happy. Coincidence? Maybe a blessing from Allah. Maybe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2pkcEDRrT8 – Here is a Christian man reacting to crying

babies listening to the Quran and how they become calm.
Claim – Anti Christ is alive and on an island with a beast
I think some point in the authors life they may turn into Christopher Columbus and explore every
single island on earth. Do you think you will find it if God does not will it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktXO1g7Wc8o – Watch this video it explains to you about the

Island of the Dajjal.
Claim – Muhammad pbuh wished for martyrdom
This is the hadith the author cited. All this shows is Muhammad’s pbuhs dedication to Islam how
much he loved Allah and I believe this is a case for Islam as what man who the author believes is a
false Prophet say such a thing. Why would he wish to be martyred again and again? Because martyrs
are guaranteed paradise, right? But if Islam is false like the author believes they can’t use this
reason. This hadith just shows Muhammad’s pbuh dedication to Islam.
Claim – Find 4 witnesses if you catch wife cheating
This is the hadith. What will most people do in this situation. They will beat their partner and
perhaps even kill their partner or the man who she was cheating on her husband with.
185
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6-5N_THuVQ – Watch this from 24.40 – 25.08 mins
So, 4 witnesses are required to prove the event actually happened so the punishment for such an
offence can be applied fairly.
haykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in al-Sharh al-Mumti’ (6/157):
They should describe zina in clear terms, such as saying: “I saw his penis in her vagina”. There is no
alternative to that. If they say: “We saw him on top of her and they were naked”, that is not
acceptable. Even if they say “We saw him doing with her what a man does with his wife,” that is not
sufficient as testimony. They must say “We bear witness that his penis was in her vagina.” And this is
very difficult, as the man said who was testified against at the time of ‘Umar: “If you were among the
(four) thighs you would never be able to give this testimony.” Hence Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah
mentioned that at his time no case of zina was proven by means of testimony from the time of the
Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) until the time of Ibn Taymiyah. If no case was
proven from that time until the other, then we do not know of any case that was proven by
testimony up till our own times, because it is very difficult.
And moreover, for zina, it is four (not two) sound witnesses of upright character (i.e. should not be
known as a faasiq (sinful) person).
Shaykh ‘Abd al-Rahmaan al-Sa’di said in his Tafseer (1/563):
“Why did they not produce four witnesses?” [al-Noor 24:13], i.e., why did the accusers not bring
witnesses to the things they accused them of? “four witnesses” i.e., of good character. “Since they
(the slanderers) have not produced witnesses! Then with Allaah they are the liars” – even if they are
certain about that in themselves, they are liars in Allaah’s judgement, because Allaah has forbidden
them to speak of that without four witnesses. Hence Allaah says: “Then with Allaah they are the
liars”, and He did not say “Then they are the liars”. All of this points to the grave sanctity of the
Muslim’s honour, so it is not permissible to make accusations against it without establishing
testimony.
Also, the witnesses have to be honest and they can’t make false accusations now I am no Hudud
expert so I won’t comment on this further but the author can reach out to people who know about
Hudud such as “The Muslim Skeptic” or “Assim Al Hakeem”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8r7t_X18Uw – Refer to this video in regards for the

punishment for adultery/ fornication.
Claim – Quran bans singing
The topic the author is referring to but does not address specifically is how music is a sin in Islam. The
songs today mainly talk about sex and drugs. It is disgusting and the content is haram and can cause
people to sin.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPUw8AIU9qo – Refer to this
Nasheeds such as this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liRGHxZj3NU are allowed there are no

instruments.
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/11563/the-ruling-on-islamic-nasheeds
186
Claim – Baby girls murdered by mothers will go to hell with their mothers
Yes, this is a sahih hadith I have pasted it for you below
Before making a conclusion on any particular verse or hadith, we must look at the available data and
start reasoning from there. Below, I will discuss a few relevant verses from the Quran.
The first verses which should come to one’s mind when seeing this narration are the following:
When the baby girl buried alive is asked for what sin she was killed
Quran 81:8-9 (Abdel Haleem)
As is well-known, in pre-Islamic Arabia female infants were buried alive because of the shame they
brought by being female as male children were prized. This shame is alluded to in the Quran:
When one of them is given news of the birth of a daughter, such as he so readily ascribes to the Lord
of Mercy, his face grows dark and he is filled with gloom
Quran 43:17 (Abdel Haleem)
In Q 81:8-9, God mentions that the female infant will be asked on the Day of Judgement for what sin
she was killed as a way to show that they were sinless and were killed without any reason. This is
mentioned to bring fear into the hearts of those in Arabia who practiced infanticide.
There is also relevant data from a hadith that anyone who hasn’t reached the age of accountability
(which would usually correlate with puberty, though not necessarily) is not responsible for their sins
as the pen is lifted (meaning their sins won’t be recorded):
It was narrated from Aishah that: The Messenger of Allah said. "The Pen has been lifted from three
: from the sleeping person until he awakens, from the minor until he grows up, and from the insane
person until he comes to his senses."In his narration, (one of the narrators Abu Bakr (Ibn Abu
Shaibah) said: "And from the afflicted person, unit he recovers"
Sunan Ibn Majah 2041, Grade: Hasan (good) according to Darussalam; Sunan Abu Dawud 4403 (from
Ali ibn Abu Talib), Grade: Sahih (authentic) according to al-Albani
An infant by necessity could never be accountable and, as such, they are sinless. We also know that
they can’t be punished for sins they didn’t do and that people are not punished until the message of
Islam reaches them and they reject it:
Whoever accepts guidance does so for his own good; whoever strays does so at his own peril. No soul
will bear another’s burden, nor do We punish until We have sent a messenger.
187
Quran 17:15 (Abdel Haleem, cf. Q 6:164, 35:18, 39:7, 53:38)
Furthermore, there is another report which explicitly mentions that infants and children buried alive
are in paradise:
Narrated Hasana' daughter of Mu'awiyah: She reported on the authority of her paternal uncle: I asked
the Prophet (‫)ﷺ‬: Who are in Paradise? He replied: Prophets are in Paradise, martyrs are in Paradise,
infants are in Paradise and children buried alive are in Paradise.
Sunan Abu Dawud 2521, Grade: Sahih (authentic) according to al-Albani
So, how is the original report in question understood? When we look at all the data at hand, it becomes
clear that it cannot possibly be absolute and unrestricted in meaning. In his discussion of this hadith,
Waqar Akbar Cheema writes:
A few scholars, nevertheless, take a more ingenious approach of parting with the apparent meanings
of the hadith suggesting the word “al-ma’udah” does not actually refer to the one buried alive rather
to the one for whom or on whose behest (or even consent) she was buried. Accordingly, they imply
that the actual construction was supposed to be “al-ma’udah laha.” Both these ways of restricting the
implications of hadith to the specific incident and the ingenious interpretation appear to be borne of
apologetic concerns or seem altogether desperate. This, however, is only before we see more detailed
versions of the hadith like the one preserved by Ahmad b. Hanbal in his well-known Musnad...
Salama b. Yazid al-Ju‘fi said: I and my brother went to the Messenger of Allah (‫ )ﷺ‬and asked,
“Messenger of Allah! Our mother Mulaika kept the ties of kinship, honoured the guest and did so and
so [good deeds] and she died in the times of ignorance [before Islam]; will her good deeds benefit
her?” He said, “No.” We [then] asked, “In the times of ignorance, however, she had our sister buried
alive, will that benefit her [i.e. our sister]?”[6] The Messenger of Allah (‫ )ﷺ‬said, “Al-Wa’idah and al-
Ma’udah will enter Hell except if al-Wa’idah lived to accept Islam for then Allah would forgive her.”
Accordingly, we see that the most significant part of the narration are the clarifying remarks of the
Prophet (‫“ )ﷺ‬except if the one who buried her lived to accept Islam for then Allah would forgive her”
because along with the prior mention of the death of mother of the girl they are evidently about a
woman other than the mother of the girl which in turn leads us to the understanding that the al-
ma’udah in fact refers to mother of the girl who was equally responsible for the heinous crime. In view
of the details above we can conclude that:
a) “al-ma’udah” here refers to the mother of the girl buried alive for she had her buried, and “al-
wa’idah” refers to a woman burier of the infant girl who was someone besides her mother.
b) the remarks about two women entering Hell had a specific context and they do not relate to the
infant girl buried alive. This interpretation is not the brainchild of this author rather a number of
scholars from the past centuries have mentioned this.
Al-Qadi al-Baidawi (d. 685/1286), for instance, wrote…
Perhaps, ‘the burier’ (al-wa’idah) refers to the midwife, and ‘al-ma’uda’ to the one for whom burying
was done i.e. the mother of the infant. The adjunct (‘for whom’) was thus omitted. It was their custom
that when a woman would be in labour pains a deep hole was dug for her on which she was made to
sit. Meanwhile the midwife remained behind her waiting for the child. If the mother bore a boy the
midwife would hold him and if the mother bore a girl she would through her in that hole and put mud
on her.
188
Others who gave this interpretation include al-Tibi (d. 743/1342),[9] Ibn al-Malak (d. 854/1450), al-
Manawi (d.1031/1622),[11] al-Mazhari (d. 1225/1810), al-Alusi (d. 1270/1854), and al-Sahanpuri (d.
1346/1927). More recently al-Albani (d.1420/1999) adopted a similar interpretation.
https://icraa.org/does-hadith-condemn-the-infants-buried-alive/#_ftn4 – refer to this
As per usual I am using the same logic and mindset of the author so if you think I am ignorant then
what is the author?
“Random Facts and Crazy Teachings: Odd and Random the Bible says”
The author clearly has an “baby girls going to hell”. I assume they also must not like how babies are
killed. Have they read their own Bible? Also the belief in Christianity as per Romans 10:9-10 says how
you get to heaven so what happens to babies.
The lack of clarity on this topic in the Bible may have led some theologians (specifically Catholics) to
speculate the existence of a place called “limbo” (which is not heaven or hell) where unbaptized
infants go when they die. What's more, there are Bible passages which imply infants would be in hell
as they are born upon sin and are not of the elect. In Christianity, it is known that the only way one
can be saved is by “accepting [Christian] Jesus as their lord and savior”:
9 Because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God
raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and
with the mouth one confesses and is saved.
Romans 10:9-10 (ESV)
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except
through me.
John 14:6 (ESV)
How can an infant go to heaven if they can’t confess with their mouths that “Jesus is Lord”? Things
get even worse when baptism is factored into the equation:
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.
Mark 16:16 (ESV)
Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter
the kingdom of God.
John 3:5 (ESV)
Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an
appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
1 Peter 3:21 (ESV)
So infants who aren’t baptised and die or are murdered, such as the ones in pre-Islamic Arabia
whom Christians claim to care so much about, “cannot enter the kingdom of God”.
189
The view of a Church Father
The blog for the Bible software, Logos, writes:
The theological insights of the early Greek and Latin Church Fathers have shaped the course of
Christian history. From the Trinity and original sin to the scriptural canon and just war, looking to the
early Church Fathers helps us better understand the development of Christian doctrine throughout
the millennia.
The Church Fathers’ explorations of Scripture have grounded biblical commentary up to the modern
era. To ignore the writings of great theologians like Augustine, Basil, Ambrose, and Chrysostom is to
ignore the very roots of Christian theology. But these early patristic texts can be either difficult to
find, difficult to understand (because of translation issues), or both.
The famous Church father Augustine writes regarding infants and original sin:
The inevitable conclusion from these truths is this, that, as nothing else is effected when infants are
baptized except that they are incorporated into the church, in other words, that they are united with
the body and members of Christ, unless this benefit has been bestowed upon them, they are
manifestly in danger of damnation. Damned, however, they could not be if they really had no sin.
Now, since their tender age could not possibly have contracted sin in its own life, it remains for us,
even if we are as yet unable to understand, at least to believe that infants inherit original sin.
http://www.awitness.org/books/bapinf3.html - Refer to this
https://www.reddit.com/r/MuslimsRespond/comments/dw08rw/the_girl_who_is_buried_alive_will
_go_to_hell/ - Refer to this too.
The bible refers to lusting after someone who’s genitals were like that of a donkey and whose
emission was like that of the horse.
She lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like
that of horses. Ezekiel 23:20 NIV
Bible talks about raping women
You will be pledged to be married to a woman, but another will take her and rape her. You will build
a house, but you will not live in it. You will plant a vineyard, but you will not even begin to enjoy its
fruit. Your ox will be slaughtered before your eyes, but you will eat none of it. Your donkey will be
forcibly taken from you and will not be returned. Your sheep will be given to your enemies, and no
one will rescue them. . . . The Lord will afflict your knees and legs with painful boils that cannot be
cured, spreading from the soles of your feet to the top of your head. Deuteronomy 28:30-31,35
The Bible talks about cutting women’s hand off if she touches a man’s private parts when men are
fighting
When men fight with one another, and the wife of the one draw near to rescue her husband from
the hand of him who is beating him, and puts out her hand and seizes him by the private parts, then
you shall cut off her hand. Deuteronomy 25:11-12
As per the baby example the author has an issue with that but not with the one below
190
Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man
intimately. But all the girls who have not known man intimately, spare for yourselves. Numbers
31:17-18
He [Josiah] executed the priests of the pagan shrines on their own altars, and he burned human
bones on the altars to desecrate them.... He did this in obedience to all the laws written in the scroll
that Hilkiah the priest had found in the LORD's Temple. Never before had there been a king like
Josiah, who turned to the LORD with all his heart and soul and strength, obeying all the laws of
Moses pbuh. And there has never been a king like him since. 2 Kings 23:20-25 NLT
The author wrongly accused Islam of allowing rape and prepubescent sex I have refuted this yet their
Bible condones this. I know the author will say for the Numbers example is for Moses pbuh but Moses
pbuh is a Prophet of God and the author believes Jesus is God. So, Jesus commanded this and as we
read in
2 Timothy 3:16, NLT: "All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful to teach us what is true and to
make us realize what is wrong in our lives. It corrects us when we are wrong and teaches us to do
what is right."
So according to the author Moses pbuh did nothing wrong when Jesus (who the author believes is
God) commanded him to take these girls as sex slaves. Refer to this
https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/11/14/bible-does-numbers-3118-sanction-pre-pubescent-
marriages-child-marriage-2/
I will reiterate again I am using the same logic as the author. They should have an issue with the Bible
and any Christian reading this who has read the author’s articles and believes what the author has
said about Islam should denounce Christianity. If you dare say context, if you dare say it needs
explaining then you are a hypocrite. As you know this refutation of the authors website is not meant
to be an attack on Christianity. Other responses where I have exposed hypocrisy, I keep short as I do
want to upset Christians. The author titled their article “Random Facts and Crazy Teachings: Odd and
Random Things Muhammad Did and Said” I have shown and can show more ““Random Facts and
Crazy Teachings: Odd and Random the Bible says” But I won’t instead I will provide a link and you can
check this if you would like this is a link which is optional for you to check.
https://www.salon.com/2014/05/31/11_kinds_of_bible_verses_christians_love_to_ignore_partner/
- Check this if you like.
I will keep repeating myself I am pointing out double standards and hypocrisy by showing to the reader
how if you apply the same logic to the author’s religion, they should denounce it. Are they going to?
Probably not. Have they even made it this far into the refutation? Maybe. Have they checked the
evidences including all the links I have provided? I hope so. This article they have created just further
displays their dishonesty. How they lack integrity. They used Da’if hadith again and a couple of them
and who does that? Someone who has so much hate and straight up is just a horrible person. There
are not many articles left to respond to know.
191
CRAZY AND DISTURBING THINGS MUHAMMAD SAID ABOUT GOD
AND SATAN – A RESPONSE
The link to the authors article is below
https://www.whowasmuhammad.org/god-satan
This is a really short article and will be a nice one to respond too. Again, any repeated claims I will
either ignore or provide the same evidence from past sections. The inference here is that the God in
Islam is not good and that He is not loving. So, I expect to find nothing in the Bible where God is
shown to be cruel.
ABOUT GOD- A RESPONSE
Claim - He said Allah does not love unbelievers:
The author cites Surah 3:32 of the Quran which reads
“Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ “Obey Allah and His Messenger.” If they still turn away, then truly Allah does
not like the disbelievers.”
Ibn Kathir says in the tafsir of this verse the below
(Say: "Obey Allah and the Messenger.'' But if they turn away) by defying the Prophet)
َ ‫اَلل َل ُيحب ْال َكـفر‬
‫ين‬ َ ّ ‫َفإن‬
ِ ِ ِ ِ
(then Allah does not like the disbelievers.) thus, testifying that defiance of the Messenger's way
constitutes Kufr. Indeed, Allah does not like whoever does this, even if he claims that he loves Allah
and seeks a means of approach to Him, unless, and until, he follows the unlettered Prophet, the Final
Messenger from Allah to the two creations: mankind and the Jinn. This is the Prophet who, if the
previous Prophets and mighty Messengers were to have been alive during his time, they would have
no choice but to follow, obey him, and to abide by his Law. We will mention this fact when we explain
the Ayah,
‫ي‬ ُ ّ ‫َوإ رذ َأ َخ َذ‬

َ ‫اَلل م َيث َـق النب ِّي ر‬
‫ِ ر‬ ِ ِ
(And (remember) when Allah took the Covenant of the Prophets) 3:81, Allah willing.
Allah loves all of His creatures and for that reason He sent Prophets and messengers to teach us the
truth and guide us to the straight path. Allah and the believers want people to choose the way of
righteousness and thereby enter Paradise, but Allah does not love sinful actions. A person who
rejects Allah, commits evil deeds, and dies without repentance will be denied the blessings of Allah’s
love. Therefore, we should become familiar with the characteristics of those whom Allah loves and
does not love as mentioned in the Quran.
Allah loves faith and the believers, those who depend upon Him for their needs, who are mindful of
Him and remember Him, who are grateful to Him for their blessings, who fear His punishment and
hope in His reward.
Continue reading here - https://abuaminaelias.com/those-allah-loves-and-does-not-love/
192
Claim - He said Allah is the best deceiver: Surah 3:54, 8:30.
In the authors irreconcilable article (link - https://www.whowasmuhammad.org/irreconcilable ) they

say the below. This is very interesting.
Go right now and check Surah Imran verse 54 and Surah Anfal verse 30 it does not say deceive. The
author will reply that ‫ مکر‬means deceive. The author does not know Arabic. Deluded Christian
missionaries have tried to twist the meaning of makr.
If you go to the glossary Of Islamic Terms: English–Arabic – Anwer Mahmoud Zanaty:
MAKR Has two meanings: 1. Plotting or planning evil intent. 2. Planning for a good purpose: ‘Wa
Makaru wa Makara Allah wa’LLahu Khairul Makereen’ (Surah Aali Imran 3:54. They planned and
Allah planned and Allah is the best of planners’. Makara = they plotted. Makara = He planned.
Makkar = plotter. Makereen = plotters.
Refer to this link - https://discover-the-truth.com/2015/01/24/response-to-critics-claim-allah-is-a-

deceiver-quran-354/
Now I will focus more on the hypocrisy of the author later but notice how the author says from that
image “Christianity teaches that there is no deceit in God” This is unbelievably false. The author does
not even know their own religion.
Ezekiel 14.9 KJV “And if the Prophet be DECEIVED when he hath spoken a thing, I THE LORD HAVE
DECEIVED that Prophet, and I will stretch out my hand upon him, and will destroy him from the
midst of my people Israel.”
Jeremiah 20.7 “O LORD, THOU HAST DECEIVED ME, AND I WAS DECEIVED: thou art stronger than I,
and hast prevailed: I am in derision daily, every one mocketh me.”
So, the individual has lied to you about their own religion. I will touch more on this in the hypocrisy
section. Some translations used the word entice but a lot use the word deceive. I literally went to my
physical copy of the KJV and looked it up myself. The word deceive has been used.
Claim - He said Allah wants humans to sin so he can show them mercy, and if humans refused to
sin Allah would wipe them out and replace them with people who would sin:
So? One of the main issues in Christianity is the necessity of a blood sacrifice. In Islam God can
forgive sins. Allah says in the Quran
ُ ‫يعا ۚ إ َّن ُهۥ ُه َو ٱ ْل َغ ُف‬
ُ ‫ور ٱ َّلرح‬ َ ‫ّلل َي ْغف ُر ٱ ُّلذ ُن‬
ً ‫وب َجم‬ ُ َ ‫ُ ْ َٰ َ َ َ َ َ ْ َ ُ َ َ ى‬
َ َ ‫نفسه ْم َل َت ْق َن ُطوا من َّر ْح َمة ٱ َّلل ۚ إ َّن ٱ‬
۞ ‫يم‬ ٰ ‫قل يـعبادى ٱلذين أِسفوا ع‬
‫ىل أ‬
“Say, ˹O Prophet, that Allah says,˺ “O My servants who have exceeded the limits against their
souls! Do not lose hope in Allah’s mercy, for Allah certainly forgives all sins. He is indeed the All-
Forgiving, Most Merciful.”
193
We are flawed creatures; we sin and we seek repentance from God and we ask Him to guide us and
to make us better. Have a read of this article where it is explained better
https://abuaminaelias.com/if-you-did-not-sin-allah-would-replace-you-with-sinners/
monotheism.com/does_allah_desire_that_people_sin__a_clarification_of_an_important_hadith
Claim – Same as past claim but author says “according to Islam Satan is the hero and saviour of the
world since he is the one that tempted humanity to sin.”
Seriously? Just so you know the author yet again has provided their opinion. (the part in
quotations”)
In the Quran, Allah says in Chapter 38:82
“Satan said, “By Your Glory! I will certainly mislead them all,”
Satan’s mission is to mislead people. Just like in Christianity, right? So, Satan whispers known as was
was. For example, a friend invites you to the club you say no as you do not drink you go (Satan’s
waswas) Whilst you are there it leads to you sinning whether that be drinking or hooking up with
someone of the opposite gender. What was the cause you listening to your desires and going to that
club? If you have read the past claim and the evidence provided you will understand.
So, no Satan is not the hero in Islam Auzibillah. Refer to this link as well
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/is-islam-from-the-devil/ - I wrote this
Claim - He said Allah loves sneezing but dislikes yawning:
Abu Huraira reported: The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “Verily, Allah likes
sneezing and dislikes yawning. When one of you sneezes and praises Allah, it is a duty on every
Muslim to say to him: May Allah have mercy on you. As for yawning, it is from Satan. When one of
you yawns, let him hold it back as much as he can. When one of you yawns, Satan laughs at him.”
‫ْ ُ ى‬
Whenever we sneeze, we say ‫ ٱل َح رمد ِلل‬Alhumdullialh which means “thank God” Do you know what
happens when we sneeze? Sneezing brings a person the blessing of relief by releasing thousands of
germs out of the body that were trapped in the head, lungs, body which, if they were to remain
there, would cause the person pain and sickness. So, we thank God. Nice isn’t it?
Yawning can be seen as disrespectful. Imagine you yawn in a business meeting, during an interview.
Bad right? Now imagine yawning while you are praying. You are yawning in the presence of God.
Yawning can be done intentionally as well. Here is a fun challenge for you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nv2wQvn6Wxc - We Challenge You Not to Yawn
If you pass that well done.
Claim - He said Allah doesn't accept the prayer of anybody who farts, urinates, or defecates until
the person performs the ablution.
So, this is a repeated claim before I provide the same evidence look at this. This is from the authors
website the article that I am responding too now if you have read their article first you may have
noticed this.
194
They say the same thing straight after each other. This is as a deceptive as they are focusing on
quantity.
There is nothing wrong with this when we pray, we have to be in a state of Wudu, purity. You are
praying to the creator. If you want to know why it is important. Watch this lecture
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyJ-czBQiro - The Origins of WUDU (Ablution) & the WISDOM

Behind it
ABOUT SATAN – A RESPONSE
Claim - He said Satan farts when he hears the call to prayer
The Arabic word for breaking the wind is not limited to releasing stomach gas
The Arabic word ‘‫( ضط‬dart)’ needs to be understood properly. It carries the meaning of passing or
breaking the wind but this is not the only meaning. It also means to let slip which can be stomach
gas but not necessarily so.
Other meanings of the Arabic word ‘‫ ’ضط‬are ‘to ease’ or ‘shortage’ or ‘to release/escape’ and hence
shortage of hair is also called ‘‫ ’ضط‬where hair is ‘released’ from the head or ‘reduced’. Therefore, it
could be said for a balding man that his hair is escaping him. A person who has light beard is called
‘‫( ’اضط‬Adraat). A woman with light eyebrows is called ‘‫( ’ضطاء‬Dartaa); all different forms of the
same verb ‘‫’ضط‬.
Even though it is weak, there is a saying of Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) that proves that the
word is not exclusive to passing the wind i.e. stomach gas. The sentence, at the least, proves that the
usage of the word in the past was not restricted to the one being alleged and made fun of by enemies
of Islam. This is included to show you the Arabic word that is used is the same as the one related to
the claim the author has made.
Read more here - https://qurananswers.me/2014/02/05/the-hadith-of-shaytaan-passing-wind-

explained/
Claim - He said Satan urinated in a man's ears
Even if this literal so what. However, we can take this in a metaphorical sense. Here is the hadith
195
Satan did something which led to the person not praying. Satan wants to mislead us we have already
established this earlier.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAQIRPrQ4lg – This video addresses the claim. It refutes David

Wood.
https://icraa.org/understanding-satan-urinates-in-the-ear-hadith/
Claim - He said Satan sleeps in noses
The author doesn’t realise how this is metaphorical and how the hadith teaches hygiene. Here is the
hadith
There is dirt in your nose. Dirt is evil. Therefore, clean your nose. It is very simple. Muhammad pbuh
also said this
Allah's Messenger peace be upon him said, "If anyone of you performs ablution, he should put
water in his nose and then blow it out and whoever cleans his private parts with stones should do
so with odd numbers. And whoever wakes up from his sleep should wash his hands before putting
them in the utensil, because nobody knows where his hands were during sleep."
Why didn’t the author tell us this?
Claim - He said Satan (who is a Jinn in Islam) eats animal dung
The author got this from David Wood. They like Wood, don’t they?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpGNz9h4_gg – This video addresses this claim
Claim - He said Satan will eat food that people drop if they don't pick it up
The command to pick up the food that falls on the floor and eat it is Mustahabb (recommended), not
Fardh (obligatory), to be mindful of the favour of Allah and be distanced from the attitudes of the
prideful. Tuhfat Al-Ahwathi, a commentary on the Sunan of At-Tirmithi, reads: "Leaving the food that
falls is (described as) leaving it for the devil is because it involves neglecting the favour of Allah and
undervaluing it. Moreover, it is the practice of the prideful. People's unwillingness to pick up the
food that has fallen on the floor and eat it is often from their pride; and this is the devil’s work."
An-Nawawi may Allah have mercy upon him said: "The Hadeeth implies that it is recommended
to eat food that falls on the ground after removing any dirt that got onto it; this is of course if it has
not fallen on an impure place. If it has fallen on an impure place, then it becomes ritually impure as
196
well and must be washed if possible; otherwise, it should be fed to an animal and not left for the
devil.'
Claim - He said yawning is from Satan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyOOgmhifI4 – This video explains it
Claim - He said when you yawn to cover your mouth with your hand so Satan doesn't enter into
your mouth
https://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/11/01/yawning-comparative-study-knowledge-and-
beliefs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yAQcrxSKVw – Yawning while praying
Claim - He said Satan eats and drinks with his left hand, so therefore people shouldn't
It is sunnah to eat with the right hand. There is nothing wrong with this. In fact, if you think about
this it teaches us to be nothing like Satan at all. It is so detailed that something like eating, which we
do not pay attention too should be done according to the Sunnah
Claim - He said Satan ties three knots at the back of people's heads when they sleep
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jL6VJYrLmSA – This video explains the three knots.
It is all about Satan trying to take you away from the remembrance of Allah. Again, we have already
established that Satan wants to misguide mankind. Look how much Satan has misguided the author
so much so they have created this website in which they have lied and cherry picked where they
have deliberately misrepresented the religion of Islam and Muhammad pbuh.
May Allah protect us all.
Claim - He forbade sitting between the sun and the shade because he said it is the seat of Satan:
Repeated claim. Yet again nothing wrong with this.
It was reported that a Muslim is not allowed to sit with one half of his body in the shade and the
other half in the sun. “The Prophet, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, forbade sitting between the shade
and the sun.” [Ibn Maajah, Al-Albaani: Saheeh]
Scholars said the reason for this prohibition is that the person is badly harmed due to the different
opposite effects on him. However, it is more worthy to give the reason that was narrated i.e., this is
the way the devil sits, for the Prophet, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, forbade sitting partially in the
sun and partially in the shade, and said: “This is how Satan sits.” [Ahmad, Al-Albaani: Saheeh]
https://theislamissue.wordpress.com/2018/12/31/the-prohibition-on-sitting-between-the-sun-and-
shade-in-islam/
Now it is time to look at the Bible. Remember I am using the same mindset as the author.
We have shown two verses in the Bible which show that the God of the Bible is a deceiver.
197
This is what the author said. They cite Isiah 53.9 do they think Isiah 53 is about Jesus? We will touch
this in other sections. Isiah 53.9 says “neither was any deceit in his mouth.” Is deceit in the mouth
the only way to deceive someone? No. Jeremiah 20.7 and Ezikiel 14.9 clearly show how God
deceived to the extent that the word deceived is actually used.
For more evidences refer to this link
https://www.call-to-monotheism.com/the_biblical_god_as_a_deceiver
Therefore, we can conclude and the author should as well if they want to be consistent that the God
of the Bible is a deceiver.
In Numbers 23.19 it says “God is not a man, that he should lie; Neither the son of man, that he
should repent:Hath he said, and shall he not do it?Or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it
good?” Yet Christians say God is a man. Amazing.
The author referred to excrement well when we go to the Bible we read in Ezekiel 4 :15 Then he said
to me, “See, I assign to you cow's dung instead of human dung, on which you prepare your bread.”
Does the author want to comment on this and say it is “Crazy and Disturbing”
Also in Ezekiel 4 :12 And you shall eat it as a barley cake, baking it in their sight on human dung.”
2 Kings 18 :27 But the Rabshakeh said to them, “Has my master sent me to speak these words to
your master and to you, and not to the men sitting on the wall, who are doomed with you to eat
their own dung and to drink their own urine?” How strange? The author should agree.
Leviticus 26:29 "You will eat the flesh of your sons and the flesh of your daughters." So, the Bible
supports cannibalism? The author who has shown a blatant disregard for context should agree with
me but they won’t due to their hypocrisy.
Remember this according to the author is all from God and as we read in 2 Timothy 3:16, NLT: "All
Scripture is inspired by God and is useful to teach us what is true and to make us realize what is wrong
in our lives. It corrects us when we are wrong and teaches us to do what is right." So, everything in the
Bible is from God. The author is someone as well who I am sure believes the Bible is reliable and is
preserved etc.
We just keep seeing examples of the authors dishonesty and if they respond to me and dare pull the
context card when I talk about their religion. Why does context matter when it comes to Christianity
but you consistently do not care at all for Islamic context? I have exposed this to everyone.
Yet again I have refuted the claims the author has made. I mentioned this in the disclaimer that at the
end of this response, I will provide you with a list of resources that you can refer too which clear up
many misconceptions about Islam and if you think I have not covered some claims in enough detail
198
then you can refer to the list of resources. Some of the authors points in their article were very similar
and some were repeated hence why I did not respond to them all. I believe the evidence provided is
sufficient to refute their whole article.
199
MUHAMMAD: DISTURBED AND DECEIVED – A RESPONSE
Here is a link to the article that I am responding too.
https://www.whowasmuhammad.org/disturbed-deceived
As per usual any repeated claim I will either ignore or provide the same evidence as before. Clearly
the author believes Muhammad pbuh was disturbed and that he was deceived. Thus, I am expecting
to find no examples of people thinking people in the Bible are crazy and I am expecting to find no
deceit in the Bible. If any of those things exist then the author is a hypocrite.
The author mentions Ibn Ishaq a lot again if you haven’t read this article then please do so
MUHAMMAD WAS A DISTURBED INDIVIDUAL – A RESPONSE
Claim - Muhammad himself thought that he might've been possessed by an evil spirit after his first
encounter with the spirit that gave him the revelations: He was suicidal. He tried to jump off
mountains several times:
Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, page 106. The author also references page 72 of Ibn Ishaq and tries to
say Halima retuned Muhammad pbuh to his mother as she though he was possessed. I have already
addressed the possession argument before. The report is not authentic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPvZ_xNePzo Watch from 1.00 it also addresses the suicide

point as well. You may have already seen this in past sections. Watch the whole thing it addresses
many claims as well. Like Aisha, Satanic verses etc.
Moreover, why didn’t his enemies accuse him of this more often especially his bitter enemies like
Abu Lahab? They knew it was not true.
This addition is not from the speech of A'isha, rather it is the statement of Az-Zuhri. He was from the
second generation of Muslims and did not witness any of these incidents, nor did he remark that any
of the companions of the Prophet informed him of this. He clarifies this in the very narration itself
with his statement: "in what has reached us."
Ibn Hajar (may God have mercy on him) said:
"Thus, the one who made the statement 'in what has reached us' was Az-Zuhri, and the meaning of
his statement is: in this sentence is that which has reached us regarding the Prophet (peace be upon
him) in regards to this story. It is merely an addition from what has reached Az-Zuhri and is not
actually connected back to the original narration, as Al-Kirmani said: this is what is apparent."(Fath
al-Bari, volume 12, page 359)
Abu Shama al-Maqdisi (may God have mercy on him) said:
"This is the statement of Az-Zuhri or someone else other than A'isha - God knows best - due to the
phrase: 'in what has reached us,' and Aisha did not say anything from what was mentioned in the
hadith." (Sharh al-Hadith al-Muqtafa fi Mab'ath an-Nabi al-Mustafa, page 177)
200
Additions of Az-Zuhri from that which reached him are not accepted because their chain of narration
is disconnected to begin with, thus they are considered to be "hanging" narrations in both the
terminological and practical sense. The mere presence of hanging narrations like this in the
collection of Bukhari doesn't mean that Bukhari considered them to be authentic, or that it would be
accurate to say that Bukhari narrated them, because that which Bukhari is said to have narrated
authentically is only in regards to that which he narrated with a complete chain from beginning to
end.
Sheikh Albani (may God have mercy on him) said:
"To ascribe this narration as being one of Bukhari's is a manifest error, because one who ascribes
such a thing imagines that this story of jumping off the mountain is authentic according to the
conditions of Bukhari himself. This is not the case, and the proof is that Bukhari narrated this event
himself at the end of A'isha's statement in the chapter of "How the Revelation Began".[Albani goes
on to quote the full narration].
"This narration along with Az-Zuhri's addition has been recorded by Ahmad (volume 6, pages 232-
233), Abu Nu'aym (ad-Dalaìl, pages 68-69), and Al-Baihaqi in his ad-Dalaìl, volume 1, pages 393-
395), via Abdur Razzaq on the authority of Ma'mar. It has also been narrated via this route by
Muslim (volume 1, page 98), but he did not narrate the expression; rather, he only referred to the
expression narrated by Yunus on the authority of Ibn Shihab without Az-Zuhri's addition. Muslim and
Ahmad (volume 6, page 223) both narrated it this way via Aqil bin Khalid on the authority of Ibn
Shihab without Az-Zuhri's addition. Bukhari also narrated it this way in the beginning of his collection
via Aqil.
"Thus I [Albani] say: we may conclude, from the above, that the addition to the narration contains
two defects:
The first: only Ma'mar narrated it this way, while Yunus and Aqil did not; thus it is rendered an
oddity (shaadha).
The second: its chain of narration is disconnected at two consecutive levels (mursala mu'adalla). The
phrase "in what has reached us" is the addition of Az-Zuhri, as is clear from the expression, as Ibn
Hajar declared in his al-Fath.
So I [Albani] say: this is something which the Dr. [meaning: Dr. Sa'id Ramadan al-Buti, author of the
book which Albani is criticizing] has either forgotten or failed to realize, as he seems to think that
every letter of Bukhari's collection must be authentic according to his own conditions. Perhaps he
has failed to differentiate between that which has a complete chain of narration and that which has
an incomplete chain, just as he failed to differentiate between the authentic narration which
contains additions and the inauthentic narration which contains some authentic information. An
example of this is the narration of A'isha, which contains at the end of it this inauthentic addition. So
know that this addition is not present in any of the narrations with complete authentic chains, which
are accepted as proof as I clarified in my book Silsila al-Ahadith ad-Da'ifa, number 4858, and as I
pointed out in my commentary on my summarized version of Bukhari's collection." (Difa' 'an al-
Hadith an-Nabawi, pages 40-41)
monotheism.com/the_narration_of_the_prophet_s__peace_be_upon_him__contemplation_of_suic
ide_is_inauthentic_both_in_terms_of_its_citation_and_textual_content
201
monotheism.com/does_Prophet_muhammad_s_contemplation_of_suicide_disprove_his_Prophet_
hood__assuming_he_did__
Claim - His shoulders trembled in terror after the angel Gabriel supposedly appeared to him for
the first time
I am not a Prophet obviously but I can logically deduce that if an angel came to someone, your natural
reaction will be that off paranoia and being afraid. You are met by an angel. You are experiencing the
supernatural. Just think about that. Jesus’s family in the Bible thought he was crazy too. I will touch
on this in the hypocrisy section.
Was Muhammad pbuh afraid after he went back and he spoke to Khadija and Waraqa? No, he wasn’t.
So, this claim from the author is a ridiculous one if anything it shows Muhammad pbuh’s reaction is a
genuine sincere reaction.
In Surah Taha chapter 20 (read from verse 9) we learn of the story of Moses pbuh notice despite God
telling him to put his staff down he was still scared? Yet another genuine reaction. I reiterate the fact
this is a meaningless point made by the author.
https://muslimmatters.org/2020/06/09/30-khawaatir-in-30-days-a-parents-guide-day-12-Prophet-
musa-and-overcoming-fear/ - Have a read of this.
Claim - He said the angel that revealed the supposed revelations to him caught him and pressed
him so hard he couldn't bear it anymore
Here is a link to the hadith we will address more of this in the next point but just look at the hadith
yourself here is an excerpt. Read the highlighted part
So, Angel Gabriel released Muhammad pbuh? The own hadith when read properly refutes the author
and is just a meaningless claim. As I said I will address the revelation and what happened during it in
the next section. If you want to read the full hadith and not just the excerpt above here is the link for
it. https://sunnah.com/bukhari/1/3
Claim - Told his wife Khadija to cover him His face would turn red when he received his supposed
revelations, His face would change colour when he received his supposed revelations He would
sweat when he received his supposed revelations He breathed heavily when he received his
supposed revelations He breathed with a snore when he received his supposed revelations His
heart beat severely after his supposed revelations - When he received his supposed revelations,
one could hear what sounded like bees by his face
202
Yes, that is long. I decided to group all these claims into one as they are all similar and revolve around
the topic of Muhammad ‫’ﷺ‬s revelation and what happened during them. It will be easier to explain
it all under one section as opposed to separately for your ease. So have a look at the authors claims
again so you understand what the author is arguing. Need some help? They are indirectly trying to
argue that the revelations had physical effects on the Prophet pbuh such as sweating and heavy
breathing. They think this in some way impacts Muhammad’s ‫ ﷺ‬revelation. In reality, it shows a
genuine and honest reaction.
Let’s start at the beginning Muhammad pbuh wentْ to cave Hira there he was greeted by the Angel
َ َ ّ َ ‫ر‬
Gabriel who asked him to read. ‫ “ ٱق َرأ ِبٱ رس ِم َرِّبك ٱل ِذى خل َق‬Read, ˹O Prophet,˺ in the Name of your Lord
Who created—” The Angel Gabriel grabbed Muhammad pbuh tightly. Now after this altercation
naturally Muhammad pbuh was shaken up. He went back home and asked his wife to cover him he
was afraid this was an honest genuine reaction to what we would say is the supernatural in the sense
of something we will never comprehend. Muhammad pbuh told Khadija and Waraqa of what
happened and Waraqa confirmed that Muhammad pbuh had met Angel Gabriel. We read this in Sahih
Al Bukhari 3. https://sunnah.com/bukhari/1
Read the whole chapter of Bukhari on the Book of Revelation. Read the “The Sealed Nectar”
Muhammad pbuh displayed a sincere and genuine reaction to what came to him. So, when he would
breath heavily, heart beat increased and face change colour it is further evidences of a genuine sincere
reaction. Remember the Quran was being revealed to mankind. Today when I read the Quran, I cry
my heart beats fast speak to many Muslims they will tell you this. The Quran moves me and is truly
amazing.
It was Muhammad’s (SAW) destiny and the will of Allah (SWT) to call his people to the straight path
of righteousness and goodwill and to warn of the punishments that could befall them if they
maintained their ignorant ways. When Muhammad (SAW) told Khadijah (RA) of his revelation and
Prophetic duties, she was the first woman to accept Islam. She remained steadfast in her beliefs from
then on and firmly supported Muhammad (SAW) on his journey to spread his message and call people
to the oneness of God.
Have a read of this https://www.dar-alifta.org/foreign/ViewArticle.aspx?ID=171
https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2010/10/tough-physical-consditions-revelation.html?m=1 –
Read this too.
So, the signs which were exhibited during revelation in fact can be argued as proof of his Prophethood.
We as Muslims believe that the Quran is the verbatim word of God. So, when it was revealed to
Muhammad pbuh naturally something as powerful as the word of God should obviously impact the
person. As I said when I read the Quran, I cry it moves me. This is 1400 years later. Muhammad pbuh
became sad when revelation stopped his heart longed for it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoqhNz7wD3I – Watch this lecture on it. It is only 8 minutes.
Now I can’t even imagine what it was like when the Quran was being revealed to Muhammad pbuh.
Subhan Allah. Have you read the story of how Umar bin al Khattab converted? He was blown away by
the Quran. Refer to the below sources.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGA8vFaDc1k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlQsty_nT1s
203
I recommend you read “The Sealed Nectar” and Sahih Bukhari Book of Revelation to learn more
MUHAMMAD WAS DECEIVED ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS – A RESPONSE
Claim – Magic done on him
You can read this article which refute the authors claim.
Magic was worked on the Prophet so that he began to fancy that he was doing a thing which he was
not actually doing. One day he invoked (Allah) for a long period and then said, "I feel that Allah has
inspired me as how to cure myself. Two persons came to me (in my dream) and sat, one by my head
and the other by my feet. One of them asked the other, "What is the ailment of this man?" The
other replied, 'He has been bewitched" The first asked, 'Who has bewitched him?' The other replied,
'Lubaid bin Al-A'sam.' The first one asked, 'What material has he used?' The other replied, 'A comb,
the hair gathered on it, and the outer skin of the pollen of the male date-palm.' The first asked,
'Where is that?' The other replied, 'It is in the well of Dharwan.' " So, the Prophet went out towards
the well and then returned and said to me on his return, "Its date-palms (the date-palms near the
well) are like the heads of the devils." I asked, "Did you take out those things with which the magic
was worked?" He said, "No, for I have been cured by Allah and I am afraid that this action may
spread evil amongst the people." Later on the well was filled up with earth.
Many have tried to use this hadith in a negative manner against the blessed prophet Muhammad.
Some Muslims have also struggled with this hadith, but it must be said that most Muslims who have
struggled with this hadith is a result of missionaries holding it against them in a negative fashion.
So the aim of this article is to show that the missionaries have no case, and that the Muslims should
feel no harm from this hadith, and that this hadith PROVES Muhammad is a true and blessed
prophet.
So with that said let us now examine this hadith.
Now the only reason as to why missionaries bring this hadith up is because of the opening statement
of the hadith, which reads:
Magic was worked on the Prophet so that he began to fancy that he was doing a thing which he was
not actually doing.
This is the only reason as to why they cite this hadith. So as you can see the magic that was
performed on the prophet made him believe he was doing things which he actually wasn't. Now in
another hadith we get the specific details of what exactly the prophet thought he was doing, and we
read:
Narrated 'Aisha:
Magic was worked on Allah's Apostle so that he used to think that he had sexual relations with his
wives while he actually had not (Sufyan said: That is the hardest kind of magic as it has such an
effect)... (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 71, Number 660)
So the prophet used to think that he was having sex with his wives when he wasn't. The magic did
NOT affect the revelations being sent to the prophet from the angel Gabriel.
204
Secondly, the prophet himself was conscious of the fact that something was wrong, as we read the
hadith we see:
One day he invoked (Allah) for a long period and then said, "I feel that Allah has inspired me as how
to cure myself
So as you can see the prophet invoked and prayed to God for help and a cure, hence the prophet
was aware that there was something wrong, hence he was conscious of the problem.
Now the next parts of the hadith prove that Muhammad is indeed a true prophet, because
remember he asks Allah for help and a cure, and Allah hears the prophet's prayer and helps him. We
read:
Two persons came to me (in my dream) and sat, one by my head and the other by my feet. One of
them asked the other, "What is the ailment of this man?" The other replied, 'He has been
bewitched" The first asked, 'Who has bewitched him?' The other replied, 'Lubaid bin Al-A'sam.' The
first one asked, 'What material has he used?' The other replied, 'A comb, the hair gathered on it, and
the outer skin of the pollen of the male date-palm.' The first asked, 'Where is that?' The other
replied, 'It is in the well of Dharwan.' " So, the Prophet went out towards the well and then returned
and said to me on his return, "Its date-palms (the date-palms near the well) are like the heads of the
devils."
So, notice two persons come to the prophet in a dream, two angels. As you can see the angels tell
the prophet where the materials for the bewitchment are, and the prophet eventually goes to this
location and sees it for himself.
Now one would think that the prophet Muhammad would go and destroy the material to be freed
from the bewitchment, yet he does not! We read the most interesting part of the hadith which says:
"Did you take out those things with which the magic was worked?" He said, "No, for I have been
cured by Allah and I am afraid that this action may spread evil amongst the people." Later on the
well was filled up with earth.
So, notice the prophet Muhammad did not need to destroy the material, because God himself had
cured the prophet!
So, let us summarize what we have so far:
-evil magic was worked on the prophet
-the magic did not affect the revelations of the Quran
-the prophet asked Allah for help, which means he was conscious of a problem
-Allah sent two angels to the prophet in a dream
-the angels told Muhammad where to go to find the materials that were used
-the Prophet goes to the location, but he does not destroy the materials
-Allah himself has cured the prophet Muhammad
So, as you can see this incident in the prophet's lifetime does NOT disprove his prophethood, rather
it is a great proof and evidence that he is a prophet! He asks Allah for help, and Allah comes to his
aid!
205
There is a whole moral and wisdom behind this story, and the wisdom behind this story is that if we
are afflicted with some sort of evil then we must look and turn to Allah for the help and cure,
because Allah is the only one who can protect and save us. This is the entire basis of this incident,
that we put all our faith and trust in Allah.
As Allah himself says in the Noble Quran:
033.003
YUSUFALI: And put thy trust in Allah, and enough is Allah as a disposer of affairs.
007.196
YUSUFALI: "For my Protector is Allah, Who revealed the Book (from time to time), and He will
choose and befriend the righteous.
003.150
YUSUFALI: Nay, Allah is your protector, and He is the best of helpers.
Lastly, all of us will be tested by God, including the prophet himself, therefore it should not surprise
us if harm comes to the prophet, as the Quran says:
002.214
YUSUFALI: Or do ye think that ye shall enter the Garden (of bliss) without such (trials) as came to
those who passed away before you? they encountered suffering and adversity, and were so shaken
in spirit that even the Messenger and those of faith who were with him cried: "When (will come) the
help of Allah?" Ah! Verily, the help of Allah is (always) near!
So, in conclusion this hadith does not disprove Muhammad as a prophet, nor does it question his
credibility. If anyone is honest with themselves they will accept the hadith for what it is, and what it
says, that angels came to the prophet, and that Allah cured and healed the prophet Muhammad.
http://muslim-responses.com/Black_Magic_on_the_Prophet/Black_Magic_on_the_Prophet_/ -
Response from this
If anything, the claim the author referred to before regarding Gabriel praying for Muhammad pbuh
is evident here.
Aisha reported: If the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, was afflicted by
something, the Angel Gabriel would supplicate over him, saying, “In the name of Allah, may he
cure you, may he heal you from every ailment, from the evil of the envier when he envies, and
from the evil of every eye.”
Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 2185
Claim – Satanic verses

about these idols
206
on Surah 22:52)
207
So, the author references a disconnected report which is inauthentic to try and say Muhammad pbuh
was possessed. The report the author referenced does not even say possessed but rather the word
used is ‫ مجنون‬Majnun. A synonym can also be someone who is out of his mind or beside themselves.
So, it is therefore fair to say that Mark 3.21 shows Jesus was ‫مجنون‬. The difference is that this is in the
scripture of the Bible that the author claims to follow and they claim is “reliable” whereas in the case
of Islam, the author used an inauthentic source to try and say that Muhammad pbuh was possessed.
It displays a lack of integrity, their ignorance of Arabic and the hypocrisy of the individual.
So, the author has shown that by using their logic they have just the called their God, crazy.
The author uses the satanic verses argument again however yet again I have debunked it. They think
that there are verses in the Quran that are not from God. However, in their own Bible 1 John 5:7 KJV
has been added in to the Bible and Mark 16:9–20 is not even authentic.
The same thing we have learnt throughout. I have shown yet again how the author is uneducated and
how they are hypocritical. They have no issues using inauthentic sources. Some people could accept
if they accidently used a 1 or 2 inauthentic sources but the author has used many and repeated many
too. I have shown you this and you are more than welcome to check for yourself. Ask yourself why
they have done this? Also, they are fully aware of the authenticity of the sources if you remember
from the introduction, they told us to go and check the sources.
208
THE VIOLENT AND OPPRESSIVE HISTORY OF ISLAM – A RESPONSE
This is the link to authors article
https://www.whowasmuhammad.org/violent-oppressive-history
In this article they essentially just cherry pick actions of terrorists who act in the name of Islam and
they pick on Muslim countries and what has happened there. They say this in their article.
Now as you know I have already refuted the violence and intolerance article. This response will be
slightly different to the others in regards to how it is laid out and you will see this when you read
through the response. In past responses I would summarise the authors claim and respond. In this it
is different as they are not citing Quran verses or hadith but statistics etc. I am going to branch this
into separate sections. They are “Terrorism” “Women” “Contributions to the world”
TERRORISM – A RESPONSE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jy9tNyp03M0 – Is Islam a peaceful religion? Watch this first as I

will be referencing this throughout the response.
The author references organisations like ISIS as expected they are trying to argue that ISIS is Islam.
Anyone with an open mind will know this is not true I have refuted the allegations of violence
already and provided plenty of evidences for this. Here is a book written by a Muslim refuting ISIS
have a read of it https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dq9PqrWf_bE_r2N89jyqruBjqhPdl328/view
ISIS kill innocent people. Islam forbids the killing of innocent people. ISIS kill Muslims they kill Children
they destroy religious places of worship all forbidden in Islam. I could go on and on. They have hijacked
a religion and tricked gullible people like the author into thinking they are a representation of Islam.
The author references other terrorist groups as well like ISIS.
They reference statistics but they did not tell you this statistic which is more important. Firstly,
Professor Robert Pape of the University of Chicago one of America’s leading terrorism experts who
studied every single case of suicide terrorism between 1980 and 2005 and he says “There is little
connection between suicide terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism or any of the world’s religions
rather what nearly all suicide terrorists attack have in common is a specific secular and strategic goal
to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from territory that the terrorists consider
to be their homeland”
Gallop carried out the biggest poll of Muslims around the world 50,000 Muslims in 35 countries. 93%
of Muslims rejected 9/11 and suicide attacks. The 7% who didn’t when polled and focus grouped cited
political reasons for their support for violence not religious.
Tom Friedman a NY times columnist and a Jew believes that if Muslims had been running Europe in
the 1940s 6 million Jews would have been alive.
Go through the below to learn how this is nothing to do with Islam at all
209
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXGvwaNoPgpeQ44PvRukUyvajgErqUW49
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXGvwaNoPgpd6vXdkHLiDlfeq5awNHljf
Also, if this is what Islam is why aren’t all of us doing it? Why do people who revert to Islam say they
had misconceptions like “Islam promotes terrorism” but when they studied, they realised that this is
false.
The KKK are Christians therefore Christianity teaches the KKK ideology. Is this true. Well yes according
to the author it is. The crusades were done by Christians. The Gunpowder plot, Pogroms, bombing of
abortion clinics. Are we going to sit there and look at events done by people who claim to be part of
a faith and attribute it to a whole religion? This is what the author is doing. So why can’t I do the same
to show you how ridiculous it is.
WOMEN – A RESPONSE
The author then references women in Muslim countries they say this “In Muslim countries little girls
are being married off to men because Muhammad had a child bride. This is literally causing little girls
to suffer and die. One example of this is what happened in 2010 in Yemen's Hajja province, when it
was reported that a 13-year-old girl who was forced into marriage died five days after her wedding
when she suffered a rupture in her sex organs.”
I have already refuted the allegations surround Aisha and the marriage to Muhammad pbuh. Here is
a link to an article on my website. Check it out and all the evidences provided
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QI3yb3dchZwJXzcxM_FEZnCpf9SYCJbJ/view
One argument people make is since Muhammad pbuh married Aisha at 9 and he is the best example
to follow you can do this today. People who make this claim are ignorant. Read below.
Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) being an example of mankind is not related to his personal preferences
and actions but rather to his obedience to the revelation from Allah. Allah has not revealed a set age
of marriage in Islam rather he revealed a set of laws which – based on the environment & time – adapt
to produce a healthy marriage. For example, based on the environment and time at the time of
Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) it was the social norm to marry at a young age between nine and twelve
years and the marriage was not unhealthy at all. Wouldn’t Aisha R.A be the first person to complain
from this? And then her family and the critics of Prophet Muhammed (PBUH)? But none of them did.
Now based on the same set of laws that made it permissible for Aisha R.A to marry Prophet
Muhammed (PBUH) at nine years old we can apply the conditions to our societal norms and prove
that it is at least preferable to marry above the age of 18 or 20.
Several Islamic laws need to be taken into consideration for the marriage to work which are but not
limited to: Capability, puberty, consent, risk of harm (and more). Capability can include for example:
Financial capability, physical capability (Ability to give birth), mental capability (Ability to provide and
manage the family). Puberty & Consent – which are perhaps the most obvious one why. And the most
relevant one here would be the risk of harm. Marriage at nine years old in the 21st century is just
begging for health problems and abuse. Nine-year olds today cannot be considered the same nine-
year olds in the 7th century – in the middle of a desert (a hot and tough climate which requires for
people to mature as fast as possible to survive) compared to softies who cry if the TV was off during
spoon-feeding time. The way I see it is that these conditions can only be fully achieved in the 21st
century by being at least between the age of 16 – mid 20’s. Contrary of 7th century age norms where
210
they would reach these conditions at a young age. To sum up: We can say that the example being set
by the Prophet PBUH is not his preference for a young adult, this should not be the example we follow
because it is merely but his permissible choice and preference. The example being put are the morals
of the Prophet PBUH which are in accordance with the revelation of Allah. So, we should endeavour
to obey Allah in the same manner that the Prophet PBUH did. Whether in his marriages, personal life
or entertainment.
So, it is not allowed as per the example given by the author no consent was given and as we read in
Bukhari 5138, Islam prohibits forced marriage.
“that her father gave her in marriage when she was a matron and she disliked that marriage. So
she went to Allah's Messenger (‫ )ﷺ‬and he declared that marriage invalid.”
Also, in the example given by the author the girl was not mature and harm was caused therefore this
goes against Islamic teachings. Again, I would say the author SHOULD have an issue with Numbers
31.18 “But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for
yourselves.” This is from their God who instructed Moses pbuh of the Bible to do as the verse says.
But the author has no issue with this verse.
I will also now address the other points they have in regards to women which is to do with violence
against women and discrimination against women. Islam first of all does not abuse women. I have
refuted many of the allegations the author has made in their treatment of women article if you are
not satisfied then click this link below and go to page 101 and read till page 108 checking all the links
that you want to check.
So, Islam is against the discrimination of women and just so you know before Saudi Arabia got rid of
the ban women could not drive. Show me a verse in the Quran or hadith which says women can’t
drive. You can’t. Do you know why it was banned? “"If a woman drives a car," Al-Loheidan told Saudi
news website sabq.org in an interview, "it could have a negative physiological impact ... Medical
studies show that it would automatically affect a woman's ovaries and that it pushes the pelvis
upward." Said by Sheikh Saleh Al-Loheidan's. Show me a hadith which says not to drive a car?
CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE WORLD – A RESPONSE
The author talks about Nobel peace prizes and tries to argue that Muslims have won few awards.
The inference is therefore Islam does not give anything to the world. They are ignorant of history.
Firstly, Islam encourages it’s followers to seek knowledge The Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu 'alaihi
wa sallam) said: “Seeking knowledge is a compulsion on every Muslim.” This Hadith is referring to
the knowledge of that aspect of the Deen that will save someone from the Fire.
https://abuaminaelias.com/forty-hadith-on-knowledge/ - Read more here.
Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi worked in the Golden age of Islam a Muslim a great
mathematician he is the guy who came up with algorithms without his work you would not have half
the technology we have today including laptops and thus the author would not have been able to
create this site where they have embarrassed themselves and shown by using their logic their religion
is false. Congratulations to the author.
211
The Islamic Golden age was fundamental in how the world is today when it comes to technology etc.
David Levering points out in his award-winning book “God's Crucible: Islam and the Making of Europe,
570-1215” There would be no renaissance there would be no reformation in Europe without the role
played by Ibn Sina, Ibn Rushd and more of the great Muslim theologians, philosopher and scientists.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FAWAbGDxGA - History of the Islamic Golden Age | Religion,

Science, & Culture in the Abbasid Empire
So, Islam encourages us to seek knowledge and Muslims have contributed to the world a lot. They do
not need an award to prove this. Just study the Islamic Golden Age yourself.
CONCLUSION – WHAT HAVE WE LEARNT FROM THIS SECTION?
America is a Christian country right, as is the UK? Well racism is prevalent in both the UK and US
therefore can I say that Christianity is racist right? This logic is fallacious. No so-called Islamic country
today has true Islamic law. The country is not a representation of the religion but rather the teachings
found in scripture are. The correct teachings not people taking parts out of context.
The author wrote an article on violence which I have refuted and the treatment of women which I
have also refuted. They also tried to paint Islam as a religion which has contributed nothing to society.
This is amazingly false. Without the Islamic Golden Age, it is fair to say we would not be where we are
today in regards to technology etc. Islam as I have shown encourages Muslims to seek knowledge.
212
MUHAMMAD PBUH AND THE BIBLE – A RESPONSE
The link to the authors article is below.
https://www.whowasmuhammad.org/bible
This seems like the article where they have actually put the most effort in and the one which exposes
the authors hypocrisy even further.
ADDRESSING THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM
Before I get into refuting, I want to point out a few things the author has said in this article.
They say the above at the end of the article. How disgraceful. Shocking. When I first read this, I was
in utter disbelief. What have they done throughout their whole website? They have been dishonest,
they have lied, they have not been open minded, they have been biased. So, the author wants you
to be honest and open minded when it comes to the Bible but not Islam. They lie, they quote
inauthentic sources they cherry pick. I have shown that they have done all these things numerous
times. Haven’t I?
They accuse the MercifulServant Youtube channel of being dishonest look at what they say
So, they want to trick people? Are you not the one who has used weak sources and, in most cases,
you have not told people that they are weak? Are you the one who provides their own opinion and
tries to twist and word it in such a way it looks like the verses and hadith you cherry pick say what is
in reality your opinion?
The author is the one who is disingenuous. Ask yourself people, having gone through my responses
to their articles why has the author lied? Why do they use weak sources?
They say this as well. What has the author done throughout their website? They have cherry picked?
The author has. Now I too as you will know adopted their mindset throughout to expose the irrational
mindset of the author. Have I gone and created a website dedicated to hating on Christianity where
all I do is cherry pick? No, I have not. If someone references the articles from my website
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/why-i-reject-christianity/
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/is-makkah-in-the-bible/
What do I say in both, I provide my opinion and state or suggest that I mean no disrespect!
213
They say this too. They say Muslims are desperate. Yet they are the ones who repeat things
constantly, they use weak hadith lie etc. Who is desperate? The author.
Before the author accuses me of selectively picking these statements, I am going to address them in
this section later under the relevant subheadings. Everyone reading is more than welcome to click
the link to your article and see these statements in the full context themselves right now. I am going
to address them throughout this response. I just wanted to show you the double standards of the
author.
MUHAMMAD PBUH BOTH AFFIRMED AND CONTRADICTED THE BIBLE - A RESPONSE
I have already refuted the affirming the Gospel misconception. Therefore, I will provide the same
information again and then I will move onto the next section.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQQf3BIrtEfIg8YkO0fsTCa7GXkIo0YK9 – Playlist refuting the

claim.
They then quote verses from the Quran to say that Muhammad pbuh affirmed the Bible and past
scriptures. This argument is loved by Christians however if they were too just use their brain, they
would see that The Quran says God had revealed the past scriptures and trusted it with the people
who changed it. When the Quran says none can change his words in Surah Kahf. What does this
mean? Well, when you read the full verse it says,

The above 3 sources I believe provide enough proof to educate anyone who still believes this
ridiculous notion that is the so called “Islamic Dilemma”
This is more than sufficient evidence to refute people who bring up the claim of the “Islamic
Dilemma”
THE RELIABILITY OF THE BIBLE – A RESPONSE
Now I am no expert on this I can happily admit this. But the author says
Remember they said the Quran has been corrupted then mentioned forgotten verses etc. All of which
I have refuted. Therefore, there should be absolutely nothing at all in the Bible that shows any form
214
of corruption of there is well the Bible is not reliable and evidently the Muslims who make the claim
are right.
Before I get into this, I want to address this
He never did this. When are you going to learn? I have provided sufficient proof that refutes you. You
by the way, have indirectly proven that Muhammad pbuh is a Prophet in past sections. Don’t you
remember?
Now I will get into the reliability of the Bible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JulqQ-cV8GQ – 1 John 5.7 this is a Christian talking about it. It

was added into the Bible. Dan Wallace.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JulqQ-cV8GQ – No original manuscripts of the NT. They all

disappeared within a Century says Dan Wallace.
We have Quranic manuscripts from the 7th century like the Birmingham one which by the way is
exactly the same as today. Jay Smith who the author is probably aware off tries to argue otherwise.
Watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMJVqSF5Xq4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQMaK0TP-GI – Watch how people read from the Birmingham

manuscript.
Mark 16:9–20 is not even authentic. The Bible contains inauthentic verses! Wow. Biblical scholars
admit this too. It is not even me I am getting this from critics of Islam like David Wood and Biblical
scholars. I have no doubt the author watches David Wood they believe anything Wood says about the
Quran based on what the arguments they have used in their arguments.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Slq6KA5alGw – David Wood on Mark – he was offered poison as

well.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLlakCKN1elFQCyvjpLOhkQZG2ZeKBMP9Z – Go through this

whole playlist check the evidences provided they invite Christians on they do show after show. So, to
the author why don’t you go through it and you will see your faith crumble just like it did for this
individual below
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Or6As8IBuFg – He reverted to Islam by the way
Even just from the 1 John 5.7 example and the example of Mark is enough. But I am not done yet.
The Bible has textual variants the author makes the point in their corruption of the Quran article which
I have refuted that the Quran has textual variants. So does the Bible therefore the Bible must be false.
I have already given you some. John 7:53—8:11. Is another example. The author is a hypocrite. So,
they do not believe the Quran is reliable because of textual variants and other things. Yet the Bible
has the same, added verses, inauthentic verses and many more issues yet it is reliable.
Bart Ehrman who yes says the crucifixion happened has already shown the Bible is unreliable. I wont
even refer to his books but go and read them. Watch this. It is amazing how anyone can try and say
215
the Bible is reliable. The hadith we have are more reliable because we have a chain of transmission,
we can go back we know the people who narrate hadith.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vzSwGc2KSW3yov3XKow_u-suk-WO3rAN/view - Here is a book free

for you, by Bart Erhman.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRHjZCKRIu4 – Ehrman v Wallace
The author says this. Have you gone through everything I have just sent? 1 John 5.7 which explains
that 3 is 1 and arguably the clearest verse about the trinity is not even authentic. So, no it has not
been faithfully preserved as if it was then every Christian would believe Christ is God and every
Christian would believe in the trinity. They do not and where do they get their information from….
The Bible. So, the Bible says Jesus is God and isn’t? The Bible says God is part of a trinity and isn’t
part of a trinity? This shows how there has not been a faithful preservation and shows a long with
the other evidences I have provided that the Bible is not reliable at all. The author unless they are a
hypocrite should agree based on the standards they applied to the Quran.
MUHAMMAD PBUH MAKES IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR MUSLIMS TO REJECT WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS –
A RESPONSE
No, he does not. If you study honestly you will see how the author yet again has no argument. I will
address their argument though.
This is their first premise. I have already refuted this. I have shown evidence of Biblical corruption
and I have refuted the so called “Islamic Dilemma” Refer back to the evidences provided in past
sections.
216
Déjà vu anyone? Both their arguments rest on the argument that Islam affirms the preservation of
the past scriptures? I will say again I have already refuted this. Refer back to the evidences I
provided.
BECAUSE OF THE BIBLE, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE QURAN TO BE TRUE – A RESPONSE
Again. I have already refuted the so-called Islamic Dilemma. The Bible has been changed too I
provided you with plenty of evidences for this. The author also says “the Bible presents Jesus as God”
no it does not. If it did then every Christian would believe Jesus is God yet you can’t even decide
amongst yourselves whether God is 1 or 3 in 1.
This is exactly the same as their first reason and what they said in their “Muhammad pbuh makes it
impossible for Muslims to reject what the bible says – a response” I have refuted it already.
217
I do not like repeating myself but I am shocked at how the author has just waffled constantly when
their whole argument rests on
1 – Did Muhammad pbuh affirm the Gospels and their preservation? No
2- Is the Bible reliable? No, it has been corrupted
3 – Is Jesus God? No, even some Christians accept this
ABOUT MUHAMMAD PBUH INCORRECTLY SAYING HE WAS WRITTEN ABOUT IN THE TORAH
AND THE GOSPELS – A RESPONSE
Here we go. This is the one I was waiting for. I will just say one thing we already know that the Jews at
the time were waiting for a Prophet. I have already mentioned Waraqa, Byzantine Emperor and his
friend and Abdullah Bin Salaam and how they knew he was a Prophet. They were all expecting
someone. Where did they get the idea that a Prophet was coming from their scriptures? If nothing in
the Bible or Torah today refer to Muhammad pbuh then this shows that it has been corrupted as we
know that the people, I just mentioned were expecting someone.
A common argument Christians make is we can’t argue Muhammad pbuh is in the Bible because we
believe that it is corrupted. This is fallacious. We do not claim everything in the Bible is corrupt. The
Quran is the criterion that we judge by so when the Bible says God is one, we agree when the Bible
says God is not a man we agree. When it talks about the crucifixion we disagree. If you have referred
to the evidences I provided when addressing the argument that the Quran affirms the past scriptures
you will see this.
The argument is hypocritical because Christians ignore the OT, they say it is irrelevant it is abrogated
or that it refers the old law. Essentially, they do not want to have anything to do with it. Yet they love
to try and argue that Jesus pbuh is prophesised in the OT. They use chapters like Isiah 53 and Psalms
22. These do not talk about Jesus. I won’t paste why here as I want to focus on Muhammad pbuh but
you can watch this video as to why they do not refer to the Messiah.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXc570f6V-k – OT prophecies
Before I get into what the author has said I want you to focus on this verse, Genesis 17:20. When we
get to the end I will reference it again.
“And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and
will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.”
DEUTERONOMY
This is what the author says
218
So, the author says Deuteronomy is talking about Jesus. Do they realise they have just contradicted
their idea of Jesus? Have a look at this table.
These verses can’t be talking about Jesus pbuh at all. Moses pbuh pbuh had a natural birth, he got
married, had children he had his own shariah (law) he had to emigrate etc. Jesus pbuh birth was not
natural he was single and didn’t have children he did not have to emigrate. The only individual that
219
fits the Prophet like Moses pbuh pbuh is Muhammad ‫ﷺ‬. This is affirmed by the hadith in Bukhari
which the author has referenced in past sections.
https://sunnah.com/bukhari/1/3
So, put 2 and 2 together. I will address the authors points though. They mention the satanic verses. I
have already refuted this. The author refers to the Al-Laat, Uzza, Manaat argument many times this
misconception has been dubbed as the Satanic verses. It is a really silly argument check the below
links for the refutation

about these idols
The author refers to Deuteronomy 34:10-12 and one of the things that these verses say is God knew
face to face. However, whilst Muhammad pbuh did not see literally God he did still meet him during
the Miraj.
There have been extensive discussions regarding the Prophet Muḥammad (peace and blessings upon
him) seeing Allāh on the night of ‘Ascension’. Please refer to the following: “Thus He (Allāh) revealed
to His slave what He revealed. The heart did not err in what he saw.” (Qur’ān 53:10) Ibn Abbās (May
Allāh be pleased with him) said, “Muḥammad saw his Lord” (Tirmidhī) Abū Dhar (May Allāh be pleased
with him) states, “I asked the Messenger of Allāh (peace and blessings upon him)”, “Did you see your
Lord?” He replied, “I certainly saw His light” (Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim). Refer to this too
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JykNCSwu7AY – It also address Moses pbuh pbuh
So, Dt 34:10-12 doesn’t mean that the prophecy in Deuteronomy can’t be Muhammad pbuh. The
author also says Muhammad pbuh taught another God than Moses pbuh pbuh did. No, he did not. He
taught that God is one and speak to Jewish people who call God Elohim they will tell you that it is
Allah. Remember we Muslims and I have shown this believe past scriptures were corrupted.
The author references Acts 3:19-24. The key part is here verse 22 “Moses pbuh truly said unto the
fathers, A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall
ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.”
As demonstrated already it can’t be talking about Jesus pbuh so Peter was wrong. Have you watched
those Dawah streams?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_mI4Wr0qno – Part 1 on Acts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1osZN4zAaZM - Part 2 on Acts
Remember some Christians say that Jesus is God so how can Dt be talking about Jesus pbuh when it
clearly says “Prophet LIKE Moses pbuh pbuh”
220
In regards to miracles the author references 28.48 of the Quran which
“But when the truth came to them from Us, they said, “If only he was given the like of what Moses
pbuh had been given.” Did they not deny what had been given to Moses pbuh earlier? They claimed,
“Both ˹Scriptures˺ are works of magic, supporting each other!” Adding, “We truly deny both.”
Tafisr Ibn Kathir says
Allah tells us that if people were to be punished before proof was established against them, they
would use the excuse that no Messenger came to them, but when the truth did come to them
through Muhammad, in their stubbornness, disbelief, ignorance and misguided thinking, they said:
ُ ُ
‫وس‬ َ ‫وئ م ْث َل َمآ أ‬
َ ‫وئ ُم‬ َ ‫َل ْوال أ‬
(Why is he not given the like of what was given to Musa) Meaning -- and Allah knows best -- many
signs like the staff, the hand, the flood, the locusts, the lice, the frogs, the blood, the destruction of
crops and fruits -- which made things difficult for the enemies of Allah -- and the parting of the sea,
the clouds (following the Children of Israel in the wilderness and) shading them, the manna and
quails, and other clear signs and definitive proof, miracles which Allah wrought at the hands of Musa
as evidence and proof against Firàwn and his chiefs and the Children of Israel. But all of this had no
effect on Firàwn and his chiefs; on the contrary, they denied Musa and his brother Harun, as Allah
tells us:
‫ئ‬َ ‫اال ْرض َو َما َن ْح ُن َل ُك َما ب ُم ْؤمن‬

ٌّ
‫ف‬ ‫آء‬
َ ََُ ََ َ
ُ ‫ون َل ُك َما ْالك َْي َي‬‫ك‬ ‫ت‬‫و‬ ‫ا‬ ‫ن‬‫اء‬ ‫ءاب‬ ‫ه‬ ْ ‫َأج ْئ َت َنا ل َت ْلف َت َنا َع َّما َو َج ْد َنا َع َل‬
‫ي‬
‫ر‬ ِ ِ
The Quran is a miracle. There are other miracles too
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhCUziRBws8
The author then uses the Satanic verses argument again. I have already refuted this.
So, I have shown that Deuteronomy does not talk about Jesus pbuh. So, who is it referring too, it has
to be Muhammad pbuh who else can it be? Remember that table I pasted.
Deuteronomy 18.18
221
“I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in
his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.”
When we go to Suraj Najm verse 2 – 4 (Chapter 53 verse 2-4) we read
“Your fellow man is neither misguided nor astray. Nor does he speak of his own whims. It is only a
revelation sent down ˹to him˺.”
So, Muhammad pbuh spoke what was revealed to him, what was commanded to him. What was
revealed to him? The Quran. What does Deuteronomy 18.18 say “he shall speak unto them all that I
shall command him.” Therefore, this is even further proof that the verse refers to Muhammad pbuh.
The verse in Deuteronomy says “among their brethren” but we know from Deuteronomy 34.10 (KJV)
“And there arose not a Prophet since in Israel like unto Moses pbuh, whom the LORD knew face to
face” The Jewish Study Bible acknowledges this supposed contradiction and says “Never again” “Note
the discrepancy between the perspective of this verse and the divine promise to Moses pbuh that the
line of Prophetic succession will continue in the future” “I will raise up a Prophet for them like yourself”
This can’t be a reference just any Gentile nation, as the usage of the word brother in Dt 18.18 indicates
a people who are closely related to the Israelites. According to Hebrew dictionaries the Hebrew word
for brother that is “ach” can mean brother of the same parents, half-brother, relative. With this in
mind, brother can refer to the Ishmaelites and the Edomites who all trace their lineage back to the
Prophet Abraham pbuh pbuh and therefore related to the Israelites.
An example of this can be seen in Deuteronomy 23:7 “Thou shalt not abhor an Edomite; for he is thy
brother: thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian; because thou wast a stranger in his land.” So, Deuteronomy
18.18 can refer to Gentile peoples closely related to the Israelites. This understanding of the a Gentile
Prophet is further supported by an analysis of the language used in Deuteronomy 18.18, “I will raise
them up a Prophet from among their brothers” Notice the prophecy says “from their brothers” If we
look at, Deuteronomy 18.16-17 it makes it clear that the context is all of the tribes of Israel who are
being collectively referenced.
“According to all that thou desiredst of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying,
Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more,
that I die not.” Dt 18.16
Here the mention of “the day of assembly at Horeb” is a reference to a terrifying incident which all
the tribes of Israel were camped at a mountain and they heard the very voice of God. Therefore, the
Prophet like Moses pbuh can’t be a reference to the Israelites themselves, as God is referring to the
brothers of all the tribes of Israel when he spoke this prophecy. From a language point of view, it does
not make sense to say that the brothers of the tribes of Israel are the tribe of Israel, so the brothers
must be a separate people who are closely related. We have already seen that the Gentile peoples
such as the Ishmaelites and Edomites fit this description perfectly.
Muhammad pbuh who as we have already shown is very close to Moses pbuh pbuh is an Ishmaelite
he is a descendant of Ishmael pbuh. An objection to what I have said would be Deuteronomy 18.15
which says “The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy
brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken” The key part being “midst of thee.” The problem
here is they are missing from most versions of the OT.
222
These words can only be found in the Masoretic text version of the OT and not among many other
versions which predate it. Furthermore, not only do these extra words contradict other versions of
the OT, but they even contradict the Masoretic text itself as we see in Deuteronomy 18.18 the
prophecy is repeated without the extra words. Also, remember Deuteronomy 34.10 “No Prophet like
Moses pbuh will ever arise out of Israel again. So, these extra words are either a scribal error or a
fabrication.
In conclusion the prophecy in Deuteronomy 18.18 is not a prophecy of Jesus pbuh it can’t be the only
individual that fits the description is Muhammad pbuh. If it not him then you have to try and show
who else it can possibly be.
SONG OF SOLOMON
The author makes many points refers to other verses not within Song of Solomon but to other Bible
verses. All I will ask you to do is watch this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERWr5sXIvCg – Coincidence or not? You decide. It addresses

the idea of it simply being a description. James White talks about how it refers to Solomons wife and
how the passage relates to love etc. James white says that it is poetry and says that is an adjective.
Some of the other verses that the author cites James White also uses.
ISAIAH
The main prophecy we Muslims use is Isaiah 42. This I believe is a clear reference to Muhammad pbuh.
I will assess the authors contention. They believe that Isaiah 42 refers to Jesus pbuh. Yet again they
are wrong.
223
So, the first verse reads “Behold my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen, in whom my soul delights I
have put my Spirit upon him; he will bring forth justice to the nations.”
The author says it’s Jesus and cites Gospel of Matthew and these verses do attribute Isaiah 42.1 to
Jesus. This however does not mean it is correct. The issue for the author is they believe Christ is God
the verse refers to Isaiah saying that God’s servant … So, Jesus who the author believes is God is the
servant of himself. The author would contest this saying it to do with the trinity. I would say in
response to that if the Son who is God is also the servant and the Father is God this means that God
was the servant of himself and thus God is limited and therefore this can’t be a God. This issue has a
lot to do with the trinity which as I am sure most of you know is very confusing and not monotheistic.
The verse can also be applied to Muhammad pbuh the author accepts this could be the case but
disagrees due to Muhammad pbuh having many names. This is a fallacious argument and does not
refute the idea that this verse refers to Muhammad pbuh. Prophet Muhammad pbuh is known as
God’s servant “Abdullah” in Arabic. This was mentioned by Muhammad pbuh “Do not exaggerate in
praising me as the Christians praised the son of Mary for, I am only a servant, so call me the servant
of God” “Chosen one” implies that this person has been picked by God for an important purpose such
as Prophethood. For Isaiah to say God will delight in this person must mean that they will be someone
who is righteous in God’s sight and obedient to him. Muhammad pbuh fits this like a glove. Isaiah also
indicated that God will support the coming of the servant with an angel referred to as the spirit. “I will
put my spirit on him”
The Hebrew word for spirit is “ruwach” it is used to refer to angels throughout the OT such as in the
Book of Zechariah. “These are the four spirits (ruwach) of heaven, going out from standing in the
presence of Lord of the whole world” (Zechariah 6:5) Many respectable Bible commentaries interpret
the four spirits (Ruwach) as four angels. Scofield Reference Notes states in it’s commentary on
Zechariah 6:5 “That which is symbolised by the four chariots with their horses is not the four world
empires of Daniel but the four spirits of heaven which go forth from standing before the Lord of all
the earth…” These spirits are angels. The commentary Albert Barnes Notes agrees “They cannot be
literal winds: for spirits, not winds, stand before God as His servants as in Job. “the sons of God (angels)
came to be present with the Lord” Here is another commentary. Gills Exposition of the entire Bible
states “these are the four spirits of the heavens or “the four winds of the heavens. Angels are called
spirits or the winds. Psalm 10 4:3 they are created spirits and so differ from God; are incorporeal ones
224
and so differ from men. They are immaterial and immortal, and so die not; they are spiritual
subsistences and spirits of the heavens or heavenly spirits.
The Quran confirms the Spirit of God, who Muslims believe is the Angel Gabriel, was sent down by
God to Muhammad pbuh.
“And so, We have sent to you ˹O Prophet˺ a revelation by Our command. You did not know of
˹this˺ Book and faith ˹before˺. But We have made it a light, by which We guide whoever We will of
Our servants. And you are truly leading ˹all˺ to the Straight Path—”
Isaiah further states the coming servant will not just be concerned with his own people, but rather the
nations of the entire world. “And he will bring justice to the nations” The word translated as justice
in Isaiah 42 is the Hebrew “mishpat” which also means judgement according to Biblical Hebrew
dictionaries. The very fact that this Prophet will bring judgement to the nations is a point to be noted.
Israelite Prophets did not preach to non-Israelites. Whereas Muhammad pbuh, brought judgement
for the whole world as is clear from history. Moreover, some of the foremost authorities commenting
on the book of Isaiah interpret this judgement to be comprehensive in the sense of a complete way
of life, which is what Islam represents. Professor of Hebrew Christopher North stated in his
commentary Isaiah 42.1 “Most commentators remark that mishpat is here used absolutely, without
the definite article and that is has comprehensive sense of the Islamic din (“judgement”) which
embraces both faith and patience.”
That is just the fist verse. I will move onto other verses in Isaiah 42 to demonstrate further to you that
this is talking about Muhammad pbuh.
Isaiah 42.2 “He will not cry aloud or lift up his voice, or make it heard in the street” So the individual
Isaiah referred too is a calm spoken man. Someone who did not raise his voice and someone who has
a soft voice. This personality fits Muhammad pbuh. His companions bore witness to this fact that he
was soft in speech and did not raise his voice in the market place. “Be moderate in your pace. And
lower your voice, for the ugliest of all voices is certainly the braying of donkeys.” 31.19 Quran If the
phrase “not cry” is meant as not complain about the duty God gave him. This is a fitting description of
the Prophet Muhammad pbuh as he accepted his mission. Throughout his life, he never complained
at the mission that God had given him in spite of all the suffering and hardship it entailed. He put his
trust in God and delivered God’s word to mankind. Now to the next verse
Isaiah 42.11 says “Let the desert and its cities lift up their voice, the villages that Kedar inhabits; let
the habitants of Sela sing for joy, let them shout from the top of the mountains.”
225
It provides locations. Kedar and Sela. Firstly. It is important to note that the first part of the verse says
“desert cities.” The fact that these two are mentioned by name is important. Who is Kedar and where
did he settle? The OT tell us that Kedar was one of the sons of Ishmael. “and these are the names of
the sons of Ishmael, by their names, according to their generations: the firstborn of Ishmael,
Nebajoth; and Kedar, and Adbeel, and Mibsam,” Genesis 25.13. Kedar and his own sons are
specifically linked to Arabia. “Arabia, and all the princes of Kedar, they occupied with thee in lambs,
and rams, and goats: in these were they thy merchants.” Ezekiel 27.21. Smith’s Bible dictionary
defines Kedar as “the name of a great Arab tribe that settled on the northwest peninsula. That they
also settled in villages and towns. The tribe seems to have been one of the most conspicuous of all the
Ishmaelite tribes” The Keli-Delitzsch commentary on the OT discusses Isaiah’s use of Kedar “The name
Kedar is here the collective name of the Arabic tribes generally”
The two ancient Assyrian inscriptions dating to 7th century BCE associate the king of the Arabs with
the land of Kedar.
King Esarhaddon Prism A IV lines 6-9 King Assurba Nipal Prism B VII, lines 93-96
Hazael, King of the Arabs, with a sumptuous gift Iauta son of Hazael
Came over to Nineveh, city of my sovereignty King of the land of Qedar paid homage to me
He kissed my feet He approached me concerning his gods (and)
And begged me for his gods. And I had pity Begged my kingship
Compare the two. This shows us the Arabs were associated with Kedar even in ancient times. So Kedar
dwelt in Arabia. In fact, Kedar dwelt within a specific part of Arabia known as Hejaz. I want to remind
you of this hadith
The Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬entered the Ka`ba and found in it the pictures of (Prophet) Abraham pbuh and
Mary. On that he said’ “What is the matter with them ( i.e. Quraish)? They have already heard that
angels do not enter a house in which there are pictures; yet this is the picture of Abraham pbuh. And
why is he depicted as practicing divination by arrows?” Bukhari 3351
So, at some point in history the descendants of Abraham pbuh were in Makkah if as the author claims
Kedar is Northwest Arabia then the people travelled from there to Makkah likely passing through
Madinah. (I have been Saudi Arabia before a few times) I have travelled between Makkah and
Madinah many times.
The OT scholar Charles Foster confirms that Kedar dwelt in western Saudi Arabia (Hijaz/Hedjaz):
Namely of the land of Kedar: which every reader conversant with Arabian geography will recognise as
a most accurate delineation of the district of Hedjaz (western Saudi Arabia) including its famous cities
of Mecca and Madinah” Even ancient pre-Islamic Arab traditions state that Kedar settled in Western
Saudi Arabia. And that his descendants have ruled there ever since.
In summary, Kedar and his descendants settled in a specific part of Arabia. Which is modern day Saudi
Arabia. In fact, we can narrow the location down even further. Isaiah references Sela remember and
it says “habitants of Sela sing for joy, let them shout from the top of the mountains” So it is key that
it says Sela and mountains. The author says is Edom and that is what it refers too. I want you to think
about everything I have shown you so far and ask yourself is the authors explanation logical. No.
226
The author has used the same argument as a certain youtuber that I know they watch based on they
retweet their tweets. Who is that youtuber? Colin aka Islam Critiqued
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXcL-WFJDkg – Refer to this video which refutes him on Isaiah

42
If you want to see his dishonesty then refer to the link below. I have provided just some evidences
where he has lied.
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/refuting-islam-critiqued/
Anyway, back to topic. The Sela in Edom is not part of Saudi Arabia. Moreover, when you think about
it in the context of what I have said. It makes no sense at all for it to be in Edom. The only place it
makes sense is Madinah.
The Sela in Isaiah is a clear reference to the mountain in Madinah. Muhammad pbuh lived in Madinah
for some of his life and he passed away in Madinah. He mentions the Sela mountain too. For example,
“while I was sitting in the condition which God described. My very soul seemed straitened to me and
227
even the earth seemed narrow to me for all it’s spaciousness, there I heard the voice of one who had
ascended to the mountain of Sela calling with his loudest voice….”
“By God, we did not see any cloud or any patch of it, and there was neither any house or building
standing between us and Sela”
One of the earliest biographers of the Prophet Muhmmad pbuh Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d documents one pf
the chains of genealogy, which confirms he was a direct descendant of Abraham pbuh pbuh through
his grandson Kedar. Hayden’s Bible dictionary states “Muhammad (pbuh) is said to have been Bene-
Kedar (sons of Kedar)”
So, it is established then that Sela is in Madinah as we well as the location of Kedar being Hejaz. The
next part of the prophecy is “Let the people of Sela sing for joy let them shout from the mountain
tops” When the Prophet Muhammad pbuh arrived in Madinah it’s inhabitants were overjoyed and
cried out in happiness
“I never saw the people of Madinah so happy with anything as they were with his arrival. I even saw
the little boys and girls saying, “Here is the Messenger of God; he has come!” Bukhari, Book of
Prophetic Commentary, Hadith 4560.
“The people hurried quickly to meet the Messenger of God when he arrived in Madinah. They cried,
‘The Messenger of God has arrived! The Messenger of God has arrived!” Tirmidhi, Book of the
Description of the Day of Resurrection, Softening of Hearts, and Piety, Hadith 2409.
“Then men and women climbed upon house-tops; the boys and servants scattered in the way, and
they were all calling out: ‘Muhammad! Messenger of God! Muhammad! Messenger of God!”
Muslim, The Account of the Prophet’s Emigration, Hadith 7150.
Is it not amazing the parallel?
Isaiah 42.12 is something the author writes a whole paragraph one where they attack the
MericfulServant You tube channel for leaving out “The Lord” Read the objection below
The objection is Muhammad pbuh cannot be the servant foretold because the following verse states
that “the Lord will march out”
The Lord will march out like a champion, like a warrior he will stir up his zeal; with a shout he will raise
the battle cry and will triumph over his enemies [42:13].
The claim is that since this verse states that “the Lord will march out” therefore it cannot be a
reference to Muhammad who was just a man, it must be a reference to Jesus who is God. The first
thing to note is that this verse is not meant to be taken literally, it does not mean that God Himself
will be fighting on the battlefield. This is actually an example of the principle of Sheliah. Under the
Jewish law of Agency, a Sheliah is a legal representative or agent of a person who carries out the
authorised tasks of the person and is considered to be the person that they represent [44]. In the case
of this verse, it just means that the representative of God, in this particular case the coming servant
of God, will fight battles on behalf of God and is thus spoken of as if he is God. This is in fact a common
occurrence throughout the Old Testament. In many places it speaks about the agents of God as if they
are God Himself. A good example is the Book of Exodus:
228
This is what the Lord says: By this you will know that I am the Lord: With the staff that is in my hand I
will strike the water of the Nile, and it will be changed into blood. The fish in the Nile will die, and the
river will stink; the Egyptians will not be able to drink its water.’”
The Lord said to Moses pbuh, “Tell Aaron, ‘Take your staff and stretch out your hand over the waters
of Egypt—over the streams and canals, over the ponds and all the reservoirs—and they will turn to
blood.’ Blood will be everywhere in Egypt, even in vessels of wood and stone.”
Moses pbuh and Aaron did just as the Lord had commanded. He raised his staff in the presence of
Pharaoh and his officials and struck the water of the Nile, and all the water was changed into blood.
[Exodus 7:17-20]
Here we can see that God states “with the staff that is in my hand I will strike the water of the Nile”.
Even though God speaks of Himself striking the Nile with a staff, the action itself is actually carried out
by Moses pbuh who acts as God’s agent: “Moses pbuh and Aaron did just as the Lord had commanded.
He raised his staff in the presence of Pharaoh and his officials and struck the water of the Nile”. The
Old Testament clearly shows that the one with the authority behind a person is credited to the “work”
even if they themselves have not personally carried it out. It would be absurd in this instance to
literally equate the hand and staff of Moses pbuh to those of God. Other good examples of Sheliah
are the numerous instances throughout the Old Testament where an angel is described as God. Here
when Moses pbuh spoke to God in the burning bush we are told that it was actually an angel who was
speaking:
There the angel of the Lord appeared to him in flames of fire from within a bush. Moses pbuh saw that
though the bush was on fire it did not burn up. [Exodus 3:2]
The angel proceeds to speak as if it were God speaking to Moses pbuh in the first person:
When the Lord saw that he had gone over to look, God called to him from within the bush, “Moses
pbuh! Moses pbuh!”
And Moses pbuh said, “Here I am.”
“Do not come any closer,” God said. “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is
holy ground.”
Then he said, “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham pbuh, the God of Isaac and the God
of Jacob.” At this, Moses pbuh hid his face, because he was afraid to look at God.
The Lord said, “I have indeed seen the misery of my people in Egypt. I have heard them crying out
because of their slave drivers, and I am concerned about their suffering. So I have come down to
rescue them from the hand of the Egyptians…” [Exodus 3:4-8]
Christians should note that this is confirmed in the Book of Acts:
This is the same Moses pbuh they had rejected with the words, “Who made you ruler and judge?” He
was sent to be their ruler and deliverer by God himself, through the angel who appeared to him in the
bush. [Acts 7:35]
Again, it would be absurd in this instance to literally equate the voice of the angel with that of God.
Finally, it should be noted that such language is also employed in Islamic sources. Here the Qur’an
talks about the battle of Badr where the Muslims fought and defeated the pagan Arabs:
229
And you did not kill them, but it was God who killed them. And you threw not, [O Muhammad], when
you threw, but it was God who threw that He might test the believers with a good test. Indeed, God
is Hearing and Knowing. [8:17]
We can see that God takes responsibility for the events of the battle, even though it was the Muslims
themselves who were present on the battlefield and doing the fighting. In the following tradition of
Prophet Muhammad, God figuratively likens a believer’s hearing, seeing, and walking to His own:
He who is hostile to a friend of Mine I declare war against. My slave approaches Me with nothing more
beloved to Me than what I have made obligatory upon him, and My slave keeps drawing nearer to Me
with voluntary works until I love him. And when I love him, I am his hearing with which he hears, his
sight with which he sees, his hand with which he seizes, and his foot with which he walks. If he asks
me, I will surely give to him, and if he seeks refuge in Me, I will surely protect him.
So, make your mind up. Look at the evidences provided. If you want more information then read these
articles.
https://www.manyProphetsonemessage.com/2014/06/28/muhammad-pbuh-and-madinah-in-the-
bible/
https://salam.org.uk/2019/02/24/muhammad-pbuh-and-madinah-in-the-bible/
THE GOSPEL OF JOHN
The author says that this is the most common verse quoted which is weird as I disagree in fact out of
all the 4 sections Deuteronomy, Solomon, Isaiah and John. I believe that John is the weakest one. I
find it hypocritical how the author says the below
I am shocked that they accuse Muslims of this when what have they done throughout their whole
website?
HAVE A LOOK AT THE BELOW
230
source: http://dss.collections.imj.org.il/isaiah#42:1
231
CONCLUSION - WHAT HAVE WE LEARNT FROM THIS SECTION
Perhaps some Muslims the author has interacted with have cherry picked. However, the author has
created a whole site where you have done the same to Islam except you have lied, used weak sources
provided their opinions and tried to deceptively spin it as something Islam condones.
I believe that Muhammad pbuh is in the Bible. I think I have provided sufficient evidence to show this
the author will likely disagree I am not expecting them too. But perhaps there will be one Christian
reading this who will agree with me. I pray this is the case. Remember too, Muslims believe the past
scriptures have been corrupted so there may have been other documents pertaining to the coming of
Muhammad pbuh. Something definitely did exist because as I mentioned in past sections that there
were people, Christians and Jews who were expecting another Prophet. They knew someone was
coming and they knew it was from Arabia. Why do you think there were so many Jews in Madinah?
Remember Waraqa, Abdullah Bin Salam, the Byzantine emperor and his friend from Rome? They were
Jews and Christians and knew that Muhammad pbuh was a Prophet. If you go to the Stone Edition
Chumash commentary on page 76 it says “We see from the prophecy in this verse that 2337 years
elapsed before the Arabs, Ishmaels pbuh descendants became a great nation (with the Rise of Islam
in the 7th century) Throughout this period, Ishmael waited anxiously until the promise was fulfilled and
they dominated the world”
Remember I quoted the above at the very beginning. The author has not been honest throughout,
they ignore context, they are biased. How can they expect us to look at their religion with the
conditions they set out when they can’t do the same to other religions?
I will share some resources for you to go through relating to Muhammad pbuh in the Bible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cv9BS-1ks4 - Is the line of Ishmael under the covenant? - Zakir

Hussain vs David Wood
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8C3lBLxE1w - Was Muhammed ‫ ﷺ‬foretold in the Bible? - Zakir

Hussein vs Samuel Green
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzGVQ-evXCY - Prophet Like Moses pbuh pbuh?
232
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
I mentioned in this document that you may not be satisfied with some of the explanations or you may
want more information. I am going to provide you with plenty of resources which you can check out
and I do recommend that you go through this.
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/ - My website.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QHuzR1AwFctItMCTuhD6i2FcN96i7djo/view - Refutes many

misconceptions against Islam. Check it out.
https://www.call-to-monotheism.com/ - A good website that refutes many misconceptions against

Islam and also refutes certain people
https://discover-the-truth.com/ - Another very good website.
https://icraa.org/
https://www.letmeturnthetables.com/ - Check this out as well
https://nocontradictionsinquran.wordpress.com/ - People argue that there are contradictions in the

Quran this website refutes a lot of these supposed “contradictions”
https://twitter.com/RioPedro2/status/1309520822571274240?s=20 – More sites can be found

here
https://quranandbibleblog.com/ - Check this website out too.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCD38osGNyt3LiEoUDRs1c7w - FaridResponds refutes critics
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCr97KSnkyiCDzDWEQopjpg - Muslim Allegation Hunters
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVzaQvkFMZsEnL1OLDNc2qA - Quranandbibleblog
https://youtube.com/channel/UCqYAQa28E9Fbsak6zM4hA3w - Andalusian Project
https://youtube.com/channel/UCqYAQa28E9Fbsak6zM4hA3w - Islamic Defence
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1jzOAf8UopCBSEVXtqeoQg - Bring Your Proof
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1jzOAf8UopCBSEVXtqeoQg - SCDawah
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCx420FfPBbEboBvnYjIemzw - EFDawah
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2qZyVbTwkAA4441YJ8St-w - Yemenite Front
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJdLNnAZb1cc-tL6B64dZvA - ManyProphetsOneMessage
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/further-education/ - I will be adding links to

here so keep an eye out on this page.
https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/refuting-critics/ - The author watches certain

Youtubers refer to this part of my website where using the drop-down menu you will be able to see
some of the lies that the apologists have told.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCTcEnNmfOivZVtOyYAbsTHQ - One Nation ‫أمة واحدة‬
233
TURNING THE TABLES
Turning the tables
Consistently throughout I have used the same mindset and logic of the author to criticise their religion,
Christianity. As I have explained many times, the reason I did this was to further expose how ridiculous
the author truly is. In this section I am going to amalgamate what I have said about Christianity
throughout in a more visual form to show you how by using the same flawed logic of the author their
religion can be represented in completely the wrong way.
I am doing this to help you further see the authors dishonesty and hypocrisy. If you have been through
the whole response you would have seen how I have responded to the claims they made against Islam
and Muhammad ‫ﷺ‬. Now I do not hate Christianity. I have no issues with people practicing their
religion. This is not meant as an attack on the Christian faith but rather me showing you the dangers
of cherry picking and ignorance. The author did this with Islam I am simply returning the favour to
show some Christians (the fans of the authors site) how they would not like it if the same logic was
applied to their religion.
WhatIsChristianty.org.uk
WWC
Home About us Source used Articles
Many people think that Christianity is a loving religion but they

don’t know its true colours, the pagan origins of the tri-une God.
The history of so-called Prophets of God who slept with their
daughters and killed Children.
Here at WWC we will show you the dark history of Christianity
In what way is what I have just done different to what the author did to Islam. Imagine I
actually created a site and under the articles tab I put everything that I have showed in
this response and more. It would not be nice. This was painful for me to create but I did so
to show how the author is a hypocrite.
I will reiterate this again. I am not attacking Christianity. I would not create a site like that as well. I am
trying to show you how if I use the same mindset as the author then their religion can be
misrepresented as well. That is what I have done throughout this response. I am hoping that maybe
the author will wake up and realise the error in their ways. I want the Christians who use the authors
website to realise that the author has grossly misrepresented Islam. I want them to see how the author
234
has lied and the authors blatant hypocrisy. If you have gone through my response and you have been
honest you will see this.
235
ENDING TO RESPONSE
CLOSING REMARKS
Alhumdulillah, we have reached the end of this response and all thanks to God I have in my opinion
successfully refuted the individual. I believe that I have provided sufficient evidence throughout. I have
shown to you how the author of WhoWasMuhammad is dishonest and ignorant. I used their logic
against them to critique Christianity as well. Now I personally have no hatred to Christianity. I
understand that people have their own religions. Whilst I believe that Islam is the truth, I do not go
around undermining and insulting other religions. I have reasons why I reject Christianity but normally
when I critique Christianity I only do so to expose double standards. (Like in this document)
NON-MUSLIM’S ON MUHAMMAD PBUH
Have a look at the below
236
There is plenty more as well. Michael Hart ranks him number 1 in his book.
237
MESSAGE TO THE INDIVIDUAL AND CHRISTIANS WHO FOLLOW THE SITE
If you have gone through the response checking the links etc as I said to do you will see how I have
responded to the author and in my opinion, I believe I have provided plenty of evidences which refute
the author? Do you see how they have lied to you? I used their logic to critique Christianity. Some of
you would not have liked that. But the whole reason I did this was to further show how the logic is
contradictory as if applied to the authors faith then the author indirectly admits that Christianity is a
bad religion and is false.
I also believe the author should interact with Jews more to convince them that Christ is the Messiah
the Jews themselves will then God Willing accept this but they will accept it from the Islamic
perspective. Before trying to convince Muslims, they should focus on convincing other Christians the
trinity exists and is monotheistic as well as convincing that a man who worshipped God a man who
went to the toilet, who was hungry, who ran away is God. When they realise how it is illogical if they
use their brain you will accept Islam. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BorHxXWzOZ0 – Yusha
Evans a former youth minister reverted to Islam.
To the author I tried sending you a DM via Insta you didn’t respond I just wanted to ask if you thought
you had been honest but obviously the answer to that has to a yes otherwise you would have not
created the site. As you can expect after everything I have shown, I have no interest at all in having a
conversation with you after I publish this. I don’t trust you; you are rude. Your hatred for my Nabi is
that much you lied throughout your website, committed fallacies used weak sources, inauthentic
reports, ridiculous logic. I believe you really only have a few options;
1. Come out and apologise on your social medias citing this document and take your website
down. Your certificate for your site is expiring soon save some money don’t renew it.
2. You leave your religion. Be consistent I used the exact same mindset as you to critique your
faith.
3. This option you will probably choose, ignore this response carry on with your agenda.
However, you may even respond and make accusations against me. If you decide to respond
answer and reflect on the following questions
- Why did you consistently lie throughout your website?
- Are you willing to apologise for this and just be honest and admit it?
- Do you accept you are wrong and misinformed?
- If you think you have not lied encourage people to go through my response and let them
make the judgement. Tell them to be fair and impartial. I have linked your articles
throughout my response and people can check themselves the evidence I provided and
do their own research and they will come to the same conclusion as I have.
- Do not offer me a debate. I have no interest in debates at all. In all my time doing
refutations. I have never once done a debate and people like you I would never entertain;
you are rude and dishonest. Would you be willing to reach out and speak to people who
are more knowledgeable than me and have your other misconceptions cleared up there?
I hope you choose option 1. We can then move forward. Nothing good comes out of hating. You know
very little about Islam and I have shown this throughout. Does it not bother you? Now if you don’t
accept this, Ok. I will be sure to share this document around with people. People who are interested
in learning and are open minded will go through this themselves they can then make their own mind
up.
238
SEEKING THE TRUTH?
The Question now is do you and anyone else reading this want to learn about Islam and Muhammad
pbuh properly? If so, I will give you tips.
Read the Quran yourself. Watch lectures on the Quran whether it be from Mufti Menk or YouTube
channels such as Bayyinah Institute or Quran Weekly.
Reach out to Muslims you can go to this link here https://www.gainpeace.com/contact-us Sabeel
Ahmed is a wonderful man he is very polite and kind. You can also reach out to SCDawah and
EFDawah as well.
Read “The Sealed Nectar” which is the biography of the Prophet pbuh.
library.blogspot.in.pdf/TheSealedNectar-Alhamdulillah-library.blogspot.in_text.pdf
Check the below articles
https://www.hamzatzortzis.com/the-Prophetic-truth-why-muhammad-is-gods-final-messenger/ - A
good article and will teach you new things.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1s9TRd06X4mM2gpC9vH9U9gVWMU-h7r9Q/view - Prophecies of
Muhammad pbuh
https://www.islamreligion.com/category/33/evidence-islam-is-truth/ - Evidence Islam is the truth

159 articles
https://iera.org/downloads/category/ebooks/ - This website has many free books. Look at them all
“The Forbidden prophecies” is a good read.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCD38osGNyt3LiEoUDRs1c7w - Farid will be doing a proof of

Prophethood series (he may already have dependant on when you are reading this.)
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQQf3BIrtEfLfBsC_dY3pvxWlFk9Oq1r6 – I will be adding

more vids to this
Thank you for going through this whole response. InshAllah it has benefited you. Feel free to share
this around with people who will also have misconceptions cleared up and if they interact with
Christians they will know how to respond and they can use their logic against them to expose double
standards.
FINAL POINT I HAVE TO SAY
I TESTIFY THAT THERE IS NOTHING WORTHY OF WORSHIP EXCEPT ALLAH (GOD) AND THAT
MUHAMMAD ‫ ﷺ‬IS HIS LAST AND FINAL MESSENGER!
239

Refuting WhoWasMuhammad

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Refuting WhoWasMuhammad

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A refutation of the anti-Islamic website created by an

ignorant Christian who also indirectly exposed to all

By Spreading the truth

I ask Allah to forgive us of all of our sins and grant us paradise.

MAY ALLAH BLESS THEM ALL FOR DOING THIS.

Welcome to my response to the website WhoWasMuhammad(‫)ﷺ‬.org. This is hateful website which

The motive of the user is very clear

Here is the URL for this https://www.whowasmuhammad.org/muhammad-s-sexual-perversions

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWWGA_607MI – I recommend you watch through this David

CLAIM 1 AISHA AND MUHAMMAD PBUH MARRIAGE AND CONSUMATION

https://spreadingthetruth217821274.wordpress.com/age-of-aisha/ - I wrote this it is well referenced

https://twitter.com/RioPedro2/status/1324667117845778434?s=19 – Also here are some additional

There is an interesting Hadith in Sahih Bukhari 465 who read as follows:

As-Sunan al-Kubra by al-Bayhaqi (1/319)

Ibn Sa‘d, al-Tabaqat al-Kubra, Vol.2, 286

"There was no impropriety in Muhammad’s betrothal to Aisha. Marriages conducted in absentia to

And also those articles :

CLAIM 2 PARADISE BEING A BROTHEL

https://abuaminaelias.com/seventy-two-virgins-in-paradise/ - I recommend you go through this

"This Hadith has the Prophet promising that,

Ismā‘īl is recorded as transmitting it via five contrasting paths:

1. Baḥīr ← Khālid ← Miqdām bin al-Ma‘dīkarab ← Prophet

2. Baḥīr ← Khālid ← Kathīr bin Murra ← ‘Ubāda bin Ṣāmit

Abū Mālik ← Prophet.

Abū Hurayra. It quotes the Prophet as saying:

CLAM 3 VISIT ALL 9 OF HIS WIVES IN ONE NIGHT

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWWGA_607MI – I recommend you watch through this David

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hLRNEmiVCo – This video also addresses this claim as well

CLAIM 4 SEX SLAVES

Before we begin, I will ask to go through these links

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvR2F7SfpiI - Slavery and Right-Hand Possession in Islam

https://abuaminaelias.com/islam-and-concubines/ - What does Islam teach about concubines?

https://abuaminaelias.com/consent-marriage-concubines/ - Sexual consent, marriage, and

CLAIM - He owned sex slaves: Surah 33:50.

Read more about this verse via this link https://discover-the-truth.com/2017/01/22/tafseer-on-

https://twitter.com/Talhawaqas98/status/1302199353528983552?s=19 – Go through this thread as

Here is a video regards to Surah 66 verse 1. Watch it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfWZ62f4chA – David Wood uses this argument as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vvs-ylOpbKE - Can we be Lenient with Historical Reports? In

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXMNOOEUuQ4 – You can watch this video where the individual

For the refutation of this please check the link below.

Also in Islam Slaves are considered brothers .

Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (‫ )ﷺ‬as saying:

Sahih Muslim 2249

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Narrated Abu Musa:

Sahih Bukhari 2544

Narrated Al-Ma'rur bin Suwaid:

Sahih Bukhari 2545

Sahih Muslim 1659

No theology of rape in Islam: https://abuaminaelias.com/no-theology-of-rape-in-islam/

Does marital rape exist in Islam?: https://abuaminaelias.com/marital-rape-domestic-violence/

Marital Rape in Islam debunked: https://www.dar-alifta.org/Foreign/ViewFatwa.aspx?ID=6033

Marital Rape debunked: https://qurananswers.me/2017/01/14/hadith-of-angels-cursing-the-wife-

Can you rape slave girls? https://www.call-to-

Rape is two crimes, 1) Adultery & 2) Using force and intimidation.

2) Confession of the Rapist

CLAIM 5 SUCKED ON TOUNGE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWWGA_607MI – I recommend you watch through this David

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWWGA_607MI – I recommend you watch through this David

Clearly Adult breastfeeding doesn't exist in Islam .

CLAIM 8 TEMPORARY MUTAH

You should also watch the two below videos as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPDlcQnhQxA – Video 1 address Quran verse 4.24.