Author Topic: THOSE WHO REWROTE HISTORY FOR MUSLIMS  (Read 3813 times)


  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 8702
  • the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God
    • View Profile
    • False Prophet Muhammad
« on: March 17, 2010, 12:23:34 PM »
Typed from Dr. Rafat Amari's book 'Islam In Light of History" (any typos are Pete's)
Excerpts from page 62 to 88


Mohammed said in Surah 2, called al-Baqarah, verse 127, that Abraham and Ishmael built the temple. His claim is backed up by the writers of so-called "Islamic tradition." But such tradition was born many years after Mohammed died. The Islamic tradition writers never quoted a written document earlier than Mohammed, nor did they quote any document before Islam which supports their claims. They simply created their stories as one creates fiction. To make matters worse, the writers who came after them depended on what Islamic tradition writers wrote, and considered their writings to be true. This shows us that the writers who depended on the first writers (who invented the stories) did not find any historical document on which to support their claims, so they adopted the inventors' stories as if they were well-documented history, and they added their own stories to them. Eventually, a huge false tradition was formed.

The Inventors of the "Islamic Tradition" Were Also Ignorant of Basic History

The development of the Qur'an goes beyond ignorance of historical fact. It involves deception by the first fathers of the Islamic tradition. Educated people don't consider their writings valid, since their stories were born in the generations in which they were written, and there is no written document in history which supports their claims.  Unless a person is writing pure fiction, it is clear that he has no right today to insert a story into events that happened 3,000 years ago and claim he is writing truth. Yet the fathers of Islamic tradition wrote stories which they created in the 7th and 8th centuries A.D., and inserted them into events that happened in the time of Abraham, which was about 2,900 years earlier.


Ibn Ishak and his Prevaricated History and Ignorance of Basic Historical Fact

Ibn Ishak was the first person to assign names to the tribes living in Mecca and create a history for Quraish, the tribe of Mohammed. Yet, Ibn Ishak was born in Medina around 725 A.D., 85 years after Mohammed immigrated there. Ibn Ishak died 150-153 years after the emigration of Mohammed to Medina.

Ibn Ishak, and others who depended on his writings, thought this was the only way to authenticate the narration contained in the Qur'an. In order to contradict documented history and the events of the Bible, he wrote a new history which respected the Qur'an's narration. He tried to tell the world he was writing truth, when he was actually writing creative fiction. He didn't fool the Muslim scholars of his time. They knew he was a fake, writing a fabricated history. They said he was writing without the support of prior historians and geographers. He was accused by his contemporaries of fraud, deception, forgery and creating false genealogies. It was common knowledge that Ibn Ishak was a womanizer which led to the Caliph criticizing and scourging him for his immorality.49

It's a matter of credibility too important to let stand without exposing its true nature. Muslims today are trusting their lives and their destinies to these claims. They must not trust their eternal destiny to literature born in the 7th and 8th centuries A.D. which presents primitive and mythological stories as documented history.

The unreliability of Ibn Ishak's writings and the other main Islamic writers who endeavored to back his unhistorical claims concerning Mohammed.

The so-called "fathers of Islamic tradition" rewrote history separating Muslims from documented truth and keeping them from reading the Bible.

As I mentioned previously, Ibn Ishak is accepted today as the chief biographer of Mohammed and of Islam, the religion he founded. The writer of Halabieh, a book that narrates the life of Mohammed, reports that Ibn Ishak recorded some of Mohammed's Hadiths without anyone previously telling him what was contained in those Hadiths. This means that Ibn Ishak invented the Hadiths and reported them as fact. The writer of Halabieh tells us that respected Islamic scholar, such as Ibn al-Madani and Ibn Main, said that Ibn Ishak was not trustworthy, and Malek Bin Uns accused him of lying and forgery. Malek said

"Ibn Ishak is one of the most dishonest frauds. Therefore, we expelled him from Medina, the city of Ibn Ishak."

Other Islamic scholars have also commented on Ibn Ishak. The modern commentator on Ibn Hisham wrote

"We find trustworthy reporters of the Hadith, such as Malek Bin Uns and Hisham Bin Urua Bin Al-Zubeir, all of whom eliminated Ibn Ishak from the list of the trustworthy reporters of the Hadith. They never hesitated to accuse him of lying, forgery, knavery, depending upon untrustworthy reporters, inventing poetry which he inserted in his book, and creating false genealogies."51

It is interesting to note that, among the accusations against Ibn Ishak which were made by the major reporters of the Hadith, there is a concern about the poetry he wrote and introduced into his book. He wrote poetry in the Arabic language of his time, but he attributed it to the 21st century B.C., at a time when there was no Arabic language at all. The Arabic language began in the 10th century B.C. The Arabic before the rise of Christianity was totally different from the Arabic of the Qur'an, which was the language spoken by Quraish, the tribe form which Mohammed came. This Arabic developed after their emigration from Yemen to Mecca a few centuries into the Christian era.

Another accusation against Ibn Ishak, as we saw, was creating false genealogies. These very genealogies became the official genealogies which Muslims follow today. They state that Mohammed descended from Ishmael. This claim is unsubstantiated outside their writings. Mohammed, Himself, refused to allow his own genealogy to go back prior to his 21st ancestor, certainly not back to Ishmael.

The commentators on the biography of Mohammed quote Muslim scholars commenting on Ibn Ishak. "Meki Bin Ibrahim abandoned the Hadith reported by Ibn Ishak and never returned to it. Yazid Bin Haroon reports that Ibn Ishak spoke to the people of Medina about a certain tribe, but Medina's citizens opposed his sayings. Evidently, they knew about the tribe better than did Ibn Ishak, and they detected his forgery. Ibn Numeir said that Ibn Ishak narrates false claims about unknown people."52 Ibin Numeir criticized Ibn Ishak for making false claims and making up stories about people that didn't exist. Ibn Ishak gave details about Biblical people which the Bible never gave. For example, Ibn Ishak invented stories about those people, such as whom they married. He created Arabic names for them taken from names common in Ibn Ishak's own time and gave them Arabic wives, even though the people lived in Palestine.

One of the most serious things which Ibn Ishak did was to create stories and give details to support the false claims of the Qur'an. One example of this perversion concerns the flood. The Qur'an states that God sent a flood to Egypt as one of the plagues against Pharaoh. Ibn Ishak said the flood covered all of Egypt, and he gave details about it as though the Qur'anic claim were true.53 We know that the words of Mohammed about the alleged flood are historically false. Egypt never had a flood-not during the reign of any of the pharaohs, nor at any time in history since the flood of Noah.

The above typed from "Islam In Light of History". Every adult on earth needs to read Dr. Amari's book, whether Jew, Gentile, Muslim Christian or atheist.
I will include highlights of just a few of the "fathers of Islam" more ridiculous writings for entertainment purposes here.

He created Arabic names for the daughters of Adam.55 No one besides Ibn Ishak ever named a daughter of Adam. By so doing, Ibn Ishak made himself a pillar of inspiration more important than Moses, who was inspired to write the book of Genesis and record the names of the sons of Adam and their progeny.

Ibn Ishak created genealogies for other figures, some of which were mentioned in the New Testament. Among them, he gave Arabic names to the ancestors of John the Baptist. Just to make him a Muslim, John because the son of Adi, son of Muslim, son of Saduk.57

Ibn Ishak was the person who originated the idea that Abraham mounted the Baraq, or winged camel, to travel between Damascus to Mecca every time he wanted to visit Ishmael,58 whom Mohammed claimed built the temple of Mecca and lived there.

Ibn Ishak said that the son whom Abraham placed on the alter as a sacrifice was Ishmael,60 rather than Isaac, although the Islamic narrators before him said it was Isaac.61

Ibn Ishak claims that a people descended from Shem were transformed into guinons62 (small monkeys with long tails)to justify the Qur'an's claim the Israelite inhabitants of Ilat on the Gulf of Aqaba were transformed into monkeys. This also supports Mohammed's hadith which says that one tribe of the twelve tribes of Israel was transformed into mice.63

Yet, Muslims today still refer to the Islamic tradition, and its fathers and founders, as reliable resources for history, and as a fundamental "proof" in confirming the unhistorical claims of the Qur'an.


Al-Shaabi, a major source for Ibn Ishak, confessed that the tribe of Quraish began recording history only after the year of the elephant, which was 570 A.D., and he advised his readers to turn to the Jewish history for the facts.

"Muslim history must be viewed according to the Jewish history-meaning as it appeared in the Old Testament-Muslims never recorded history before Mohammed's emigration to al-Medina. They never recorded anything before that. Auraish didn't begin recording history until the year of the elephant."66


"Just as Ibn Ishak had done, Wahab created many stories which had never been written before him, nor which had ever appeared in any documented sources. All histories were mythological and exaggerated. Wahab was confused in his understanding of historical events and Biblical chronology. He claimed that Ezekiel led Israel immediately after the death of Joshua,73 the servant of Moses who led Israel into the promised Land. Wahab didn't know that 1,000 years had passed between Joshua and the prophet Ezekiel, and that Ezekiel was a prophet, but never became a leader in Israel."

(Pete note- here are contents of the holiest object, on the holiest alter, in the holiest temple, in the holiest place in the world, as described by Ibn Ishak.)

"Ibn Ishak used another of Wahab Bin Manabbih's narratives when he wrote the following account of the Ark of the Covenant in the Old Testament

'Inside the ark there was the "Shekhinah' glory, and it was the head of a dead cat. When the dead cat's head issued a loud cry from inside the ark, the Israelites had assurance of victory and knew they would conquer the lands of others.'74

Depending on Wahab again Ishak said Samson was a Roman citizen and a Muslim. But Samson was an Israelite judge who was born in the 13th century B.C., before the city of Rome was built in 753-748 B.C.


Ibn Abbas, the authoritative scholar of the nation of Islam and an expositor of the Qur'an, was a superstitious mythological narrator who failed to understand historical chronology.

One of the main creators of "Islamic tradition" is Ibn Ababs. His first name is Abdullah. He was the son of Abbas, the uncle of Mohammed. He was 13 years old when Mohammed died. He was called "Heber al-Ummah, which means "the scholar of the nation of Islam." Ibn Abbas reported many Hadith of Mohammed, and is considered a significant authority interpreting the Qur'an. He died in the year 690 A.D.

The narrations of Ibn Abbas failed to consider history when he endeavored to support Mohammed's ideas. For example, he claimed that all the progeny of Adam, up to the time of Noah, were Muslims.85 He claimed that the Babylonians were Muslims.86 Like Mohammed, who claimed that many ancient historical figures were Muslims, Ibn Abbas believed Mohammed's assertions without comparing them to history. Ibn Abbas was believed in environments where people were without any education in history."

"The myths of Ibn Abbas are replete with Old Testament names. I will give an example so that the reader may have an idea of the man: Ibn Ishak (relying on the narration of Ibn Abbas) related many myths about Og. Og was the king of Bashan, a land in Trans-Jordan which Moses defeated with his people before entering the land of Canaan. You can read the account in Numbers 21. Ibn Abbas claimed that Og was 800 ells tall. Since each ell is about 3 feet, that makes him 2,400 feet, or 800 yards, tall, the length of 8 football fields. Ibn Abbas also claimed that Moses was 10 ells tall, or 30 feet. His rod was also 30 feet tall, and Moses could jump 30 feet high. But even though Moses could reach only the heel of Og, he was able to kill min (Og). Og was so big that his body became a bridge over the Nile for the people of Egypt to cross. Although no one in the bible lived longer than 969 years, Ibn Abbas claimed that Og lived 3,000 years."88

"For example, Ibn Abbas says there were 179 years between Moses and David.89 We know from both history and the Bible that Moses was born about 1525 B.C., and that David became King around the year 1004 B.C., not less than 500 years later."

"Ibn Abbas says the daughter of the king's wife gave him a drink. When the king wanted to sleep with her, she asked that the head of John the Baptist first be cut off. He granted her request. But when the head of John the Baptist was brought to him, Ibn Abas says that the head continued to say to him, "It is not lawful for you to marry her." Then he ordered the head to be buried in the ground. But when the head was buried, blood came out of the ground and the head continued to cry, so they added more and more dirt to cover the blood until the level of the ground reached the top of the walls. Still, the blood continued to cry. When Nebuchadnezzar heard the call of the blood, he retaliated for the killing of John the Baptist by destroying the city with the help of the Romans."

"This literature, though primitive, mythological and significantly misinformed, was accepted in the city of Medina, and later was imposed on Arabia and the Middle East with the sword. It was presented as the true history of the world, and the truth which can't be challenged or subjected to doubt. Since Allah had inspired it to Mohammed, it had to be defended, even to the extent of creating a new history which connected them to a past that they had never experienced. They followed Mohammed's teachings, even though there were no documents that would support any connection between their invented history and the Bible, or any other ancient recorded history. The writings of Ibn Ishak and Ibn Abbas, and other men such as Wahab bin Mujnabbih, were eventually accepted as true. Their undocumented stories replaced documented history because they wanted to fill the great gap between the claims of Mohammed and the facts of history.

Because there were no archiving methods and no printing such as we have today, it is commonly accepted that tradition can be considered accurate only if it was written within four centuries of the writers. We have some writers who wrote about Arabia between the 7th and 9th centuries A.D. That means we may have accurate information about Arabia extending four centuries before they wrote, but what they wrote presented information that was in stark contrast to what Ibn Ishak, Ibn Abbas, and others who were born in Medina, presented about Mecca and its temple.

And on and on regarding the evidence against these history fabricating liars.

EVERYBODY should buy Dr. Amari's book, whether Jew or Gentile, Christian, Muslim or atheist.


  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 8702
  • the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God
    • View Profile
    • False Prophet Muhammad
« Reply #1 on: May 23, 2010, 12:39:01 PM »
Wowie. Just when you were beginning to conclude that Mohammed's religion, was little more than 7th century illiterate desert dweller superstition, along comes something like this.
Muslims actually believe that Mohammed performed a miracle by splitting the moon in two.

Never mind that Mohammed himself claimed that he would perform no miracles.
Just as Mohammed called anybody that traced his genealogy back further than al-Nather bin Kinaneh a liar, so his busy little 8th century Islamic history and tradition creators went contrary to Mohammed's words again, pretending that he actually, literally, split the moon in two. Perhaps they felt short-changed with a "prophet" that never had a fulfilled prophecy, as well as one that had never performed a single miracle.