Buried by "the Butt"

How Osama Abdallah made a fool of himself, again

Jochen Katz


For more than three months now, Osama Abdallah has the following at the very top of his "What's New" page — displayed here in its original font size:

GOD's Stupidity is smarter than all of us?!

(According to Paul's blasphemy!)

(Click here)

Apparently, Osama Abdallah considers this article the pearl of his site, one of his best arguments ever. Out of several hundreds if not thousands of pages, it is his "top article", advertized in huge, bold, colorful letters so that nobody can overlook it, and he even sent out several emails mocking us and daring us respond to it.[1]

In the article itself, he shouts out another colorful huge font challenge:

Paul did clearly insult GOD Almighty, and I challenge any polytheist trinitarian pagan to disprove it!

Rebutting Abdallah's nonsense is not our top priority,[2,5] but since he is asking for it so persistently, I could not resist the temptation. As he pumped so much extra air into this particular balloon, the explosion will be all the louder.

I will not respond to his article "line by line" but point out some of the main reasons why his argument is so bad, and why his conclusion does not follow.

I don't care about the meaning

Near the top of his polemic, O. Abdallah states this:

Now before Christians jump and start telling me what Paul's "real" intentions were, I want to eliminate this nonsense of theirs altogether by telling them that Paul's intentions are not relevant here, even though it is quite obvious that he did INSULT GOD Almighty!  So please, hold your horses, sit down, and don't spam my email address with your nonsense.  The reason why his intentions are irrelevant, even though he is clearly a blasphemer, is because:

1-  I am not discussing Paul's human-words, but rather GOD Almighty's supposed Divine Revelations!  I don't care what humans say.  I care about what is supposed to be GOD Almighty's Holy and Divine Revelations.

2-  The verse above is crystal clear that it is Paul's stupidity that uttered such blasphemous words and not GOD Almighty's Divine Inspirations!

So again, Paul and his intentions are irrelevant here.  It is the TEXT that is relevant, and whether or not the Bible is corrupt and altered by men.

In the mind of Osama Abdallah, the meaning of a text has nothing to do with the intention of the author. It is Abdallah who decides what the text has to say, and it is irrelevant to ask for the opinion of anyone else, not even of the person who wrote it. A very interesting approach, to say the least. The readers will agree that this argument alone — or shall we say this introductory excuse? — is a sure sign that we have to expect a top-quality interpretation from Mr. Abdallah.

Answering a fool according to his folly

Let's see what Abdallah is screaming about at the top of his voice:

2-   "Fool" is a forbidden word by Jesus!  Paul clearly contradicted that:

It is truly funny how the word "fool" is forbidden upon Christians to use it against each others, and yet, Paul used it on the Creator of the Universe Himself!

Let us look at what Jesus said:

"But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca, ' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell.  (From the NIV Bible, Matthew 5:22)"

Clearly, Paul contradicted Jesus' own commands by using this forbidden word on the Creator of the Universe Himself, blowing away every argument about him being a true apostle of GOD Almighty!

Basically, according to Abdallah, Jesus forbade the word "fool", Paul used a derivative of the word "fool", therefore he cannot be an apostle of God. Case closed. We do not even have to ask in what sense the word was used, it does not matter in what context it was used. The very fact that it was used is sufficient.

To see how utterly ridiculous this approach is, let us illustrate it with an example from the Qur'an. The Qur'an also has at least one forbidden word:

... So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not "Three" - Cease! (it is) better for you! ... S. 4:171 Pickthall

The Qur'an is very clear. People should believe in Allah and His messengers and not use the word "three".

Well, I searched Abdallah's own website, www.answering-christianity.com, for the forbidden word and found that "three" currently occurs in no less than 644 articles on his site, not counting his audio files (search result on 15 August 2006). Certainly, that exposes O. Abdallah as a terribly disobedient Muslim. Some may even take that as proof positive that he is an unbeliever because he is transgressing one of the simplest commands of Allah again and again and again.

What is worse, the forbidden word occurs in many other verses of the Qur'an! Just a few examples (there are many more!) will suffice to make the point:

... then a fast of three days while on the pilgrimage ... S. 2:196 Pickthall

Women who are divorced shall wait, keeping themselves apart, three (monthly) courses. ... S. 2:228 Pickthall

He said: My Lord! Appoint a token for me. (The angel) said: The token unto thee (shall be) that thou shalt not speak unto mankind three days except by signs. Remember thy Lord much, and praise (Him) in the early hours of night and morning. S. 3:41 Pickthall

He said: My Lord! Appoint for me some token. He said: Thy token is that thou, with no bodily defect, shalt not speak unto mankind three nights. S. 19:10 Pickthall

... marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four; ... S. 4:3 Pickthall

O ye who believe! Let your slaves, and those of you who have not come to puberty, ask leave of you at three times (before they come into your presence): Before the prayer of dawn, and when ye lay aside your raiment for the heat of noon, and after the prayer of night. Three times of privacy for you. ... S. 24:58 Pickthall

And you (all) will be in three kinds (i.e. separate groups). ... then a fast of days while on the pilgrimage ... S. 56:7 Al-Hilali & Khan

"Depart you to a shadow (of Hell-fire smoke ascending) in three columns, S. 77:30 Al-Hilali & Khan

Despite the fact that "three" is a forbidden word, it seems to be one of the favorite numbers of the author of the Qur'an. If somebody is interested to waste more time on it, he could even research the question whether there is any other number that is mentioned more often in the Qur'an than the number three!

Using the reasoning of Mr. Abdallah one would have to conclude: Because Allah did forbid the use of the word "three" in S. 4:171, all of these verses cannot be from Allah, but must therefore be corruptions of the Qur'an.[3]

To paraphraze Abdallah:

Now before Muslims jump and start telling me what the "real" intentions of this command were, I want to eliminate this nonsense of theirs altogether by telling them that those intentions are not relevant here, ...! So please, hold your horses, sit down, and don't spam my email address with your nonsense. The reason why his intentions are irrelevant, ..., is because:

1-  I am not discussing these words like they are human words that need to be interpreted by taking the intention of the author into account, but rather as GOD Almighty's supposed Divine Revelations! I don't care what humans say about reading words in context. I care about what is supposed to be GOD Almighty's Holy and Divine Revelations.

2-  The statement quoted above is crystal clear that it is the authors's plain stupidity that uttered such nonsense and not GOD Almighty's Divine Inspirations!

So again, the author's intentions are irrelevant here. It is the TEXT that is relevant, and whether or not the Qur'an is contradictory and corrupt and altered by men.

You think that is stupid? Well, I agree, it definitely is.

Maybe we are now finally ready to ask the all-important question? Here it comes: What then is the actual meaning of Paul's statement?

Since J.P. Holding has already explained that well enough, I simply recommend the readers to have a look at his article, Oh, A Wise Guy, Huh?

Here just a short summary: Verses 18 to 25 of 1 Corinthians chapter 1 form one coherent argument. They need to be read together. Abdallah only quotes the last verse, the conclusion, without having any interest in the context that is found in the verses that precede it. He even states explicitly that he does not care about the intended meaning. In 1 Corinthians 1:18-25, Paul responded to arguments by certain opponents of the Gospel, and when writing his answer, using the literary device of irony, he assumed a certain level of intelligence and reading comprehension. Although I have never met a Christian who was troubled by this verse, the ‘complexity’ of Paul's answer was apparently way too high for Mr. Abdallah. Maybe he thinks it is essential for a follower of an illiterate prophet to be unsophisticated?.[8]

A friend whom I asked to review this article wanted to contribute more to it. Therefore, here follows another example from the Qur'an that Mr. Abdallah is certainly going to cherish as well.

A blasphemous fool

About a week ago it came to my attention that an amateur Muslim named Osama Abdallah, who has a mediocre website, has posted a ridiculous article called “GOD’s stupidity is smarter than all of us?!”, as a challenge to the Answering-Islam team, or as he called it, to the Snake head of answering-islam. When reading the article I could not help but to feel sorry for this fool and his lack of basic knowledge on bible exegesis. Not to mention, lack of knowledge of his own scholars’ belief.

Mr. Abdallah’s whole argument stems from the view point that, since the apostle Paul wrote 1 Corinthians 1:25 and in his words “insulted God Almighty”, then this is proof that Paul is not an apostle of God Almighty, and the Bible is not inspired by God, but rather by Satan.

Mr. Abdallah claims that Paul’s verse is a blasphemy to God. After all, God will never say such thing about himself. But what Mr. Abdallah failed to do, is to read the verse within its context. Something Mr. Abdallah obviously does not know how to do. So we suggest that Mr. Abdallah starts by learning what does the word “CONTEXT” means before jumping to any conclusions.

If we want to turn the table around on Mr. Abdallah and his amateur team (my apology to real amateurs for using this term), we can easily pick verses from the Quran and make same claims. For instance, The Quran in Sura 8:30 clearly mentions that Allah is a Deceiver (exactly what the Arabic TEXT states).

And when the unbelievers were devising against thee, to confine thee, or slay thee, or to expel thee, and were devising, and God was devising; and God is the best of devisers. S. 8:30 Arberry

Wa-ith yamkuru bika allatheena kafaroo liyuthbitooka aw yaqtulooka aw yukhrijooka wayamkuroona wayamkuru Allahu waAllahu khayru almakireena. S. 8:30 (transliteration, source)

See also S. 3:54, 4:142, and 27:50 which all talk about Allah scheming and deceiving.

To paraphrase Mr. Abdallah:

Now before Mr. Abdallah jumps and starts telling us what Muhammad’s "real" intentions were, I want to eliminate this nonsense of his altogether by telling him that Muhammad’s intentions are not relevant here, even though it is quite obvious that he did INSULT GOD Almighty! So please, hold your horses, sit down, and don't spam my email address with your nonsense.  The reason why his intentions are irrelevant, even though he is clearly a blasphemer, is because:

1-  I am not discussing Muhammad's human-words, but rather GOD Almighty's supposed Divine Revelations!  I don't care what humans say.  I care about what is supposed to be GOD Almighty's Holy and Divine Revelations.

2-  The verse above (S. 8:30) is crystal clear that it is Muhammad's stupidity that uttered such blasphemous words and not GOD Almighty's Divine Inspirations!

So again, Muhammad and his intentions are irrelevant here.  It is the TEXT that is relevant, and whether or not the Quran is a Divine book or a fabricated one made up by a human and a false prophet.

Ironically, when we read some of the English translations of this verse, we clearly see that some translated the word “Deceiver” to PLANNER! Simply because the true English translation would have been so offensive to use!

To me, GOD Almighty would never say that He has deception in Him. He would never declare that He is a Deceiver. In fact, when we examine the God of the Bible, we can clearly see an entirely different God than the one in the Quran (see Does Yahweh Deceive?)

No doubt, Mr. Abdallah has taken Paul’s verse completely out of context, a typical tactic by Muslims out of ignorance, or deception. After all, their God by his own account claimed to be a deceiver himself.

So if we ought to play the contextualization game with the Quran, we can easily find many verses that can be interpreted differently than what is actually intended. Let us for example analyze a verse in the Quran by taking it completely out of context:

Who doth more wrong than those who invent a lie against God? They will be turned back to the presence of their Lord, and the witnesses will say, “These are the ones who lied against their Lord! Behold! The curse of God is on those who do wrong! S. 11:18 Yusuf Ali

If we carefully examine this verse, one can assume that it is talking about two different Gods. One is called God, and the other God is called the Lord. Based on this, one can claim that Muhammad is actually teaching about the existence of two Gods not One God. Something clearly against the teaching of Islam, and is contradictory to other verses in the Quran itself. Therefore, we can conclude that Muhammad is the Liar mentioned in this verse. Furthermore, we can also conclude that the Quran is TRULY a corrupt book that was inspired by Satan. May God Almighty burn that liar and blasphemer, in hell for Eternity! Amen

And in another verse:

But those who struggle in Our cause, surely We shall guide them in Our ways; and God is with the good-doers. S. 29.69 Arberry

We can see that the author of the Quran (Muhammad) placed himself at the same level with God, by declaring that he has the power to guide those who struggle in following his path. Yet the Quran teaches that only God can guide and misguide. Once again Muhammad is introducing teachings that go against the doctrine of Islam.

And yet in this verse:

The Prophet is nearer to the believers than their selves; his wives are their mothers… S. 33:6 Arberry

One can only read that Muhammad is actually teaching that he is Omnipresent, as he declares himself to be close to ALL the believers of Islam at the same time. An attribute no one other than God can possess. And in addition, he is announcing to his followers that his wives are their Mothers by faith in Muhammad. Which is no different than what Christianity teaches that God is our Father by faith in Christ.

Furthermore, Mr. Abdallah foolishly claims that PAUL must not be an apostle from God Almighty since he was inspired to write such a verse in the Bible. My response to that foolish claim is to ask Mr. Abdallah to explain to us why a Muslim scholar like Al Qurtubi, a well known and approved Islamic commentator of the Quran, in his comments on Sura 61:14, makes a clear statement that PAUL was one of Jesus’ apostles whom was sent by Jesus to Rome. If a well accepted Muslim scholar, such as Al Qurtubi, can make such a statement about Paul, who is then Mr. Abdallah to claim that PAUL is not. Obviously Mr. Abdallah lacks knowledge of what his own scholars’ view are of the apostle Paul.

Finally. Mr. Abdallah makes the claim that his house is made out of solid brick! I just would like to add that it is clearly made out of HOLLOW brick filled with HOT AIR.

Mutee’a Al-Fadi, 18 August 2006

We will have more to say about this in the appendices.

On the very day that Abdallah published his article, I had asked an Arab friend, another ex-Muslim and is now also a follower of Jesus, to look at Osama Abdallah's article and give me his opinion.[4] He also did more than that. His answer follows in the next section.[5]

The mark of a fool

An amateur Muslim apologist named Osama wrote an article thinking it’s a strong and devastating argument against the Apostle Paul. His article consists basically of three points:

1- Paul's blasphemous statement.
2- "Fool" is a forbidden word by Jesus! Paul clearly contradicted that.
3- GOD Almighty would never declare such utter nonsense!

I personally think this is a very funny article because all that the writer managed to do is earn the title "fool" for himself.

Let us look at what he says and I will start from the second point, he says: ‘... the word "fool" is forbidden upon Christians to use it against each others... (Matthew 5:22) Clearly, Paul contradicted Jesus' own commands by using this forbidden word on the Creator of the Universe Himself, blowing away every argument about him being a true apostle of GOD Almighty!’

Well, let us go back to the Sermon on the Mount and see what Jesus said right at the end of the sermon. He said:

But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand.   Matthew 7:26

So, clearly, Jesus has no problem whatsoever using the word "fool" to describe those who don't follow his words. Jesus also used the same word in other places like:

You blind fools! Which is greater: the gold, or the temple that makes the gold sacred? ... You blind men! Which is greater: the gift, or the altar that makes the gift sacred?   Matthew 23:17, 19

Five of them were foolish and five were wise. The foolish ones took their lamps but did not take any oil with them.   Matthew 25:2-3

Jesus uses the word fool to describe unbelievers and hypocrites, i.e. people who pretend to be godly men, and may even be religious leaders, but in reality live lives of disobedience against the commands of God. As a matter of fact, the Bible gives us a very detailed description of the fool.

The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”
      They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds, ...   Psalm 14:1

A wise man fears the LORD and shuns evil,
      but a fool is hotheaded and reckless.   Proverbs 14:16

The heart of the wise inclines to the right,
      but the heart of the fool to the left.
Even as he walks along the road,
      the fool lacks sense
      and shows everyone how stupid he is.   Ecclesiastes 10:2-3

The wise man has eyes in his head,
      while the fool walks in the darkness; ...   Ecclesiastes 2:14

The fool folds his hands and eats his own flesh.   Ecclesiastes 4:5

For the fool speaks folly,
      his mind is busy with evil:
He practices ungodliness
      and spreads error concerning the LORD; ...   Isaiah 32:6

A fool finds no pleasure in understanding
      but delights in airing his own opinions.   Proverbs 18:2

A fool's lips bring him strife,
      and his mouth invites a beating.   Proverbs 18:6

The vexation of a fool is known at once,
      but the prudent ignores an insult.   Proverbs 12:16

A wise son makes a glad father,
      but a foolish son is a sorrow to his mother.   Proverbs 10:1

Doing wrong is like a joke to a fool,
      but wisdom is pleasure to a man of understanding.   Proverbs 10:23

As a dog returns to its vomit,
      so a fool repeats his folly.   Proverbs 26:11

The Bible has no problem in using harsh language when it is required even as Jesus himself gave us the mark of the fool.

Of course it would be wrong to call someone who isn't a fool by such a name, but on the other hand it's merely descriptive to call Osama a fool. He simply fits the character very well.

Now let us look at the fool's first point and I will quote the whole argument:

Let us read what Paul said:

"For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength. (From the NIV Bible, 1 Corinthians 1:25)"

Let us analyze this "foolish" verse from Paul:

1- Regardless of how smart and stupid GOD and us humans are, our intelligence will never reach even the stupidity of GOD!

2- GOD is a fool.

3- GOD is weak.

4- Man is more foolish and weaker than GOD.

5- The comparison itself is very insulting and degrading to GOD Almighty. It is also limiting to Him since our finite and limited intelligence and strength were compared to His infinite Attributes.

Without knowing it, Osama has just demonstrated what Paul is saying since he wrote, "Let us analyze this "foolish" verse from Paul". This is very important ... why?

Well, going back to verse 18, Paul says: "For the word of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us who are saved it is the power of God." And that is exactly what Osama did: he called it foolish.

What Paul is simply repeating (quoting) here is what the world in its wisdom thinks: God's way is foolish (vv. 18, 21), and then answers that what the world calls wisdom, God calls foolish (v. 20). It's complete enmity between God and unbelievers (Romans 8:7).

So having that in mind as the touchstone for what Paul is saying, we read verse 25.

Its rather clear what it says that what the world calls foolish and weak is, in fact, wisdom and power.

It's very strange for such an argument to come from a Muslim because over and over again Muslims call the Gospel foolish, and call ‘saving us by the cross’ weak. This is the very point Paul is making in 1 Corinthians.

The fool goes on and says: "GOD Almighty would never declare such utter nonsense."

This is a very interesting point because the only way it would make any sense is by assuming that we have to agree to the fool's standard of what is rude and what is not; i.e., we have to agree the Quran did come from God, and few other things. But those are the points Osama has to prove, not to assume. It would be very easy to get the Quran, Hadith and other Islamic source and list the filth in them but it would also be pointless. There are two ways critiquing any thought, religion, ...

1- External criticism: list any number of things and declare you don't like them or you think they are wrong — that is what Osama does, and it has no weight at all. All what the article told us is Osama doesn't like the way the Bible speaks, but we already know that. His liking or disliking is a piece of autobiography and has nothing to do with the subject.

2- Internal criticism: that is to compare internally the system itself and that is what Osama failed to do.

Bassam Khoury, 29 April 2006

Abdallah's Argument from an Arabic translation (AAA, so to speak)

Nearly two months after he had first published his article, Abdallah added another piece to his polemic, this time arguing from one Arabic translation. He states:

Ironically, when one reads the Arabic translation of this stupidity and blasphemy, he clearly sees that the liars translated "foolishness" to IGNORANCE (jahalah)!   The reason for this is because in Arabic we don't have two words for foolish and stupid.  They both mean one word and that is GHABI.  Foolishness or stupidity mean GHABA'A.  The Arabic translators COULD NOT DARE to use this word in their translations, because the Arabic words ghabi and/or ghaba'a are very offensive words!

Just as Osama Abdallah will not accept the sometimes ludicrous or deceptive (English) translations of the Qur'an, see Versions of the Qur'an, as evidence for serious problems in the Qur'an, this above argument does not show that there is a problem in the original Greek text of the New Testament. Even if true — and Abdallah is not known for his proficiency in Arabic —, instead of incriminating the Bible, it only shows that the Arabic language is deficient because it cannot distinguish between the two concepts the way English can, i.e. the above is only an example exposing a/the deficiency of the Arabic language when compared to the Greek and the English language.

So, the Qur'an is written in a deficient language. Congratulations, Mr. Abdallah! Maybe that helps you to understand why God caused his final message, the Gospel of Jesus Christ, to be written down originally in Greek, and not in Arabic.

Again, the original Greek text cannot be judged based on a translation into any language, be it Arabic or Zulu, or whatever other language Osama Abdallah is going to fancy next.

However, with his latest addition to this article, Abdallah piled foolishness upon foolishness, and folly upon folly. B.K. comments:

Osama said the Arabic has only one word for fools which is "stupid". In fact, nothing could be more stupid than that. There are many words in Arabic to for different levels of and reasons for foolishness:

A– Gahil = ignorant
B- Mughafal = unwitting
C- Ma'toh = retarded
D- ahmaq = Moron
E- Emaa' = the one who goes with the flow and has no opinion of his own
F- Fahih = Dull or stupid

And I could get a lot more.[6]

[... some discussion of the Greek word, the English usage, and a classical Arabic word omitted ...] I have currently access to only two Arabic translations of the Bible. One of them is what Osama uses, and the other (modern Arabic translation) renders the word as hamaka which means lack of wisdom, see this online edition.

In short, there is no right word in Arabic that I know of to give the exact meaning of the Greek [but both of those that were used in the translations are reasonably close].

Moreover, the Greek word does not mean "stupid" so that there is no justification for O. Abdallah's operation to forcefully translate it into the Arabic equivalent of stupid. This can be seen from another statement of Paul:

Don't have anything to do with foolish (moros) and stupid (apaideutos) arguments, because you know they produce quarrels.   2 Timothy 2:23

Conclusion: Somebody who has neither understood the meaning of the text, nor has a sufficient knowledge of the target language (Arabic in this case), is hardly in a position to evaluate whether a certain translation is appropriate or not. That should be rather obvious to the vast majority of people, and my guess is that this majority comprises approximately all but one.

P.S.: Here comes an extra bonus observation for O. Abdallah from our friend B.K.:

No one argues the meaning of a word in Greek by going to modern Arabic. I don't know if he would like it if we did that with the Quran and Hadith.

For example, Al-Hilali & Khan translate the word Gha'it in S. 4:43 as "the call of nature". This is what it means, but the literal translation ought to be "shit".

Or in Sahih Bukhari we find the following hadith:

Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
When Ma'iz bin Malik came to the Prophet (in order to confess), the Prophet said to him, "Probably you have only kissed (the lady), or winked, or looked at her?" He said, "No, O Allah's Apostle!" The Prophet said, using no euphemism, "Did you have sexual intercourse with her?" The narrator added: At that, (i.e. after his confession) the Prophet ordered that he be stoned (to death). (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 82, Number 813)

What was translated here as "did you have sexual intercourse with her" is only one word in the Arabic, aniktaha, which in English should be translated as "Did you fuck her?"

And for sure, they didn't dare to translate it this way.

So that point of the translation is just a smoke screen. So what if Osama doesn't like the translation? Big Deal!!

There are a few words in English and in Arabic translations that I don't like personally, and I know the translators chose certain words because of their readers and how to convey the meaning to them.

Appendix 1: The foolishness of lying

I don't know about Osama Abdallah, but I consider lying and attempts of deception not a particularly smart course of action. The truth is powerful. Lying is foolish because every lie, every deception will eventually be exposed. Even when the liar is clever, and works very carefully, it is next to impossible to remove all traces of the truth in a matter. Life is very complex and everything is interwoven with so many other aspects of life. In consequence, lies and deceptions usually contain inconsistencies and conflict with known facts. There will always be traces and hints that something doesn't quite fit, and then there are people who find them and start thinking and investigating and, sooner or later, the truth will come to light, and the lie will be exposed.

Moreover, lying and deception are morally wrong. For this paper I will consider this as a given that does not need to be argued.

Usually people lie or use deception in order to gain some unfair advantage over others (whether using doping in sports, or making an extra profit in building projects by using cheaper materials than agreed in the contract, etc.), or to avert an uncomfortable situation (e.g., trying to cover up a mistake in order to avoid real or imagined consequences of being held responsible for it).

However, when it comes to light that someone lied or deceived, the damage suffered is often much larger than the advantage one tried to gain by lying in the first place. Not only will he lose all the gain, and often has to pay a hefty penalty on top, but it also results in a considerable loss of honor and credibility.

On the other hand, if companies or individuals are known for being hard-working and honest, known for delivering true value for money, people will want to do business with them. In the short term, deceptive schemes seem to promise quick profits, but in the long run honesty and quality build the basis for credibility and lasting success.

Therefore, I propose that honesty is wise and lying is foolish. Or, since Osama Abdallah wants to equate "foolish" and "stupid", honesty is smart and using deception is stupid.

Now we are ready to turn to the Qur'an again:

Verily, the hypocrites seek to deceive Allah, but it is He Who deceives them. And when they stand up for As-Salat (the prayer), they stand with laziness and to be seen of men, and they do not remember Allah but little. S. 4:142

And (the unbelievers) schemed and planned, and Allah schemed also, and the best of schemers is Allah. S. 3:54

Remember how the unbelievers schemed against thee, to keep thee in bonds, or to slay thee, or get thee out (of thy home). They scheme and plot, but the best of schemers is Allah. S. 8:30

So they schemed a scheme: and We schemed a scheme, while they perceived not. S. 27:50

The Qur'an plainly admits that Allah uses deception. Actually, the author of the Qur'an seems to be quite proud of it. It states that his deception is better or greater or smarter than the deception of others, and that Allah is the best of all schemers. Yet, however one wants to qualify it, at the end of the day, it is still deception. Since deception is morally wrong, this causes all kinds of problems for the credibility of the Qur'an which is discussed in other articles (1, 2, 3, 4, 4, 6).

Moreover, related to the topic of this particular article, these observations result in the following syllogism:

  • Allah uses deception (by his own admission).
  • To use deception is foolish (see the above discussion).
  • Therefore Allah acts foolish.

Or, to apply this more personally to O. Abdallah, since it is he who made it such a big issue:

  • Osama Abdallah's god uses deception.
  • To use deception is stupid.
  • Osama Abdallah's god is stupid.

In fact, if the use of deception is foolishness (or stupidity) then the above Qur'an verses imply that "Allah's stupidity is smarter than that of the unbelievers", which has a stunning similarity to the title of Abdallah's article. Since Abdallah declared such a statement to be his number one reason why he rejects the Bible, by his own criterion, he should now reject the Qur'an and Islam. Again, along the lines of Abdallah's reasoning, it doesn't help that this god thinks that HIS deception is smarter than the deception of everyone else, the Qur'an still attributes deception and thus stupidity to God, and that is unacceptable.

The only way how Abdallah could challenge this syllogism is to attack the second line. Well, I am looking forward to see his defense of using deception as something that is not foolish but smart. Even more, that the use of deception is actually a sign of great wisdom and befitting the dignity of God Almighty, the Creator of the Universe.

The foolishness of Allah's deceptions examined

There are actually two aspects of foolishness found in the deceptions used by the author of the Qur'an in his pretense to be God. The first level of foolishness is to use deception at all, since it will back fire. That has been explained above, and I will give some examples below. The second level of foolishness is to brag about it.

Even if you had success with a particular scheme or deception, it is foolish to make that public and brag about it. Perhaps, you feel so strong at the current moment that you think this cannot harm you anymore, but the long-term damage is very obvious. You have exposed your character. You have made it public that you are a deceiver. Your character flaw is now "on record". And even if you intend to be honest in the future, there will always be a suspicion against you. Nevertheless, humans regularly do such silly things because of vanity. What is the value of tricking others if nobody applauds you for your trickery?

S. 3:54, 8:30 and 27:50 are statements in the past tense. They refer to specific situations in which Allah (or Muhammad) got the better of his enemies. They plotted against him/them, but somehow the Muslims had "superior intelligence" and tricked the unbelievers. Now, after the incident is over, they do the natural thing and brag about it. On the human level, that is all very understandable, but it is foolish, and it is part of Islam's undoing. It is one element why Muhammad and his Allah are exposed as imposters.

Islam works with lies and deception on may levels, but one of the most easily exposed, is the claim that the Qur'an confirms the Bible. The reason for this claim is not hard to comprehend. In order to convince believers in the God of the Bible that you have further revelation from the same source, you must convince them that your message is in agreement with the earlier pronouncements of the same God. Thus, in order to establish his own credibility as a prophet from the same God whom Jews and Christians believe in, Muhammad claimed that his message is in confirmation of and agreement with their scriptures, and he incorporated dozens of Biblical characters and stories into the Qur'an. Perhaps this scheme was not even devised for the purpose of convincing Jews and Christians, but simply in order to communicate to his main audience, the Arab pagans, that he was preaching a respectable religion, not merely something he made up himself. At least, they would not so easily have been able to verify or falsify this argument.

Anyway, that this claim was merely a lie in order to deceive people who don't know the Bible well enough, is easily exposed by pointing out dozens of contradictions between the Qur'an and the Bible. Muhammad goes even farther by rewriting the stories and fashioning the earlier prophets in his own image.

As mentioned above, life is very complex and many aspects and relationships are interwoven. It is next to impossible to cover all traces and destroy all evidence. Whether in court or during criminal investigations, crimes, lies, schemes and deceptions are often exposed because the perpetrators overlooked some "small details" connected with "side issues" even if their case was constructed very cleverly. But those seemingly insignficant details expose the whole grand scheme as a fraud.

The fraud of Islam was hardly as subtle as many of today's fraudulent schemes in politics or business. Nevertheless, the big blunders as well as the small oversights and so-called insignificant traces of ignorance all contribute to expose the Qur'an as the deception that it is.

Here I want to give just two examples. One major blunder and one oversight that may look insignificant. The title "Son of God" is absolutely central to the Biblical message, in both Old and New Testaments. The Gospel of Matthew reports the following conversation about the identity of Jesus:

When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say the Son of Man is?" They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets." "But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?" Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. ... Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ. Matthew 16:13-17, 20

The time to make this message public had not yet come at that point, but it is obvious that the recognition and confession that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah), and (therefore) the Son of God, is absolutely central to the Christian faith. The Qur'an, on the other hand curses those who confess Jesus as the Son of God:

... and the Christians call Christ the son of God. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. God's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth! S. 9:30 Yusuf Ali

The Qur'an directly attacks and denies the central confession of the Christian faith. Even more, it puts under a curse all who utter the Christian creed. There are many more absolutely crucial disagreements (the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus, the forgiveness of sin by way of atonement, the Trinity, etc.) which all expose as a lie the claim that the Qur'an confirms the Bible. But it is not only seen in those big issues. There are many small points that also show that the author of the Qur'an was simply ignorant and/or overlooked many seemingly small details while working out his great deception. In the Quranic version of the story of Joseph we read:

Then when they entered the presence of Joseph, he provided a home for his parents with himself, and said: "Enter ye Egypt (all) in safety if it please God." And he raised his parents high on the throne (of dignity), and ... S. 12:99-100 Yusuf Ali

Where is the problem? Well, the author of the Qur'an overlooked that Joseph's mother had died long ago, and even his step-mother had died before his father and brothers with their families moved to Egypt (cf. this article).

Muhammad had a considerable handicap in styling the Qur'an to be similar to the Bible. In his time, all manuscripts were handwritten, and thus very expensive and very hard to get for somebody who was neither a Jew nor a Christian. And even if, he would not have been able to properly study them, since they were in a different language. Thus, all his knowledge of the Bible was hearsay, picked up here and there in listening to Jews and Christians. No wonder that he messed it up so badly.

That was foolish. Osama Abdallah may even call it stupid. It may have worked for a long time in Muhammad's environment, but today the Bible and the Qur'an are easily accessible and everyone can compare them and verify that the Qur'an contradicts not only itself but also the Bible in hundreds of places, despite the fact that it claims to confirm the scriptures of the Jews and the Christians. This deception has definitely caught up with Islam, and is plain to anyone who doesn't wilfully close his eyes against it.

In conclusion, the author of the Quran used lies and deceptions en masse, and many of them are done so carelessly, everyone can see them quickly as what they are. That is foolish in itself (Osama Abdallah may prefer the word "stupid"). But then, feeling himself invincible, he added an even more foolish move by loudly bragging that he is the best of schemers.

In my opinion, in regard to the author of the Qur'an, we have to correct the proud claim found in Sura 8:30, because the deceptions of Allah are not even as clever as those that have been devised by many mediocre human beings.

One more point to ponder:

Qurtubi observes that some scholars have considered the words "best of schemers" to be one of God's beautiful names. Thus one would pray, "O Best of Schemers, scheme for me!" Qurtubi also reports that the Prophet used to pray, "O God, scheme for me, and do not scheme against me!" (Qurtubi, IV, pp. 98-99; cf. Zamakhshari, I, p. 366). (Mahmoud M. Ayoub, The Quran and Its Interpreters: The House of Imran [State University of New York Press (SUNY), Albany 1992], Volume II, p. 166)

In the Bible, the deceiver is one of the names of Satan. The first time he appears in the story of the Fall, and there he deceives Eve to eat the forbidden fruit (Genesis 3; 1 Timothy 2:13,14), and he is the deceiver until the very end (Revelation 20:3,8,10). Jesus calls Satan not only a liar but "the father of lies" (John 8:44). It is quite amazing that in the Qur'an khayru al-makireen (the best of deceivers) is one of the names of Allah; according to some scholars even being included among the ninety-nine beautiful (!) names of Allah.[7] Whom else but Satan would brag to be the best of deceivers? To those who have eyes to see, this title may serve as a hint who had his hand in the dough.

Finally, don't fault me for using strong words. It is Osama Abdallah who set the tone for this discussion.

Appendix 2: Even more ignorance

In the first section of his article, although completely misunderstanding its meaning, Abdallah raises the following objection against Paul's comparative statement:

"For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.  (From the NIV Bible, 1 Corinthians 1:25)"

Let us analyze this foolish and blasphemous verse from Paul:

1-  Regardless of how smart and stupid GOD and us humans are, our intelligence will never reach even the stupidity of GOD! ...

5-  The comparison itself is very insulting and degrading to GOD Almighty.  It is also limiting to Him since our finite and limited intelligence and strength were compared to His infinite Attributes.

Abdallah objects on two counts. First, foolishness is a negative term, and it is therefore insulting and degrading to apply it to God in any way. Second, any kind of comparison of human abilities to God's divine and therefore infinite attributes is limiting God. (Why does a comparison of human abilities and divine attributes limit God? How does it limit God?) Frankly, I do not understand how a comparison in itself — i.e. a verbal or written statement by a human being — is able to put some kind of restriction on God, but that is for Abdallah to explain. I consider this particular statement of Abdallah mere gibberish. Nevertheless, for this section, I am simply going to accept Abdallah's criterion that the existence of such comparisons is an argument against a book to be revelation from God.

Let's revisit the Qur'an:

And (the unbelievers) schemed and planned, and Allah schemed also, and the best of schemers is Allah. S. 3:54

Remember how the unbelievers schemed against thee, to keep thee in bonds, or to slay thee, or get thee out (of thy home). They scheme and plot, but the best of schemers is Allah. S. 8:30

These verses clearly compare Allah's ability to deceive with the ability of unbelieving humans to scheme and deceive. And they declare that Allah's ability to deceive is the greatest. Again:

Verily, the hypocrites seek to deceive Allah, but it is He Who deceives them. ... S. 4:142

So they schemed a scheme: and We schemed a scheme, while they perceived not. S. 27:50

Others sought to deceive and to scheme, but Allah understood what they were doing, and he put his own superior scheme against their inferior scheme, and they did not realize it. The comparison is not done by using an adjective in comparative form (grammatically speaking), but it is nevertheless a comparison.

Is deception something good or something bad? If it is an insult to call a human being a schemer and deceiver, then certainly it is even more an insult to God.

Thus, we conclude in Abdallah's own words: The comparison itself is very insulting and degrading to GOD Almighty. It is also limiting to Him since our finite and limited ability of scheming is compared to His infinite Attributes.

There is no question that the Qur'an is comparing human abilities to God's abilities. By his own criterion, Abdallah has to reject the Qur'an as revelation from God.

Another example:

Then fashioned We the drop a clot, then fashioned We the clot a little lump, then fashioned We the little lump bones, then clothed the bones with flesh, and then produced it as another creation. So blessed be Allah, the Best of creators! S. 23:14

Again, the urge to brag brings the author of the Qur'an in all kinds of difficulties. Who are those other creators? Are they also eternal and independent gods, Allah merely being the best of them? That would contradict the message of the Qur'an as a whole. Or are those other creators themselves created and thus finite beings? Whether angels or humans or jinn, if they are finite creatures, then we have here a comparison of God's infinite ability to create with the lesser, finite ability to create that is attributed to some of his creatures. Yet again, Abdallah's "best of all criteria for evaluation of revelations" disqualifies the Qur'an from being of divine origin.

Moreover, Osama Abdallah himself has certainly chanted "Allahu Akbar" numerous times. What does that phrase mean? According to Wikipedia, "Allahu Akbar is a shortened form of the Arabic phrase Allahu Akbar min kulli shay, which means ‘God is greater than everything.’" (Source, 28 August 2006) This is a comparison statement! What is Allah compared with? He is compared to everything else, all of which is small and finite compared to him. In particular, this includes a comparison to his creatures from ants to elephants to human beings. Is such a comparison limiting to God? It should be obvious to everyone that Abdallah's argument is utter nonsense, and his ignorant critique an attack on the fundamental expressions of Islam.

It is rather obvious that Mr. Abdallah is talking about things that he does not have a clue about. He knows neither the Bible nor the Qur'an. He is simply spreading ignorance and strife. A search engine is no substitute for sitting under the instruction of knowledgable men, studying hard, and receiving a thorough training by accomplished teachers. As long as one doesn't know the concepts and principles of a religion, retrieving verses from a search engine and transferring them into an article via a copy and paste operation is not going to produce a coherent argument, ever.

Mr. Abdallah, give up your "defense of Islam" that does more damage than good, and put some effort into getting a proper education.


1. After he had published this article, Abdallah sent me/us these emails:

Sent: Friday, April 28, 2006 5:26 PM
Subject: Checkmate article! Paul is a liar......

As'salamu Alaikum,
I strongly believe that Paul's fate had been sealed with this articles:
I don't think any article can be as strong and devistating as this one in proving that Paul was a liar and was deceived by satan.

Sent: Friday, April 28, 2006 7:45 PM
Subject: Shamoun and his gospel of porn had been "burried" as he says.....

As'salamu Alaikum dear Muslim brothers,
There is no question that Shamoun and his gospel of porn and blasphemies had been "burried" (using his own word).
I'd love to see this barking missionary write a rebuttal to this article.  The stupidity of GOD is smarter than us.  Amazing indeed!

Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 3:30 AM
Subject: How come the barking missionary never responded to PAUL'S BLASPHEMY article?

Mr. barking missionary,
You've been barking too loud and then all of the sudden you just shut up at once!!  Did the cat eat your tongue, or did my latest article about Paul's blasphemy against GOD Almighty by calling Him "STUPID" just put you back in that fox hole that you came from?
LOL, check out our web site and see how I am pushing this article for everyone to see.  If you open the http://www.answering-christianity.com/whatsnew.htm page, you'll see it right in your face LOOLLL. 
The stupidity of GOD is smarter than all of us combined??  Give me a break!!
Paul must have been drunk when he uttered this stupidity and blasphemy of his.

Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 4:03 AM
Subject: Barking missionary, when will you respond to PAUL'S STUPIDITY?

We're all waiting barking missionary.  The article is quite effective and devistating.  Several Muslims have already expressed their love for this article, and it's still a brand new article. So I was just wondering when will you have the balls to respond to it, since your gospel of stupidity got "BURRIED" in this one, as you say it.
Anxiously waiting for your response for the article so I can further annhialate you and your intelligence,
Osama Abdallah

These emails are displayed here in order to document that Osama truly thinks that this is his master piece, and cannot later back-pedal and just let it disappear as if it never was that important, or make other excuses. Moreover, he did not simply write this spontaneously and then never touch it again, but he has been working on this article repeatedly over a two months period, as announced on his "What's New" page:

06/20/2006- I added a new section "4- "Bride" is a Semitic language metaphor; it is not literal" to the article X-Rated Pornography in the Bible!  Also, brother Karim added more points to the article How many years is "few years" and "many years"?  Also, I added more points to the articles My rebuttal to Sam Shamoun on his alleged variant readings of the Noble Quran and GOD's stupidity is smarter than all of us?!

05/03/2006- I added more point to the article GOD's stupidity is smarter than all of us?!

04/28/2006- The barking missionary and leader of the "answering Islam" team, Sam Shamoun, is truly a street trash who just can't keep his foul mouth shut!  In this foul email of his, he calls me both a "bastard" and one who was "molested by a relative".  

I also added a new article GOD's stupidity is smarter than all of us?!

2. Another one of Abdallah's email messages, sent out the day after my rebuttal to Sami Zaatari (*), will add some spice to this whole exchange:

Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 2:52 PM
Subject: No need to waste time on Jochen Katz brothers....

As'salamu Alaikum Muslim brothers,
Quite honestly, I don't think we should bother with an irrelevant person as Jochen Katz.  In fact, his whole site would be quite useless and almost irrelevant if their main man shamoun is not there.
So concentrate on cutting the snake's head, not its butt.
Best regards,
Osama Abdallah

On 29 April 2006, Sam Shamoun had replied to my question whether he intends to respond to Osama's fooolishness: "I don't care to answer this one, so do what you want." To use Osama's wording, "the head" didn't think it is necessary to even reply to it (because this article is too obviously ridiculous to be worth his time). Nor did I. Nevertheless, sometimes I do things "for the fun of it." Obviously, this email inspired the first title of this paper.

Think about it: if the "butt" of answering-islam.org so easily crushes the head of answering-christianity.com, not over any odd article but by dismantling his "master piece", one of his best ones ever, what does that say about the totality of answering-christianity.com?

3. Examining S. 4:171 more closely under the rules of hyperliteralism, one will realize that even this verse cannot be of divine origin because it is impossible to recite it without transgressing the law of Allah! For details, see the article, Do not say, "Three"?

4. I asked him because it was beyond me, how anyone could think this was a valid, let alone a strong, argument. Maybe there is something in the Muslim psyche that eludes me here? Therefore, I asked an ex-Muslim for his opinion.

5. The section with the title, "The mark of a fool", was received already on April 29. At that time, Osama Abdallah's article consisted of three parts. The section on the Arabic Bible translation was added much later (20 June 2005) and is therefore not responded to in this part. I simply did not find the time to edit this brother's contribution earlier, and to write up my own thoughts that I wanted to add to this article. That is the reason for the great delay. The same holds for J.P. Holding's article, Oh, A Wise Guy, Huh?, which was received on 20 June 2005, before Abdallah added his additional argument later on the same day. I simply wanted to publish all of it in one go.

6. That list is what he gave me "at the top of his head", i.e. words which came to his mind immediately upon asking, and without checking any resources. Later, he sent me the following:

Let me first comment on Osama's chosen word, ghabi. Here is the dictionary entry:

غبي = غير فطن والغباء الخفاء من الأرض أو ما يخفى عنك ( المحيط في اللغة بغى 1- 421)
غبا وغباوة = لم يفطن له، وهو غبي، والشيء منه خفي.

Ghabi = somebody who is unaware; and the adjective, ghaba', means a piece of the ground (earth, floor) that is hidden from you (because it is covered, or in a ditch, etc.), or refers generally to something "hidden from you". (el muheet)

إن غبي عليكم أي إن خفى عليكم.

Mohammed, in a hadith, used the phrase "in ghabaa alikum" meaning "if it's made hidden from you".

As for the claim there is no other word in Arabic to translate the word moree in Greek, and that Arab translator didn't dare to write the word "Ghabi", it is a very interesting claim but it is total nonsense for several reasons.

First the word "Ghabi" simply means in Arabic "to be unaware of something", or "to have something hidden from you", as I explained above. The word "gahil" on the other hand is a much stronger word. Osama's own ignorance of the Arabic language made him substitute the strong word of Paul with a much weaker one.

I think the reason for this is that Osama was thinking of the modern use of the word "ghabi", not what it really means (in classical Arabic). In fact, I am not even sure whether he actually knows what it means. (Note: Classical Arabic, modern standard, and dialect Arabic are very different from one another. Trying to understand one on the basis of the other is like trying to study German from an English grammar book.)

Second, here is a short list of words that allegedly don't exist in Arabic. Maybe Osama would like to make some effort to increase his vocabulary? They all mean "fool" in different degrees and in a different sense, but I will just give him the words and if he like to know when and how they are used, he should do some studies.

Gheer fatenغير فطن

I only checked one Arabic dictionary (el moheet), and the above is just very small sample of what could be listed.

7. The Qur'an only mentions "the beautiful names" of Allah without giving their number or specifying exactly which those names are (S. 7:180, 17:110, 20:8, 59:24). In the traditions it is stated that there 99 of them. However, there are more than 99 names or titles or attributes of Allah mentioned in the Qur'an. Thus, various companions of Muhammad and later Muslim scholars present differing selections of what those 99 beautiful names actually are.

8. Interestingly, in a response to another article, posted on 12 September 2006, Osama Abdallah shows that he is aware of the concept of sarcasm, and even claims to have used sarcasm himself in an article posted on 20 July 2006, i.e. a whole month before he was informed about this oratory and literary technique in the publication of this article on 20 August 2006. If he was not ignorant of it, then this may be taken as an indication and one piece of evidence that his article about the "foolishness of God" was simply one of his "fair and balanced lies" against the Bible, cf. this article.

Rebuttals to Answering-Christianity
Answering Islam Home Page