Debunking Epileptic Prophet Claim.

Last updated: 13th, March. 2022

By: Mustafa Sahin

Video response:

Counter rebuttals:

A respectful critic wrote:

Muslim – Response:

Hi Asafa,

I hope you are well. No, don’t ever feel that, your starting trouble. I’m happy to engage, it helps me exercise new skills.

There point about Prophet Muhammed being crazy has nothing to do with their claim on Epilepsy. I think that’s a side issue. They don’t just say, at the time of revelation he was having a crazy attack, they say He was foaming at the mouth which indicated epilepsy. For example, David wood would continue to narrate the hadiths that show He had a fit while receiving revelation.

And even if they want to then shift goalposts from being Epileptic to crazy while receiving revelation:
But that doesn’t hold much value. Because if they are going to hold claims such as he was crazy, at the (time of revelation) what type of craziness are we talking about? The term Crazy can be very broad, are we talking as in crazy angry bipolar? Or crazy delusional? Is it about crazy anger? There are verses in the Quran that says if your enemy resorts to peace then you also resort to peace.
If one reads the life of the Prophet one will see, many hadiths show many kind traits of the Prophet, for example when he stopped a whole army platoon just to return a baby bird’s chicks to its mother. Which another companion unjustly took. This was his kindness towards certain animals. This doesn’t really show crazy angry person or crazed persons behaviour.

If it’s about being delusional, one has to ask themselves how does an illiterate crazy delusional man, conquer the world, by taking Arabs out of paganism, converting them to Islam, changing the entire culture of the region, spreading Islam where Islam became the dominant religion and empire? How does this delusional crazy man, set up Islamic jurisprudence and courts governments where society has functioned for hundreds and thousands of years, it’s just not feasible

How does a crazy delusional man, produce all these linguistic miracles in the Quran:

See https://youtu.be/j-ULa2JzPG0

I mean put the Prophet Muhammed pbuh aside, Atheists today believe ALL believers are crazy in one way or another or lack mental efficiency, because they argue we believe in fairy tales.

So really, there claims about being crazy doesn’t have to just resort to the Prophet, we are all defined as being delusional no matter if your a Muslim, christian, Jew, Hindu or whatever else for that matter. Even if the Prophet Muhammed conducted a medical test to prove his sanity, his enemies or critics would still accuse him of being crazy and delusional.

But these claims are nothing new, his enemies would say that 1400 years ago:

And so the Quran rebukes them for it:

Sahih International: You are not, [O Muhammad], by the favor of your Lord, a madman (Quran 68:2)

As for the other points, thank you for being honest to acknowledge my other points.


Another Critique wrote:

Muslim – Response:

You said are you saying Allah sent revelation to give the Prophet mental afflictions:

If you are a Christian, you would need to answer this verse from your Bible:

2 Corinthians 12:7
New International Version
or because of these surpassingly great revelations. Therefore to keep me from becoming conceited, I was given a thorn in my flesh, a messenger of Satan, to torment me.

Here we get to read, that when Paul received revelation, Paul would feel pain in his body because Satan was tormenting him.

So as a Christian you would have to answer, why God was allowing Paul to get tormented upon receiving revelations? Surely God should be protecting him right?

So you don’t have a leg to stand on.

Yes, the Prophet did experience hardship, but that was God’s plan, God can express his power and might as He pleases. He created the Sun, but if you were to look at the sun, it could blind you. So will you now say why did God create the sun, where it can hurt your eyes? Thus God can create revelation to momentarily give pain, to express his power, just as the brightness of the sun, gives pain and expresses God’s mighty power.
Again these episodes were short-lived, and it wasn’t as though the Prophet was being tortured with unbearably.


It seems you haven’t paid much attention to my response.

If you wish to argue well the Prophet was trying to somehow hide his Epilepsy by blaming it on revelation being so heavy and hard.

Then as Asaf pointed out to you, you would also need to explain how we’re all the other people around the Prophet were also being affected not just the Camels. I’ll post for you the hadith of a companion of the Prophet who would write down the revelation and even He said that when the revelation came, His leg almost broke

ALDN, was the Prophet Muhammad’s companion leg also having an epileptic fit? 🥴👍

Take a read:

Zayd bin Thabit narrates:

“I wrote down the revelation in the presence of the Prophet. When the revelation came, the Messenger of Allah would shiver and shake, and sweat would come down from his temples. When the revelation ended, he would come round. Then, he would say and I would write. The divine revelation that came pressed so hard on me that I would think that my leg broke and that I would not be able to walk again…” (Bukhari, Tafsir, 91, Jihad, 31; Muslim, Imara, 141-142; Abu Dawud, Jihad, 19; Tirmidhi, Tafsir 5; Nasai, Jihad, 4

I’ll also attach hadiths where his camel was being affected;

Ibn Sa´d narrate the following from Abu Arwa of Daws:

“I witnessed revelation coming to the Prophet while he was riding his camel. It screamed and contracted its forelegs. Sometimes it sat and sometimes it stood up straightening its forelegs. Sweat was coming down the temple of the Prophet like a string of pearl

Ahmad and Bayhaqi´s narration from Hz. Aisha regarding the issue is as follows:

“When the revelation came to the Messenger of Allah on his camel, the camel would kneel due to the heaviness of the revelation. Sweat would come down the temple of the Prophet even when the weather was cold.”

Ahmed, Tabarani, Bayhaqi and Abu Nuaym narrate the following from Asma bint Yazid: She affected when the chapter of al-Maida was sent down, the Messenger of Allah was on his camel and I was holding the halter of the camel. The fore-legs of the camels almost broke down due to the heaviness of the chapter

Surely now if this was a case of Epilepsy his direct scribe and Animals wouldn’t be affected to now would they?

Please now, watch the video properly from start to finish, before trying to articulate a (got ya) argument.

Are we now going to perhaps accept that his companions and animals were play-acting, in order to cover up their Prophets Epilepsy?


Allah mistake, Christians claim Jesus is the Literal Son of God?

Muslim vs Nakdimon Yasmeen from Answering-Islam.

Christian missionary like Nakdemon Yasmeen claim Christians do not claim Jesus is Gods literal Son, And Allah made mistake thinking Christian believe Yahway had intercourse to produce Jesus for why Allah says” If Allah had son then whos his wife?

Muslim Response:

Thank you Nakdimon for agreeing Jesus is not Gods literal Son. So the Christian interestingly is agreeing God does not have a Real Son?

When your claiming God not to have a literal Son are you claiming he had a fake Son? The Word Beggoten which means Children through Offspring of Intercourse.
Since that is the definition of Beggoten, Then Allah is not wrong to say Why claim God has a Son when he has no wife.

Christians don’t have to assert Son means Sexual intercourse to have a Son. Rather when they utter Beggoten and Literal Son even though they do not believe God had intercourse to produce a Son. Saying God begget a Son is equivalent in saying God produced Son through intercourse, because that is exactly what Begget Means. Open your dictionary. So God argues against those: “do not say God has literal Son otherwise its as Blasthemous to say as though God had sexual relations. Because thats what literal Sons signify a Product between Husband and Wife. In fact we even read in the Bible the Holy Spirit God overshadowed Mary upon Mary conceiving Jesus. Ask yourself what does over shadow mean? Notice yet again another sexual conatation is perceived, hence Allah is clearing up a misconception that can occur when such things are uttered. So Allah uses logical reasoning when you utter Sonship then you would be un-intentionally issueing Wifeship and even Mothership to God since Jesus is identified as God then what about his Mother? A Bigger God? Again this does not mean mainstream Christians believe all these things like God having a Mother who is s bigger God rather Allah is addressing the Fallacy in claiming such idea which have consequences. For example if i said Im married. You would Auto-Matically assume i will have Children. Same thing when you say” God has a Son it Auto-Matically puts the idea that God has a Wife or God impregnated Mary to begget Jesus. And if God had a Son then there would be 2 Gods instead of 1 God. These are all part of Gods reasonable arguements. Nothing to do with Allah not understanding Christian Theology rather Allah pointing out the un-accuracy of uttering such claims and Atributions to God.

Nakdimon Yasmeen wrote:

Answer the question. Where does the Bible teach that Jesus is the Literal Son of the Father?

Muslim Response (Yahya Snow)
Nakdimon don’t pretend Christians of the past only believed what you believe. There was a spectrum and there still is a spectrum of Christian beliefs. Some are biblical and some aren’t. So to say there weren’t any Christians who believed in Jesus being the literal son of God in Arabia is naive to say the least.

Muslim Reply:

Here is a Christian agreeing on the contarary Jesus is Gods literal Son watch:
Christian Pastor says” Jesus literal beggoten Son of God.

Sila at Answering Islam
Agrees its not a Metaphorical Son Ship written in his conclusion.

Nakdimon Yesman wrote:

You first have to prove people like Mark Martin existed!

Furthermore Suran 5:18 and 19:88-93 say Allah doesn’t have figurative sons either! Therefore your distinguishing of the two is completely irrelevant as Allah argues against BOTH literal and figurative sonship! But in both cases Allah contradicts both the Bible and therefore orthodox christian teaching. Hence doesnt matter how you slice it ALLAH IS WRONG! For your question to be valid you first have to demonstrate how one cannot be a real son without being a literal son. Good luck with that!

Muslim Response:

Mark Martin actually left Being A jehovas Witness and Yes he exists.

This is his video and he uploaded it. Jesus is the Literal Beggoten Son of God.

As for Sureh 5:18 you misqouted the verse.

The verse does not reject the figurtive son ship rather that the Jews and Christians assertion that being the Sons of God that God will LOVE them and Pardon them.

So because they were the figurtive sons of God they thought God will love them more hence pardon them.

So nothing about Allah rejecting the figurtive relationship.

As for Sureh 19:88-89
Same thing nothing about figurtive Son rejection rather addressing those in the likes of you who claim God has taken a Son.

You then Qouted”
For your question to be valid you first have to demonstrate how one cannot be a real son without being a literal son. Good luck with that!


You said Jesus is not Gods literal Son. Rather He is Gods Real Son.

Do you see the Contradiction.

The word (literal) does mean its (Real) otherwise it would only mean its Fake Son. The opposite of (Real)

So you work out your own delemare.


Sam Shamoun – Mishap on determining Truth.

Last updated: 24th July 2020


By: Mustafa Sahin


I wish to respond to Sam Shamoun from (Answering-Islam). He had a Debate with a Muslim Apologist respected Brother Ijaz Ahmed from (CallingChristians.com) on the topic of  Is Jesus God?


(Minute 19:58 onwards) Ijaz uses a Modern Historian to prove that the verses in the Bible, don’t refer to Jesus as the deity but the Father, and early christians worshipped the father and not Jesus. And learning about truth one can appeal to historiography to check the validity of the Bible.

So the arguement from Ijaz Ahmed sums up us, we shouldn’t just believe in the Bible using the Bible alone, and we shouldn’t just believe that the Bible is true, because the Bible’s says its true, but rather look at what other Historians have said, testing the Historicity of the Bible.

Sam Shamoun then condemn Ijaz for using 20th or 21st century Scholar’s or Historians to discredit the Bible.

(Minute 21:21) Sam shamoun says, to try and escape the burden of proof and appeal to “Modern Criteria”.

When that’s a criteria unknown to your prophet. Unknown to his companion’s, unknown to the Christian’s in the 1st century. 2nd centuary, and 3rd century.

To mention 20th or 21st century, Criteria was not used to determine truth. That’s not what your Prophet did. He didn’t appeal to this criteria ( historiography) to determin what Jesus said, centuries prior.

Sam continues to argue,

(Minute 22:02) Sam says; Use your Prophets method of determining historicity. Not a method, brought up by 20th or 21st century.

Sam Shamoun claims Ijaz Ahmed should not be quoting modern 20th to 21st Century Scholars or Historians to determine Historicity or truth of the Bible.

I find this really strange that Sam would dismiss people living in the 20th or 21st century. When Sam Shamoun even at his website at (answering-Islam.com) quotes several Historians to prove the historical accuracy of the Bible who happen to be from the 20th or 21st century.

Take for example;

“Bart Ehrman: A Hero for Islam?” https://www.answering-islam.org/authors/thompson/bart_ehrman_hero.html

Sam Shamoun publishes a article written by Keith Thomas quoting a “Modern day 21st Scholars” like New Testament Scholar Bart Ehrman. Where Bart Ehrman believes that Jesus was indeed Cruicified, unlike what the Quran claims.

Now just incase Sam Shamoun says the reason why, He brings up Bart Ehrman, was not to use him as a reference but only to use him against Muslims, to show that Bart Ehrman disagrees with Muslim.

Well not that i believe Sam, because I can assure you many other Christians use Ehrman as a point of reference since his (unbiased) not a Muslim or a Christian)  therefore Christians think quoting Ehrman validates the Cruicifiction narrative since his secular and not a Christian (thus unbiased) but for arguement sake let’s just assume that Christian’s like Sam shamoun only bring up Ehrman to counter the Muslims because Muslims are honouring the works of Ehrmans, no problem let us continue…..

Sam Shamoun uses other 20th century Historians, to determine the historical accuracy of the Bible.

From Sam Shamouns own Website again;
Source: “The New Testament Documents and the Historicity of the Resurrection” https://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/documents.htm

He writes: Other skeptics who have conceded the Bible’s historical accuracy include the renowned Jewish archaeologist Nelson Glueck:

“It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference,” and “the almost incredibly accurate historical memory of the Bible, and particularly so when it is fortified by archaeological fact.” (Josh McDowell, Evidence That Demands A Verdict p. 65)

Nelson Glueck is a 20th century Historian, whom Sam Shamoun has no problem quoting to determine the historical accuracy of the Bible.

Let’s keep going:

Sam Shamoun continues to use 20th Centuary Historians and Scholars to even determine that the Gospel of John maybe even dated before Luke and Mathew, and possibly as early as Mark.

See: Source: https://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/documents.htm

He writes:
The NIV Study Bible furnishes additional evidence for the early dating of the Gospel of John.

If Jn is the most Jewish rather than the least Jewish of the Gospels, it becomes doubtful that it is the latest. If it is to be dated at the latest before 70. It is probably earlier than both Lk and Gk Mt, and possibly early as Mk …”

So Sam Shamoun uses a 20th century Scholar named: John L. McKenzie. To determine the date of Johns Gospel, and claims John is even as early as Marks Gospel.

He references:
The Dictionary of the Bible by John L. McKenzie continues to say in relation to the evidence furnished by the Dead Sea Scrolls and its effect on the dating of John.
McKenzie, Dictionary of the Bible [Touchstone Book; New York, NY 1995], p. 449)

So there you go, Sam has no issue in using 20th or 21st century Historians or Scholars to pass judgements on Ancient Scriptures.

Hypocrisy perhaps?

Let’s continue…..

Why does Sam Shamouns Christian brethern  David Wood from (Acts17Apologetics) appeal to use Daniel Brubaker, a 21st centuary Modern Qur’anic textural Scholar to disprove the historical accuracy of the Quran?




Will Sam Shamoun also now condemn David Wood for appealing to 21st centuary Scholar to discredit the authenticity of the Quran? Just as Sam condemns Ijaz for using Modern Scholars to discredit the New Testament?

In fact; Sam Shamoun argues that “David Wood” is the “Best English speaking Debater”.


So David wood is the Best English speaking Debater, yet David refers to 21st centuary Westen Academics to discredit the accuracies of the Quran?

Hypocrisy or what?


Let us continue:

Sam Shamoun publishes a articles written by Ernest Hahn. The topic was “Jihad in Islam: Is Islam Peaceful or Militant”?

They spoke about violent verses being abrogated in the Quran, for more peaceful verses. All though they admit early scholars agree that the violent verses are abrogated with the more peaceful ones, interestingly enough, Answering-Islam still goes ahead and uses, contemporary Muslim Scholars from the 19th centuary, that being Sir Sayyid Ahmed Khan, who rejects the claim about, violent verses being abrogated for the more peaceful verses.



Source: https://answering-islam.org/Hahn/jihad.htm

So again, I call Mr Shamoun out. Why does He condemn Ijaz ahmed for using Modern Scholars that being 20th or 21st century Scholar’s/Historians to make a case against the Bible, and Sam has no problem publishing articles that reference contemporary Scholars that being in the 19th century, to use against Muslims? So Sam disputes using 20th century Scholars but not 19th century Scholar’s?


Sam clearly has exposed his own Hypocrisy for condemning Ijaz Ahmed for using “Modern Scholar’s/Historians” I.e Modern Criteria, to determine through historiography, the true interepretaion of the Bible, and yet He Sam Shamoun has no problem using Modern Scholar’ or near  to Modern Scholars for His own convenience when it comes to proving the reliability of His Bible. Or criticising the Islamic sources. Nor does He have a problem with David Wood, who He say’s is the “Best English speaking Debater. And yet David also appeals to Modern Scholars using the method of historiography to cast judgements on the truth about the Quran.

So why the double standards?


I personally sent Sam Shamoun my article response, refuting his arguements, and exposing him for what He is. Sam got extremely triggered and started bad mouthing, check it out:



Yep, triggered indeed!


Does Allah & Angels Praye to the Prophet?

            Last updated:     20/08/2020          


By: Mustafa Sahin

Christian missionaries have twisted the Quran to claim that Allah and his Angels send their (Saluhna) Prayers on Prophet Muhammed (Pbuh) they qoute (Sureh 33:56)

So they argue, How can God (Allah) Worship Prophet Muhammed (pbuh)?



When analyzing the verse it certainly does not mean Allah did  Salah (Sujood) Prostration or Worship, to Prophet Muhammed (Pbuh) And this is the unfortunate misunderstanding of those who don’t understand Arabic linguistics.

When Allah and His Angels send their Selah (Prayers) all this means is Allah sends his (condolences or best Wishes, or blessings) to the Prophet. Hence there is a distinction between (Prayer Selah) and (Sujood). Sujood(Prostration) can be part of Prayer. But Prayer is not always part of Sujood.

We use this term even in the English language. For example; If you know that someone has lost a family member. We may use the “Phrase”; “We send our Prayers” (Condolences) to the family and Relatives. This does not mean; You worship the family members or relatives of the deceased person, now does it?

Similarly when Allah send’s his Prayers, it does not mean his worshiping that person, rather his sending his “good fortune”, “blessings” or “condolences”, to that person.

“Now some critics will say, “Selah” does not mean “blessing”, or “good fortune”, in Arabic word translation”.

One needs to understand word translation doesn’t always reflect the meaning. For example, the Quran will refer to Allah as (He). However the term (He) would mean Allah has a gender, however we know that (He) is just a term we use, out of respect, and does not mean Allah has a gender, and we only use the term (He) because it’s better then calling Allah, (IT). So all though the term (He) does not mean “Respect”, it doesn’t mean we can not define it as such. So just because Allah uses terms as (He), or (We) these are not literal terms as though Allah has a gender or that Allah is Plural more then one. Allah uses terms as (He) so that it can be distinct from being called (IT) and Allah uses terms “We” as in the “Royal We” to add power to his speech, and not that (We) is Plural of some sort.

Therefore not every word, is to be taken in its literal sense, So when Allah says, He sends his ( Prayer, Salah) to the Prophet, its never mean’t to be understand in the literal sense of Allah performing worship.

Islamic Scholar Shiek Al-Islam explaines in the Arabic Glossary. The Word Selah is distinct between Allah and human beings. Muslim Selah is not the same as Allahs selah. Muslim Selah is Prostration. While When (Selah) comes from Allah it’s blessings. (Or Condolences and Admiration) or Blessings, Respect in honoring that Person, for being a Good obedient Servent of Allah.

In the following bellow link there is Proof Allah uses Prayer only to mean admiration or (Rahma) Mercy to what He has Created.

You can read hadeeth here including Tefsir Ibn Kathir:

We challenge the Critics of Islam to show us a single verse where we, read Allah say’s in the Quran; “Allah and Angels send their (Sujood) Prostration, to His Prophet. Which actually clearly means to Praye in Worship. You will never find this in the Quran. On the Contarary, Allah asks Others to Prostrate to Him ( Sujood). Quran: 7:206, 13:15,16:49,17:107,19:58.

Similarly, You will never read Allah ever say; Worship Us (plural). On the contarary, you will only read Allah say; Worship Me (Singular)
Quran 51:56

Hence worship the way human beings do (Sujood) Prostration , is Solely for Human beings towards Allah alone. And never the other way around. Therefore Allah sends his; Prayers meaning (Mercy, good fortune, admiration, condolences, respect, honoring, blessings) and “NOT” prayers as in “Sujood” (Prostrate), worship type prayer as the Critics want you to believe.

Listen now from a expert who teachers (Arabic), who tells us more about the verse in Question;


So these desperate critics of Islam, have only got themselves to blame, for being ignorant and arrogant to comprehend basic, wisdom.


Counter Rebuttal section:


Christian wrote:


Muslim – Response:


Why would Allah send his condolences knowing that that person is going to meet his Creator.

Reply: What is wrong with Allah sending his grief, or blessings towards the Prophet, I.e keeping the Prophet in his prayers?

That doesn’t mean his praying to the Prophet. As you know the Prophet went through so many “trials and tribulations in his life, therefore Allah can send him “condolences”.

We all can still send our condolences to loved ones or people who have suffered, and yet we are going to meet those people in a diffrent abode. So the same logic then applies to Allah, that he can equally send his prayers in the form of condolences, even though He will meet the Prophet also in the Afterlife.

You then send, that its not quite true we send our prayers?

Of course the West does. You haven’t heard of the saying, I send my prayers to you?

See how Westerners write “get well cards”

By saying I send my prayers to You.


So regardless if you, say we praye to God and he helps that person. Your still using the the language of prayer directed to the person. So the same applies with Allah. He again all though says, i send my prayer to the Prophet. It doesn’t mean to the Prophet directly, rather Allah keeps the prophet in mind, and wishes the best for him in the form of blessing and healing, and so forth to the Prophet where God continues to send him his Prayers… so its more as a “figurtive speech” I send you my prayers, meaning I send you my help, mercy blessing etc.

It’s figurtive speech its that simple .

In fact even the Bible is full of figurtive speeches.

For example:

Jesus said that Jew’s are gods (Theos) in (John 10-34)

So is this to be taken, literal or figuratively? Since all Jews are not Gods.

Christian will say: of course it’s “figuratively”!

But then Jesus is called (Theos) a God. In
(Hebrews 1:8)

So is this to be taken, Figurtively or Literal?

Triniterian Christian’s of course will say that’s “literal”. And not Figurtive.

So just like Christians can interepret, the Bible “figurtive speech” and “literal speech”.

Then Muslim’s can equally intereprete the Quran in a similar fashion. When Muslims “praye” to Allah that’s literal, but when Allah and Angels praye to Prophet Muhammed (pbuh), that’s not literal and only part of figurtive speech.

That is how easy it is to catch out the Christian missionaries.


Christian  wrote:







Muslim – Response:


Ridiculous? Let us expose your ignorance of Islamic Text.

Firstly it is a matter of linguistics. In the Classical Arabic language of the Quran, the word We is used to emphasize God’s grandeur, it is a way of saying I in the most grandest way possible as is fitting for Allah. An example of a similar use of the word ‘We’ to emphasize grandeur is how some queens & kings of medieval Europe would say “We are not amused” when referring to themselves in order to signify their glory, It wasn’t that there was more than one king or queen. In the Quran Allah interchangeably uses the singular and plural in reference to Himself, however this is a matter of linguistics. So the singular is used to affirm the fact that He is One and has no partner or associate, and the plural is used to emphasize His glory.

God uses the singular and plural when describing many things in the Qur’an but a closer study will show that when God says

Q41:12 “ So he completed them, the heavens, as seven firmaments in two days”


Q7:172 “When thy lord drew forth from the children of Adam from their lions-their descendants and made them testify concerning themselves (Saying) “Am I not your lord (who cherish and sustains you? They said “yea! We do testify”


Q55:4 “He has taught (man) speech (and intelligence)”

Q2:30 “Behold thy lord said to the Angels “I will create a vicegerent on earth” they said “will you place therein one who will make mischief therein and shed blood? While we do celebrate your praises and glorify thy holy name?”

In similar verses it explain what God alone can do and no one else. In such cases God uses the singular but in other cases where God uses other agencies he used the plural like

Q25: 48-9 “And we send down pure water from the sky that with it we may give life to a dead land”

Q6:75 “So also did we show Abraham the power and the laws of heaven and earth, that he might (with understanding) have certitude”

Q51:47 “And it is we who built the universe with power; and verily, it is we who are steadily expanding it”

In similar verses you will find that what God is describing is using an agency to achieve what he wants, for example rain happens through various forces of nature he controls, Abraham was able to understand the laws of nature through various natural processes, the expansion of universe is achieved by a variety of factors etc. The “Kun fa ya kun” be and it is, is not a magic wand, God doesnt play magic but willed things and make them happens through process whose control are under his supervision. In a nutshell that is the difference between I and We.

Please educate yourself properly about Islam before you like to enter into a  discussion with a Muslim.

Thank you


Christian  wrote:




Muslim – Response:

You said only Humans wish or send things. If your Christian God is “ONE” then why God does send things ?

Let’s read from your own books;

24 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life. John 5:24-25

So if He can send Jesus. Why He can’t send condolences?

You then wrote, God will “instantly” give?

Let’s read;

But very truly I tell you, it is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. (John 16:7)

Really? You mean God has no time and place to do things? Surely not every thing that God intends to do or wishes to do, gets done right away right? If God gives instantly then why does Jesus say I must go. If I don’t go then God won’t send the comforter. So in otherwords God does not exactly do things instantly, rather there is a time and place He does things.

You then wrote, God does not wish?

Let’s read;

The Lord is not slow about his promise as some count slowness, but is forbearing toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. (2 Peter 3:9)

So clearly your God does not wish, for people to perish. So his technically wishing for things not to happen to them.

And yet you have a issue with God wishing Good fortune for the Prophet, since God is happy to see the Prophet full fill his duty.

And besides, God having a wish doesnt mean his limited, rather this is part of figurtive speech, since the same wishing of God is found in your own Bible.

If only Christians read their own scriptures properly, they wouldn’t be making the arguments they are making. Well that one was a reality check im sure.



Also just like to share a message feedback. It’s nice to see our apologetic work, is beneficial and being appreciated.

Praise Be to Allah. And thank you, may Allah bless you and preserve You and your Family and ALL the Ummah also.







Satanic Verses & Allah is a Deciever? What about the Bible?


Refuting the claim the Qur’anic satanic verses?



After, reading the above link, you can get a real grasp to the events, basically Satan tries to come to the Prophet, to try and confuse him, and Satan tries to reveal false verses to the Prophet, and then Allah jumps in to tell the Prophet those verses are incorrect, and Allah then removes those verses, and then rectifies to the Prophet that Allah never gave the Prophet those verses. Again this remained Privart between Allah and his Prophet, and the Prophet never recited those verses to any of his companions. So in other words, this whole narrative proves the Prophet is a true, Prophet. If He were false, then the narration or the Qur’anic passage would never say, Allah corrected the truth, which proves the Prophet and the Quran was “protected”. Even Samuel Green a Christian Apologist who is a “Author” at the AnsweringIslam website, agrees the Quran, was “Corrected”. In otherwords there was “No satanic verses”, that were left, or made part of the Quran:


So as you can see, the Prophet never walked around preaching the satanic verses, or never said to any companion this is part of the Quran.

It was a very short lived moment, Satan comes tries to deliver the Prophet verses, then Allah quickly intervenes telling the Prophet, I didn’t give you those verses, so then Allah removes those verses, before those verses reach other companions. Christians assume, that the satanic verses were revealed, and then the Prophet narrated them to a companion, then those companions and scribes wrote those verses down, and made it part of the Quran. However none of this is true, and it never got to that point. Allah (swt) quickly removed what was casted in the mind or toung of the Prophet and it was all quickly removed, which proves again that his a True Prophet, and not a false one.

Other Christians bring arguements such as: Satan can play tricks by putting some truth in the Quran?


Its funny how he says Satan put some Truth in the Quran to make you believe its true then added lies to decieve you its true. Well same could be said about your bible. And your Bible says Satan can not say truth or else he will be destroyed. So your got owned by the standard of your bible.

(Mark 3:26) Satan will not work against himself.

Now Quran says (26:210); No evil one has brought down this Revellation.

Hence according to your Bible. If there are satans words in Quran it can’t be, because He will be destroyed according to your Bible. Satan will not work against himself be revealing Truth.  Sure 26:210; declares no evil one brought down the Quran. If these words were Satan’s words, that would mean his working against himself, which the bible declares can’t happen, and Satan would be destroyed!

And here is another “inconsistency”  Christians says it’s very very clear ALLAH = SATAN


Inconsistency much?

Christianities main two figures effected by (Iblis) Satan according to their own Bibles:

St.Paul possessed by demon in inspiration

Jesus possessed by Demon in the Bible

Proof for the devils words in the Bible

Was Prophet Mohammed (Pbuh) squeezed by Demon?

Part 1/2:

Part 2/2



Muslim Response to Allah is the “Best Deciever”?



Now evidence the Biblical God can “Be a Deciever”


Christian say’s; Allah is best deciever, and gets Humiliated. After back and forth discussion admits;

Christian say’s in text comment bellow his own God (Yahway) sent Allah to Muslims as (Strong delusion) meaning Deceived the Muslims, when he tries answering: 2 Thessalonians 2:11

So Yahway is Responsible for sending deception and causing people to be “decieved ”




Now let’s see what, strong delusion means according to the English dictionary?


Yep, it means Deception.

So according to Christians there own God (Yahway) sent “Muslims a deception. He decieved Muslims basically, by sending them a False God called Allah?

Yet these Christians accuse Allah for being a Deciever? Yet they agree their own Biblical God sent a false Allah to Muslims?



Christian dilemma the two natures of Jesus Christ


■ last updated: 10th June 2020

By: Mustafa Sahin

In this article, we shall respond to the Christian Trinitarian assertion, that Jesus has two natures. One being fully human, while being fully God. Christians have invented this theology to address the many controversial issues in the Bible, when talking with Muslims, and debating the idea that Jesus is God. When Muslims bring up many verses showing flaws in Jesus Christ that prove Jesus is not devine, the Christians in response use a get away car, to suggest that Jesus has two natures. So when Jesus feels hungry or needs to sleep, or He feels pain, or at times, He is helpless, and at times, not all knowing. Christians argue, that these qualities of Jesus are just his humanely attributes, which is distinct from his Godly nature. And so since Christians have “opened” the can of Worms” I shall demonstrate that when Christians invent new ideas into the Bible, to fix a problem they have in fact Created more problems for themselves, and we shall now explore those problems.

1 – Where are the explicit Words of Jesus having TWO natures?

The first Question I like to ask Christians is, where did Jesus, Paul or any of Jesus Desciples claim that ” Jesus had two nature”. And I know what Christians are thinking, they are reading this and saying, well that’s easy I’ll just pull a verse from there, that shows Jesus is God. Then I’ll bring a verse from over there too, show Jesus has human attributes, and there you go, here I’ve proved Jesus has TWO natures.

Here is the problem, anyone can get a verse, then force his own interpretation. One would imagine that in the entire Bible, if the central message of the Bible is about the Divinity of Jesus, then we would have seen at least one single verse, that combines both natures of Jesus into one single verse. Just a example, Jesus could have said, I have two natures. Period.  Yet we don’t find that in the entire problem.

Even Christian Apologist named Sam Shamoun from Answering-islam admits, that if pressed He can not show the two natures of Jesus in one person in the Bible, because it’s not there. That precise language, see

2 – Where is the Human nature of Jesus in the afterlife?

We often hear, from Christians how Jesus will be in his new Glorified body, and in the afterlife, He shall be seated at the right hand of the Father. Only the Godly nature of Jesus will be seated on the Throne. So the Question is, where will the Human nature of Jesus go? Why don’t we get any information, where the Human nature of Jesus be? Or are Christians suggesting the Human nature is also seated on the Throne? How can that be possible though when “only” God sits on the Throne? Perhaps Jesus human nature will split from the Godly nature, so are we to believe that there will be Jesus with a twin in the afterlife? We are told that the Human nature of Jesus, endured so much suffering, surely then, He will be compensated with a heavenly abode. So why is there no information on this, since the Human nature was if not the closest human being to perfection. After all Christians tell us, Jesus never commited any sins even by his human nature.

If Christians assert that, Jesus will be spiritualized as the God, sitting at the right hand, then Christians need to explain in book revelations, who is that one that is the lamb and looks slain? (Revelation 5:6) So how can something spiritualized look slain if it’s Jesus? So we are left with so many problems, we have Jesus as the son sitting on the throne as the God, then  Jesus as the Son who looks slain? Why is a Resurrected Jesus looking slain?

3 – Did Jesus commit a Sin with his Human nature? “The Inconsistency”

Christians tell us, Jesus never commited any Sins. And that’s proof, He is God. Well I ask the Christians, if Jesus is God, Because He never commited a Sin, and in doing so your suggesting his a “Perfect being”. What about his human nature? Is that also sinless? If the answer is, Yes! The human nature is also sinless, but wait a minute, I thought the Human nature, is not perfect, only the devine nature is perfect. I mean after all, you tell Muslims, Jesus human nature has flaws which is supposed to be distinct from his Godly nature, so why are we being told, both Jesus human nature and Godly nature are both sinless? This would now only suggest, that Jesus human nature is also Godly, after all it has the ability to resist Sin, even the smallest of the smallest sins?

My short video on this:

3 – Jesus Praying to heaven

When Muslims say how can Jesus be God yet Jesus prayed, did God praye to himself? A Christian will say, no Jesus had (two nature’s) so the human nature of Jesus prayed to his Godly nature. However when reading the Bible we come across the following verse;

“After Jesus said this, he looked toward heaven and prayed: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you -John 17:1

After reading the above verse one now has to ask the question why on earth would Jesus look towards a direction other then his Godly self if He was God on earth having TWO natures? Why didn’t the human side of Jesus look towards himself, maybe walked up to a pong and tried to look at his own reflection, then ask his own Godly self for Glory.  Yet instead Jesus turns away from himself and glares into the heavens and requests Glory from above. Did not Jesus believe He had two natures?

I would like to ask Christians if God did come to the earth. Show us a example where Jesus himself prayed directly to this earthly God like he prayed to the Heavenly God. This clearly proves the falsehood of the notion that Jesus has two natures, human and God.


4 – Jesus Godly nature ignores Him.

We read a remarkable, event that takes place in the Bible, where Jesus is lead away into the wilderness, He suffers under Satan’s temptations, and as a result; “An Angel from Heaven appeared to Jesus and Strengthened Jesus” (Luke 22:43)

Now this begs the Question, If Jesus really believed, He had two distinct natures, why is Jesus depending on angels to give him strength? Surely if Jesus believed he was God, He wouldn’t need the assistance of angels, you would think Jesus would simply request his Godly nature who is already present in Jesus to give him strength, so what happened did the Godly nature of Jesus walk off? Did it go to sleep? So where was He?

To answer this, dilemma Christian Apologists suggest that, Jesus wanted to humble himself before the Angels, for why He turned towards Angels to be strengthened. They use this verse:

“But we do see Jesus, who was made lower than Angels for little while.
Hebrews 2:9″

However this makes no sense, isn’t it more important to humble your self before God, then before angels? Also, why would Jesus need to prove that his human nature is lower then Angels? Were the Angels confused about Jesus divinity?

Christians then suggest, why can’t God just use angels to do things for him, however this makes no sense. It’s not as if, God is somewhere in a distant location, or that his just busy doing other things, his right there, inside Jesus, yet He refuses to help Jesus directly himself. This could have been in fact the perfect opportunity for Jesus to prove He has two natures, yet Jesus refuses to request assistance from himself.

5 – The Two natures, Jesus does not know the hour?

The Bible tells us, that Jesus as the Son (the second God head of the trinity), has “NO” knowledge when the “Hour” is, let’s read:

New International Version
“But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. (Mathew 24:36)

As you can see the NIV says: nor the son.

However when we read the King James Version & New King James Version:

king James Bible
But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. (Mathew 24:36)

New King James Version
“But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only.

Nor the Son, has been “Removed” from the passage, why?

Todays Biblical Scholars tell us, the (New International Version) bible, is more accurate because it uses much earlier ancient manuscripts, compared to the Manuscipts used for the King James Version.

Now here is the issue, if today’s Christian Apologist say, Jesus has TWO natures, one being God, and one being Human. Therefore when (Mathew 24:36) says, the “Son does not no” when the hour is, this is talking about the (Human nature of the son), and not his Godly nature, therefore this verse does not prove his not God, they argue.

So my question is, then why did the ancient scribes remove: “nor the son“, from the King James version? Surely if they believed ” nor the son” is just talking about the “Human nature” and not the devine nature, they would have left the verse as it is, yet instead they removed it from the passage, dishonestly. They tried to forge it out of the Bible. That tells me, biblical scribes deep down understood “nor the son” displays a problematic display about Jesus being divine and  so they removed it from the text was the best option for them, because they know, not many people are going to buy the arguement like, “oh but wait! that was the “human nature!”. Because the text is clear it says (the son is included) in “not knowing” when the hour Is. Because the text itself even shows that lets read again carefully:

New International Version
“But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. (Mathew 24:36)

Lets look at two parts of the text:

no one knows.

So this part of the verse already deals with Jesus human nature.

Then the verse says,

nor the Son

So why would the passage repeat itself and say, nor the son, also means Human nature? If God has already clarified the Human nature not knowing in the first part of the verse, “no one knows”, So the first part of the verse already covers Jesus human nature, so why then would God then need to cover the Human nature by mentioning the Son?

The best explanation I can think of is, it’s as though God predicted,  Christians will claim the Son was God, so God had to also remind them that not knowing the hour, also included the Son!

And because God made it clear to them that Jesus as the Son, was not God by showing us his ignorant of the hour, they tried removing the verse from the text. Now talk about, how dishonest one can be! Of course only now they have added it back to the Bible in the NIV, because they got caught red handed when, ancient manuscripts were studied, and it was found out that the earliest manuscripts did include the “nor the son part” Well thank you for being honest after getting caught red handed!

Christians when refering to “The Human” nature, have no escape! Because God refutes them, even when they try to remove it! Even when they try and twist the verses, they still get exposed! And thats why they were so bothered by the text that includes “The Son” they tried so hard to hide it for so long, that God foiled their plans!

Now here is another point, I will show you, Christians play the inconsistency and the convience card. Just imagine for a moment the verse read:

“But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, but only the Son, and the Father knows the hour”.

Of course the verse doesn’t say this, but let’s just imagine it did read this way:

Christians will no longer say this is refering to “human nature”, but this now refers to his “Godly nature”. Why? Because the verse makes Jesus equal with the father. So as you can see, Christians play the convienience card, they quickly claim it’s the Godly nature, when it suits them, and human nature when it goes against them. They will never say, the Son knows, because God shares all secrets with the Son who is just a human and God loves him. No of course they will never accept such explaination, They will instead say, no. The Son knows everything because His God. Period.

6 – Does only the Human nature suffer? Or also God’s nature?


If Christians claim, God the father did not die on the Cross, and also suffer as the Son. I suggest Christians, to refer to a Christian Apologists by the name of  Dr James White, who believes that The Father, is not a selfish God. He didn’t just send his Son, to suffer for our sins on the Cross. The Father also came down himself to get himself sacrafised along with his Son.  There Dr james white argues, God himself is not selfish, God himself also endured those sufferings.

Dr. James white says” The elective God joined them, Gods death became there Death, in reference to Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit”.

Dr James white confessed to admit this to counter our Question why was the Father selfish that he didnt die himself yet gets his own Son to die. So James white admits there is no selfishness and that the Sons death became there death i.e (The Father and Holy Spirit) and Jesus Christ ressurection became there ressurection (Father and holy Spirit)

Source: https://youtu.be/SzslKkjEb_g
Listen from (minute 63:20)

A Christian shouldn’t feel uncomfortable to talk about his God feeling Hungry, he cries, or goes to bathroom to have a poop, just as God can go through death, he can also do those other human attributes.

7 – Did God die on the Cross or was it only the Human nature?

Christian Apologist disagree with one another:

David Wood vs Jay Smith & Dr James White.

David wood says: “ONLY human Nature Died”. David says it makes no sense that God can die.

However he tries to assume if Jesus became a Man then it was the human nature that died. So God did not Die but only human nature.


Jaysmith disagree’s with David Wood. And that God can die. See
Jay argues God died. Qoute” He certainly did!

Source: (5.22 minutes)

Dr.James White also disagees with David wood. And that God did die on the Cross!


James says” The elective God joined them, Gods death became there Death, in reference to Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit”.

Dr James white confessed to admit this to counter our Question why was the Father selfish that he didnt die himself yet gets his own Son to die. So James white admits there is no selfishness and that the Sons death became there death i.e (The Father and Holy Spirit) and Jesus Christ ressurection became there ressurection (Father and holy spirit)

Source: https://youtu.be/SzslKkjEb_g
Listen from (minute 63:20)

Who is telling the Truth? Who has the Holy Ghost? The Bible teachers that the Holy Spirit will speak to You and guide You to ALL truth. (John 16:13)

Surely they all can not be Correct?

If We follow David Woods line of thinking, both Jay and Woods concept of God being Eternal Fails according to David if God was killed as both Jay and James white believes. And If We followed in James white and Jay Smiths line of thinking, than that would mean David Woods concept of God fails since his God would be a “Selfish God” as the Father sends the human nature as the Son to die while the father himself pays no penalty of his own, making the father selfish didnt come down himself to die instead sent his Son. Makes his Son sacrifice himself while the father does not sacrifice himself by getting killed as a God

We have put this in video here;

8 –  More Christian mishaps. “Jesus death”.

Muslim tell Christians how can Jesus be God? If Jesus died on the Cross? There are Christians who say, oh no that was only  “The Human Nature that died”.


I pointed out to Bosingr, is the “Soul” of Ravi Zacharias also God? It does not die, like the Godly nature of Jesus, Interesting Hey?

9 – A Christian admits, His God has Male Genitals.


So as you can see, Christians are confused and it’s really difficult to get consistency from them, you have some Christians who try to hide the shame that God has a Penis, they will say that was the “Human” side. But then you will have Christians like Dr James White who say, God died (God’s death became their death) so God was in actual fact like a human being, for he became a Human and really did die.

It’s also, Interesting, that Jesus also rose to Heaven, both spiritually and Physically into Heaven. According to book (Revelation 5:6) “He looks Slain” Therefore this would mean God has a physical appearance as Jesus, thus God has Male Genitals even in Heaven as He did as on Earth. And yet the Bible tells us: “God is not a Man” Bible: (Numbers 23:19)

In conclusion: Christian Trinitarians who think that they can simply get away with answering flaws in their God by blaming those flaws on Jesus human nature, only create more problems then solving the questions raised about their Man God.

Please also visit:



“Figurtive or Literal” games Christians play to Prove Jesus is devine God

Last updated: 13th August 2021.

By: Mustafa Sahin


Jesus God or Exaggerated? ” Figurative “or “Literal” games?

Here are some examples, where Christians manipulate the interpretation of the Bible so that it can conform with their theological beliefs about Jesus being “God”. We show that these interpretations are forced to prove that Jesus is God.

1 – Jesus said; “I and father are one”. Figurative or Literal?

Christian will say: “Literal”.

Notice: Christians will say “Literal” to conveniently prove Jesus is God.

2 – Jesus said everyone is ONE with God. (John 17:21) Literal or Figuratively?

Christians will say: “Figuratively”!

Note: Christians will never say, Disciples are One with God in the literal sense because then that would mean a Christian would make blasphemy to say, Disciples are One with God therefore it could imply the Disciples are God as well. This is why they will say it’s “figurative”, conveniently as to cause no blasphemy. So why then Christians conveniently interpret this verse as Figuratively, but don’t do the same when Jesus is defined as being “one with God? Why not say, that was “figurative also” oh but wait, that would not serve their agenda to prove that Jesus is God, so let’s conveniently interpret that as being literal when being one with God applies to Jesus!

3 – Jesus said Me and Father are One & When you see Me, You see the father.

Christian will say: “Literal”!

Note: Christians will never say, it’s figurative because saying it’s literal, will prove Jesus is one with God therefore a God like Yahweh.

4 –  Jesus said Jews are Gods (Theos) John 10-34 Literal or figuratively.

Christian will say: “figuratively”!

Note: Christians will say:  “(Theos) or (Elohim) can mean ANY spiritual being angelic human or both. But the tetragrammaton is the Elohim of Israel which Yeshua applied to himself and was nearly stoned for blasphemy”.

However, this is inconsistent, because Theos, is not just used for Jews in the O.T but also for Jesus in the N.T yet it is translated as meaning as his God. For example John 1:1. And Christians use john 1:1 heavily to prove his God, and they don’t claim its meaning is just (any spiritual being). Theos is also used for Jesus in (Hebrews 1:8) and Christians don’t interpret as (any spiritual being) rather as God, so why the inconsistency? Why not also interpret John 1:1 or Hebrews 1:8, as (any spiritual being) instead of God”?

Christians then say they nearly stoned him to death? However did they forget the part when Jesus rebuked them and also called them gods, to prove to the Jews, it’s not blasphemous to call each other Gods. Jesus was trying to illustrate to the Jews, terms such as Gods was never to be understood as literal terms. It’s rather like being called Godly people because people who serve God are defined as Godly. But Christians have misinterpreted these verses to suit their theology

5 – Jesus called (Theos) a God.
(Hebrews 1:8) Figuratively or Literal?

Christian will say Literal!!!

Note: Notice Christians don’t translate Theos in (Hebrews 1:8) as being figurative like any spiritual being”, no of course not here, it’s “literal”? Why, because the Christians force the meaning to go that way when it’s convenient for him to prove Jesus is God.

6 – Prophet Daniel worshipped in bible Daniel:2-46: Literal or Figuratively?

Christian will say: “Figuratively”!

Note: Christians will say Daniel wasn’t being worshipped it was God for God revealed mysteries or dreams to Daniel that came true, so they argue technically the Worship was directed to God and not Daniel. However the same thing could be said about Jesus being worshipped, the disciples fell in worship when Yahweh revealed a miracle through Jesus (like Jesus holes in his arms being healed by God), so technically the worship was directed to Yahweh and not Jesus. If you notice disciples only fall in worship when they see a miracle being performed not when Jesus or Daniel is going by their daily natural business when miracles or mysteries or true dreams are not being revealed, we are not seeing Disciples or people fall in worship towards Jesus or Daniel, rather when people see miracles getting performed is only when they fall to worship towards them, so one can conclude, people are getting mesmerised by the miracle and not the person.

Here are those examples:

Jesus only gets worshipped when a “miracle” takes place.

Mathew 14:33
Jesus only worshipped When Shown a Miracle. (Astonishment)

Mathew 2:11 Again Seeing the Miracle of Virgin Birth. Jesus Worshipped. (Astonishment)

Mathew 28:9 again seeing the Miracle (Astonishment) that Jesus came from the dead they worshipped him.

Notice every single verse where Jesus was worshipped follows by his disciples seeing a Miracle of God performed before them. I challenge any Christian to show me, where Jesus was worshipped where the context of the verse does not show a miracle being performed. Surely if Jesus was God, you wouldn’t worship God only when He shows you a miracle right, you will also worship him, while he’s not performing any miracles. So then can Christians bring forth a verse in the Bible where Jesus was still being worshipped even though he wasn’t displaying them all these wonderful signs and miracles, I bet they can not! Thus then we conclude Just like The King seen a Miracle of God revealed through Daniel. So If Daniel was worshipped because he represented a Miracle. And the Worship was technically directed to God. (Daniel 2:46) Then why when Jesus also represented a Miracle in the following verses. The Worship is not directed to God since God gave those Miracles to Jesus. Just like Daniel was Given the Miracles?

Just another example, when Moses parted the sea into two and performed a miracle, if suppose the children of Israel, fell to their knees and worshipped towards Moses, Christians will say, Moses wasn’t being Worshipped here, they were just worshipping the miracle of God being passed through Moses.

Ahmed Deedat response, that When Thomas witnessed the Holes of the Nails no more on Jesus, Thomas Proclaimed My God, My Lord out of Astonishment witnessing the miracle of God. Like if a person sees someone cutting their arm with a Rambo knife, we would say, My God! Anthony, what are you doing cutting yourself like that. This wouldn’t mean Anthony is God now, would it?

Another example, We human beings make such proclamations today like if you saw Ronaldo score a spectacular Goal we will say “My God” what a Goal! Would this mean; We Worship Ronaldo as God, or is this just a proclamation of showing emotional gratitude for witnessing such a spectacle?

7 – Jesus worshipped in the bible. Literal or figuratively.

Christian will say: “Literal”!

Note: Of course Christians won’t use examples of Disciples being mesmerised by the Miracle being performed from above, rather it was Jesus alone doing this, therefore his God. Convenient isn’t it? Even though Jesus said many times in the Bible the works He does are because of the father (John 14:10), and Jesus of himself does “nothing”. (John 5:30) But Christians will conveniently ignore those verses.  Of course, they would never ignore these TWO verses if it were Daniel.

8 – Jesus is the Son of Man. Literal or figuratively?

Christian will say: Figurative

9 –  All Jews are Sons of God in the Bible (Psalm 82:6). Literal or Figuratively.

Christian will say: “Figuratively”!

Note: Christians will claim the reason why it is Figurative because Bible scholars know what the divine council is and it’s spiritual. I would argue how convenient once again, saying All Jews are sons of God, is all spiritual, well isn’t Jesus spiritual in essence when His also the Son of God? Saying this is just “spiritual” does not negate your Jesus as not being as such as well, as all Gods children carry the spirit of God within them. Christians even today will profess the Holy Spirit dwells in them.

10 – Jesus Son of God? Literal or figuratively?

Christians will say: “Literal while others say “Unique”

Note: some Christians will claim, unique or literal means the same thing, but I say then why would they dispute the literal term? Anyhow there you have it, they will conveniently say Jesus is Unique or Literal Son of God, to prove his God, but Other Jews being Sons of God,  Nah that’s non-literal or non-unique, Jesus the Son of man, yeh Nah, of course,e, that’s, non-literal.


11 – Jesus said Kill Children who are disobedient to parents. ( Mathew 15: 1-9). Figuratively or literal?

Christians: Figuratively!

Note: Christians will say the above verse becomes ” Figurative” because it was ever enacted. In other words, Christians are saying Because there are no physical examples of children being killed in the New Testament for disobeying their parents is proof, that it’s meant to be understood as being Figurative One could simply imagine that no parent at the time, was willing to bring their disobedient child to court, because they would have feared, the consequences. Therefore saying Because there was no case brought up, doesn’t turn the ruling into a figurative ruling. Also consider, Jesus had more enemies than followers back then. Jesus had a very small number of followers and his ministry only lasted 3 years, therefore the chances of Christian devotees bringing children to court would have been almost impossible. Of course, Christians will conveniently opt-out to prove what a “Peaceful Religion” it is, to put a spin on the verse.

12 – Jesus said” I came not to send peace but sword. Literal or figuratively?

Christians: Figuratively or literal.

Note: Depending on what kind of Christian, you talking to He will tell you the verse is figurative, because the Sword here, refers to Words. But then you will have other Christians talking about the Sword being “physical” quoting, book revelations Jesus having a fight and coming back to fight the anti-Christ, and then you have (Luke 19:27) John Gills commentary talking about, Jesus coming back in the end times, and slaughtering those who did not accept him as King. Also, it’s pretty interesting that Christians refer to Jesus as being the same God as the Old Testament, yet we see a “physical sword” in (Samuel 15:3 & numbers 31 of the Bible) where People like Moses or the Ameliktes, including there women and children, were put to the sword, (but the virgins were spared) and only non-virgins killed, because of their disbelief to God. So when Christians try to prove “Jesus” to be some kind of pacifist God, it kinda sounding artificial, when History on their deity, doesn’t seem to suggest so. These swords were not words, and Moses under the instruction of God, killed and took the spoils of war, and shared it.

13 – Jesus said; “Love thy (Enemy)”. (Mathew 5:44)
Figuratively or Literal.

Christians: LITERAL!!!

Note: again this is a Christian convenient card, that it’s literal love because they wish to turn Jesus all-loving to a pacifist God because they are ashamed of the God of the O.T, so they now want to claim they have a God that changed his moral standards. Yes a God that is supposed to be all-knowing and all-wise, couldn’t figure out, until later that killing people on earth wasn’t the brightest idea of reflecting one’s compassion so he had to then act differently. Talk about, a God who improves himself? So Biblical God lacks moral wisdom and only understands it after killing children, babies and women?

14 – Jesus: will send disbelieving (Enemy) to Hell
Literal or Figuratively?

Christian: Literal/Figurative
** confused Much**

Note: Interesting they say, Jesus loves the enemy but sends them to hell for rejecting Christ? Pretty artificial “love” if you ask Me. I can’t imagine being told im loved even though im an unbeliever, or an enemy to Christ. I wonder if God loves Satan for being an Enemy as well? Of course, this is for those who interpret a literal Physical Hell. And for those who interpret it as Figurative (non-literal hell), I find that bizarre that people the likes of Adolf Hitler or  Satan will go to a Non-physical place of punishment, as they say, a place of separation from God, how is that justified, for gassing people in ovens, is beyond me. Of course, a Christian will say, we need the Holy Spirit to understand this yet those who have the holy spirit can’t answer these questions.

Now that we have established with certainty that Christians play with the biblical text to force a theology about Jesus being God, let’s look at what the Prophet Muhammed(PBUH) said in a Hadith;

” Do not Exaggerate About Me like the Christians did with Essa(Jesus) ibn Meryem, and Turned him into a God.”
Hadeeth is found in Muslim, Nasaii & Abu Dawood

In this amazing narration, the Prophet Muhammed (PBUH), understood that Jesus was never God and that God would never have meant to tell Christians that Jesus was God, and rather Christians have manipulated the text of the Bible, to prove that Jesus was God. And so the Prophet warned the Muslims, to never do this with Him, what the Christians did with Jesus Christ.

It is no surprise then, Muslims for decades have been requesting Christians to show a clear non-ambiguous verse where Jesus himself said the following: “I am God”. And there is not a single verse in the entire Bible! If Jesus was God, He would have made that clear statement. No wonder now why Christians have to force other verses of the Bible to say that Jesus is God, to compensate for something Jesus left out of the Bible, that being the explicit words to call himself I am God. Some Christians have even taken desperate measures to claim, Jesus was afraid to say those explicit words, because He feared persecution, but this explanation does not make sense for two reasons. One is that, wasn’t it part of Jesus mission to get persecute to die for your sins? So why then would He fear death, if he knew that was going to be his fate? And secondly, If he was so afraid of saying those words, why didn’t He say it on the Cross, that was the perfect chance to proclaim who He was explicit? Of course, when Christians are confronted by Muslim responses they resort to cheap tactics, like saying; show me a verse in the Bible where Jesus explicitly denied being God; like I AM NOT GOD.

But this can be easily responded to, because if Jesus had to deny every characteristic or attribute then that would be endless. Then a Muslim could say, show Me explicitly where Jesus said; I am not gay. Now imagine if people started claiming Jesus was a homosexual and telling you to prove where he explicitly said He is not Gay? Therefore this isn’t a good arguement to make as it can backfire. See Jesus was proving He was God, therefore He should have said those explicit words, which are supposed to be part of the core fundamental tenants of Christianity!

When a Christian is stuck here too He then tries to attack the Quran, and say where did Allah say the explicit words that He is God. Like the following Christian. But this has been refuted here:

Missionary Mishap – Copying Bad Arguments

The verse:

Indeed, I am (God) Allah. There is no deity except Me, so worship Me and establish prayer for My remembrance. (20:14.)

Muslims believe Prophet Moses is also a Prophet of God, in Islam. And we can see Allah telling us in the Quran, He told Mises that He is God (Allah) this would also mean, He showed Prophet Muhammed PBUH) who He specifically Is, by bringing up a statement He told Prophet  Moses long ago.

And in another verse;

So know, [O Muhammad], that there is no deity except Allah and ask forgiveness for your sin and the believing men and believing women. And Allah knows of your movement and your resting place. (47:19)

Allah, He now directly again tells Prophet Muhammed explicitly, there is no God except Allah.

Therefore if Christians need to show there is a consistency in the message, the God of the Old Testament, was explicit in saying the words: I am Yahway, your God. (Exodus 20:2-6)

The Quran says the same, however, these words are missing in the New Testament. Which clearly show an inconsistent pattern in God’s message.

So where did Jesus say, I am Elohim or Yahway, your God? In the New Testament? This in of itself is enough to prove: Jesus was never a God!

Enough said.

Update: I sent my article and posted it to Christian Apologist David Wood & Sam Shamoun and this is how the followers of David and Sam Shamoun reacted:


When Muslims like myself expose the way Christians play games when interpreting the Bible, to prove Jesus is God and mislead people, the Muslim is the liar? They no longer want to talk to Muslims. This is the hostility we always get when we take the time to write articles, and when we respond, we are told we are not educated enough to respond? May I ask what Islamic academia has David or Sam Shamoun got when day and night they try to fault Islam? But they are knowledgeable! Why because they are Christian, but a Muslim can never be knowledgeable about the Bible, only Christians can know about the Quran.

Yep, that’s how it is, but then again these are the followers of Sam Shamoun and David Wood, they have taught them, Islam, pretty well;


Also please visit a related article where we demonstrate how Biblical Scribes have manipulated the Bible;


So it’s no surprise that Christians today, follow the deceitful measures of their earlier predecessors.


Refuting Pedophillia Lie of Atheists & Christian claims against the Prophet Muhammed Pbuh.

  • Last Updated: 18th, May.2022

Watch video response: Ali Dawah gives a wonderful Response:

Now watch this:

Also, see:

And finally watch this also before we continue…




Let’s first show Christianity before we continue…..

Joseph “90 Years old” married 12-Year-old St.Mary
According to Christian (Historical Record) http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08504a.htm
{ According to the Roman Catholics’ Encyclopedia “New Advent”Mary was as young as 12 when she married 90-year old Joseph. This means that she was around 11 when she got pregnant with Jesus.}

Nabeel Qurashi a Christian Apologist even admits that Mary and Joseph were “Young Children” when they conceived Jesus.


Bible: We also have a clear verse in Bible. KILL women but keep virgins (little) girls to your selves.
Numbers 31:17-18. In this passage of the Bible a priest was given 32 virgin girls as “war booty”.

A Christian named Christian Prince even admits,  these girls were taken as slaves and after one month time, you can marry them. So after killing their parents in war, you take them as slaves and you can desire to wed them. See:

And then they attack the Quran about wedding children?

No wonder Christian Priests follow the Bible they are known as the Biggest Pedophiles world widworldwide00 Priests Convicted of Rape just in the U.S.A
Proof: http://bishop-accountability.org/priestdb/PriestDBbylastName-A.html

I believe Allah has punished the Christians for their slandering of our Prophet so Allah has exposed them. So they are taking their anger out on Islam.

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) had many enemies and they claimed many things against him but never of Pedophilia ( astaghfirullah)
It’s unfair to judge people of 1400 years to even as far back as 100 years according to today’s laws and customs, you have to judge them if they were doing something wrong or not, by their laws and customs during their time.

Age of consent was set at Puberty in History:
Age of consent & customs
The Encyclopaedia of Britannica 15th edition volume 26 page 850.
Definition for puberty:
In human physiology, puberty is the stage or period of life when a child transforms into an adult normally capable of procreation

100 years ago for Islamaphobes and ignorant people go read history in “1889 America age of consent 7 to 10 years old in history in the WEST. Clearing the Prophet of going against the laws in history hence clearing Pedophilia.

This is taken directly from Wikipedia:


Under Subtitle History and Social attitudes.

Alexios II Komnenos Byzantine emperor married Anna of France at 8 years old she was born in 1171 married at 1179 died in 1204
Isaac II Angelos Byzantine emperor married Margaret of Hungry (empress) in 1184 when she was only 9 years old she was born in 1175 and died at 1204

Today around the world the average is between 13 and 16
Spain 13 Argentina 13 Austria 13 Bulgaria 14 Germany 14 Italy 14 Portugal 14 Brazil 14 Ecuador 14 Canada 14 and many more. The list is on the link below.

Legislation varies across Europe, with countries setting different legal ages of consent:

  • 14 years old: Austria, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Portugal
  • 15: Greece, Poland, Sweden
  • 16: Belgium, the Netherlands, Spain, Russia

In the UK the age of sexual consent is 16,

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43300313

So if we look at it with a sound mind; Your ancestors can be classified as a pedophile as well. Your family is born from pedophiles. I am ashamed of you, you are an outcome of pedophilia, Perhaps?

Not to mention throughout history people would get married young because the average life span was short. And it was normal during the customs of that time. Take a look at 1700 to mid-1900.


Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancy

25 years to 35 years was the age expectancy. So this is more proof that people would have married much earlier.

Also, this begs the question if life expectancy was low, then girls developing early to women hood would have been a factor too. Some people ask, would you give your 9-year-old daughter to a 50-year-old man? The answer is, we dont live 200 years ago let alone, 1400 years ago, where girls matured much earlier based on puberty. Just as life expectancy had evolved so could have girls maturing later.

Just 200 years ago, the American constitution had laws that set marriage between 7 and 10 years old. These days it’s not the same, so no I wouldn’t condone 50 years old marrying today’s 9-year-olds. Because we know that, they can hardly be developed as, today’s human biology has changed significantly.

We can see even the age of puberty dramatically changes:


So who can say for sure, girls didn’t develop earlier back 1400 years ago, Just as age death expectancy changes and so does puberty, it’s then possible girls and boys developed into women and men much earlier than today’s standard.

Christian Apologist Sam Shamoun admits on his Website.
at Answering-Islam.com

Thus, we have a biblical text establishing that the age for marriage begins when a girl has become post-pubescent, i.e. when she has reached a point where she is past puberty. Source:http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/marriage_age.htm

According to experts in the medical field, the average age for the start of puberty starts between 9 and can end at 15 or 16. So this would mean Sam Shamoun is suggesting that after the age of 15 or 16. Then a girl can be wedded. However, if we follow Sam’s explanation there are laws in both Australia or most states in the United States of America that have the legal age set at 18. However, the Bible says “Post- Pubescent which would mean around 15 or 16. That’s still two to three years younger than the legal requirement. So will the critics also  believe the Bible condones Pedophilia because it would now allow a 30 or 40 or 50-year-old man, to get married to a 15 or 16-year-old? Sam Shamoun now has to accept that a 50-year-old man wedding a 15-year-old is not then defined as Pedophilia because He argues the Bible says, Post-Prebuscent is when she can get married.

Now, this gets more interesting, all though “the average” age for the start and end of puberty can be between 9 and 15. It can even start much earlier depending on which ethnicity or race, or the geographical region you are belong too. For example in the African or Hispanic continent, it can start much earlier like age 7 and can take 3 to 4 years of the process of puberty to end. That would mean by age 10 a girl can be Postpubescent!

See here:


Source: https://www.dukehealth.org/blog/when-puberty-too-early

Therefore Sam Shamoun technically accepts that Young marriages to even 10-year-old girls are Biblical!

So again when the Prophet Muhammed consummated his Marriage with Ashia, she could have been 9 years and 11 months old. (i.e) close to 10 years old.

And we know Islamic sources do say, she was 9 when Marriage was consummated. And not 6.

At age 6 she was only betrothal  to the Prophet, (a mutual promise or contract for a future marriage) meaning only worded contract, nothing more than that. There was no “sexual intimacy”.

So now going back to the Bible and looking at this book for approval of the Prophets marriage, which is approved Biblically and scientifically as being PostPrebuscent.

The West understands  the difference between a child and a adolescent is the onset of Puberty. Ashia (r.a) the Prophets youngest wife after becoming post prebuscent was married according to the norm of the society at the time.

Christian Apologist Dr James white reminds christians not to use the pedophillia arguement because, Young Marriages were common back then:
Source: https://youtu.be/wyvPhcsWbzY

Here is the Evidence from History and Present Day!
Age of Marriage was low back then. Western World.

Even in our Modern World 12 Year old Girls.

Read this:
2000 to 2010, the most recent year for which most states were able to provide information. We learned that in 38 states, more than 167,000 children — almost all of them girls, some as young 12 — were married during that period,

Source: 1:


Source 2:


We even have the “French” 🇫🇷  in Our Modern World reducing the age of sexual consent from 18 to only 15 years old. Source:


Makes you now wonder, how the WEST is confused on the specific age of sexual consent. Having sexual relations between a 40 year old and a 15 year old, would be considered rape in the UK, Australia and Most states of the U.S, well not so now in France. But again who gets to call they are “Progressed”? France or the Rest?

Here is another Christian conservative Apologist Milo Yiannopoulos who is Anti-Islamist agrees that for a 29 year old man to have consensual sex with a 13 year old who is ready sexually. It is not Pedophillia! He argues. Take a read:

For more details read: Responses to Common Arguement Christians make about Pedophillia read:

According to Journal of Human development reaching Puberty meant becoming a Adult in terms of Giving Consent read:

Young Teenagers in History who went through Puberty were able to give consent according to The Journal of Human development. As the onset of Puberty marked Maturity, Responsibility and Behavior. The link i provided attests to that for why the age of consent coincided with the Age of Puberty.

At the same link here:

Go to the Anti-Islam responses section bellow the page, we deal with all the twisted lies in the hadith that Ashia. Did not reach puberty at 9 years of age. Playing with Dolls, Does the Quran allow sex with prebubscent children? Did Abu Bekir Refuse Marriage? Also above the page we deal with the lie that she was only SIX years old. When this is not exactly correct, all though there was marriage at age 6, this wasn’t consummated until she was 9. We explain it further here:

See here:



  1. All though we do not condone Child marriages or sex with minors check out this point from a Atheistic point of reference;

Atheist can not even say from a Scientific perspective that child marriages are wrong or raping people is wrong. Take a listen here; there are no real objective morals in Science.

Again I’m not condoning Child marriages just showing the double standards according to their own Atheist world view.

In the Year 1976 “Taking Nude and Sexualized pictures of a 10 year old Girl in the West.


From the Religion of Love. 10 and 8 years olds in Romania promised Arranged Marriage:

12 Year Old Gives Birth in Australia.
Source: https://thewest.com.au/news/health/12-year-old-girl-gives-birth-in-perth-hospital-report-ng-b881084396z

Of course it’s possibly another Legal Teen pregnancy due to boy & girl friend relationship. Will now hush our Bogan Culture Under the table?

What about these: 17,000 Pedophiles in Australia?


Should we now say, Pedophilia is Australian Culture?

Rebuttal section:

The critics write; Muslims follow Pedophile/ Warlord Prophet as the “Best Exemplar”.


The West still has laws in the Modern West that still allow sexual relations on the onset of Puberty. Look at America the age of consent still set at 12 in some states. Our Prophet has nothing wrong as being the best exemplar since he never brock the ruling of young marriages which were accepted through out history. So yes his still the best exemplar for ALL time. Ashia marriage age was certainly normal and even today U.S laws still have the age of consent as low as 12. Just because your subjective opionion raises it to 18 does not mean who ever disagree is a false exemplar. Its a straw man arguement its like argueing if i change the consent law to age 28, who ever does not full fill this and disagrees and marry’s people who are 18 is the wrong exemplar.

So whos the best exemplar? Puberty at 9 is wrong for sexual maturity. But puberty at 13 is O.K for sexual maturity according to West? Teen pregnancy isn’t encouraged but still acceptable in West but marriage to a 13 year old is wrong?

Furthermore even if you like to dispute and say his not the best examplar due to our current laws. That still a incoherent arguement  because his life was the best exampler through out history. As you are aware his young wife was not the only wife, he had wives that were even older then him, therefore he was still the best exempler as he full filled both pre-modern laws and full filled Modern laws by marrying women whos ages of consent was accepted in the past and future. So to then judge him with todays modern laws proves nothing since he still married older women within even his own life time. Who knows maybe in the future Westerners may drop the age of consent back to Puberty, just like today they still accept teen pregnancies in the West so to try and character assisinate him on today’s subjective laws is quite unfair and illogical. And since when is the West the measuring stick of the best exemplar? The same West that has legal necrophilia, incest, sodomites, even having sex with animals. Girls who identify themselves as being Male, and then you have a lady marrying her piano, you can find these laws legal in parts of Western countries. So “No” the West is not the measuring stick of what is determined as best Exemplar. For Muslims engaging in these sorts of behaviours such as man on man is the wrong exemplar. Therefore imagine i used my subjective opionion and criticized West for being the wrong exemplar for human kind? See im showing you that its a incoherent arguement to apply a subjective opionion to determin what makes or makes not a good exemplar.


“Your Prophet was a pedophile! He was married to and cohabited with Aisha when she was just nine years old!”

You trolls need to find some new lines. The Prophet, peace be upon him, married Aisha with the blessing and approval of her parents and he was committed to her, took care of her, taught her, and, through his care, she became one of the most knowledgeable and influential scholars of Islam and a leader of the community. This was the kind of marriage practiced by Muslims and Christians and Jews and every other culture and religion for nearly all of human history. Girls were married young by their parents to committed husbands. My own great grandmother was married at 13.

In contrast, the pedophilia pioneered in the modern West, practiced by rich and poor Western perverts alike, involves, among other things, diddling one’s child relatives secretly in closets and dark rooms, orgies with underage girls that are essentially kidnapped, the most evil child pornography, sex rings with thousands of abducted children, where once they have drugged up the children, used them and put them through the most degrading, vile sex acts, passing them around among their friends like broken objects, these children are discarded like trash. Some are killed and never heard of again. This is the pedophilia of the “superior” west that you disgusting trolls want to equate with the noble, pure marriage of the Prophet peace be upon him to our mother, Aisha.

Don’t project the filthy degeneracy found in the “superior” West onto the superior religion.

-Daniel Haqiqatiu

A Critic Wrote: Yes I do know catholic’s also have a problem in Child Molestation but most of them seem to be historic cases, they seem to have got their house in order, We no longer have Grooming Modern day gangs as prolific in the West unlike the Muslim ones.

My Response: Predominately Christian cases are only Historic are they?

Most of the top 5 countries in the World are Predominately Christian countries who have a significant Child Abuse Cases. So Child abuse is part of your filthy non-Muslim Modern day culture, not just history.


South Africa

One child is raped in South Africa every three minutes, according to a 2009 report by trade union Solidarity Helping Hand.

A 2009 survey by the country’s Medical Research Council found that one in four men admits to raping someone, 62% of boys over 11 believe forcing someone to have sex is not an act of violence and a third believe girls enjoy rape, the Independent reported


In its 2013 report India’s Hell Holes: Child Sexual Assault in Juvenile Justice Homes, the Asian Centre for Human Rights said that sexual offences against children in India have reached epidemic proportion.

The report stated that more than 48,000 child rape cases were recorded from 2001 to 2011 and that India saw an increase of 336% of child rape cases from 2001 (2,113 cases) to 2011 (7,112 cases).

“Imagine 48,838 children raped in just 10 years


Police spokesperson Assistant Commissioner Charity Charamba said in 2012 that rape cases against children continued to increase countrywide, according to NewsdeZimbabwe.

“The (rape) cases are on the increase and during the week ending 25 September 2012, the cases rose to 81 from 65 the previous week. Evident from our investigations is the fact that relatives commit most juvenile rape cases,” said Charamba. 30,000 boys and girls sexually abused

United Kingdom

A quarter of a million Britons – more than one in every 200 adults – are paedophiles, according to figures released by Scotland Yard, the Telegraph reported in 2000.

In 2012/13, there were 18,915 sexual crimes against children under 16 recorded in England and Wales, according to the National Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC). Included in that figure were 4,171 offences of sexual assault on a female child under 13 and 1,267 offences of sexual assault on under-13 male children.

In the UK, one in 20 children (4.8%) have experienced contact sexual abuse and over 90% of children who experienced sexual abuse, were abused by someone they know, NSPCC said.

A paedophile ring linked to Britain’s worst abuser Robert Smith, arrested in 2005, is ‘still at large’, the Herald reported in 2013.

United States

“Even if the true prevalence of child sexual abuse is not known, most will agree that there will be 500,000 babies born in the US this year that will be sexually abused before they turn 18 if we do not prevent it,” according to the Children Assessment Centre (CAC).

What is more “Shocking is that even in our modern World some states it is legal to Wed girls as young as 12 years old read:

2000 to 2010, the most recent year for which most states were able to provide information. We learned that in 38 states, more than 167,000 children — almost all of them girls, some as young 12 — were married during that period,



BBC-Reports Angel was just 13 years old when she was forced into Marriage in the U.S:

According to the local department of tourism, more than 4.7 million foreigners come to the Philippines each year. Of these, 1.2 million are men who arrive on their own. Most numerous are tourists from Korea, the US, China and Australia. The UK is ninth on the list, closely followed by other European countries.
Freedom to leave children behind?

In conclusion:

We need to understand we live in a Modern new world. Things that were practised in the past, were done in the context of environmental differences from today. 200 to 300 years ago, Marriages to adolescents were accepted even in the West, between ages 7 to 10 years old. Now since then the age of consent has been raised to 14 or 18 depending what part of the Western World you live in.

The reason being in our modern era, girls tend to develop much later. This is part of human evolution. And no, I’m not talking about Darwinian evolution, but rather accepted changes that naturally fluctuate depending on nutrition and environmental circumstances. For example they say, girls and boys who live in hotter climates tend to develop earlier then those who live in colder climates. And so if we accept that these changes can occur, who is to say 1400 years ago the climate was much diffrent and so was the science behind girls developing much younger? So for example todays 15 or 16 year old girl could be equivalent to a 9 or 10 year old back 1400 years ago?

And so based on that, it would be unfair to judge the Prophet based on the age He married Ashia, when she most probably did not look anything like todays 9 year old girls, but rather looked like she was 14 or 16 for the matter.

1400 years ago was awfully a long time ago, and many things may have changed by then. Thus the critics trying to attack the character of the Prophet have no real arguement at all, since they conflate our modern era, to that of very ancient times. For those who dispute and claim there is very little evidence that, biological changes occur or that there is no evidence that girls developed earlier in pre-modern times, well i would ask you to read this article:

So to sum up:

There you will read that even in our modern times, people are going back to maturing earlier based on nutritional factors . So I ask what makes you think it wasn’t possible for girls to mature earlier during the Pre-modern era? If changes are observed today then its also possible changes occurred in ancient times, thus the fact that there is now evidence that biological development fluctuates in our modern times what makes you think it didn’t fluctuates back in the ancient times? If it’s possible now, then it was possible back then, end of story.

Also makes me laugh, when a critic claims back in the ancient times there are no records to suggest that girls in ancient times matured earlier. This makes me laugh, because they think almost 1500 to 2000 years ago, there were scientists collecting data from all parts of the globe measuring when girls conclusively went through development. These fools think, that science back then was interested in those findings as if there were hundreds of universities collaborating with one another on such findings, well news flash things of that nature and interests about such topics were very vague and not conclusive and hardly was there investigation agenda as there is like in today’s modern world, they just didn’t have that sort of accessibility, people back then would spend months and years travelling from  one continent to another let alone, attain all the knowledge about human development of the time. Science and data was hardly even collected for conclusive rulings, so yes it does make me laugh, when today’s Modern critic rules out the evidence of early development in girls in pre-modern time because he thinks there is no evidence. Well, the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, all it means is that people didn’t pay attention to collecting data more broadly back then, because of environmental factors, or other circumstances like the development of science. So for these silly critics to dismiss possibilities based on no data is foolish and ignorant and arrogant indeed. Because that’s not how things are to be dismissed. Just because there was no data in ancient times about the existence of DNA does not mean that DNA isn’t true, is it? Well, it is, even if there wasn’t supporting evidence for it in ancient times. Just as we have supporting evidence today of the existence of human DNA and the genome, we also have evidence of human development evolving at times maturity comes much later and at times much earlier which in of its self also evidence those changes could have occurred much earlier in ancient times.

A Christian wrote;



Clearly this person is a liar. The Prophet did not explain how the rules of the religion made it possible. Rather Abu Bekir hesitation was due to Aisha being already engaged to someone else at the time. And So Abu Bekir didn’t know how to approach this and end it, He later then found it a good idea to help end his daughters engagement to another man who was a member of the Qurashe who were enemies of the Muslims, so infact Abu Bekir thought this was eventually a good idea to end that engagement. Which begs another question, if Islamic rules were there to convince Abu bekir to so those rules favour the Prophet, why was Abu Bekirs daughter already engaged to someone else before the Prophet?

This in itself debunks the accusers, and that young marriages were practised before the Prophet engaged with Abu Bekirs Daughter. This now refutes the notion that the Prophet was like a cult figure trying to introduce a law to suit the Prophet, when there was already customs of young marriages being implemented before the Prophet wish to engage with Aisha R.A.


Jesus of the Bible will Torture Ex-Christian Apostates.

By: Mustafa Sahin

It’s pretty straightforward, all Christians believe, Jesus will come back and judge. (See: John 5:22)

His Judgement will include, sending disbelievers which include Apostates since an Apostate is a disbeliever (See: Rev 21:8), to the lake of fire, which the Bibles calls the second death a place of separation from God.

The Bible also indicates to us this place is literal fire and a literal physical punishment of the new Spiritualized body that will “feel agony”

See Christian Fatwah (commentary) “New Bodies feel pain”:

Source: https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/gotquestions.org/amp/bodies-hell.html

See also Christian Apologist Matt Slick who argues the lake of fire is both literal and everlasting and Eternal.


Matt Slick also shows the Bible, describing hell to not just be spiritual torture but physical. Read his “conclusion”.

Here: https://carm.org/christianity/what-is-hell/

So what we see is, All though Islam may prescribe to kill apostates on this earth. We see Christianity teaches Jesus will return and torture infidels/Apostates in an everlasting agony which is eternal punishment for rejecting Christ. This includes Infidels, Disbelievers, Ex-Christian, and the like in the Next life will face immense punishment’s.

What is interesting is that Jesus will not act alone. But also get his disciples to judge the 12 tribes of Israel, and help Jesus decide who gets the Execution.
(See Luke 22:30)

So both Jesus and the Disciples will cast infidels and Apostates to hell. So much for the Christian assertion, Islam is barbaric for killing Apostates who leave Islam.

Some Christian Apologists argue, that Islam is still different since it beheads those who leave the faith. However, I would argue, it’s equally worse if you put them in hell and torture them into eternal agony and pain. It’s like having to ask the executioner if you would like the Sword or the Fire? you take your pick.

Some Christians say that Jesus put to death Apostates is not a real style execution death it’s just a separation from God to Hades (Hell) where they will be separated from God. However this is not entirely correct we posted above in the article, that this place of separation is eternal, it has pain and suffering. And of course, God will be separated since God is not in a place called hell, thus the separation thus a type of execution, if they don’t die it’s worse since it everlasting hence eternal suffering, if they do, however, ” die” and their life does not continue it’s still an execution no matter which way you look at it.

Some Christian’s argue Muslims compare Earthly Islam Individual punishment to God sending people to hell? However this argument also has no value, since the basic point of our argument is the fact that Jesus will punish apostates not only by himself, it includes his disciples carrying it out since they will also judge see (Luke 22:30) So if Muslims are accused of punishing or carrying out God’s punishment then what about the disciples of Jesus whom will help carry out the work of Jesus?

Furthermore, there is no real difference between prescribing God’s punishment on this earth or the next, that would be as though assuming Punishing Apostates on planet Neptune that is wrong, but executing them on Mars is fine? It’s that absurd of an Argument to assert there is a huge difference, killing or torturing apostates is all the same no matter where it is, here(Earth) or there( Hereafter).

Besides I thought Christians believed Jesus will come back to this earth ( Luke 19:27) to carry judgement?

Nevertheless, Jesus and his disciples will kill or perhaps to the least torture and punish Apostates. Period.


Christian Apologist Caught bad behavior

Last updated: 23rd July 2020



The Christian Missionary” dumpster section”. Note this will continue to Update.

Jesus said;” You will know them by their Fruits. Mathew 7:16

Here is a list of Qoutes of Christian missionaries and their Foul mouths and true colors exposed on social Media.

Steven Tilley:
Gets caught lying. And deletes his post instead of Apologizing.

Christian Robert Wells:

“He does not care if Muslim Buisness are sprayed by Bullets or Mosque Vandelized so long as their are no personel injuries.
Proof: https://m.facebook.com/groups/872453962812726?view=permalink&id=991943360863785

Note: To view some of the links” you need to add facebook group called” World Muslim Debate Academy” once your in the room the links that can’t be accessed  will work!

Link 2: goes against Jesus turn the other cheeck he Qoutes” When Muslims kill Christians ” enough is enough”.

Link 3: condones “Rape”
If Jihadi Rape other Jihadies. Im all for it.
Proof: https://m.facebook.com/groups/872453962812726?view=permalink&id=983152251742896

Link 4: Qoutes ” He does not care if Muslims kill other Muslims. He only cares when Muslims kill Non-Muslims.

Link 5: Calls Muslims” Dirty Rag Heads” He interestingly also called Good Christian deeds Dirty Rag heads?

Link 6: Calls a Muslim Apologist Yusuf Ismael a” Swine” https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10153619190498650&id=735888649

Christian Nakdimon Yesman:

Qoutes” Tells Muslim to lick another Muslims “butt Hole”.

Note” Nakdimon Yesman once he got exposed, did Apologise for his statements”. Years later.

Christian David Wood:

admits he” Lied about leaving ” Aplogetics” and called it ” April Fools day”

Christian Sidwell Johaness:

Active Christian Missionary on Facebook.
” Qoutes, God can be stupid.

Christian Prince of InvestigateIslam:

Link 1: He wants to F##K Muslim mother if he can prove Paul in Quran

Link 2: He insults a Muslim by calling him ” Donkey Penis come to Mic”

Christian Sam Shamoun:


From Answering-Islam.com: Calling Muslim ” Fag Rat” Fat Idiot”.

Link 1 http://www.answering-christianity.com/shamouns_foul_insults_exposed.htm

Link 2: https://youtu.be/adxMGLmGzno

Link 3: http://callingchristians.com/2016/02/19/missionary-mishap-jonathan-mclatchie-sam-shamoun-target-dr-shabir-ally/

Link 4: https://callingchristians.com/2016/04/06/missionary-mishap-sam-shamouns-cursing-rage/


I personally sent Sam Shamoun a response I wrote.

And so Sam Shamoun starts sending Me, abusive Messages:




As you can see, He is very insulting towards women and a sexist. “Thinking like a Girl”

It’s a shame that his raising Two daughters of his own, talk about bad parenting skills and discrimination towards girls.


Christian France Francis Evg:

His a Apologist from India,
Caught condeming Muslims for Mocking his Religion while he got caught red handed mocking Muslims.

Link 1: https://m.facebook.com/groups/872453962812726?view=permalink&id=985905158134272

Link 2: http://callingchristians.com/2016/01/25/missionary-mishap-pig-headed/

Link 3: https://m.facebook.com/groups/872453962812726?view=permalink&id=1008642402527214

Christian Jonathen mclatchie:

Qoutes” Muslim immigrants to Europe are a “Cancer” and “Virus”

Christian Dr James White:

Insults Muslim named Yahya Snow. He calls him, ” Yahya Smell”
He also makes racist remarks against ” Middle Easterners: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1681709005447682&id=100008257968099

Christian Naqeel Qurashi:

Ex-Qadiani now Pagan Triniterian: Mocks Sami Zaatari voice. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=j7KowEzUAj4&feature=youtu.be

Christian Walid Shoebat:

Evangelist Activist foul mouth exposed calling another person a” Bastard”