Monday, 18 July 2011

Drunk Racists Beaten up by Muslim Students

Drink sodden racist chavs including a Hindu got more than they bargained for when after hurling racist abuse outside an Islamic College in Bolton the College's Muslim students beat them up with cricket bats.

The hilarious ironic story gets even better because after receiving a hiding and spending time in hospital it was the racists who were given various court sentences. What almost made me fall of my chair with laughter was the Hindu bloke Bhavesh Patel (who got a fractured skull for his efforts) had his racist abuse towards presumably fellow brown people described by his brief as "out of character given his heritage".

LM should point out I do not condone violence particularly as one bloke previously got seriously attacked outside a Pub and left unconscious.

Islamophobia Backfires in Bolton
 AN angry mob shouted racist abuse at the gates of an Islamic college, sparking a confrontation with Muslim students, a court heard.

A bottle and stones were thrown after the group of drunken teenagers goaded residents at the college, in Willows Lane, Deane, in March last year.

Two of the group climbed the gates to confront students but were beaten up and taken to hospital, Bolton Crown Court was told.

Niall Briercliffe, Barry Lomax, Aaron Buckley and Bhavesh Patel all admitted affray.

Patel, aged 19, of Brandon Street, Daubhill, was first to enter the college but after he threw missiles about five students rounded on him, leaving him unconscious with a suspected fractured skull.

Defending Patel, Peter Cunliffe said: “His comments were out of character and given his heritage, it makes it all the more strange and deplorable he said those words.”

Buckley, aged 18, of Canterbury Grove, Daubhill, told a doctor he had been attacked with a cricket bat and hit in the face with a brick.

Defending Buckley Nick Ross said: “His provocative behaviour was absolutely unjustified.”

Police investigated the two defendants’ injuries but no charges were brought.

Briercliffe and Lomax stayed behind the gates of the college with a group of others, who swore, shouted racist abuse and some threw stones.

The late-night standoff followed an earlier, unrelated assault at the Willows pub, involving Briercliffe, Lomax and Patel, who also admitted assault.

The court heard they beat up Lee Chadwick in the car park of the pub following a disagreement.

Mr Chadwick, who was in his early 20s and was known to the group, was left unconscious with cuts above his eye and to his lip.

Sentencing, Recorder Brian Cummings QC said: “You went into the grounds of the college, making confrontation almost inevitable.”

Patel was given a 10- month sentence suspended for two years and ordered to complete 100 hours unpaid work. He was ordered to pay £100 compensation.

Buckley was given a six-month sentence suspended for two years and ordered to complete 60 hours unpaid work. He was ordered to pay £100 costs.

Lomax, aged 18, of Horeb Street, Bolton, was given a 10-month sentence suspended for two years and ordered to complete 100 hours unpaid work. He was ordered to pay £100 compensation.

Briercliffe, aged 17, of Church Avenue, Daubhill, was given a 12-month youth rehabilitation order and ordered to complete 200 hours unpaid work.


Wednesday, 1 September 2010

Pastor Joseph of ABN Claims Homosexuality is Islamic

Here we have it folks. Pastor Joseph and Brother Hamoudy claiming Islam allows and even encourages homosexuality!

This, of course, is blatantly untrue; these two Christians on the 'News and Views' show (via the Aramaic Broadcasting Network)) were obviously wrong; everybody and their dog KNOWS Islam does NOT allow homosexuality and is in fact very striclty against the homosexual act.

I guess the axiomatic truth is no obstacle for Pastor Joseph and Brother Hamoudy - these two Christians make it quite apparent they have no regard for accuracy and truth. They are shown to be the charlatans they clearly are in this embarrassing and spectacular video. Enjoy :)

The scholars at Islamonline discuss homosexuality:

The Qur’an tells us the story of the people of Lut (Lot), who deviated from the natural way and got involved in this abnormality, refusing every word of advice from their Prophet Lut. Thus, their destiny was destruction and punishment. Almighty Allah says: “And Lo! (Remember) when he said unto his folk: Will ye commit abomination such as no creature ever did before you? Lo! ye come with lust unto men instead of women. Nay, but ye are wanton folk. And the answer of his people was only that they said (one to another): Turn them out of your township. They are folk, forsooth, who keep pure. And We rescued him and his household, save his wife, who was of those who stayed behind. And We rained a rain upon them. See now the nature of the consequence for evil doers!” (Al-A`raf: 80-84)

The eminent Muslim scholar Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, states:

“Almighty Allah has prohibited illegal sexual intercourse and homosexuality and all means that lead to either of them. This perverted act is a reversal of the natural order, a corruption of man’s sexuality, and a crime against the rights of females.

The spread of this depraved practice in a society disrupts its natural life pattern and makes those who practice it slaves to their lusts, depriving them of decent taste, decent morals, and a decent manner of living. The story of the people of Prophet Lut as narrated in the Qur’an should be sufficient for us. Lut’s people were addicted to this shameless depravity, abandoning natural, pure, lawful relations with women in the pursuit of this unnatural, foul and illicit practice. That is why their prophet, Lut (peace be upon him) told them: “What! Of all creatures, do you approach males and leave the spouses whom your Lord has created for you? Indeed, you are people transgressing (all limits)!” (Ash-Shu`araa: 165-166)

The strangest expression of these peoples’ perversity of nature, lack of guidance, depravity of morals, and aberration of taste was their attitude toward the guests of Prophet Lut (peace be on him), who were angels of punishment in human form sent by Allah to try these people and to expose their perversity.
The Qur’an narrates the story: “And when Our messengers came to Lut, he was grieved on their account and did not know how to protect them. He said, ‘This is a day of distress.’ And his people, who had long since been practicing abominations, came rushing toward him. He said, ‘O my people, here are my daughters. They are purer for you, so fear Allah and do not disgrace me in front of my guests. Is there not a single upright man among you?’ They said, ‘Thou knowest well that we have no right to thy daughters, and certainly thou knowest what we want.’ He said, ‘If only I had strength to resist you or had some powerful support!’ Said (the angels) ‘O Lut, truly, we are messengers of thy Lord; they shall not reach thee….’”(Hud: 77-81)

Muslim jurists hold different opinions concerning the punishment for this abominable practice. Should it be the same as the punishment for fornication, or should both the active and passive participants be put to death? While such punishments may seem cruel, they have been suggested to maintain the purity of the Islamic society and to keep it clean of perverted elements.”

Moreover, Sheikh Muhammad Saleh Al-Munajjid, a prominent Saudi scholar and lecturer, adds:

“Islam emphatically forbids this deed [homosexual sex] and prescribes a severe punishment for it in this world and the next. How could it be otherwise, when the Prophet of Islam (peace and blessings be upon him) said: ‘Whoever you find committing the sin of the people of Lut, kill them, both the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.’ (At-Tirmidhi: 1376) That is, if it is done with consent.”

The scholars of Islam, such as Malik, Ash-Shafi`i, Ahmad and Ishaaq said that (the person guilty of this crime) should be stoned, whether he is married or unmarried.

There is no doubt that this act, which goes against the pure human nature created by Allah, by making men content with men and women with women, destroying families, adversely affecting the birth rate, causing the spread of killer diseases, harming the innocent when children are raped, and generally spreading corruption on earth, should be uprooted and stamped out.”

Thinking of the wisdom behind prohibiting homosexuality and lesbianism, the following can be said:

First, such acts lead to the spread of passivity among the young generation and destroy their morality, since they cannot practice such perversion except after taking some drugs to create for themselves a virtual atmosphere where they feel fake joy. Sufficient unto any person to feel that his manhood is lost.

Second, it destroys the lives of women whose husbands leave them in pursuit of this perversion and they, in turn, try to find a way to satisfy their sexual needs. In such case, the whole society will be no more than chaos.

Third, it is a fierce attack on progeny and pregnancy, which increases the human race.

Fourth, the dangerous diseases that are caused by it are unavoidable and fatal. Topping these illnesses is HIV/AIDS.


As for lesbianism, it is also no more than a perversion and an attack against the natural relation between a man and a woman.

There is no certain punishment for lesbianism. Still, disciplinary punishment is there for any perverted person who commits it. The Kuwaiti Encyclopedia of Islamic Jurisprudence states:

“Muslim jurists agree that there is no certain hadd (punishment) for lesbianism. However, they agree that disciplinary punishment should be administered since it is a sin.”

Such an act spoils the doer’s character and make her testimony unacceptable, as stated in the above named encyclopedia:

“Muslim Jurists agree that a witness should be morally sound. A pervert cannot be taken as a witness. Since lesbianism is an act of perversion, a lesbian cannot be a witness. Even with the jurists not declaring this openly, it can still be understood from their words and conditions.”

Almighty Allah knows best.

Read more:

Have you spotted any other crazy Christian missionary claims? If so please forward to

Tuesday, 31 August 2010

The Thighing Lie

The Mufakhathat (Thighing) Claim is a Deception

It is wise to make people aware of a fabrication (falsification) traversing the internet which states Islam allows Muslim men to gratify themselves sexually with pre-pubescent girls (even as young as 3 years of age) via a method known as mufakhafat (thighing).

This claim of theirs is errant nonsense. The early classical scholar, Hasan al-Basri (642 - 728 or 737 AD), has already made it known Islam does NOT allow Muslim men to approach prepubescent girls in a sexual fashion. [1]

As for the fabrication (falsified fatwa) on the internet; Ebrahim Saifuddin confirms the thighing claims are erroneous (“a fabricated lie”) and points out Christian missionaries made this malicious, untrue and vile allegation up. [2] Moreover inform us the falsified fatwa has ALREADY been commented upon by Saudi scholars and they have denounced it as a lie as well as informing us Islam does not allow such a sick practice. The Saudi scholars also confirm the Prophet Muhammad NEVER took part in such a practice, thus further denouncing and disproving the Christian missionary lies. [1]

I have appended a typical sample of the false claim to this article (see appendix 1).

Looking Stupid

I have recently come across two people parroting the false claims and using these fabrications in order to satisfy their anti-Muslim agenda – one of these individuals is a Christian tele-evangelist of ill-repute whilst the other is a member (Kevin Carroll) of a far right group named “English Defence League” (EDL). These people do not realise how unscholarly and silly they look when repeating such nonsense even though it does not take much in the way of research to realise the material they use is a fabrication (false).

Another Fabrication?

Alongside the “fatwa” fabrication there seems to be another fabrication of this nature attributed to Khomeini which is being circulated on the internet. I would like to state Khomeini is NOT seen as an authority and is seen as a deviant by recognised scholarly authorities. Nevertheless the quotes attributed to Khomeini are thought to be fabrications too.

The “book” where the alleged Komeini’s quotes were taken from ("Tahrirolvasyleh" fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom, Iran, 1990) does not seem to even exist! [3]. Alongside the alleged quotes of approving child-sex there are alleged quotes approving sex with animals [4]. Both are outrageously false allegations; Islam does not allow these depraved actions


Essentially, somebody/group of bodies made a malicious lie up about Islam and other Islamophobes have been propagating (spreading) it without checking for accuracy and truth.

The fact remains, Islam does not allow thighing (mufakhafat) of prepubescent girls. There are forgeries on the internet which are being used in a smear campaign against Muslims - be alert to these false and nasty claims.

Any feedback: send it to Yahya Snow at






Appendix 1

Here is a typical sample of the falsehood we have discussed in this article (increase screen size to read it, it was shrunk for compaction purposes):

Regarding the practice of "thighing", the masterbating between the legs of a female infant or actually sodomizing her, Islamic clerics have this to say:

Pedophilia decrees from

Question 1809

After the permanent committee for the scientific research and fatwahs (religious decrees) reviewed the question forwarded by the grand scholar of the committee with reference number 1809 issued on 3/5/1453 and 7/5/1421 (Islamic calendar)

Question: ‘It has become widespread these days, and especially during weddings, the habit of mufa’khathat of the children. (mufa’khathat - literally translated, it means “placing between the thighs” which means placing the male member between the thighs of a child).

What is the opinion of scholars, knowing full well that the prophet, the peace of Allah be upon him, also practiced the “thighing” of Aisha - the mother of believers - may Allah be pleased with her ?

Answer: After studying the issue, the committee has answered as follows:

As for the prophet, his thighing his fiancée Aisha when she was six years of age and not able to consummate the relationship was due to her small age. That is why the Prophet used to place his male member between her thighs and massage it, as the prophet had control of his male member not like other men.

Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, The Supreme Leader of Iran, the Shia Grand Ayatollah, 1979-89 said in his official statements:

"A man can quench his sexual lusts with a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate. Sodomizing the baby is halal (allowed by sharia). If the man penetrates and damages the child, then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however, does not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girl’s sister. It is better for a girl to marry when her menstruation starts, and at her husband's house rather than her father's home. Any father marrying his daughter so young will have a permanent place in heaven."

Khomeini, "Tahrirolvasyleh" fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom, Iran, 1990

“It is not illegal for an adult male to 'thigh' or enjoy a young girl who is still in the age of weaning; meaning to place his penis between her thighs, and to kiss her.”

Ayatu Allah Al Khumaini's "Tahrir Al wasila" p. 241, issue number 12

"Young boys or girls in full sexual effervescence are kept from getting married before they reach the legal age of majority. This is against the intention of divine laws. Why should the marriage of pubescent girls and boys be forbidden because they are still minors, when they are allowed to listen to the radio and to sexually arousing music?"

"The Little Green Book" "Sayings of the Ayatollah Khomeini", Bantam Books

Appendix 2

Ebrahim Saifuddin of IqraProductions exposes the thighing (mufa’khathat) lie:

More info can be obtained here:

Monday, 2 August 2010

Fake "Ex-Muslim" Stories?

Pinar's Testimony (Does Pinar Exist? Is it a Missionary Forgery/Hoax?)

I came across this testimony of an ex-muslim converting Christianity on a missionary website; the chief architect of this website is well known to me and characterized by dishonesty and sensationalism

As I was reading through this testimony I could not help asking myself whether it was genuine, a hoax or simply a product of the website owners mind.
The “testimony” begins with the lady’s background and is written in the first person. The lady is named “Pinar”

My Muslim Background

She goes on to describe a secular background, a background which has very little mention of Islam or Islamic practices yet she is presented as an ex-Muslim; this is a little curious.

I was born in a big city in Turkey, to a modern family, who lived their Muslim faith in a secular way. They advised me not to worry too much about God and religion but just know that God loves me and that I love him and He will protect me and everything will be great.

Now she is questioned as to the existence of God. Does she answer utilizing the Quran or mention prayer? No, why not? It seems a little odd.

I had a lot of atheist and agnostic friends, and when they asked me how I know God exists, I told them I could feel His presence. My life was a bundle of love and blessings…

She reaches 18 and decides to read the Quran, this is odd. Why had she not read the Quran prior to this? After all she was born into a Muslim family. Curious.

Up until I decided to really check what it means to be a Muslim and what does the Kur’an say. I was 18 years old

When I decided to read the Kur’an and see what my wonderful God, full of love, has to say in the Holy Book. As you can imagine I was disappointed.

Why was she disappointed? God is al Wadood (the Most Loving) S85:14. How can you be disappointed at that? Perhaps she did not read all the Quran?

However, it now becomes apparent why her “testimony” is on an anti-Muslim site (the chief architect of the site is well renowned for hatred), she has a sensational pop:

The book was the worst horror book I have ever read. Every night my heart was racing and I was filled with terror. I said to myself, if that is what God is, I am an atheist. And I rejected the Lord of the universe just like my atheist friends.

Wow this lady wants us to believe she stopped believing in God all because of the Quran which she thought to be a “horror book”. She is even more sensationalistic as she claimed she was “filled with terror” and “every night” her “heart was racing”

Now do you really expect us to believe that?

The Quranic descriptions of Hell are balanced with descriptions of Paradise.
Furthermore, the passages concerning disbelievers have a context; did she not read the Quran with some sort of Tafsir?

Did she read the Quran at all or is she simply making things up for effect? The Quran is full of glorious teachings of mercy, kindness and wisdom. Did she not read the FIRST chapter of the Quran (Surah Al-Fatiha), the English translation (S1:1) describes Allah as:

In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most MERCIFUL

Note: This lady accepts the Bible despite the violent passages within the Bible. This is perplexing and suspicious to say the least!


In my view this story sounds a little fishy. It gets fishier and I begin to think it is a hoax or the product of the mind of one of the anti-Muslim brigade from the website in question.

However, this story does mention something interesting, as she stopped “believing” in Islam this happened:

Then my life changed, I lost my peace, joy, and love, my relationships started to shatter; even though I managed to look successful on the outside, I was a huge mess

Just to get another dig in she writes:

But I did not want anything to do with the God of the Kur’an. I could not lie to people and claim, I am a Muslim when I did not believe in more than half of the Holy Book.

What half would that be? You believed in half of the Book but disbelieved in the other half. That is odd. Care to explain?

Was it simply a case of this lady being unwilling to believe in Hell and the separation of believers and disbelievers?

Getting Interesting

It gets even more interesting as the lady is willing to believe in Christianity which also has teachings of Hell as well as a separation of believers and unbelievers. The Quran and the Bible have similar themes. Somebody needs to tell Pinar this, or at least give her copies of both Books so she can realise it herself.

Getting MORE Unbelievable

OK, now it gets even more unbelievable. A friend takes her to church, she likes it and continues going BUT does not convert to Christianity:

After that day, I kept on going to churches. I have gone to house churches, catholic, protestant, etc, you name it I went. But I was not a Christian, I just liked the experience since every time when I was feeling heavily burdened, I went to church and each time God touched my heart.

Does she bother to read the Bible? NO!

At least 30 friends witnessed to me in Turkey alone but none of them could convince me of following Jesus

Despite enjoying church and all these people trying to convert her she does not convert or read the Bible. Perhaps the Old Testament would have filled her with terror?

A vision of Jesus (why do all these "conversion" stories contain "visions"?)

She then claims to have seen a vision of Jesus in a dream. After this she converted to Christianity. She did not EVEN read the Bible but converted based on feelings. Even her dream of Jesus does not instruct her to follow Christianity:

I slept and immediately Jesus was there. I was praying in a circle of believers and Jesus was amidst of us. He was covered with a prayer shawl but we were in Him

OK, Jesus had a prayer shawl over him; perhaps this indicates he prays to God and therefore has a God. Muslims believe Jesus prayed to God. This is even confirmed in the Bible!

One of those days Jesus went out to a mountainside to pray, and spent the night praying to God. (Luke 6:12) NIV

I (a Muslim) have SEEN Jesus (pbuh) in a dream too!!!

I have seen Jesus in a dream too. I did not convert to Christianity. In my dream Jesus was PRAYING (supplicating) to God. Thus Jesus has a God so cannot possibly be God.

In a different dream I was wandering the streets of Damascus and looking for Jesus whilst calling “Isa Ibn Maryam”. “Isa Ibn Maryam” is translated as “Jesus son of Mary”, thus through this dream, too, I realise Jesus is not the son of God. The significance of Damascus is that Jesus will descend upon the White minaret of Damascus in his second coming (Muslim belief).

Therefore, my dreams were in accordance with the Muslim beliefs of Jesus (pbuh).

Dissection + personal commentary was by Yahya Snow

Is “Pinar’s” story genuine?

Her story sounds far-fetched. Perhaps it was made up by somebody from the anti-Muslim website. Here are a few more fake “convert” stories; Mohammad Khan’s YouTube channel explores what are perceived to be fake “converts” (famously this channel helped bring the Christian evangelist Ergun Caner to account for his deception :

(Ironically Ergun Caner looks uncannily like the owner of the website (Sam Shamoun) which featured “Pinar’s conversion story” )

Here is a real convert (ex Christian Deacon Jerald Dirks):
Part 1:

Part 2:

Those who want to convert to Islam or learn more about Islam may visit:

Useful site:


Jesus (pbuh) praying to God in the Bible:

So he left them and went away once more and prayed the third time, saying the same thing. (Mt 26:44) NIV

Jesus praying to his God in the gospel of Luke:

One of those days Jesus went out to a mountainside to pray, and spent the night praying to God. (Luke 6:12)

Another one:

Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will." (Matthew 26:39)

Wednesday, 28 July 2010

Mohammad's Salavtion? (PBUH)

Yet another Christian polemicist is peddling the “Muhammad was not assured salvation” claim despite there being a plethora of material disproving their claim. Previously his colleague was admonished for such erroneous claim; unfortunately his colleague did not fill him in and thus he is looking rather red-faced indeed.

Sadly, this Christian polemicist has not been privy to the source material which proves Muhammad was guaranteed Paradise (i.e. assured of salvation). However, in an act of responsibility and altruism we will guide him into the right direction by showing him proof Muhammad was assured of salvation and then we will clear up some of his misdirected ideas within his article.

Proof Muhammad was Certain of Salvation and Paradise

It is difficult to believe people are still peddling questions regarding Muhammad’s salvation, ponder upon this Quranic verse:

Surah 9:72

Allâh has promised to the believers -men and women, - Gardens under which rivers flow to dwell therein forever, and beautiful mansions in Gardens of 'Adn (Eden Paradise). But the greatest bliss is the Good Pleasure of Allâh. That is the supreme success.

Now Muhammed is a believing man, thus according to the Quran he is to be in Paradise thus showing his salvation is certain. Those who are unsaved are not going to Paradise, only the saved enter Paradise (like Jesus and Muhammad).

Muhammad Declares he Will be in Paradise

Here is the most explicit reference I could get hold of regarding Muhammad:

Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 73, Number 34:
Narrated Sahl bin Sa'd:
The Prophet said, "I and the person who looks after an orphan and provides for him, will be in Paradise like this," putting his index and middle fingers together.

Thus Muhammad is CONFIRMING he will be IN Paradise (and those looking after orphans will be very close to him in Paradise). Anybody of a reasonable disposition will acknowledge this points to Muhammad being GUARANTEED Paradise and SALVATION!

Here is another quick one:

“No one will enter Paradise except a Muslim” ((Reported by al-Bukhaari, 6047).

Muhammad is a Muslim therefore Paradise is guaranteed for him. However knowing Shamoun’s fertile imagination and obstinacy he will claim Muhammad to be a non-Muslim in order to maintain his bizarre claim

We have already seen Muhammad is going to Paradise and therefore is guaranteed salvation. But let us cut through some of the now obsolete points Sam Shamoun has been making in the interest of thoroughness and in the hope Sam will drop his invalid claims.

Cutting Through Sam Shamoun’s Dubious Rhetoric

In typical zealous style our Sam Shamoun begins his outrageous claim which is symptomatic of his misunderstanding of basic Islamic principles and practices; within his title he proclaims:

“Praying for Muhammad’s Peace and Security”

A quick interjection to correct him; Muslims don’t pray for Muhammad’s “security” we simply ask God to send His Peace and Blessings upon the Prophet. The more times we do this the more goodness God showers upon the Prophet. Would you not do this for a Prophet you love? I actually do this for Prophet Jesus too as I love him as well. By Shamoun’s warped understanding this means we are praying for the “security” of Jesus.

I think Sam can see the erroneous nature of his claim. Unsurprisingly the rest of his lengthy article is a dire attempt in propping this already refuted claim.

Does this mean we can end the article and toddle off to the gym and avoid inflicting further refutation upon Shamoun’s outrageous material?

Not so fast Sam, stay right where you are!

There are a few other points of contention which I want to bring to your attention. I will get the most embarrassing one out of the way.

PROOF: Sam you have NEVER read the WHOLE Bible

Shamoun wrote this:

In the first place, there is not a single Biblical verse or Quranic citation which exhorts believers to pray for the peace and salvation of any of God’s true prophets and apostles after their respective deaths; Muhammad is utterly unique in this respect

Firstly Sam, we have already taught you that Muslims do not pray for Muhammad’s “salvation” so you can go back and expunge such fanciful claims. However it gets more interesting as our Sam Shamoun appears to have never read the Bible. God is speaking to Abram (Abraham) in this verse:

I will bless those who bless you,
and whoever curses you I will curse;
and all peoples on earth
will be blessed through you."
(Genesis 12:3 NIV)

Now, that is undisputable. It clearly encourages people to pray for blessings on Abraham. This is all too similar to what Muslims do to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Indeed Muslims would be considered uncouth not to say peace be upon Abraham after mentioning his name. Muslims do this prayer for ALL prophets when mentioned.

Thus two points are proven here:

1. Muslims are blessed by God according to Genesis 12:3 as we Muslims ask God to bless Abraham with peace (alayhissalam)

2. Sam Shamoun is unfamiliar with the Bible

Sam may be hiding behind the sofa right now, hold on Sam is American so I guess he will use the word “couch” as opposed to “sofa”. Nevertheless he is finding it rather embarrassing.
Before the embarrassment can subside, Sam let’s get the appended claim out of the way:
“Muhammad is utterly unique in this respect.”

I’m sure you have realised Muhammad is not alone in this respect as Genesis 12:3 encouraged people to send blessings upon Abraham just like Muslims do for the last Prophet, Muhammad.

Sam, before we move on please join us in this supplication:

O Lord of all that exists, please send your peace and blessings on Abraham, Jesus and Muhammad and upon all the other Prophets. Ameen.

Sam Shamoun also states:

If Muhammad who is the founder of Islam needed and continues to need individuals to pray for his salvation

It is getting a little repetitive, Sam. I’m sure having read up to this point in the article a man of comprehension will realise Muslims are not praying for “salvation” as Muhammad had salvation guaranteed. May I remind you he told us he will be in Heaven, that sounds like guaranteed salvation, thus he does not require anybody to pray for his salvation. Muhammad has already attained salvation he will be in the same place as Abraham and the other Prophets.

Worry about your own salvation, Sam. Prophets are more than fine when it comes to salvation.

I think we have had our fill of Shamoun’s wild and spurious claims for today

God willing Sam will realise the error in his ways.

I know I have been having some fun with Sam Shamoun throughout the course of this article but it is all for effect in order to help him and others see the truth. God willing it will be of use to people of a sincere disposition.

May Allah send His peace and blessings upon all his Prophets. Ameen.

Any files or information should be sent to:

Appendix 1:
Sam Shamoun latest outright lie of Muslims being” black stone lickers it is refuted here:

Appendix 2:

Interesting article by Jonathon Dupree which could further the truth-seeker’s understanding, God willing:

Appendix 3:

Here is a typical Muslim prayer asking for further blessings upon the Prophet they love:

Translation (2) O Allah, Lord of this lasting call and this beneficial prayer, confer blessings upon Muhammad and become pleased with me so that You are never displeased with me thereafter.

Here’s one in which ABRAHAM is mentioned:
Translation (4) O Allah, confer blessings upon Muhammad and upon the family of Muhammad, and bless Muhammad and the family of Muhammad, and shower Your mercy upon Muhammad and the family of Muhammad, in the manner You conferred blessings, blessed and showered mercy upon Ibrahim and the family of Ibrahim. Verily, You are the Praiseworthy, the Majestic.

Here’s one asking for blessings for ALL believers (obviously that includes Jesus and Abraham, right?):
Translation (3) O Allah, confer blessings upon Muhammad, Your bondsman and Your messenger and confer blessings upon the believing men and women, and the Muslim men and women.

Friday, 23 July 2010

Refuting False Allegations Against Prophet Muhammad's Parentage

An Ignorant, Malicious and False Claim has been made against the Parentage of the Prophet Muhammad

An erroneous allegation (by an Islamophobe) has been which claims Muhammad’s father is unknown as his mother had an affair with “somebody” after the death of her husband (Abdullah), the claimant also alleges Muhammed was born four years after the death of Abdullah.

In an act of responsibility it would be wise to state this article is not written due to dispute concerning the parentage of the Prophet Muhammed. It is agreed upon by historians, genealogists and theologians alike that the parents of Muhammad were Amina and Abdullah. It is consensus amongst all authorities, there has never been dispute, controversy or any complexity related to this subject amongst authorities

Then, Why Produce an Article proving the Parentage of Muhammad?

It is a pre-emptive article to make ensure false claims do not gain credence on the internet, after all, the internet is a place where malicious and misinformed claims flourish if good people sit on their hands.

ALL scholarly authority agree upon Amina and Abdullah being the parents of Muhammad, thus a claim on the contrary would be inaccurate and odd, to say the least. So this article proving the parentage of Muhammad is simply written in order to prevent false information being spread by Islamophobes on the internet

NOTE: Abdullah can be written as “Abd’Allah” and Amina can be written as Aminah

Authority tells us Abdullah (Abd’Allah) was the Father of Muhammad

The quickest way to show the Islamophobe’s claim to be false is to prove Muhammad’s father was Abdullah

Let us look at scholarly authority, Ibn Kathir confirms Muhammad’s father to be Abdullah

Ibn Kathir states “he (Muhammad) was the son of Abd’Allah who was in turn the son of his father Abd’al Muttalib” [1]

So Ibn Kathir, a classical expert in the life of Muhammad, states Muhammad’s father was Abdullah

What do the Genealogies tell us?

To further point to expertise and the unanimous agreement amongst scholars concerning Muhammad being the son of Abdullah and Amina we can look to the genealogies.

Ibn Hisham and al Tabari both confirm Muhammad as the “son of Abdullah” whilst giving a list of his genealogy [2] [3]

The genealogy in A Chronology of Islamic History confirms Abdullah as the father of Muhammad and Amina as Muhammad’s mother. [4]

Other Biographers Confirm Abdullah and Amina to be the Parents of Muhammad

Al Mubarakpuri mentions the accepted fact of Abdullah being “the father of Muhammad”. [5]

Karen Armstrong names Muhammad’s father as Abdullah [6] [7]

Quite simply there has never been a dispute related to the parentage of Muhammad in scholarly circles as all the authorities have always been in agreement on Abdullah being the father of Muhammad. This clearly illustrates the Islamophobe claiming otherwise is wrong, badly wrong.

Did Abdullah Marry Amina? Yes.

Al Mubarakpuri confirms this by telling us the grandfather of Muhammad (Abdul Muttalib) chose Aminah, daughter of Wahb bin Abd Manaf bin Zuhra bin Kilab as a wife for his son, Abdullah. [8]

He goes further and informs us “they were married in Makkah, and soon after Abdullah was sent by his father” on a trade journey to either Madina or Syria (two versions) [8]

Another biographer, Yahiya Emerick, informs us of Amina telling of signs of pregnancy after Abdullah left for the trade journey. [9]

Abdullah Passed Away Whilst on a Trade Journey

On the way back from this trade journey, Muhammad’s father passed away [10]. Karen Armstrong writes “Muhammad’s father Abdullah died before Muhammad was born”.

“Most historians state his (Abdullah’s) death was two months before the birth of Muhammad. Some others state his death was two or more months after the Prophet’s birth” [10]

Muhammad also told us his father was Abdullah (Abd’Allah)

Muhammad told us who his father was Abdullah (Abd’Allah) whilst giving his genealogy to us:

“I am Muhammad son of Abd’Allah bin Abd’Muttalib bin Hashim bin Abd’Manaf…"(he went on to give mention to his forefathers all the way up to and including bin Nizar) [11]

In the same narration Muhammad tells us: “I was the product of true marriage, not fornication, right down from Adam to my father and mother”. [12]

Ibn Kathir lists other supporting narrations saying the same thing [13]

So what we have here is Muhammad confirming his parentage; i.e. his father is Abdullah and he was a product of true marriage thus any claims of him being born four years after the death of his father (Abdullah) are erroneous (false) and any claims of his mother (Amina) having an affair which bore Muhammed is shown to be erroneous too.

All Muhammad’s contemporaries considered him to be the son of Abdullah

Muhammad’s mother passed away whilst he was a young boy and he then “lived with his grandfather Abdul Muttalib” [14]. Thus everybody saw Abd al Muttalib as Muhammad’s grandfather and therefore considered Abdullah as the father of Muhammad as Abdullah was the son of Abdul Muttalib.

After the passing on of his grandfather; “Muhammad went to live with his uncle Abu Talib” [15]. Abu Talib was the brother of Abdullah. Once again, this shows us the community and the family of Muhammad considered Muhammad to be the son of Abdullah.

Muhammad’s Enemies Confirm Abdullah to be his Father

Whilst agreeing the contract/treaty of Hudaibiyah the Prophet initially wanted his name signed as “Muhammad, the messenger of Allah” but his enemies disagreed and wanted him to use his own name and the name of his father and thus the treaty was signed with the name “Muhammad, the son of Abdullah” [16]. Thus showing even the enemies of Muhammad considered Abdullah to be the father of Muhammad.

I merely mention these extra points to further illustrate there was no disagreement concerning the parentage of Muhammad, everybody knew his mother to be Aminah and his father to be Abdullah.

Looking at the False Claim

Having presented all the incontrovertible evidence we can look at the false claim made by ONE dubious missionary/Islamophobe. Before doing so it is worth noting this “missionary” has a history of falsehood and is infamous for making up his own Biblical verses, such is his lack of regard for accuracy and honesty!

The Islamophobe wants us to believe Muhammad’s father is not Abdullah

We have already seen Abdullah being confirmed as the father of Muhammad by authorities such as al Mubarakpuri, Ibn Hisham and Ibn Kathir

Ibn Kathir states “he (Muhammad) was the son of Abd’Allah who was in turn the son of his father Abd’ al Muttalib”.

So the missionary/Islamophobe is simply making stuff up.

The Islamophobe claims Muhammad was born four years after the death of Abdullah

Well, we have already stated:

"Most historians state his (Abdullah’s) death was two months before the birth of Muhammad (p). Some others state his death was two or more months after the Prophet’s birth." [10]

So the missionary is making stuff up. NOBODY believes he was born four years after the death of his father, Abdullah.

The Islamophobe claims Muhammad was born due to an affair on the part of Aminah

It is depressing to note this “man” (the Islamophobe) would make such a claim against a lady’s honour without any regard for truth or decency. Such is this “man’s” nature

As we have seen every authority recognises Abdullah (the husband of Amina) to be the father of Muhammad and thus proves Amina is free from wrong doing. However, the defence of Amina also comes through Al Kalbi who studied Muhammad’s maternal ancestors (including Amina). Al Kalbi confirms Amina did not have an affair

Al Kalbi who investigated the maternal genealogy of Muhammad (including Amina) found no fornication in any one of them:

Muhammad bin Sa’d said, Hisham bin Muhammad al Kalbi informed us from his father who said “ I wrote out some 500 maternal ancestors for the Prophet(p) and found fornication in NOT one of them nor anything related to “the evil ways) of the Jahaliyya” [17]

So the Islamophobe is making claims without any investigation. If he had looked into matters before making his malicious and ignorant claims he would have noted Muhammad’s confirmation of being from a “true marriage” [12] as well as the other evidence presented such as the findings from Al Kalbi’s investigations

I would advise this Islamophobe to stop in his attempts to malign the good name of past personalities. Wrongly accusing a lady of adultery is not a matter to be taken lightly; this Islamophobe should rethink his ways and incorporate integrity into his reason d’être

The Islamophobe’s Strange Mind

The Islamophobe makes other bizarre and unsupported claims.

This Islamophobe also claims Muhammad made a story up about a woman being pregnant for four years and delivering the child in the fourth year which was born with teeth and hair!

The Islamophobe goes further and claims Muhammad made this story up because he was born four years after the death of Abdullah. The Islamophobe suggests Muhammad made the story up to convince people he was not the offspring of an affair.

These pronouncements are quite clearly the product of a debauched mind.

Muhammad was not born four years after the death of his father (Abdullah); this is quite clearly shown above. We do not need to repeat ourselves as we have already dealt with such an erroneous claim

Muhammad’s father has been shown to be Abdullah, thus Amina had no affair and Muhammad was not the offspring of an affair.

As for the story about a child being in a woman’s womb for four years, scholars confirm it to be a fabrication (i.e. a false or made up story). This story was made up by somebody AFTER the Prophet Muhammad passed away, so Muhammad did not make this story up. Somebody needs to pass this information onto the ignorant Islamophobe.

Yahya ibn Abi Kathir said:

“Studying Sacred Knowledge is a prayer”

May Allah's peace and blesseing be upon Muhammad and all the other Prophets


Appendix 1

This Islamophobe is caught lying and making up his own biblical verse:


[1] Life of the Prophet Muhammad, Ibn Kathir, translated by Professor Trevor Le Gassick, Garnet Publishing Ltd, 1998, Volume 1, pg 131

[2] Ibn Hisham 1/1-2

[3]`Tarikh al Tabari 2/239-271

[4] A Chronology of Islamic History, Ta-Ha Publishers Ltd, 1998, pg 10-12

[5] Ar-Raheequl-Makhtum by Safi-ur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri, Darussalam, 2002 pg 68

[6] Islam: A Short History, Karen Armstrong, Phoenix Press 2001 pg3

[7] Muhammad: Prophet for our Time, Karen Armstrong, Harper Press, 2006 pg 35-36

[8] Ar-Raheequl-Makhtum by Safi-ur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri, Darussalam, 2002 pg 69-70

[9] Muhammad, Yahiya Emerick, Alpha Books, 2002, pg 21-22

[10] Ar-Raheequl-Makhtum by Safi-ur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri, Darussalam, 2002 pg 70

[11] Life of the Prophet Muhammad, Ibn Kathir, translated by Professor Trevor Le Gassick, Garnet Publishing Ltd, 1998, Volume 1, pg 135

[12] Ibid

[13] Ibid pg 135-136

[14] Muhammad: Prophet for our Time, Karen Armstrong, Harper Press, 2006 pg 36

[15] Ibid

[16] Ar-Raheequl-Makhtum by Safi-ur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri, Darussalam, 2002 pg 404

[17] Life of the Prophet Muhammad, Ibn Kathir, translated by Professor Trevor Le Gassick, Garnet Publishing Ltd, 1998, Volume 1, pg 136

Thursday, 24 June 2010

Does Allah Repent in the Quran?

Allah Does NOT Repent

Some Christian critics are claiming Allah repents in the Quran. This is blatantly false and dishonest on their part. This claim to my attention when a Christian critic made this claim and claimed Surah 2:37 proves it, this is utter nonsense.

The context and the translations prove these Christian “critics” to be incorrect. The context of the verse is Adam asking Allah for forgiveness and Allah forgives him. Before proving Allah does not repent in Surah 2:37, by listing various English translations of the Verse, we shall quickly look at the context

The Context Shows the Christian Critics to be Wrong

Surah 2:36 tells us of Adam’s sin:

Then the Shaitân (Satan) made them slip therefrom (the Paradise), and got them out from that in which they were. We said: "Get you down, all, with enmity between yourselves. On earth will be a dwelling place for you and an enjoyment for a time."

The next Verse (2:37) tells us of Allah accepting Adam’s repentance.

Then Adam received from his Lord Words. And his Lord pardoned him (accepted his repentance). Verily, He is the One Who forgives (accepts repentance), the Most Merciful.

To add further context to this we can even mention the prayer (Words) which Adam used to beseech (beg for) forgiveness from Allah. The prayer Adam used is in Surah 7:23.

Thus it is clear ADAM is seeking REPENTENCE from God (Allah) and Allah ACCEPTS the REPENTENCE.

The Christian critic throws aside all sense of logic in making their bizarre claim. It is Adam who has sinned, he (Adam) is repenting; Allah is ACCEPTING the repentance, why cannot these unscholarly Christian critics see this?

It seems as though it is a case of rank dishonesty on the part of the Christian critics, especially when viewing the English translations as no translation is claiming Allah is repenting!

The Translations Disagree with these Christian Critics

View the translations below to realise the Christian claim is a lie.

Let us begin our translation-based refutation by highlighting Mohammad Asad’s translation of the Quran, this translation of the Quran is widely considered to be the best English translation available

فَتَلَقَّى آدَمُ مِن رَّبِّهِ كَلِمَاتٍ فَتَابَ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّهُ هُوَ التَّوَّابُ الرَّحِيمُ (2:37)

Transliteration: Fatalaqqa adamu min rabbihi kalimatin fataba AAalayhi innahu huwa alttawwabu alrraheemu

ASAD: Thereupon Adam received words [of guidance] from his Sustainer, and He accepted his repentance: for, verily, He alone is the-Acceptor of Repentance, the Dispenser of Grace. (2:37)

Here we realise Allah FORGIVES Adam; it does NOT say Allah repented! The Christian missionaries making such claims have either lost their ability to comprehend and read or are simply being dishonest.

Other Translations Show the Christian Critics to be Incorrect

To be even thorough a number of other English translations of the Quran are presented, these translations all prove the Christian missionaries to be incorrect, and thus proving to us that Allah does NOT repent.

As you can see (below) all these translations (Quran 2:37) point out the fact that Allah ACCEPTED the repentance of Adam; none of the translations claim Allah was repenting:

Then learnt Adam from his Lord words of inspiration, and his Lord Turned towards him; for He is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful.

Then Adam received from his Lord words (of revelation), and He relented toward him. Lo! He is the relenting, the Merciful.

Then Adam received (some) words from his Lord, so He turned to him mercifully; surely He is Oft-returning (to mercy), the Merciful

Then Adam received from his Lord Words . And his Lord pardoned him (accepted his repentance). Verily, He is the One Who forgives (accepts repentance), the Most Merciful.

The “other” translations have been divided into two groups, the first group (above) contains translations by Muslims, and the second group consists of translations from non-Muslims. NO group of translators claim Allah repents.

Non-Muslim (Christian) Translations (of Quran 2:37) Prove Allah is NOT repenting in the Quran

To add further proof of the dishonesty of these Christian critics making the bizarre claim of Allah repenting in Surah 2:37 we can refer to translations by non-Muslims too, which show the Christian critics to be wrong. Amongst the non-Muslim translations we have a Christian MISSIONARY (Rodwell) who proves the Christians claiming “Allah repents in the Quran” to be incorrect.

And words of prayer learned Adam from his Lord: and God turned to him; for He loveth to turn, the Merciful.

As we can clearly see, Rodwell is not claiming Allah repented. Rodwell is agreeing with all the other translations by pointing out Allah accepts Adam’s repentance.

We also have AJ Arberry who is endorsed by the Christian missionary Dr Robert Morey. Arberry does not claim Allah is repenting. Arberry reflects what every other translator reflects, that is, Allah FORGIVING Adam.

AJ Arberry:
Thereafter Adam received certain words from his Lord, and He turned towards him; truly He turns, and is All-compassionate.

Sale and Palmer do not claim Allah is repenting thus they also disagree with the Christian critic’s claim. Both, Sale and Palmer reflect Allah’s acceptance of Adam’s repentance.

George Sale:
And Adam learned words of prayer from his Lord, and God turned unto him, for He is easy to be reconciled and merciful.

E.H Palmer:
And Adam caught certain words from his Lord, and He turned towards him, for He is the compassionate one easily turned

It is quite clear the Christian critics are simply being dishonest. To take the refutation of their fallacious claim one step further we can refer to Tafsir literature

Tafsir also Proves the Christian Critics to be Lying

Tafsir literature reflects what early Muslims believed about Verses from the Quran, we can clearly note the Tafsir literature does not claim Allah repents, in fact the Tafsir literature simply reiterates that Allah ACCEPTS the repentance of Adam and forgives him.

Tafsir Jalalayn Confirms Allah is simply accepting Adam’s repentance.

Thereafter Adam received certain words from his Lord, with which He inspired him (a variant reading [of Ādamu] has accusative Ādama and nominative kalimātu), meaning they [the words] came to him, and these were [those of] the verse Lord, we have wronged ourselves [Q. 7:23], with which he supplicated, and He relented to him, that is,
He accepted his repentance; truly He is the Relenting, to His servants, the Merciful, to them.


It is clear through the context, translations and Tafsir literature that Allah did NOT repent. The evidence shows Allah accepting the repentance of Adam.

The Christian critics are spreading falsehood and should be rebuked (corrected) by sincere Christians.