[KENNETH MATIBA]

Muslims and Christians agree that it is impossible for God to inspire error in His Word. But no one can deny that the Koran contains a large number of errors. Dr. Robert Morey lists over 100; e.g., citing Ali's translation, the Koran teaches the Ark of Noah came to rest on the top of Mt. Judi (Sura 11:44), not Mt. Ararat as the Bible teaches; that Abraham's father was Azar (Sura 6:74), not Terah as the Bible teaches; that he attempted to sacrifice Ishmael (Sura 37:100-112), not Isaac as the Bible teaches; that Pharaoh's wife adopted Moses (Sura 28:8-9), not his daughter as the Bible teaches; that Noah's flood occurred in Moses'day (Sura 7:136, cf., 7:59ff); that Mary, the mother of Jesus, gave birth to Jesus under a palm tree (Sura 19:22), not in a stable as the Bible teaches; that Mary's father was named Imram (Sura 66:12), etc.

The Koran has many biblical distortions. Almost every biblical episode discussed in the Koran has additional and/or contrary information supplied: "The names and events of Old Testament books and prophets are very definitely copied in the Koran. However, often the stories in the Koran are garbled and confused." For example, in Sura 2:56, 57, 61 the Jews returned to Egypt after the Exodus which, biblically and historically, was never the case. In Sura 3:41 it is stated that Zacharias would be speechless for three days. Biblically, it was until John's birth—nine months (Luke 1:18-20). In Sura 12:11-20 the Koranic story of Joseph is markedly different from the biblical story of Genesis 37; the accounts are so contrary as to demand one be in error. In Sura 2:241 Muhammad confuses the persons of Saul and Gideon. There are also variations in Sura 12:21-32, 36-55 when compared with Genesis 37-45. Whether it is the descriptions of the creation of man, the Fall, Moses and the burning bush, Noah and the ark, Joseph going into Egypt, or the life of Zechariah, John the Baptist, Mary and Jesus, or other biblical characters, the Koran often contradicts biblical teaching.

Yet the Koran also explicitly claims to "confirm the Book of Moses and the Gospel." So if the Bible is historically accurate, then it is the Koran that must be in error.

Muslims Beat Women



I do not understand why if Mohammed was such a "holy" man, why he would advocate beating women. A holy man of God would NEVER beat a woman. I have printed below what is written in Koran concerning women and the Muslim's position on beating them:

Men have authority over women. (Koran 2:228)

In the home:

"Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the others, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them." (Koran 4:34)

"Mothers shall suckle their children two years completely, for such as desire to fulfill the suckling....But if the couple desire by mutual consent and consultation to wean, then it is no fault in them." (Koran 2:233)

Women who disobey their husband will go to hell. (Koran 66:10).

"Thou mayest decline for the present whom thou wilt of them, and thou mayest take to thy bed her whom thou wilt, and whomsoever thou shalt long for of those thou shalt have before neglected; and this shall not be a crime in thee. Thus will it be easier to give them the desire of their eyes... and to satisfy them with what thou shalt accord to each of them." (Koran 33:51)

In society:

Women do not have equal right to their inheritance (Koran 4:11-12) Women receive half of the male share for an equivalent degree of kinship. Women who disobey should be beaten:

"Good women are obedient.... As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you, take no further action against them." (Koran 4:34)



Given the way Muslims treat women, one should be amazed that two of the most recent disastrous suicide bombers in Jerusalem, were Palestinian Muslim women, actually young girls 17 years old. Why would a woman want to give her life for a cult that treats them like animals?

At 56 Years Old, Mohammed Married A 7-Year Old Baby Girl And Doesn't That Make Mohammed a Child Molesting Pedophile and a Rapist ?
Mohammed, at age Twenty-five (25) married his boss, a forty (40) year old rich woman named Khadijeh, after she proposed to him. They had four daughters together but we know a lot about one daughter named Fatemeh. When Khadijeh died Mohammad at age fifty-six asked to marry Ayesha, daughter of his friend and first follower Abobakr. She was just a seven years old baby.

Abobakr requested from Mohammed to wait till she reached the age nine before consummating their marriage. So at age fifty-Eight the great “Prophet”, raped a nine-year-old child. This is a sick act of an animal today and it was back then also.

That is the reason for marriage age for girls age is nine years old (and sometimes younger in Islam).

Then Mohammad married anywhere between 29 to 45 more women. According to Ebn Abbas, "The highest member of Moslems who is the Prophet Mohammed has also the highest appetite for women." The Koran says a Muslim may have up to four (4) wives. I guess there was an exception made in Mohammed’s case.

In another place Mohammed claimed God told him that "we have made such women available to you without any payment to them, these are all your cousins, slave women and any Moslem woman who would like to give you herself free of charge." So slavery at least for women was quite common.

Mohammad even asked his own adopted son, Zaid Ebn Hares, to divorce his wife, Zeinab, so that he could marry her. When the members of tribe protested this marriage, because the daughter-in-law was considered like one's daughter, Mohammed answered that he received a revelation from God, that "A Moslem man cannot adopt another man's child." Hence Hares was not his real son, therefore he could marry his adopted son's wife.

When Mohammad and his wife Khadijeh adopted Zaid they were not Moslem. Prophet must obey God's word and therefore, Zaid is not his son and Zeinab is not his daughter-in-law (according to Mohammad). That is why adoption is prohibited in Islam.

Jesus said in Matthew 18:6, and Mark 9:42, that whoever harms a child it would be better for him to have a millstone tied around his neck and to be thrown into the deepest sea. A millstone was so large that it took several men to move it. Therefore, if one was tied around the neck of somebody and they were tossed into the sea, it would be impossible for them to resurface. It could be argued here that Jesus was advocating the death penalty for child abusers.

Mohammed was the lowest filth of all, by raping a little baby. If you are a follower of Islam, you are following a belief handed down by a filthy child molester. Think about it!

[KENNETH MATIBA]

In conclusion, I believe I have provided more then enough evidence to prove that Islam is nothing more then a Cult Of The Damned. Their abuse of women, there advocating killing Christians and Jews, their distortion of God’s Word, their blasphemy against Jesus Christ the Son of God, their glorification and following of a known child molesting pervert, and many other things that they advocate and teach puts them in the classification of a cult and not a religion. Therefore, Islam is a cult of the damned, and they are followers of Satan, and not God. Jesus said in John 8:44-47

44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

45 And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.

46 Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?

47 He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.

(KJV)

The Devil was a murderer from the beginning and therefore his children will continue to do the lust of their father. Committing murder and advocating the killing of Christians and Jews qualifies for this category.

What Can Muslims do to Know That They Have Eternal Life?

If you are a Muslim, PLEASE renounce Islam and Pray the prayer of salvation through Jesus Christ, who is the ONLY way to Heaven! I love you enough to tell you the truth so the truth will set you free!

If you are a Muslim who is willing to accept the above evidence and who desires to know that you have eternal life, what can you do? Jesus promises that all who believe on Him can know that they now possess eternal life. "This is eternal life to know Thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou has sent" (John 17:3). "Truly, truly I say unto you he who believes has eternal life" (John. 6:47). "I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes Him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life" (John 5:24). "My sheep listen to my voice; I know them and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand" (John 10:27-28).

If you have often longed for a personal relationship with God, a relationship wherein you know that God loves you, as you are not able to find this in Islam, then the true God offers you this opportunity. But God tells us "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Rom. 3:23). God has promised us full forgive ness of sins (Heb. 10:14) if we turn from our sin and turn to Christ, believing on Him for salvation: "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord (Rom. 6:23):

' For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him. Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son (John 3:16-18).


”We accept man's testimony, but God's testimony is greater because it is the testimony of God, which He has given about His Son. Anyone who believes in the Son of God has this testimony in his heart. Anyone who does not believe God has made Him out to be a liar, because he has not believed the testimony God has given about His Son. And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life in His Son. He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you know that you have eternal life” (1 John 5:9-13).

If you sincerely desire to know God personally, to know that your sins are forgiven—and that a place in heaven is reserved for you (1 Pet. 1:4-5), you can know this by praying the following prayer to receive Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior.

Dear God:
I acknowledge my sinfulness before you. I confess that I have been trying to earn my own salvation by following the teachings of the Koran. But I now realize that Allah is not the true God. I realize that Mohammed was a liar. I recognize my need for forgiveness and now realize that Jesus Christ died for my sins on the cross. I now receive Him as my personal Savior and Lord. Give me courage and strength to face the opposition I may encounter. Help me to lead my family and friends to you as well. From now on I live for Jesus Christ and not for Islam. In Jesus' name. Amen.

[mkenya asili]

Originally Posted by KENNETH MATIBA

Muslims and Christians agree that it is impossible for God to inspire error in His Word. But no one can deny that the Koran contains a large number of errors. Dr. Robert Morey lists over 100; e.g., citing Ali's translation, the Koran teaches the Ark of Noah came to rest on the top of Mt. Judi (Sura 11:44), not Mt. Ararat as the Bible teaches; that Abraham's father was Azar (Sura 6:74), not Terah as the Bible teaches; that he attempted to sacrifice Ishmael (Sura 37:100-112), not Isaac as the Bible teaches; that Pharaoh's wife adopted Moses (Sura 28:8-9), not his daughter as the Bible teaches; that Noah's flood occurred in Moses'day (Sura 7:136, cf., 7:59ff); that Mary, the mother of Jesus, gave birth to Jesus under a palm tree (Sura 19:22), not in a stable as the Bible teaches; that Mary's father was named Imram (Sura 66:12), etc.

The Koran has many biblical distortions. Almost every biblical episode discussed in the Koran has additional and/or contrary information supplied: "The names and events of Old Testament books and prophets are very definitely copied in the Koran. However, often the stories in the Koran are garbled and confused." For example, in Sura 2:56, 57, 61 the Jews returned to Egypt after the Exodus which, biblically and historically, was never the case. In Sura 3:41 it is stated that Zacharias would be speechless for three days. Biblically, it was until John's birth—nine months (Luke 1:18-20). In Sura 12:11-20 the Koranic story of Joseph is markedly different from the biblical story of Genesis 37; the accounts are so contrary as to demand one be in error. In Sura 2:241 Muhammad confuses the persons of Saul and Gideon. There are also variations in Sura 12:21-32, 36-55 when compared with Genesis 37-45. Whether it is the descriptions of the creation of man, the Fall, Moses and the burning bush, Noah and the ark, Joseph going into Egypt, or the life of Zechariah, John the Baptist, Mary and Jesus, or other biblical characters, the Koran often contradicts biblical teaching.

Yet the Koran also explicitly claims to "confirm the Book of Moses and the Gospel." So if the Bible is historically accurate, then it is the Koran that must be in error.

Muslims Beat Women



I do not understand why if Mohammed was such a "holy" man, why he would advocate beating women. A holy man of God would NEVER beat a woman. I have printed below what is written in Koran concerning women and the Muslim's position on beating them:

Men have authority over women. (Koran 2:228)

In the home:

"Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the others, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them." (Koran 4:34)

"Mothers shall suckle their children two years completely, for such as desire to fulfill the suckling....But if the couple desire by mutual consent and consultation to wean, then it is no fault in them." (Koran 2:233)

Women who disobey their husband will go to hell. (Koran 66:10).

"Thou mayest decline for the present whom thou wilt of them, and thou mayest take to thy bed her whom thou wilt, and whomsoever thou shalt long for of those thou shalt have before neglected; and this shall not be a crime in thee. Thus will it be easier to give them the desire of their eyes... and to satisfy them with what thou shalt accord to each of them." (Koran 33:51)

In society:

Women do not have equal right to their inheritance (Koran 4:11-12) Women receive half of the male share for an equivalent degree of kinship. Women who disobey should be beaten:

"Good women are obedient.... As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you, take no further action against them." (Koran 4:34)



Given the way Muslims treat women, one should be amazed that two of the most recent disastrous suicide bombers in Jerusalem, were Palestinian Muslim women, actually young girls 17 years old. Why would a woman want to give her life for a cult that treats them like animals?

At 56 Years Old, Mohammed Married A 7-Year Old Baby Girl And Doesn't That Make Mohammed a Child Molesting Pedophile and a Rapist ?
Mohammed, at age Twenty-five (25) married his boss, a forty (40) year old rich woman named Khadijeh, after she proposed to him. They had four daughters together but we know a lot about one daughter named Fatemeh. When Khadijeh died Mohammad at age fifty-six asked to marry Ayesha, daughter of his friend and first follower Abobakr. She was just a seven years old baby.

Abobakr requested from Mohammed to wait till she reached the age nine before consummating their marriage. So at age fifty-Eight the great “Prophet”, raped a nine-year-old child. This is a sick act of an animal today and it was back then also.

That is the reason for marriage age for girls age is nine years old (and sometimes younger in Islam).

Then Mohammad married anywhere between 29 to 45 more women. According to Ebn Abbas, "The highest member of Moslems who is the Prophet Mohammed has also the highest appetite for women." The Koran says a Muslim may have up to four (4) wives. I guess there was an exception made in Mohammed’s case.

In another place Mohammed claimed God told him that "we have made such women available to you without any payment to them, these are all your cousins, slave women and any Moslem woman who would like to give you herself free of charge." So slavery at least for women was quite common.

Mohammad even asked his own adopted son, Zaid Ebn Hares, to divorce his wife, Zeinab, so that he could marry her. When the members of tribe protested this marriage, because the daughter-in-law was considered like one's daughter, Mohammed answered that he received a revelation from God, that "A Moslem man cannot adopt another man's child." Hence Hares was not his real son, therefore he could marry his adopted son's wife.

When Mohammad and his wife Khadijeh adopted Zaid they were not Moslem. Prophet must obey God's word and therefore, Zaid is not his son and Zeinab is not his daughter-in-law (according to Mohammad). That is why adoption is prohibited in Islam.

Jesus said in Matthew 18:6, and Mark 9:42, that whoever harms a child it would be better for him to have a millstone tied around his neck and to be thrown into the deepest sea. A millstone was so large that it took several men to move it. Therefore, if one was tied around the neck of somebody and they were tossed into the sea, it would be impossible for them to resurface. It could be argued here that Jesus was advocating the death penalty for child abusers.

Mohammed was the lowest filth of all, by raping a little baby. If you are a follower of Islam, you are following a belief handed down by a filthy child molester. Think about it!

1 Timothy 2:12
I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.

Adoption refused???? that is a lie..

Quran 33:5] You shall give your adopted children names that preserve their relationship to their genetic parents. This is more equitable in the sight of GOD. If you do not know their parents, then, as your brethren in religion, you shall treat them as members of your family. You do not commit a sin if you make a mistake in this respect; you are responsible for your purposeful intentions. GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful.

[33:36] No believing man or believing woman, if GOD and His messenger issue any command, has any choice regarding that command. Anyone who disobeys GOD and His messenger has gone far astray.

[33:37] Recall that you said to the one who was blessed by GOD, and blessed by you, "Keep your wife and reverence GOD," and you hid inside yourself what GOD wished to proclaim. Thus, you feared the people, when you were supposed to fear only GOD. When Zeid was completely through with his wife, we had you marry her, in order to establish the precedent that a man may marry the divorced wife of his adopted son. GOD's commands shall be done.

[33:38] The prophet is not committing an error by doing anything that is made lawful by GOD. Such is GOD's system since the early generations. GOD's command is a sacred duty.

[33:39] Those who deliver GOD's messages, and who reverence Him alone, shall never fear anyone but GOD. GOD is the most efficient reckoner.

[mkenya asili]

[quote=mkenya asili;532905][b]1 Timothy 2:12

CALCULATING THE AGE OF AISHA



EVIDENCE #: Surat al-Qamar (The Moon)
According to the generally accepted tradition, Ayesha was born about eight years before hijrah. But according to another narrative in Bukhari, Ayesha is reported to have said: “I was a young girl (jariyah in Arabic)‿ when Surah Al-Qamar was revealed (Sahih Bukhari, kitabu’l-tafsir, Bab Qaulihi Bal al-sa`atu Maw`iduhum wa’l-sa`atu adha’ wa amarr).

Chapter 54 of the Quran was revealed eight years before hijrah (The Bounteous Koran, M.M. Khatib, 1985), indicating that it was revealed in 614 CE. If Ayesha started living with the Prophet at the age of nine in 623 CE or 624 CE, she was a newborn infant (sibyah in Arabic) at the time that Surah Al-Qamar (The Moon) was revealed. According to the above tradition, Ayesha was actually a young girl, not an infant in the year of revelation of Al-Qamar. Jariyah means young playful girl (Lane’s Arabic English Lexicon). So, Ayesha, being a jariyah not a sibyah (infant), must be somewhere between 6-13 years old at the time of revelation of Al-Qamar, and therefore must have been 14-21 years at the time she married the Prophet.

EVIDENCE #: Arabic Terminology
According to a narrative reported by Ahmad ibn Hanbal, after the death of the Prophet’s first wife Khadijah, when Khaulah came to the Prophet advising him to marry again, the Prophet asked her regarding the choices she had in mind. Khaulah said: “You can marry a virgin (bikr) or a woman who has already been married (thayyib)‿. When the Prophet asked the identity of the bikr (virgin), Khaulah mentioned Ayesha’s name.

All those who know the Arabic language are aware that the word bikr in the Arabic language is not used for an immature nine-year-old girl. The correct word for a young playful girl, as stated earlier, is jariyah. Bikr on the other hand, is used for an unmarried lady without conjugal experience prior to marriage, as we understand the word “virgin‿ in English. Therefore, obviously a nine-year-old girl is not a “lady‿ (bikr) (Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Vol. 6, p. .210, Arabic, Dar Ihya al-turath al-`arabi, Beirut).

EVIDENCE #. The Qur’anic Text
All Muslims agree that the Quran is the book of guidance. So, we need to seek the guidance from the Quran to clear the smoke and confusion created by the eminent men of the classical period of Islam in the matter of Ayesha’s age at her marriage. Does the Quran allow or disallow marriage of an immature child of seven years of age? There are no verses that explicitly allow such marriage. There is a verse, however, that guides Muslims in their duty to raise an orphaned child. The Quran’s guidance on the topic of raising orphans is also valid in the case of our own children. The verse states: “And make not over your property (property of the orphan), which Allah had made a (means of) support for you, to the weak of understanding, and maintain them out of it, clothe them and give them good education. And test them until they reach the age of marriage. Then if you find them maturity of intellect, make over them their property...‿ (Quran, 4:5-6).

In the matter of children who have lost a parent, a Muslim is ordered to (a) feed them, (b) clothe them, (c) educate them, and (d) test them for maturity “until the age of marriage‿ before entrusting them with management of finances.

Here the Quranic verse demands meticulous proof of their intellectual and physical maturity by objective test results before the age of marriage in order to entrust their property to them.

In light of the above verses, no responsible Muslim would hand over financial management to a seven- or nine-year-old immature girl. If we cannot trust a seven-year-old to manage financial matters, she cannot be intellectually or physically fit for marriage. Ibn Hambal (Musnad Ahmad ibn Hambal, vol.6, p. 33 and 99) claims that nine-year-old Ayesha was rather more interested in playing with toy-horses than taking up the responsible task of a wife. It is difficult to believe, therefore, that AbuBakr would betroth his immature seven-year-old daughter to the 50-year-old Prophet. Equally difficult to imagine is that the Prophet would marry an immature seven-year-old girl.

EVIDENCE #: Consent in Marriage
A women must be consulted and must agree in order to make a marriage valid (Mishakat al Masabiah, translation by James Robson, Vol. I, p. 665). Islamically, credible permission from women is a prerequisite for a marriage to be valid.

By any stretch of the imagination, the permission given by an immature seven-year-old girl cannot be valid authorization for marriage. It is inconceivable that AbuBakr, an intelligent man, would take seriously the permission of a seven-year-old girl to marry a 50-year-old man. Similarly, the Prophet would not have accepted the permission given by a girl who, according to the hadith of Muslim, took her toys with her when she went live with Prophet.

All the above quotations give ample refutation to the common misconception that ‘Aishah’s age at the time of her Nikah was 6 years and at the time of consummation of marriage it was only 9 years. If Muslim scholars of the present era deem fit to make an objective research instead of beating the old track, they will find ample material in the pages of history to arrive at a correct age for ‘Aishah. This indeed would be a great service to the cause of Islam.

EVIDENCE #: The Betrothal
According to Tabari (also according to Hisham ibn ‘Urwah, Ibn Hunbal and Ibn Sad), Ayesha was betrothed at seven years of age and began to cohabit with the Prophet at the age of nine years.

However, in another work, Al-Tabari says: “All four of his [Abu Bakr’s] children were born of his two wives during the pre-Islamic period‿ (Tarikhu’l-umam wa’l-mamlu’k, Al-Tabari (died 922), Vol. 4, p. 50, Arabic, Dara’l-fikr, Beirut, 1979).

If Ayesha was betrothed in 620 CE (at the age of seven) and started to live with the Prophet in 624 CE (at the age of nine), that would indicate that she was born in 613 CE and was nine when she began living with the Prophet. Therefore, based on one account of Al-Tabari, the numbers show that Ayesha must have born in 613 CE, three years after the beginning of revelation (610 CE). Tabari also states that Ayesha was born in the pre-Islamic era (in Jahiliya). If she was born before 610 CE, she would have been at least 14 years old when she began living with the Prophet. Essentially, Tabari contradicts himself. Al-Tabari is unreliable in the matter of determining Ayesha’s age.

EVIDENCE #: Ayesha’s Age in relation to Asma’s Age
According to Abda’l-Rahman ibn abi zanna’d: “Asma was 10 years older than Ayesha (Siyar A`la’ma’l-nubala’, Al-Zahabi, Vol. 2, p. 289, Arabic, Mu’assasatu’l-risalah, Beirut, 1992).

According to Ibn Kathir: “She [Asma] was elder to her sister [Ayesha] by 10 years‿ (Al-Bidayah wa’l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol. 8, p. 371, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933).

According to Ibn Kathir: “She [Asma] saw the killing of her son during that year [73 AH], as we have already mentioned, and five days later she herself died. According to other narratives, she died not after five days but 10 or 20, or a few days over 20, or 100 days later. The most well known narrative is that of 100 days later. At the time of her death, she was 100 years old.‿ (Al-Bidayah wa’l-nihayah, Ibn Kathir, Vol. 8, p. 372, Dar al-fikr al-`arabi, Al-jizah, 1933)

According to Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani: “She [Asma] lived a hundred years and died in 73 or 74 AH.‿ (Taqribu’l-tehzib, Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani, p. 654, Arabic, Bab fi’l-nisa’, al-harfu’l-alif, Lucknow).

According to almost all the historians, Asma, the elder sister of Ayesha was 10 years older than Ayesha. If Asma was 100 years old in 73 AH, she should have been 27 or 28 years old at the time of the hijrah.

If Asma was 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijrah, Ayesha should have been 17 or 18 years old. Thus, Ayesha, being 17 or 18 years of at the time of Hijra, she started to cohabit with the Prophet between at either 19 to 20 years of age.

EVIDENCE #: The Battles of Badr and Uhud
A narrative regarding Ayesha’s participation in Badr is given in the hadith of Muslim, (Kitabu’l-jihad wa’l-siyar, Bab karahiyati’l-isti`anah fi’l-ghazwi bikafir). Ayesha, while narrating the journey to Badr and one of the important events that took place in that journey, says: “when we reached Shajarah‿. Obviously, Ayesha was with the group travelling towards Badr. A narrative regarding Ayesha’s participation in the Battle of Uhud is given in Bukhari (Kitabu’l-jihad wa’l-siyar, Bab Ghazwi’l-nisa’ wa qitalihinna ma`a’lrijal): “Anas reports that on the day of Uhud, people could not stand their ground around the Prophet. [On that day,] I saw Ayesha and Umm-i-Sulaim, they had pulled their dress up from their feet [to avoid any hindrance in their movement].‿ Again, this indicates that Ayesha was present in the Battles of Uhud and Badr.

It is narrated in Bukhari (Kitabu’l-maghazi, Bab Ghazwati’l-khandaq wa hiya’l-ahza’b): “Ibn `Umar states that the Prophet did not permit me to participate in Uhud, as at that time, I was 14 years old. But on the day of Khandaq, when I was 15 years old, the Prophet permitted my participation.‿

Based on the above narratives, (a) the children below 15 years were sent back and were not allowed to participate in the Battle of Uhud, and (b) Ayesha participated in the Battles of Badr and Uhud.

Ayesha’s participation in the Battles of Badr and Uhud clearly indicates that she was not nine years old but at least 15 years old. After all, women used to accompany men to the battlefields to help them, not to be a burden on them. This account is another contradiction regarding Ayesha’s age
[/color]

[KENNETH MATIBA]

Questions and Answers

Q: How was the Qur'an revealed? Does the Qur'an claim to be pure Arabic, uncorrupted, inspired, no contradictions and unchangeable?


A: Muhammad claimed that the Qur'an was a series of revelations he received from Allah through the angel Gabriel. The inspirational experiences were described by Muhammad to be like a bell, clanging in his head, causing him to shake and sweat profusely. Qur'an 4:82 says, "Do they not consider and ponder the Qur'an? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancy and incongruity." Qur'an 085:021 says, "Nay this is a glorious Qur'an, (inscribed) on a Preserved Tablet." Qur'an 043:003 informs us that, "A Scripture Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail; a Qur'an in Arabic. Further, 039:27 says, "We have coined for man in this Qur'an. (It is) a Qur'an in Arabic, without any crookedness (therein)." The Qur'an is considered to be an exact replica of the "Eternal Tablets" which exist in heaven. (085:022)

Muhammad admitted to have also received revelations directly from Satan. Known as the "Satanic verses," al-Tabari records in his History under "Muhammad at Mecca" that "Satan Cast a False Revelation on the Messenger of God's Tongue." Muhammad's admission that, "I have fabricated things against Allah and have imputed to Him words which He has not spoken." confirms that Muhammad was demon possessed.

The only person who attempted to write down all of the Qur'anic revelations while Muhammad was still alive was killed by order of Muhammad. According to the Hadith, Abdallah bin Sa'd became concerned that some of the phraseology didn't sound godly, so he suggested enhancements. When Muhammad accepted his edits, Abdallah rejected Islam. He recognized that the Qur'an couldn't be from god if he, a scribe, could copyedit it. Tabari V888:178 goes on to report that "When the Messenger entered Mecca he ordered that the following men should be killed... first among them was Abdallah bin Sa'd." Clearly Abdallah bin Sa'd knew too much.

Allah says the Qur'an was Arabic because "the Pen" wrote the Qur'an before man was created. Qur'an 46:2 says, "And before it the Book of Musa [Moses] was a guide: and this [Qur'an] is a Book verifying (it) in the Arabic language." And in Qur'an 39:27 we find: "We have coined for man in this Qur'an every kind of parable in order that they may receive admonition. (It is) a Qur'an in Arabic, without any crookedness (therein): in order that they may guard (against evil)." Qur'an 41:3 tell us that: "A Scripture Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail; a Qur'an in Arabic, for people who have knowledge." Then in Qur'an 41:44 we find that: "Had We sent this as a Qur'an (in the language) other than Arabic, they would have said: 'Why are not its verses explained in detail? What! (a foreign tongue, a Book) not in Arabic and (a Messenger) an Arab?' Say (unto them, Muhammad): 'It is a Guide to those who believe; and for those who do not believe it, there is a deafness in their ears, and it is blindness in their (eyes)!'" There are problems with the Arabic theory, however. The oldest Qur'an fragments date to around 725 A.D. - a century after they were first recited. Arabic, especially in written form, is a recent phenomenon linguistically. Not only wasn't it one of man's earliest languages, it was derived from a language that predated it by at least 3,000 years, having evolved among Syrian Christians as a stylistic derivative of Aramaic in the 6th century A.D. There is no evidence that written Arabic even existed in Mecca until after the Qur'an was revealed. Therefore, it couldn't have been the language of Allah if, as the Qur'an and Hadith attest, written scrolls were given to Adam, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus prior to the time written Arabic was even conceived. Even then, the Qur'an is filled with many non-Arabic words and phrases, including the word "qur'an," which the Syrian Christians defined as "to recite" or "to preach." Arthur Jeffrey, in his book Foreign Vocabulary of the Qur'an devoted 300 pages to this study. One must wonder why these words were borrowed, as they refute the "pure Arabic" claim and put doubt on whether "Allah's language" was sufficient to explain what he intended. Thus the assertion that the Qur'an is pure Arabic and was thusly written on "Eternal Tablets" in Heaven is false.

In addition, during the Qur'an's first century, the emerging Arabic alphabet did not have diacritical points, and some of its letters were omitted. The text that Uthman canonized, if this actually occurred, was a bare consonantal text with no marks to show verse endings, to distinguish consonants, or vowels. And without them it is impossible to comprehend the intended meaning of the text.

[KENNETH MATIBA]

Among other problems for the veracity of the Qur'an are the differing versions, even in Muhammad's day. Bukhari's Hadith reports: "Ibn Abbas asked, 'Which of the two readings of the Qur'an do you prefer?' The Prophet answered, 'The reading of Abdallah ibn Mas'ud.' Then Abdallah came to him, and he learned what was altered and abrogated." Another Bukhari Hadith claims that: "Umar was sitting with Abu Bakr and was speaking (to) me. 'You are a wise young man and we do not suspect you of telling lies or of forgetfulness. You used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. Therefore, look for the Qur'an and collect it (in one manuscript).' By Allah, if Abu Bakr had ordered me to shift one of the mountains (from its place) it would have been easier for me than the collection of the Qur'an. I said to both of them, "How dare you do a thing which the Prophet has not done?""

The Qur'an wasn't, therefore, as Allah claims--a book memorialized on heavenly tablets--but was instead comprised of an evolving text. The oldest Qur'ans differ from one another and from today's version. The original written copies were devoid of the diacritical points, so most words had to be chosen and their meaning interpreted two centuries after the Qur'an was revealed orally. It's not pure Arabic as Allah claims, and there are a plethora of foreign words. There are also missing words, wrong words, and meaningless words, as well. And most importantly, the leading authority of the initial script of the Qur'an, studying the oldest fragments says: "One out of every five verses is indecipherable - meaningless in any language."

Excerpts from Prophet of Doom

From chapter 10, "Muddled Message"

In exposing Islam I have erred on the side of the Qur'an and Hadith. That is to say, I have been nearly as repetitious as they have been. By bringing the doctrine's most holy books together chronologically and placing them in the context of time and place, the evidence piles up one confession at a time. The truth ultimately becomes undeniable. Therefore, I will continue to present their scriptures as completely as your endurance allows. By observing a consistent pattern of behavior, you will be able to render an accurate assessment.

In this light, let's dissect the 52nd surah, kissing cousin to the 56th. Qur'an 52.1 "I call to witness Tur (Mount Sinai) and a Scripture Book inscribed, written on a fine parchment scroll unrolled, and the House ever-peopled, and the roof raised high, and the sea kept filled. The Islamic spirit is trying to pull a fast one. The House wasn't "ever-peopled." As you will discover in the "Source Material" appendix, there is no archeological or historical evidence to show that Mecca even existed before the sixth century. Therefore, Islam's formation is based upon a lie, because without people it would have been impossible to pass on any semblance of Islamic ritual from Abraham to Qusayy.

Elsewhere in the Qur'an, we're told that the "Book" was chiseled on Memorial Tablets, not inscribed on perishable parchment scrolls. But that's the least of the Qur'anic headaches. It claims, as Maududi confirms, that it was first written before creation, and that it was passed down and maintained in its original form - verbatim. "The Qur'an that you are bent upon belying is unchangeable: 'It is inscribed in the Preserved Tablet, which cannot be corrupted in any way.'"

Since the Qur'an's claims regarding its origin and nature are essential to our understanding, I'd like to explore this matter more completely. Allah's "book" says of itself: Qur'an 012:001 "These are verses of the immaculate Book, a clear discourse." Immaculate means perfect, flawless - inerrant. Yet we've already discovered scores of errors, big and small. Qur'an 012:003 "Through the Qur'an We narrate the best of histories." Yet it is devoid of history. It doesn't even provide any context. Qur'an 2.1 "This is a book free of doubt." That is true, but not in the way it was intended. Qur'an 010:037 "This Qur'an is such a writing that none but Allah could have composed it. It confirms what has been revealed before." Not only would the behavior in the Islamic heaven be illegal in every state save the brothels of Nevada, the Qur'an contradicts rather than confirms the prior revelation it says is inspired. What's more, the writing quality is an embarrassment. While lecturing on creation, Allah's prophet professed, "All that was going to be was written on the memorial Tablet before anything else was created." And that is particularly odd since everything we have read thus far has been fixated on one man's quest for gold and glory. Said another way: the Qur'an's revelations temporal and they only serve Muhammad.

The reason I bring this to your attention is to scuttle the Islamic claim that the Qur'an is a perfect reflection of the original tablet inscribed in heaven. The earliest Qur'anic writings all differ with each other, and they conflict with the present version. Coins from 685 A.D. have inscriptions that don't match today's surahs. The scripture inside the Dome of the Rock (691 A.D.) also varies. Further, the earliest copies of the Qur'an were written without vowels and the diacritical dots that modern Arabic uses to determine what letter is intended. It wasn't until the late eighth century, more than a hundred and fifty years after Muhammad's death, that Islamic scholars added diacritical marks to clear up countless ambiguities. In doing so, they chose the letters and vowels - and thus the current words, punctuation, and meaning. They translated what was essentially code into the gibberish we are reading today.

Then there is the problem of the parchments themselves. The oldest fragments date to the eighth century, not the seventh. They were found in a pager grave on the loft rafters of the Mosque of Saria'a in 1972. Aberrations from the accepted text abound, including the order of the verses, textual variations, and artistic embellishments. Gerd Puin, the leader of the German team analyzing the scrolls said, "Revisions are very clearly written over earlier, washed-off versions. What the Yemeni Qur'ans suggest is an evolving text rather than the word of God revealed in its entirety to the Prophet Muhammad." Puin went on to declare: "The Qur'an claims for itself that it is 'mubeen.' or clear, but if you look at it, you will notice that every fifth sentence or so simply doesn't make sense. A fifth of the Qur'anic text is incomprehensible. This is what has caused the anxiety regarding translation. If the Qur'an is not comprehensible, if it can't even be understood in Arabic, then it's not translatable into any language." This stark reality is frightening to orthodox Muslims who parrot their prophet's claim that the Qur'an has been preserved perfectly - unchanged and inerrant - just as Allah wrote it.

[KENNETH MATIBA]

The perfection claim Allah makes on behalf of his Qur'an would be impossible even if Allah were god. Language is an imperfect tool. One word can mean many things and meanings often change with inflection. Connotation is altered by context, something the Qur'an lacks. Knowing the time, place, and parties to a conversation is required to establish the intended implication. For example, the Classical Arabic word used for fighting could just as easily be translated killing. And the word for virgin is indistinguishable from the classical Arabic word for white grape.

Yahweh knew better. He never said his Scripture was inerrant. He said it was sufficient. But while we are on the subject, I'd like to share something you might find interesting. There are thousands of prophecies in the Bible, most of which are exacting. There have been no misses. There are thousands of detailed historical depictions in the text - none of which have been shown to be invalid.

From the "Source Materials"

Islam provides only one prime source of information on Muhammad and the formation of Islam written within two centuries of the time he lived and it was conceived. Ishaq's Sira, or Biography, stands alone - a singular and tenuous thread connecting us to a very troubled man and time. Over the next two hundred years, other Hadith Collections were compiled by the likes of Tabari, Bukhari, and Muslim. Their assemblages of oral reports, or Traditions, were said to have been inspired by Allah. They purport to convey Muhammad's words and example. They also explain the Qur'an - a book so deficient in context and chronology, it can only be understood when seen through the eyes of the Sunnah writers.

Throughout Prophet of Doom, I have been less concerned with the validity of these sources than with what they have to say. Their message is all Muslims have. Together, the Sunnah and Qur'an are Islam. Therefore, I was willing to take them at face value.

But you don't have to dig very deep to find the truth. Even a cursory reading of the Qur'an is sufficient to prove that it is a fraud. There is no way the creator of the universe wrote a book devoid of context, without chronology or intelligent transitions. Such a creative spirit wouldn't need to plagiarize. He would know history and science and thus wouldn't have made such a fool of himself. The God who created man wouldn't deceive him or lead him to hell as Allah does. Nor would he order men to terrorize, mutilate, rob, enslave, and slaughter the followers of other Scriptures he claims he revealed, wiping them out to the last. One doesn't need a scholastic review of the Qur'anic text to disprove its veracity. It destroys itself quite nicely.

While that remains true, I believe that I owe it to readers, especially Muslims, to explore the textual evidence for the Sunnah and Qur'an. I'll start with what the Hadith has to say about the Qur'an's origins, but I'm going to dispense in short order with the circular reasoning Islamic scholars use in that they all quote the Sunnah. While there are Hadiths that say Bakr tried to assemble the Qur'an and others that credit Uthman, Muhammad's third successor, it's like using the results of Carbon-14 dating to prove the validity of Carbon-14 dating. The source is the same.
In Bukhari's Hadith Collection alone we find a sea of disturbing and contradictory claims regarding the compilation of Allah's book. There were differing versions, even in Muhammad's day: "Ibn Abbas asked, 'Which of the two readings of the Qur'an do you prefer?' The Prophet answered, 'The reading of Abdallah ibn Mas'ud.' Then Abdallah came to him, and he learned what was altered and abrogated." This is reasonably clear. The Hadith says that portions of the Qur'an were conflicting, changed, and cancelled.

Tradition tells us that Muhammad had not foreseen his death, and so he had made no preparations for gathering his revelations. He left it up to his followers to sift through the conflicting versions. That's astonishing. Islam's lone "prophet" left his Qur'an as vapor, sound waves that had long since faded.

Bragging one day, the imposter called his surahs a miracle: Bukhari:V6B61N504 "Muhammad said, 'Every Prophet was given miracles because of which people believed. But what I have been given is Divine Inspiration which Allah has revealed to me. So I hope that my followers will outnumber the followers of the other Prophets.'" If the Qur'an was his only "miracle," why would he leave it in such horrid condition? I believe the answer is clear. Muhammad knew his recitals had been nothing more than a figment of his less-than-admirable imagination, situational scriptures designed to satiate his cravings. Preserving these recitals would only serve to incriminate him, as this Hadith suggests. Muslim: C24B20N4609 "The Messenger said: 'Do not take the Qur'an on a journey with you, for I am afraid lest it would fall into the hands of the enemy.' Ayyub, one of the narrators in the chain of transmitters, said: 'The enemy may seize it and may quarrel with you over it.'"

A number of Bukhari Hadith suggest that Muhammad's companions tried to remember what they could of what he had said, but there was a problem. Like today, those who knew the Qur'an were militants. So Abu Bakr feared that large portions would be forgotten. The best Muslims were dying on the battlefield subduing fellow Arabs. In one battle alone, most of the Qur'an's most knowledgeable reciters were lost, and many Qur'anic passages along with them. Bukhari:V6B60N201 "Zaid bin Thabit, the Ansari said, 'Abu Bakr sent for me after the (heavy) casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of Yamama (where a great number of Muhammad's Companions were killed). Umar was present with Bakr. "The people have suffered heavy casualties at Yamama, and I am afraid that there will be more casualties among those who can recite the Qur'an on other battlefields. A large part of the Qur'an may be lost unless you collect it." I replied to Umar, "How can I do something which Allah's Apostle has not done?" Umar kept on pressing, trying to persuade me to accept his proposal.' Zaid bin Thabit added, 'Umar was sitting with Abu Bakr and was speaking (to) me. "You are a wise young man and we do not suspect you of telling lies or of forgetfulness. You used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. Therefore, look for the Qur'an and collect it (in one manuscript)." By Allah, if Abu Bakr had ordered me to shift one of the mountains (from its place) it would have been easier for me than the collection of the Qur'an. I said to both of them, "How dare you do a thing which the Prophet has not done?"

Zaid declared that collecting the Qur'an's surahs would be an impossible task. He said that it would be easier to move mountains than to turn Muhammad's string of oral recitals into a book. The reason for this rather troubling statement is obvious: Zaid's search for Qur'anic passages forced him to rely upon carvings on the leg or thigh bones of dead animals, as well as palm leaves, skins, mats, stones, and bark. But for the most part, he found nothing better than the fleeting memories of the prophet's Companions, many of whom were dead or dying. In other words, the Qur'an, like the Hadith, is all hearsay.

There were no Muslims who had memorized the entire Qur'an, otherwise the collection would have been a simple task. Had there been individuals who knew the Qur'an, Zaid would only have had to write down what they dictated. Instead, Zaid was overwhelmed by the assignment, and was forced to "search" for the passages from men who believed that they had memorized certain segments and then compare what he heard to the recollection of others. Therefore, even the official Islamic view of things, the one recorded in their scripture, is hardly reassuring.

Worse still, the Muslim chosen for this impossible task was the one in the best position to plagiarize the Torah and Talmud. Moreover, it's obvious he did. Remember: Tabari VII:167 "In this year, the Prophet commanded Zayd bin Thabit to study the Book of the Jews, saying, 'I fear that they may change my Book.'"

As is typical of the Islamic Traditions, the more one digs, the worse it gets. Bukhari:V6B61N511 "Zaid bin Thabit said, 'I started searching for the Qur'an till I found the last two Verses of Surat At-Tauba with Abi but I could not find them with anyone other than him. They were: 'Verily there has come to you an Apostle from amongst yourselves.'" [9:128] This is incriminating. The 9th surah was the second to last revealed. If only one person could remember it, there is no chance those revealed twenty-five years earlier were retained. Furthermore, this Tradition contradicts the most highly touted Islamic mantra: Most Muslims contend Uthman, not Bakr, ordered the collection of the Qur'an a decade later.

And who knows what version they finally committed to paper, if in fact they ever did? Bukhari:V6B61N513: "Allah's Apostle said, 'Gabriel [whom Muhammad said had 600 wings] recited the Qur'an to me in one way. Then I requested him and continued asking him to recite it in other ways, and he recited it in several ways till he ultimately recited it in seven different ways.'" So there were at least seven Qur'ans.

[KENNETH MATIBA]

That wasn't the end of the confusion. In version two of the angelic recital, Muhammad was the reciter, not Gabriel. Bukhari:V6B61N519: "In the month of Ramadan Gabriel used to meet Muhammad every night of the month till it elapsed. Allah's Apostle used to recite the Qur'an for him." Then, we go from every night to once a year. Bukhari:V6B61N520: "Gabriel used to repeat the recitation of the Qur'an with the Prophet once a year, but he repeated it twice with him in the year he died."

No wonder they couldn't remember who said what to whom. Bukhari:V6B61N549 "Allah's Apostle said, "The example of the person who knows the Qur'an by heart is like the owner of tied camels. If he keeps them tied, he will control them, but if he releases them, they will run away." To release something you have memorized you would have to share it. So this Hadith is apparently telling Muslims not to recite surahs for fear of losing them. And speaking of losing it: Bukhari:V6B61N550 "The Prophet said, 'It is a bad thing that some of you say, "I have forgotten such-and-such verse of the Qur'an." For indeed, I have been caused to forget it. So you must keep on reciting the Qur'an because it escapes from the hearts of men faster than a runaway camel.'"

This frivolity is important because it exposes a lie that sits at the heart of Islam. It's irrational to think God would shift from a reliance on literate Jewish prophets to an illiterate Arab. The foundation of Islamic teaching is based upon the notion that God chose Arabs because they had good memories. Therefore, they reason, the Qur'an wouldn't be changed the way the Bible was corrupted. All Islamic schools from Alazahr to Pakistan are centered around this obvious lie. The Qur'an was forgotten; it was changed and recited by so many people it was corrupted beyond hope before it ever found paper. And since the Bible started out as words on a page, it has remained true to its initial inspiration.

But it's worse than that. Muslims insist on confining the Qur'an to Religious Arabic - a language which is so hard to learn with its complex grammar and antiquated vocabulary, it's ranked second by linguists after Chinese, as the world's least hospitable communication medium. Worse still, even in Arabic much of the Qur'an cannot be understood because many words are missing and others are nonsensical. It's not rational to think that God would choose illiterate people and such a difficult language if he wished to communicate his message to the whole world. It's like using diesel to fuel a lamp and then hiding it in a swamp.

But there is a method to their madness. By confining the Qur'an to Religious Arabic, Islamic clerics and kings can say whatever they want - and they do. An Egyptian doctor who edited Prophet of Doom wrote: "You would be amazed how they can distort facts to deceive others."

In keeping with the camel theme, Allah's divinely inspired messenger announced: Bukhari:V6B61N552 "The Prophet said, 'Keep on reciting the Qur'an, for Qur'an runs away (is forgotten) faster than camels that are released from their tying ropes.'" In the interest of full disclosure, I present: Bukhari:V6B61N559 "The Prophet said, 'Why does anyone of the people say, "I have forgotten such-and-such Verses (of the Qur'an)?" I am, in fact, caused (by Allah) to forget.'" It's a wonder anyone takes Islam seriously.

Continuing to cripple its own claim that the Qur'an was retained as Allah's Pen wrote it: Bukhari:V6B61N561 "Umar bin Khattab [the second Caliph] said, 'I heard Hisham bin Hakim bin Hizam reciting Surat Al-Furqan ["Al-Furqan," the title of the 25th surah, has no meaning in any language.] during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle. I listened to his recitation and noticed that he recited it in several ways which Allah's Apostle had not taught me. So I was on the point of attacking him in the prayer, but I waited till he finished, and then I seized him by the collar. "Who taught you this Surah which I have heard you reciting?" He replied, "Allah's Apostle taught it to me." I said, "You are lying. Allah's Apostle taught me in a different way this very Surah which I have heard you reciting." So I led him to Muhammad. "O Allah's Apostle! I heard this person reciting Surat-al-Furqan in a way that you did not teach me." The Prophet said, "Hisham, recite!" So he recited in the same way as I heard him recite it before. On that Allah's Apostle said, "It was revealed to be recited in this way." Then the Prophet said, "Recite, Umar!" So I recited it as he had taught me. Allah's Apostle said, "It was revealed to be recited in this way, too." He added, "The Qur'an has been revealed to be recited in several different ways, so recite of it that which is easier for you." If Muhammad were alive today and made this statement, he would be branded an apostate, hunted down and murdered. As we shall soon discover, he just contradicted Islam's holy grail.

Examining these Hadith we discover that the first "manuscript" wasn't even in Muhammad's tongue, requiring it to be translated. Bukhari:V4B56N709 "Uthman called Zaid, Abdallah, Said, and Abd-Rahman. They wrote the manuscripts of the Qur'an in the form of a book in several copies. Uthman said to the three Quraishi persons, 'If you differ with Zaid bin Thabit on any point of the Qur'an, then write it in the language of the Quraysh, as the Qur'an was revealed in their language.' So they acted accordingly." Because there was such confusion, Uthman ordered competing versions to be burned. But by destroying the evidence, he destroyed the Qur'an's credibility. Now all Muslims have is wishful thinking.

Since "wishful thinking" isn't sufficient, and since the Islamic Hadith is more conflicting than helpful, I am going to turn to reason and fact to determine what is true and what is not.

First, let's establish what Muslims believe so that we can direct our attention to determining whether or not it is accurate, or even reasonable. As evidenced by the official Islamic introduction to the Qur'an, Islamic scholars contend: "The Qur'an is one leg of two which form the basis of Islam. The second leg is the Sunnah of the Prophet. What makes the Qur'an different from the Sunnah is its form. Unlike the Sunnah, the Qur'an is quite literally the Word of Allah, whereas the Sunnah was inspired by Allah but the wording and actions are the Prophet's. The Qur'an has not been expressed using any human words. Its wording is letter for letter fixed by Allah. Prophet Muhammad was the final Messenger of Allah to humanity, and therefore the Qur'an is the last Message which Allah has sent to us. Its predecessors, such as the Torah, Psalms, and Gospels have all been superceded." Funny thing, though, the Allah-inspired Sunnah just confirmed that the Qur'an used "human words" and that it wasn't "fixed letter for letter by Allah." Muslims ought to read their own scriptures.

Despite all evidence to the contrary, including their own, Islamic scholars contend that today's Qur'an is an identical copy of Allah's Eternal Tablets, even so far as the punctuation, titles, and divisions of chapters are concerned. Maududi, one of the most esteemed Qur'anic scholars said, "The Qur'an exists in its original text, without a word, syllable nor even letter having been changed." (Towards Understanding Islam, Maududi) Abu Dhabi, another leading Muslim said, "No other book in the world can match the Qur'an. The astonishing fact about this Book of Allah is that it has remained unchanged, even to a dot, over the last fourteen hundred years. No variation of text can be found in it." That's factually untrue, every word of it.

The Qur'an says of itself: "Nay this is a glorious Qur'an, (inscribed) on a Preserved Tablet." (85:21) "A Scripture Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail; a Qur'an in Arabic." (41:3) "We have coined for man in this Qur'an. (It is) a Qur'an in Arabic, without any crookedness (therein)." (39:27) Richard Nixon tried that line too. It didn't work any better for him than it does for Allah. Over the course of these pages you'll discover why.

The Quran, however, in it's origional Arabic has never been changed. Not one single period has been moved, not one word changed, not one sentenced moved. (YR)