Rebuttal to Craig Winn's "Prophet of Doom: Chapter 13" article:

This article is a rebuttal to Craig Winn's article that is located at: http://www.prophetofdoom.net/chapter13.html.

Important Note to the Reader:

Craig Winn purposely twisted and modified the English translations that he used!  He changes words in translations and uses non-Muslim ones.  I've noticed this a lot through his translations of the Noble Verses that he used from the Noble Quran.

Please visit:

List of Craig Winn's fabricated lies and deliberate alteration of quotes, WITH CLEAR-CUT PROOFS!

Before we proceed with his article, let us first look at the DARKNESS in his porn-full bible; the book of pedophilia, murder, TERRORISM, and women's vaginas and breasts taste like "wine":

Having said all of that, let us now proceed to his article.....

He wrote:

CHAPTER 13


THE PEDOPHILE PIRATE

“When the Prophet married Aisha she was very young
and not yet ready for consummation.”

    Chairman Muhammad settled into his public housing project and immediately began to act like the fool he had become. Ishaq:235 “In the year of the Prophet’s arrival, Abu Umamah died from a rattling in the throat. The Messenger said, ‘His death is an evil thing for the Jews and the Arab Hypocrites for they are sure to say, “If Muhammad were really a prophet his companion would not have died.” But truly, I have no power with Allah either for myself or for my companions.’” Truer words were never spoken.
    Muhammad had no morals either. Tabari VII:7 “The Prophet married Aisha in Mecca three years before the Hijrah, after the death of Khadija. At the time she was six.” Ishaq:281 “When the Apostle came to Medina he was fifty-three.” Tabari VII:6 “In May, 623 A.D./A.H. 1, Allah’s Messenger consummated his marriage to Aisha.” He would be dead in ten years; she hadn’t lived that long. Pedophilia was, and continues to be, child abuse. The abused had come full circle; he was now an abuser.
    Accusing a prophet of being a pedophile sounds outrageous. Yet the evidence is undeniable: Tabari IX:128 “When the Prophet married Aisha, she was very young and not yet ready for consummation.” This is how it happened: Tabari IX:131 “My mother came to me while I was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down. My nurse took over and wiped my face with some water and started leading me. When I was at the door she stopped so I could catch my breath. I was brought in while Muhammad was sitting on a bed in our house. My mother made me sit on his lap. The other men and women got up and left. The Prophet consummated his marriage with me in my house when I was nine years old.” Given a choice, I believe most people would prefer to get their spiritual inspiration from someone who wasn’t a sexual predator.
    Muhammad struggled to justify his behavior. Bukhari:V9B86N98 “The Prophet said, ‘A virgin should not be married till she is asked for her consent.’ ‘O Apostle! How will the virgin express her consent?’ He said, ‘By remaining silent.’” Bukhari:V9B87N139-40 “Allah’s Apostle told Aisha, ‘You were shown to me twice in my dreams [a.k.a. sexual fantasies]. I beheld a man or angel carrying you in a silken cloth. He said to me, “She is yours, so uncover her.” And behold, it was you. I would then say to myself, “If this is from Allah, then it must happen.”’” Allah not only approved pedophilia, he insisted upon it. That makes the Islamic god as perverted as his prophet.
    Since fifty-three-year-old pedophiles are not prophet material, I want to give Islam every possible opportunity to clear this up. The next Hadith is from Aisha. Tabari VII:7 “There are special features in me that have not been in any woman except for what Allah bestowed on Maryam bt. Imran [She was referring to Mary, the mother of Jesus, although she didn’t know her name or her father’s name, and none of the “features” applied]. I do not say this to exalt myself over any of my companions.’ ‘What are these?’ someone asked. Aisha replied, ‘The angel brought down my likeness [she was a babe]; the Messenger married me when I was seven; my marriage was consummated when I was nine [she was abused]; he married me when I was a virgin, no other man having shared me with him [she was a child]; inspiration came to him when he and I were in a single blanket [she “inspired” him]; I was one of the dearest people to him; a verse of the Qur’an was revealed concerning me when the community was almost destroyed [she inspired Allah]; and I saw Gabriel when none of his other wives saw him [she lied].’” Think about the implications of what she just said. Muhammad was “inspired”—a Qur’an surah was handed down while the prophet was having sex with a little girl. Allah didn’t find pedophilia the least bit troubling.
    The following confirms that the first Muslims were consumed by greed, the prophet was inspired by the body of a child, and the circumstances surrounding Qur’an revelations were as perverted as the scripture itself. Bukhari:V5B57N119 “The people used to send presents to the Prophet on the day of Aisha’s turn [to have sex with him]. Aisha said, ‘His other wives gathered in the apartment of Um Salama [wife number two] and said, “Um, the people send presents on the day of Aisha’s turn and we too, love the good presents just as much as she does. You should tell Allah’s Apostle to order the people to send their presents to him regardless of whose turn it may be.” Um repeated that to the Prophet and he turned away from her. When the Prophet returned to Um, she repeated the request again. The Prophet again turned away.    After the third time, the Prophet said, “Um, don’t trouble me by harming Aisha, for by Allah, the Divine Inspiration [Qur’an surahs] never came to me while I was under the blanket of any woman among you except her.”’” If there have been any skeptics who have made it this far without acknowledging that the Qur’an was inspired to satisfy Muhammad’s cravings, rather than to save men’s souls, welcome to the realm of reason.
    Earlier, I accused the victim of pedophilia of lying. I want to explain why. Her eighth divine gift was contradicted during one of the bedroom revelations. Bukhari:V4B54N440 “The Prophet said, ‘Aisha, this is Gabriel. He sends his greetings and salutations.’ Aisha said, ‘Salutations and greetings to him, and Allah’s Blessings.’ Addressing the Prophet she said, ‘You see what I don’t see.’”
    This Hadith reveals how perverted Muhammad was and how sane other Arabs were by contrast. Bukhari:V4B52N211 “I participated in a Ghazwa [raid] with the Prophet. I said, ‘Apostle, I am a bridegroom.’ He asked me whether I had married a virgin or matron. I answered, ‘A matron.’ He said, ‘Why not a virgin who would have played with you? Then you could have played with her.’ ‘Apostle! My father was martyred and I have some young sisters, so I felt it not proper that I should marry a young girl as young as them.’” It’s obvious who corrupted whom.
    Muhammad’s behavior would be considered criminal in every civilized nation on earth. No moral society has ever condoned old men having sex with young children. If you are caught, you’re locked up—separated from decent people. Pedophilia is so heinous, convicted felons torment child abusers—even they can’t stand to be in their presence.
    Such a grotesque act disqualified Muhammad from his alleged calling. What’s more, his personal perversity had a lasting legacy. Muslims follow his example. While most of what happens in the Islamic world escapes our purview, as Islam is hostile to all freedoms, including press and inquiry, we have gained glimpses in Afghanistan and Iraq. There, virginal young girls are frequently raped by Muslim men. And as you would expect in a culture influenced by Muhammad, the victims are shamed, not the perpetrators.
    It is little wonder Muhammad’s contemporaries called him “mad,” “insane,” and “demon possessed.” It is little wonder Islamic clerics try so hard to hide this stuff from the world. It is why Muhammad assassinated a score of poets, the journalists of their day, who had the courage to expose him. It is why Muslim rulers issue fatwas today.
    Decadent egomaniacs like Muhammad are deeply troubled and tortured souls. Their insecurities drive unbridled lusts for power, sex, and money. Their feelings of inadequacy cause them to be shy, yet their outward manner overcompensates making them abusive and purposely deceptive. They need others to bow down to them in submission, and they require unquestioned obedience. Muhammad was a textbook case (as was Adolf Hitler, his modern twin). Bukhari:V4B56N762 “The Prophet was shier than a veined virgin girl.” Bukhari:V9B89N251 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Whoever obeys me, obeys Allah, and whoever disobeys me, disobeys Allah, and whoever obeys the ruler I appoint, obeys me, and whoever disobeys him, disobeys me.’” Pedophilia, incest, and rape are all perverted manifestations of a thirst for power and control. Insecurity is the cause.
    I apologize for dragging you through this muck. I realize the material we just covered would be illegal, even in a pornographic movie. And we are not done. We have yet to deal with the prophet’s other depravities: incest and rape. But at least you now know why this control freak’s paradise was a brothel filled with ever-attentive young virgins ready to be conquered.
    Muhammad, like his religion, was fixated on the flesh. According to the Qur’an, bodies were reassembled so that skin could be singed in hell and teased in paradise. Man’s spirit was incidental. I believe this is because the religion was made in the prophet’s image. It reflected his character and desires.
    To appreciate Islam’s elevation of body over soul, we must look at the source of his inspiration. Muhammad was right when he described the angel that visited him as a slave. Bukhari:V4B54N455 “So (Allah) conveyed the Inspiration to His slave (Gabriel) and then he (Gabriel) conveyed (it to Muhammad).” Angels, fallen or heavenly, demonic or godly, have no choice. To borrow another line from Islam, “They must submit and obey.” Islam’s dark spirit knew all about angelic submission, because he once was one: 007.011 “It is We who created you and gave you shape; then We ordered the angels to fall and prostrate themselves to Adam.”
    The same passage goes on to correctly implicate Satan and suggest angels are eternal. 007.019 “Satan...said: ‘Your Lord only forbid you this tree, lest you should become angels, immortal, living forever.’”
    Satan, like all angels, is a four-dimensional construct. That is to say, he can maneuver in time—the fourth dimension. While this may sound complex, we have known since Einstein that space has a fourth axis, an infinite aspect that we cannot yet navigate. In this regard, angels are superior to men as we are trapped in three-dimensional bodies—stuck in time. Yahweh is not, which is why his name means “I Am,” or “I Exist.” He is immortal and timeless; his infinity exists in the fourth dimension. This explains how Yahweh predicts the future. He knows the future not because he has ordained it but because he has already been there and witnessed the culmination of our choices.
    Now, put yourself in Lucifer’s wings for a moment. He knows that his spirit is inferior to ours for two reasons. We are made spiritually in God’s image. And we have choice. With choice we have the capacity to be creative and to love. This is why God created us. These attributes remain his and our most powerful qualities. So Lucifer doesn’t want to compete with us spiritually. He can’t win.
    But when he competes bodily, he can’t lose. We are three dimensional—he is four. The difference is infinite, just as it is between two- and three-axis realms. The comparison is like a cartoon rendering of Mickey Mouse competing with Walt Disney—or more accurately, with Walt’s secretary. This is why Islam is focused on the body. It’s why the covetous Muhammad was the perfect Satanic prophet.

Y V Z M

    The arrival of the first child born to Muslims after the Hijrah was celebrated: Tabari VII:9 “The Messenger’s Companions cried, ‘Allahu Akbar’ [Allah is Greater than Yahweh, was the implication], when she was born. This was because a story was current among the Muslims that the Jews claimed that they had bewitched them so that no children would be born. The Muslims praised Allah that he had falsified the Jews’ claim.” They were saying that their “god’s” magic spells were more powerful then the Jewish God’s. Even if they were right, it made Islam wrong.
    The next seven section heads in Tabari’s The Foundation of the Community, begin with “Expedition.” The Arabic word is “Maghazi,” which is translated “Raid” in the Sira. It actually means invasion. It’s synonymous with “Jihad,” defined by Bukhari as “Holy fighting in Allah’s Cause.” A more complete explanation is provided in the Book of Jihad, on page 580 of Maktba Dar-us-Salam’s publication of Sahih Al-Bukhari: “Jihad is holy fighting in Allah’s Cause with full force of weaponry. It is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its Pillars. By Jihad Islam is established, Allah is made superior and He becomes the only God who may be worshiped. By Jihad Islam is propagated and made superior. By abandoning Jihad (may Allah protect us from that) Islam is destroyed and Muslims fall into an inferior position. Their honor is lost, their lands are stolen, and Muslim rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim. He who tries to escape this duty dies as a hypocrite.”
    Memorize this paragraph. Shout it out to all who will listen. Every word was derived from the Qur’an. Every word was lived by Muhammad. It accurately represents fundamental Islam, so much so, each of the 150 Hadiths that follow this definition of Jihad speak of fighting; none suggest a spiritual struggle. Among them, Muhammad says that the most important deed is Jihad, fighting in Allah’s Cause. (Bukhari:V4B52N44) And the Qur’an agrees, saying peaceful Muslims are hypocrites, destined for hell. They are “the worst of creatures,” “the most vile of animals.” (Qur’an surahs 3 and 33.)
    So that there is no question regarding the appropriateness of using Bukhari as a source, here’s what the Islamic scholars had to say in the preface: “Al-Bukhari’s Hadith is the most authentic and true book of the Prophet.” The translators said, “I am perfectly sure that the translation, with Allah’s help and after all the great efforts exerted in its production, has neared perfection.” The imams from the cradle of Islam, the Islamic University of Medina in Saudi Arabia, said, “It has been unanimously agreed that Imam Bukhari’s work is the most authentic of all the other sources in Hadith literature put together. It is second only to the Qur’an.”
    That leaves you and me at the crossroads of destiny. If we don’t deal with the awesome gravity of Islamic Jihad, our future will vanish before our eyes. If we wish to avoid the abyss of world war we must expose the doctrine committed to world conquest. We must liberate Muslims from Islam.
    “The Expedition Led by Hamzah” was the first Maghazi. Hamzah, a huntsman in Mecca, was now a “Mujahid” (plural—Mujahidun), “a Muslim warrior in Jihad.” Tabari VII:10 “In Ramadhan, seven months after the Hijrah, Muhammad entrusted a white war banner to Hamzah with the command of thirty Emigrants. Their aim was to intercept a Quraysh caravan.” Seven months after fleeing Mecca in shame, the pedophile prophet has become a pirate and terrorist.
    So that there is no misunderstanding, let’s define these less than admirable characterizations. Pirate: a renegade who, along with others under his command, uses force of arms to steal the property of others. Terrorist: a person who violently attacks civilians, destroys their property, and disrupts their economy as a means to achieve a political objective.
    The flag Muhammad handed to Hamzah was a war banner. It was one of the many symbols the prophet borrowed from his patriarch Qusayy. Hamzah was a warrior. He was given the command of thirty men. Their aim was to intercept a caravan, a civilian economic enterprise owned by the people Muhammad had promised to slaughter because they had teased him. Although we are told: “they separated without a battle,” the intent was piracy and terror. Their failure didn’t change what they had become—what Islam had done to them. At this point in the profiteer’s career, there were simply more good guys than there were bad guys, and he was as inept a pirate as he was a prophet.
    Turning to Muhammad’s biographer, we learn more about the mindset of the first Muslims. Ishaq:283 “Hamza’s expedition to the seashore comprised thirty riders, all Emigrants from Mecca. He met Abu Jahl who had 300 riders. Amr, intervened for he was at peace with both sides. Hazma [Muhammad’s raider] said, so they allege: ‘Wonder at good sense and at folly, at a lack of sound counsel and at sensible advice. Their people and property are not yet violated as we haven’t attacked. We called them to Islam [surrender] but they treat it as a joke. They laughed until I threatened them. At the Apostle’s command, I was the first to march beneath his flag, a victorious banner from Allah. Even as they sullied forth burning with rage, Allah frustrated their schemes.’”
    Abu Jahl, a pagan businessman, responded to the Muslim militants: Ishaq:284 “I am amazed at the causes of anger and folly and at those who stir up strife by lying controversy. They abandon our fathers’ ways. They come with lies to twist our minds. But their lies cannot confound the wise. If you give up your raids we will take you back for you are our cousins, our kin. But they chose to believe Muhammad and became obstinately contentious. All their deeds became evil.” As always, the Meccans understood Islam.
    Ibn Ishaq believed: Ishaq:281 “The Raid on Waddan was the first Maghazi.” He said, “The Expedition of Ubayda Harith was second. The Apostle sent Ubayda out on a raid with sixty or eighty riders from the Emigrants, there not being a single Ansar among them. He encountered a large number of Quraysh in the Hijaz. Abu Bakr composed a poem about the raid.” Some of the most memorable lines include: “When we called them to the truth they turned their backs and howled like bitches. Allah’s punishment on them will not tarry. I swear by the Lord of Camels [Allah?] that I am no perjurer. A valiant band will descend upon the Quraysh which will leave women husbandless. It will leave men dead, with vultures wheeling round. It will not spare the infidels.” To which a pagan named “Slave-to-Allah” replied: Ishaq:282 “Does your eye weep unceasingly over the ruins of a dwelling [Allah’s House] that the shifting sands obscure? Is your army and declaration of war firm enough that we should abandon images venerated in Mecca, passed on to heirs by a noble ancestor [Qusayy]? Are your steeds panting at the fray, are your swords polished white, are they in the hands of warriors, dangerous as lions, or are you conceited? Are you here to quench your thirst for vengeance? Nay, they withdraw in great fear and awe.”
    Of the raid, the historian reports: Tabari VII:10 “Eight months after the Hijrah, Allah’s Messenger entrusted a white war banner to Ubaydah and ordered him to march to Batn Rabigh. He reached the pass of Marah, near Juhfah, at the head of sixty Emigrants without a single Ansari (Medina Muslim) among them. They met the polytheists at a watering place called Ahya. They shot arrows at one another but there was no hand-to-hand fighting.”
    The prophet is now a repeat offender. Eight months into the Islamic Era he has ordered multiple attacks. Muslim apologists profess that Muhammad was forced into defending Islam and that he was neither aggressor, pirate, nor terrorist. But that position is indefensible. Nothing is known about the Muhammad of history—no independent records exist. All that is known about him is contained in these Hadiths. If they say he attacked a civilian caravan and then ordered men to march and fight in another town, he did. Therefore, he was the aggressor. There isn’t even a hint of self-defense in these Traditions, nor do they try to explain away the prophet’s motives. They were after money, not armies—booty, not converts.
    You may be wondering why none of the Ansari joined the Muslim Emigrants from Mecca on either raid. I believe that the answer is that they hadn’t been Muslims long enough and therefore still knew right from wrong. Islam had already corrupted the Meccan Muslims to the point that they thought piracy and terror were justifiable, even admirable. Kind of reminds us of the modern day Islamic terrorists.
    Ishaq:285 “Then the Apostle went raiding in the month of Rabi u’l-Awwal making for the Quraysh. He returned to Medina without fighting. Then he raided the Quraysh by way of Dinar.” Tabari VII:11 “In this year the Messenger entrusted to Sa’d a white war banner for the expedition to Kharrar. Sa’d said, ‘I set out on foot at the head of twenty men. We used to lie hidden by day and march at night, until we reached Kharrar on the fifth morning. The caravan had arrived in town a day before. There were sixty men with it. Those who were with Sa’d were all Emigrants.’” Muhammad is now a serial offender, a     committed pirate and terrorist, albeit a failed one.
    Tabari VII:11 “The Messenger of Allah went out on a raid as far as Waddan, searching for Quraysh. In the course of which, the Banu Damrah made a treaty of friendship with him. Then Muhammad returned to Medina without any fighting and remained there for the rest of the month.” This time Muhammad took command himself with the express intent of finding the Quraysh and robbing them. And while it is noble that he inked a treaty of friendship, even this was the wrong thing for a prophet to do. Treaties are political, not religious. Muhammad was now considered a “fellow chief” commanding a band of armed men—hardly prophet-like.    Besides, the Qur’an would ultimately say that treaties with unbelieving infidels weren’t binding on Muslims. This alliance was with pagans.
    Tabari VII:12 “During this stay he sent Ubaydah at the head of sixty horsemen from the Emigrants without a single Ansari among them. He got as far as a watering place in Hijaz [Central Arabia], below the pass of Marah. There he met a greater band of Quraysh, but there was no fighting except Sa’d shot an arrow. Then the two groups separated from one another, the Muslims leaving a rearguard.” Islamic raiders marched with the intent to plunder and kill. The only thing that stopped them from achieving their objective was the sight of a superior force. As we seek to defend ourselves today we would do well to keep this in mind.
    Tabari VII:13 “Muhammad led an expedition in [the month of] Rabi al-Akhir in search of Quraysh. He went as far as Buwat in the region of Radwa and then returned without any fighting. Then he led another expedition in search of the Meccans. He took the mountain track and crossed the desert, halting beneath a tree in Batha. He prayed there. [What on earth was he praying for? “O God, please help me rob and kill people. Thank you. Amen.”] After a few days the Prophet went out in pursuit of the Kutz.”
    The Islamic Era was but a year old, yet Muslims were fully committed to the path of piracy and terror. Forget for a moment that this was supposed to be a religion. There was nothing noble, moral, or redeeming about raiding parties seeking to plunder civilian caravans or expeditions marching off to terrorize unsuspecting villagers. Just as there was no redeeming surah in Mecca, there is no virtuous behavior in Medina. I haven’t cherry-picked the ugly parts out of a sea of pious religious activities. I have reported everything.

Y V Z M

    The second year of the Islamic Era began as the first one ended. The opening headline reads: Tabari VII:15 “Expeditions Led by Allah’s Messenger,” This was followed by: “In this year, according to all Sira writers, the Messenger personally led the Ghazwa of Alwa. [A Ghazwa is an Islamic Invasion in Allah’s Cause consisting of a large army unit led by the Prophet himself.] He left Sa’d in command of Medina. On this raid his banner was carried by Hamzah. He stayed out for fifteen days and then returned to Medina.” This was the eighth failed terrorist attack in as many months.
    There are two interesting subtleties here. First, Sa’d, Chairman Muhammad’s most fierce warrior, was left in “command” of Medina because the “prophet” had become a warlord. And considering the nature of the Islamic world today, that made him a role model. Second, the “religion” of Islam actually coined a word to define an armed raid personally led by its prophet. There is something very perverse about that.
    “According to Waqidi, the Messenger went on a Ghazwa at the head of two hundred of his companions in October, 623 and reached Buwat. His intention was to intercept a Quraysh caravan with a hundred men and twenty-five hundred camels.” This expedition was neither a military operation nor was it defensive. And it most assuredly wasn’t religious. It was an act of terrorism against a civilian economic activity. The pirate was after booty.
    The Hadith reports: “In this year Muhammad sent forth the Emigrants to intercept a Quraysh caravan en route to Syria. His war banner was carried by Hamzah.” It also failed. The score was Muslim Militants 0, Infidels 10. Unfortunately, Islam would get better at this game than they ever got at religion.
    Ishaq:286/Tabari VII:16 “Ali and I were with the Messenger on the Ghazwa of Ushayrah. We halted on one occasion and saw some men of the Banu Mudlij working in one of their date groves. I said, ‘Why don’t we go and see how they work?’ So we went and watched them for a while; then we felt drowsy and went to sleep on dusty ground under the trees. Muhammad woke us, arriving as we were covered in dust. He stirred Ali with his foot and said, ‘Arise, O dusty one! Shall I tell you who was the most wretched man? Ahmar of Thamud for he slaughtered the she-camel and he shall strike you here.’ Muhammad put his hand to the side of Ali’s head, until it was soaked from it. Then he grabbed his beard.” The Qur’an claims that the Thamudic nation was destroyed by Allah because someone hamstrung a camel. While it’s odd he liked camels more than men, there was a bigger perversion still in this tale of misplaced ambition. The Muslims were so unfamiliar with honest labor they went to watch someone work. And they were so lazy, they fell asleep doing it.
    Ultimately, that was why the pirates were there in the first place. When the bedraggled Muslim refugees migrated north they became dependent upon handouts. They were physically able to work, since they went off on raids. And the oasis town of Yathrib was a bustling agricultural and commercial center, so there was plenty of work being done. All of which leads to a conclusion: something in Islam made the Muslims unwilling to work. And it affects them to this day. Islamic states have the lowest per capita productivity in the world. Islam politically and economically is as faulty as the religion is false. Lose, lose.
    Ishaq:286 “Meanwhile the Apostle sent Sa’d on the raid of Abu Waqqas. The Prophet only stayed a few nights in Medina before raiding Ushayra and then Kurz.”
    Let’s review Bukhari’s Book of Maghazi to get a better feel for what’s happening: Bukhari:V5B57N1 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘A time will come when a group of Muslims will wage a Holy War and it will be said, “Is there anyone who has accompanied Allah’s Apostle?” They will say, “Yes.” And so victory will be bestowed on them.’” Bukhari:V5B57N51 “The Apostle said, ‘Tomorrow I will give the flag to a man whose leadership Allah will use to grant a Muslim victory.” Bukhari:V5B59N569 “I fought in seven Ghazwat battles along with the Prophet and fought in nine Maghazi raids in armies dispatched by the Prophet.”
    There was nothing “spiritual” about fundamental Islam: Bukhari:V5B57N74 “I heard Sa’d saying, ‘I was the first Arab to shoot an arrow in Allah’s Cause.’” Bukhari: V5B59N288 “I witnessed a scene that was dearer to me than anything I had ever seen. Aswad came to the Prophet while Muhammad was urging the Muslims to fight the pagans. He said, ‘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.” Bukhari:V5B59N290 “The believers who did not join the Ghazwa and those who fought are not equal in reward.” Bukhari:V5B59N320 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘When your enemy comes near shoot at them but use your arrows sparingly (so that they are not wasted).’” Bukhari:V5B59N401 “Allah’s Wrath became severe on anyone the Prophet killed in Allah’s Cause.”
    While the terrorist raids were hardly religious, religious symbolism and rewards were used to solicit and inspire the new combatants: Bukhari:V5B59N456 “Muhammad led the Fear Prayer with one batch of his army while the other (batch) faced the enemy.” Bukhari: V5B59N330 “The Prophet said, ‘This is Gabriel holding the head of his horse, equipped with arms for the battle.’” Bukhari:V5B59N440 “Allah’s Apostle used to say, ‘None has the right to be worshipped except Allah Alone because He honored His Warriors and made His Messenger victorious. He (Alone) defeated the Infidel clans; so there is nothing left.’” Bukhari: V5B59N377 “A man came to the Prophet and said, ‘Can you tell me where I will go if I get martyred?’ The Prophet replied, ‘To Paradise.’ The man fought till he was martyred.”
    There are no such bargains in the Gospels. Killing is not an express ticket to heaven. Yahshua never asked his followers to “slay” anyone. Christ mentions killing only once. He tells a parable about a ruler in the final days of the Tribulation to encourage Christians to be productive, not destructive.
    In the Torah, Yahweh asked the Israelites to kill once, as well. He told Moses and Joshua to remove those poisoned by the Canaanite religion from the land. They were like Muhammad’s Muslims: immoral, terrorizing, plundering, enslaving, and murdering. Their religion was as corrupt as Islam—equally demonic. Yahweh recognized it was more compassionate to exterminate some Canaanites than it was to allow them to seduce millions. He made the right call, but the Jews failed to execute his order.
    Let’s consider Yahweh’s moral justification for fighting. Imagine that you were God and knew the thousand people most responsible for the September 11th suicide bombings. You know that they have been poisoned to believe that mass murder is a service to you. Left alone, they will corrupt and murder thousands. Would you kill them before they perpetrated these crimes or would you let them go ahead?
    Now move back in time to the dawn of the 20th century. As usual, the world is full of bad people and bad ideas, but two doctrines are especially lethal—Communism and Nazism. Because you’ve read their manifestoes and have maneuvered in time, you know what is going to happen. Within their first three decades, these dictatorial, intolerant, and violent dogmas will lead directly to the annihilation of over fifty million people and to the indoctrination of a billion more. Given the opportunity, would you exterminate a few thousand aspiring Communists and Nazis to save the lives of the fifty million their regimes butchered? Would you do it to save a billion people from being forced into submission—forced to live in civil, religious, intellectual, and economic poverty? Would you do it to keep them from growing strong enough to kill you, your neighbors, and your children? What is the most moral, just, and compassionate choice?
    Perhaps now you know why Yahweh ordered his people to slay the practitioners of a doctrine virtually identical to Islam. But don’t get carried away. His last command to kill was 3,200 years ago. His command wasn’t open ended. It was directed at a specific group of people, in a specific time and specific place. Apart from self defense, that’s the end of the story.
    So, when you hear Muslims defend their violent doctrine, saying that the Bible is equally warlike, you’ll know the truth. Yahweh asked once. He identified the reason and the people. The order wasn’t open ended, either. And, even if it were, there are no Canaanites to kick around.  What’s more, the Jews were expressly forbidden from taking a spoil. When the walls of Jericho fell, its storehouses remained filled. Children were not sent off into slavery; women were not raped as if they were booty. The Judeo-Christian scriptures have to be corrupted to inspire such horrible acts.
   Allah, by contrast, gave Muslims hundreds of commands to kill. His orders were open ended—surviving throughout time. And his intended victims were many: those who worshiped the one true God, many gods, or no gods at all. Allah especially hated Christians and Jews, ordering Muslims to fight them until they were “wiped out to the last.” This is fundamental Islam—the very core of Muhammad’s message.
    That said, there is one Bible verse that appears to be both open ended and to encourage violence. As such, Psalm 149 became the rallying cry for the Crusades. In actuality it is prophetic, speaking of what’s called the “Tribulation,” and of the return of the Messiah. In the fashion of Hebrew poetry, the Psalm presents a series of nine couplets—pairs of phrases that say the same thing in different words.
    Let’s review them. The first couplet speaks prophetically of the new millennium, of the church and saints: “Praise Yahweh. Sing unto Yahweh a fresh song, and sing his praise in the congregation of saints.” The second celebrates the end of the Tribulation, and the Messiah’s return: “Let Israel rejoice in Yahweh who made them, let the Children of Israel be joyful in their King.” Then, “Let them praise Yahweh’s character in dance, let them sing praises unto Yahweh with the tambourine and harp.” Speaking of the Messiah’s gift of salvation, the next reports: “For Yahweh is pleased with his people; He will glorify the meek with salvation.” The fifth couplet reveals: “Let the saints be joyful in this glorious honor; let them shout from their resting place.” At Christ’s return the souls of the saints will be raised from their graves.
    A Catholic Pope misinterpreted the sixth verse to advance his personal agenda: “Let the exaltation of the Almighty be in their mouths, and a two-edged sword be in their open hand.” A two-edged sword is the Bible’s metaphor for divine judgment or rendering a godly verdict. That’s why it’s in an “open hand,” which could not wield an instrument of violence. Its pair in the couplet references the exalted words of the Almighty—suggesting an oral verdict, not a slashing weapon. The seventh pair proclaims: “To advance vengeance upon the nations and punishment upon the people.” This speaks to the final judgment of Yahweh on those who attack Israel during World War III, midway through the Tribulation. Interesting, in that the predicted Magog war against Israel is perpetrated entirely by Islamic states.
    This is followed by: “To yoke kings together, bringing them forth, and those who are severe will be tied with iron twine.” In other words, following God’s verdict, the purveyors of false doctrines, those who are severe, will be restrained. The final couplet reveals: “To advance the verdict upon them, prescribed by the splendor of his saints. Praise Yahweh.” The entire Psalm is prophetic, speaking of the final judgment of nations following the Messiah’s return in power and glory. There is no command to fight or kill anyone.
    Since Islam’s principle defense is to claim that Christians have performed no better, especially during the Crusades, I want to bring your attention to two incredibly important historical facts. First, Pope Benedict IV: he reigned in 1033 A.D., precisely 1,000 years after Christ’s resurrection. Benedict became like Muhammad, demonic, fixated on the occult, demented, delirious, and lascivious. The Church became corrupt, fixated on rituals, suppression, and money. With power-hungry men at the helm, it splintered, ultimately causing cleric and king to send men off on fool-hearty crusades.
    The second historical fact is that the Crusaders weren’t Christians. They couldn’t have been. Four centuries had passed since the last sermon was given in a language common to the people of Europe. The first Bible to be printed in the vulgar tongue, John Wycliffe’s, wouldn’t find quill for another four centuries. To be a “Christian” one must know Christ. He could not have been known to the men who fought. They carried his symbols, nothing more.

Y V Z M

    Returning to 7th-century Medina, Muhammad was back on the warpath: Tabari VII:18/Ishaq:287 “The Messenger sent Abd Allah out with a detachment of eight men of the Emigrants without any Ansari, or Helpers, among them. He wrote a letter, but ordered him not to look at it until he had traveled for two days. Then he was to carry out what he was commanded to do. When Abd Allah opened the letter it said, ‘March until you reach Nakhlah, between Mecca and Ta’if. Lie in wait for the Quraysh there, and find out for us what they are doing.’” The letter suggests there was treachery among the treacherous. One or more Muslims was spilling the beans and tipping off the Quraysh before the militants could rob them.
    “Having read the letter, Abd Allah said, ‘To hear is to obey.’ He told his companions, ‘The Prophet has commanded me to go to Nakhlah and lie in wait for the Quraysh.” To “lie in wait” was an order to kill. I present Allah as an authority. Qur’an 9:5: “When the prohibited months for fighting are over, slay the pagans wherever you find them. Take them captive and besiege them. Lie in wait for them in every likely place.”
    Abd Allah tells his fellow militants: “The Prophet has forbidden me to compel you, so whoever desires martyrdom, let him come with me. If not, retreat. I am going to carry out the Prophet’s orders.’” Martyrdom—the word that manufacturers terrorists faster than the world can rid itself of them, was spoken for the first time. No word has ever held such dire consequences for abused or abuser.
    The Islamic concept of martyrdom was twisted. Muhammad took a good word and made it bad. Prior to Islam, a martyr willingly sacrificed his or her life to save others, not kill them. A Christian martyr sought nothing. Their lives served as a living witness so that others might know the value of their faith. They died with scripture in their hands, not swords. The Greek word martus, from which martyr was derived, means “witness.” Yet at Muhammad’s direction it came to mean “murderer.” Muslims obtained martyrdom by terrorizing others—murdering millions. Muslim martyrs are mercenaries, wielding swords in pursuit of plunder.
    I believe that this is Lucifer’s signature once again. He is the world’s most acclaimed counterfeiter. Martyrdom is good, but not as a pirate. Money is good, but not when it is plundered. Sex is good, but not as an act of pedophilia. Prophets are good, but not when they are motivated by profit. Scripture is good, but not when it’s perverted. Prayer is good, but not when one prostrates oneself to the Devil.
    Ishaq:287 “His companions went with him; not one of them stayed behind.” A second Hadith says: “Whoever desires death, let him go on and make his will; I am making my will and acting on the orders of the Messenger of Allah.” Tabari VII:18 “They made their way through the Hijaz until Sa’d and Utbah lost a camel which they were taking turns riding. They stayed behind to look for it. The rest went on until they reached Nakhlah. A Meccan caravan went past them carrying raisins, leather, and other merchandise, which the Quraysh traded. When they saw the Muslims they were afraid of them. Then Ukkashah [one of the Muslims] came into view; they saw that he had shaved his head, and they felt safer. The Quraysh said, ‘They are on their way to the umrah (lesser pilgrimage); there is nothing to fear.’” The pagan umrah had become part of Islam. However, shaving one’s head was used to venerate Al-Lat, not Allah. So the Quraysh were as confused as I am. Why would a Muslim militant venerate a pagan idol while perusing plunder in Allah’s name?
    Ishaq:287 “The Muslim raiders consulted one another concerning them, this being the last day of Rajab.” Rajab, like Ramadhan, was a holy month on the pagan calendar. Fighting, looting, and general mayhem were prohibited. It is troubling that the observance of a pagan rite was a limiting factor, while thievery and murder were not. This says a great deal about the nature of Islam. “One of the Muslims said, ‘By Allah, if we leave these people alone tonight, they will get into the Haram (the sacred territory of Mecca) and they will be safely out of our reach. If we kill them we will have killed in the sacred month.’” The debate was between paganism and criminal behavior. Islam had nothing to do with Muhammad’s mission.
    Tabari VII:19 “They hesitated and were afraid to advance on them, but then they plucked up courage and agreed to kill as many as they could and to seize what they had with them.” This isn’t the least bit ambiguous. The first Muslims—Muhammad’s disciples—were about to conduct a terrorist raid with the intent to loot and kill.
    “Waqid ibn Abd Allah shot an arrow at Amr and killed him. Uthman ibn Abd Allah and al-Hakam surrendered, but Nawfal ibn Abd Allah escaped and eluded them. Then Abd Allah and his companions took the caravan and the captives back to Allah’s Apostle in Medina.” Islam had drawn first blood. The score was now Islam 1, Infidels 11. The Hadith says: “This was the first booty taken by the Companions of Muhammad.”
    Reading the passage carefully, we find there were four Slaves-to-Allah in the raid—two were Muslims and two were infidels. It is yet another drop in an ocean of evidence that Allah was a pagan deity, a common rock idol.
    Abd Allah said of his adventure: Ishaq:289 “Our lances drank of Amr’s blood and lit the flame of war.” Tabari VII:20/Ishaq:287 “Abd Allah told his Companions, ‘A fifth of the booty we have taken belongs to the Apostle.’ This was before Allah made surrendering a fifth of the booty taken a requirement.” Qur’an 8:41, a verse from a surah dedicated to booty, says that Muhammad was entitled to one fifth of whatever Muslims looted. The 69th verse proclaims: “The use of such spoils is lawful and good.” The fact Abd Allah announced this partitioning of booty years in advance of the Qur’anic endorsement suggests that the idea was Muhammad’s, and that he made up a verse to ratify his claim. Money is a powerful motivator.
    “He set aside a fifth of the booty for Allah’s Messenger and divided the rest between his Companions.” If there was any doubt as to why the first Muslim militants were off on their twelfth raid in twelve months, it should have been eliminated with this line. Their mission had nothing to do with religion. Nor did Muhammad’s. It had always been about money. Religion was simply a tool, a veil, a distraction—a means to legitimize murder and mayhem. Muhammad’s raiders weren’t religious zealots; they were mercenaries at best, pirates at worst. And lest we forget, they were now murderers, kidnappers, and thieves.
    When the raiders returned to Yathrib, they were blindsided by a raging controversy. Both the Emigrants and Helpers were horrified—deeply troubled by the breach of the holy month protections. Even the most despicable bandits refrained from thievery during Rejab. And, I suppose, they may have been bothered by the fact they had murdered, robbed, and kidnapped their kin.
    This societal disdain put the wannabe prophet in a quandary. Muhammad was broke, and poor dictators don’t last long. But if he accepted the booty, he would trash his already shaky religious credentials. He was on his heels and teetering from the Quraysh Bargain, the Satanic Verses, the Night’s Journey, and the Migration of Shame. Stooping to the depths of a scoundrel, a murderous pirate, and a two-bit terrorist so desperate for money he would steal during Rajab, was one blow too many. So what to do?
    His first ploy was to betray his troops, something Muslim suicide bombers should keep in mind the next time they contemplate murdering their way to paradise. Tabari VII:20 “When they reached the Prophet he said, ‘I did not order you to fight in the sacred month.’ He impounded the caravan and the two captives and refused to take anything from them.” The prospect of “martyrdom” and “lying in wait” confirms that Muhammad had sent his Muslim raiders out to fight, as did the requirement of making out their wills. The “division of spoils” agreement indicates he had given his authorization for them to steal. The lying prophet was buying time, which is why he didn’t send the booty back. He was trying to find a way to keep the money and maintain his dwindling prestige.
    “When Allah’s Messenger said this they were aghast and thought that they were doomed. The Muslims rebuked them severely for what they had done. They said, ‘You have done what you were not commanded to do, and have fought in the sacred month.’” To salvage his reputation, and thus cling to his position of power, Muhammad made his men scapegoats. His letter confirmed his complicity.  He had sent them out in Rajab, the idolaters’ sacred month. The act made him an accessory to murder and a thief; the denial made him a pagan and a liar—something far more lethal to someone pretending to be a prophet.
    Tabari VII:20/Ishaq:288 “The Quraysh said, ‘Muhammad and his Companions have violated the sacred month, shed blood, seized property, and taken men captive.’ The polytheists spread lying slander concerning him, saying, ‘Muhammad claims that he is following obedience to Allah, yet he is the first to violate the holy month and to kill our companion in Rajab.’” The pagans knew that breaking treaties, murder, kidnapping, and thievery were wrong. It’s a shame that Islam’s lone prophet didn’t.
    I find it especially revealing that when the Meccans told the truth about what had just happened, they were called “lying slanderers.” This has devastating implications for the totality of the Qur’an. Its second most repetitive theme is the never-ending argument. The Meccans said that Muhammad was a demon-possessed liar, not a prophet. They said that he had forged the Qur’an to serve his personal ambitions. They appeared to be right and yet Islam’s dark spirit called them “lying slanderers.” In this circumstance, the Meccans were absolutely right and yet Muhammad deployed the same strategy. At the very least, this suggests that the Hadith and Qur’an had the same speechwriter, the same agenda, and the same wanton disregard for truth. It also tells us that those who knew this “prophet” far better than we could possibly know him today, saw him as a terrorist raider, an immoral thug, and as a liar.
    Tabari VII:21 “The Muslims who were still in Mecca refuted this.” It was embarrassing. It meant that they had placed their trust in a man unworthy of it. Ishaq:288 “The Jews, seeing in this an omen unfavorable to Muhammad, said, ‘Muslims killing Meccans means war is kindled.’ There was much talk of this. However, Allah turned it to their disadvantage. When the Muslims repeated what the Jews had said, Allah revealed a Qur’an to His Messenger: ‘They question you with regard to warfare in the sacred month. Say, “War therein is serious, but keeping people from Islam, from the sacred mosque, and driving them out is more serious with Allah.’ [Qur’an 2:217] The Muslims now knew that seduction was worse than killing.” Considering the facts, this was an inane excuse for violating treaties, kidnapping, theft, and murder. The Meccan merchants were minding their business. They weren’t seducing anyone. And once again, the prophet behaves badly and it’s the pagans’ fault, not his own.
    Ishaq:288 “When the Qur’an passage concerning this matter was revealed, and Allah relieved Muslims from their fear and anxiety, Muhammad took possession of the caravan and prisoners. The Quraysh sent him a ransom, but the Prophet said, ‘We will not release them to you on payment of ransom until our companions (Sa’d and Utbah) get back, for we are afraid you may harm them. If you kill them, we will kill your friends.’ They came back, however, and the Prophet released the prisoners on payment of ransom. When the Qur’an authorization came down to Muhammad, Abd Allah and his Companions were relieved and they became anxious for an additional reward. They said, ‘Will this raid be counted as part of the reward promised to Muslim combatants?’ So Allah sent down this Qur’an: ‘Those who believe and have fought in Allah’s Cause may receive Allah’s mercy.’ Allah made the booty permissible. He divided the loot, awarding four-fifths to the men He had allowed to take it. He gave one-fifth to His Apostle.”
    Mercy for murderers. Rewards for raiders. Loot for profiteers. “Allah’s Cause” has been defined for the first time, and it’s directly linked to a terrorist raid—one in which Muslim militants attacked civilians. They committed capital murder, kidnapping, and armed robbery. Islam was not preached. Instead, Islam was used to motivate the bandits and reward the prophet. The “religion” prompted barbarism rather than discourage it.
    This incident alone destroys Islam’s religious credentials, Muhammad’s authority, and Allah’s credibility. God justifying violent criminal acts to satisfy a prophet’s financial lust is unfathomable. If we are to believe Muhammad, Allah approved murder, terror, thievery, and kidnapping for ransom. Forget for a moment that this dark spirit was demented. This is immoral. An immoral god cannot be trusted. An immoral deity isn’t worthy of a religion, devotion, sacrifice, or martyrdom.
    The same is true for an immoral prophet. Muhammad had sent out armed brigades in search of Quraysh hoping to terrorize them and rob their caravans. When his militants succeeded, he betrayed his mercenaries to save his own hide, yet he still took the money. He threatened to kill his kin and ransomed them back to his tribe. Then he claimed that his god approved this hellacious behavior, which was the biggest crime of all.
    The only thing more devastating than a man professing situational scriptures to legitimize terror, murder, robbery, and kidnapping for ransom is to lure billions to their doom by implying these words were inspired by God. By doing so, Muhammad confirmed my theory. Islam was nothing more than the Profitable Prophet Plan. According to the Sira, Muhammad was a con man.
    There have been millions of murderers, millions of kidnappers, millions of terrorists. There have been millions of sexual predators. Thieves are a dime a dozen. And there have been a score of men who have done these things while claiming to be anointed by God. Yet only one invented a “religion” and falsified “scripture” to satiate his demonic cravings. This is why Muhammad, Islam’s lone prophet, qualifies as the most evil man to have ever lived.

My response:

First of all, as I proved in my previous rebuttals, the Al-Tabari and Ibn-Ishaq and other sources are extremely doubtful and unauthenticated.   Most Muslim scholars today firmly and strongly believe in this.  Not that the hadiths above are bad or anything, but as most Muslim Scholars agree, we Muslims can't take them as absolute Truth or accurate information.  Much of these volumes are either corrupt or taken out of context.  Again, this is according to the Muslims scholars.  This is why these volumes are considered "unauthenticated".

Also visit:  What parts of the Bible and Hadiths do Muslims believe are closest to the Truth, and Why?

Now having said all of that, The hateful polytheist trinitarian pagan raised the following points:

1-  Aisha's marriage to our Prophet.   Girls as young as 9 and even younger used to also be married off in the Bible, and even sold as slave girls to masters who were as old as their grand fathers.  Also 3-year old slave girls were raped by Moses and his men in the Bible!

2-  "Allah" was GOD Almighty's original Holy Name in the Bible according to the Hebrew and Aramaic sources.

3-  Jihad in Islam and the Laws of war and peace in Islam!

4-  Jihad started with the Bible!

5-  The Jews' treason not only to the Muslims, but also to the Bible's Prophets themselves!

Point #1:
(Aisha's marriage to our Prophet.  Girls as young as 9 and even younger used to also be married off in the Bible, and even sold as slave girls to masters who were as old as their grand fathers.  Also 3-year old slave girls were raped by Moses and his men in the Bible!)

From http://www.answering-christianity.com/aisha.htm:

Introduction:

Aisha in Islam:

Let's discuss the age of Aisha being 9 when she married our Prophet in Islam!

First of all, it is important to know:

Aisha's parents were the ones who married her to our Prophet, and that no Muslim or even pagan objected to the marriage because it was widely practiced.  And even until today in 3rd world countries (Muslims and non-Muslims), little girls as young as 9 or 10 do get married.  Anyway, the reason no one objected was to the Prophet's marriage was:

1. People used to have very short life-spans in Arabia.   They used to live between 40 to 60 years maximum.  So it was only normal and natural for girls to be married off at ages 9 or 10 or similar.
   
   
2. Marriage for young girls was widely practiced among Arabs back then, and even today in many third-world non-Muslim and Muslim countries.

*** X-Rated Pornography in the Bible.

*** Fathers sticking their fingers into their daughters' vaginas before marriage in the Bible.

Young girls in the Bible and Jewish Talmud.  Let's look at two main points in the Bible:

1-  3-year old slave girls were forced into sex under the Mosaic Law in the Bible.
2-  Fathers can sell their daughters as slave girls to other men in the Bible.

1-  3-year old slave girls were forced into sex under the Mosaic Law in the Bible:

Pedophilia with 3-year old slave girls in the Bible!
Forcing 3-year old slave girls into sex during the Mosaic Law in the Bible! (click here)

Also today, the Jewish law for marriage sets the age of consent for females at 11. (Consent is only one way of marriage) I do not know if modern Jewish law still allows (in theory) betrothal by intercourse as it was practiced in ancient times.

Thirty years ago, the renowned sexologist R.E.L. Masters and Allan Edwardes said in their study of Afro-Asian sexual expression (_The Cradle of Erotica_, Julian Press, New York:1962) said, "Today, in many parts of North Africa, Arabia, and India, girls are wedded and bedded between the ages of five and nine; and no self-respecting female remains unmarried beyond the age of puberty."


**** Also, the age consent in the US and Europe only 100 years ago for girls' marriage was as little as 10, and some popular men figures married little girls who were as young as their daughters.  I have provided the Western links and proofs.

By the way, please visit: X-Rated Pornography in the Bible.  The Bible literally says that women's vaginas and breasts taste like "wine".

Also visit: Fathers sticking their fingers into their daughters' vaginas before marriage in the Bible.

2-  Fathers can sell their daughters as slave girls to other men in the Bible:

Exodus 21:7-11
7. "If a man sells his daughter as a female slave, she is not to go free as the male slaves do.
8. "If she is displeasing in the eyes of her master who designated her for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He does not have authority to sell her to a foreign people because of his unfairness to her.
9. "If he designates her for his son [Note: "his son" means that the master is either her father's age or even much older!], he shall deal with her according to the custom of daughters.
10. "If he takes to himself another woman, he may not reduce her food, her clothing, or her conjugal rights.
11. "If he will not do these three things for her, then she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money.

First of all, did the daughter have any choice to be sold off by her father, married off by her master to either himself or his son?  No!

Also, the fact that the master can either marry her or marry her off to his son, means that MOST LIKELY, SHE IS HIS DAUGHTER'S AGE and younger than his son!!  So he's probably at least 30+ years older than her.  Yet, he himself (her father's age or even MUCH older) can marry her.

Again, please visit: X-Rated Pornography in the Bible.  The Bible literally says that women's vaginas and breasts taste like "wine".

Also visit: Fathers sticking their fingers into their daughters' vaginas before marriage in the Bible.

Also, the fact that there is no AGE LIMIT to how girls in the Bible were sold off and married off to other men, WITHOUT ANY CHOICE, who were much much older than them as also the case with the Biblical Prophets who married 100s of wives each clearly proves the hypocrisy of some Christians who attack Islam through Aisha's very young age, while they clearly ignore the same fact in their own Bible.  Here is a sample of the 100s of wives of the Biblical Prophets:

In Exodus 21:10, a man can marry an infinite amount of women without any limits to how many he can marry.

In 2 Samuel 5:13; 1 Chronicles 3:1-9, 14:3, King David had six wives and numerous concubines.

In 1 Kings 11:3, King Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines.

In 2 Chronicles 11:21, King Solomon's son Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines.

Please visit: Aisha was "9" when she married our Prophet.  If this is weird or unacceptable to you, then are BOTH HER PARENTS and the whole Arabs' culture BACK THEN also guilty for giving her and others like her in marriage to other men, 1500 years ago?

Even today, girls in many third-world countries are married off at the same or similar age.  Also, it is believed by many Jews and Roman Catholics that Mary was 12 - 14 when she had Jesus.   Also as I said, the Biblical Prophets who had 100s of wives each most probably married young girls as well.

Also, what about Aisha's PARENTS (MOM AND DAD)?   Didn't they see it right and fit to marry their daughter at that age and at that time?   Who are we to judge?

Also, see why Muta (temporary) Marriage was allowed and why it was discontinued.

A picture and news paper article about a 9-year old girl from Thailand gave birth

A 12-year old Christian girl getting married in Romania

Also as I said, didn't the Biblical Prophets marry 100s of wives each?   Is it possible that some of those wives were little girls as well?  It's both highly probable and possible!

Mr. Sam Shamoun of "Answering Islam" even admits that his grandmother was 12 when she got married:

Note:  I won't go into the details of his cheap insults and trash words, because I am much higher and classier than him.  He has proven himself several times to be a total loser.

QuranSearch Com: question
Answering Islam: yes
QuranSearch Com: how old was your grandma when she got married?
Answering Islam: 12 perhaps

The fact that his own Biblical Prophets married 100s of wives each and fathers used to sell their daughters as slave girls to other men without any age limit makes it extremely possible and probable that several if not many of these wives were little girls between 9 to 13, while the Prophets were MUCH MUCH OLDER than them.  If his own grandmother who exited THOUSANDS of years later still married at 12, then what makes it impossible for girls during Biblical times to have married way much older men than them when they were little ones?

Since there is no age limit for the girl to be sold by her own father as a slave girl to another man, WHO CAN HAVE SEX WITH HER, then I want to ask Mr. Sam Shamoun here:

Aren't you a total hypocrite for denying that little girls were sold off and married off during biblical times at very young age to much much older men (as I proved in Exodus 21:9 above), while making fierce charges against Islam on Aisha's age?

How do you respond to this?

My response to the "Child Molester" lie against our beloved Prophet, Muhammad peace be upon him:

The sections of this article are:

1-   My response to the "Child Molester" lie against Prophet Muhammad.
2-   Was Aisha engaged to someone else before she got engaged to Muhammad?
3-   The Middle Eastern and other Cultures.
4-   What about Aisha's parents (mom and dad), are they too "Child Molesters"?
5-   More on Aisha's Marriage and its acceptance by the Arab culture back then.
6-   But still, she is considered a child in our standards today!
7-   Was Muhammad a pedophile?
8-   The life span 1400 years ago was short. 
9-   What about Mary, Jesus' Mother peace be upon both of them?  How old
       was she when she got pregnant?
10- What about the Bible's Prophets' marriages?
11- What about the X-Rated Pornography in the Bible?
12- Jesus never got married before!  Therefore, Muhammad is not truthful!  Jesus
       could've been genitally mutilated from his circumcision when he was a child.
13- Conclusion.

Important Note: Please pay attention toward the end of this article to the Virgin Mary's (peace be upon her) age.  According to Christian resources, Mary was 12-14 when she had Jesus.   You will also see proofs from the Jews' Holiest Book, the Talmud, that girls were married off before at the age of 3, meaning that the Bible's Old Testament has no age limit on when girls can marry, and certainly the Jews had awfully abused it in the past.  You will also see a section on the Prophets of the Bible who married hundreds of wives and some had even slept with their neighbor's wives and some had exposed their wives in the most disgusting PORNOGRAPHIC way to the entire world in the Bible.  You will also see my response to the missionaries' argument: "Jesus never got married, so therefore Muhammad is not truthful".

Every time the Muslims talk about Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him to the anti-Islamic, the anti-Islamic use Muhammad's marriage with a girl named Aisha as a point against Islam.   They claim that since Muhammad was in his 50's and Aisha was only 9 years old, then its ok to call him a "Child Molester":

Narrated Aisha:  "The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Alright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.  (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Merits of the Helpers in Madinah (Ansaar), Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234)"

Notice here that Aisha's mother and the Muslim women back then were ok with her marriage.  It was part of the Arab custom and still is in many of the Muslim and non-Muslim countries today for girls to marry at a very young age.  When a girl's body starts showing up (her breasts and her height and physical size), then she would be ready for marriage.  This is further elaborated on in the "The Middle Eastern and other Cultures" and "What about Aisha's parents (mon and dad), are they too "Child Molesters"?" and "The life span 1400 years ago was very short" sections below in this article.

The "child molester" charge is a terrible unfair attack on Islam because it doesn't apply to our beloved prophet in anyway!

A picture and news paper article about a 9-year old girl from Thailand gave birth

A 12-year old Christian girl getting married in Romania

Was Aisha engaged to someone else before she got engaged to Muhammad?

I was told that Aisha was already engaged to a non Muslim man named Jober Ibn Al-Moteam Ibn Oday.  Back then, the people of Mecca did not object to Aisha's engagement to Jober because she was physically big enough and tall enough to be considered for marriage.  Her parents saw that and they engaged her to Jober.

The only reason why Aisha's father, Abu Baker Al Siddeek, broke her engagement with Jober is because he was a non-Muslim.  Later, a woman named Kholeah Bint Hakeem suggested for Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him to marry Aisha, because the Prophet and Abu Baker became best friends.   Prophet Muhammad engaged Aisha for 2 years before he married her. 

All Muslim scholars agree 100% that Prophet Muhammad and Aisha were engaged for 2 years before marriage.  However, some say that she was 7 when she got engaged, and 9 when she got married.  Others say that she was 9 when she got engaged and 11 when she got married.

I personally think that it makes more logical sense to say that she was 9 when she got engaged to Prophet Muhammad and 11 when she got married, because if she were 7 when she got engaged to the Prophet, then how old was she when she first got engaged to Jober?   I don't think she was big enough and mature enough to get engaged with Jober before the age of 7.  I don't think her parents would have allowed it.

The Middle Eastern and other Cultures:

If you take the time to study a little bit about the history of the tribes in South America, Middle East, Africa, India and the far eastern Oriental countries 1400 years ago, you would find that many tribes even until today (as shown in the Thai girl's and the 12-year old Romanian girl links above) allow the marriage of females at a very young age.

Do you think it is fair for you to come today and attack our beloved Prophet and call him a child molester when nobody 1400 years ago from his tribe had objected to his marriage? Not even the Pagans of Mecca, nor the Jews and Christians of Medina ever objected to it or used it as a point against Islam as anti-Islamic do today.

We all need to understand the culture that we are talking about. Life in the Middle East is a very simple one. It is a lot simpler than what our brain can imagine, because the simplest to us here in America may be a very difficult or complicated thing to them in the Middle East especially for those folks who live in tribes in the rural areas where they don't have TV, electricity, or any electrical equipment. They live on natural water and survive on what they have available from fruits, vegetables and animals as food.

Parents look at the girl's physical appearance when they prepare her for marriage. They don't care about her age. She could be 9 or 13, it doesn't matter.

What about Aisha's parents (mom and dad), are they too "Child Molesters"?

Since Aisha's parents both approved of her engagement with Jober and later approved to her marriage to Muhammad, is it fair for anyone to call her mom and dad and former fiancée and whole tribe all child molesters? I think whoever does that would be out of his mind and needs to study a little history about the Middle East.

Let us look at the following narration:

Narrated Aisha:  "The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Alright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.  (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Merits of the Helpers in Madinah (Ansaar), Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234)"

Notice here that Aisha's mother and the Muslim women back then were ok with her marriage.  It was part of the Arab custom and still is in many of the Muslim and non-Muslim countries today for girls to marry at a very young age.  When a girl's body starts showing up (her breasts and her height and physical size), then she would be ready for marriage.

More on Aisha's Marriage and its acceptance by the Arab culture back then:

The following article was sent to me by brother Faris Osman Abdat; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him.

Asalamu Alaikum brother Osama

Below are the points that perhaps could be of some use in the defense of the marriage of Lady Aisha to our beloved Prophet (peace be upon him). You would know if they are good enough to be utilize, insyallah :

"Firstly - if indeed the marriage of Lady Aisha was something which was despicable even at that time and in that culture, this fact would never have been recorded for posterity and all efforts to conceal or cloud it would have been undertaken.

But the fact that this hadith had reached us after it was recorded centuries ago and to all the Muslim generations in between proved that the marriage was culturally and morally acceptable and the fact is also that the Muslim community at that time remained unshakened in its faith in his Prophethood and the message which he had brought bear testimony to this assertion.

Secondly - we have to look at the life of Lady Aisha afterwards.  She was without doubt one of the foremost scholars of Islam. It is even said that she had attained in her lifetime the position of Mufti - someone capable of giving religious rulings - a position very few Muslims will ever occupy.

She was seeked by many, both men and women, who hungered for knowledge and they came to her from all directions, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria. History does not know of any woman who was approached by so many for such a noble purpose.

If indeed she had became a victim of sexual abuse she would in most probability be devastated emotionally, psychologically, mentally and perhaps even physically but the achievements she had made in her life after the death of the Prophet proved that she was a woman who was in complete control of her faculties, becoming one of the intellectual giants of Islam.

And the fact that she had spoken so dearly of the Prophet was indicative of the innocence of the marriage and of the impeccable character of her husband because given the trust enjoyed by her by the virtue of her relationship with him, she could have unleashed a vengeful attack against him by attributing to him words or deeds of horrendous nature if indeed she was a victim of his supposed lust, destroying both the Prophet and Islam.

No sexual abuse victim would ever spoke positively of her attacker, much less becoming a channel that promote love and understanding of him and the message which he had brought."

But still, she is considered a child in our standards today!

Well, a lot of the things we do today are not right in the eyes of many.  Our "standards" today mean nothing to what took place 1400 years ago.  Today, anyone under 18 years old is considered a "child", a baby still under his mommy's and daddy's care.  Back then on the other hand, people who reached the age of 18 were considered wise and very mature.

Let me share this Islamic story with you:

There is a famous Islamic figure called "Osama bin Zayd".  This man once led an army of 50,000 Muslim men to meet the Roman Christians.  He defeated them.  You won't believe if I tell you that Osama was 16 years old when he led the 50,000 Muslim men!

This is what I personally was taught about Osama bin Zayd.

So the point is, Aisha peace be upon her might look as child to you, but back then, she certainly was considered as a woman who was qualified for marriage.

Was Muhammad a pedophile?

The following is an email sent to me by brother Amir Abdul Rahim; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him.

From: amir_abdul_rahim@yahoo.co.uk
To: truthspeaks@answering-christianity.com
Subject: Was Muhammad a child molester?
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 16:37:17 +0000 (GMT)

Assalamu Alaikum Wr Wb

The discussion of Muhammad's marriage to Aisha has recently come up on a muslim message board, with the usual cries of 'Muhammad was a pedophile' coming from the usual anti-Islam lobby.

In order to answer this filthy slander, I went to a police website detailing the traits of a pedophile, and this is what I came up with. It seems that, even by today's standards, Muhammad could not be considered a pedophile.  

Please feel free to use or edit this text in any way you like.

-----------------------------------------------------

Okay, lets have a look at the psyche of a typical pedophile, and see how much of it fits Muhammad shall we? Quoted text is taken from Understanding the Pedophile Psyche, courtesy of the Police Federation of England & Wales:

http://www.polfed.org/magazine/08_2001/80_2001_paedophile.htm

"Low self esteem. Many pedophiles, although by no means all, do not have a great sense of capacity for adopting a sexual demeanor towards adults or those of their own age or older. They feel unhappy and fearful at the prospect of sexual behaviour with adults and hence turn to children due to the fact that they are unable to have the strength of personality to seek adults for sexual demeanor. When considering treatment therefore it is important to establish and develop a higher sense of self-esteem in such individuals."

As well as being married to Aisha, he was also married to many other women during his life. He wasn't certainly suffering from low self-esteem. Therefore, this does not apply to Muhammad.

"Lack of impulse control. Many pedophiles find it extremely difficult to deal with the impulsive nature which inclines them towards sexual behaviour to children. They simply cannot control their need for engaging children in sexual practices. They might be said to suffer from an obsessive-compulsive condition. Here again treatment would involve developing better impulse control and of course redirecting the sexual inclinations."

As has been mentioned before, Muhammad waited for at least two years before consummating the marriage. Therefore, this point of 'lack of self control' does not apply to Muhammad. Also, fasting during Ramadan requires abstention from sexual relations. Why would Muhammad practise this if he had no self-control? 

"Denial. Many pedophiles deny there is anything wrong with having sexual relations with children and many will in due course paradoxically deny having carried out such practices should they be confronted. It is vital to change the attitudes of such individuals much as in the lack of empathy with their victim."

Muhammad never once denied having sex with his wife. Also note the use of the term 'victim'. Aisha could not be described as a victim. Therefore, this does not apply to Muhammad.

"History of previous pedophile activity. Many pedophiles have carried out minor or major acts of pedophile behaviour in the past and this has led to habit as well as the obsessive-compulsive nature of the act towards children. It is vital here to promote alternative habits i.e. in attitudes and demeanor of sexual behaviour with adults."

Muhammad has no history of pedophile activity whatsoever. Also, as I pointed out, all of Muhammad's other wives were adult, and there is no evidence of him being obsessed with children. Therefore, this doesn't apply to Muhammad.

"Poor family relationships - many pedophiles have come from families that are in chaos or are lacking in stability. This has led them to view sexual behaviour with children rather than adults as acceptable especially if this has been practised upon them by a member of the family in the past. Although it is difficult to reverse what has happened in the past through discussion or attitude changes it is vital that insight must be gained by the individual into how his/her pedophile activity originated and was developed through the family dynamics."

Although he was orphaned at a young age, Muhammad was always very close to all his family members, and advocated that whosoever cuts the bond of kith and kin, he/she would be denied paradise. Therefore, this does not apply to Muhammad.

"Low IQ - there are pedophiles who have low intelligence but by no means all are in this category. Where this is the case appropriate therapeutic efforts must be made to develop understanding of what they are doing wrong and what they must do to change."

Despite being illiterate, Muhammad had a reputation for being a very bright young boy, an excellent trader, and an extremely wise man. Therefore, this point does not apply to Muhammad.

"Loneliness, depression and relationship needs - this particular trait is associated with low self-esteem and lack of empathy with the victim. Many pedophiles are lonely individuals who live on their own and have found it difficult to establish relationships with adults, especially for sexual purposes. Some suffer from psychological problems and even psychotic illnesses. Here intensive treatment and monitoring is in order."

Muhammad wasn't suffering from depression when he married Aisha. Also, low self-esteem, loneliness, and difficulty to establish relations could not be attributed to Muhammad.

"Having been themselves sexually abused - many pedophiles have themselves been sexually abused in the past by adults. They merely imitate what they experienced and continue their activity considering it as appropriate since it was done to them."

This certainly isn't true.

I have demonstrated that, despite the fact Muhammad married a nine-year old girl, he could NOT be considered a pedophile. 

The life span 1400 years ago was short:

The following is an email that was sent to me by sister Janet, who recently embraced Islam; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with her.

From: JnMil3@aol.com
To: truthspeaks@answering-christianity.com
Subject: Article on marriage of Aysha (saws) to prophet Muhammad (saws)
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 03:59:10 EST

Assalamu alaikum brother Osama,

Thank you for your informative article on the marriage of Aysha, peace be upon her, to prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. I don't think I'm yet finished with this article, as I clicked on a topic.

Did you also research the average life span 1400 years ago in the Middle East? The gypsy, or romany people, of Indian descent who now for the most part occupy eastern Europe, arrange their children in marriage. They arrange the children @ the age of 9 to be engaged for 3 or 4 years before they are married. The only ground for divorce in their culture is failure to conceive a child within a year of marriage (what an irony-- largely illiterate people recognize the American Medical Association's definition of infertility and divorce, while 'educated' people in the west pursue various infertility 'treatments' for years w/o end). Also, compared to Europeans, the average life span of the Romany is around 45, compared with those life spans in the 60's and 70's, so when their children are married, their lives are about 1/3 over.

Thanks again for this article, which I found looking up Aysha on a searchnet. I am a new Muslimah in the U.S., by the way.

Allah hafiz,
Sister Janet

An addition by me, Osama Abdallah: 

Life 1400 years ago was very rough in the too hot desert.  From my personal knowledge, the average life span back then was 50 years.  People used to die from all kinds of diseases.  Both parents of Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him for instance, died natural deaths before he even knew them.  His father, Abdallah bin Hashem, died while Amina bint Wahb (Amy in English as Mary for Mariam), Muhammad's mother was still pregnant with Muhammad.  After she gave birth, she died when he was 2 years old (I believe).  Muhammad was the only child of his parents.

Muhammad was raised by his mother's female servant, Saadiyyah, and by his uncle (father's brother) Abu Talib, who later stood up for him and protected him when Muhammad declared to be Allah Almighty's Messenger at the age of 40.

What about Mary, Jesus' Mother peace be upon both of them?  How old was she when she got pregnant?

Not only was it a custom in the Arab society to Engage/Marry a young girl it was also common in the Jewish society.  The case of Mary the mother of Jesus comes to mind, in non biblical sources she was between 11-14 years old when she conceived Jesus.  Mary had already been "BETHROED" to Joseph before conceiving Jesus.  Joseph was a much older man. therefore Mary was younger than 11-14 years of age when she was "BETHROED" to Joseph.  We Muslims would never call Joseph a Child Molester, nor would we refer to the "Holy Ghost" of the Bible, that "Impregnated" Mary as a "Rapist" or "Adulterer".

This paragraph was sent to me by brother Mike, who embraced Islam recently; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him: According to the Priest of Saint Mary's Catholic Church: "Mary was approximately 14 years old when she got pregnant with Jesus.  Joseph, Mary's Husband is believed to be around 36.  Mary was only 13 when she married Joseph.  When she first was arranged with Joseph she was between 7 to 9 years old."

According to the "Oxford Dictionary Bible" commentary, Mary (peace be upon her) was was 12 years old when she became impregnated.

So if I want to be as silly and ridiculous as many of the Christians, I would respond to them by saying that Mary was psychologically and emotionally devastated for getting pregnant at a very young age.  And speaking of "child molesting", since most Christians believe that Jesus is the Creator of this universe, then why did GOD allow himself to enter life through a 12-year old young girl's vagina?  Please note that we Muslims love and respect Allah Almighty, Mary, Jesus and Allah's Message to the People of the Book (The Jews and Christians).  In other words, we Muslims would never make fun of Christianity through such childish topic like this one as many ridiculous Christians do make fun of Islam through our Prophet's (peace be upon him) marriage.

What about the Bible's Prophets' marriages?

When we read the Bible, we learn about some Prophets marrying many wives, even hundreds of wives in some cases.  Let us look at some of the verses from the Old Testament:

In Exodus 21:10, a man can marry an infinite amount of women without any limits to how many he can marry.

In 2 Samuel 5:13; 1 Chronicles 3:1-9, 14:3, King David had six wives and numerous concubines.

In 1 Kings 11:3, King Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines.

In 2 Chronicles 11:21, King Solomon's son Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines.

And knowing that the Bible's Old Testament allowed before for men to have sex with girls who were at the age of 3, then it wouldn't surprise me that those Prophets who had 700 wives for instance, had many very young "teenage" girls before as their wives.

It wouldn't surprise me if they too had wives that were younger than Mary when she got pregnant, and younger than Aisha when she got married.

Since there are so many wives that those Prophets married (hundreds of wives), then how would anyone know that they didn't marry young women as our beloved Prophet peace be upon him did with his marriage to Aisha peace be upon her?

What about the X-Rated Pornography in the Bible?

When we read the Bible, we learn about some weird pornographic teachings that are certainly not appropriate for anyone with morals to read.  Please visit X-Rated Pornography in the Bible to see the many pornographic verses in the Bible.  You will read for instance, about Solomon's wife's vagina tastes like wine for him!

You will also see examples of Prophets sleeping with their neighbor's wives, such as the following:

David watches a women bathe, likes what he sees, and "goes in unto her."    Let us look at 2 Samuel 11:2-4  "One evening David got up from his bed and walked around on the roof of the palace. From the roof he saw a woman bathing. The woman was very beautiful, and David sent someone to find out about her. The man said, 'Isn't this Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam and the wife of Uriah the Hittite?'  Then David sent messengers to get her. She came to him, and he slept with her. (She had purified herself from her uncleanness.) Then she went back home."   This Holy Figure in the Bible is a pervert!. 

So what happened to "If a man commits adultery with another man's wife--with the wife of his neighbor--both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.  (From the NIV Bible, Leviticus 20:10)"<