Islam: the Demise of Love

Mohammed Aisha

There have been several efforts by Muslim apologists – with much intellectual dishonesty of course – to paint Islam as a religion of peace, but not much to present it as a religion of love. This is a no-brainer. Why try to convince others of a quality that is obviously missing from your religion?

William Chittick, a Western scholar, assures us that: “Part of Islam’s intellectual heritage is a vast literature exploring and elucidating the nature of love.” He quotes Rashid Maybudi who calls the Quran “the story of love and lovers.”

He brandishes the views of 13th century Muslim writers like Tabrizi, Ibn Qayyim and Rumi, but quotes no part of the Quran or hadiths to back up his argument. Chittick was actually quoting the works of Sufis and Medieval free thinkers as representative of mainstream Islam.

Sufism, a system of Islamic mysticism, emphasizes love, inner meditation and spiritual union with Allah.

It was a sect developed when Orientalists realized that Islam was inferior to their religions and cultures, so rather than rejecting it, they tried to hide its savagery with philosophy; mask its beastly face with mysticism and mollify its crude deity with spirituality.

But love is the foundation of this universe and God is love (1 John 4:8). A religion that claims to be from God must have love as its hallmark. To understand Islam, however, we need to understand Muhammad. And to understand Muhammad is to understand Muslims. Do Muhammad’s teachings and lifestyle reflect God’s love?

The Quran attaches a negative notion to love in several places:

This is because they love the life of this world better than the hereafter: And Allah will not guide those who reject faith” (Sura 16:102)

And ye love wealth with inordinate love!” (Sura 89:20)

Fair in the eyes of men is the love of things they covet. Women and sons, heaped up hoards of gold and silver; horses branded (for blood and excellence); and (wealth of) cattle and well tilled land … but in nearness to Allah is the best of goals.” (Sura 3:14)

These verses reduce love to something carnal or evil. They demand that Muslims detach themselves from all things, including love for their spouses, parents, or children so as to get close to a distant Allah.

This twisted idea of love shines brightly in a Muslim leader’s article about Ibrahim’s pure submission by his willingness to sacrifice his son:

“So that he would leave nothing of attachment except to Allah. That is what we must do – kill our drives, volitions, desires, and our love- nullify everything but Allah. You and I need to annihilate the demons inside of us, and the evil inclinations that we sometimes disguise and claim as beautiful intentions” (The Message International, April 12, 2012)

Love for non-Muslims is also condemned:

O ye who believe! Take not My enemies and yours as friends (or protectors) – offering them (your) love even though they have rejected the Truth that has come to you, and have (on the contrary) driven out the Prophet and yourselves (from your homes), because ye believe in Allah your Lord!…” (Sura 60:1).

Ah! Ye are those who love them, but they love you not,- though ye believe in the whole of the Book. When they met you they say, ‘We believe.’ But when they are alone, they bite off the very tips of their fingers at you in their rage. Say: ‘Perish in your rage…” (Sura 3:119)

To anyone who knows the historical context, that first verse is a manipulative lie. The second one is meant to keep Muslims from giving or receiving love from non-Muslims. I call it the windscreen syndrome.

When a person driving a car views outside through a dirty or dusty windscreen, it will appear as if everyone else is dirty or the weather is foggy, whereas he only needs to wipe his screen clean.

Many Muslims are programmed to hate and distrust non-Muslims because their mind windscreen is befogged with hate and needs to be cleaned. There are other in-house rules:

And hold fast, all together, by the Rope which Allah (stretches out for you), and be not divided among yourselves…for ye were enemies and He joined your hearts in love, so that by His grace, ye became brethren” (Sura 3:103)

How convenient. Anyone can love his co-religionists. Even a pack of hyenas have love for themselves. True love is the ability to love those outside your religious, racial, ethnic and social circle. How can a purported “book of love and lovers” omit this fundamental principle of love?

Jesus Christ asked “If you love those who love you, do you deserve a reward?… Are you doing anything remarkable if you welcome only your friends? Everyone does that!” (Matt. 5:46-47).

Even the Quran admits Christians love their Muslim haters: “…and nearest among them in love to the Believers [Muslims] wilt thou find those who say, ‘We are Christians’…” (Sura 5:85).

True Christians love those who hate them because they are of the Father in heaven who “makes his sun to rise on people whether they are good or evil” (Mt. 5:45).

On the other hand, Islam has no concept of fatherhood. Nowhere in the Quran is Allah introduced as a “father.” None of his “99 beautiful names” includes the word “father.” Allah has “neither sons nor daughters” (Sura 6:100).

Sura 5:15 is quite revealing:

And (both) the Jews and the Christians say ‘We are the children of Allah and His loved ones.’ Say: ‘Why then does He punish you for your sins?’ Nay, you are but human beings, of those He has created, He forgives who He wills and He punishes whom He wills…”

From this, it can be inferred that:

1. The Allah of Islam had a master-slave, rather than a Father-son relationship with Muhammad.

The relationship between a father and son is more loving and intimate than a relationship between a master and his slave. This proves the god of Islam is not the God of the Bible who is revealed as “our father, our redeemer” (Isa. 63:16).

Christians have not “received the spirit of bondage again to fear” but have “received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry Abba Father” (Rom. 8:15).

In Islam, the greatness of Allah trumps out relationship or love. Muslim slaves live in a perpetual state of bondage to fear to earn Allah’s acceptance. Thus, the more Muslims love Allah, the lesser they love people.

2. Muhammad had a skewed view of fatherhood. He didn’t understand spiritual adoption and also assumed that a father shouldn’t discipline his children.

But the Bible says “Endure your discipline. God corrects you as a father corrects his children. All children are disciplined by their fathers” (Heb. 12:7). Discipline doesn’t negate fatherhood.

Muhammad didn’t seem to know much about fatherhood. His own father died before he was born. He lived with his grandfather and later his uncle Abu Talib, and thus didn’t experience a father-son relationship. His ideas about fatherhood came from his experiences. This is why he tailored his Allah along that line.

3. Muhammad’s god has a warped sense of justice. He forgives whom he wills and punishes whom He wills. His forgiveness is not guaranteed for the guilty and his vengeance can fall on the innocent. This is sadism.

God’s judgement will fall only on those who deserve it. He will not “slay the righteous with the wicked” (Gen. 18:25).

The Prophet’s love stories?

One Muslim wrote an article in a newspaper saying:

I can find no love story more powerful, more spiritually uplifting, more awe-inspiring as that of Prophet Muhammad and Khadijah. It is a shining example of what an ideal marriage is, and if I ever claim that I love my wife, I must gauge my actions with that of the Prophet” (Dr. Hesham Hassaballa, Daily Sun, February 15, 2008, 38).

How “powerful” was their love story? Khadija was a wealthy widow, aged 40 who had many servants, including Muhammad aged 25.

According to Tabari’s biography (3:832), she “sent a message to Muhammad inviting him to take her” as a wife.

Muhammad was reluctant, so she brought her own father, made him drunk, then sent for Muhammad and his uncles and her father married them while still intoxicated. It was such an unusual marriage that could only be contracted under the influence of alcohol.

Women who emulate Khadija today are called “sugar mamas” of the manipulative variety. There is no report of Muhammad ever working after marrying Khadija. His fingers were all dipped in mama’s feasts. This is why he became poor after her death.

In fact, there wasn’t a single instance where it’s recorded that Muhammad took care of the 10 children they had. He was too busy retreating into his physical and mental caves. The same emotional detachment and apathy with which he was raised was the same he gave his own children.

Dr. Hesham informs us that: “At a time when it was a common custom to have multiple wives, the Prophet did not marry anyone else while he was with Khadijah.”

Of course, since Khadija was the one who had the money and was older. Muhammad was just a poor employee of hers. It was his marriage to her that made him wealthy, so he had to comply. It was like a contract marriage; what’s love gotta do with it? It was after her death he threw off his mask and became a sexual butterfly.

Dr Hesham continues: “Most of these wives were widows, whom the Prophet married to care after them, or they were the daughters of prominent Arab chieftains, so that the Prophet could form a cohesive Muslim society out of fiercely (barbaric) Arab culture.”

Yes, most of his wives were widows. But why did he have to marry them to care after them? For example, if the president of Nigeria is going to help all the widows in his country, does he have to take them to his bed? The Muslim mind reasons in an amazing way.

If Muhammad married his wives because of their Arab pedigree, that means he didn’t marry them for love. He only saw them as tools to further his own political and sexual conquests. After Khadija’s death, he married Sawda, apparently to cater for his home needs. She wasn’t his favourite because the hadiths later described her as “old and fat.” Hafsa was also given to him by Umar.

Apart from these two, every other woman Muhammad married was either a beautiful virgin or a beautiful divorcee or widow. In Aisha’s case, she was barely 6 years old when Muhammad had a (wet?) dream about her (Bukhari 9:140). By the way, how did Muhammad’s sex with a toddler “form a cohesive Muslim society?”

He married Zaynab because of her beauty. The same for Mariyah and others. Most islamic marriages follow this trend; the “powerful” husband always wants a younger wife to satisfy his lust while the older wife gets dumped like garbage.

Sura 4:129 says in part “And if you must marry another wife, do not incline excessively to one and leave the other like a thing suspended.” Muhammad didn’t live up to this verse. He didn’t equally love his wives as he had favourites.

Islamic scholar, Muhammad Haykal, wrote that he “loved her [Aisha] more than any of his wives” (Life of Muhammad, Islamic Publications Bureau, 1982, 336). It was recorded that Muhammad “often ignored some of his wives, and avoided others on many occasions, precisely in order to discourage their abuse of his compassion” (p. 436).

Haykal also noted that there were constant fights in Muhammad’s home due to the pocket money he allocated, or the honey Zaynab served. One day while he was with Aisha, “his other wives delegated Zaynab, daughter of Jahsh, to go in and, in their name, to accuse him of injustice and unfairness to them, and to plead that his love for Aisha was a violation of the code which he himself has set down of a day and night for each of his wives” (Ibid, 437).

Ideal marriage anyone? Does this even look like a happy home? In a Christian marriage, a husband is to love his wife as his own body (Eph. 5:27). And it takes a person who has received God’s love to show love.

This is why there is a crisis of love in Islam, because a person who has not been shown love from childhood or taught how to love, or is trying to appease a god of fear cannot give love. Many Muslim parents are not even capable of loving their own children. This is why many Muslims are devoid of humanity, filled with hate, torn apart and bereft of love.

The more devoted to Islam a person is, the less he is able to love others. Muhammad said: “None of you truly believes until I am more beloved to him than his child, his father and all the people” (Muslim 1:71)

Devoted Muslims have their minds and emotions taken away. This is why they strap explosives on their own children. When a Christian woman now marries a Muslim out of shallow sentiments or for money, he will suck her dry until she is bereft of life and reduced to a shell. Knowing Jesus Christ is the only key to true love. There is no love in Islam.

1914 and the Last Days

Doomsday predictions

A Christian writer aptly observed that “dangerous religious groups draw their strength from the growing expectation of a coming apocalypse” and that “each turn of the century is marked by movements of people who separate themselves from society in an attempt to renew faith in God and save themselves from the coming judgment” (Martin De Haan, How To Identify a Dangerous Religious Group, 1994, 2).

The Jehovah’s Witness religion emerged from one of such groups. As a result, they place so much emphasis on eschatology (the last days, the earthly paradise, Armageddon etc.).

This apocalyptic shroud casts a huge shadow on their teachings and prevents people from seeing the troop of heresies lurking in their bushes.

When JWs come to your door, they talk about the signs of the “last days” which as a Christian you would agree with, but as you progress in their study, they gradually lace your feed with some yak milk and powdered sparrow eggs until you suddenly realize you have been introduced to a set of strange and unbiblical doctrines grafted on half truths and bland novelties.

The 1914 “pivotal sign” is a good place to start. According to Watchtower teaching, the last days began in 1914 when Jesus became king. Before then is termed ‘the waiting period’:

“During the 19th century, sincere Bible students calculated the waiting period would end in 1914 … World events that began in 1914 confirm that the calculation of these sincere Bible students was correct. The fulfillment of Bible prophecy shows that in 1914, Christ became King and God’s heavenly Kingdom began to rule” (What Does the Bible Really Teach? pp. 84-85).

“In the year 1914, Jesus was enthroned as king of God’s heavenly kingdom, and ‘the Lord’s day’ began.” (The Watchtower, Sept. 1, 2005, 19)

Two things can be deduced here.

One, the idea that Jesus became king in 1914 was not taught or believed by Christians for 1900 years.

Two, since Jesus has returned “invisibly” in 1914, that implies that all Christians who are still expecting (or proclaiming) the return of Jesus Christ today are sincerely deluded.

In other words, the Bridegroom came over 9 decades ago, and no one knew…except that little group in Pittsburgh. Quite hilarious, if not scary.

Let us see if these two deductions have any weight.

1. If the 1914 “kingdom-rule” theory escaped the minds of Christians until the 19th century, then we need to examine if the “Bible students” who arrived at it had some sincerity (or a good calculator) on their side.

The Watchtower’s early practice of setting dates can be traced to N. H. Barbour who predicted Jesus’ visible return in 1874 in his Herald of the Morning publication.

He later modified his stance and claimed that Jesus would return “invisibly” in 1874 and the world would end in 1914. This influenced Charles Russell in setting his own dates of Christ’s “invisible presence” in 1874 and the end in 1914:

“The careful student will have observed that the period designated ‘The Time of the End’ is very appropriately named since not only does the Gospel age close in it, but in it, also, all prophecies relating to the close of this age terminate reaching their fulfillments. The…special importance of the last 40 of these years (1874 -1914), called ‘The End’ or ‘Harvest'” (Studies in the Scriptures 3:121).

To support his predictions, Russell resorted to the occult art of Pyramidology – seeking omens through pyramids – and spent a fortune to travel to Egypt to measure the lengths of the Great Pyramid in Giza, claiming that the lengths of its corridors confirmed his 1874 date of Christ’s return.

When Rutherford came on board, he de-emphasized the pyramid superstition and shifted the dates ahead of 1914 to favour his own prediction:

“We have no doubt whatever in regard to the chronology relating to the dates 1874, 1914, 1918, and 1925” (The Watchtower, May 15, 1922, 147)

Cult researcher, Ronald Enroth observes, “To accommodate the change, a new edition of Russell’s Studies (1923) simply added forty-one inches to the corridor’s length in order to locate the starting point for the final years of earth’s existence in 1914” (A Guide to Cults and New Religions, 1983, p. 104).

It’s clear that these “sincere Bible students” were neither sincere nor students of the Bible. Their calculations were based on falsehood.

2. How could Jesus have returned invisibly in 1914 and no one knew? JWs respond:

“All the foretold marks of the ‘last days’ are here. They prove without a doubt that we have been in the ‘last days’ since 1914. Hence it was in that year that God’s heavenly kingdom came to power!” (The Truth that Leads to Eternal Life, 1968, 90).

Apart from the signs in Matthew 24 taking place after 1914, JWs are also taught that Satan and his angels were cast down that year, bringing woes and trouble upon those on earth.

Therefore, 1914 is “the ‘turning point’ of modern history, a pivotal one for mankind, because that is when the world entered a period of difficulty never before experienced on such an earth-wide scale.” (The WT, Oct. 15, 1980, 14-15)

The “signs” Jesus listed out in the Olivet Discourse – wars, famine, earthquakes – apply to every century of the church since that time until the end of the Church Age when He returns. These are the “beginnings of birth pains” (Mt. 24:8); they do not in themselves prove that the final fulfillment is here.

To safeguard their 1914 theory, the Watchtower Society resorts to historical revisionism and outright distortion of facts when citing last days events.

I. Wars

The war that began in 1914 fits this description…For the first time in history the whole world was at war.” (The Truth, 86)

The WW1 was not the first world war. The Wars of Napoleon (1792-1815) were fought for more than 20 years and fought on all continents, whereas the WWI was only limited to Europe.

Outrageous figures of deaths are also thrown about: “More than 100 million people have died as a result of wars since 1914.” (Bible Teach, 89).

This proves nothing. The Taipan Rebellion in the 19th century claimed 40 million lives. Add to this the war of Spanish succession (1702-1713), the seven years war (1756-1763), the wars of American Independence (1775-1783) and other brutal wars in past centuries, and we have over a 100 million deaths.

The Norwegian Academy of Sciences has estimated that there have been 14,531 wars fought since 3600 B.C. and 3.6 billion people have been killed.

II. Famine

In 1929, famine caused an estimated 3 million deaths in China. In the 1930’s, 5 million died of hunger in the USSR” (WT, Apr 15, 1983, 5)

These have happened before 1914. In India, the famine between 1876-78 claimed 5 million lives.

Fourteen million deaths resulted from the 1849 famine in China while an additional 9 million died of the same in 1876.

The Watchtower quotes the WHO that “malnutrition plays a major role in the deaths of more than five million children each year.” (Bible Teach, 89)

Malnutrition is not famine. Aside that, malnutrition didn’t start in 1914. The population decline in Europe before 1750 A.D. was due to poor nutrition.

There were famines in Ireland, France and Persia in the 19th century which claimed millions of lives. In fact, the devastating effects of famine have reduced in the 20th century due to advanced crop sciences.

III. Earthquakes

Also, after 1914 a series of earthquakes rocked the earth, causing great damage. In 1915, in Italy, nearly 30,000 were killed. In 1920, in China, 180,000 died. In 1923, 143,000 died in Japan” (The Truth, 87)

The 1556 earthquake in China killed 800,000 people (whereas those in the 1990s killed about 240,000).

The 1703 earthquake in Japan claimed 200,000; India (1737), 300,000 and Syria (1201) 1.1 million. There have been 49 earthquakes between 1900-1904, and 44 between 2000-2004.

Paul Gundy documents that of the 5 earthquakes in the last 1,500 years, only 1 since 1914 has been serious.

IV. Pestilence

Right after WWI more people died of the Spanish flu than had died of any disease epidemic in the history of mankind. The death toll was some 21 million.” (You Can Live Forever on Planet Earth, p 181)

This is an exaggeration. Countless number of people have died of pestilences long before 1914.

There are evidences that the great epidemics of AD 160-180 and 221-226 which severely weakened the Roman Empire and aided its decline were caused by measles and small pox viruses.

Between 1346-1720, Europe suffered a plague every 6 years which affected 30 per cent of the population. During the 13th and 17th centuries, the Bubonic plague (or Black Death) killed millions of people in Europe.

The Aztec empire was easily conquered because of a small pox epidemic which wiped out one-third of the whole population in 1520.

If not for the advent of Microbiology and medical sciences in the 20th century which have helped to address some diseases, a minor infection would have wiped out entire populations within a short time.

Date-Setting, not a ‘New Trade’

The Watchtower Society links the societal conditions described by apostle Paul in 2 Timothy 3:1-5 with 1914.

But Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible says the expression ‘in the latter times’ used in this passage, “does not necessarily imply the last ages of the world, but any times consequent to those in which the Church then lived.”

These events have always been there before 1914. This is why at different periods of church history, people have set dates for the return of Christ based on conjecture and guesswork.

Hippolytus (170-236) predicted that Christ would return in 500 A.D. based on the dimensions of Noah’s ark.

On New Year’s Eve of 999 A.D., Pope Sylvester II celebrated the last Mass of the first millennium as 1000 A.D. approached. He and the others believed Satan’s 1000-year binding had elapsed since the birth of Christ and that Satan would again be loosed.

Panic swept through Europe and thousands of people flocked to Jerusalem to wait for Christ to return to the holy city (Russell Chandler, Doomsday, 1993, 39-48).

Hugh Broughton (1549-1612) in his work, A Revelation of the Apocalypse, dated creation at 3926 BC, added 6,000 years to it and arrived at 2072 AD, which he termed the date of Christ’s return (cited in Ed Hindson, Earth’s Final Ages, Evangel Press, 1999, 48).

John Napier of Scotland (1550-1617) mixed his mathematical genius with Bible prophecy and speculated that “the star that fell” with the fifth trumpet in the book of Revelation was Muhammad and wrote:

“The last trumpet and vial beginneth anno Christ 1541 and should end in anno Christ 1786” (John Napier and Apocalyptic Thought, 16th Century Journal, 1974 5:101-14).

The date-setting games of Charles Russell and Rutherford were not new after all.

What God’s Kingdom is Not

Let me briefly point out another masked heresy.

God’s Kingdom is a government established by Jehovah God with a King chosen by God. Who is the King of God’s Kingdom? Jesus Christ…God’s Kingdom is – in heaven. That is why the Bible calls it a ‘heavenly kingdom.’ (2 Timothy 4:18) Although God’s Kingdom is in heaven, it will rule over the earth” (Bible Teach, 77).

Here, they have muddled up two different things. God’s kingdom is not the same as the kingdom of heaven.

The kingdom of God is the universal, reign of God over all people, including angels, the church, and those in the Old and New testaments, while the kingdom of heaven refers to a future kingdom in which Jesus would reign as king.

A Bible scholar notes the differences:

“The kingdom of God can only be entered by the new birth (John 3:3, 5-7), while the kingdom of heaven is entered by the coming rule of Jesus Christ on earth. Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is primarily an earthly rule, while the kingdom of God includes both earth and heaven. The kingdom of God does not ‘come outwardly’ (Luke 17:20), but is an inward, spiritual rule (Rom. 14:17), while the kingdom of heaven is an outward rule whereby Jesus Christ will put ‘all things under His feet’ and shall ‘deliver the kingdom to God the Father’ (1 Cor. 15:24-28).” (Elmer Towns, Bible Answers for Almost All Your Questions, Thomas Nelson, 2003, 422)

After quoting Daniel 2:44, they declared that:

God’s Kingdom was to be established ‘in the days of those kings,’ or while other kingdoms still existed.” (Bible Teach, 81)

Another error. The kingdom being referred to in Dan. 2:44 is not God’s kingdom, but the kingdom of heaven which God will set up on earth. This kingdom will have Jesus as its king (Jn. 17:37) unlike God’s kingdom which has God as king (1Cor. 15:28).

The kingdom of heaven begins at the second advent of Christ (Zech. 14); it has a beginning, whereas God’s kingdom is now and timeless (Ps. 90:2).

On pg. 79 they stated:

Satan and the angelic spirit creatures who chose to follow him- called demons- were allowed to stay in heaven for a while…The newly enthroned King, Jesus Christ, was to wage war on Satan.”

Satan and his demons did not stay in heaven for “a while” of ages until 1914. They were cast out when they sinned (Lk 10:17, 2Pet 2:4).

Jesus didn’t wage war against Satan in heaven, rather it was Michael and his angels. JWs are using one heresy (“Jesus is archangel Michael“) to prop up another heresy. This is how the Watchtower system of falsehood works.