Osama Abdallah's reaction to

Muhammad's False Prophecies

[Part 3]

Sam Shamoun

[Read first Part 1 and Part 2.]

This is the third part of our rebuttal series to Osama Abdullah, whose article can be found here.

Osama begins:

My response:

Even though I agree with the what the verse above says, I would like Mr. Shamoun to know that according to the Historians and Theologians of the Bible, almost all of its books were written by mysterious authors.

Please visit: The original Bible was lost! See comments from the commentary of the NIV Bible (one of the most used Bibles world wide) itself admitting that most of the Books and Gospels of the Bible are corrupted. No one ever claimed ownership of the current Books and Gospels. The owners/writers are unknown.

The book of Deuteronomy:

"The book itself testifies that, for the most part, Moses wrote it (1:5; 31:9,22,24), and other OT books agree (1Ki 2:3, 8:53; 2ki 14:6; 18:12)--though the preamble (1:1-5) may have been written by someone else, and the report of Moses' death (ch.34) was almost certainly written by someone else. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 240)"

As we clearly see, there is ample evidence that proves beyond the shadow of the doubt that Moses was not the sole author of the book. He couldn't have possibly have written about his own death. Again, another corrupted book by man in the Bible. How can you claim that the book of Deuteronomy was indeed all revealed by GOD Almighty? If you're not sure, and you still insist on your claim, then you are committing a crime against GOD Almighty's Revelations.



Please visit the following links and see how Osama misquotes the NIV Bible commentary: [1], [2], [3].

In the section What the Qur'an says about the Bible are several articles documenting what the Quran actually has to say about the authority and authenticity of God's true word, the Holy Bible.

It should be again pointed out that instead of dealing with the false prophecies of his prophet, Osama consistently seeks to shift the argument to irrelevant issues. My paper had nothing to do with the authority and/or the preservation of either the Holy Bible or the Quran. That Osama needs to throw out red herrings is a clear indication of his ineptness and inability to deal with the presented facts.

In answer to Osama's dilemma regarding Moses writing his own obituary, here are my comments taken from a response to Shabir Ally:

Shabir attacks the Mosaic authorship based on the fact that Deuteronomy 34 records Moses' death and burial. There are basically two positions which both Jews and Christians accept. One is the belief that God might have possibly revealed to Moses the manner of his death prior to the latter actually dying. God did something similar when he revealed to Moses Israel's eventual apostasy and captivity thousands of years before it ever happened:

"The LORD said to Moses, 'Now the day of your death is near. Call Joshua and present yourselves at the Tent of Meeting, where I will commission him.' So Moses and Joshua came and presented themselves at the Tent of Meeting. Then the LORD appeared at the Tent in a pillar of cloud, and the cloud stood over the entrance to the Tent. And the LORD said to Moses: 'You are going to rest with your fathers, and these people will soon prostitute themselves to the foreign gods of the land they are entering. They will forsake me and break the covenant I made with them. On that day I will become angry with them and forsake them; I will hide my face from them, and they will be destroyed. Many disasters and difficulties will come upon them, and on that day they will ask, "Have not these disasters come upon us because our God is not with us?" And I will certainly hide my face on that day because of all their wickedness in turning to other gods. Now write down for yourselves this song and teach it to the Israelites and have them sing it, so that it may be a witness for me against them. When I have brought them into the land flowing with milk and honey, the land I promised on oath to their forefathers, and when they eat their fill and thrive, they will turn to other gods and worship them, rejecting me and breaking my covenant. And when many disasters and difficulties come upon them, this song will testify against them, because it will not be forgotten by their descendants. I know what they are disposed to do, even before I bring them into the land I promised them on oath.' So Moses wrote down this song that day and taught it to the Israelites. The LORD gave this command to Joshua son of Nun: 'Be strong and courageous, for you will bring the Israelites into the land I promised them on oath, and I myself will be with you.' After Moses finished writing in a book the words of this law from beginning to end, he gave this command to the Levites who carried the ark of the covenant of the LORD: 'Take this Book of the Law and place it beside the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God. There it will remain as a witness against you. For I know how rebellious and stiff-necked you are. If you have been rebellious against the LORD while I am still alive and with you, how much more will you rebel after I die! Assemble before me all the elders of your tribes and all your officials, so that I can speak these words in their hearing and call heaven and earth to testify against them. For I know that after my death you are sure to become utterly corrupt and to turn from the way I have commanded you. In days to come, disaster will fall upon you because you will do evil in the sight of the LORD and provoke him to anger by what your hands have made." Deuteronomy 31:14-29

The second view is that God used inspired prophets to either amend or add material that God wanted to include to earlier prophetic writings. Hence, Jews and Christians have no problem with the fact that God used his prophet Joshua to amend the book of Deuteronomy by adding Moses' obituary, see for example Glenn Miller's article. (Source)

Furthermore, Osama believes that Moses was able to predict the coming of Muhammad thousands of years before his false prophet's birth. (Cf. Deut. 18:15-19)

Yet if Osama believes this then why should it surprise him that Moses would be able to record the manner and place of his death even before dying? If God could reveal thousands of years of history to Moses, couldn't God also reveal to his prophet when and where the latter would eventually die?

This leads us to another point. Namely, Osama has the audacity to appeal to the Holy Bible as verification for Muhammad being a true prophet while at the same time repeatedly slandering the contents of God's pure and holy word. This is simply hypocritical and irrational to say the least.


My response:

Mr. Sam uses an anti-Islam inaccurate source to try to discredit the Prophecy and prove that it wasn't met accurately. This claim had been refuted as shown below with historical evidence.

Before we respond to his points, I would like to ask Mr. Shamoun the following:

1- Since you complain about why didn't Allah Almighty specifically say that the Romans will be victorious in an X amount of years, I would like you to use your logic about the Bible's prophecy to Jesus' coming. It took 700 years for Jesus to fulfill Isaiah's prophecy about his coming. How come GOD didn't say that Jesus was going to come 700 years latter?

2- Show me in your Bible a verse where an event was prophesied with an exact number of years. Again, please visit: The original Bible was lost! See comments from the commentary of the NIV Bible (one of the most used Bibles world wide) itself admitting that most of the Books and Gospels of the Bible are corrupted. No one ever claimed ownership of the current Books and Gospels. The owners/writers are unknown.

3- How about Paul's prophecies about the Day of Judgement? He told his followers that the hour is near and they should be prepared. It's been 2000 years so far and Paul and his followers are all dead and the Hour hasn't come yet. How about applying your logic and judgement to Bible too?


Here are my answers to Osama's questions:

1. Osama hasn't read my argument carefully since I didn't claim that Allah NEEDED to specify the exact time frame in order to make it a valid prediction. Rather, I had stated that since Allah chose to specify the time period he should have at least given the exact number of years, as opposed to guessing that the Romans would be victorious in a "few years." Here is my original statement in order to demonstrate Osama's misreading of my point, this time with added emphasis:

It amazes us that a prophecy from God would not specify the EXACT time of the victory, seeing that God is all-knowing and all-wise, declaring the end from the beginning. WHEN GOD SPECIFIES A TIME FRAME AS AN IMPORTANT PART OF A PROPHECY WE WOULD EXPECT THAT IT BE PRECISE, NOT A MERE GUESS. FOR GOD TO GUESS that the Byzantines would win at some time within "a few years" AS OPPOSED TO SPECIFYING THE EXACT YEAR, is inconsistent with the belief in an Omniscient, Omnipotent Being. Hence, it is unlikely that the true God would actually make such a prophecy.

Therefore, since I never argued that Allah must give a time frame whenever he predicts an event, there is no need for me to answer Osama's request to show him in the Holy Bible where God gives the exact time frame for a prediction. Osama has obviously attacked a straw man. Yet, I will still oblige and grant Osama specific verses that give the time frame for the fulfillment of a specific prophecy. This leads me to question number 2:

2. Here is a prophecy that specifies the exact time period:

"Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy. Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One (Messiah), the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two ‘sevens.’ It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. After the sixty-two ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be cut off and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed. He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing of the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him." Daniel 9:24-26

Daniel is given the allotted time for a) the decree of the rebuilding of both the city, b) the time it would take for the Messiah to appear after this decree, as well as c) the destruction of the temple and the termination of the Messiah's life.

Several dates have been given as a starting point for the period of time stated in the book of Daniel (7 * 7 = 49 and 62 * 7 = 434 for a total of 483 years).

One such date is King Cyrus' decree to rebuild the temple in 539 B. C. This event will not fit the context of the prophecy since Cyrus' edict referred to the rebuilding of the temple, not the city. Yet the prophecy clearly states that the time frame would begin only when the decree goes forth for the rebuilding of the city and its walls. The only decree that fits the context of the prophecy is that of Artaxerxes to Nehemiah in 444 B. C. (Nehemiah 2:1-8), since this decree included the restoration of the city and the city walls.

The following quotation from Josh McDowell's book, "Evidence That Demands a Verdict", Thomas Nelson; ISBN: 0785243038; (March 1999), helps illustrate Daniel's amazing timeline:

"If Daniel is correct, the time from the edict to restore and rebuild Jerusalem (Nisan 1, 444B.C.) to the coming of the Messiah to Jerusalem is 483 years (69 * 7), each year equaling the Jewish prophetic year of 360 days (173,880). The terminal event of the 69 weeks is the presentation of Christ Himself to Israel as the Messiah as predicted in Zechariah 9:9. H. Hoehner, who has thoroughly researched this prophecy in Daniel and the corresponding dates, calculates the date of this event:

‘Multiplying the sixty-nine weeks by seven years for each week by 360 days gives a total of 173,880 days. The difference between 444 B.C. and A.D. 33 then is 476 solar years. By multiplying 476 by 365.24219879 or by 365 days, 5 hours, 48 minutes, 45,975 seconds (there are 365 ¼ days in a year), one comes to 173,885 days, 6 hours, 52 minutes, 44 seconds, or 173,885 days. This leaves only 25 days to be accounted for between 444 B.C. and A.D. 33. By adding the 25 days to March 5 (of 444 B.C.), one comes to March 30 (of A.D.33) which was Nisan 10 in A.D. 33. This is the triumphant entry of Jesus into Jerusalem.’" (McDowell, p. 173; bold emphasis ours)

Now someone may want to argue that the Jews didn't measure months in 30-day periods, which would total 360 days in a year. If so, then they are in error as the following NT passages demonstrate:

"I was given a reed like a measuring rod and was told, ‘Go and measure the temple of God and the altar, and count the worshipers there. But exclude the outer court; do not measure it, because it has been given to the Gentiles. They will trample on the holy city for 42 months. And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth." Revelation 11:1-3

"The woman fled into the desert to a place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days ... The woman was given the two wings of a great eagle, so that she might fly to the place prepared for her in the desert, where she would be taken care of for a time, times and half a time, out of the serpent's reach." Revelation 12:6, 14

1,260 days, 42 months, and time, times and half a time all refer to the same period of time, namely 3 ½ years. Yet for there to be 1,260 days in a 42 month period implies that there are only 30 days in a month.

We also find this to be the case in the OT. For instance, we are told in Genesis 7:24 that the flood lasted 150 days. Earlier on in Genesis 7:11 we are told that the flood began in the 17th day of the second month. And then in Genesis 8:4 we are told that the flood subsided on the 17th day of the seventh month, when the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat. This totals 5 months, leaving us with 30 days in each month.

Hence, these passages illustrate that the author's claim that there are 360 days in a prophetic year is correct.

Furthermore, notice that this prophecy clearly predicts the brutal death of the Messiah:

"After the sixty-two sevens, the Anointed One will be cut off and have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary (temple)." Daniel 9:26

The other astonishing aspect of this prophecy is that it also accurately predicted that the Temple would be destroyed after the death of the Messiah, something which took place approximately 37 years after Christ's crucifixion!

Finally, here is a list of ancient rabbinic citations which affirm the messianic interpretation of Daniel 9:

"I have examined and searched all the Holy Scriptures, and have not found the time for the coming of the Messiah, clearly fixed, except in the words of God to the prophet Daniel, which are written in the ninth chapter of the prophecy of Daniel." R. Moses Abraham Levi.

"He (Jonathan) moreover sought to make a Targum of the Hagiographa; but the Bah Kol came forth and said, ‘Enough.’ And why might he not execute a Targum of the Hagiographa? Because the end of the Advent of the Messiah is revealed in it. Rashi says, ‘In the book of Daniel.’" Megillah, fol. 3a.

"To anoint the most Holy" is to be explained of the Messiah. Abarbanel.

"To seal the vision and the prophecy, and to bring in MESSIAH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS." R. Azariah.

"That the ‘vision and the prophecy’ may be fulfilled even unto Messiah, the Holy of the Holies." Jonathan ben Uzziel.

"The Most Holy is the MESSIAH, for He is more holy than the Sons of David." R. Nachman.

Interestingly, the Mikra'ot Gedolot, a list of the rabbinic commentaries to each biblical book, states that this prediction refers to the coming Messiah, who will come after the fall of the Second Temple.

Another prophecy specifying the time period includes the following passage:

"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

This prophecy was given approximately 735/734 BC. Isaiah predicted that within 65 years, the Northern Kingdom would be so destroyed that they would no longer exist as a people. By the year 670/669 BC. Ephraim ceased to exist as a separate nation, since the Samaritans came into existence and became the dominant peoples in the land.

The NIV Study Bible published by Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids MI, states in relation to 7:8:

... Within sixty-five years. By c. 670 BC. Esarhaddon (and shortly after him, Ashurbanipal) king of Assyria settled foreign colonists in Israel. Their intermarriage with the few Israelites who had not been deported resulted in the "Samaritans" (see 2Ki 17:24-34 and note on 2Ki 17:29) and marked the end of Ephraim as a separate nation.

Charles Ryrie in his Ryrie Study Bible, Expanded Edition, Moody Press, Chicago IL, concurs:

... within 65 years. I.e., by 669 B.C., when the resettling of the land of Israel by foreign colonists would have taken place. The intermarriages with Israelites who were not deported resulted in the Samaritans.

Jamieson, Fausset Brown's Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible notes:

8. head--that is, in both Syria and Israel the capital shall remain as it is; they shall not conquer Judah, but each shall possess only his own dominions.
threescore and five ... not a people--As these words break the symmetry of the parallelism in this verse, either they ought to be placed after "Remaliah's son," in Isaiah 7:9, or else they refer to some older prophecy of Isaiah, or of Amos (as the Jewish writers represent), parenthetically; to which, in Isaiah 7:8, the words, "If ye will not believe ... not be established," correspond in parallelism. One deportation of Israel happened within one or two years from this time, under Tiglath-pileser (2 Kings 15:29). Another in the reign of Hoshea, under Shalmaneser (2 Kings 17:1-6), was about twenty years after. But the final one which utterly "broke" up Israel so as to be "not a people," accompanied by a colonization of Samaria with foreigners, was under Esar-haddon, who carried away Manasseh, king of Judah, also, in the twenty-second year of his reign, sixty-five years from the utterance of this prophecy (compare Ezra 4:2,3,10, with 2 Kings 17:24, 2 Chronicles 33:11) [USHER]. The event, though so far off, was enough to assure the people of Judah that as God, the Head of the theocracy, would ultimately interpose to destroy the enemies of His people, so they might rely on Him now. (Source; bold italic emphasis ours)

Interestingly, not only does the Holy Bible give specific time frames for certain prophecies, but also predicts the names of certain influential figures in God's redemptive history such as king Josiah:

"By the word of the Lord a man of God came from Judah to Bethel, as Jeroboam was standing by the altar to make an offering. He cried out against the altar by the word of the Lord : ‘O altar, altar! This is what the Lord says: "A son named Josiah will be born to the house of David. On you he will sacrifice the priests of the high places who now make offerings here, and human bones will be burned on you."’ That same day the man of God gave a sign: ‘This is the sign the Lord has declared: The altar will be split apart and the ashes on it will be poured out.’ When King Jeroboam heard what the man of God cried out against the altar at Bethel, he stretched out his hand from the altar and said, ‘Seize him!’ But the hand he stretched out toward the man shriveled up, so that he could not pull it back. Also, the altar was split apart and its ashes poured out according to the sign given by the man of God by the word of the Lord." 1 Kings 13:1-5

This prophecy was made nearly 300 years before Josiah ascended to the throne. The Holy Bible records the fulfillment:

"Even the altar at Bethel, the high place made by Jeroboam son of Nebat, who had caused Israel to sin - even that altar and high place he demolished. He burned the high place and ground it to powder, and burned the Asherah pole also. Then Josiah looked around, and when he saw the tombs that were there on the hillside, he had the bones removed from them and burned on the altar to defile it, in accordance with the word of the Lord proclaimed by the man of God who foretold these things. The king asked, ‘What is that tombstone I see?’ The men of the city said, ‘It marks the tomb of the man of God who came from Judah and pronounced against the altar of Bethel the very things you have done to it.’ ‘Leave it alone,’ he said. ‘Don't let anyone disturb his bones.’ So they spared his bones and those of the prophet who had come from Samaria. Just as he had done at Bethel, Josiah removed and defiled all the shrines at the high places that the kings of Israel had built in the towns of Samaria that had provoked the Lord to anger. Josiah slaughtered all the priests of those high places on the altars and burned human bones on them. Then he went back to Jerusalem." 2 Kings 23:15-20

The other person predicted by name in the Holy Bible is the Persian king Cyrus:

"This is what the Lord says - your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb: I am the Lord, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself, who foils the signs of false prophets and makes fools of diviners, who overthrows the learning of the wise and turns it into nonsense, who carries out the words of his servants and fulfills the predictions of his messengers, who says of Jerusalem, ‘It shall be inhabited,’ of the towns of Judah, ‘They shall be built,’ and of their ruins, ‘I will restore them,’ who says to the watery deep, ‘Be dry, and I will dry up your streams,’ who says of Cyrus, ‘He is my shepherd and will accomplish all that I please; he will say of Jerusalem, "Let it be rebuilt," and of the temple, "Let its foundations be laid."’" Isaiah 44:24-28

"This is what the Lord says to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I take hold of to subdue nations before him and to strip kings of their armor, to open doors before him so that gates will not be shut: I will go before you and will level the mountains; I will break down gates of bronze and cut through bars of iron. I will give you the treasures of darkness, riches stored in secret places, so that you may know that I am the Lord, the God of Israel, who summons you by name. For the sake of Jacob my servant, of Israel my chosen, I summon you by name and bestow on you a title of honor, though you do not acknowledge me. I am the Lord, and there is no other; apart from me there is no God. I will strengthen you, though you have not acknowledged me, so that from the rising of the sun to the place of its setting men may know there is none besides me. I am the Lord, and there is no other. I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the Lord, do all these things. Isaiah 45:1-7

Both the Holy Bible and archaeology confirm the fulfillment of this prediction:

"In the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, in order to fulfill the word of the Lord spoken by Jeremiah, the Lord moved the heart of Cyrus king of Persia to make a proclamation throughout his realm and to put it in writing: ‘This is what Cyrus king of Persia says: "The Lord, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and he has appointed me to build a temple for him at Jerusalem in Judah. Anyone of his people among you - may his God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem in Judah and build the temple of the Lord, the God of Israel, the God who is in Jerusalem. And the people of any place where survivors may now be living are to provide him with silver and gold, with goods and livestock, and with freewill offerings for the temple of God in Jerusalem."’ Ezra 1:1-4

"King Darius then issued an order, and they searched in the archives stored in the treasury at Babylon. A scroll was found in the citadel of Ecbatana in the province of Media, and this was written on it: Memorandum: In the first year of King Cyrus, the king issued a decree concerning the temple of God in Jerusalem: Let the temple be rebuilt as a place to present sacrifices, and let its foundations be laid. It is to be ninety feet high and ninety feet wide, with three courses of large stones and one of timbers. The costs are to be paid by the royal treasury. Also, the gold and silver articles of the house of God, which Nebuchadnezzar took from the temple in Jerusalem and brought to Babylon, are to be returned to their places in the temple in Jerusalem; they are to be deposited in the house of God." Ezra 6:1-5

Archaeologists discovered the Cyrus cylinder where Cyrus himself records the edict he made regarding the rebuilding of all the Temples of the peoples which the Babylonians had taken captive:

... I am Cyrus. King of the world. When I entered Babylon ... I did not allow anyone to terrorise the land ... I kept in view the needs of people and all its sanctuaries to promote their well-being ... I put an end to their misfortune. The Great God has delivered all the lands into my hand; the lands that I have made to dwell in a peaceful habitation ... (Source)


All the kings of the entire world from the Upper to the Lower Sea [i.e., from the Mediterranean Sea to the Persian Gulf], those who are seated in throne rooms, those who live in other types of buildings as well as all the kings of the West land living in tents, brought their heavy tributes and kissed my feet in Babylon. As to the region from [lacuna] as far as Aššur and Susa, Agade, Eshnunna, the towns of Zamban, Me-Turnu, Der as well as the region of the Gutians, I returned to these sanctuaries on the other side of the Tigris, the sanctuaries of which had been ruins for a long time, the images which used to live therein and established for them permanent sanctuaries. I also gathered all their former inhabitants and returned to them their habitations. Furthermore, I resettled upon the command of Marduk, the great lord, all the gods of Sumer and Akkad whom Nabonidus had brought into Babylon to the anger of the lord of the gods, unharmed, in their former chapels, the places which make them happy. (Source.)

3. This article responds to Osama's erroneous claims regarding Paul's view of the time of the end.

You can also read it here.


The following article was taken from www.answering-christianity.com/defeat_romans.htm

Quran's correct prophecy of defeat of Romans

Abdul Haleem

Surah 30 contains a remarkable historical prophecy which was fulfilled.

"The Romans have been defeated

"In the nearer land, and they, after their defeat will be victorious

"Within ten years - Allah's is the command in the former case and in the latter - and in that day believers will rejoice .

"In Allah's help to victory. He helpeth to victory whom He will. He is the Mighty, the Merciful." Quran (Pickthal translation), 30:2-5

The period of the revelation of this Surah is determined absolutely by the historical event that has been mentioned at the outset. It says: "The Romans have been vanquished in the neighboring land." In those days the Byzantine occupied territories adjacent to Arabia were Jordan, Syria and Palestine, and in these territories the Romans were completely overpowered by the Iranians in 615 A. D. Therefore, it can be said with absolute certainty that this Surah was sent down in the same year, and this was the year in which the migration to Habash took place.


Please remember to keep the author's claim that S. 30 was "sent down" in the year 615 in mind, since this will sound the death knell to Osama's alleged "rebuttal."


Syed Maudani commentary http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/maududi/mau30.html, "This prophecy has two parts:

1. that the Roman [Byzantine] Christians, although they have been vanquished at this time, will predominate over Iran after nine years;


Again, please remember to also keep this statement in mind, since we shall shortly demonstrate that this "prophecy" failed to materialize within the time frame stipulated by the Quran.


2. that the Muslims shall also rejoice on the day of the Romans' victory over Iran; for they, too, shall gain victory over shirk (associating partners with Allah), although the idolaters, at that time, prided exultantly over their huge numbers."

"Muhammad In World Scriptures," Volume I, Maulana Abdul Haq Vidyarthi (New USA Edition, 1999), p. 253.

Both prophecies were actually fulfilled within ten years in 624 C.E.


Before proceeding, we would like to comment on the author's assertion that the "prophecy" was fulfilled within ten years. Muslims often opt for the later time frame stipulated by the Arabic term Bida'. Yet nothing in the term itself makes it necessary for one to assume a later time period as opposed to an earlier one.

As I had already noted, Bida' refers to a time period between 3-9 nine years. The term Bida' is used at least twice in the Quran, here in S. 30 and also in S. 12: 46. Ibn Kathir comments on the use of Bida' in S. 12:46:

<But Shaytan made him forget to mention it to his master.>

that it refers to the man who was saved. As was said by Mujahid, Muhammad bin Ishaq and several others. As for ‘a few years’, or, Bida' in Arabic, IT MEANS THREE TO NINE, according to Mujahid and Qatadah. Wahb bin Munabbih said, "Ayub suffered from the illness for seven years, Yusuf remained in prison for seven years and Bukhtanassar (Nebuchadnezzar - Chaldean king of Babylon) was tormented for seven years." (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged) Volume 5, Surah Hud to Surat Al-Isra', Verse 38, abridged by a group of scholars under the supervision of Shaykh Safiur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, Riyadh, Houston, New York, Lahore; First Edition: July 2000], pp. 170-171; bold and capital emphasis ours)

In light of Ibn Kathir's time specification for the term, this means that there was nothing stopping Allah from causing the Romans from being victorious within 3 years. Seeing that the Romans didn't become victorious until much later, it comes as no surprise that Muslims opt for the later time frame.

Interestingly, Ibn Kathir highlights the embarrassment Muslims faced due to the imprecise nature of the time stipulated by the term:

He [Ibn Abbas] said, "They were defeated and then they were victorious." He said, "The idolators wanted the Persians to prevail over the Romans, because they were idol worshipers, and the Muslims wanted the Romans to prevail over the Persians, because they were People of the Book. This was mentioned to Abu Bakr who mentioned it to the Messenger of Allah. The Messenger of Allah said ...

((They will prevail.))

Abu Bakr mentioned this to the idolators, and they said, "Set a time limit for that, and if we prevail, we will get such and such; and if you prevail, you will get such and such." So he set A LIMIT OF FIVE YEARS, AND THEY (THE ROMANS) DID NOT PREVAIL. Abu Bakr mentioned that to the Messenger of Allah and he said...

((Why did you not make it less than))

[I (the narrator) think he meant less than ten]. Sa'id bin Jubayr said: "Bid' means less than ten." Then the Romans were victorious ...

Abu ‘Isa At-Tirmidhi recorded that Niyar bin Mukram Al-Aslami said: "When the following Ayat were revealed ...

<Alif Lam Mim. The Romans have been defeated. In the nearest land, and they, after their defeat, will be victorious. In Bid' years.>

on the day they were revealed, the Persians were prevailing over the Romans. The Muslims wanted the Romans to prevail over them (the Persians), because they were both people who followed a Book. Concerning this Allah said ...

<And on that day, the believers will rejoice- with the help of Allah. He helps whom he wills, and He is the All-Mighty, the Most Merciful.>

The Quraysh, on the other hand, wanted the Persians to prevail, neither of them were people who followed a Book and neither of them believed in the Resurrection. When Allah revealed these Ayat, Abu Bakr went out proclaiming throughout Makkah ...

< Alif Lam Mim. The Romans have been defeated. In the nearest land, and they, after their defeat, will be victorious. In Bid' years.>

Some of the Quraysh said to Abu Bakr: ‘This is (a bet) between us and you. Your companion claims that the Romans will defeat the Persians WITHIN THREE TO NINE YEARS, so why not have a bet between us and you?’ Abu Bakr said, ‘Yes.’ This was before betting had been forbidden. So, Abu Bakr and the idolators made a bet, and they said to Abu Bakr: ‘What do you think, Bid' means something between three and nine years. So let us agree on the middle.’ So they agreed on six years. Then six years passed without the Romans being victorious, so the idolators took what had bet with Abu Bakr. When the seventh year came and the Romans were finally victorious over the Persians, the Muslims REBUKED Abu Bakr for agreeing on six years. He said: ‘BECAUSE ALLAH SAID: "In Bid' years."’ At that time many people became Muslims." (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Abridged, Volume 7 Surat An-Nur to Surat Al-Ahzab, Verse 50, First Edition, August 2000, pp. 518-520; bold and capital emphasis ours)

This clearly demonstrates the huge embarrassment the expression turned out to be even for the Muslims. The imprecision of the phrase led Abu Bakr to bet that the prophecy would be fulfilled within five-six years. This demonstrates that nothing in the phrase led the first Muslims to assume that Allah would only grant victory to the Romans at the later part of the stipulated time period.

Furthermore, seeing that Abu Bakr lost the bet Muhammad and others had to step in and correct him since the event didn't transpire within the five-six year period. This implies that Abu Bakr was only corrected to save face in the eyes of the pagans. All this could have been prevented had Allah given the exact time in the first place, as opposed to giving a vague time frame that ended up embarrassing the Muslims.

Finally, we shall see that even the later time period doesn't solve the problem for Osama, since the alleged "prophecy" only came to pass some 13-14 years later!


"[D]uring the fixed period of time, exactly after nine years, the Roman armies entered Iran triumphantly, and on the same day Muslims also scored their victory against the idolaters on the field of Badr. The event of the Roman victory took place in 624 C.E., and it is written in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, under the heading 'Chosroes II':

"'In 624 he [Heraclius] advanced into northern Media, where he destroyed the great fire-temple of Goudzak.'"

Ibid., emphasis added.

"[Byzantine Emperor] Heraclius started his counter attack in 623 A. D. from Armenia. Next year, in 624 A. D., he entered Azerbaijan and destroyed Clorumia, the birthplace of Zoroaster, and ravaged the principal fire temple of Iran. Great are the powers of Allah, this was the very year when the Muslims achieved a decisive victory at Badr for the first time against the mushriks. Thus both the predictions made in Surah Rum were fulfilled simultaneously within the stipulated period of ten years."


Let us quote the Encyclopedia in context to see if whether the date of 624 A.D. is correct. Encyclopedia Britannica says about Heraclius:

In 614 the Persians conquered Syria and Palestine, taking Jerusalem and what was believed to be Christ's Cross, and in 619 occupied Egypt and Libya ...

In 622, clad as a penitent and bearing a sacred image of the Virgin, he left Constantinople, as prayers rose from its many sanctuaries for victory over the Persian Zoroastrians, the recovery of the Cross, and the reconquest of Jerusalem ...

The next two years he devoted to campaigns in Armenia, the manpower of which was vital to the empire, and to a devastating invasion of Persia. In 625 Heraclius retired to Anatolia. He had encamped on the west bank of the Sarus River when the Persian forces appeared on the opposite bank. Many of his men rushed impetuously across the bridge and were ambushed and annihilated by the enemy.

Emerging from his tent, Heraclius saw the triumphant Persians crossing the bridge. The fate of the Empire hung in the balance. Seizing his sword, he ran to the bridge and struck down the Persian leader. His soldiers closed rank behind him and beat back the foe.

In 626 the Persians advanced to the Bosporus, hoping to join the Avars in an assault on the land walls of Constantinople. But the Romans sank the primitive Avar fleet that was to transport Persian units across Bosporus and repelled the unsupported Avar assault. Heraclius again invaded Persia and in December 627, after a march across the Armenian highlands into the Tigris plain, met the Persians near the ruins of Nineveh. There, astride his renowned war-horse, he killed three Persian generals in single combat, charged into enemy ranks at the head of his troops, killed the Persian commander, and scattered the Persian host.

A month later, Heraclius entered Dastagird with its stupendous treasure. Khosrow was overthrown by his son, with whom Heraclius made peace, DEMANDING ONLY THE RETURN OF THE CROSS, the captives, AND CONQUERED ROMAN TERRITORY. Returning to Constantinople in triumph, he was hailed as a Moses, an Alexander, a Scipio. IN 630 HE PERSONALLY RESTORED THE CROSS TO THE CHURCH OF THE HOLY SEPULCHRE IN JERUSALEM. (bold and capital emphasis mine)

Under Khosrow II, p. 843, Britannica notes:

A second invasion of Mesopotamia, by Khosrow's ablest general, Shahrbaraz, took place in 613. Damascus was taken in that year, and in 614 Jerusalem fell. The Holy Sepulchre was destroyed and the True Cross carried to Ctesiphon. Although Khosrow himself was generally tolerant of Christianity, Shahrbaraz permitted thousands of Christian prisoners to be tortured by his Jewish aides...

This tide of conquest was turned by Heraclius in a series of brilliant campaigns between 622 and 627. Since he retained command of the sea, Heraclius was able to sail to Issus and rout the Persian Army near the Armenian border. In alliance with the Khazar kingdom to the north of the Caucasus, he invaded Armenia again in 623, gaining victory over the King's army near Canzaca. The town and fire temple were destroyed, together with the temple at Lake Urmia, traditionally associated with Zoroaster. The campaigns of 624 and 625 ranged across northern Syria and Mesopotamia and culminated in a reversal for Shahrbaraz forces on the river Saras.

Khosrow rallied his forces in 626 and, in alliance with the Avars, a people who were also in conflict with Byzantium at this time, sent one army to besiege Constantinople and another to oppose Heraclius. Constantinople held, and Shahin was defeated: the Persian second force was outmanoevred in 628 by Heraclius' brave dash to Dastagird, the royal residence 70 miles (113 kilometres) north of Ctesiphon. An important but indecisive battle was fought near Nineveh, but, as the Byzantine army reapproached Dastagird, Khosrow fled. His letters calling Shahrbaraz to his aid had been intercepted, and, although his resources were now drastically reduced, he refused peace terms.

Khosrow's prestige was now shattered, and he was now sick. The execution of Sharhbaraz and the desecration of Shahin's corpse were followed by revolution in the royal household. Khosrow was condemned to death and executed (628), and his youngest son and heir, Mardanshah, was murdered before his eyes. His eldest son, Kavadh (Qobad) II. Sheroe, signed the peace. (bold emphasis mine)

According to these secular sources Khosrow took over Jerusalem in 614. Heraclius completely defeated the Persians in 627. In 628 Khosrow's son gave back to Heraclius all the Roman territory and the Cross which Khosrow had taken. This would naturally include Jerusalem also. Yet it wasn't until 630 that Heraclius restored the Cross to the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. This means that my original date of 625 was off by at least three years. So I am grateful to the author since his rebuttal only caused me to strengthen my case against the Quran.

The Encyclopedia Americana concurs. In Volume 4, 2000 edition, p. 115 under the heading of Heraclius, Americana states:

Heraclius found the empire in domestic turmoil. The Slavs threatened in the Balkans, the Persians and Visigoths in Asia Minor; in 615 the Persians reached the Bosporous, and in 619 they conquered Egypt. At first, Heraclius concentrated on internal reorganization of the empire. Then, in 622, he left Constantinople to begin a counterattack against the Persians. His military reforms bore fruit WHEN HE DESTROYED THE PERSIAN ARMY AT NINEVAH IN 627. (bold and capital emphasis mine)

On p. 421, under Khosrow II, Americana writes:

... In 614 Khosrow's army entered Jerusalem, sacked the Holy Sepulchre, and carried off the "True Cross" to the Sassanian capital at Ctesiphon. In 617 the Persians took Chalcedon, opposite Constantinople. Not until the forces of Emperor Heraclius crossed the Black Sea and took the offensive in the east were the armies of Khosrow and his chief general, Shahrbaraz, defeated in a series of brilliant campaigns (622-625).

In 626, Khosrow's army, now rallied under his general Shahin, besieged Constantinople. But Heraclius again invaded Persian by way of Armenia and marched on the royal residence of Dastagird, from which Khosrow fled. A dynastic revolution led to Khosrow's execution in 628 - an end, as poets sang, that was the more ignominious for the glory lost. (bold and capital emphasis mine)

These sources approximate the Roman victory at roughly 628 AD. Other sources that agree with this dating include the following. Helmut Gätje notes:

The Persians had inflicted a heavy defeat upon the Byzantines in 613/14 and had carried off the cross from Jerusalem. Emperor Herakleios I forced the Persians to an armistice in 628 and in 629 carried the cross back to Jerusalem. (Gatje, The Qur'an and its Exegesis [Routledge and Keagan Paul, London UK 1976], p. 272, f. 31)

Christian author Gerhard Nehls writes:

"This passage refers to the defeat of the Byzantines in Syria by the Persians under Khusran Parvis. (A.D. 615 - 6 years before the Hegira). However, the defeat of the Persians should take place soon 'in a small number of years'. In the light of this prediction, Abu-Bakr undertook a bet with Ubai-ibn-Khalaf that this prediction would be fulfilled within three years, but he was corrected by Mohammed who stated that the 'small number' is between three and nine years (Al-Baizawi). Muslims tell us that the Byzantines overcame their enemies within seven years. The fact, however, is that the Byzantines defeated Persia in A.D. 628 (Al-Baizawi commentary). That was twelve years after the prediction of Mohammed. Consequently this passage does not qualify as a prophecy, particularly as the time between prophecy and fulfilment was far too short, and in addition the event was easily predictable." (Gerhard Nehls, Christians Ask Muslims [Life Challenge, SIM International; Africa, 1992], pp. 70-71; bold emphasis ours)

A. Yusuf Ali concurs:

16. In these desperate circumstances Heraclius conceived a brilliant plan. He knew that the Persians were weak in sea power. He used his sea power to attack them in the rear. In 622 (the year of the Hijra) he transported his army by sea through the AEgean Sea to the bay just south of the Taurus Mountains. He fought a decisive battle with the Persians at Issus, in the same plain in which Alexander the Great had defeated the Persians of his day in his famous march to Syria and Egypt. The Persians were taken by surprise and routed. BUT THEY HAD STILL A LARGE FORCE IN ASIA MINOR, which they could have brought into play against the Romans if Heraclius had not made ANOTHER and equally unexpected dash by sea from the north. He returned to Constantinople by sea, made a treaty with the Avars, and with this help kept the Persians at bay round the capital. Then he led THREE CAMPAIGNS, IN 623, 624 AND 625, along the southern shore of the Black Sea and took the Persians again in the rear in the region round Trebizond and Kars. Through Armenia he penetrated into Persia and got into Mesopotamia. He was now in a position to strike AT THE VERY HEART OF THE PERSIAN EMPIRE. A DECISIVE BATTLE WAS FOUGHT ON THE TIGRIS NEAR THE CITY OF MOSUL IN DECEMBER 627. Before this battle, however, he had taken care to get the alliance of the Turks and with their help to relieve Constantinople IN 626 against the Persians and the treacherous Avars who had then joined the Persians.

17. Heraclius CELEBRATED HIS TRIUMPH IN CONSTANTINOPLE IN MARCH 628. PEACE WAS THEN MADE BETWEEN THE TWO EMPIRES ON THE BASIS OF THE STATUS QUO ANTE. Heraclius, in pursuance of a vow he had made, went south in the autumn to Emessa (Hims) and from there marched on foot to Jerusalem TO CELEBRATE HIS VICTORIES, AND RESTORE TO ITS PLACE THE HOLY CROSS WHICH HAD BEEN CARRIED AWAY BY THE PERSIANS AND WAS RETURNED TO THE EMPEROR AS A CONDITION OF PEACE. Heraclius's [sic] route was strewn with costly carpets, AND HE THOUGHT THAT THE FINAL DELIVERANCE HAD COME FOR HIS PEOPLE AND HIS EMPIRE ... (Ali, appendix X, pp. 1073-1074; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Ali's claim leaves us with a time period after 628 AD for the Roman victory.

Do note that earlier we had been informed by Osama's source that the "prophecy" was "given" in 615 AD. Therefore, the Romans only became victorious 13 years after the alleged "prophecy" was "revealed", not within the 3-9 nine years stipulated by the Quranic term. This means that the prophecy failed to transpire within the time stipulated by Allah!

This also gives the reason why Osama and his source would claim that the prophecy was fulfilled in the year 624 AD. and are even willing to misquote secular sources like Britannica. They seemingly do this in order to give the impression that even secular sources agree with their date. Yet when these secular sources are quoted in context, this sounds the death knell for Osama and the Quranic claim that it is the word of God.


Syed Maudani, supra

What is remarkable is that, at the time the Prophet revealed Surah Rum its fulfillment would have seemed extremely unlikely to objective human observers: These were the conditions when this Surah of the Quran was sent down, and in it a prediction was made, saying: "The Romans have been vanquished in the neighboring land and within a few years after their defeat, they shall be victorious. And it will be the day when the believers will rejoice in the victory granted by Allah." It contained not one but two predictions: First, the Romans shall be Victorious; and second, the Muslims also shall win a victory at the same time.

Apparently, there was not a remote chance of the fulfillment of the either prediction in the next few years. On the one hand, there were a handful of the Muslims, who were being beaten and tortured in Makkah, and even till eight years after this prediction there appeared no chance of their victory and domination. On the other, the Romans were losing more and more ground every next day. By 619 A. D. the whole of Egypt had passed into Sassanid hands and the Magian armies had reached as far as Tripoli. In Asia Minor they beat and pushed back the Romans to Bosporus, and in 617 A. D. they captured Chalcedon (modern, Kadikoy) just opposite Constantinople. The Emperor sent an envoy to Khusrau, praying that he was ready to have peace on any terms, but he replied, "I shall not give protection to the emperor until he is brought in chains before me and gives up obedience to his crucified god and adopts submission to the fire god." At last, the Emperor became so depressed by defeat that he decided to leave Constantinople and shift to Carthage (modern, Tunis). In short, as the British historian Gibbon says, even seven to eight years after this prediction of the Quran, the conditions were such that no one could even imagine that the Byzantine Empire would ever gain an upper hand over Iran. Not to speak of gaining domination, no one could hope that the Empire, under the circumstances, would even survive.


First, the author assumes that the phrase "And it will be the day when the believers will rejoice in the victory granted by Allah", implies that there are two predictions. Yet nothing in the phrase leads one to necessarily think that there are two prophecies. The natural reading of the text leads one to assume that the believers would rejoice that the believing Romans defeated the pagan Persians. This is supported by the earlier citations from Ibn Kathir regarding S. 30. Here are the relevant sections:

He [Ibn Abbas] said, "They were defeated and then they were victorious." He said, "The idolators wanted the Persians to prevail over the Romans, because they were idol worshipers, and the Muslims wanted the Romans to prevail over the Persians, because they were People of the Book. This was mentioned to Abu Bakr who mentioned it to the Messenger of Allah. The Messenger of Allah said ...

on the day they were revealed, the Persians were prevailing over the Romans. The Muslims wanted the Romans to prevail over them (the Persians), because they were both people who followed a Book. Concerning this Allah said ...

Second, Muslims often cite Gibbons as supporting their view. Yet, what Muslims fail to tell their readers is that Gibbons was clearly dependent upon the Muslim sources:

While the Persian monarch contemplated the wonders of his art and power, he received an epistle from an obscure citizen of Mecca, inviting him to acknowledge Mahomet as the apostle of God. He rejected the invitation, and tore the epistle. "It is thus," exclaimed the Arabian prophet, "that God will tear the kingdom, and reject the supplications of Chosroes." Placed on the verge of the two great empires of the East, Mahomet observed with secret joy the progress of their mutual destruction; and in the midst of the Persian triumphs, he ventured to foretell, that before many years should elapse, victory should again return to the banners of the Romans.

At the time when this prediction IS SAID TO HAVE BEEN DELIVERED, no prophecy could be more distant from its accomplishment, since the first twelve years of Heraclius announced the approaching dissolution of the empire. (Gibbon, Edward, The History of the Decline and Fall of Roman Empire, Vol. 4, Chapter 46, Part 3)

It is clear that Gibbon is dependent upon the Muslim sources for the dating of the prophecy, i.e. IS SAID TO HAVE BEEN DELIVERED. Interestingly, as we have already seen, it is these very same sources that actually falsify the prophecy since it failed to materialize within the stipulated time.


Syed Maudani, supra.

The correctness of this unlikely prophecy clearly points to Divine Revelation as the source of the Quran. This is what Arab polytheists at the time thought:

After this no one could have any doubt about the truth of the prophecy of the Quran, with the result that most of the Arab polytheists accepted Islam.

Syed Maudani, supra.

The prophecy is no less impressive today than it was 1475 years ago!


The fact of the matter is that this prophecy is much less impressive than it was 1475 years ago. Both modern secular and Muslims sources demonstrate that this is a failed prophecy, proving that Muhammad was not a prophet of the true God. The incorrectness of this mistaken prophecy clearly proves that the source of the Quran is not Divine.

Finally, most of the pagan Arabs became Muslim due to the threat of the sword:

Narrated Anas ibn Malik:

On the Day of Hunayn, Umm Sulayman took out a dagger she had in her possession. AbuTalhah saw her and said: Messenger of Allah, this is Umm Sulayman. She is holding a dagger. The Messenger of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) asked (her): Why are you holding this dagger? She said: I took it up so that I might tear open the belly of a polytheist who comes near me. The Messenger of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) began to smile (at these words).

She said: Messenger of Allah, kill all those people --other than us-- whom thou hast declared to be free (on the day of the Conquest of Mecca). (They embraced Islam because) they were defeated at your hands (and as such their Islam is not dependable). The Messenger of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) said: Umm Sulayman, God is sufficient (against the mischief of the polytheists) and He will be kind to us (so you need not carry this dagger). (Sahih Muslim, Book 18, Number 4453)

In fact, many Muslims apostatized after Muhammad's death forcing Abu Bakr to bring them back by the sword:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

When the Prophet died and Abu Bakr became his successor and some of the Arabs reverted to disbelief, 'Umar said, "O Abu Bakr! How can you fight these people although Allah's Apostle said, 'I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah, 'and whoever said, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', Allah will save his property and his life from me, unless (he does something for which he receives legal punishment) justly, and his account will be with Allah?' "Abu Bakr said, "By Allah! I will fight whoever differentiates between prayers and Zakat as Zakat is the right to be taken from property (according to Allah's Orders). By Allah! If they refused to pay me even a kid they used to pay to Allah's Apostle, I would fight with them for withholding it." 'Umar said, "By Allah: It was nothing, but I noticed that Allah opened Abu Bakr's chest towards the decision to fight, therefore I realized that his decision was right." (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 84, Number 59)

Other examples include:

Narrated Ibn Masud:

I witnessed Al-Miqdad bin Al-Aswad in a scene which would have been dearer to me than anything had I been the hero of that scene. He (i.e. Al-Miqdad) came to the Prophet while the Prophet was urging the Muslims to fight with the pagans. Al-Miqdad said, "We will not say as the People of Moses said: Go you and your Lord and fight you two. (5.27). But we shall fight on your right and on your left and in front of you and behind you." I saw the face of the Prophet getting bright with happiness, for that saying delighted him. (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 288)

Narrated Abu Burda:

Abu Musa said, "I came to the Prophet along with two men (from the tribe) of Ash'ariyin, one on my right and the other on my left, while Allah's Apostle was brushing his teeth (with a Siwak), and both men asked him for some employment. The Prophet said, ‘O Abu Musa (O ‘Abdullah bin Qais!).’ I said, ‘By Him Who sent you with the Truth, these two men did not tell me what was in their hearts and I did not feel (realize) that they were seeking employment.’ As if I were looking now at his Siwak being drawn to a corner under his lips, and he said, ‘We never (or, we do not) appoint for our affairs anyone who seeks to be employed. But O Abu Musa! (or ‘Abdullah bin Qais!) Go to Yemen.’" The Prophet then sent Mu'adh bin Jabal after him and when Mu'adh reached him, he spread out a cushion for him and requested him to get down (and sit on the cushion). Behold: There was a fettered man beside Abu Muisa. Mu'adh asked, "Who is this (man)?" Abu Muisa said, "He was a Jew and became a Muslim and then reverted back to Judaism." Then Abu Muisa requested Mu'adh to sit down but Mu'adh said, "I will not sit down till he has been killed. This is the judgment of Allah and His Apostle (for such cases) and repeated it thrice. Then Abu Musa ordered that the man be killed, and he was killed. Abu Musa added, "Then we discussed the night prayers and one of us said, ‘I pray and sleep, and I hope that Allah will reward me for my sleep as well as for my prayers.’" (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 84, Number 58)

Narrated Ikrima:

Ali burnt some people and this news reached Ibn ‘Abbas, who said, "Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, ‘Don't punish (anybody) with Allah's Punishment.' No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, ‘If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.’" (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 260)

Narrated Jubair bin Haiya:

‘Umar sent the Muslims to the great countries to fight the pagans. When Al-Hurmuzan embraced Islam, 'Umar said to him. "I would like to consult you regarding these countries which I intend to invade." Al-Hurmuzan said, "Yes, the example of these countries and their inhabitants who are the enemies of the Muslims, is like a bird with a head, two wings and two legs; If one of its wings got broken, it would get up over its two legs, with one wing and the head; and if the other wing got broken, it would get up with two legs and a head, but if its head got destroyed, then the two legs, two wings and the head would become useless. The head stands for Khosrau, and one wing stands for Caesar and the other wing stands for Faris. So, order the Muslims to go towards Khosrau." So, ‘Umar sent us (to Khosrau) appointing An-Nu'man bin Muqrin as our commander. When we reached the land of the enemy, the representative of Khosrau came out with forty-thousand warriors, and an interpreter got up saying, "Let one of you talk to me!" Al-Mughira replied, "Ask whatever you wish." The other asked, "Who are you?" Al-Mughira replied, "We are some people from the Arabs; we led a hard, miserable, disastrous life: we used to suck the hides and the date stones from hunger; we used to wear clothes made up of fur of camels and hair of goats, and to worship trees and stones. While we were in this state, the Lord of the Heavens and the Earths, Elevated is His Remembrance and Majestic is His Highness, sent to us from among ourselves a Prophet whose father and mother are known to us. Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. tribute); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says:-- ‘Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master." (Al-Mughira, then blamed An-Nu'man for delaying the attack and) An-Nu'man said to Al-Mughira, "If you had participated in a similar battle, in the company of Allah's Apostle he would not have blamed you for waiting, nor would he have disgraced you. But I accompanied Allah's Apostle in many battles and it was his custom that if he did not fight early by daytime, he would wait till the wind had started blowing and the time for the prayer was due (i.e. after midday)." (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Number 386)


My response:

As to the Hudaibiyya peace treaty, what Mr. Sam Shamoun fells to see here is the following:

1The Muslims were taking on 365 Arab Pagan tribes. Our Prophet's main concern was to spread Islam to Mankind. The Muslims suffered a great deal losses in lives from the many battles that were imposed upon them. A peace treaty was a must to take place in order for Islam to grow quickly and swiftly among the Pagan Arabs.


Osama delves into irrelevant issues since nothing Osama writes excuses Muhammad from making a treaty and then breaking it willfully in order to achieve his aims. Nothing that Osama says excuses Muhammad from falsely assuming that the Muslims were going to enter Mecca and perform Umrah, or the lesser Pilgrimage as it is thus called. Hence, we see that Osama needs to toss out red herrings in order to avoid dealing with Muhammad's failed predictions.


Our Prophet peace be upon him did the right thing, because he was inspired by Allah Almighty to do so. The treaty only lasted 2 years, and only few Muslims had to be sacrificed and die as Martyrs from the Pagans for embracing Islam. The number of the Muslims rose from approximately 700 or so, to 10,000 military men. That's very impressive!


Osama assumes what he has yet to prove, namely that Allah "inspired" Muhammad to do the "right thing." Osama also fails to inform his readers the reason why the treaty only lasted two years, as opposed to the stipulated ten. Muhammad BROKE the treaty and claimed that God told him to do so! For more on this, please read this excellent article.

Furthermore, what is even more impressive is how many people were forced to become Muslims by the sword, and apostatized, and then forced to come back again through the threat of death and violence!


2- If Mr. Sam Shamoun wants to consider this a "compromise" on Muhammad's part, then how about using this logic with Jesus?

Tell us Mr. Sam, why did the "Prince of Peace", Jesus peace be upon him, order his followers to buy swords? Isn't this a compromise to the "peace" that the prince came for? How is a sword supposed to show your enemy that you love him as much as you love yourself as Jesus told his followers to love their enemies as much as they love themselves.

Please visit Why did Muhammad take up arms and Christ didn't? Why did Islam spread by the sword if it were indeed a Religion of Truth, and Christianity didn't? See my response to this misunderstanding. Did you know that even Jesus killed his enemies in the Bible?


Let us look at the context to see the point Jesus was trying to make:

"Then Jesus asked them, ‘When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?’ ‘Nothing,’ they answered. He said to them, ‘But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. It is written: "And he was numbered with the transgressors"; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.’ The disciples said, ‘See, Lord, here are two swords.’ ‘That is enough,’ he replied." Luke 22:35-38

The context clearly demonstrates that Jesus was telling his disciples to provide for themselves, since he would be taken away from them in order to fulfill prophecy. The command of purchasing a sword refers to a dagger that would be placed in a person's pouch while on a journey. People often carried such daggers in order to protect from highway bandits who would often kill their victims after plundering them.

Interestingly, it is Muhammad and his followers that often raided caravans for plunder. Hence, Jesus was warning his followers to protect themselves from people that had the same mentality as Osama's prophet!

Second, Osama lies when he says that Jesus claimed that we are to love our enemies as ourselves. Here is what Jesus did in fact say:

"You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect." Matthew 5:43-48

Yet loving one's enemy doesn't mean that we are to allow violence and injustice to go unpunished. In fact, to guarantee peace it becomes necessary at times to punish those who would oppose it.

Therefore, part of Jesus' mission as the Prince of Peace entails the eradication of any and all obstacles that would seek to hinder peace:

"All this is evidence that God's judgment is right, and as a result you will be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are suffering. God is just: He will pay back trouble to those who trouble you and give relief to you who are troubled, and to us as well. This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels. He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the majesty of his power on the day he comes to be glorified in his holy people and to be marveled at among all those who have believed. This includes you, because you believed our testimony to you." 2 Thessalonians 1:5-10

"I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and makes war. His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. ‘He will rule them with an iron scepter. He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair, ‘Come, gather together for the great supper of God, so that you may eat the flesh of kings, generals, and mighty men, of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, small and great.’ Then I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies gathered together to make war against the rider on the horse and his army. But the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who had performed the miraculous signs on his behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped his image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur. The rest of them were killed with the sword that came out of the mouth of the rider on the horse, and all the birds gorged themselves on their flesh." Revelation 19:11-21

"Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, ‘Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.’ He who was seated on the throne said, ‘I am making everything new!’ Then he said, ‘Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.’ He said to me: ‘It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To him who is thirsty I will give to drink without cost from the spring of the water of life. He who overcomes will inherit all this, and I will be his God and he will be my son. But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars-their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death." Revelation 21:1-8

This is called justice, not violence.

Osama also lies when he says that Jesus killed people. In his link, he appeals to several passages to prove his case. Let us quote these passages in context:

"While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once. He said: ‘A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king and then to return. So he called ten of his servants and gave them ten minas. "Put this money to work," he said, "until I come back." But his subjects hated him and sent a delegation after him to say, "We don't want this man to be our king." He was made king, however, and returned home. Then he sent for the servants to whom he had given the money, in order to find out what they had gained with it. The first one came and said, "Sir, your mina has earned ten more." "Well done, my good servant!" his master replied. "Because you have been trustworthy in a very small matter, take charge of ten cities." The second came and said, "Sir, your mina has earned five more." His master answered, "You take charge of five cities." Then another servant came and said, "Sir, here is your mina; I have kept it laid away in a piece of cloth. I was afraid of you, because you are a hard man. You take out what you did not put in and reap what you did not sow." His master replied, "I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant! You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow? Why then didn't you put my money on deposit, so that when I came back, I could have collected it with interest?" Then he said to those standing by, "Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas." "Sir," they said, "he already has ten!" He replied, "I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away. But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them - bring them here and kill them in front of me."’" Luke 19:11-27

It is clear from the context that Jesus is referring to his return as King of kings and Lord of lords to repay all men for all that they have done. Since those who rejected Jesus as King deserved their punishment, we really fail to see how this proves Osama's point, especially since he himself believes in a day of judgment where all who reject Allah and his prophet will be condemned to eternal hell fire.

Osama claims that Revelation 2:23 shows Jesus killing the kids of his enemies. Let us quote the context and see if he is correct:

"To the angel of the church in Thyatira write: These are the words of the Son of God, whose eyes are like blazing fire and whose feet are like burnished bronze. I know your deeds, your love and faith, your service and perseverance, and that you are now doing more than you did at first. Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols. I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is unwilling. So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make THOSE WHO COMMIT ADULTERY WITH HER SUFFER INTENSELY, unless they repent of her ways. I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds. Now I say to the rest of you in Thyatira, to you who do not hold to her teaching and have not learned Satan's so-called deep secrets (I will not impose any other burden on you): Only hold on to what you have until I come. To him who overcomes and does my will to the end, I will give authority over the nations - ‘He will rule them with an iron scepter; he will dash them to pieces like pottery’ - just as I have received authority from my Father. I will also give him the morning star. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches." Revelation 2:18-29

It is clear from the context that children here refer to Jezebel's followers, not to literal kids. The term children is often used to describe a person's followers as the following passages demonstrate:

"I am not writing this to shame you, but to warn you, as my dear children. Even though you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. Therefore I urge you to imitate me. For this reason I am sending to you Timothy, my son whom I love, who is faithful in the Lord. He will remind you of my way of life in Christ Jesus, which agrees with what I teach everywhere in every church." 1 Corinthians 4:14-17

"She who is in Babylon, chosen together with you, sends you her greetings, and so does my son Mark." 1 Peter 5:13

"My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense - Jesus Christ, the Righteous One." 1 John 2:1

Again, peace does not entail that Jesus should overlook sins. Rather, true peace entails the complete eradication of all obstacles that seek to hinder it.

Here is the final reference that Osama quotes to prove that Jesus used a sword and therefore contradicted himself:

"Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven. But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven. Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn ‘a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law- a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.’ Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it." Matthew 10:32-39

The sword that Jesus was obviously referring to is the sword of division, as both the context and the Lukan parallel demonstrate:

"I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! But I have a baptism to undergo, and how distressed I am until it is completed! Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law." Luke 12:49-53

Jesus is simply stating that trusting in him may result in the loss of family, friends and loved ones. Jesus is telling his followers beforehand that to be true disciples they must be willing to forsake all for Christ. The result of doing so will be eternal life:

"Peter answered him, ‘We have left everything to follow you! What then will there be for us?’ Jesus said to them, ‘I tell you the truth, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life. But many who are first will be last, and many who are last will be first.’" Matthew 19:27-30

Hence, Osama's red herrings do not prove his point nor do they refute the fact that his prophet made false predictions.


What does the Qu'ran say about violence? Why does the Noble Quran contain Verses that command the Muslims to fight? See the justified and good reasons behind it.


Here in fact is the true teaching of Islam regarding violence: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6].

This concludes this part. Part 4 to follow shortly, Lord Jesus willing.

In the service of our eternal Lord and risen Savior forever, Jesus Christ, God's beloved eternal Son. Amen. Come, Lord Jesus. We love you forever, eternal Lord of glory.

Rebuttals to Answering-Christianity
Further articles by Sam Shamoun
Answering Islam Home Page