Allah was a pagan deity long before Mohammed


Many people believe that Islam, Judaism, and Christianity are connected in some way or another.. Judaism and Christianity are connected, there is no question about that. But what about Islam? It is true that the Koran (the Bible of the Muslims) mentions Jesus, Mary, John the Baptist etc... But did this information come from God? Is the God of Islam, and the God of the Bible, the same God?

Who is Allah?

(Pre-Islamic Arabia)

The Muslims say that the God of the Bible, and the god of Islam, are one and the same God? But what are the origins of Allah. Did he come from the Bible? Or from ARABIAN PAGANISM?

The word "Allah" is a contraction of "Al-ilah," 'al' meaning "the" and "ilah" meaning 'god.' Early biographers said that "al-ilah" comes from 'El" or 'Elohim," meaning the God of the Bible but, "Early scholars attested the diffusion of this belief SOLELY TO CHRISTIAN AND JUDAIC INFLUENCES. BUT NOW a growing number of authors maintain that this idea [of Allah] had older roots IN ARABIA..." (Studies in Islam, Swartz, p.12, emphasis mine).

Ceasare Farah concludes: "There is NO REASON therefore, to accept the idea that Allah passed to the Muslim from the Christians and the Jews" (Islam, p.28, emphasis mine). We must look for the ORIGINS OF ALLAH AMONG THE ARABIAN DEITIES, and NOT from the Judeo-Christian Bible!

The Arabs had tribal gods in which they worshipped. Every tribe had their own God. "The Quraysh tribe into which Muhammad was born was particularly devoted to ALLAH..." (Islamic Invasion, Morey, p.51, emphasis mine). Before Muhammad was EVER BORN, his tribe worshipped Allah, and he was the CHIEF GOD OF MECCA: "Its been pointed out that Mecca was in the control of the Quraysh tribe into which Muhammad was born" (ibid., pp.39-40). Since they were in control of Mecca, it was only right that their God was chief of the Kaaba in Mecca.

"In pre-Islamic days, called the Days of Ignorance, the religious background of the Arabs was pagan, and basically animistic. Through wells, trees, stones, caves, springs, and other natural objects man could make contact with the deity... At Mekka, Allah was the chief of the gods and THE SPECIAL DEITY OF THE QURAISH, THE PROPHET'S TRIBE. Allah had three daughters: " (Van Ess, John, Meet the Arab, New York, 1943, p. 29)

Zwemer writes: "But history establishes beyond the SHADOW OF A DOUBT that even the PAGAN ARABS BEFORE MUHAMMAD TIME, knew the CHIEF GOD BY THE NAME OF ALLAH...ilah is used for any god and Al-ilah (contracted to Allah, i.e, the god), was the name of the SUPREME. Among the Arabs this term denoted the CHIEF GOD of three hundred and sixty idols...As final evidence, we have the fact that centuries BEFORE Muhammad the Arabian Kaaba, the temple at Mecca, was called Beit Allah, the House of God..." (Muhammad is Mecca, pp.25-26, 31-36, emphasis mine).

Collier's Encyclopedia under "Allah" writes "...there were among the Arabs, long BEFORE THE EMERGENCE OF ISLAM worshippers of a supreme god known as Allah, and the Koran (13:17; 29:61; 31:24 [These show that the Pagan Arab and Muhammad worshipped the same Deity]) LEAVES LITTLE DOUBT that Meccans...recognized the Allah was creator and provider" (p.570, emphasis mine).

The Encyclopedia of Religion of Ethics under "Allah" writes, "The origin of this [Allah] goes back to PRE-ISLAMIC TIMES as Prof. Nokleke has shown...Muhammad found the Meccans believing in a supreme god whom they called Allah...with Allah however they associated minor deities [called] the daughters of Allah. MOHAMMED'S REFORM WAS TO ASSERT THE SOLITARY EXISTENCE OF ALLAH. The first article of the Muslim creed, therefore 'La-ilaha illa-Llahu-means only as addresses by him to the Meccans 'There exist no god except the one whom you ALREADY CALLED ALLAH" (Hastings, p.326, emphasis mine).

"Islam owes the term 'Allah to the HEATHEN ARABS...Muhammad DID NOT find it necessary to introduce an altogether novel deity but CONTEND HIMSELF OF RIDDING THE HEATHEN ALLAH OF HIS COMPANIONS [known as the daughters of Allah...Had he not been accustomed from his YOUTH to the idea of Allah as the supreme god in particular IN MECCA, it may all be doubted whether he would have come forward as a preacher of monotheism" (Ibn Warraq, Why I Am Not A Muslim, p.42, emphasis mine).

"Historians like Vaqqidi have said Allah was actually the chief of the 360 gods being worshipped in Arabia at the time Mohammed rose to prominence. Ibn Al-Kalbi gave 27 names of pre-Islamic deities...Interestingly, not many Muslims want to accept that Allah was already being worshipped at the Ka'ba in Mecca by Arab pagans before Mohammed came. Some Muslims become angry when they are confronted with this fact. But history is not on their side. Pre-Islamic literature has proved this" (G. J. O. Moshay, Who Is This Allah?, Dorchester House, Bucks, UK, 1994, pg. 134, emphasis added)

And Ceasare Farah concludes: "There were hundreds of such deities in Pagan Arabia, of all those mentioned, four appear to be most popularly revered ON THE EVE OF ISLAM: AL-UZZA, ALLAT, AND MANAT. All three female deities, popularly worshipped by the tribes of Hijaz, they were regarded as the DAUGHTERS OF ALLAH, THE GOD WHO HEADED THE ARABIAN PANTHEON WHEN MUHAMMAD BEGAN TO PREACH ALLAH WAS THE PARAMOUNT DEITY" (Islam, emphasis mine).

So the Allah that the Meccans worshipped was

1. Chief god at Mecca in the Kaaba

2. The same god Muhammad was proclaiming and worshipped by him and the pagan Arabs.

3. He was worshipped centuries before Muhammad.

4. Allah was the tribal deity of Quraysh, Mohammed's tribe, and was the supreme god of Mohammed's youth.

But now we seem to have a contradiction in history about the chief of God the Kaaba? Even though history shows that Allah was the chief god of the Quraysh, and the Kaaba. We also see a god called HUBAL WHO WAS THE CHIEF GOD OF THE KAABA, AND OF THE QURAYSH TRIBE! How can this be? Is there a contradiction in history? Let's look at some quotes from historians and scholars about Hubal, and then let's answer this question logically and from the foundations of history.

"Among the gods worshipped by the Quraysh, the GREATEST WAS HUBAL...The Quraysh had several idols in and around the Kaaba. THE GREATEST OF THESE WAS HUBAL" (F.E. Peters, The Hajj, pp.24-25, emphasis mine).

"Hubal was the PRINCIPAL DEITY [in Mecca] THE GOD OF THE MOON..." (Concise Encyclopedia of Islam, p.179, emphasis mine).

"...of the 360 idols set up in the Kaaba, the MOST IMPORTANT WAS HUBAL, THE GOD OF THE MOON...IT WAS SET UP IN THE KAABA, and became the PRINCIPAL IDOL OF THE MECCANS..." (ibid., p.161, emphasis mine).

"HUBAL WAS THE CHIEF GOD OF THE KAABA" (George W. Braswell, JR, Islam, p.44, emphasis mine).

"...THE MAIN GOD OF THE SHRINE [was] HUBAL" (Neighboring Faiths, Winfried, Corduan, p.78, emphasis mine).


1. Hubal was the greatest god of the Kaaba

2. Supreme god of the Quraysh tribe.

3. Hubal was the chief god of Mecca.

How do we reconcile this obvious contradiction in history? Is this a contradiction? ABSOLUTELY NOT! We have found in our research that HUBAL IS ALLAH, THEY ARE ONE AND THE SAME GOD!

The Funk and Wignall's Dictionary of Folklore, Mythology and Legend says under "Allah," "The pre-Mohammedan Arabic god HUBAL HAD AS HIS TITLE ALLAHU meaning 'THE GOD'...As the PATRON OF THE KAABA AT MECCA, ALREADY SUPREME he was MAINTAINED IN MOHAMMEDAN THEOLOGY AS THE ONE GOD..." (vol.1, p.36, emphasis mine).

Under "Hubal," or "Hobal," the same dictionary says, "Some say that Hubal, was the REAL NAME OF ALLAHU, THE CHIEF GOD OF PRE-ISLAMIC TIMES, WHO BECAME THE ONE GOD OF ISLAM..." (ibid., p.499, emphasis mine).

"In Mecca, a god Hubal was worshipped, who may be IDENTICAL WITH ALLAH" (H. Ringgren and A.V Strom, Religions of Mankind, p.178, emphasis mine).

Muslims don't want to admit what history shows, the Hubal is Allah. Robert Morey writes: "Religious claims often fall before results of hard sciences such as archaeology...the hard evidences demonstrates that the god Allah was a pagan deity. In fact he was the MOON GOD[ Hubal]..." (The Moon God, Allah, p.1, emphasis mine). People of religion can say and believe anything they want, but it's what the facts show, that prove whether you are right or wrong! Hubal IS ALLAH!

In Ibn Warraq's book, Why I Am Not A Muslim, he writes about Hubal, and who he really is: "Hubal was worshipped at Mecca, and his idol...Hubal's position next to the black stone [ Muslims kiss this stone today] suggests there is some CONNECTION between the two..."Wellhausen thinks that HUBAL WAS ORIGINALLY THE BLACK STONE...Wellhausen also points out that God is called 'Lord of the Kaaba,' and 'Lord of the Territory,' of Mecca in the Koran. The prophet railed against the homage rendered at the Kaaba to the goddesses Allat, Manat, and Al- Uzza, when the pagans called them the daughters of God, but MUHAMMAD STOPPED SHORT OF ATTACKING THE CULT OF HUBAL. From this Wellhausen concludes that HUBAL IS NONE OTHER THAN ALLAH 'THE GOD' OF THE MECCANS" (p.39, emphasis mine). Why wouldn't Muhammad preach against the "CHIEF OF THE DEITIES," and say the ALLAH WAS THE GREATEST? Even the Dictionary of Islam had to admit: "ITS REMARKABLE that there is NO DISTINCT ALLUSION TO THE IDOL [Hubal] in the WHOLE QURAN" (Thomas Patrick Hughes B.D., p.181, under "Hubal," emphasis mine). He's RIGHT! It is quite remarkable that the chief of the Kaaba is not even mentioned in the Quran at all. How can MUHAMMAD TOTALLY EXCLUDE HIM?

In addition to the quote above about Allah being 'Lord of the Kaaba," Muhammad evidently said that he "received commandments to worship the 'Lord of the House' i.e. the Kaaba" (Muhammad, Tor Andrea, p.31). So its obvious he was talking about the pre-Islamic deity Hubal!

Well Muhammad did not exclude him for the simple reason: "There are stories in the sira of pagan Meccans praying to Allah while standing besides the IMAGE OF HUBAL" (Watt, Mohammed's Mecca, p.39, emphasis mine). They are one and the same! Remember The Allah of the Meccans is the same Allah that Muhmmad was proclaiming to them!

Robert Morey writes on his cultbusters website:

"Was the title al-ilah (the god) used of the moon god? YES!

"Was the word "Allah" derived from "al-ilah"? YES!

"Was the pagan "Allah" a high god in the pantheon of deities"? YES!

"Was he worshipped at the Kaaba? YES!

"Did they place the statue of Hubal on top of the Kabba? YES!

"At the time was Hubal considered the Moon god?YES!

"Was the Kaaba thus the "house of the moon god"? YES!

"Did the name "Allah" eventually REPLACE that of Hubal as the name of the Moon God? YES!"

"...Hubal the moon god, was the central focus of prayer at the KAABA and the people prayed to Hubal USING THE NAME ALLAH" (Morey at, emphasis mine).

The origin of Allah and Allat were as sun and moon deities. (Zwemmer, (Ed) The Daughters of Allah, By Winnett, F V, MWJ, Vol. XXX, 1940, pg. 120-125).

This had to be the case that Hubal and Allah are one and the same as this source says: "What deity did the Quraysh represent? The Meccan shrine accommodated Hubal...but Hubal is NOT mentioned in the Quran...a building accommodating Hubal MAKES NO SENSE AROUND A STONE REPRESENTING ALLAH [as Warraq noted originally Hubal was the black stone] if Quraysh REPRESENTED ALLAH. What is Hubal doing in the shrine?...Naturally Quraysh were polytheists, but they [the different gods] were house separately. NO PRE-ISLAMIC SANCTUARY, STONE OR BUILDING IS KNOWN TO HAVE ACCOMMODATED MORE THAN ONE [chief] MALE GOD, as opposed to one male god and a female...if Allah was a pagan god [as we have seen he is] like any other QURAYSH WOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED HUBAL TO SHARE THE SANCTUARY WITH HIM...One who have to fall back on the view that ALLAH MIGHT SIMPLY BE ANOTHER NAME FOR HUBAL, as Wellhausen suggests; just as the Israelites knew Yahweh as Elohim, so the Arabs KNEW HUBAL AS ALLAH, MEANING GOD" (Muslim Trade and the Rise of Islam, pp.192-193, emphasis mine).

Origin of the Kaaba

The Kaaba is a cube like structure built for Allah, where Muslims go to kiss the black stone, and pray to Allah. It is the central shrine for all Muslims.

Muslims believe that the shrine was built by Abraham and Ishmael, and the instructions were given to them by God. But history shows a different story.

"It is virtually certain that Abraham NEVER reached Mecca" (Watt, p.136, Muslim and Christian Encounters, emphasis mine).

"According to Muslim Tradition, Abrah, and Ishmael built the Kaaba...But outside these traditions there is absolutely NO EVIDENCE for this claim-whether epigraphic, archaeological, or documentary. Indeed Snouck Hurgronje has shown that Muhammad INVENTED the story to give his religion an Arabian the same time incorporating into Islam the Kabah with all its historical and religious associations for the Arabs" (Warraq, Why I Am Not A Muslim, p.131, emphasis mine).

What is its real origins?

"In pre-Mohammedan times it was believed that the stone had fallen from the moon and was sacred to the OLD MOON GOD HUBAL. The stone was enclosed in a small square temple known as the KABAH, which contained many lesser gods..." (Robert Payne, The History of Islam, p.4, emphasis mine).

"...the Kabah was in fact built as a shrine for the MOON-GOD" (Morey; The Moon God Allah, p.9, emphasis mine).

Maxine Robinson Says, "The Kaaba at Mecca, which may have been INITIALLY A SHRINE OF HUBAL ALONE..." (Life of Muhammad, p.40, emphasis mine).

"At the time of Muhammad, the Kaaba was officially dedicated to the GOD HUBAL..." (Karen Armstrong, Muhammad, p.61, emphasis mine).

Mohammed's Religious Background

When you look into Mohammed's background we see that he was a WORSHIPPER OF HUBAL, the ALLAH OF THE KAABA! And when we understand his background, Islam becomes more and more clear.


At Mohammed's birth, Mohammed's grandfather, who was the KEEPER OF THE KAABA, did this in front of HUBAL: "After his [Mohammed's] birth his mother sent to tell his grandfather Abd al-Muttalib that she gave birth to a boy...It is alleged that Abd al-Muttalib took him before (the idol) HUBAL IN THE MIDDLE OF THE KAABA,where he stood and PRAYED TO ALLAH, thanking him for his gift" (Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad, pp.66-68; see also F.E. Peters, A Reader of Classical Islam, p.45, emphasis mine). This confirms Watt's statement that: " "There are stories in the sira of pagan Meccans praying to Allah while standing besides theIMAGE OF HUBAL" (Watt, Mohammed's Mecca, p.39, emphasis mine)

It is interesting to note that Mohammed's father was called "Abdullah," meaning "the servant of Allah." Now if Mohammed's grandfather was worshipper of Hubal, and named his son and Hubal, Allah, then Hubal is Allah!

In this story about Mohammed's birth GJO Moshay writes: "In this revealing incident in the life of Mohammed's grandfather. Who was 'the Lord'? Was it Allah? What about Hubal?...From Ibn Ishaq's account here, praying to Allah was the SAME THING AS PRAYING TO HUBAL. They could practically mean the SAME THING. As HA-BAALor HU-BAAL means 'the Lord' so Al-ilah' or 'Allah' means 'the god'''(Who is this Allah, p.136, emphasis mine). Hubal is ALLAH!

Here is another example: "For two years Muhammad remained in his [grandfather's] house overlooking the KAABA, while the old man TAUGHT HIM THE CEREMONIES ATTACHED TO THE WORSHIP OF THE MOON GOD, [Hubal] AND TOLD HIM THE LEGENDS OF THE PLACE: (Robert Payne, The History of Islam, p.11, emphasis mine).

"Muhammad was raised in the religion of the moon god, Allah" (Morey, The Moon god Allah, p.11, emphasis mine). THIS IS MUHAMMAD'S BACKGROUND

Here is an example of one of the legends that was taught to Muhammad by his grandfather.In the Koran we read about the Christian King of Abyssina who wanted to take over the Kaaba, and make it Christian. Look at what Muhammad says in the Koran: "Have you not considered how God [Allah] dealt with the army of the elephant? Did he not confound their stratagem and send against them flocks of birds which pelted them with clay stones..." (Surah 105). This happened in the year of his birth, and it was still fresh in the minds of the Meccans. Also his grandfather at the time witnessed it first hand, and taught Muhammad this story as a boy.

Look at what Robert Payne says in his book about this incident, for proof of who Allah really is, and what Muhammad learned from his grandfather: "Abd al-Muttalib offered a last prayer to the MOON GOD [Hubal] to preserve the Kaaba...The Meccans expected the Abyssinians to Advance but HUBAL HEARD THEIR PRAYERS, overnight, and epidemic perhaps an aggravated form of small pox swept through the army...No one could doubt the power of the MOON GOD [Hubal] who kept the army of the elephants at bay" (The history of Islam, p.7, emphasis mine). Now he told Muhammad that Allah, i.e Hubal was the one that saved them. This incident was still fresh in the minds of the Meccans at the time of Muhammad. Why is it in the Koran, you don't hear the Meccans rebuking Muhammad saying that Hubal saved them and not Allah if these two deities were different. Instead there is silence from the Meccans about Hubal because they already knew who ALLAH WAS, HUBAL, THE ALLAH OF THE MECCANS, AND Muhammad UNDERSTOOD IT THE SAME WAY, THAT'S WHY THERE IS NO DISPUTE!

The Religion of Allah and Hubal Are the Same

Payne noted that Muhammad was taught the "ceremonies" attached to Hubal. What are those ceremonies?

Here at the time of the new moon, following the summer solstice, at the hottest time of the year, the ancient pilgrims worshipped the Moon God [Hubal]...and thenREVERENTLY KISSED IT [the Black Stone], AND AFTER THEY WALKED AROUND THE KAABA SEVEN TIMES" (ibid., p.4, emphasis mine).


"Allah is not a generic Arabic word for God but a name of a particular god among many deities traditionally honored in ancient times by nomadic tribes in Arabia. Allah was the chief god among the approximately 360 idols in the Kaaba in Mecca...Allah is a contraction of AL-ilah, the name of the Moon God [Hubal] of the local Quraysh, Mohammed's tribe...Allah' symbol was a crescent moon, which Muhammad carried over into Islam. This symbol is seen on Mosques, minarets, shrines, and ARAB FLAGS" (David Hunt, In Defense of the Faith, pp.37-38, emphasis mine).

In the book Behind the Veil, it notes the ceremony about kissing the stone: "Al-Burkhari records a famous statement made by Umar...which demonstrates the CONFUSION OF THE MUSLIMS. The Burkhari says: 'When Umar ibn al-Khattab reached the black stone, he kissed it and said, 'I know that you are stone that does not hurt nor benefit. If I had Not SEEN THE PROPHET KISS YOU, I would not have kissed you'...ALL scholars confirm this statement" (p.285, emphasis mine) Note: Authors of this Behind the Veil could not give their names for fear of their lives but you can find this book on line at:

Why did Muhammad kiss the stone? The stone that was sacred to Hubal. If Allah was different that Hubal, That would have been blasphemy "joining other gods with God" as the Koran says! Hubal and Allah are the same deity, there is no question about it!

What about the Pilgrimage?

"The Pilgrimage is a SURVIVAL OF THE ANCIENT ARABIAN PILGRIMAGES TO THE HOLY STONES. Almost none of the customs attended upon the pilgrimage DERIVE FROM MUHAMMAD TIMES...Muhammad changed the sevenfold tawaf or cicumambulation of the Kaaba only in one respect BEFORE HIS TIME it was performed naked" (Payne, The History of Islam, p.79, emphasis mine). These customs were done to Hubal long before Muhammad, and none of these customs started in Mohammed's time, they were already there. Muhammad just changed ONE thing, being naked that's all.

"...several pre-Islamic ritual practices ESPECIALLY THOSE CONNECTED WITH THE KAABA CULT IN MECCA WERE CONTINUED BY MUHAMMAD..." (Frederick Denny, An Introduction to Islam, p.56, emphasis mine).

"...important Muslim practices such as visiting the Kaaba, and the many details of the ceremony of Hajj, including visits of Safa and Marwa, and also throwing stones against the stone pillar symbolizing Satan, were ALL PRE-ISLAMIC PRACTICES OF PAGAN ARABIA" (Answering Islam, Norman Geisler, p.309, emphasis mine).

"Pagan ritualism also CONTRIBUTED to the religious world into which Muhammad was born...The PAGANS OF PRE-ISLAMIC ARABIA taught that everyone should bow and pray towards Mecca during certain times of the day. Everyone should make a pilgrimage to Mecca to worship at the Kaaba at least once in their life. Once they arrive at Mecca, the PAGANS RAN AROUND THE KAABA SEVEN TIMES KISSED THE BLACK STONE...The pagan rites comprised the religion into which MUHAMMAD WAS RAISED BY HIS FAMILY [who were worshippers of Hubal-the Allah of Mecca] IS ACKNOWLEDGED BY ALL. Thus it is no surprise to find that, as Arab scholar Nazar-Ali has observed: 'Islam RETAINED MANY ASPECTS OF THE PAGAN RELIGION''' (Morey, Islamic Invasion, pp.42-43, emphasis mine).

"Middle Eastern scholar, E.M. Wherry in his monumental work, A Comprehensive Commentary on the Quran shows that worship of Allah and the worship of BAAL (HUBAL) involved the worship of heavenly bodies, the moon, the stars and the sun" (Moshey, Who is this Allah, p.137, emphasis mine). Notice Allah and Hubal or Baal, the religions are exactly the same, because the deities are the same!

Here are some more quotes about the origins of the ceremonies in Islam:

"Islam owes many of its most superstitious details to old ARABIAN PAGANISMespecially in the rites and rituals of the pilgrimage to Mecca (see suras 2:153; 22:28-30; 5:1-4; 22:37)...the superstitions connected with the jinn's [Genies] and old folk tales such as those of Ad and Thamud...The entire ceremony of the pilgrimage has been shamelessly taken over from PRE-ISLAMIC PRACTICE...Cicumambulation of a sanctuary was a very common rite practiced in many localities. The pilgrim during his circuit frequently kissed or caressed the Idol. Sir William Muir thinks that the seven circuits of the Kaaba 'were probably emblematical of the revolution of the planetary bodies.' While Zwemer goes so far as to suggest that the seven circuits of the Kaaba, three time rapidly and four times slowly were 'an imitation of the inner and outer planets.'...It UNQUESTIONABLE that the Arabs at a comparatively late period worshipped the sun and other heavenly bodies" (Warraq, pp.35-36, 40, emphasis mine).

Alfred Guillaume, Professor of Arabic, in London says, " THE CUSTOMS OF HEATHENISM has left an indelible mark on Islam, notably in the RITES OF PILGRIMAGE" (Islam, p.6, emphasis mine). Notice how all the sources note that the rituals are from Mecca, where the chief god of Mohammed's tribe dwelt and worshipped Hubal, the Allah of the Kaaba! The religion of Hubal and Allah are one and the same, because Hubal and Allah are one and the same!

Lastly Warraq writes: "Muhammad DID NOT find it necessary to introduce an altogether novel deity, BUT HAD CONTENTED HIMSELF WITH RIDDING THE HEATHEN ALLAH OF HIS COMPANIONS [the daughters of Allah]...Wellhausen also cites pre-Islamic literature where Allah is mentioned as a great deity. Had he not beenACCUSTOM FROM HIS YOUTH to the idea of Allah as the supreme go, in particular IN MECCA, it may be all doubted whether he would have come forward as a preacher of monotheism" (p.42, emphasis mine). Remember Muhammad did not say Allah was great, but that Allah was the GREATEST among the other Gods, acknowledging the pre-Islamic origin of Allah, and his religion.


1. Some authors don't think that Allah and Hubal are one and the same for the simple reason that Hubal is the god of the moon, and Allah is the creator of all these, and supreme ruler of the Universe. They say that the characteristics of the two are different. But as we have shown Hubal was called supreme and creator. There are more similarities than differences between the two. The only reason why there are some differences between the two, and that Allah NOW, as opposed to BACK THEN, resembles the God of the Bible in SOME NOT MOST WAYS, is for the simple reason that "...Judaic and ChristianCONCEPTS abetted the TRANSFORMATION OF ALLAH FROM A PAGAN DEITY[Hubal] to the god of all monotheists...There is NO REASON therefore to accept the idea that Allah PASSED TO THE MUSLIMS FROM THE CHRISTIANS AND THE JEWS" (Ceasare Farah, Islam, p.28, emphasis mine). The Jews and the Christians influenced Muhammad, and changed some of the characteristics of Allah to more resemble the God of the Bible. Then he proclaimed that Allah was the supreme god of all religions. As Morey puts it, "Islam is Heathenism in monotheistic form" (Islamic Invasion, p.43, emphasis mine). Why do you think Muhammad destroyed the Idol of Hubal, when he took over Mecca? Because the influences of the Jews and Christians. He knew that the 2nd Commandment said you shall not make any idols to represent God, so because he heard that from the Jews and Christians he destroyed the idol. He also did not at first preach that all god's were false, but that Allah was the greatest among them. It was only later as he was more and more influenced by the Jews and Christians about the concept of God that began to preach that Allah was the only god. But in the beginning it was not so: "This is seen from the fact that the first of the Muslim creed is not 'Allah is Great' but 'Allah is the greatest' i.e., he is the greatest among the gods. WHY WOULD MUHAMMAD SAY THAT...EXCEPT IN A POLYTHEISTIC CONTEXT?" (The Moon God Allah, p.12, emphasis mine). In Morey's book Islamic Invasion he actually shows more DIFFERENCES THAN SIMILARITIES between the God of the Bible and the god of the Koran.

2. Some try and compare this version of reverence to the stone at the Kaaba to Jacob's pillar stone in the Bible see Genesis 28. But Jacob did not worship this stone, nor did he kiss it, or circle it. He set it up as a testimony to his faith. Also remember as we have seen time and time again these practices of kissing the stone ORIGINATED IN ARABIAN PAGANISM and Not the Bible! Robert Morey says: "This fact answers the questions. Why is Allah never defined in the Koran? Why did Muhammad ASSUME that the pagan Arabs already KNEW WHO ALLAH WAS?...While they [the pagans] believed that Allah, i.e. the moon god, was the greatest of all the gods and the supreme deity in the pantheon of deities, Muhammad decided that Allah was not ONLY the greatest god by theONLY GOD" (The moon god Allah, p.11-12, emphasis mine). The pagans and Muhammad worshipped the same deity! Allah or Hubal!

Origins of Hubal

What are the origins of Hubal? Where did He come from?

"It has been suggested by Pockcock that the word Hubal could be from HUBAAL or Hobaal in Hebrew meaning 'the Lord'...God destroyed the Israelites for involving themselves in the worship of this god (Numbers 25:1-3)" (Moshey, Who is this Allah, p.136, emphasis mine).

Another source writes:"Hubal was associated with the Semitic god BA'L [Baal] and with Adonis or Tammuz" (Fabled Cities, Prices and Jinn from Arab Myths and Legends, by Khairat Al- Saleh, p.28, emphasis mine). Hubal is BAAL, that God condemns the worship of all over the Bible. But Baal's origins go back even further than this. He goes back to the BABYLONIAN RELIGION! The religion of Nimrod, see Genesis 10.

In his book the Two Babylon's, by Hislop, he has done a wonderful job of tracing all heathen religions back to Babylon and the Tower of Babel, see Gen 11. When the world was scattered, the people of the world kept their religion that originated with Babylon. This is how we find the Babylonian religion all over the world!

"Herodotus, world traveler and historian of antiquity, witnessed the mystery religions and its rites in numerous countries and mentions how Babylon was the PRIMEVAL SOURCE from which ALL SYSTEMS OF IDOLATRY FLOWED. Bunsen says: 'the religious system of Egypt was derived from ASIA, AND THE PRIMITIVE EMPIRE OF BABEL" (David Todd, The Origins of Easter, p.11, emphasis mine).

Hislop says that the Babylonian god Bel and Baal, are one and the same deity: "Belus or Bel...As BAAL or Beltus with the name of the great male divinity of Babylon...Belus was UNDOUBTEDLY BAAL 'The Lord'...the worship of the 'SACRED BEL' the mighty one who died a martyr for idolatry...the regeneration of his heart [was the new birth or reincarnation of NIMROD OR BEL...we learned that it was under Bel or Belus, THAT IS BAAL" (pp.20, 25, 190-191, 232, emphasis mine). Now notice this quote from the Encyclopedia of Religion and what is says about Allah, and really discovering the truth about who Allah is and who the Muslims today are worshipping: "Allah is a pre-Islamic name...corresponding to the BABYLONIAN BEL[Baal]" (Thomas O'Brian, 1:117, emphasis mine). Hubal, or Allah is Baal or Nimrod the first King of Idolatry, the MUSLIMS ARE WORSHIPPING A MAN NIMROD!

Is it any surprise that "The Daughters of BAAL are three in number...The triad of Baal's daughters is reflected in the triad of ALLAH'S DAUGHTERS according to pre-Islamic Arabs. There is some outside confirmation that the three goddesses ARE DAUGHTERS OF BAAL (see Moslem World 33, No.1 1943, for the daughters of Baal and Allah)" (Mythologies of the Ancient World, Samuel Noah Kramer, p.196, emphasis mine).


The Quraysh ADOPTED ALLAH AS BAAL, and added the goddesses to his cult the same way as Baal had three daughters in the Fertile Crescent. They venerated him and his three female companions in his new House, the Kaaba at Mecca. (Bergsson, Snorri G., Goddesses and Wica worship,'Neo-paganism at its most deceptive form, Islam and Goddess Worship Chpt. IV, pg. 15, 1998-2000)

"And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, [Babylon] my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues" (Rev 18:4).



The following verse in the Quran seems to call into question Hubal being Allah.

"Will ye cry unto Baal and forsake the Best of creators, Allah, your Lord and Lord of your forefathers?" S. 37:125-126 Pickthall

"Here, the author of the Quran distinguishes Allah from Baal which seems to imply that they are not one and the same entity. A couple of responses are in order. First, even though the text distinguishes Baal from Allah, it says nothing about HU-bal. In fact, the word Hubal never appears in the Quran. It seems that the author was unaware that Hubal and Baal were actually one and the same entity. The surrounding context seems to support this:

"And lo! Elias was of those sent (to warn), When he said unto his folk : Will ye not ward off (evil)? Will ye cry unto Baal and forsake the Best of creators, Allah, your Lord and Lord of your forefathers? But they denied him, so they surely will be haled forth (to the doom) Save single-minded slaves of Allah. And we left for him among the later folk (the salutation): Peace be unto Elias! Lo! thus do We reward the good. Lo! he is one of our believing slaves.' S. 37:123-132 Pickthall

"Since this is referring to the time of Elijah, presumably during his showdown with the prophets of Baal on Mt. Carmel (cf. 1 Kings 18), it may be that the author of the Quran didn't realize that the Baal of Elijah's day was none other than the Hubal worshiped at Mecca. Second, we are focusing on the identity of the pre-Islamic Allah, the Allah worshiped by the pagans prior to the advent of Islam. Hence, it is quite possible that through Muhammads influence Allah was transformed from a pagan high god to the true universal God worshiped by Jews and Christians. In other words, Muhammad tried to package Allah as a distinct Being from the false gods such as Hubal/Baal, purifying the pre-Islamic Allah from all pagan elements" (Article; Did the Meccans Worship Yahweh God, Sam Shamoun, emphasis added).

Again because of Christian and Jewish influence Muhammad tried to convert is god to more of the biblical God, but his god was still Baal. Unknown to him was the origins of Hubal. Notice, "

Allah, the paramount deity of PAGAN Arabia , was the target of worship in varying degrees of intensity, from the southernmost tip of Arabia to the Mediterranean. To the Babylonians, he was Il (god); to the Canaanites, and later the Israelites, he was El ; the South Arabians worshiped him as Ilah , and the Bedouins as al-Ilah (the deity). With Muhammad he BECOMES Allah , God of the Worlds, of all believers, the one and only who admits of no associates or consorts in the worship of Him. Judaic and Christian concepts of God abetted the transformation of Allah FROM A PAGAN DEITY to the God of all monotheists . There is no reason, therefore, to accept the idea that 'Allah' passed to the Muslims from Christians and Jews." (Caesar E. Farrah, Ph.D., Islam: Its Beliefs and Observances[Barron's Educational Series, Inc., Sixth Edition, 2000; ISBN: 0764112058], p. 28; bold and capital emphasis ours).


"Both the concept of a Supreme God and the Arabian term [Allah] have been shown to be familiar to the Arabs in Mohammeds time. What Mohammed did was to give a NEW and fuller content to the concept, TO PURIFY IT FROM ELEMENTS OF POLYTHEISM WHICH CLUSTERED AROUND IT." (H.A.R. Gibb,Mohammedanism: An Historical Survey [Oxford University Press, London 1961], p. 54; capital emphasis ours).

And what of this statement in the Koran, "Adore not the sun and the moon, but adore Allâh who created them...(Qur'ân 41:37). Again Judaic and Christian influences have taken over Muhammad's teaching, and has converted the Moon God Hubal (Allah) into the Supreme God of all, BUT ITS STILL HUBAL!

Muhammad A Prophet of God?

There are conflicting versions of the call of Muhammad in the Koran. Montgomery Watt says, "Unfortunately, there are several alternative versions of these events" (For a full treatment of this contradiction see W.Montgomery Watt, Mohammed's Mecca, pp.54-68).

There are four conflicting accounts of this original call to be a prophet.

We are told in Sura 53:2-18 and sura 81:19-24 that Allah personally appeared to Muhammad and did signs in front of him.

Later on we see sura 16:104 and sura 26:192-194, that the "holy Spirit" called him.

The third account of his call is given in sura 15:8 where we are told "the angels" came down and called him. Later on this account was amended and we are told the only Gabriel called him.

The last account of his call is the most popular one the angel Gabriel called him to be a prophet sura 2:92. In the Bible However ONLY GOD calls people to be prophets. So here we see the first of many differences between the Bible and the Koran.

Another problem that Muhammad creates for himself is, the prophethood according to Muhammad can ONLY come from the line of ISAAC AND JACOB. In the Koran we read: "And we bestowed on him Isaac and Jacob, and we ESTABLISHED THE PROPHETHOOD AND SCRIPTURE AMONG HIS SEED" (Sura 29:27). Yusuf Ali adds "Abraham" into the text so Muhammad can qualify, but "Abraham is not in the Arabic text, which the Muslims claim is perfectly preserved. So according to the Koran, Muhammad CANNOT BE A PROPHET. Prophets only come from Isaac and Jacob's seed, and no other race of people can claim the office of prophethood. Also the scriptures are eastblished with Isaac and Jacob. So according to the Koran the only ones who possess God's word in a book ARE THE ISRAELITES, so the Koran isNOT THE WORD OF GOD!

Norman Geisler in his book Islam, examines the call of Muhammad and he says, "Muhammad himself questioned the divine origin of the experience. At first he thought that he was being deceived by a jinn or evil spirit. One of the most widely respected biographers, M.H. Haykal, speaks vividly of Mohammed's plaguing fear that he was DEMON POSSESSED: 'Stricken with panic, Muhammad arose and asked himself, 'What did I see? Did POSSESSION OF THE DEVIL WHICH I FEARED ALL ALONG COME TO PASS...?Haykal notes that Muhammad had feared demon possession before, but his wife talked him out of it" (p.155, emphasis mine). Even in the Koran the people of Mecca knew about his possession. In sura 15:6 it reads "they [the people of Mecca] say: 'O thou to whom the warning hath been sent down, thou art surely possessed by a djinn [evil spirit]." See also Sura 81:23.

Geisler also writes that "Another characteristic often associated with OCCULT REVELATIONS is contact with the dead (CF. Deuteronomy 18:18:9-14; Isaiah 8:19, God condemns it). Haykal relates an occasion when 'the Muslims overheard him [Muhammad] asked, 'are you calling the dead?'and the prophet answered, 'TheyHEAR ME NO LESS THAN YOU DO, EXCEPT THERE ARE UNABLE TO ANSWER ME.' According to Haykal even frankly admits that 'There is hence no reason to DENY the event of the prophet's visit to the cemetery of Baqi AS OUT OF PLACE CONSIDERING MOHAMMED'S PSYCHIC POWER OF COMMUNICATION WITH THE REALMS OF REALITY AND HIS AWARENESS OF SPIRITUAL REALITY THAT SURPASS THAT OF ORDINARY MEN''' (Answering Islam, pp.155-156, emphasis mine). Muhammad was right, he was possessed by a demon!

Other proofs of soothsaying or the psychic ability of Muhammad are seen throughout his life, Mr. Ankerburg says: "Guillaume describes Mohammed's other spiritualistic contacts and revelations: 'On the way back to Mecca a number of JINN OR SPIRITS ARE SAID TO HAVE JOSTLED HIM...From the books of tradition we learn that the prophet was subject to ecstatic seizures. He has reported to have said that when an inspiration came to him he felt as it were the painful sounding of a bell...At other times visions came to him in its early stages Mohammed's verses were couched in the SEMITIC FORM OF MANTIC ORACULAR UTTERANCE...VEILING OF THE HEAD AND THE USE OF RHYMED PROSE WERE MARKS OF THE ARABIAN SOOTHSAYER, WHILE THE FEELING OF PHYSICAL VIOLENCE AND COMPULSION...THE OUTWARD APPEARANCE OF 'POSSESSION'...SEEMED TO THE ONLOOKERS TO INDICATE MADNESS OF DEMON POSSESSION (Facts on Islam, p.12, emphasis mine). The seizures, the foaming at the mouth, the spirits hitting the person, can all be associated with the Occult and soothsaying.

This is also another form of Shamanism: "Muhammad was a SHAMAN who controlled the Jinn i.e. the spirits who lived in rocks, waters and trees (Hadith vol. 1, no 740; vol.5, no.199)" (Islamic Invasion, section 2, Appendix A, p.191, emphasis mine). Shamanism is another form of the Occult religion!

Muhammad in the Bible?

Muslims apologetics, such books like Muhammad in the Bible, by Abdu L-Ahad Dawud, claim that the Bible predicts the coming of Muhammad. Let's examine the evidence to see if that is so.

In Deuteronomy 18:15-18 God promised Moses: "I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him." Muslims believe this prophecy was fulfilled in Muhammad, as the Koran itself claims when it refers to the "unlettered prophet," whom they mention in their own scriptures, in the law and the Gospels" (Sura 7:156). Let see if this is true since the Koran claims to be free from error, see Sura 18:1.

This prophecy could not be a reference to Muhammad for several reasons. First it is clear that the term "from among their brethren" means fellow Israelites in the Bible and not gentiles.

The term "brethren" when read in context can only refer to the twelve tribes of Israel as the opening verses of chapter 18 show:

"The Levitical priests, that is, all the tribe of Levi, shall have no portion or inheritance with Israel ... They shall have no inheritance among their brethren." (vv. 1-2)

Once more, in chapter 17:14-15 the Israelites are told to put one of their "brethren" as king over them, never a foreigner. The fact is that Israel at no time in their history have ever put an Ishmaelite "brother" as king, but always an Israelite i.e. Saul, David, proving that the word does not refer to any nation outside of the twelve tribes of Israel.

Another scripture in Deut 15:12 says: "And if thy brother a HEBREW MAN OR A HEBREW WOMAN..." The word "brother" is the exact word in Deut 18:15 for "brethren." so God is being specific about which brethren he is talking about, and Muhammad is NOT a Hebrew!

Notice also in verse 15 in a newer version of the Bible that makes it clear: "YHWH your God will raise up for YOU a prophet like me from AMONG YOUR OWN PEOPLE...I will raise up for them a prophet like you from AMONG THEIR OWN PEOPLE...(V.15, 18 NRSV). The context is fellow Israelites.

As shown earlier the prophethood according to Muhammad can ONLY come from the line of ISAAC AND JACOB. In the Koran we read: "And we bestowed on him Isaac and Jacob, and we ESTABLISHED THE PROPHETHOOD AND SCRIPTURE AMONG HIS SEED" (Sura 29:27).

He did not speak to God face to face they way Moses did. He did not perform signs and wonders the way Moses did (Deut 34:11), in fact Muhammad admits he can't do miracles (see sura 2:111; 3:180-181, and he claimed to get his revelations from an angel not God, see sura 25:33-34; 17:106-107.

Finally, the Quran bears witness that Muhammad was not the Prophet like Moses, since he could not do what the latter did:

But (now) when the Truth has come to them from Ourselves, they say, "Why are not (signs) sent to him (Muhammad), like those which were sent to Moses?" Sura. 28:48

Even more amazing than the Quran bearing witness that Muhammad was unlike Moses, is the fact that the earliest Muslim biographer, Ibn Ishaq, in his Sira RasulAllah, testifies that Moses wrote of Jesus:

When the Christians of Najran came to the apostle the Jewish rabbis came also and they disputed one with the other before the apostle. Rafi said, `you have no standing,' and he denied Jesus and the Gospel; and a Christian said to the Jews, `you have no standing' and he denied that Moses was a prophet and denied the Torah. So God sent down concerning them: `The Jews say the Christians have no standing; and the Christians say the Jews have no standing, yet they read the Scriptures. They do not know on the day of resurrection concerning their controversy,' i.e., each one reads in his book the confirmation of what he denies, so that the Jews deny Jesus though they have the Torah in which God required them by the word of Moses to hold Jesus true; while in the Gospel is what Jesus brought in confirmation of Moses and the Torah he brought from God: So each one denies what is in the hand of the other. (Alfred Guillaume,The Life of Muhammad, p.258) .


The only person who fits this prophetic profile is Jesus Christ the Lord. This is due to the following reasons:

1. Christ states that Moses wrote about him. (c.f. John 5:46)

2. The Apostles quote this passage as being fulfilled in Christ. (c.f. John 1:45; Acts 3:17-24)

3. On both their births, infant deaths were enacted. (c.f. Ex. 1:15-16,22; Mt. 2:13)

4. Both were rescued by divine intervention. (c.f. Ex. 2:2-10; Mt. 2:13)

5. Christ being the Son of God, knew God the Father "face to face"- as did Moses. In fact, Christ is the image of God and is God's exact representation. (c.f. Mt. 11:27; John 1:1-3,14,18; John 14:9; Col. 1:15-17; Heb. 1:2,3)

6. God prepared Moses for his mission by his wandering in the wilderness for forty years; Christ for forty days. (c.f. Ex. 7:7; Mt. 4:1)

7. Christ, like Moses, shone with glorious light at the Mount of Transfiguration. (c.f. Ex. 34:29; Mt. 17:2)

8. Christ performed greater miracles than Moses. An example would be raising the dead. (c.f. John 11:25-26,43-44)

9. Christ spoke the words of God alone. (c.f. John 8:28)

10. Christ, like Moses, intercedes on behalf of men. (c.f. Exodus 32:30-32; 1 Tim. 2:5)

11. Christ, like Moses, is the mediator of God's covenant. (c.f. Exodus 24:4-8; Mark 14:24; 1 Cor. 11:23-25)

12. Christ and Moses liberated their people from bondage; one from slavery, the other from sin. (c.f. Exodus; Isaiah 53; John 8:32-36; Gal. 5:1)

13. Christ, like Moses, is an Israelite from the tribe of Judah. (c.f. Num. 26:59; Luke 3:22-38)


Duet 33:2. The prophecy of Sinai, Seir and Paran is not a prophecy of Judaism, Christianity and Islam as Badawi erroneously assumes. Paran and Seir are located near Egypt in the Sinai Peninsula, as any good Bible map will demonstrate. It is purely wishful thinking to claim that Seir refers to Jesus' ministry in Palestine, or that Paran is near Mecca, when Paran was thousands of miles away near southern Palestine in northeastern Sinai!

Proof of this can be found in the Holy Bible itself:

"And the children of Israel took their journeys out of the wilderness of Sinai; and the cloud (of God) rested in the wilderness of Paran." Numbers 10:12

"And afterward the people (Israelites) removed from Hazeroth, and pitched in the wilderness of Paran." Numbers 12:16

"And Moses by the commandment of the Lord sent them from the wilderness of Paran... And they went and came to Moses, and to Aaron, and to all the congregation of the children of Israel, unto the wilderness of Paran, to Kadesh..." Numbers 13:3,26

"These be the words which Moses spake unto all Israel on this side of Jordan in the wilderness, in the plain over against the Red sea, between Paran, and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Dizahab." Deuteronomy 1:1

All these verses prove that Paran could not possibly be Mecca but a locale near Sinai, since Moses and the Israelites never settled in that part of Arabia. Hence, Badawi's assertion fails in the light of the biblical evidence.

Furthermore the prophecy speaks of "Yahweh" coming not Muhammad. And he comes with ten thousand of his saints, not soldiers as Muhammad did to Mecca. There is no basis in this text for Mohammed's invasion of Mecca.

Finally, this prophecy was for a "blessing to Israel." (v.1) not for the Arabs.

For other Islamic Biblical references refuted go to Answering -Islam at this page for a full examination.

The Mad Prophet and Idol Shepherd

Yet The Bible does mention Muhammad, but as false prophet. The Bible mentions Buddha as well. That we will examine in another paper at a later time.

Cosmas Megalommitis writes that Zechariah prophesies of the true shepherd which is Jesus Christ, and the idol shepherd which is Muhammad, " And the LORD said unto me, Take unto thee yet the instruments of a foolish shepherd" (Zechariah 11:15–16), which is of great importance. This "Foolish shepherd” could be "identified as Mohammed. It is interesting that Zechariah later explains the cause of the failure of the mission initially foreseen for Mohammed:" “[he] does not care for the perishing, or seek the wandering, or heals the maimed, or nourishes the sound, but devours the flesh of the fat ones, tearing off even their hoofs. Woe to the IDOL shepherd, whodeserts the flock! May the sword smite his arm and his right eye! Let his arm be wholly withered, his right eye utterly blinded!” (vv. 16–17) If all the difficulties and problems of Islam after the death of Mohammed and the assassination of the first Imam, Ali (“his arm”), are due to the “mistakes” of the Prophet, these consist of the omission of two of his tasks: the Prophet did not take care of “those who risk being struck down” and did not seek the wandering, i.e. scattered Israel.." Instead Muhammad pursued the Arabic peoples and their paganism. (by Cosmas Megalommitis his paper Elizabeth II on the Throne of David and Solomon).

Let's go through this prophecy verse by verse:

"And the LORD said unto me, Take unto thee yet the instruments of a foolish shepherd." A shepherd in the Bible is a Ruler. David was called to shepherd his people etc.. Muhammad came from the ruling family of Mecca and "he was distantly related to the Arab royal family of Hashim" (Morey p.69). The "foolish" part of this shepherd means, "Assume the character of a bad ("foolish" in Scripture issynonymous with wicked, Psa_14:1) shepherd ..." (JFB Commentary). This shepherd or ruler is totally ignorant of God's will and law therefore wicked which Muhammad was. "The Old Testament remained inaccessible to the early Muslims and the Prophet...[Muhammad] had no direct access to the Bible in Arabic" (Share your faith with a Muslim, Haqq, pp.28, 31, emphasis added).

" For, lo, I will raise up a shepherd in the land, which shall not visit those that be cut off, neither shall seek the young one, nor heal that that is broken, nor feed that that standeth still: but he shall eat the flesh of the fat, and tear their claws in pieces." (16). As a result of the Jews rejecting the true Shepherd, Jesus Christ, for "30 pieces of silver," verse 12, God raises up a foolish, wicked, or Idol Shepherd (v.17). This is to show the Jews the difference between being under the rule of the Good Shepherd, Jesus, and the false Shepherd, Muhammad.

This Idol Shepherd, "shall not visit those that be cut off, neither shall seek the young one, nor heal that that is broken, nor feed that that standeth still." He does the opposite of what Jesus does, see Isaiah 61:1. Instead of taking care of the flock which is the Jews, he " shall eat the flesh of the fat, and tear their claws in pieces." This means, "Flesh of the fat" "shall spoil the substance of the rich;'' (Gills Exposition of the Entire Bible), and "tears their claws in pieces" means, "expressing cruel voracity; tearing off the very hoofs (compare Exo_10:26), giving them excruciating pain, and disabling them from going in quest of pasture." (JFB Commentary). Did Muhammad do this to the Jews and the rich people of the Land? Yes he did!

Notice what history says, "The Muslims began raiding caravans for financial gain...An important battle for the prophet occurred at Badr in March 624. Muhammad had led three hundred men against a large caravan of merchants enroute to Mecca. The booty won by raiders was said to be worth the equivalent of 50, 000 dollars today-a needed infusion of wealth to carry forward their military task" (Unveiling Islam, Caner, pp.47. 49).

During these attacks on caravans he persecuted the Jews, "...the Jews continued to reject his claims of prophet hood and began criticizing him...he [Muhammad] realized that the Jews posed a real danger...Muhammad decided to attack the Jewish tribe of Nadir...The Prophet had been well aware of the wealth of the departing [Jewish tribe of] Nadir, whose land was divided between Muslims; Muhammad's share made him financially independent" (Warraq, pp.93, 95). Eventually all the Jews were expelled from the Land of Arabia. Their wealth and lands were gone thus fulfilling the first and second part of Zechariah's prophecy. This campaign continued against the Jews and Christians from Muhammad's time, through the expansion of the Islamic empire right down til today. Many verses in the Koran show the commands to kill Christians and the Jews (see below).

"Woe to the idol ["Idolatrous" Darby's Translation] shepherd that leaveth the flock! the sword shall be upon his arm, and upon his right eye: his arm shall be clean dried up, and his right eye shall be utterly darkened." (v.17). Muhammad since he preached to obey Allah who is Baal and told his followers to go and worship at an idolatrous shrine for Baal can be considered an "idolatrous shepherd."

He "leaveth the flock." Muhammad at first joined in the worship of the Jews trying to convert them to Islam and have them accept his prophet hood. Then , when it was obvious that the Jewish merchants were not going to become his disciples Muhammad decided to drop the observance of Jewish rites. He changed the direction of prayer from Jerusalem to Mecca, dropped the Saturday Sabbath and adopted the pagan Friday Sabbath. He once again adopted the pagan religious rites in which he had been raised by his family" (Morey, p.82).

"the sword shall be upon his arm, and upon his right eye." After Muhammad left the Jews and took their wealth. Then gathered enough followers that "his forces had grown sufficiently so that he now had a large army in the field...[he] then turned his attention again to Mecca...with an army of thousands of followers, forced Mecca to surrender to his leadership. Muhammad then became the undisputed political leaderof Mecca as well as its undisputed religious head" (ibid, p.83, 84). The "Arm" means-" the secular power;" and the "right eye" means - the ecclesiastical state." (Clarke's Commentary), which Muhammad was the leader of them both! And so Mecca becomes "The center of Islam [and] was now and forever established" (Islam unveiled, p.60). Since then til now the Islamic faith has not changed, "Muhammad owned Arabia...His goal was firmly established-spiritual and governmental...and the community [was] solidified under the name of Allah...So Islamic life remains to this day" (ibid, p.60).

After this Muhammad died his doctrines lived on and the Islamic empire grew. Known as the "prophet of the sword" as Zechariah prophesied that the "the sword [war "Jihad"] shall be upon his arm his [government]" the governmental rulers called "caliphs" meaning "successors" of Muhammad's government that he established, "expanded the kingdom...[and] extended the Muslim empire" (ibid, p.69). In the name of "Jihad" which means, "DJIHAD, holy war. The spread of Islam by arms is a religious duty upon Muslims in general...So it must continue to be done until the whole world is under the rule of Islam.” (Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam, page 89, [7]). Then after Islam is spread by the sword through the Muhammad's government that he established, "his arm," "his right eye" the ecclesiastical rule Muhammad created as well was established (see below in Jihad section). So here we find in Zachariah the prophecy of the Islamic empire fulfilled to the letter.

In conclusion to Zechariah's prophecy he writes, "his arm shall be clean dried up, and his right eye shall be utterly darkened." This is shows the end of the Islamic empire never again to rise but is "dried up." "The secular power shall be broken, and become utterly inefficient." (Clarkes Commentary). The Islamic Sharia laws has proved to be totally inefficient, especially in these Modern Times. Warraq in his book, Why I Am Not A Muslim dedicates a whole chapter on Islam, Democracy and Human Rights to show its inefficiency in today's world. When we look at the Muslim countries today, if there is wealth it come mostly from the Christian West, and that poverty, discrimination, persecution against non-Muslims, and war plagues these nations that are still locked in the "dark ages."

"his right eye shall be utterly darkened." The ecclesiastical rule of Islam is in total darkness to the true light of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and they have totally rejected the truth of the Bible, and so it still remain in darkness today.

The book of Hosea is very interesting it actually names Muhammad by name and calls him a "mad prophet." Yair Davidy writes: "Regarding the future, some type of ill-fated bond between "Ephraim" and the followers of Islam is spoken of in the Biblical Book of Hosea. It is obvious that the same Biblical Prophecies may legitimately often be understood in several entirely different ways - as they were perhaps intended to be. The verses should be seen in their context The overall message is that the Prophet Hosea condemns Ephraim, uses a word which may be understood to be a form of the name "Mohammed", speaks of the region of Egypt and the east, and predicts a disaster which somehow involves a mad prophet also identified traditionally as "Mohammed": The quotations are from Hosea chapter nine: " Do not be happy Israel, do not rejoice like (other) peoples, for you have sinned (and gone) away from your God...(Hosea 9;1). Note that "Israel" is told not to be "happy" because they have departed from the truth. By "Israel" in this case Ephraim i.e. the Ten Tribes in their place of exile is intended.





"Note: the word we transliterated from the Hebrew as "Machmad" is the same as the Arabic for Mohammed. The KJ translates the Hebrew "machmad" (i.e. Mahommed) as "pleasant places" and such a rendition is also linguistically feasible. It should be repeated that the language of the Prophets often seems to deliberately allow itself of more than one meaning."


"THE DAYS OF VISITATION HAVE ARRIVED, THE DAYS OF PAYMENT HAVE COME, ISRAEL SHALL KNOW, THE PROPHET IS EVIL, MAD [Hebrew: "Meshuga"] A MAN OF SPIRIT [Muhammad practiced the occult, see below] BECAUSE OF YOUR TRANSGRESSION [Israel realized their ways are wrong] AND OF GREAT HATRED[Muhammad's hatred towards Christians and Jews] (Hosea 9;7):



As mentioned above, "The mad prophet" in Hosea 9;7 was considered by some (e.g. Maimonides, 1135-1204, in his "Letter To Yeman") to be a reference to Mohamed and the name of Mohammed (in Hebrew and Arabic: "Machmad") does appear in the previous verse (Hosea 9;). The desert sun, sparse diet, and seclusion (as well as the possible use of hashish and various weeds smoked by some of the Arabs) are liable to play tricks on highly strung spiritually inclined individuals. If the people concerned also suffer from epileptic attacks (as Mohammed did) and delusions of grandeur so is the propensity for error compounded." (From Brit-Am 44 Yair Davidy, emphasis added).

"He (i.e. Muhammad) suffered from Hallucinations of his senses, and to finish his sufferings, he several times contemplated suicide...the majority [of people] took a less charitable view and declared he was insane... (Dictionary of Islam, p.393, emphasis added). Mclintock and Strong's Encyclopedia vol.6, p.406 writes, "...the oldest and most trustworthy narratives...[shows Muhammad] was considered to be possessed of evil spirits." As the Bible says Muhhamd was a mad and evil prophet which had a spirit meaning possession which can be verified in history and the Koran itself.

Ephraim which is Britain today has 3 million Muslims that live there. And many are known terrorists that live there. There has been race riots, and also the Muslims want the British Parliament to institute the Sharia law. Not to mention all the wars the British and the U.S.A. have been drawn into because of the Islamic Nations. The teachings and followers of Muhammad is really a "snare" for Britain in there own land.

Is the Koran the Word of God?

The Quran is at the heart of Islam. If its claims can be substantiated, then Islam is true, and all opposing religious claims, including Christianity, and Judaism, are false.

Of course the claims that the Muslims make for the Quran are, that the Quran is errorless sura 18:1, and there is a copy of it in a table in heaven preserved sura 85:21-22.

The Quran also claims that, "The revelation of this book is from God, The exalted in power, full of wisdom. It is we who have revealed the book to thee in truth" (sura 39:1-2).

Muslim commentators say that the Quran is the final revelation from God (see for more details, Geisler's book, Answering Islam, p.179-80).

Muhammad also makes the claim that, "Can they not consider the Koran? Were it from any other than God, they would surely have found in it many contradictions" (sura 4:84).

So according to the Quran, if there is contradictions in this book, then IT IS NOT THE WORD OF GOD!

Muhammad just helped us dig the grave for the Quran. THE QURAN IS LOADED WITH CONTRADICTIONS!

Let's examine some of the contradictions in the Quran.

1. The Quran differs whether a day is 1000 years, or 50,000 years see sura 32:4, and 70:4.

2. On the day of Judgment the infidels attempt to conceal something from God Sura 6:22-23. But in Sura 4"45 we see that the infidels don't attempt to conceal anything.

3. In sura 56 the people who follow Muhammad will be "a crowd of the former, and few of the latter generations" verse 14. But in verse 39 it says that the people of Muhammad will be "a crowd of the latter generations." Other translations have "multitude" as the word instead of "crowd." so which one is it, a few of the latter, or a crowd?

4. Commenting on the Exodus, God told the Israelites, "And it was said to them, "Dwell in this city, and eat therefrom what ye will, and say "Hittat" (forgiveness) and enter the gate with prostration's; then we will pardon your offences, we will give increase to the doers of good" (7"162).

Now look at this verse about the same subject: "And when we said, 'Enter this city, and eat therefrom plentiful at your will, and enter the gate with prostration's, and say, "Forgiveness," and we will pardon you your sins, and give an increase to the doers of good:' (sura 2:55). Now if the Quran is without error how do you explain the difference of these two statements? This is god talking to the Israelites, and both times God is quoted wrong. One could understand if this was two people witnessing what was going on and wrote it down, but this is not the case. the Quran is dictating what happened in the past.

5. In sura 22:40-41 God says that people who are persecuted because of believing in God can take up arms and defend themselves. But in Sura 66:9, God commands to make war with people who don't believe.

6. Because Judaism and Christianity were divided into sects, the Quran says that they were not of God, see Suras 30:30-32; 42:11-15.

Yet Islam is divided into many warring sects, and therefore Islam is false as well, according to the Quran.

7. In sura 11:45 we read that Noah's son "was among the drowned," that is he died in the flood. But sura 21:76 we read that God saved "all his kinsfolk from the great calamity..."

8. At first Muhammad was nice to the Christians and the Jews. The Quran says that if they try to convert you to "unbelief" to "forgive them." (sura 2:59, 103). Then Muhammad says to slay all unbelievers (sura 5:55;9:29-30;66:9).

9. There are conflicting views about how many days of creation. In sura 41:8-11 the Quran says that it took 8 days to create everything (4 days + 2 days + 2 days = 8 days). but it only took 6 days according to the Bible (Gen. 1:31). Also in the Quran in suras 7:52, 10:3; 32:3-4 it says God created everything in 6 days. Then it says that everything was created in a twinkling of an eye, see Sura 54:50 So the Quran conflicts with itself and the Bible.

10. In the creation of Adam, God told his angels to worship Adam, see sura 2:32. This breaks his own law , that you should only worship God, see sura 2:77

All over the Quran we read that God is AN ABSOLUTE ONE. Sura 112 says, "he is God alone: God the eternal!He begetteth not, and He is not begotten; and there is none like unto him" It also says that, "And they say God has a son.' No! ..sole Maker of the heavens and the earth!" (sura 2:111; 4:169). Problem is why does the Quran say that, "Have WE not made the earth a couch? And the mountains tent stakes?...And built above you seven solid heavens" (sura 78:8, 11).

"And as to the earth, WE have spread it out..." (sura 50:7).

"WE have not created the heavens and the earth and whatever is in between them in sport: We have not created them but for a serious end" (sura 44:39).

Question: If God is alone, has no son, sole maker of all things, they deny the Trinity saying God is one not three (see sura 5:77). So the question is who is "WE" IN THESE VERSES? Not Just in these verses, but this is all over the Quran. it talks about how "we parted the sea," and "we made a covenant with Israel." Some Muslim scholars say that this is the plural of majesty, like in Genesis 1:26, where God says "Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness." Problem is, recently historians are starting to discover that the plural of majesty was never known among the Hebrews, and it came to be during the Medieval times of the kings of England, in Europe. So who is "we?" Was Muhammad claiming divinity, even though he denied it?

11. To drink wine (sura 16:67; 2:219:4:43), or not to drink wine, (sura 5:92)?

12. Did Jesus die (Sura 19:33; 3:55), or not? (Sura 4:157-158).

13.One part in the Koran God says that you need a mediator to talk to him (Sura 42:51-52), and that it "biffitteth not a man," meaning all men. In another place it says that Moses spoke directly to God, (Sura 7:143; 4:164).

14. In one place it says that Abraham was not an idolater (Sura 3:67; 6:62). but in another place you see Abraham committing idolatry (Sura 6:75-78).

15. In one place Muhammad is told not to bother, in converting unbeliever (Sura 2:6-7), for their fate is sealed. In another place Muhammad is told to attempt their conversion by peaceful means anyway (Sura 24:54).

16. Muhammad first said that it does not matter where you are facing to pray because God is everywhere (Sura 2:109). Then he changed his mind and said that we should pray towards Jerusalem, and then changed his mind again and said we should face Mecca (Sura 2:119-121, 138-144). And this contradiction is all in the same chapter.

17. Finally, one huge contradiction in the Quran that actually is embarrassing to the Muslims. The Quran claims that the book is written in pure Arabic see suras 12:2; 13:37; 16:105; 41:44. Robert Morey says: "The Quran is not perfect Arabic. It contains many grammatical errors, such as suras 2:177, 192; 4:162; 5:69; 7:160; 13:28; 20:66; 63:10. etc..." (Islamic invasion, p.119).

In his book, The Foreign Vocabulary of the Quran, Authur Jeffery documents the fact that the Quran contains over 100 foreign (non-Arabic) words. There are Egyptian Hebrew, Greek, Syriac, Akkadian, Ethiopian and Persian words and phrases in the Quran.

Back to Mohammed's question, "Can they not consider the Koran? Were it from any other than God, they would surely have found it many contradictions." How would you answer Muhammad, if he were still alive today?

For a whole list of contradictions click here.

Does the Bible and the Koran Contradict?

The Koran says that the Bible and the Koran agree with one another, that there is no difference between the two: "We believe in God and that which has been sent down us [Koran], and sent down on Abraham and Ishmael, Isaac and Jacob, and the [Israelitish] tribes, and in that which was given to Moses [the law] and Jesus [the Gospel], and the prophets of their Lord; we make NO DIVISION between any of them..." (Sura 2:130; 3:78). But there are many differences between the two books.

1. As we have shown earlier, the Quran says creation took place in 8 days, the Bible says 6 days.

2. We showed you earlier that one of Noah's son died in the flood, but the Bible says all his sons were saved. Sura 11:4-6 says the ark landed on mount Judi, the Bible says it landed on the Mountains of Ararat, which was east of the land of Shinar, most likely in Iran!

3. The Koran says that Abraham's father was called Azar, sura 6:74, but the Bible says Terah Gen 11:27.

4. Abraham did not live and worship in Mecca, sura 14:38, but south of Bethel according to the Bible, see Gen 13:3. "It is virtually certain that AbrahamNEVER reached Mecca" (Watt, p.136, Muslim and Christian Encounters, emphasis mine).

5. It was Abraham's son Isaac, not Ishmael that was sacrificed, see Sura 37:100-110 and Gen 22.

6. He did not build the Kaaba, as history has shown us and it is not in the Bible, see Sura 2:121-122

7. He was not thrown into the fire by Nimrod as the Koran claims, see Sura 21:60-69. This is a very serious error in Biblical and secular history. Nimrod was dead for centuries while Abraham walked this earth.

8. The Koran says Joseph was named Aziz Sura 12:21 ff, when his name was really Potiphar Gen 37:36.

9. It was not Pharaoh's wife that adopted Moses Sura 28:7-8, it was Pharaoh's daughter, Exodus 2:5.

10. Noah's flood did not take place in Moses day Sura 2:248-9; 7:130-132 compare 7:57 ff. This error cannot be easily swept aside.

11. The Koran says Haman lived in Egypt during Pharaoh's day in the time of Moses building the tower of Babel, Suras 28:5-7,:38; 29:38; 40:24-25, 38-39. But Haman actually lived in Persia 1000 years later, see the book of Esther. This contradicts secular as well as biblical history.

12. Crucifixion was not used in Pharaoh's time, the time of Moses, see Sura 7:121. This also contradicts secular history. The Carthaginians are the ones who invented crucifixion, and then the Romans took it from them.

13. Mary, the mother of Jesus, her father was not Imram Sura 66:12. Muslims say she was a descendant of Aaron, but Sura 3:30-43 plainly says that she gave birth to Mary and Imram said a prayer when she was born, and Zechariah took care of her when she was born. She is also called the "sister of Aaron" Moses' brother, see Sura 19:29. Mary and Aaron live thousands of years apart from each other! Muhammad confused her with Miriam the sister of Moses and Aaron.

14. She did not give birth to Jesus under a palm tree, but in a stable, see Sura 19:20-23; Luke 2:1-20

15. Muhammad made up fictional speeches of the people in the Bible, using such words as "Muslim" and "Islam" which were not used in the languages of those people at that time. These people did not call themselves Muslims, see Suras 2:122-126; 3:45-52, 60; 7:120-126; etc...

16. The test of how the soldiers would drink the water from the stream did not take place in the days of Saul when David defeated Goliath, but many years earlier with Gideon, compare Sura 2:250 with Judges 7:1-8

17. In Sura 20:87-88, 96 we are told that the Israelites built a golden calf at the suggestion of the "Samaritan." Muhammad did not know that Samaria wasfounded by the Israelites under King Omri, and then when Assyria took them away captive in 721 B.C. they put other races people into Samaria years after Moses in the wilderness. This also contradicts secular as well as Biblical history.

The Encyclopedia Britannica says, "The deviations [in the Koran] from the Biblical narratives are very marked, and can in most cases be traced back to the LEGENDARY ANECDOTES OF THE JEWISH HAGGADA AND THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPEL. Much has been written concerning the sources from which Muhammad derived his information;there is no evidence THAT HE WAS ABLE TO READ, and his dependence on ORAL COMMUNICATION may explain some of his misconceptions..." (see samples above 13:479, emphasis mine). This is true even in the Koran he called the "Unlettered Prophet" (7:156).

Arabic scholar Edward Sell says, "He certainly did not get them from the Old Testament. The confusion of names is quite remarkable" (Studies, p.225).

"As pagan, Jewish, and Christian traders sat around the fire telling each other favorite stories, they would get the names times and events all jumbled up and confused" (Morey, Islamic Invasion, p.141). The worst to preserve anything is through human memory. Our human memories are too fragile to remember details of history. This is why God commanded Moses and the prophets, and the whole Bible for that matter to be "written in a book," as EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY!

Does the Koran Contradict Secular History?

There are many historical mistakes in the Koran. If the Koran is the word of God then it should not contain any mistakes. Let go through some of them

1. In Sura 105 Muhammad claims that the army of the elephant was defeated by birds dropping stones of baked clay upon them. According to historical record, Arbah's army withdrew their attack on Mecca after small pox broke out among the troop, see Guilaume Islam p.21 ff.

2. The Kabba was not built by Abraham but by the pagan for Allah, or Hubal the moon god to encase the black stone that fell out of the sky as we have proved earlier in the book.

3. One of the greatest errors I have seen from a religious book, is the claim that Alexander the Great, who is called the "Two Horned one," in the Koran was aMUSLIM, he worshipped Allah and lived to a good OLD AGE, see Sura 18:82-98. This error is ironclad. History shows that Alexander the Great was a pagan sodomite, and died at a young age. Daniel 8 in the Bible gives you an accurate description of Alexander the Great. Now some try and dispute this account and say it wasn't Alexander the Great but someone else. The problem with that is, the Only person in ALL OF HISTORY who was called the "two horned one" was Alexander the Great. Also this story matches exactly to the myth of Alexander the Great in a book called the "Romance of Alexander." And Even Muslim scholars recognized that this is speaking of Alexander the Great, see Yusuf Ali's Translation of the Koran. Warraq says: "The account of Alexander the Great (Sura 18:82) is hopelessly confused historically, and we are certain it was based on the Romance of Alexander. At any rate, the Macedonian was NOT A MUSLIM, and he did not live to an OLD AGE, nor was he a CONTEMPORARY OF ABRAHAM, as Muslims contend" (Why I Am Not A Muslim, p.158-159, emphasis added). The Encyclopedia Britannica writes: "His [Mohammed's] account of Alexander introduced as the 'Two Horned One' (Sura 18:82), is derived from the ROMANCE OF ALEXANDER, which was current among the Nestorian Christians of the 7TH CENTURY IN A SYRIAC VERSION" (15:479, emphasis mine). How can we rely on a book that is filled with so many errors as the Koran! Go to this web site for absolute proof that its talking about Alexander the Great.

4. The Koran denies the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ (Sura 4:157-158). The crucifixion is an absolute historical fact. There are non-Christian, Roman, Christian, and Jewish sources that will testify that Jesus was actually crucified on that Passover day. Read Lee Strobel's book The Case for Christ. He has his Law degree at Yale, and was a former Journalist for the Chicago Tribune who denied Christianity, and put his Law skills to the test. When he was done his investigation he realized that the Bible is historically accurate and Jesus did die and was resurrected! See also this web site for the crucifixion being a historical fact!  and


Sources of the Koran

What are the sources of the Koran? Where did these versions of Biblical history and secular history come from? The answer PAGANISM, THE TALMUD, THE APOCRYPHA, AND OTHER BOOKS OF FABLES AND LEGENDS!

The Qur'an claims that it is the Book of God and that; "falsehood comes not to it from before nor from behind it." It is the true word of God, the epitome of knowledge. Thus runs the myth of the Qur'an, which disproves itself through the occurrence of myth within it!

Whoever peruses the verses of the Qur'an find that they record things that have nothing to do with historical fact. The historical material in the Qur'an has gone beyond the bounds of reality to those of fairy-tales. This was the reason that prompted the unbelieving Arabs who opposed the Islamic dawa in Mecca to say that the Qur'an was nothing but the fairy-tales of the ancients (Sura al-An`am 6:25). One may indeed wonder: are there myths in the Qur'an?

Warraq writes: The prophet TRANSFERRED to ISLAM the beliefs and practices of theHEATHEN PAGAN ARABS, especially into the ceremonies of the pilgrimage to Mecca. And yet Muslims continue to hold that their faith came directly from Heaven, and that the 'Koran is held to be of eternal origin recorded in heaven, lying as it does there upon a preserved table suras 85:21; 6:19, 97...Perhaps Muslims have the unconscious fear that if we can trace the teachings of the Koran to a purely HUMAN AND EARTHLY SOURCE, then the entire edifice of Islam will crumble" (Why I Am Not A Muslim, p.34, emphasis mine).

Professor Jomier, one of Frances greatest Middle Eastern scholars says, " Muslims receive these narratives as the word of God, WITHOUT ENQUIRING ABOUT THEIR HISTORICAL BACKGROUND. In face we have here a popular poetic form of LEGENDS, VARIANTS OF RELIGIOUS THEMES KNOWN FROM OTHER SOURCES" (Morey, Islamic Invasion, p.147, emphasis mine).

Morey also notes that "Abraham Geiger in 1833, and further documented by another Jewish scholar, Dr. Abrahan Katsh, of New York University, in 1954, " that "Many of the stories in the Koran come from the JEWISH TALMUD, THE MIDRASH, AND MANY APOCRYPHAL WORKS" (ibid., pp.148-149, emphasis mine). The Britannica also documents the same thing (15:648)

And what is amazing is that, "In spite of all the evidences, it is interesting that Muslim authors have been most unwilling to address the issue of the human origins of the Koran, but have simply repeated their dogmatic assertions about its divine origin. In fact, in our research of Muslim authors we have not even come across an acknowledgment of such problems in the Koran to say nothing of Solutions" (Answering Islam, p.309, emphasis mine).

W. St. Clair-Tisdall is the best source for the origins of the Koran. He demonstrates the direct dependence of Koranic stories of the Bible from the Talmud, the Apocrypha (Jewish and Christian), Zoroaster Buddhism, and also Hinduism. To read his book on-line go to / Also this web site where he answers his critics at

Here is a brief summary of the sources of the Koran:

1. The birth of Christ in Sura 19:22-34 come from the "The History of the Nativity of Mary and the Savior's infancy."

2. Alexander the Great as we have seen come from the "Romance of Alexander."

3. The Seven Heavens in Sura 17:46; 23:88; 41:11; 65:12, comes from the Indo-Iranian sources in both Hindu and Zoroastrian scriptures.

4. Sura 11:9 we find God's throne above the waters. This comes from the Jewish Rashi

5. In Sura 7:44, there is mention of a wall called Aaraf. This comes from the Jewish Midrash.

6. Suras 15:17; 37:7; 67:5 we find Satan listening stealthily and being driven away with stones. This story we find in Jewish writings, about Genii "listening behind the curtain in order to gain knowledge of what is to come."

7. Sura 1:29 talks about hell being full. In the Rabbinic book Othioth Derabbi Akiba 8:1, we find the same thing.

8. Sura 24:24 is found in the Jewish Talmud (Cheiga 16 Taanith 11).

9. The traditions of Mount Caf is a garbled and misunderstood version of the passage in Hagigah.

10. The Creation of Adam (sura 2:28-33) resembles the Midrash Rabbah on Leviticus, Parashah 19, and Genesis, Parashah 8 ; and Sanhedrin 38.

11. Various Suras also recount that God commanded the angels to worship Adam (Suras 7:10-26; 18:48; 20:115; 37:71-86). This agrees with the account in the Midrash of Rabbi Moses.

12. Cain and Abel (Sura 5:35) resembles the Mishna Sandhedrin 4:5. The conversation of Cain and Abel is taken from the Targrum of Jerusalem.

13. The conversations of Noah when they were building the ark is from the Sandhedrin 108

14. The story of Abraham being saved from Nimrod's fire (suras 2:260; 6:74-84; 21:52-72; 19:42-50; 26:69-79; 29:15-16; 37:81-95; 43:25-27; 60:4 etc... All stories about Abraham have been shown to be from the Jewish Midrash Rabbah, see Tisdall and Geiger.

15. Muhammad often refers to God as "rabb," meaning "Lord." Sometimes as "Lord of the Worlds, see sura 56:79; 82:29 83:6. Also at the head of each Sura we see God being called "The Merciful," (Sura 55:1, 78:3). This term was used before Islam, by the pagan Arabs. It has been found in South Arabian inscriptions.

16. The story of the Seven sleepers (sura 18:8-26) comes from the legend that arose around the 5th century, and spread all over Europe and Asia. It originated from a Syrian Bishop named James Sarug.

17. The denial of the crucifixion of Jesus, see Sura 4-157-158, comes from the "apocryphal book Travels of the Apostles," see Abdul-Haqq Sharing your Faith with a Muslim, pp.130-139 for a full study.

Warraq writes: "These old Testament Characters...mentioned in the the Dictionary of Islam puts it: '[are] with strange want of accuracy and a LARGE ADMIXTURE OF TALMUDIC FABLE''' (Why...p.54, emphasis mine).

Even Muhammed admitted that he himself "I Am not apostle of new doctrines..." (Sura 46:8, Rodwell Transl) And we see that in all the stories in the Koran was nothing new. They were all borrowed from myths legends and paganism.

Interesting, the Koran in Sura 25:5 it says that the unbelievers say: "...tales of the ancients he hath put in writing! And they are dictated to him morn and even" Mohammed's response which of course was Allah's response? All they do is attack the character of those who made the accusations, "Of a truth, it is they who have put forward an iniquity and falsehood" (Sura 25:4).

"Say: 'He has sent it down who knoweth the secrets of the Heavens..." (25:6). Interesting, Muhammad did not deny the borrowing, but denied that these were myths. Warraq writes, "Two important passages in the Koran indicate that he may well have had a Jewish teacher, probably a rabbi. In sura 25.5f., the unbelievers accuse him of listening to old stories, dictated to him by someone else. Muhammaddoes not deny the human teacher, but insists his inspiration is divine. In sura 16.105, the angel of revelation tells us, "We know very well that they say: it is only a mortal man who has taught him. But the language of him to whom they refer is foreign, while this language is clear Arabic!" Torrey has argued this instructor must have been a Babylonian Jew from Southern Mesopotamia.

"Besides learning from particular individuals, by visiting the Jewish quarter, Muhammad learned from direct observation the rites and rituals of Jewish practice. In any case, the Arabs who came into contact with the Jewish communities had already acquired a knowledge of Jewish customs, stories, legends, and practice; much of this material is to be found in pre-Islamic poetry." (ibid, p.50, emphasis added). Sura 16 that says, "it is only a mortal man who has taught him" the context is that the Koran only came from mortal man and not God, but then he says, "this language is clear Arabic." Muhammad thought for some reason that Arabic was some sort of divine language, but he said this to proof not only was he borrowing from men, but that he was getting revelations from God as well in Arabic. The borrowing was never denied!

Muhammad thought these stories were divine in nature, and came from God, he never denied the borrowing. To him these were not "tales," but true histories. The Quran says, "And that we have related to thee of these HISTORIES of these apostles, is to confirm thy heart thereby. By these hath the truth reached thee..."(Sura 11:121). "Thus do We recite to thee histories of what passed of old; and from ourself have we given thee admonition." (20:99). Again the Koran confirms that these are not "inventions" but true histories, "When at last the Apostles lost all hope, and deemed that they were reckoned as liars, our aid reached them, and we delivered whom we would; but our vengeance was not averted from the wicked. Certainly in their histories is an example for men of understanding. This is no new tale of fiction, but a confirmation of previous scriptures, and an explanation of all things, and guidance and mercy to those who believe.." (12:110-111). Notice, first, these stories are NOTin the Bible. Second Muhammad is saying these stories are known they are not new. And third he believed that they are true and these events happened, but history shows that they are not, they are myths!

And if you did not believe what he said, he told people to ask the "people of the book" to confirm the things he was saying, "If thou art in doubt as to what we have sent down to thee, inquire at those who have read the scriptures before thee. Now hath theTRUTH come unto thee from thy Lord: be not therefore of those who doubt." (Sura 10:94). This proves that these stories WERE KNOWN, but these stories are not in the bible, but in legends and myths. Muhammad thought these were in the bible, and its not true!

Muhammad did not like questions about his faith. In the first chapter of the Koran it says, "No doubt is there about this book" (Sura 2:1). Why shouldn't we put it to the test. What is Allah afraid of?

Muhammad when he was asked questions, "The Holy Prophet himself forbade people to ask do not try to probe into such things" (The Meaning of the Koran, vol.11, pp.76-77). If you do not want people to investigate, there in itself raises questions to the validity of the faith of Islam. The Bible however says to "prove all things" (1 Thessalonians 5:21). God is challenging us to prove the Bible. That shows confidence in His word that God has, that the Bible is true unlike the Koran which tells us to do the opposite!

And the origins of these sources are nothing more than "...LEGENDARY and spurious...which began to appear in the 2nd century. They were mostly FORGERIES, and we so recognized from the first. 'They were so full of NONSENSICAL STORIES OF CHRIST and the Apostles, that they had never been regarded as DIVINE...Deliberate attempts to FILL THE GAPS of the New Testament story of Jesus in order to further heretical ideas by FALSE CLAIMS...It is said that MOHAMMED GOT HIS IDEAS OF CHRISTIANITY FROM THESE BOOKS" (Halley's Bible Handbook, p.747, emphasis mine).

The Bible says "For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty" (2 Peter 1:16).



See also Warraq paper on the Origins of the Koran and the Pagan sources of Islam

The Abrogater of Verses

In Sura 2:100, and 16:103 Muhammad says this, "Whatever verses we cancel, or cause thee to forget, we bring one better or like it." First, what's amazing is, in an earlier verse (v.20) he challenges people to "produce a sura like it." And here he is canceling them. Looks like God was violating his own law. But why would God have Muhammad cancel verses and bring other ones just like it or better? Isn't God's revelation good enough for all races and for all times, and to give it to us just once? Can't he produce a verse that's perfect ONE TIME? The Bible says, "...The word of the Lord endures forever" (1 Peter 1:25). In the Koran, this is not the case! In the Bible there is not one case where a prophet cancelled any verses.

Secondly, notice in this verse that Mohammed "forgot" something God told him. So now we have some of God's message lost because Muhammad has a bad memory.

Let's Go through some of the Verses that Muhammad cancelled to illustrate the change in the Koranic Text.

1. Let's start with the Satanic verses. According to one version of these verses Muhammad had an early revelation in Mecca, which allowed the intercession of idols: "Do you consider Allat and Al-Uzza and Al-Manat, the third the other? Those are swans exalted; Their intercession is expected..." Some time after Muhammad received another revelation canceling the last three lines and substituting them with what we find now in Sura 53:21-23., which omits the part about the Pagan gods interceding. According to Watt, both versions had been recited publicly. Mohammed's explanation was that Satan had deceived him and inserted the false verses WITHOUT HIM KNOWING IT! (see Watt, pp.60-61). Problem is, if Satan deceived him in this part of the KoranWITHOUT HIM KNOWING IT. How do we know that Satan did not deceive him in another place in the Koran WITHOUT HIM KNOWING, AND THAT VERSE IS STILL IN THE KORAN TODAY?

2. The command to stone adulterers was changed to 100 stripes sura 24:2

3. The "sword" verse Sura 9:5 supposedly annuls the 124th verse that originally encouraged tolerance (cf 2:256), yet in other places it urges Muslims to "fight those who believe not" (9:29). and fight and slay the pagans wherever you find them (9:5), of course here's a CONTRADICTION!

4. A contradiction can be found in the fact that the Koran claims that there can be "no changes to the word of God" (10:65). For there is none that can alter or change the words of God (6:34). But here Muhammad is canceling verses Sura 2:100. Geisler writes that most of the time you see the corrected verses near the ones being corrected. The reason for the abrogation of verse is quite clear.There are many contradictions in the Quran, and Muhammad said you can't find any or else its not God's word, ""Can they not consider the Koran? Were it from any other that God, they would surely have found in it many contradictions" (sura 4:84).

5. The Koran claims that Humans are responsible for their own choices (18:28), yet it also claims that God has sealed the fate of all in advance (17:14; 10:99-100)

Scientific Errors in the Koran

Some critics question just how scientific there Koran really is. Take for instance the statement that humans are made from a clot of blood: "Then we made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood; Then of that clot we made a (foetus) lump; then we made out of that lump bones clothed the bones with flesh (Sura 23:14). This is scarcely a scientific description of embryonic development. For a full explanation of this go to

Here are others

1. The Koran speaks of travelling west to "the setting of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring" (sura 18:84). Of course this is absolutely impossible.

2. The Koran claims the earth is flat! Yes Flat! Now the Bible says the earth is "round" (Isaiah 40:22 Moffatt Translation). The Koran however"...alludes to the fact that the earth is FLAT and its mountains are like poles which create a balance so that the earth does not tilt" (Unmasking Islam, p.175, emphasis mine). In "Sura 88:17, 20, it is recorded, 'Will they not regard the camels how they are created...and the earth how it is spread?'...In page 509, Jalalan says: "in his phrase, 'how it is spread' he denotes that the earth is FLAT. ALL SCHOLARS OF ISLAMIC LAW AGREE UPON THIS. IT IS NOT ROUND AS THE PHYSICISTS CLAIM''' (ibid, p.175) The Dawood Translation translates this verse As "The earth how it was LEVELED FLAT? (88:20). See also the Suras that show the mountains like poles hold the earth in place so it won't tilt, 21:32; 50:7. Sura 2:20 says that the earth is a "bed" for us Humans. Beds are flat, so in the Koran, the earth is Flat! But is the earth flat? Absolutely Not! And mountains do NOT hold the earth steady. Any geologist will tell you that Mountains actually CAUSE EARTHQUAKES! In fact one example of the persecution of scientists in the Arab world during the time of the Arab empire, was the case of Ibn al-Haitham, whose works were branded heretical and then forgotten in the Muslim East. "A disciple of Maimonides, the Jewish philosopher, relates that he was in Bagdad on business, when the library of a certain philosopher (who died in 1214) was burned there. The preacher, who conducted the execution of the sentence, threw into the flames, with his won hands, an astronomical work of Ibn al-Haitham, after he had pointed to a delineation therein given of the sphere of the earth, as an unhappy symbol of impious Atheism" (Warraq, pp.274-275, emphasis added)

3. The Koran also says that the sky is a solid dome or a roof, see Sura 2:20; 21:33. The New Commentary on the Whole Bible by JFB says, " allusion to the ancient Near Eastern cosmological thought that considered the earth flat with the sky A VAULT, sustained by pillars..." p.940, emphasis mine). Scientifically the Koran fails.

4. They also boast about the Koran when it talks about creating man in different "stages" of development, see Sura 71:14, and how science shows the evolution of man from its primitive form to our present day form. The problem here is, all the different bones like Cro-Magnon man, and Neanderthal man and so on, have all been DISPROVEN TO BE PROOF OF THE EVOLUTION OF MAN, see Bones of Contention by Marvin L. Lubenow! This book is one of many that show these theories to be false. There is NO EVIDENCE THAT MAN DEVELOPED IN STAGES!

But where did Muhammad get this theory that man was developed in "stages" as the Koran says? As we have noted above, the Muslims got their knowledge of science from the Greeks. The idea that man developed from "stages" isNOTHING NEW. THAT WAS AROUND LONG BEFORE MUHAMMAD WAS EVEN BORN, JUST LIKE THE EMBRYOLOGY IN THE KORAN WHICH CAME FROM THE GREEKS AS WELL!

"The Great Chain of Being...patterned after PLATO. According to this concept the Almighty had created a great ladder or chain of living things, from singled celled organisms all the way up to humans, each organism being a bit more complex than the one below it...the Great chain of being we are dealing not with biblical concepts but with PAGAN GREEK PHILOSOPHY" (Bones of Contention, pp.93-94, emphasis added). So again the Koran is scientifically inaccurate.

Now there is a myth being spread by the Muslims that the Muslims were great men of science due to the Koran. But Muslims got their science from "...the works of ancient GREEKS, and the Muslims are important as the PRESERVERS and Transmitters of Greek (and Hindu) learning ...[but] most of the credit [for science] must go to the Persians, CHRISTIANS AND JEWS...There is a persistent Myth that Islam encouraged science. Adherents of this view quote the Koran and Hadith to prove their point: "Say shall those who have knowledge and those who have it not be deemed equal?' (Koran 39:12); Seek knowledge in China if necessary;' 'The search after knowledge is Obligatory for every Muslim' THIS IS NONSENSE because the knowledge advocated...IS RELIGIOUS KNOWLEDGE. Orthodoxy has always been suspicious of 'knowledge for his own sake,' and UNFETTERED INTELLECTUAL INQUIRY IS DEEMED DANGEROUS TO THE FAITH" (Warraq, Why I Am Not A Muslim, pp.272-273, emphasis mine). Its interesting how the Islamic achievements hit its zenith between the 10-11th centuries when they were learning science math etc of the Greeks and other classical works. Then "When Islam went fundamentalist in the 12-13th centuries, Islamic science died. That is why the Muslim world today is the most backward in the world. Even with Muslims attending Western universities,they still fall behind because Islam..."(Lewis Loflin Science & Islam, emphasis added). Amazing! Because the Islamic empire returned to the religion of Islam, the empire went downward and eventually into oblivion!

Where did they get this Knowledge?-Very few Arabs at the time of Mohammad could read or write or know arithmetic's. Mohammad himself said we are a nation that does not know how to write or to do arithmetics (nahnu 'omah la takteb wa la tahseb). The Arabs used the local tradesmen, architects and scholars of the conquered countries and learned their skills from them. The scientific measure of the Arabs at the time of Mohammad is best reflected in the Hadith and the Qur'an, which when read is not very scientific at all.

It is the Jewish prisoners of war in early Islam that taught the early Muslims how to read and write etc. and in return they received their freedom.

Also, when it came to Greek science, "most of the translators were Christians" (Warraq, p.262). Its was the Christians that translated the Greek works of science to the Arabs. These were the great scholars that taught the Arabs about science and philosophy. And during that time, "Christians and Jews continued to make so active a contribution [science]..." (ibid, p.272).

After the Arabs conquered many territories an Islamic Renaissance began. Theyabsorbed and extended the learning of all the dominions where their sword had been successful. They now learned paper making from the Chinese, mathematics from the Indians, commerce and banking from the Jews, astronomy from the Egyptians, poetry and literature from other parts. And wherever they went, they carried with them the results of their increasing knowledge.

The so called great Muslim thinkers and philosopher's of the time were actually " theleast Moslem....The Moslem mainstream of this time, on the other hand, emphasized rigid Koranic orthodoxy and deployed Greek philosophy and science solely to buttress its authority....[and when] paying little attention to the authority of the Koran, they aroused suspicion of the rulers both in North Africa and Spain, as well as in the East. Persecution, exile, and death were frequent punishments suffered by the philosophers of Islam whose writings did not conform to the canon. (The Golden Age of Islam is a Myth By Serge Trifkovic, emphasis added). Most Historians will tell you that these Muslim thinkers practiced science and philosophy in SPITE of Islam, not because of it.

Go to Qur'an, Islam and Science web site for more fallacies from the Muslims about they being the originators of modern science, when in actuality, they borrowed from the Greeks, Romans, Hindu's and other countries they conquered. The whole Muslim religion and way of life has been plagiarized from other religions and cultures of this world, there is nothing to brag about. If anyone should brag it should be everybody else.

Myth of the Golden Age-Many Muslims boast about the golden age of Islam when they ruled a vast part of the world, but actually this was due as noted above by other influences and not the religion of Islam. The religion of Islam only influenced the conquering and killing of people and spreading the religion all over the world. Once conquered, the influence of other cultures and sciences influenced the Arabs. Warraq writes: "We might distinguish three Islam's: Islam 1, Islam 2, and Islam 3. Islam 1 is what the prophet taught, that is, his teachings as contained in the Koran. Islam 2 is the religion as expounded, interpreted, and developed by the theologians through the traditions (Hadith); it includes the sharia and Islamic law. Islam 3 is what Muslimsactually did do and achieved, that is to say Islamic civilization.

"If any general thesis emerges in this book it is that Islam 3, Islamic civilization, often reached magnificent heights DESPITE Islam 1 and Islam 2, and NOT because of them. Islamic, and Islamic art would not have attained those heights had they rested on Islam 1 and Islam 2. Take poetry for example. At least early on, Muhammad despised the poets: 'Those who go astray follow the poets' (sura 26:224)...As for Islamic art, the Dictionary of Islam (DOI) says, Muhammad cursed the painter or the drawer of men and animals (Mishkat, 7, ch. 1, pt. 1), and consequently they are held to be unlawful...the Hadiths are full of condemnation for 'makers of figured pictures,' who are called the 'worst of men.'...Mercifully contact with older civilizations with rich artistic traditions induced converted Muslims to flout the orthodox position, and was responsible for such masterpieces of representational art...Thus the creative impulse underlying Islamic and ...literature came from outside Islam 1 and Islam 2 from contact with older civilizations with a richer heritage...[these] were totally lacking in Arabia...Without Byzantine art and Sussanian art there would have been no Islamic art, Islam 1 and 2 were hostile to its development. Similarly without the influence of Greek art and science there would not have been Islamic art and science, for Islam 1 and 2 were certainly ill-disposed to these 'foreign sciences.' For the orthodox, Islamic philosophy was a contradiction in terms, and Islamic science futile...Some of the greatest representatives in these fields, or those who played a crucial role in their development were either non-Muslim or actually hostile to some or even all of the tenets of Islam 1 and 2" (Why I am not a Muslim, pp.1-02, emphasis added).

Muhammad and the Occult

We shown you earlier how Muhammad talked to the dead, and visited cemeteries, and Haykal, one of the best biographers of Muhammad admitted that he had Psychic ability, see Norman Geisler, Answering Islam, pp.155-56.

Mr. Ankerberg says: "Oxford educated Alfred Guilaume was a professor of Arabic at both Princeton and the University of London...He observes that Muhammad first considered himself as belonging to the category of shair'-man with mysterious esoteric knowledge which was generally attributed to a familiar spirit called a jinn or shaytan''' (Facts on Islam, p.11). He goes on to say, "Mohammed's inspiration and religious experiences are remarkably similar to those found in some forms of spiritism. Shamanism, for example, is notorious for fostering periods of mental disruption as well as spirit possession. Significantly Muhammad experienced Shaman-like encounters and phenomena. Further, many authorities have noted that spirit possession frequently leads to the kinds of experiences that Muhammad had" (ibid., p.10, see Author Jeffery's Islam, Muhammad and His Religion, p.16).

Geisler says: "Another authority describes the Quranic verse in this way: 'The shortest verses generally occur in the earliest Suras, in which the style of Mohammed's revelation comes very close to the RHYMED PROSE (saj) USED BY THE KAHINS, OR SOOTHSAYERS OF HIS TIMES..." (Answering Islam, p.93, emphasis mine).

Warraq writes: "The belief in angels and demons is said to have been acquired from the PERSIANS (the Koranic word 'ifrit' meaning 'demon' is of Pahlavi origin). If this is the case then it was acquired long ago, for the PAGAN ARABS BEFORE ISLAM ALREADY HAD CONFUSED THE NOTION OF A CLASS OF SHADOWY BEINGS everywhere resent yet nowhere distinctly perceived, the jinn or djinn...For the Heathen Arabs, the jinn were invisible but were capable of taking various forms, such as those of snakes, lizards and scorpions. If a jinn entered a man it rendered him mad or possessed [like Muhammad claimed] Muhammad...MAINTAINED A BELIEF IN THESE SPIRITS: 'in fact the prophet went so far as to RECOGNIZE THE EXISTENCE OF HEATHEN GODS, classing them among the demons (see sura 37:158)...these primitive superstitions...held their ground in [Muslim] Arabia...[and] spread over the rest of the [Muslim] world...Mohammed's own beliefs in jinns are to be found in the Koran...Sura 72 (entitled 'The Jinn') 6:100...6:128...37:158...55:14...The angel Gabriel is spoken of as a companion of Muhammad, just as though he were a jinni accompanying a poet, and the same word 'nafatha,' blow upon, is used of anENCHANTER, OF A JINNI inspiring a poet and of Gabriel revealing to Muhammad" (Why..., pp.48-49, emphasis mine).

Muhammad also classed the Sabians and the people of Zoroaster as the "people of the book." Now these Sabians were those who were "...the people of the book...[who] worshipped the stars and admitted to the existence of astral spirits....Insofar as the Sabians may have influenced Muhammad, we may note the prevalence of oaths by stars and planets in the Koran (Sura 56:75: 'I swear by the falling of the stars...' Sura 53 entitled 'The Star,' verse 1: 'By the start when it plunges...')..." (ibid., p.65, emphasis mine). The God of the Bible condemns Astrological observations, see Deuteronomy 4:15, 19; 18:10-12

What is a soothsayer? One who practices divination, generally associated with the occult sciences. Hinduism Zoroasterism, Mithaism all have laments of astrology in them. We see in sura 15:16 "We set THE signs of the ZODIAC in the heavens..." Islam condones not condemns Astrology. In sura 53:45 Muhammad refers to "Sirius," the dog star worshipped by the pagan Arabs.

Here is a warning to Christians about false these prophets: "If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign [In Mohammed's case the sign is the Koran] or a wonder,

"And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, [The Koran which teaches us to worship the Moon God Hubal] which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;" (Deut 13:1-2). Then God says it is a test to see if we love him and stay with his religion (v.3). Then it pronounces the death penalty on these false prophets (v.5).


Jihad by By: Abdullah Al Araby

Why do Muslim extremists act this way?

Are Muslims inherently inhumane, savage and evil?- of course not. Muslims are ordinary people, just like anybody else. They are fathers, brothers and sons. They could be doctors, engineers and lawyers. They are your co-workers, and your next door neighbors. Violence is committed by a minority of Muslim extremists.

So, what goes on their minds when they act violently? To understand this one must understand an important and dangerous Islamic teaching called "Jihad" ( or Holy war).

It is important to understand that not every Arab is a Muslim , not every Muslim is an Arab, and not every Muslim is a extremist. We are not trying to attack a group of people here, nor are we trying to attack a religion. We are only exposing a teaching in a religion that could have a serious effect on society.

It is also important to know that in exercising Jihad, Muslim extremists may not think they are trying to maliciously hurt others, but rather they are only obeying God's commandments. And in doing so, they are assuring themselves a place in Paradise.

Jihad (Holy War)

Jihad is one of many sacred duties Muslims perform. The word "Jihad" is an Arabic word which means "struggle". Jihad can mean striving to be a better Muslim, but it can also mean fighting in the name of Allah. In this sense Jihad is the struggle for the cause of spreading Islam, using all means available to Muslims, including force. This kind of Jihad is often referred to as "Holy War".

In resorting to force, Muslims will not have any problem finding passages in the Quran (believed by Muslims to be Allah's word), and the Hadith (Mohammed's sayings as recorded by Al Bukhari), that will not only condone violence, but will also demand it.

Jihad in the "Quran"

Allah orders Muslims in the Quran to terrorize non-Muslims on His behalf:

* "Strike terror (into the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies"Surah 8:60

* "Fight (kill) them (non-Muslims), and Allah will punish (torment) them by your hands, cover them with shame" Surah 9:14

* "I will instil terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them It is not ye who slew them; it was Allah" Surah 8:12, 17

* "When ye encounter the infidels, strike off their heads till ye have made a great slaughter among them" (Sura 47:3).

* "Believers! Wage war against such infidels as are your neighbours, and let them find you rigorous" (Sura 9:124).

* "Make war upon such of those to whom the scriptures (Christians and Jews) have been given as believe not in God and His Apostle have forbidden, and profess not the professor of truth, util they pay tribute out of hand, and they be humbled" (Sura 9:29).

* Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God’s religion reigns supreme. But if they desist, fight none except the evil doers. (2:193)

* Those who believe, fight in the Cause of Allah, and those who disbelieve, fight in the cause of Taghut (Satan, etc.). So fight you against the friends of Shaitan (Satan); Ever feeble indeed is the plot of Shaitan (Satan)(4:76).

* “SAY to those Arabs of the desert, who took not the field, ye shall be called forth against a people of mighty valour. Ye shall do battle with them, or [other translations have "until"] they shall profess Islam.” (sura 48:16).

* “O Prophet! Strive hard against the disbelieves and the hypocrites, and be harsh against them” (9:73),

* “O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who are the Pious, (9:123).

* "kill the disbelievers wherever we find them" (2:191),

* "fight and slay the Pagans, seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem" (9:5).

* "slay or crucify or cut the hands and feet of the unbelievers, that they be expelled from the land with disgrace and that they shall have a great punishment in world hereafter" (5:34)

* "harsh with unbelievers", (48:29).

* The quran also allows them to be "disobedient towards the disbelievers and their governments and strive against the unbelievers with great endeavour" (25:52).

* Muhammad even prescribes fighting for Muslims and tells them that "it is good for us even if we dislike it" (2:216).

* Then he advises Muslims to "strike off the heads of the disbelievers"; and after making a "wide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives" (47:4).

* Jihad is mandatory and warns us that "Unless we go forth, (for Jihad) He will punish us with a grievous penalty, and put others in our place" (9:39).

* "And He orders us to fight them on until there is no more tumult and faith in Allah is practiced everywhere (8:39).

* "God has bought from the faithful their selves and their belongings against the gift of paradise; they fight in the way of Allah; they kill and get killed; that is a promise binding on Allah... (Repentance, 9: 110).

* "And that God may test those who believe, and destroy the infidels." (3:141)

* "Relent not in pursuit of the enemy" (4:104)

* "O Prophet! MAKE WAR on the infidels and hypocrites, and deal rigorously with them" (sura 66:9)

World Domination and forced conversions: There are suras that show that Islam must prevail and dominate over all religions. "He it is Who hath sent His messenger with the guidance and the religion of truth, that He may cause it to prevail over all religion. And Allah sufficeth as a Witness." (48:28)

"He has sent His messenger with the guidance and the true religion, and will make it dominate all religions, in spite of the idol worshipers" (61:9, Rashad Khalifa.). This is to be done by warfare. "Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God’s religion reigns supreme. But if they desist, fight none except the evil doers. (2:193; 8:39).

Christians and Jews were forced to pay a tax if they did not convert, but even death was given as well. "O ye to whom the Scriptures have been given! believe in what we have sent down confirmatory of the Scripture which is in your hands, ere we efface your features, and twist your head round backward, or curse you as we cursed the sabbath-breakers: and the command of God was carried into effect." (4:47). Here Allah is threatening physical harm of twisting the heads off of Christians and Jews if they did not convert.

This other sura says that they should pay a tax til they are humbled. "Make war upon such of those to whom the Scriptures have been given as believe not in God, or in the last day, and who forbid not that which God and His Apostle have forbidden, and who profess not the profession of the truth, until they pay tribute out of hand, and they be humbled." (9:29) Was this Muhammad's idea of freedom of Religion?

The above Koranic verses delineate that Jehad is a binding contract between Allah and Muslims to the following effect:

1. Whatever a Muslim possesses, including his life, belongs to Allah in return for paradise.

2. Allah is bound by His promise to offer paradise to a Muslim provided he willingly kills and gets killed for His pleasure.

3. The Muslims must fight non-Muslims.

Jihad in the "Hadith"

In the Hadith Mohammed also urges Muslims to practice Jihad.

Mohammed once was asked: what is the best deed for the Muslim next to believing in Allah and His Apostle? His answer was : "To participate in Jihad in Allah's cause" Al Bukhari vol. 1:25

Mohammed was quoted as saying : "I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, none has the right to be worshipped but Allah" Al Bukhari vol. 4:196

Mohammed also said, "The person who participates in (Holy Battles) in Allah's cause and nothing compels him to do so except belief in Allah and His Apostle, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty (if he survives) or will be admitted to paradise (if he is killed)." Al Bukhari vol. 1:35.

Having trained the Arabs militarily, the Prophet laid down the following rules (as found on p. 188-189 of Ibn-E-Majah, Vol. 2) to conquer the world:

When you meet an enemy (infidels) give them three choices:

1. Invite them to embrace Islam (which actually means acknowledging the Lordship of Muhammad).

2. If they do not accept the proposal, then they must surrender and pay tribute, and

3. if they reject both alternatives, then fight them mercilessly:

"It is not for any Prophet to have prisoners until he make wide slaughter...Eat what you have taken as booty; it is lawful and good." (The Spoils, 8: 65)


Mohammed: an Example

When the prophet of Islam started preaching his new religion in Mecca, he was conciliatory to Christians and Jews. He told them: "We believe in what has been sent down to us and sent down to you, our God is the same as your God" Surah 29:45. This attitude changed completely after he gained strength. Allah then tells him to "Fight People of the Book (Christians and Jews), who do not accept the religion of the truth (Islam), until they pay tribute (penalty tax) by hand, being inferior. " Surah 9:29

Regarding Christians and Jews, it seems that Mohammed hated the Jews more. During his life time, Mohammed devoted much of his efforts to get rid of the Jews:"You (Jews) should know that the earth belongs to Allah and his apostle, and I want to expel you from this land (the Arabian Peninsula), so, if anyone owns property, he is permitted to sell it" Mohammed was quoted.

At that time there were in Medina three Jewish tribes. Two of them, the Qaynqa and the Bani-al-Nudair tribes, were besieged by Mohammed's men, blocking their access to food supplies, until they surrendered on Mohammed's terms, which were that their lives would be spared, that they must emigrate from Medina, and that they must deposit all their belongings at a certain place for distribution among Muslims.

The third tribe, Bani Qurayza, was not as lucky. After the War of the Trench , in which Mohammed was besieged by the Qurayshites led, by Abu Sofyan, it was alleged that Bani Qurayza agreed to provide help from within to Abu Sofyan's forces. Although the alleged help did not materialize and the siege eventually ended, nevertheless, Mohammed never forgave them for their willingness to help his enemies.

Muslims turned against Bani Qurayza and blocked their streets for twenty five days. The Jewish tribe expressed readiness to accept the surrender terms which had been conceded to the other two Jewish tribes, namely cession of their belongings and departure with safe conduct.

Mohammed, however, would not consent to this, and instead appointed as an arbiter Saad iben Moaz, a man who was known to be on bad terms with Bani Qurayza. Saad ruled that all Bani Qurayza's men should be beheaded, that the women and children should be sold as slaves, and that all their property should be divided among the Muslims. Trenches were dug in the bazaar of Medina for disposal of the nine hundred Jewish bodies whom Mohammed had spent the night slaughtering. (See Ibn Hisham: The Prophet's biography ; vol. 2 pages 40 & 41)

Dear friends

These are historical facts that happened 14 centuries ago, they represent a dangerous tendency for violence in the Muslim fundamentalist mentality. More serious is that Muslim fundamentalists are trying to repeat these acts of violence in this 21st century.

Guard our freedom and democracy. Let Jesus' message of tolerance and non-violence rules our land "Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword". Matthew 26:52 "

What Encyclopaedia's Say about Jihad

Jihad is “a religious war with those who are unbelievers in the mission of the Prophet Muhammad [the Prophet]. It is an incumbent religious duty, established in the Qur’an and in the Traditions as a divine institution, and enjoined specially for the purpose of advancing Islam and repelling evil from Muslims" (T.Hughes, Dictionary of Islam, entry “Jihad” ).

Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam, page 89, [7]:

DJIHAD, holy war. The spread of Islam by arms is a religious duty upon Muslims in general. It narrowly escaped being a sixth “rukn”, or fundamental duty, and is indeed still so regarded by the descendants of the Kharidjis. The position was reached gradually but quickly. In the Meccan Suras of the Kur’an patience under attack is taught; no other attitude was possible. But at Madina the right to repel attack appears, and gradually it became a prescribed duty to fight against and subdue the hostile Meccans. Whether Muhammad himself recognized that his position implied steady and unprovoked war against the unbelieving world until it was subdued to Islam may be in doubt. Traditions are explicit on the point; but the Kuranic passages speak always of the unbelievers who are to be subdued as dangerous or faithless. Still, the story of his writing to the powers around him shows that such a universal position was implicit in his mind, and it certainly developed immediately after his death, when the Muslim armies advanced out of Arabia. It is now a “fard ‘ala ‘l-kifaya, a duty in general on all male, free, adult Muslims, sane in mind and body and having means enough to reach the Muslim army, yet not a duty necessarily incumbent on every individual but sufficiently performed when done by a certain number. So it must continue to be done until the whole world is under the rule of Islam.”


What Historians say About Jihad:

"Jihad is a religious obligation. It forms part of the duties that the believer must fulfill; it is Islam's _normal_ path to expansion. "

-- Bat Yeor, _The Decline of Eastern Christianity_


"Mahomet established a religion by putting his enemies to death; Jesus Christ by commanding his followers to lay down their lives."

-- Blaise Pascal, _Pensees_


"Muhammad, unlike Christ, was a man of violence, he bore arms, was wounded in battle and preached holy war, Jihad, against those who defied the will of God as revealed to him". -- John Keegan, _A History of Warfare_


"Jihad is a divinely ordained institution in Islam. By many authorities it is counted as one of the pillars of Islam. Theologically, it is an intolerant idea: a tribal god, Allah, trying to be universal through conquest. Historically, it was an imperialist urge masked in religious phraseology."

-- Ram Swarup, _Understanding Islam through Hadis_


"When accusing the West of imperialism, Muslims are obsessed with the Christian Crusades but have forgotten their own, much grander Jihad. In fact, they often denounce the Crusades as the cause and starting point of the antagonism between Christianity and Islam. They are putting the cart before the horse. The Jihad is more than four hundred years older than the Crusades. "

-- Paul Fregosi, _Jihad in the West: Muslim Conquests from the 7th to the 21st Centuries_


Of course not all the Muslims here are terrorists. Most Muslims living in America are either nominal Muslims or living just a devout personal piety without the essential political dimension of orthodox Islam, and are certainly not bent on terrorist actions. Many Muslims do not want the violence. They are people with a better moral code than Muhammad. But they are saddled with a system that has a spiritual force behind it, and violence as a systemic root. To be a Muslim is to be aligned with the same satanic spirit that choked and influenced Muhammad in the cave, the same spirit that caused Muhammad to wage war upon and massacre those that rejected him, the same spirit that caused Muhammad to teach his followers to continue to do the same. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but the fundamental, orthodox Muslims will teach and pressure the nominal Muslims towards obeying Muhammad’s commands to establish the rule of Islam, if necessary including the use of violence. Nominal Muslims only need to awaken to the actual call of the Quran, Hadith, and Sira, to violence for Islam’s sake. More and more they are awakening, and their violence increases.

So, I ask the peace loving Muslim, “why follow Muhammad?

Do you want to follow Muhammad in every respect – including his commands to violence against those who reject him as a prophet? If not, why entrust your eternal future to Muhammad, if you truly disapprove of the Muslim terrorist actions?” If a Nazi strongly disapproved of Hitler’s actions, I would ask him, “why follow Hitler?” If you truly believe that the Muslim terrorists were wrong, why follow Muhammad? He did and taught the same thing. A person who chooses to follow Muhammad and trust his eternal future to Muhammad’s word, approves of Muhammad’s brutal actions, and brutal teachings.

Promise of Paradise: He promises Muslims that in the fight for His cause whether they slay or are slain they return to the garden of Paradise (9:111). In Paradise he will "wed us with Houris (celestial virgins) pure beautiful ones" (56:54), and unite us with large-eyed beautiful ones while we recline on our thrones set in lines (56:20). There they are promised to eat and drink pleasantly for what they did (56:19). He also promises "boys like hidden pearls" (56:24) and "youth never altering in age like scattered pearls" (for those who have paedophiliac inclinations) (76:19). As you see, Allah has promised all sorts or rewards, gluttony and unlimited sex to Muslim men who kill unbelievers in his name. They will be admitted to Paradise where they shall find "goodly things, beautiful ones, pure ones confined to the pavilions that man has not touched them before nor jinni" (56:67-71).

Conclusion of Jihad

Islam is a violent religion and it allows the use of aggressive violence to spread its dominion over non-Muslims. The war that Muhammad launched long ago continues, but the stakes are getting higher. America, Europe, and other nations, will continue to be adversely affected by the actions of real Muslims – those that are obeying their god and prophet.

Jesus said "the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service" (John 16:2).


Read JEHAD AND PARADISE by Anwar Shaikh Part One

Did Muhammad Like Jews and Christians?

98: 1 Those who disbelieve from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and among Al-Mushrikun (polytheists) were not going to leave (their disbelief) until there came to them clear evidence.

98:6 Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islam, the Quran and Prophet Muhammad) from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikun will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures.

5:51 O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians as Auliya' (friends, protectors, helpers, etc.), they are but Auliya' to one another. And if any amongst you takes them as Auliya', then surely he is one of them. Verily, Allah guides not those people who are the Zalimun (polytheists and wrongdoers and unjust).

58:19. Shaitan (Satan) has overtaken them (the Jews). So he has made them forget the remembrance of Allah. They are the party of Shaitan (Satan). Verily, it is the party of Shaitan (Satan) that will be the losers!

4:76 Those who believe, fight in the Cause of Allah, and those who disbelieve, fight in the cause of Taghut (Satan, etc.). So fight you against the friends of Shaitan(Satan); Ever feeble indeed is the plot of Shaitan (Satan).

4:35 So be not weak and ask not for peace (from the enemies of Islam), while you are having the upper hand. Allah is with you, and will never decrease the reward of your good deeds.

Christians and Jews do not hold any special place in Islamic theology. In the end, they were regarded with contempt by Muhammad, and presented in a hateful manner in the Quran today. Thus another reason to make war upon them (refer to 9:29). And when the Muslims have the upper hand, they are not to seek peace, but the continued destruction of their enemies.

What about this verse? sura 2:256. "There is no compulsion in religion" Most people just stop there and say "oh, you see Islam is a tolerant religion." When examined closer it tell a different story:

" 2:256. There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allah is All-Hearer, All-Knower.


This verse is the most often quoted verse used to portray Islam as a religion of peace. On the surface it sounds good. However, investigation into how the early Muslim scholars viewed it, and the background and comments they ascribe to it cast it in a slightly different light.

From the Sunan of Abu Dawud, Book 14, Number 2676:

Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas:

When the children of a woman (in pre-Islamic days) did not survive, she took a vow on herself that if her child survives, she would convert it a Jew. When Banu an-Nadir were expelled (from Arabia), there were some children of the Ansar (Helpers) among them. They said: We shall not leave our children. So Allah the Exalted revealed; "Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth stands out clear from error."

From the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, op cite, pages 37, 38

Allah says: “There is no compulsion in religion”, meaning: do not force anyone to embrace Islam because it is clear, and its proofs and evidences are manifest. Whoever Allah guides and opens his heart to Islam has indeed embraced it with clear evidence. Whoever Allah misguides, blinds his heart and has set a seal on his hearing and a covering on his eyes cannot embrace Islam by force.

The reason for the revelation of this verse was that the women of Ansar used to make a vow to convert their sons to Judaism if the latter lived. And when the tribe of Bani an-Nadhir was expelled from Madinah, some children of Ansar were among them, so their parents could not abandon them; hence Allah revealed: “There is no compulsion in religion…” narrated by Ibn Jarir, on the authority of Ibn Abbas, Abu Dawud and an-Nasa’I, on the authority of Bandar, Abu Hatim, and Ibn Hiban from the Hadith of Shu’bah, Mujahid and others. However Muhammad Ibn Ishaq narrated that Ibn Abbas said: it was revealed with regard to a man from the tribe of Bani Salim Ibn Awf called al-Husayni whose two sons converted to Christianity but he was himself a Muslim. He told the Prophet: “Shall I force them to embrace Islam, they insist on Christianity”, hence Allah revealed this verse. But, this verse is abrogated by the verse of “Fighting”: “You shall be called to fight against a people given to great warfare, then you shall fight them, or they shall surrender” (sura 48:16). Allah also says: “O Prophet! Strive hard against the disbelieves and the hypocrites, and be harsh against them” (9:73), and He says, “O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who are the Pious, (9:123).

Therefore, all people of the world should be called to Islam. If anyone of them refuses to do so, or refuses to pay the Jizya they should be fought till they are killed. This is the meaning of compulsion. In the Sahih (al-Bukhari), the Prophet said: “Allah wonders at those people who will enter Paradise in chains”, meaning prisoners brought in chains to the Islamic state, then they embrace Islam sincerely and become righteous, and are entered among the people of Paradise.

Ibn Kathir presents two different stories as reasons behind 2:256. The first story has nothing to do with compelling people into Islam. The second story begins to go against compulsion, but, Ibn Kathir then says that this verse was abrogated by the verse of “fighting” i.e. 48:16. I add that the only Sahih Hadith material I’ve been able to find on the matter (Sunan of Abu Dawud) supports the story of the expulsion of the Banu Nadir Jews. Thus, either way, compulsion of people to convert to Islam is allowed.

Ibn Kathir does say at the beginning of this quote: Allah says: “There is no compulsion in religion”, meaning: do not force anyone to embrace Islam because it is clear, and its proofs and evidences are manifest. Whoever Allah guides and opens his heart to Islam has indeed embraced it with clear evidence. Whoever Allah misguides, blinds his heart and has set a seal on his hearing and a covering on his eyes cannot embrace Islam by force. But he goes on to contradict himself later in the next two paragraphs."(AMERICA, ISLAM, JIHAD, AND TERRORISM, Answering-Islam web site).

Woman in Islam

Woman in Islam are second class citizens. The Koran declares that "Men aresuperior to women on account of the qualities with which God gave them." (Sura 4:38).. Little does Muhammad know that women are stronger than men in the qualities that God gave them. The Bible teaches that men and women are equal (I Corith 11:11). That they should love one another. The Bible says "Husbands love your wives, even as Christ loved the church, and gave himself for it" (Eph 5:25). We should give our lives to the point of death to our wives. The Bible says that the husband is the head of the wife (Eph 5:23). But this has nothing to do with equality. The Prime minister of Canada is the Head of the country, is he superior to us? No he was appointed leader of the country, it has nothing to do with equality. And the Biblical definition of leadership is SERVICE Matthew 23:11.

Women in Islam are also looked upon as property in Islam see Bullough, The Subordinate Sex, p.139.

For a full study on women in Islam and violence against women in Islam go to and Also read Warraq's book Why I Am Not A Muslim, pp.290-327, of the treatment against women in the Islamic world.

Origin of the Veil: "The Arabic word 'hijab' is sometimes translated veil...[used] to cover Muslim women in...throughout the Muslim world...The veil was adopted by the Arabs from the Persians, and the woman's obligation to stay closed in at home was a tradition copied from the Byzantines, who in turn had adopted an ancient Greek custom" (Ibid, p.315, emphasis mine).

"...Persian influence was in Arabia long time ago. (Zwemmer, Current Topics, p. 97, H G Wells..., By Zwemmer, MWJ, Vol. XXIX, 1939). This is a very important step for us to note since the Quran does contain many Persian words and Islam also has many Persian-like practices

Ibn Warraq on Women: "As for women the book of Allah says that they are inferior to men and their husbands have the right to scourge them if they are found disobedient (4:34). It advises to "take a green branch and beat your wife", because a green branch is more flexible and hurts more. (38:44). It teaches that women will go to hell if they are disobedient to their husbands (66:10). It maintains that men have an advantage over the women (2:228). It not only denies the women's equal right to their inheritance (4:11-12), it also regards them as imbeciles and decrees that their witness is not admissible in the courts of law (2:282). This means that a woman who is raped cannot accuse her rapist unless she can produce a male witness. Our Holy Prophet allows us to marry up to four wives and he licensed us to sleep with our slave maids and as many 'captive' women as we may have (4:3) even if those women are already married. He himself did just that. This is why anytime a Muslim army subdues another nation, they call them kafir and allow themselves to rape their women. Pakistani soldiers allegedly raped up to 250,000 Bengali women in 1971 after they massacred 3,000,000 unarmed civilians when their religious leader decreed that Bangladeshis are un-Islamic. This is why the prison guards in Islamic regime of Iran rape the women that in their opinion are apostates prior to killing them, as they believe a virgin will not go to Hell."( from his web site see link at top of this page).

Prostitution- Believe it or not, the Koran also allows prostituting female slaves girls if the owner wishes. In Sura 24:33 its says, "Do not force your slave girls into prostitution in order that you may enrich yourselves..." Most Muslims stop here and don't read the rest of the verse saying that prostitution is condemned here. But Muhammad added, "...if they [the slave girls] wish to preserve their chastisement." What did Muhammad mean? If a slave girl is unconcerned about chastity, then her owner may profit by prostituting her. Muhammad continues, "If anyone [i.e. slave owner] compels them [forces chastity-choosing slave girls to be prostitutes], God will be forgiving and merciful to them" (24:33). The slave girls compelled had no choice, so they cannot be the "them" needing forgiveness. Muhammad was blatantly committing his god to free Muslims from guilt who force their slave girls into prostitution.

It seems to Muhammad that, that's all women were good for, sex. In other suras we find women are there just for the sexual gratification for a man, "Your wives are yourfield: go in, therefore, to your field as ye will;" (2:223). Not to mention that polygamy is is lawful in the koran. I man is allowed up to four wives if he wishes, see sura 4:3. But he also has slave girls at his disposal as well and was allowed to take them into his bed and have sex with them, "O Prophet! we allow thee thy wives whom thou hast dowered, and the slaves whom thy right hand possesseth out of the booty which God hath granted thee, and the daughters of thy uncle, and of thy paternal and maternal aunts who fled with thee to Medina, and any believing woman who hath given herself up to the Prophet, if the Prophet desired to wed her - a Privilege for thee above the rest of the Faithful. We well know what we have settled for them, in regard to their wives and to the slaves whom their right hands hold, that there may be no fault on thy part: and God is Indulgent, Merciful!...Thou mayst decline [their turn] 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" (33:50-51). Notice a special privilege was given to Muhammad so he could add more wives to his harem, and how he could take turns with them in bed. The treatment of women has always been a sore spot in the religion of Islam and always will be with these kind of examples that they follow.


Homosexuality is it condoned or condemned in the Koran? There are two conflicting views of Homosexuality in the Koranic verses. There are many scriptures that condemn it, see Sura 4:16; 7:80-81; 26:165; 27:55. But there are also Suras that condone it!

Warraq explains: "A GREAT TOLERANCE FOR HOMOSEXUALITY IN THE ISLAMIC WORLD HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED FOR A LONG TIME. From the 19th century onward, many westerners have been going to Muslim north Africa to look for homosexual adventure that their own society [Christian] condemned" (Why...p.341, emphasis mine).

"However ambiguity creeps in, in the passage of the Koran describing the delights of paradise [Heaven]... (ibid., p.341).

Sura 52:24 says, "We shall unite the true believers with those of their descendants who follow them in their faith, and shall not deny them the reward of their good works...Fruits we shall give them, and such meats as they desire. They will pass from hand to hand a cup inspiring no idle talk, no sinful urge; and there shall wait upon them YOUNG BOYS OF THEIR OWN AS FAIR AS VIRGIN PEARLS" (see also 56:17; 76:19). In the book 99 names for God by Judith Miller she examines these scriptures about having sex with young boys. She demonstrates to you that these scriptures do mean Homosexual relations with these boys.

"...are these boys available for sexual dalliance, or are they only to serve? (Warraq, p.342)

Homosexual marriage were known among the Arabs: "We have enough historical and philological evidence to show homosexuality was known in pre-Islamic Arabia. Our evidence is RICHER FOR THE 7TH CENTURY...During the Abassid period there seems to have been many Caliphs who were Homosexual...As for Muslim Spain in the 11th century Henery Peres tells us: 'Sodomy is practiced in all courts of the Muluk Al-Tawaif" (ibid, p.342).

Mohammed could not make up his mind about Sodomy. He prohibits it on earth, but then he says that Muslims can enjoy homosexuality in Paradise. It is a well established fact that many famous Muslims were practicing homosexuals who looked towards the Koran to justify their actions. For example, Babar, the moghul king was madly in love with a young boy named Baburi. Kuttubuddin Aibak, another Muslim ruler of India used to dress up as a woman and dance in a vulgar manner.

Another example is Abu Nuwas--one of the greatest poets in Arabic language writes in the Perfumed Garden:

O the joy of sodomy! So now be sodomites, you Arabs.

Turn not away from it--therein is wondrous pleasure.

Take some coy lad with kiss-curls twisting on his temple

and ride as he stands like some gazelle standing to her mate.


-A lad whom all can see girt with sword and belt

not like your whore who has to go veiled.


Make for smooth-faced boys and do your very best

to mount them, for women are the mounts of the devils.


There are other such poems by Abu Nuwas and others which are more graphic in glorifying homosexuality and lesbianism.

Read this article sex and Islam and be shocked!

The Ishmael Myth

Many Arabs today claim to be descendant of Ishmael Abraham's son. Is this true? McClintock and Strong's a well known Encyclopedia of Religion comments: "There is a prevalent notion that the Arabs, both of the south and the north, are descended from Ishmael; and the passage Gen often cited as if it were a prediction of that national independence which, upon the whole, the Arabs have maintained more than any other people. But this supposition founded on a misconception of the original Hebrew...these prophecies found their accomplishment in the fact that the sons of Ishmael being located ...EAST OF THE OTHER DESCENDANTS OF ABRAHAM whether by Sarah or by Keturah. But the idea of the southern Arabs being of the posterity of Ishmael is ENTIRELY WITHOUT FOUNDATION, and it seems to have originated in the tradition invented by Arab vanity that they, as well as the Jews, are of the seed of Abraham-a vanity which besides disfiguring and falsifying the whole history of the patriarch and his son Ishmael, has transferred the scene of it from Palestine to Mecca...The vast tracts of the country known to us under the name Arabia gradually became peopled by a variety of Tribes in different lineage" (Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, I:339, emphasis mine).

Robert Morey writes: "Most standard reference works on Islam REJECT the Arab claim to Abrahamic descent. ...[The] Encyclopedia of Islam traces the Arabs to non-Abrahamic origins. Even the Dictionary of Islam questions the whole idea that the Arabs are descendants of Ishmael" (Islamic Invasion p.24, emphasis mine).

Warraq writes: "As for the Historian, the Arabs are NO MORE descendants of Abraham, then the French are of Francus, son of Hector" (Why...p.131, emphasis mine).

Where are the Real Ishmaelites?-The Ishmaelites with the Midianites "formed a tribal league" (cf Judges 8:22-24)" JFB, p.52 see also Holman's Bible Dictionary, p.961. They went away to "the east" and became "interrelated" with Midian and "their main homeland seems to be east of the Jordan and south of Edom" (Ibid., under "Midian" p.961). You notice in the Bible that Midianites and Ishmaelites are used interchangeably, see Gen 37:25, 28 and Judges 8:22-24. These people lived in the Land of Midian that was right up against the land of Palestine to the east.. These people dwelt in Syria, Midian and Moab, and are "clearly DISTINGUISHED FROM THE DESCENDANTS OF JOKTAN WHO PEOPLED THE ARABIAN PENINSULA" (The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible, under "Ishamelites," p.749, emphasis mine). The Bible even shows that the Ishamelites, "...settled from Havilah to Shur, which is opposite of Egypt, in the direction of ASSYRIA..." (Gen 25:18 NRSV). Assyria was NORTHEAST, NOT IN THE SOUTH OF ARABIA!

This is also confirmed by secular History. The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible writes that when the Assyrians and the Babylonians conquered the Middle East they found the people of Ishmael North of Arabia dwelling near Assyria, see under articles "Ishmael and Kedar."

Josephus mentioned that one of Abraham's great-grandsons joined with the Assyrians. ("Antiquities", book I, ch. xv § 1.) His name was Asshur, the son of Dedan, the son of Jokshan. Jokshan was the son of Abraham. See Genesis 25:3. "And Jokshan begat Sheba, and Dedan. And the sons of Dedan were Asshurim, and Letushim, and Leummim." From Sheba have come the Swabian Germans. From Letushim are descended the Lettish people along the Baltic. Is it any surprise that we find in Psalm 83:1-8 we find the Ishamelites with "Asshur" in a "confederacy," meaning the United States of EUROPE, the ten nation combine called the Beast?

The Midianites-Ishmaelites are the modern day peoples of "White Russians (Byelorussians)" (The Lost Races of

the Ancient World, Craig White).

Go to Russia in Prophecy for the Real Ishmaelites

One more note. How can the Arabs be descendants of Ishmael, for when Ishmael was born the ARABS ALREADY EXISTED!

The Arabians are actually the descendants of Joktan, and partly of Cush, see Gen 10:7, 26-30; 1 Chron 1:20-23.

"THE DESCENDANTS OF JOKTAN ARE WHO PEOPLED THE ARABIAN PENINSULA" (The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible, under "Ishamelites," p.749, emphasis mine).

Unger's Bible Handbook says, Seba is connected with South Arabia and is mentioned in the Assyrian inscriptions in the 8th century B.C. Havilah was ancestor to a people in central and southern Arabia partly Cushite and partly Semitic Joktanite..." (pp.53, 56).

The New Bible Commentary Says: "In so far as they can be identified Joktan and his descendants seemed to have lived in southern Arabia" (p.68).

Morey writes: "Nowhere in the Koran does it state that Ishmael is the progenitor of the Arab race. Since it is not taught in the Koran, it cannot be a true Islamic belief...Arabian literature has its own version of prehistoric times, but its entirely legendary" (Britannica, vol. 2:176)..."

"The pure Arabs are those who claim to be descended from Joktan or Qahtan, whom the present Arabs regard as their principle founder...The 'Arabu 'l-Musta'ribah, the mixed Arabs, claim to be descended from Ishmael.. They boast as much as the Jews of being reckoned the children of Abraham. This circumstance will account for the preference with which they uniformly regard this branch of their pedigree, and for the many romantic legends they have grafted upon it...The Arabs, in their version of Ishmael's history, have mixed a great deal of romance with the narrative of Scripture."

(A Dictionary of Islam, pgs. 18-19)

The Bible plainly shows that the Arabs are the descendants of the Joktanites, and says of their location as well. Genesis the tenth chapter says, "And Joktan begat Almodad, and Sheleph, and Hazarmaveth, and Jerah,

"And Hadoram, and Uzal, and Diklah,

"And Obal, and Abimael, and Sheba,

"And Ophir, and Havilah, and Jobab: all these were the sons of Joktan.

"And their dwelling was from Mesha, as thou goest unto Sephar a mount of the east" (Gen 10:26-30). What is "Mesha"? R. Zacuth (s) "says, Mesha in the Arabic tongue is called Mecca; and it is a point agreed upon by the Arabs that Mesha was one of the most ancient names of Mecca; they believe that all the mountainous part of the region producing frankincense went in the earliest times by the name of Sephar; from whence Golius concludes this tract to be the Mount Zephar of Moses, a strong presumption of the truth of which is that Dhafar, the same with the modern Arabs as the ancient Saphar, is the name of a town in Shihr, the only province in Arabia bearing frankincense on the coast of the Indian ocean (In Juchasin, fol. 135. 2. (t) Universal History, vol. 18. p. 353., emphasis added) And "from Mecca till you come to the city of the eastern mountain, or (as in a manuscript) to the eastern city,'' meaning perhaps Medina, situate to the east; so that the sense is, according to this paraphrase, that the sons of Joktan had their dwelling from Mecca to Medina (In Pocock. Specimen Hist. Arab. p. 34. emphasis added). The Bible clearly identifies the people of Joktan dwelling in Mecca and Medina in the east, these are the Arabs today and NOT THE PEOPLE OF ISHMAEL.

"Muhammad was not informed about the family of Abraham."

(Encyclopedia of Islam) I:184. See also pages 544-546.


"There is a prevalent notion that the Arabs, both of the south and north, are descended from Ishmael; and the passage in Gen. xvi.12, "he (Ishmael) shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren," is often cited as if it were a prediction of that national independence which, upon the whole, the Arabs have maintained more than any other people. But this supposition is founded on a misconception of the original Hebrew, which runs literally, "he shall before the faces of all his brethren," i.e., (according to the idiom above explained, in which "before the face" denotes the east), the habitation of his posterity shall be "to the east" of the settlements of Abraham's' other descendants...These prophecies found their accomplishment in the fact of the sons of Ishmael being located, generally speaking to the east of the other descendants of Abraham, whether of Sara or of Ketuah. But the idea of the southern Arabs being of the posterity of Ishmael is entirely without foundation, and seems to have originated in the tradition invented by Arab vanity that they, as well as the Jews, are of the seed of Abraham--a vanity which, besides disfiguring and falsifying the whole history of the patriarch and his son Ishmael, has transferred the scene of it from Palestine to Mecca." (McClintock and Strong, Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, (Vol. I:339)


This source also states that the Southern Arabs come from Qahtan, not Ishmael (The Concise Encyclopedia of Islam, p. 48).

See also:

The Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol. 7, pg. 296 where the connection between the Midianites and the Ishamelites is noted.

The Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam, pgs. 178-179.

A Popular Dictionary of Islam, p. 127.

Muslims in America before Columbus?

Muslims brag that they were in America long before Columbus sailed to America. Now, a lot of their history on this is mixed with truth and legend, and many of their articles lacks evidence and references.

Now although IT HAS NEVER BEEN PROVEN let's suppose they were in America, where did they receive the knowledge to get there? From the CARTHAGINIANS!

The people of Carthage were sailing to the new world CENTURIES BEFORE THE BERBERS-MOORS. The Phoenicians as well came to America and Canada in the days of Solomon, about 1000 B.C.! This has now been established through archaeological finds in North America by Barry Fell.

The people of Carthage. established trading routes all over North Africa. They were the dominant nation at that time. These people became Christian in the first century by Simon: "Here, from the Greek records, is the route of his journey: Simon "directed his journey toward Egypt, then to Cyrene, and Africa ... and throughout Mauritania and all Libya, preaching the gospel .... Nor could the coldness of the climate benumb his zeal, or hinder him from whipping himself and the Christian doctrine over to the WESTERN Islands, yea, even to Britain itself. Here he preached and wrought many miracles ...." Nicephorus and Dorotheus both wrote "that he went at last into BRITAIN, and ... was crucified ... and buried there" (p. 203 of Cave's "Antiq. Apost."). All these lands were established Phoenician colonies. But to be more specific to who he preached we find Geoffrey of Monmouth making it clear that these were the "white nations" "Universal History" (1748-Vol. xviii, p. 194). "But this ... was to be understood only of the WHITE nations inhabiting some parts of western Barbary [Berber] and Numidia." So these people could only mean the Phoenician people of Carthage and other colonies and not the dark Berber native tribes.

The inscriptions found in America proves that the Carthaginians made their way there:" "Some… [of the inscriptions] is of North African origin…[and it contains] letters of the Libyan (Numidian) alphabet…the letters are understood as spelling the name Y-S-W that is to say, Yoswa=Hebrew Joshua…that is JESUS. The next letters are understood…evidently spell the Berber-Arabic word H-M-N, Hamin, meaning ‘Protector.’…[this] represents JESUS THE PROTECTOR, and the tablet was made for, or by, a North African of the Christian Faith" (Fell, A Christian North African Inscription from Comalcalco, vol.17, 1988, pp.284-286, emphasis mine). "A Punic gravestone from the first and second century A.D. was found in Pennsylvania bearing a Christians inscription is quite remarkable..." (Collins, p.161).These inscriptions are also described as " use at Carthage..." (ibid, p.282-283).Stephen Collins writes about this inscription and says: "The above inscribed bricks date to the early CHRISTIAN ERA…The presence of Punic and North African speakers were present when structures in Comalcalco were built offers strong evidence that Carthaginian refugees were present in the New World...DATING TO THE FIRST TO THIRD CENTURIES A.D." (Lost Ten Tribes…Found, p.162, emphasis mine). Long before Islam or Muhammad was even born! These dates can only mean the Phoenician peoples! The Majority of these people were white, and since Phoenicians were Semitic, and Semitic's were white, then again it could only mean the Phoenicians! And the "Punic similar to the Hebrew" (Saga America Barry fell, p.237, emphasis mine). This shows again that they were a Semitic people! The Phoenicians also dwelt in these areas and as we have proved and came into contact with the natives, dwelt with them, built cities with them, and could have easily learned their language as the natives learned their language. And who else in the Old World had the Naval power to come to America? And Collin's shows that these people were fleeing the Romans in the Old world coming to the new, and the found an abundant amount of "Carthaginian coins in America", pp.159-163.

Carthage, after their fall fled to the other Phoenician trading posts all over North Africa and Britain as well as America.

"After the fall of Carthage., Punic cities (and the Punic Language) survived in North Africa for another half Millennium. Their inscriptions were 'written in the Hebrew language'...its was well noticed by St. Augustine and St. late as the fourth century..." (ibid, p.156).

"Where did most of the Carthaginians go when Carthage fell to the Romans? It is highly likely that all the Carthaginians stayed in Carthage...Carthage had a network of Colonies and trading posts. Many likely fled from the Romans...relocating elsewhere. Some may have sailed Carthage's old maritime routes to America. Historical facts support this conclusion" (ibid, p.159). So the Carthaginians had the knowledge for years to sail to America, and they were Christian.

But a minority of those refugees could have been Berbers who were as we have read "Punicized," and came to the New World with the Phoenicians. That's why we find "Moorish looking" people in some of the art of the Mayans. And some "Berber-Arabic" inscriptions. But again these things all happened centuries before Muhammed was ever born!

Now the Phoenician people when in North Africa came into contact with the Native people called the Berbers who were called Moors afterwards. "These Berbers were seldom MUCH INFLUENCED by Phoenician city life...[and] they allied themselves with Carthage and its sister states..." (Basil Davidson, Africa in History, emphasis mine). He also calls some towns "Phoenician-Berber towns" (p.55). Many "Berbers...became Punicized and adopted the Phoenician language, Punic as the Lingua Franca for trade [which was done by sea]" (Africans and Their History, p.71). So many of the Berbers became knowledgeable of the Punic way of life. As another author writes: Carthage and her satellites came to exert a considerable influence in the life of NATIVE BERBERS...Since the Phoenicians were quick to develop any opportunities for trade...even the smallest coastal settlement tended to become a local metropolis where Berber tribesmen could gain some KNOWLEDGE of a more ordered settled mode of living" (Roland Oliver A Short History of Africa, p.41, emphasis mine). So the Phoenicians taught the Native people their way of life, and as a result the Berbers had a, " civilization...before the arrival of the Arabs" (Warraq, p.211, emphasis mine) And again these Punic people stayed in Africa until the 4th century A.D. So the knowledge was ingrained in the Native people for centuries. So there is no reason to doubt that the Moors-(Berbers) could have known about America FROM THE PHOENICIANS!

Barry Fell writes that these Beber people came on "Carthaginian ships" with the people of Carthage see America B.C. pp. 174-191.

Then the Berbers "…slowly converted to Islam, NOT from deep religious conviction, but rather from MATERIAL SELF INTEREST, in the hope of winning booty" (ibid., p.211, emphasis mine). Paul Fregolsi’s book "Jihad" documents the same motive of the Berber-Moors. They weren’t interested in Islam, but just getting rich. They learned this also from the Phoenicians! So they had knowledge of going to America LONG BEFORE THE MUSLIMS EVER CAME INTO CONTACT WITH THEM.

Notice, that Christians were in America before Muslims. Other people found America centuries BEFORE Muslims. The Phoenicians and the Carthaginians were Israelites of the Lost Ten Tribes read Collin’s book, The Lost Ten Tribes…Found for proof. Even the Vikings came to America before the Muslims! So what is there to brag about? Christians were in America long before the Muslims! If the Muslims claim to make all these incredible discoveries, (which as we have proved they did not), why aren't they the CHIEF OF THE NATIONS? WHY ARE THE CHRISTIAN NATIONS THE MOST BLESSED NATIONS ON EARTH? WHY ARE THE MUSLIM NATIONS "'BACKWARDS'" (Warraq, p.210) IN CIVILIZATION AND NOT ADVANCED?

The elephants that were found in America that Muslims claim came from the Muslims in America before Columbus is just not true. Yes there were elephants, but the Muslims did not bring them over from Africa, the CARTHAGINIANS DID! The bones of the Elephants that have been found were dated " 2000 YEARS"...[and]"a mammoth skeleton in the Mississippi river valley was once dated about 2000YEARS" (Carter, A Note on the Elephant in America, and The Mammoth in American Epigraph, vol. 18, 1989, pp.90, 213, emphasis mine).

Collins writes, these "place the approximate time of Christ...Where did these elephants originate?...We know that the CARTHAGINIANS specialized in the use of Battle elephants, and it is known that the elephants accompanied Carthaginian troops...The presence of North American elephants can be traced to the third century B.C.during the time of Carthage...The presence of the African elephants in ancient America is consistent with the evidence that the Carthaginians were present in ancient America. Who but the Carthaginians with their large maritime fleets could have transported African elephants to America?" (p.166, Lost Ten Tribes, emphasis mine). Muslims just claim that they found elephants in North America and that they had to be the Muslims! But the evidence shows otherwise. These elephants were here LONG BEFORE MUSLIMS EVER CAME TO AFRICA and converted people to Islam.

Any ways even the aboriginals who were PAGAN arrived before the Muslims. There is also evidence that the Egyptians who were PAGANS at the time arrived long before the Muslims! And there is evidence that these people, the Egyptians and Polynesians were from the Alliance that Solomon had with Tyre, Sidon and Egypt! So the discovery of America goes solely to the Israelites of the Bible!

Ancient Maps of the "Sea Kings"

Some Muslims claim that maps made by Muslims in the Middle Ages caused the Muslims to go to America. But History shows that these people just copied ancient maps from the Carthaginians!

In his book Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings, Charles H. Hapgood tells of the Piri Re'is map of 1513 A.D. Studies of this map show that it correctly gives latitudes and longitudes along the coasts of Africa and Europe, indicating that the original mapmaker must have found the correct relative longitude across Africa and across the Atlantic to Brazil. This amazing map gives an accurate profile of the coast of South America to the Amazon, provides an amazing outline of the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico (supposedly not yet discovered!), and -- incredibly enough -- shows a part of the coast of the Antarctic Continent which was not discovered, in modern times, until 1818!

This map does not stand alone. A world map drawn by Oronteus Finaeus in 1531 gives a truly authentic map of Antarctica, indicating the coasts were probably ice-free when the original map was drawn (of which Oronteus Finaeus' map was a later copy). The Oronteus Finaeus map was strikingly similar to modern maps of the Antarctic. How could this be?

Another fascinating map is the map of Hadji Ahmed of 1559. It is evident that the cartographer had some extraordinary source maps at his disposal. Says Hapgood: "The shapes of North and South America have a surprisingly modern look, the western coasts are especially interesting. They seem to be about two centuries ahead of the cartography of the time. . . . The shape of what is now the United States is about Perfect" (p.99).

Another map of the Middle Ages, the Reinel Chart of 1510 -- a Portuguese map of the Indian Ocean -- provides a striking example of the knowledge of the ancients. Studying the identifiable geographical localities and working out from them, Hapgood was astounded to find that "this map apparently shows the coast of Australia . . . The map also appeared to show some of the Caroline Islands of the Pacific. Latitudes and longitudes on this map are remarkably good, although Australia is shown too far north" (ibid., p.134).

How can such remarkable accuracy be explained on the basis of almost total ignorance of the earth during that time? Obviously, at an earlier period of earth's history, sea-faring nations must have travelled around the world and accurately mapped the major continents, and fragments and copies of their ancient maps survived into the Middle Ages and were copied again.

Concludes Hapgood: "The evidence presented by the ancient maps appears to suggest the existence in remote times . . . of a true civilization, of a comparatively advanced sort, which either was localized in one area but had worldwide commerce, or was, in a real sense, a worldwide culture" (p.193).

How advanced was this ancient culture? Says Hapgood, "In astronomy, nautical science, mapmaking and possibly ship-building, it was perhaps more advanced than any state of culture before the 18th Century of the Christian Era." He continues: "It was in the 18th Century that we first developed a practical means of finding longitude. It was in the 18th Century that we first accurately measured the circumference of the earth. Not until the 19th Century did we begin to send out ships for purposes of whaling or exploration into the Arctic or Antarctic Seas. The maps indicate that some ancient people may have done all these things" (Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings, p.193).

What ancient society could have been responsible? Is there really any doubt?

The evidence is overwhelming. The Semitic features discovered in Mexico and South America, the Hebrew and Phoenicians inscriptions, the Hebrew religious customs found in the Americas, and similar customs in far off New Zealand among the Maories of ancient times, all attest to the fact that worldwide oceanic travel, trade and commerce was occurring during the time of the Solomonic Empire! And everyone knows that the "ancient sea kings" are none other than the Phoenicians of the ancient world.

Hapgood says such mapmaking would indicate economic motivations and vast economic resources. Further, organized government is indicated, since the mapping of a continent such as Antarctica implies much organization, many expeditions, and the compilation of many local observations and maps into a general map under central supervision. He adds that it is unlikely that navigation and mapmaking were the only sciences developed by this ancient people. Such a comprehensive enterprise could only have been achieved during a relative time of world peace, and by a very powerful and extremely wealthy kingdom! What ancient kingdom could have accomplished this?

So the possibility was there, but again there is no significant proof of these claims that Muslims were in America before Columbus. I think that Muslims are just jealous because of all the accomplishments that the Christian nations have made, and they dream up these scenarios to make themselves seem bigger than they really are! But if this was true, Again we see Muslims riding on the backs of other peoples accomplishments as always!

If there is anyone who should brag, it is the Israelites, (Phoenicians and Carthaginians) and Religion wise, Christians and the Faith of the Old Testament, Because there were in inscriptions that read "Yahweh is our God," in America as well. Go to our Archaeology site for proof.

Why Muslims Don't Know?

Why don't Muslims know any of these things that we have written and researched? Simply because "...Muslim leaders are afraid of carrying out any thorough research into the origins of Islam, especially, the pre-Islamic Arabian religion, in case they discover anything that will cause their faith in Islam to wane" (Who is This Allah, p.136, Moshsay, emphasis mine).

They also follow what Muhammad commanded them to do, and that is to: "O ye who Believe ASK NOT QUESTIONS about things which if made plain to you, MAY CAUSE YOU TROUBLE...Some people before you did ask questions, and on that account LOST THEIR FAITH" (Sura 5:101-102). He also says: "This book is not to be doubted" (Dawood, Transl Sura 2:1). Why not? Why not put it to the test? God in the Bible actually challenges us to prove the Bible. God is confident that the Bible is true. "PROVE ALL THINGS" (1 Thess 5:21).

Maududi in his commentary warns Muslims not to probe deeply into Islam: "The Holy prophet himself FORBADE PEOPLE to ask do not try to probe into such things" (The Meaning of the Koran, vol.3, pp.76-77, emphasis mine).

Bukhari's Hadith tells us how Muhammad responded to those who asked questions: "The prophet was asked about things which he did not like, and when the questioner insisted, the prophet got angry" (vol.1, no.92). Muhammad just wanted people to believe on blind faith. "Take my word for it!" Muhammad implies.

The Myth of the Rise of Islam.

It is commonly believed that Islam is the world fastest growing religion. Many writers report great leaps forward in the number of Mosques in western countries, and they give numbers for immigration which would seem to sustain the terror that Muslims will soon control the US House, the Senate, and the British Parliament.

I beg to differ. While Islam is certainly of growing religion (mostly by force in the third world), it is not the fasted growing cult at all. The myth of Islam's rapid growth is moderated greatly by understanding how Mosques come and go. Outside the Middle east, the majority of mosques are in homes and rented buildings. They flourish for a while, then the congregation regroups, as some abandon Islam., while new members immigrate into the western world fresh from the Middle East. In this process, a new location is found for the house-mosque, and the old one is abandon. I have seen very little evidence that Americans and Britain's are being converted from Catholic, Baptist, or any other churches to Islam. Actually the immigration department in the U.S are having trouble finding out how many Muslims are in the U.S because many of them are converting to Christianity.

As far as the non-western world, the new converts to Islam are often very secular. In Egypt , Coptics "convert" by going to Friday prayers. This is done so they can be seen by the Imam, and the potential employers, thus enhancing their job hunting status. The Coptic Orthodoxy is of the cheap variety anyway. This kind of "convert" to Islam becomes secularized very quickly if he moves out of Egypt to a neutral or democratic nation.

This applies to the vast majority of Muslims that you would meet all over the world. The problem is that the media never tells you about these Muslims. They only show the mad mob frenzy bigots screaming for blood on the streets of Terhan or Khartoum.

Here is an excellent article that shows that Christianity is the religion that is rising in the world

See these links that people are leaving Islam in droves

Whose Land?

The people in Palestine are fighting over the land of Israel today. The Jews say its their land, the Palestinians say its theirs. Whose right? The Bible says its Israel's. And the Koran says its Israel's see Sura 5:25; 7 :133.

sura 5:25: "enter o my people, the holy land which god hath destined for you."


sura 7:133: "and we gave to the people who have been brought so low, the eastern and western lands, which we had blessed as an heritage: and the good word of thy lord was fulfilled on the children of Israel because they have borne up with patience..."

Salvation in Islam?

Is the Muslim certain that he has salvation in Islam. Absolutely not! Even Muhammad wasn't even sure if he was saved as we read in the Koran: "...nor do I know what will be done with me or you...(Sura 46:8) A religion that can't assure salvation of its own prophet will certainly disappoint its adherents in the last day.

The Koran Teaches salvation by works Sura 23:104-105, but the Bible is Salvation by Grace. The Koran teaches also that all Muslims go to hell first, see Sura 19:67-72.

New Revelation?


Was Muhammad one to bring us new revelations? Absolutely not! He said himself "I Am not apostle of new doctrines..." (46:8) And we see that in all the stories that he has given, and all the ceremonies that he has given in the Koran, we have seen that it was nothing new. They were all borrowed from myths legends and paganism.

God's Word is Complete

The Bible is now complete. God's last book is the book of Revelation. There are many prophecies in the Old Testament that show you that the word of God would be complete in Jesus day, and the days of the Apostles.

In Isaiah 8:16 it says: "BIND up the testimony; SEAL THE LAW among my DISCIPLES..." Verse 20 says: "TO the law and to the testimony; if they speak not according to this word [The Bible], it is because there is no light in them." This prophecy is about Jesus Christ. It talks about the "rock of offense" in verse 14, this means Christ, see 1 Peter 2:8. Then it says to bind up the law "among my disciples." Who are the Disciples? The Disciples of Christ. The last one, who was John who wrote the last book of the Bible. The Bible is now SEALED. THERE IS NO MORE TO BE ADDED TO GOD'S WORD ITS COMPLETE. So the Mormons and the Muslims and everyone else that claims extra revelation from God are claiming a total LIE and going against scripture. Jesus is called the " and FINISHER OF OUR FAITH" (Hebrew 12:2).​wiki/All%C4%81t






Did the Meccans Worship Yahweh God?

Revisiting the Issue of the Ishmaelites and the worship of the true God

Sam Shamoun

It is asserted by Muslims that the Meccan Arabs are descendents of Ishmael. They also claim that Ishmael settled in Mecca where he, along with Abraham, built the Kabah and passed on the religion of the true God to his offspring. It is believed that throughout time the Ishmaelites perverted the worship of the true God, not by abandoning their belief in him, but by adding other gods in their worship, thus perverting the religion of the God of their father Ishmael.

Muhammad, we are told, was sent by God to restore the true and pure worship of God. One aspect of Muhammad’s mission was to bring the Meccan Arabs back to the true religion which had been instituted by Abraham and Ishmael.

We have already documented why we reject the claim that the Meccan Arabs are descendents of Ishmael. For those interested to read our reasons please consult the following:

In this article we would like to point out that the Holy Bible contradicts the Muslim assertion that the Ishmaelites were worshiping the true God Yahweh. We read in the 83rd chapter of the Psalms that the Ishmaelites did not worship Yahweh God:

"O God, do not keep silence; do not hold your peace or be still, O God! For behold, your enemies make an uproar; those WHO HATE YOU have raised their heads. They lay crafty plans against your people; they consult together against your treasured ones. They say, ‘Come, let us wipe them out as a nation; let the name of Israel be remembered no more!’ For they conspire with one accord; AGAINST YOU they make a covenant - the tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites, Moab and the Hagrites, Gebal and Ammon and Amalek, Philistia with the inhabitants of Tyre; Asshur also has joined them; they are the strong arm of the children of Lot. Selah Do to them as you did to Midian, as to Sisera and Jabin at the river Kishon, who were destroyed at En-dor, who became dung for the ground. Make their nobles like Oreb and Zeeb, all their princes like Zebah and Zalmunna, who said, ‘Let us take possession for ourselves of the pastures of God.’ O my God, make them like whirling dust, like chaff before the wind. As fire consumes the forest, as the flame sets the mountains ablaze, so may you pursue them with your tempest and terrify them with your hurricane! Fill their faces with shame, that they may seek your name, O LORD. Let them be put to shame and dismayed forever; let them perish in disgrace, that they may know that you alone, whose name is the LORD, are the Most High over all the earth. Psalm 83:1-18

The Psalm is part of collection of Psalms which are attributed to Asaph. Asaph lived about 1000 BC, and was a leader of David’s Levitical choirs, and had descendants from his line who continued as singers for many centuries. Some think that Psalm 83 was composed in 1040 BC., others at 800 BC., others claim it dates from 600 BC., and still others that date it from 400 BC.

The implication this Psalm has on the Muslim claims is quite devastating. According to this Psalm the Ishmaelites, at least from the period between 1000-400 BC., were part of the nations who hated both the true God and his covenant people. The Psalmist asks God to bring utter destruction upon these nations so that they may come to the realization that Yahweh alone is the Most High God over the earth. This means that if the Muslim claims regarding the Meccan Arabs being descendents of Ishmael are correct, then the Allah of pre-Islamic Mecca was a false god. He couldn’t have been the same God worshiped by Jews and Christians.

In fact, there is evidence which points to Baal being the high god worshiped by the Meccans!

For instance, there seems to be a broad consensus that the high god of Mecca was Hubal:

"... The great god of Mecca was Hubal, an idol of carnelian." (Maxime Rodinson, Muhammad [New Press, NY, May 2000 ISBN: 1565847520], p. 16)

"... The Ka'ba which may have initially been a shrine of Hubal alone, housed several idols ..." (Rodinson, p. 40; underlined emphasis ours)

"... The presiding deity was Hubal, a large carnelian kept inside the temple; 360 other idols were arranged outside ..." (Malise Ruthven, Islam in the World [Oxford University Press, Second edition 2000], p. 15; underlined emphasis ours)

"... Although originally under the aegis of the pagan god Hubal, the Makkan haram which centered around the well of Zamzam, may have become associated with the ancestral figures of Ibrahim and Isma'il as the Arab traders, shedding their parochial backgrounds sought to locate themselves within the broader reference-frame of Judeo-Christianity." (Ibid., p. 17)

"... the god of Makka, Hubal, represented by a statue of red carnelian, is thought to have been originally a totem of the Khuza'a, rulers of Makka before their displacement by the Quraysh ..." (Ibid. p. 28; underlined emphasis ours)

"... At the time of Muhammad, the Ka'abah was OFFICIALLY DEDICATED to the god Hubal, a deity who had been imported into Arabia from the Nabateans in what is now Jordan. But the pre-eminence of the shrine as well as the common belief in Mecca seems to suggest that it may have been dedicated originally to al-Llah, the High God of the Arabs ..." (Karen Armstrong, Muhammad: A Biography of the Prophet [Harper San Francisco; ISBN: 0062508865; Reprint edition, October 1993], pp. 61-62; bold and capital emphasis ours)

"... Legend had it that Qusayy had travelled in Syria and brought the three goddesses al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat to the Hijaz and enthroned the Nabatean god Hubal in the Ka'abah ..." (Armstrong, p. 66; bold emphasis ours)

Pre-Islamic Arabia also had its stone deities. They were stone statues of shapeless volcanic or meteoric stones found in the deserts and believed to have been sent by astral deities. The most prominent deities were Hubal, the male god of the Ka'ba, and the three sister goddesses al-Lat, al-Manat, and al-Uzza; Muhammad's tribe, the Quraysh, thought these three goddesses to be the daughters of Allah. Hubal was the chief god of the Ka'ba among 360 other deities. He was a man-like statue whose body was made of red precious stone and whose arms were of solid gold. (George W. Braswell, Jr., Islam Its Prophets, Peoples, Politics and Power [Broadman & Holman Publishers, Nashville, TN; July, 1996], p. 44; bold emphasis ours)

Hubal. An idol, God of the moon. It was set up in the Kabah and became the principle idol of the pagan Meccans. (Cyril Glassé, The Concise Encyclopedia of Islam [Harper & Row: San Francisco, 1989], p. 160; underline emphasis ours)

... the principle gods at Mecca were Hubal (god of the moon) and the female goddesses. (Ibid., p. 179)

Ibn Al-Kalbi in his Book of Idols notes:

The Quraysh were wont to venerate her above all other idols. For this reason Zayd ibn-'Amr ibn-Nufayl, who, during the Jahilyah days, had turned to the worship of God and renounced that of al-'Uzza and of the other idols, said:

"I have renounced both Allat and al-'Uzza,
For thus would the brave and the robust do.
No more do I worship al-'Uzza and her two daughters,
Or visit the two idols of the banu-Ghanm;
Nor do I journey to Hubal and adore it,

... The Quraysh had also several idols in and around the Ka'bah. The greatest of these was Hubal. It was, as I was told, of red agate, in the form of a man with the right hand broken off. It came into the possession of the Quraysh in this condition, and they, therefore, made for it a hand of gold. The first to set it up [for worship] was Khuzaymah ibn-Mudrikah ibn-al-Ya's' ibn-Mudar. Consequently it used to be called Khuzaymah's Hubal.

It stood inside the Ka'bah. In front of it were seven divination arrows (sing. qidh, pl. qidah or aqduh). On one of these arrows was written "pure" (sarih), and on another "consociated alien" (mulsag). Whenever the lineage of a new-born was doubted, they would offer a sacrifice to it [Hubal] and then shuffle the arrows and throw them. If the arrows showed the word "pure," the child would be declared legitimate and the tribe would accept him. If, however, the arrows showed the words "consociated alien," the child would be declared illegitimate and the tribe would reject him. The third arrow was for divination concerning the dead, while the fourth was for divination concerning marriage. The purpose of the three remaining arrows has not been explained. Whenever they disagreed concerning something, or purposed to embark upon a journey, or undertake some project, they would proceed to it [Hubal] and shuffle the divination arrows before it. Whatever result they obtained they would follow and do accordingly.

It was before [Hubal] that 'Abd-al-Muttalib shuffled the divination arrows [in order to find out which of his ten children he should sacrifice in fulfilment of a vow he had sworn], and the arrows pointed to his son 'Abdullah, the father of the Prophet. Hubal was also the same idol which abu-Sufyan ibn-Harb addressed when he emerged victorious after the battle of Uhud, saying:

"Hubal, be thou exalted" (i.e. may thy religion triumph);

To which the Prophet replied:

"Allah is more exalted and more majestic."


The Oxford Dictionary of Islam (Oxford University Press, 2003) says that Hubal was the patron deity of Muhammad's particular tribe:

Hubal A pre-Islamic deity represented by an idol in Kaaba that was destroyed by Muhammad when he conquered Mecca in 630. Patron of the Quraysh, leading tribe of Mecca. (p. 117; underlined emphasis ours)

More on this below.

F.E. Peters, though not believing that Hubal is Allah, nonetheless writes:

"Among the gods worshiped by the Quraysh, the greatest was Hubal ...

Some additional details on this cleromantic deity, the most powerful of the pagan idols of Mecca, is supplied by the Meccan historian Azraqi ...

Amr ibn Luhayy brought with him (to Mecca) an idol called Hubal from the land of Hit in Mesopotamia. Hubal was one of the Quraysh's greatest idols so he set it up at the well inside the Kab'a and ordered the people to worship it. Thus a man coming back from a journey would visit it and circumambulate the House before going to his family, and would shave his hair before it ... (Peters, Hajj: The Muslim Pilgrimage to Mecca and the Holy Places [Princeton University Press, NJ, 1994], pp. 24-25)

Peters' footnote 59 states:

"Other sources say that it [Sam- the idol of Hubal] came from northern Jordan." (Ibid., p. 365)

The data also points in the direction of Hubal being the Arabic for the Hebrew Ha Baal, "the Baal." For instance, F.E. Peters’ statement above regarding Amr ibn Luhayy bringing Hubal from Mesopotamia provides evidence that the idol was a representation of Baal.

Islamicist Martin Ling, while commenting on the origin of paganism in Mecca, further supports this when he writes:

"Khuza 'ah thus shared the guilt of Jurhum. They were also to blame in other respects: a chieftain of theirs, on his way back from a journey to SYRIA, had asked the MOABITES to give him ONE OF THEIR IDOLS. They gave him HUBAL, which he brought back to the Sanctuary, setting it up within the Ka'bah itself; and it became THE CHIEF IDOL OF MECCA." (Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources [Inner Traditions International, LTD. One Park Street, Rochestor Vermont 05767, 1983], p. 5; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Commenting on 'Abd al-Muttalib's rediscovery of the well of Zamzam and its treasures, Lings writes:

"... So 'Abd al-Muttalib continued to dig without any actual move being made to stop him; and some of the people were already leaving the sanctuary when suddenly he struck the well's stone covering and uttered a cry of thanksgiving to God. The crowd reassembled and increased; and when he began to dig out the treasure which Jurhum had buried there, everyone claimed the right to share in it. 'Abd al-Muttalib agreed that lots should be cast for each object, as to whether it should be kept in the sanctuary or go to him personally or be divided amongst the tribe. This had become the recognised way of deciding an issue of doubt, and it was done by means of divining arrows inside the Ka'bah, in front of THE MOABITE IDOL HUBAL ..." (Lings, p. 11; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Ibn Kathir noted:

Ibn Hisham states that a learned man told him that ‘Amr b. Luhayy once left Mecca for Syria on business and reached Ma’ab [Sam- possibly the Moabites] in the Balqa‘ region. There at that time lived the ‘Amaliq [Sam- possibly the Amalekites], the sons of ‘Imlaq or, as some say, ‘Imliq b. Lawadh b. Sam b. Nuh. ‘Amr witnessed them worshipping idols, so he asked them why. They replied that if they asked the idols for rain it came, or for victory they won it.

‘Amr then asked them to give him an idol he could take to Arab lands where it could be worshipped, and they gave him one named Hubal. This he brought to Mecca and set on a pedestal and ordered the people to worship and venerate it. (The Life of the Prophet Muhammad (Al-Sira al-Nabawiyya), Volume I, translated by professor Trevor Le Gassick, reviewed by Dr. Ahmed Fareed [Garnet Publishing Limited, 8 Southern Court, south Street Reading RG1 4QS, UK; The Center for Muslim Contribution to Civilization, 1998], p. 42; bold emphasis ours)

Interestingly, Ibn Kathir shows that the god of Muhammad’s family was Hubal, and that his grandfather even prayed to Allah by facing Hubal’s idol!

Ibn Ishaq stated, "It is claimed that when ‘Abd al-Muttalib received such opposition from Quraysh over the digging of zamzam, he vowed that if ten sons were born to him who grew up and protected him, he would sacrifice one of them for God at the ka‘ba."

"Eventually he had ten sons grown up whom he knew would give him protection. Their names were al-Harith, al-Zubayr, Hajl, Dirar, al-Muqawwim, Abu Lahab, al-‘Abbas, Hamza, Abu Talib, and ‘Abd Allah. He assembled them and told them of his vow and asked them to honour his pledge to God, Almighty and All-glorious is He. They obeyed, and asked him what he wanted them to do. He asked each of them to take an arrow, write his name on it and return to him.

"They did so and went with them inside the ka‘ba to the site of their god Hubal, where there was the well in which offerings to the ka‘ba would be placed. There, near Hubal, were seven arrows which they would use for divining a judgement over some matter of consequence, a question of blood-money, kinship, or the like. They would come to Hubal to seek a resolution, accepting whatever they were ordered to do or to refrain from." (Ibid., pp. 125-126; bold emphasis ours)

The tradition goes on to say that the lot fell on ‘Abd Allah, Muhammad’s future father, meaning that he would have to be sacrificed. The Quraish convinced ‘Abd al-Muttalib to find a way of sparing his son, and convinced him to consult a woman diviner. The text continues:

So they left for Medina, where they found the diviner whose name was Sajah, as Yunus b. Bukayr reported from Ibn Ishaq, was at Khaybar. They rode off again and went to her and sought her advice, ‘Abd al-Muttalib telling her of the whole problem regarding him and his son. She told him: "Leave me today, until my attendant spirit comes and I can ask him."

They left her and ‘Abd al-Muttalib prayed to God. Next day they went back to her and she informed them that she had had a message. "How much is the blood-money you prescribe?" she asked. "Ten camels," they told her, that being then the case. "Then go back to your land and present your man as an offering and do the same ten camels. Then cast arrows to decide between him and them. If the divining arrow points to him then add to the number of camels until your god is satisfied; if it points to the camels, then sacrifice them in his place. That way you will please your god and save your man."

So they went back to Mecca and, when they had agreed to do as she had said, ‘Abd al-Muttalib said prayers to God. Then they offered up ‘Abd Allah and the ten camels as sacrifice and cast the arrow. At that point the men of Quraysh told ‘Abd al-Muttalib, who was standing near Hubal praying to God, "It’s all over! Your God is pleased, O ‘Abd al-Muttalib"… (Ibid., p. 126-127; bold emphasis ours)

The foregoing makes it quite clear that the Allah to whom Muhammad’s grandfather vowed and worshiped was none other than Hubal. There is simply no escaping this.

In fact, one author goes so far as to suggest that Hubal may have actually been a name personifying a specific aspect of Allah:

One aspect of Allah may have been personified in the god Hubal, who was accorded pride of place among the idols of the Kaaba. The name is said to be derived from the Semitic Hu, meaning 'He' or 'He is' (see 3.1), with the suffixEl, 'God.' He was perhaps an ancient variant of Allah, and his name used to be invoked as a war-cry by the Meccans. Hubal was venerated by the Nabataeans and certain other northern tribes, but is not named in the Koran. In his youth, Muhammad helped with the preparations being made for the ceremonial installation of Hubal in the Kaba. (Benjamin Walker, Foundations of Islam: The Making of a World Faith [Peter Owen Publishers, London & Chester Springs, 1998], p. 42)

The following citations from Philip K. Hitti puts this all together quite nicely:

Hubal (from Aram. For vapour, spirit), evidently the chief deity of al-ka'bah, was represented in human form. Beside him stood ritual arrows used for divination by the soothsayers (kahin, from Aramaic) who drew lots by means of them. The tradition in ibn-Hisham, which makes 'Amr ibn-Luhayy the importer of this idol from Moab or Mesopotamia, may have a kernel of truth in so far as it retains a memory of the Aramaic origin of the deity. (History of the Arabs from the Earliest Times to the Present, revised tenth edition, new preface by Walid Khalidi [Palgrave Macmillan, 2002; ISBN: 0-333-63142-0 paperback], p. 100; underlined emphasis ours)


Allah (allah, al-ilah, the god) was the principal, though not the only, deity of Makkah. The name is an ancient one. It occurs in two South Arabic inscriptions, one a Minean found at al-'Ula and the other Sabean, but abounds in the form HLH in the Lihyanite inscriptions of the fifth century B.C. Lihyan, which evidently got the god from Syria, was the first center of the worship of this deity in Arabia. The name occurs as Hallah in the Safa inscriptions five centuries before Islam and also in a pre-Islamic Christian Arabic inscription found in umm-al-Jimal, Syria, and ascribed to the sixth century. The name of Muhammad's father was 'Abd-Allah ('Abdullah, the slave or worshiper of Allah). The esteem in which Allah was held by the pre-Islamic Makkans as the creator and supreme provider and the one to be invoked in time of special peril may be inferred from such koranic passages as 31:24, 31; 6:137, 109; 10:23. Evidently he was the tribal deity of the Quraysh. (Ibid., pp. 100-101; underlined emphasis ours)

Ibn Kathir noted that Muhammad's family worshiped Hubal, with the Oxford Dictionary of Islam stating that Hubal was the Quraysh's patron deity. If Hitti is correct regarding Allah being the Quraysh's' tribal deity then this provides additional proof that Allah was a name for Hubal. Note the following syllogism:

1.     Hubal was the chief deity of the Quraysh.

2.     Allah was the chief deity of the Quraysh.

3.     Therefore, Hubal was Allah in pre-Islamic times.

There is another indirect piece of evidence which links Allah to Baal. Franz Rosenthal, while commenting on the mass confusion which surrounded the Muslims regarding the precise meaning of as-samad (Cf. 112:2), posits a possible origin for the word. He says:

... There is enough room for suspicion to permit us having a look at some outside evidence.

There, we encounter a noteworthy phenomenon: the not infrequent religious connotation of the root smd.

In Ugaritic, smd appears as a stick or club that is wielded by Ba'l. In the Kilammu inscription, line 15, we find b'l smd, apparently, b'l as the owner of his divine club. In the Bible, the adherence of the Israelites to Baal of Peor is expressed by the nip'al of the root smd. The verb is translated by the Septuagint heteleuse (Numeri 25:3, 5; Ps. 106:28). The use of the verb doubtlessly reflects North Canaanite religious terminology.

From Arabic sources, we learn that an idol of 'Ad was allegedly called samud, which brings us rather close to the environment of Muhammad ...

In view of this material, the suggestion may be made that as-samad in the Qur'an is a survival of an ancient Northwest Semitic religious term, which may no longer have been understood by Muhammad himself, nor by the old poets (if the sawahid should be genuine). This suggestion would well account for the presence of the article with the word in the Qur'an, and it would especially well account for the hesitation of the commentators vis-a-vis so prominent a passage. Such hesitation is what we would expect if we are dealing with a pagan survival from the early period of the revelation. (What the Koran Really Says: Language, Text, & Commentary, "Some Minor Problems in the Qur'an", edited with translation by Ibn Warraq [Prometheus Books, October, 2002, Hardcover; ISBN: 157392945X], part 5.2, pp. 336-337)

If Rosenthal is correct, then this is just additional support that Allah was the name of Hubal, and that Hubal was Arabic for Baal.

That the term Allah was used in pre-Islamic times for any pagan deity, suggesting that it is quite possible that Allah was applied to Hubal, is a view held by many scholars and writers:

"... The name used for God was 'Allah', which was already in use for one of the local gods (it is now also used by Arabic-speaking Jews and Christians as the name of God) ..." (Albert Hourani, A History of Arab Peoples [Warner Books Edition, paperback 1992], p. 16; bold emphasis ours)

"Allah, the paramount deity of PAGAN Arabia, was the target of worship in varying degrees of intensity from the southernmost tip of Arabia to the Mediterranean. To the Babylonians he was "Il" (god); to the Canaanites, and later the Israelites, he was "El"; the South Arabians worshiped him as "Ilah," and the Bedouins as "al-Ilah" (the deity). With Muhammad he BECOMES Allah, God of the Worlds, of all believers, the one and only who admits of no associates or consorts in the worship of Him. Judaic and Christian concepts of God abetted the transformation of Allah FROM A PAGAN DEITY to the God of all monotheists. There is no reason, therefore, to accept the idea that "Allah" passed to the Muslims from Christians and Jews." (Caesar E. Farah, Ph.D., Islam [Barron's Educational Series, 2000, sixth edition paperback] p. 28; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Former Muslim turned atheist Ibn Warraq writes:

We have evidence that black stones were worshiped in various parts of the Arab world; for example, Clement of Alexandria, writing ca. 190, mentioned that "the Arabs worship stone," alluding to the black stone of Dusares at Petra. Maximus Tyrius writing in the second century says, "The Arabians pay homage to I know not what god, which they represent by a quadrangular stone": he alludes to the Kaaba that contains the Black Stone. Its great antiquity is also attested by the fact that ancient Persians claim that Mahabad and his successors left the Black Stone in the Kaaba, along with relics and images, and the stone was an emblem of Saturn ...

The Black Stone itself is evidently a meteorite and undoubtedly owes its reputation to the fact it fell from the "heavens." It is doubly ironic that Muslims venerate this piece of rock as that given to Ishmael by the angel Gabriel to build the Kaaba, as it is, to quote Margoliouth, "of doubtful genuineness, since the Black Stone was removed by the ... Qarmatians in the fourth [Muslim] century, and restored by them after many years; it may be doubted whether the stone which they returned was the same stone which they removed."

Hubal was worshipped at Mecca, and his idol in red cornelian was erected inside the Kaaba, above the dry well into which one threw votive offerings. It is very probable that Hubal had a human form. Hubal's position next to the Black Stone suggests there is some connection between the two. Wellhausen thinks that Hubal originally was the Black Stone that, as we have already remarked, is more ancient than the idol. Wellhausen also points out that God is called Lord of the Kaaba, and Lord of the territory of Mecca in the Koran. The Prophet rallied against the homage rendered at the Kaaba to the goddesses al-Lat, Manat, and al-Uzza, whom the pagan Arabs called the daughters of God, but Muhammad stopped short of attacking the cult of Hubal. From this Wellhausen concludes that Hubal is no other than Allah, the "god" of the Meccans. When the Meccans defeated the Prophet near Medina, their leader is said to have shouted, "Hurrah for Hubal."

Circumambulation of a sanctuary was a very common rite practiced in many localities. The pilgrim during his circuit frequently kissed or caressed the idol. Sir William Muir thinks that the seven circuits of the Kaaba "were probably emblematical of the revolutions of the planetary bodies." While Zwemer goes so far as to suggest that the seven circuits of the Kaaba, three times rapidly and four times slowly were "in imitation of the inner and outer planets."

It is unquestionable that the Arabs "at a comparatively late period worshiped the sun and other heavenly bodies." The constellation of the Pleiades, which was supposed to bestow rain, appears as a deity. There was the cult of the planet Venus which was revered as a great goddess under the name of al-Uzza.

We know from the frequency of theophorus names that the sun (Shams) was worshiped. Shams was the titular goddess of several tribes honored with a sanctuary and an idol. Snouck Hurgronje sees a solar rite in the ceremony of "wukut" ...

The goddess al-Lat is also sometimes identified with the solar divinity. The god Dharrih was probably the rising sun. The Muslim rites of running between Arafat and Muzdalifah, and Muzdalifah and Mina had to be accomplished after sunset and before sunrise. This was the deliberate change introduced by Muhammad to suppress this association with the pagan solar rite, whose significance we shall examine later. The worship of the moon is also attested to by proper names of people such as Hilal, a crescent, Qamar, a moon, and so on.

Houtsma has suggested that the stoning that took place in Mina was originally directed at the sun demon. This view is lent plausibility by the fact that the pagan pilgrimage originally coincided with the autumnal equinox. The sun demon is expelled, and his harsh rule comes to an end with the summer, which is followed by the worship, at Muzdalifah, of the thunder god who brings fertility ...

Islam owes the term "Allah" to the heathen Arabs. We have evidence that it entered into numerous personal names in Northern Arabia and among the Nabatians. It occurs among the Arabs of later times, in theophorus names and on its own. Wellhausen also cites pre-Islamic literature where Allah is mentioned as a great deity. We also have the testimony of the Koran itself where He is recognized as a giver of rain, a creator, and so on; the Meccans only crime was to worship other gods beside Him. EVENTUALLY Allah was only applied to the Supreme Deity. "In any case it is an extremely important fact that Muhammad did not find it necessary to introduce an altogether novel deity, but contented himself with ridding the HEATHEN Allah of his companions subjecting him to a kind of dogmatic purification ... Had he not been accustomed from his youth to the idea of Allah as the Supreme God, in particular of Mecca, it may well be doubted whether he would ever have come forward as the preacher of Monotheism." (Ibn Warraq, Why I Am Not A Muslim [Prometheus Books, Amherst NY, 1995], pp. 39-40, 42; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Gerhard Nehls writes:

Who was Hubal?

In Chapter 2 we had mentioned Hubal who was considered the god of the Ka'ba before the time of Muhammad. What does the name mean? It cannot be explained from the Arabic language (ENCYCLOPEDIA OF ISLAM by Gibb and Kramers). In his book "Specimen Historicae Arabum" the author (Pocock) suggests that the name might well have been derived from ha-Baal. The old Hebrew and Arabic written languages had no vowels, so this would have been one of many common changes (e.g. one can read Mohamed, Muhamad, Muhammed, Mahomet etc.).

Interesting is the name HUBAL (in Arabic and Hebrew script the vowels were not noted). This shows a very suspicious connection to the Hebrew HABAAL (= the Baal). As we all know this was an idol mentioned in the Bible (Num. 25:3, Hosea 9:10, Deut. 4:3, Josh. 22:17 and Ps. 106:28-29). Where was Baal worshipped? In Moab! It was the "god of fertility". Amr ibn Luhaiy brought Hubal from Moab to Arabia.

The name 'Allah' (from 'al-Ilah' - the god or 'al-Liah' = the one worshippped) was well used in pre-Islamic times. It was rather a title than a name and, was used for a diversity of deities. As we shall see later, an idol called Hubal was addressed as Allah. Muhammad's grandfather reportedly prayed to Hubal and addressed him as Allah. The deities al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat were called "the daughters of Allah" (Surah 53:19). "Allah was viewed, already before Muhammad, as the Lord of the Ka'ba, while, if not surely, but very probably, this sanctuary was devoted to Hubal, whose image was placed inside" (RESTE ARABISCHEN HEIDENTHUMS, p. 221 by J. Wellhausen). "While the rituals performed are still addressed to the respective deities, Allah is seen as the creator, the father and with that the superior Lord. But he is viewed to be too general, neutral and impersonal a Lord" (ibid p. 219). "Allah became the Islamic substitute for any idol" (ibid p. 85).

"It is presupposed by Muhammad and admitted by his opponents, that Allah is the Lord of the Ka'ba. Is perhaps the Allah of Mecca Hubal? In other words, was Hubal called Allah in Mecca as Jahweh was called Elohim in Israel?", asks J. Wellhausen (ibid p. 75). This becomes even more likely when we realize that the polytheists of Arabia recognized Allah as creator (Surahs 23:84-89; 29:61), and swore by him (Surah 6:109). So the name Allah must at first have been a title. "At first Allah was the title used within each individual tribe to address its tribal deity instead of its proper name. All said 'Allah', but each one had its own deity in mind. The expression 'the god' (al-ilah), which became the only usage, became the bridge to the concept of an identical god which all tribes had in common (J. Wellhausen, p. 218)". (Source:; emphasis ours)

The next set of quotes lend support to Nehls’ claim regarding Allah being used as a title applicable to the particular deity worshiped by a specific tribe or group:

But the vague notion of Supreme (NOT SOLE) divinity which Allah seems to have connoted in Meccan religion was to BECOME both universal and transcendental; it was to be turned by the Kur’anic preaching, into the affirmation of the living God, the Exalted One. (Encyclopedia of Islam, 1960, p. 406; capital emphasis ours)

But though the name [Allah] was the same for the Meccans and for Muhammad, their conceptions of the NATURE of the bearer of the name must have DIFFERED WIDELY. (Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam, 1965, p. 34; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Certain tribes of the Hejaz also invoked him, as is shown at the end of surah 29. However, the same surah illustrates that Allah, the God of Qur’anic preaching, has nothing in common with ANY SIMILARLY NAMED DIVINITY. (Encyclopedia of Religion, 1987, p. 27; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Both the concept of a Supreme God and the Arabian term [Allah] have been shown to be familiar to the Arabs in Mohammed’s time. What Mohammed did was to give a NEW and fuller content to the concept, TO PURIFY IT FROM ELEMENTS OF POLYTHEISM WHICH CLUSTERED AROUND IT. (H.A.R. Gibb, Mohammedanism: An Historical Survey [Oxford University Press, London 1961], p. 54; capital emphasis ours)

(Note: The preceding citations were taken from Dr. Jamal Badawi’s debate with Dr. Robert Morey on November 9, 1996 titled "Is Allah of the Quran the one true and universal God?" (*) Astonishingly, Dr. Badawi tried to use these quotes to offset Morey’s claim that Allah was a pagan deity, despite the fact that these citations suggest otherwise!)

One writer goes so far as to apply Baal to the name Hubal. Speaking of the Kabah, Barnaby Rogerson writes:

Inside this holy of holies are stored all manner of sacred objects and images. These are said to include an icon of the Virgin Mary with the Christ Child and a portrait of the Prophet Abraham. But the shrine is dominated by a representation of the war god Baal Hubal, who watches over the city's political destiny. At times of trouble the city elders can seek his advice by casting a quiver of divinatory arrows before idols and reading the future from the answers they give. (Rogerson, The Prophet Muhammad - A Biography [HiddenSpring, An Imprint of Pauline Press, Mahwah, NJ 2003], p. 15; underline emphasis ours)


The statue of the Syrian war god Hubal was hauled away, as were the divination arrows that the Quraysh had been wont to throw before the statue. (Ibid., p. 190; underline emphasis ours)

Noted Christian Apologist John Gilchrist states:

In the sixth century after Christ, Mecca (pronounced Makkah in Arabic) was hardly known to the outside world but it was the commercial and religious centre of Arabia. Although the Arabs were a divided people, broken up into various tribes who were constantly at war with each other, the fairs at the city served to attract many of them and whatever unity existed among them was generated and expressed through these annual get-togethers. The focal point of attention was the Ka'aba (Arabic for "cube"), a shrine in the centre of the city containing over three hundred idols, chief of whom was the god Hubal (a probable derivation from the ancient high-god Ba'al, so often spoken of as the chief object of worship of the pagan nations around Israel in the Bible). The various tribes came to Mecca to worship their gods and take part in the various poetical contests that were arranged at the fairs. The composition of poetry was a favourite literary pastime of the Arabs and many shu'ara (poets, singular: sha'ir) competed at these contests. (John Gilchrist, Muhammad and the Religion of Islam, p. 11; online edition)

We next turn to the Holy Bible to show that the nations mentioned in Psalm 83, as well as in the Muslim sources, such as Edomites, Syrians, Amalekites, Moabites and the Midianites, all worshiped Baal:

"When Israel lived in Shittim, the people began to commit sexual immorality with the daughters of Moab. And these women invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods; and then the people ate and bowed down to their gods. So Israel joined themselves to Baal-peor. And the anger of the Lord flared up against Israel. And the Lord said to Moses, ‘Arrest all the leaders of the people, and hang them up before the Lord in broad daylight, so that the fierce anger of the Lord may be turned away from Israel.’ So Moses said to the judges of Israelites, ‘Each of you must execute those of his men who were joined to Baal-peor.’" Numbers 25:1-5 NET Bible

"The Israelites did evil in the eyes of the LORD; they forgot the LORD their God and served the Baals and the Asherahs. The anger of the LORD burned against Israel so that he sold them into the hands of Cushan-Rishathaimking of Aram Naharaim, to whom the Israelites were subject for eight years. But when they cried out to the LORD, he raised up for them a deliverer, Othniel son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother, who saved them. The Spirit of the LORD came upon him, so that he became Israel's judge and went to war. The LORD gave Cushan-Rishathaim king of Aram into the hands of Othniel, who overpowered him." Judges 3:7-10

"Again the Israelites did evil in the eyes of the LORD. They served the Baals and the Ashtoreths, and the gods of Aram, the gods of Sidon, the gods of Moab, the gods of the Ammonites and the gods of the Philistines. And because the Israelites forsook the LORD and no longer served him." Judges 10:6

Aram is the Biblical name for what is otherwise known as Syria:

"He put garrisons in the Aramean kingdom of Damascus, and the Arameans became subject to him and brought tribute. The LORD gave David victory wherever he went... EDOM and Moab, the Ammonites and the Philistines, and Amalek. He also dedicated the plunder taken from Hadadezer son of Rehob, king of Zobah." 2 Samuel 8:6, 12

(In those days the LORD began to send Rezin king of Aram and Pekah son of Remaliah against Judah) ... In the seventeenth year of Pekah son of Remaliah, Ahaz son of Jotham king of Judah began to reign. Ahaz was twenty years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem sixteen years. Unlike David his father, he did not do what was right in the eyes of the LORD his God. He walked in the ways of the kings of Israel and even sacrificed his son in the fire, following the detestable ways of the nations the LORD had driven out before the Israelites. He offered sacrifices and burned incense at the high places, on the hilltops and under every spreading tree. Then Rezin king of Aram and Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel marched up to fight against Jerusalem and besieged Ahaz, but they could not overpower him. At that time, Rezin king of Aram recovered Elath for Aram by driving out the men of Judah. EDOMITES then moved into Elath and have lived there to this day. Ahaz sent messengers to say to Tiglath-Pileser king of Assyria, ‘I am your servant and vassal. Come up and save me out of the hand of the king of Aram and of the king of Israel, who are attacking me.’ And Ahaz took the silver and gold found in the temple of the LORD and in the treasuries of the royal palace and sent it as a gift to the king of Assyria. The king of Assyria complied by attacking Damascus and capturing it. He deported its inhabitants to Kir and put Rezin to death." 2 Kings 15:37, 16:1-9

"When Ahaz son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, was king of Judah, King Rezin of Aram and Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel marched up to fight against Jerusalem, but they could not overpower it. Now the house of David was told, ‘Aram has allied itself with Ephraim’; so the hearts of Ahaz and his people were shaken, as the trees of the forest are shaken by the wind. Then the LORD said to Isaiah, ‘Go out, you and your son Shear-Jashub, to meet Ahaz at the end of the aqueduct of the Upper Pool, on the road to the Washerman's Field. Say to him, "Be careful, keep calm and don't be afraid. Do not lose heart because of these two smoldering stubs of firewood-because of the fierce anger of Rezin and Aram and of the son of Remaliah. Aram, Ephraim and Remaliah's son have plotted your ruin, saying, ‘Let us invade Judah; let us tear it apart and divide it among ourselves, and make the son of Tabeel king over it’; Yet this is what the Sovereign LORD says: ‘It will not take place, it will not happen, for the head of Aram is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is only Rezin. Within sixty-five years Ephraim will be too shattered to be a people. The head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is only Remaliah's son. If you do not stand firm in your faith, you will not stand at all.’"’" Isaiah 7:1-9

These passages also show that Esau's descendents, the Edomites, settled in Aram. The Amalekites were also descendents of Esau who settled in Seir, another descendent of Esau:

"Esau's son Eliphaz also had a concubine named Timna, who bore him Amalek. These were grandsons of Esau's wife Adah ... These were the chiefs among Esau's descendants: The sons of Eliphaz the firstborn of Esau: Chiefs Teman, Omar, Zepho, Kenaz, Korah, Gatam and Amalek. These were the chiefs descended from Eliphaz in Edom; they were grandsons of Adah ... These were the sons of Esau (that is, Edom), and these were their chiefs.These were the sons of Seir the Horite, who were living in the region: Lotan, Shobal, Zibeon, Anah, Dishon, Ezer and Dishan. These sons of Seir in Edom were Horite chiefs." Genesis 36:12, 15-16, 19-21

"The men whose names were listed came in the days of Hezekiah king of Judah. They attacked the Hamites in their dwellings and also the Meunites who were there and completely destroyed them, as is evident to this day. Then they settled in their place, because there was pasture for their flocks. And five hundred of these Simeonites, led by Pelatiah, Neariah, Rephaiah and Uzziel, the sons of Ishi, invaded the hill country of Seir. They killed the remaining Amalekites who had escaped, and they have lived there to this day." 1 Chronicles 4:41-43

What this essentially means is that these nations all worshiped the false god Baal.

And now to summarize the data:

  1. According to the Bible, the Ishmaelites were not worshiping Yahweh God.
  2. Their alliance with nations that worshiped Baal suggests that they were also worshiping the false god Baal.
  3. Both Muslim and non-Muslim sources state that Hubal was recognized as the chief presiding deity of the Kabah.
  4. Muhammad’s grandfather worshiped Hubal, and even prayed to Allah while facing Hubal’s idol.
  5. The Muslim sources claim that Hubal was brought to Mecca from Syria due to the influence of the Moabites and/or the Amalekites.
  6. These nations worshiped Baal which demonstrates that Hubal is actually the Arabic form of Hebrew Ha Baal or the Baal.

The foregoing seriously damages the Muslim claim regarding Allah in pre-Islamic times being the same God of Abraham. The assertion that the pre-Islamic Ishmaelites worshiped the same God cannot be maintained in light of the Psalm’s clear statement that they, along with a host of other pagan nations, hated and opposed Yahweh and his covenant people Israel. The evidence linking Allah with Hubal implies this as well. Hence, if the Muslim contention that the Meccan Arabs are Ishmaelites is correct, then the god of Mecca, the Allah of pre-Islamic Arabia, is actually the false god Baal.

What makes this more interesting is that one modern Muslim scholar acknowledges that Hubal was the name for the moon god:

Among the many deities that the Arabs worshiped in and around the Ka'bah were the god Hubal and the three goddesses Al-lat, al-'Uzza, and Manat. Hubal was originally a moon god, and perhaps also a rain god, as hubal means "vapor." Al-lat was perhaps a feminine form of Allah, whose name simply means the goddess...

While the Arabs professed Allah, an Arabic word meaning "the God," to be the supreme deity, they did not worship him, nor did he play an active role in their lives... (Mahmoud M. Ayoub, Islam: Faith and History [Oneworld Publications, Oxford England, 2004], p. 15; underline emphasis ours)

Ayoub's comments that the Arabs didn't worship Allah suggest that they viewed Allah as being too distant and disinterested in their daily affairs to be bothered with. Yet, one can also understand the Arabs' disinterest in Allah, in contrast to their worship of Hubal, to mean that Allah was a less important deity than Hubal. This would basically imply that Allah was not considered to be the supreme deity, contrary to Ayoub's claims. More importantly, if Allah was a name for Hubal then this means that Allah was indeed a title given to the moon deity in pre-Islamic times!

Whatever the scenario, the data leaves us with the inescapable conclusion that both the Ishmaelites and the Meccan Arabs did not worship Yahweh, falsifying the Quranic claim that Ishmael’s descendants worshiped the true God, albeit along with a host of other gods. It may have been the case that early in their history the Ishmaelites worshiped Yahweh, but later on they abandoned the true God for a false god.

Discussion of Evidence That Suggests Hubal is a god distinct from Allah

The following verse in the Quran seems to call into question Hubal being Allah.

Will ye cry unto Baal and forsake the Best of creators, Allah, your Lord and Lord of your forefathers? S. 37:125-126 Pickthall

Here, the author of the Quran distinguishes Allah from Baal which seems to imply that they are not one and the same entity. A couple of responses are in order. First, even though the text distinguishes Baal from Allah, it says nothing about HU-bal. In fact, the word Hubal never appears in the Quran. It seems that the author was unaware that Hubal and Baal were actually one and the same entity. The surrounding context seems to support this:

And lo! Elias was of those sent (to warn), When he said unto his folk: Will ye not ward off (evil)? Will ye cry unto Baal and forsake the Best of creators, Allah, your Lord and Lord of your forefathers? But they denied him, so they surely will be haled forth (to the doom) Save single-minded slaves of Allah. And we left for him among the later folk (the salutation): Peace be unto Elias! Lo! thus do We reward the good. Lo! he is one of our believing slaves. S. 37:123-132 Pickthall

Since this is referring to the time of Elijah, presumably during his showdown with the prophets of Baal on Mt. Carmel (cf. 1 Kings 18), it may be that the author of the Quran didn't realize that the Baal of Elijah's day was none other than the Hubal worshiped at Mecca. Second, we are focusing on the identity of the pre-Islamic Allah, the Allah worshiped by the pagans prior to the advent of Islam. Hence, it is quite possible that through Muhammad’s influence Allah was transformed from a pagan high god to the true universal God worshiped by Jews and Christians. In other words, Muhammad tried to package Allah as a distinct Being from the false gods such as Hubal/Baal, purifying the pre-Islamic Allah from all pagan elements. See the above citations taken from Dr. Jamal Badawi which essentially say the same thing.

Muhammad did something similar with the term Rahman. The Meccans were taken aback by the use of this name and actually thought that Muhammad was speaking of a different deity from Allah:

Thus We have sent thee among a nation before which other nations have passed away, to recite to them that We have revealed to thee; and yet they disbelieve in the All-merciful. Say: ‘He is my Lord -- there is no god but He. In Him I have put my trust, and to Him I turn.’ S. 13:30 A.J. Arberry

When the unbelievers behold thee, they take thee only for mockery: ‘Ha, is this the one who makes mention of your gods?’ Yet they in the Remembrance of the All-merciful are unbelievers ... Say: ‘Who shall guard you by night and in the daytime from the All-merciful?’ Nay, but from the Remembrance of their Lord they are turning away. S. 21:36, 42 Arberry

who created the heavens and the earth, and what between them is, in six days, then sat Himself upon the Throne, the All-compassionate: ask any informed of Him! But when they are told, ‘Bow yourselves to the All-Merciful,’ they say, ‘And what is the All-Merciful? Shall we bow ourselves to what thou biddest us?’ And it increases them in aversion. S. 25:59-60 A.J. Arberry

Ibn Kathir notes:

Then Allah rebukes the idolators who prostrate to idols and rivals instead of Allah ...

<And when it is said to them: "Prostrate yourselves to Ar-Rahman!" They say: "And what is Ar-Rahman?">

meaning: we do not know Ar-Rahman. They did not like to call Allah by His name Ar-Rahman (the Most Gracious), as they objected on the day of (the treaty of) Hudaybiyyah, when the Prophet told the scribe ...

((Write: "In the name of Allah, Ar-Rahman (the Most Gracious), Ar-Rahim (the Most Merciful)."))

They said, "We do not know Ar-Rahman or Ar-Rahim. Write what you use to write: ‘Bismika Allahumma (in your name, O Allah).’" So Allah revealed the words ...

<Say: "Invoke Allah or invoke Ar-Rahman, by whatever name you invoke Him (it is the same), for to Him belong the Best Names"> (17:110).

meaning, he is Allah and He is the Most Gracious. And in this Ayah, Allah said ...

<And when it is said to them: "Prostrate yourselves to Ar-Rahman!" They say: "And what is the Ar-Rahman?">

meaning: we do not know or approve of this Name. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged) Volume 7 (Surat An-Nur to Surat Al-Ahzab, Verse 50), abridged by a group of scholars under the supervision of Shaykh Safiur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, Riyadh, Houston, New York, London, Lahore; First Edition: August 2000], p. 192)

Regarding 17:110, Ibn Kathir writes:

Allah says ...

<Say> O Muhammad, to these idolators who deny that Allah possesses the attribute of mercy and refuse to call Him Ar-Rahman ...

<Invoke Allah or invoke Ar-Rahman (the Most Gracious), by whatever name you invoke Him (it is the same), for to Him belong the Best Names.>

meaning, there is no difference between calling on Him as Allah or calling on Him as Ar-Rahman, because He has the Most Beautiful Names ...

Makhul reported that one of the idolators heard the Prophet saying when he was prostrating: "O Most Gracious, O Most Merciful." The idolator said, he claims to pray to One, but he is praying to two! Then Allah revealed this Ayah. This was also narrated from Ibn ‘Abbas, and by Ibn Jarir. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged) Volume 6 (Surat Al-Isra’, verse 39 To the end of Surat Al-Mu’minun), First edition, July 2000, pp. 104-105; underlined emphasis ours)

And regarding the treaty of Hudaybiyyah, Ibn Kathir mentions:

<Write: In the Name of Allah, Ar-Rahman, Ar-Rahim.> Suhayl bin `Amr said, ‘As for Ar-Rahman, by Allah, I DO NOT KNOW WHAT IT MEANS. So write: By Your Name, O Allah, as you used to write previously.’ The Muslims said, ‘By Allah, we will not write except: By the Name of Allah, Ar-Rahman, Ar-Rahim.’ The Prophet said, <Write: "In Your Name O Allah.''’ (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged) Volume 9 (Surat Al-Jathiyah to the end of Surat Al-Munafiqun), First edition, September, 2000, p. 163; online edition; bold emphasis ours)

According to some sources Rahman was used as a name for a pagan deity:

Nöldeke thinks Mohammed was in doubt as to which name he would select for the supreme being and that he thought of adopting Er-Rahman, the merciful, as the proper name of God in place of Allah, because that was already used by the heathen. Rahmana was a favorite Hebrew name for God in the Talmudic period and in use among the Jews of Arabia.1 On the Christian monuments found by Dr. Edward Glaser in Yemen, Allah is also mentioned. The Sirwah inscription (A.D. 542) opens with the words: "In the power of the All-merciful and His Messiah and the Holy Ghost,"2 which shows that, at least in Yemen, Arabian Christians were not in error regarding the persons of the Trinity. One other term often used for Allah we will have occasion to study later. It is the word Es-Samad [the Eternal], and seems to come from the same root as Samood, the name of an idol of the tribe of 'Ad and mentioned in the poem of Yezid bin Sa'ad.3 Hobal, the Chief god of the Kaaba (and whom Dozy identifies with Baal),1 is, strange to say, not mentioned in the Koran. Perhaps he was at this period already identified by the Meccans with Allah. This would explain Mohammed's silence on the subject. (Samuel Zwemer, The Moslem Doctrine of God, pp. 27-28; underlined emphasis ours)

Other deities in the Arabian peninsula included al-Rahman and al-Hajar al-Aswad. Al-Rahman was the name of an ancient deity in southern Arabia. Muhammad used the name of this deity, which means "merciful," 169 times in the Qur'an. With the exception of Allah, it appears in the Qur'an more than any other descriptive term for Allah. (George Braswell, Islam, p. 44; underlined emphasis ours)

The name of an ancient deity in southern Arabia. Muhammad is said to have preferred this name to the name "Allah." He uses it 169 times in the Quran. With the exception of the name "Allah", the name "Al-Rahman" appears more times than any other name because Jews and Christians would have accepted it as an alternate name for Allah. Rahmana was a favorite Hebrew name for God in the Talmudic period and was frequently used by the Arabian Jews. Christians in Arabia also used the name "Rahman" to refer to the God of the Bible. A pre-Islamic inscription found in Yemen in AD 542 opens with the words: "In the power of the Al-Rahman and His Messiah and the Holy Spirit." In the Coptic Museum in Egypt, there are similar inscriptions. (Reach Out to the Muslim World, Vol. 6, No. 3&4 [Horizons International, Box 18478, Boulder, Co. 80308-1478; 1993], p. 8)

Other deities in the Arabian Peninsula included al-Rahman and Hajar-al-Aswad. Al-Rahman was the name of an ancient deity in southern Arabia. Muhammad used the name of this deity, which means "merciful," 169 times in the Qur’an. (Islam and Christianity - Part 4)

The word Rahman-an is especially significant because its northern equivalent, al-Rahman, became a later prominent attribute of Allah and one of His names in the Koran and in Islamic theology. Surah nineteen is dominated by al-Rahman. Though used in the inscription for the Christian God, yet the word is evidently borrowed from the name of the older South Arabian deities. Al-Rahim (the compassionate) also occurs as the name of a deity (RHM) in pre-Islamic and Sabean inscriptions. Another South Arabic inscription uses, kufr, association in the sense of polytheism. In the same inscription occurs the technical term denoting unbelief, KFR, as in North Arabic. (Hitti, History of Islam, p. 105)

The fact is that even 'Allah's' most frequently used title, ar-Rahman (the Merciful) was known in South Arabia well before the advent of Islam, and signified a moon-god, whom Muhammed even occasionally confused with or used as a substitute for 'Allah'.  The Koran mentions ar-Rahman occasionally, for example in sura 43:19, which most translators have renamed as God or Allah, since they, as Muhammed, found no difference between these two South Arabian moon-gods.

The name ar-Rahman had even been used by several Arabian prophets before Muhammed, and this deity seemed to have signified a similar, if not the same, position as Allah in Mecca. Therefore we cannot accept the unilateral acceptance of 'Allah' as the biblical High God, any more than the Persian high god Ahura Mazda or the Norse Odin. (The Nature of Islam: The Beginning)

According to the Koran, 'Allah' is one and no other god can be associated with him. This concept was most likely adopted from the South Arabian moon-god ar-Rahman (the Merciful), whose name was later adopted by Muslims as one of 'Allah's' titles. C. C. Torrey states:

The South Arabian inscriptions have brought to light a highly interesting parallel. In a number of them there is mention of the God, who is styled 'the Rahman' (Merciful). A monument in the British Museum... is especially remarkable. Here we find clearly indicated the doctrines of the divine forgiveness of sins, the acceptance of sacrifice, the contrast between this world and the next, and the evil of 'associating' other deities with the Rahman. (What is Islam? Part III.)

This may account for the confusion of some of Muhammad’s contemporaries in relation to the name Rahman being applied to Allah. The pagan Meccans may have been aware that Rahman referred to a different deity and because of this they were not accustomed to using it for Allah.

Just as one Muslim chronicler, Ibn Sa'd, noted:

... The Quraysh sent al-Nadr Ibn al-Harith Ibn 'Alqamah and 'Uqbah Ibn Abi Mu'ayt and others to the Jews of Yathrib and told them to ask them (Jews): We have come to you because a great affair has taken place amidst us. There is an humble orphan who makes a big claim, considering himself to be the messenger of al-Rahman, while we do not know any al-Rahman except the Rahman of al-Yamamah ... (Ibn Sa'd, Kitab Al-Tabaqat Al-Kabir, english translation by S. Moinul Haq, M.A., PH.D assisted by H.K. Ghazanfar M.A. [Kitab Bhavan Exporters & Importers, 1784 Kalan Mahal, Daryaganj, New Delhi- 110 002 India], Volume I, parts I & II, p. 189; bold emphasis ours)

Interestingly, these citations provide evidence that Muhammad assimilated different attributes and conceptions of the gods together to form his own conception of the Deity. The pagan Arabs made a similar accusation against him:

What! makes he the gods a single God? A strange thing is this, to be sure! And the chief persons of them break forth, saying: Go and steadily adhere to your gods; this is most surely a thing sought after. S. 38:5-6 Shakir

Hence, even if the Quranic mention of Baal turns out to be a reference to Hubal, this would only show that Muhammad disassociated Allah from Hubal by turning the former into the true universal God.

Interestingly, one writer actually believes that some Muslims who were still attached to their gods took their names and turned them into specific attributes of Allah:

Some of these honorifics bear a close linguistic relationship with the names of pagan deities, and to account for this the Muslims maintained that the pagans perversely named their idols after the titles used from earliest times for the one true God (Sale, 1886, p. 127). Thus Allat was derived from Allah; Manat from Mannan, 'Bountiful; Jibt from Jabbar, 'Preserver'; and so on.

On the other hand, it might be suggested that the early Muslims, many of whom still retained a reverence for their idol gods, my well have sought to perpetuate the names of their deities by concealing them in the so-called 'most excellent names' bestowed upon Allah. By this strange conversion the names of the many heathen deities could have survived within the pale of Islam.

Thus Wadd, the moon-god, was assimilated and survived in al-Wadud, 'the Loving'; Munim, worshiped in north Arabia, survives as al-Mani, 'the Withholder'; Salm, a deity of Tayma, in al-Salaam, 'the Peace'; Kaus or Kayis, regarded as the consort of Manat, is retained in al-Kawi, 'the Strong'; Aziz of north Arabia is preserved unchanged as al-Aziz, 'the Mighty'. The pre-Islamic designations of God, al-Rahman, 'the Merciful', and al-Rahim, 'the Compassionate', remain conspicuous in Islam. (Walker, Foundations of Islam, p. 43)

Thus, ar-Rahman wasn't the only title used for a pagan deity which was then applied to Allah; several of the other attributes of Allah may well have been at one time names of pagan gods which were transferred over to Islam's deity as well! Walker's interpretation is certainly more probable than the anachronistic explanation of the Muslims that is reported by Sale. This demonstrates the plausibility of Muhammad having taken the title given to Hubal, specifically the name Allah, and transforming it into the proper name of the one true universal God, thereby forever disassociating the name from Hubal.

Whatever the case may be, the fact remains that Surah 37:125 tells us nothing about the identity of Allah in pre-Islamic times.

The following citation also seems to cast doubt on Hubal being Allah:

Narrated Al-Bara:

We faced the pagans on that day (of the battle of Uhud) and the Prophet placed a batch of archers (at a special place) and appointed 'Abdullah (bin Jubair) as their commander and said, "Do not leave this place; and if you should see us conquering the enemy, do not leave this place, and if you should see them conquering us, do not (come to) help us," So, when we faced the enemy, they took to their heel till I saw their women running towards the mountain, lifting up their clothes from their legs, revealing their leg-bangles. The Muslims started saying, "The booty, the booty!" 'Abdullah bin Jubair said, "The Prophet had taken a firm promise from me not to leave this place." But his companions refused (to stay). So when they refused (to stay there), (Allah) confused them so that they could not know where to go, and they suffered seventy casualties. Abu Sufyan ascended a high place and said, "Is Muhammad present amongst the people?" The Prophet said, "Do not answer him." Abu Sufyan said, "Is the son of Abu Quhafa present among the people?" The Prophet said, "Do not answer him." Abu Sufyan said, "Is the son of Al-Khattab amongst the people?" He then added, "All these people have been killed, for, were they alive, they would have replied." On that, 'Umar could not help saying, "You are a liar, O enemy of Allah! Allah has kept what will make you unhappy." Abu Sufyan said, "Superior may be Hubal!" On that the Prophet said (to his companions), "Reply to him." They asked, "What may we say?" He said, "Say: Allah is More Elevated and More Majestic!" Abu Sufyan said, "We have (the idol) Al-'Uzza, whereas you have no 'Uzza!" The Prophet said (to his companions), "Reply to him." They said, "What may we say?" The Prophet said, "Say: Allah is our Helper and you have no helper." Abu Sufyan said, "(This) day compensates for our loss at Badr and (in) the battle (the victory) is always undecided and shared in turns by the belligerents. You will see some of your dead men mutilated, but neither did I urge this action, nor am I sorry for it." Narrated Jabir: Some people took wine in the morning of the day of Uhud and were then killed as martyrs. (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 375)

Unlike the verse in the Quran, this one does mention Hubal by name and suggests that he was distinct from Allah. Again, Muhammad transforming Allah from a pagan deity into the sole universal God, a transformation which was different from any similarly named deity, can account for why Sufyan viewed Hubal as a different god altogether.

Furthermore, this tradition actually poses problems for the Muslims since it implies that the pagans such as Abu Sufyan did not view Allah as the supreme god, but one of many rival gods. Sufyan attributes his victory over Muhammad and his god to Hubal and Uzza, suggesting that at least in his mind these gods were equal, if not superior, to Allah. Sufyan obviously felt that Allah could be challenged and defeated, which means that these pagans didn’t see Allah as the unrivaled and supreme Deity as both the Quran and Islamic traditions claim.

If this is so, then the Muslim assertion that Allah was not just one of many pagan deities worshiped by the Meccans is doubtful. The Pagans did view Allah as another deity.

In conclusion, we need to emphasize that these facts remain. The OT explicitly denies the Muslim assertion that the pre-Islamic Ishmaelites knew and worshiped the true God and that their only problem was that they associated other gods with him. The data conclusively shows that as the centuries unfolded the Ishmaelites forsook the God of their ancestors Abraham and Jacob, Yahweh Elohim, for the worship of some false god. The false god whom they worshiped as the true God was quite possibly Baal. The data also shows that Hubal was the high god worshiped at Mecca, which supports the view that he was the Allah of pre-Islamic times.

We started out with a quotation from the Psalms identifying the Ishmaelites as enemies of God. Even though the thesis of this paper was argued on the basis of the assumption that the Meccans are Ishmaelites the conclusion does not depend on this assumption. Most of the quotations we have cited to support our argument do not mention Ishmaelites at all.

The Biblical and historical evidence shows that the Moabites worshiped Baal. The pre-Islamic and Muslim sources show (a) that the Meccans took over the idol Hubal from the Moabites and (b) that Allah and Hubal are actually identical. Thus, whether the Meccans are Ishmaelites or not, the evidence is still strong and sufficient to conclude that Muhammad's Allah is actually Hubal, i.e. the Baal of the Moabites and thus not the God of the Bible. Muhammad incorporated the characteristics and names of various other gods into his new monotheistic message about Allah, but he apparently started the construction of Allah with Hubal, the chief god of the Meccans.

Further readings

Ba’al, Hubal, and Allah
Did the Meccans Believe in Allah as the Most High?
Ar-Rahman of the Quran: A Pagan Deity or the God of the Bible?