The Truth about Muhammad: Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion

Rock solid facts and reliability. If you just want one book that gives truthful information about Muhammad and the origins of Islam, this is it.

This book does not present the facts most of them are lies and one should do research .

I've always been confused by the many opposing views within Islam, and have always tried to find answers to these questions by reading commentary from all sides. Robert Spencer's biography of Islam's founder has finally given me solid, convincing answers to my questions. By the time I finished this biography, rather than feeling an increased sense of confusion, I felt an increased sense of clarity and understanding regarding the massive confusion occurring in Islam today. Given that the subtitle of the book labels Muhammad "founder of the world's most intolerant religion," I knew the bias the author had and was skeptical of the sources he'd be using to show Muhammad isn't the icon of peace many think he is. However, Spencer does not rely on any sources Muslims themselves (for the most part) would deem heretical or even fictitious: the Quran, the Hadith, and Sirat Rasul Allah (Life of Allah's Messenger), the first comprehensive biography of Muhammad by ancient scholar Ibn Ishaq. So, if Spencer uses the same sources the Muslims themselves use and he interprets the religion as intolerant and violent, he must be taking the text out of context right? Wrong. This is one problem I've consistently encountered when trying to understand the texts and teachings of Islam: what is the correct context? Spencer spends a great deal of time in the beginning of the book explaining this question in detail. He points out the briefness and vagueness of the Quran, and explains how the Hadith attempts to bring context to the holes and questions surrounding who Muhammad actually was. The Hadith is a collection of oral stories and explanations that were written down over one hundred years after Muhammad's death to explain the actions and customs established by him that aren't clearly outlined in the Quran. However, even the Hadith writings contradict each other, leading to much confusion in Islam. As time went on, Muslim scholars kept adding contradictory information to the Hadith to cover up some of the original history and heritage that was becoming, more or less, "uncomfortable" for many to accept. Therefore, what Spencer focuses on is not the many contradicting and often "heretical" Hadith additions conferred years leader, but rather the precise words of the supposed Gabriel, Muhammad, and those who knew him personally. He always notes when there are contradicting versions of one story and provides all the viewpoints that have been written. Spencer's most basic goal is to paint a picture of who Muhammad truly was, rather than what moderate Muslims want him to be. I write extensively on this background into the way the Quran was written and is understood simply because Spencer does. It's necessary to understand the validity of his claims and the nature of Islam as a whole. His analysis is not only balanced from a Western view of scholarly inquiry, it is the conventional knowledge in Middle East countries today. The only reason Spencer needs to talk about this hist

Robert Spencer has done it again, producing another highly readable but scholarly treatise on the most important issue of our time - the struggle of the West against Islamofacism. If you read this book you will know more about the actual Muhammad than almost everyone, past or present, has known or does know. This includes Muslims themselves. Spencer carves away the layers of myth that have accumulated around the persona of the self-proclaimed prophet, using the double-bladed scalpel of "history" and "reason". Spencer's goal is to find out what Muhammad "was really like." The idea persists in Western and Eastern minds that Muhammad was a man of peace who established a world-wide religion of peace. It is generally assumed that only in modern times has a small faction of religious radicals committed crimes in the name of Muhammad. The gentle Prophet himself, if he were alive, would certainly not approve of these deadly deeds committed in his name. But Spencer's research leads to the opposite conclusion: Muhammad was primarily a man of aggressive violence and irrationality. He was himself the prototype of the modern day Islamofascist Jihad terrorist. This conclusion is based on an exhaustive study of all the available Islamic texts. There exists an enormous body of "sacred" Islamic writing about the life and revelations of Muhammad. Spencer has spent years closely examining all these holy texts of Islam, using comparative analysis to arrive at the core beliefs about Muhammad, his life and works. First are the Suras of the Qur'an, piecemeal revelations that Muhammad (570-632 AD) claims to have received from the angel Gabriel over a twenty-three year prophetic career. The first of these are poetic ramblings bearing close resemblance to passages from the Old and New Testament, the Talmud, Zoroastrianism, and heretical Christian sects such as the Nestorians, Gnostics and Manicheans. All these sources were extant in Arabia at the time of Mohammad's life. Due to the fragmentary quality of the Suras early Muslims elaborated additional sources to provide context for the Qur'an: tafsir (commentary) and hadith (traditions about the Prophet). In the ninth century one of the most respected scholars collected over 300,000 ahadith (plural for hadith). He finally chose two thousand as authentic. His collection fills nine volumes. This is just one of six collections, some of even greater length. In addition to the above mass of information is the sira, which is the biography of Muhammad, the first of which did not appear until 150 years after his death. There arose in the eighth and ninth centuries a number of Muslim jurists and scholars who wrote contrary accounts of Muhammad's life and quarreled amongst themselves as to which account was authentic. On two matters they all agree: Muhammad was virulently anti-Jewish and anti-Christian. The last half of the Qur'an is filled with "ex post facto" revelations. For instance after Muhammad married his dau

Robert Spencer is one of the voices speaking clearly about where the Jihadists derive their core beliefs and patterns for their actions. The title of this book is not speaking against Islam or saying that Muslims are hiding some secret about their faith (although there are some difficult points they do not like to discuss much). What the title of the book is referring to is the false notion that the Western multi-culturalists like to peddle: that Islam is principally a religion of peace and that our conflict with them comes from not treating them as if they were another kind of Congregationalist sect. Because of the centrality of Muhammad to Islam, Spencer takes us through what can be known about the life of Muhammad. However, the Qur'an alone is not enough for that task. The author also uses the Hadith (traditions about Muhammad), and the Sira (a biography of Muhammad written down 150 years after his death). Using these secondary sources helps illuminate what the Qur'an is saying to the believers through their Prophet. As Spencer takes us through Muhammad's life and conquests, we learn the sources and traditions for what the Jihadists do today. Rather than twisting or hijacking the faith as some claim, there is a reason that so many within Islam feel proud and agree with the way the Jihadists act towards non-believers, what is preached against believers in their mosques, and the constant work to establish Sharia as a replacement for established law all over the world. This is what Muslims have done since their beginning and what they feel their mission is today. To them, all non-Muslim culture is inferior and all non-believers deserve second-class status at best. Tolerance and equality with non-believers is not possible according to Muhammad's teachings, even on his deathbed. This paragraph of Spencer's sums up the core of the book: "It is nothing short of staggering that the myth of Islamic tolerance could have gained such currency in the teeth of Muhammad's open contempt and hatred for Jews and Christians, incitements of violence against them, and calls that they be converted or subjugated. While human nature is everywhere the same and Muslims can, of course, act as tolerantly as anyone else, the example of Muhammad, the highest model for human behavior [according to Muslim belief - CSM], constantly pulls them in a different direction. The fact that Western analysts ignore all this demonstrates the ease with which people can be convinced of something they wish to believe, regardless of overwhelming evidence to the contrary." (pp. 182-183) The author also provides a chapter showing how the examples from Muhammad's life are preached and lived today, including jihad, violence against unbelievers, death penalty for apostates, and the marriage of young (very young) girls in countries such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. Spencer is quite clear that the marriage of young girls was not unusual in Muhammad's life and place,

It is interesting how often those who are negative to Spencer's book cite Karen Armstrong's book as a much better source. It may interest you to know that Karen Armstrong's book is sold on all the Islamist websites I recently visited. That should tell you something. Things are very polarized these days and its hard to figure out as an outsider, who is telling the truth. I have read both books as well as all the early Muslim biographies of Muhammad, Ibn Ishak in Hisham's recension, Al Tabari, Al-Waqidi, Ibn Kathir. Armstrong is writing Islamist propaganda and Spencer is telling you the truth, pure and simple. Now you don't have to believe me, just read the Muslim books! Ibn Ishak's Life of Muhammad is available for $22 postage paid from Oxford University Press Pakistan. It is an 800 page medieval tome, not an easy read. But you owe it to yourself to read it. Remember, it is a work of Islamic propaganda circa 750 C.E. It is not history but a santized version of history. What is astonishing is that Karen Armstrong, Dr. Esposito and numerous other "scholars" sanitize this sanitized version of history. In other words they write Islamic propaganda. I have no doubt that when you finish reading the book you will KNOW that Armstrong, Esposito and the entire politically correct crowd in academia have lied to you. And they are paid to do so. Esposito's Georgetown University recently received a $20 million dollar gift from a Saudi financier to further Esposito's organization at the college. There are big bucks to be made if you play the politically correct game. Spencer is risking his life to tell you the truth. He is on hit-lists. Now go buy the MUSLIM book, read it and "witness the greatest cover-up in world history". My apologies to the DaVinci Code for stealing their line.

Mr. Spencer does a fine Job of exposing some of the misconceptions about the founder of the worlds most intolerant religion. Mr. Spencer will be accused of being biased in his understanding of this subect matter and I am sure that will be the basis for some to discredit his findings he shares and articulates so well in his book. I have found in my own life that in order to find truth one must put aside his or hers own personal bias and just look at the facts and in being courageous enough to do so will find themselves in the unchartered waters of the sea of truth instead of an ocean of deception. Many, expend their energy focusing on and trying understand "Good vs. Evil", but that approach is to lead one down a rabbit trail of confusion. The real issue is not "Good vs. Evil", but rather "Truth vs.deception. Good and Evil are simply byproducts of "Truth or deception". We must first unravel the massive amount of deception that has been and still is being fed to us by a variety of sources. I really do not care where the facts come from as long as it is varifiable and incontrovertable then I am interested. If Hitler where alive today, and he made the statement that 2 + 2 = 4, It would make no difference to me in discerning that that was a true statement despite the fact that it came out of the mouth of such an evil man. I make this point because the majority of people I speak with these days and the many of the reviews I read even on this site to not uphold such a liberating approach to fleeing the deluge of deception that we encounter on a daily basis. Mr. Spencer is simply doing his part to expose deception and help people find some truth in this matter of Muhammed and the Moslem religion. I took notice to a person reviewing this book (BS Abbas) and he certainly typifies a person who holds to the erroneous approach to truth that I previously mentioned. BS Abbas states in his review that Mr. Spencer is not willing to look at the good in Muhammad, but isn't BS not guilty of the same thing he accuses Mr. Spencer of...that is, he is not willing to accept any of the FACTS that Mr. Spencer presents regarding the evil about Muhammad?? BS also uses a very interesting word in his review that might have summed up the Moslem religion with and that word is "Impose". BS says that Muhammad imposed prayer and other things as well on his people. If one really studies the Moslem relgion they will find that it is all about impsoition and inotlerance. Now, before I go any further let me say that I am not a Christian, however I am a follower of Yahshua (some call him Jesus). I never find Yahshua imosing His will on people, in fact if you read the story of the rich man who came to Yahshua and asked "what must I do to be saved"? Take notice that Yahshua did not force Himself on the rich man. He gave him a CHOICE, (something not very popular amongst the Moslems) He said "sell what you have and follow me". Then Yahshua walked away and left the rich man to make hi