Did Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) Think Judgment Day Was Sooner Than It Is? A Reply To Sam Shamoun

By

Bassam Zawadi

Shamoun in his attempt to do damage control for what I assume to be a loss for David Wood in his debate against Sami Zaatari wrote a couple of articles in response to Sami's arguments in the debate.

Shamoun mostly rehashes the same garbage he usually does in his other articles, therefore I am only going to focus on two specific ones that he gives.

Sam Shamoun said:

The second problem is that Sami focused on what he thought were fulfilled prophecies but didn't bother to mention all the false predictions of his prophet such as the following:

'A'isha reported that when the desert Arabs came to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) they asked about the Last Hour as to when that would come. And he looked towards the youngest amongst them and said: If he lives he would not grow very old that he would find your Last Hour coming to you he would see you dying. (Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 7050)

Anas reported that a person asked Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as to when the Last Hour would come. He had in his presence a young boy of the Ansar who was called Muhammad. Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: If this young boy lives, he may not grow very old till (he would see) the Last Hour coming to you. (Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 7051)

Anas b. Malik reported that a person asked Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him): When would the Last Hour come? Thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) kept quiet for a while, then looked at a young boy in his presence belonging to the tribe of Azd Shanilwa and he said: If this boy lives he would not grow very old till the Last Hour would come to you. Anas said that this young boy was of our age during those days. (Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 7052)

Anas reported: A young boy of Mughira b. Shu'ba happened to pass by (the Holy Prophet) and he was of my age. Thereupon Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: If he lives long he would not grow very old till the Last Hour would come (to the old People of this generation). (Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 7053)

Wood also sourced these hadiths in the debate which prompted Sami to assert that they are not sound narratives since they come from Sunan Abu Dawud. He then claims that Muhammad's point was that the judgment day would get closer as the lad grows older. Sami also said that the Quran says Muhammad didn't know the day or hour which further disproves the authenticity of this hadith. Talk about someone being desperate!

In the first place these narratives are from Sahih Muslim, considered the second most authentic collection of hadiths.

Secondly, Muhammad didn't say that as the child grows the hour would be approaching ever closer. Rather, he expressly and unambiguously says that the child WILL NOT GROW VERY OLD until the Day of Judgment comes, which is clearly a false prophecy.

My Response:

Imam Nawawi in his commentary has it:

قال القاضي : هذه الروايات كلها محمولة على معنى الأول , والمراد ( بساعتكم ) موتهم , ومعناه يموت ذلك القرن , أو أولئك المخاطبون . ‏

قلت ويحتمل أنه علم أن ذلك الغلام لا يبلغ الهرم , ولا يعمر , ولا يؤخر .

Al Qadi said: All of these narrations have one meaning, and the meaning of "Your Last Hour" means their death. And it means the death of that century, or of those whom he is speaking to.

I (Nawawi) say: and it is possible that he (the Prophet) knew that the boy will not grow old in age. (Imam Nawawi, Sharh Saheeh Muslim, Kitab: Al Fitan ws Ashraat Al Saa'a, Bab: Qarb Al Saa'a, Commentary on Hadith no. 5248, Source)

The translators of Saheeh Muslim correctly translated ساعتكم (which means Your Hour) in narration number 7050.

Now when we bring all the narrations together we know that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was speaking about the hour of the death of the individuals he was speaking to. In Islam we consider the Last Hour of someone to be his death as brother Shamul Hameed states:

Judgment day, however is something, which we will all come to know potentially very soon. As soon as you die, the Day of Judgment starts for you, and you could die at any moment. (Source)

That is what the Prophet (peace be upon him) was saying.

Also, as Imam Nawawi mentioned it is possible that this specific individual that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was speaking about was someone special and no ordinary human being who might live longer than normal humans.

Sam Shamoun said:

To further establish the fact that Muhammad mistakenly assumed that the world was going to end shortly notice what these next ahadith say:

Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar:
Once the Prophet led us in the 'Isha' prayer during the last days of his life and after finishing it (the prayer) (with Taslim) he said: "Do you realize (the importance of) this night? Nobody present on the surface of the earth tonight will be living after the completion of one hundred years from this night." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 3,
Number 116)

Narrated Abdullah:
"One night Allah's Apostle led us in the 'Isha' prayer and that is the one called Al-'Atma by the people. After the completion of the prayer, he faced us and said, 'Do you know the importance of this night? Nobody present on the surface of the earth tonight will be living after one hundred years from this night.'" (See Hadith No. 575). (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 10,
Number 539)

Nearly fourteen centuries have gone by and there continue to be human beings alive all around the earth! This particular hadith was so troubling that one narrator tried to explain it away by arguing that Muhammad really meant that none of his generation would be alive in a hundred years:

Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar:

The Prophet prayed one of the 'lsha' prayer in his last days and after finishing it with Taslim, he stood up and said, "Do you realize (the importance of) this night? Nobody present on the surface of the earth tonight would be living after the completion of one hundred years from this night."

The people made a mistake in grasping the meaning of this statement of Allah's Apostle and they indulged in those things which are said about these narrators (i.e. some said that the Day of Resurrection will be established after 100 years etc.) But the Prophet said, "Nobody present on the surface of earth tonight would be living after the completion of 100 years from this night"; he meant, "When that century (people of that century) would pass away." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 10, Number 575)

There are several points to note from this specific report. First, pay attention to the candid admission of the narrator that Muslims themselves understood from Muhammad's words that the world was going to end in a hundred years. This provides corroborating evidence that the plain meaning of Muhammad's so-called prophecy was that the last day would occur within a hundred years.

Second, also notice just how irrational this ad hoc explanation is. The hadith compiler really expects his readers to believe that what Muhammad meant was that no one of his generation would be alive within a hundred years when there is nothing amazing about such a claim. To say that one's generation would all be dead within a hundred years doesn't require supernatural knowledge. The only thing required to make such a claim is common sense since life expectancy was low in those days. Hardly anyone lived beyond the age of a hundred years. If it was supposed to be a statement ("prophecy") about the life expectancy of the people living around him, then it was trivial. What is the point?

Even though trivial, it would almost certainly be wrong. Muhammad said "on the surface of the earth" - that is a large place. Although centenarians are rare, they probably existed at all times. Even in the life of Muhammad there was at least one such person. Abu Afak is reported to have lived to the age of 120:

SARIYYAH OF SALIM IBN 'UMAYR

Then occurred the sariyyah of Salim Ibn 'Umayr al-'Amri against Abu 'Afak, the Jew, in Shawwal in the beginning of the twentieth month from the hijrah of the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him. Abu 'Afak, was from Banu 'Amr Ibn 'Awf, and was an old man who had attained the age of one hundred and twenty years. He was a Jew, and used to instigate the people against the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him, and composed (satirical) verses. Salim Ibn 'Umayr who was one of the great weepers and who had participated in Badr, said: I take a vow that I shall either kill Abu 'Afak or die before him. He waited for an opportunity until a hot night came, and Abu 'Afak slept in an open place. Salim Ibn 'Umayr knew it, so he placed the sword on his liver and pressed it till it reached his bed. The enemy of Allah screamed and the people, who were his followers rushed to him, took him to his house and interred him. (Ibn Sa'ad's Kitab Al-Tabaqat Al-Kabir, English translation by S. Moinul Haq, M.A., PH.D assisted by H.K. Ghazanfar M.A. [Kitab Bhavan Exporters & Importers, 1784 Kalan Mahal, Daryaganj, New Delhi - 110 002 India), Volume II, p. 31; bold and underline emphasis ours)

Did Muhammad really want to say that in a hundred years from now, there will be no more people who are older than a hundred years? Again, what would be the point of such an announcement? What has that to do with the message of Islam?

Moreover, Muhammad introduced his announcement with these words: "Do you know the importance of this night?" For that main reason, the alternative interpretation supplied by the narrator makes little sense. After all, in what sense would the observation that a time will come when nobody will be older than a hundred years be important for Muslims or Islam? It is simply irrelevant, and irrelevant is the opposite of important.

On the other hand, the proclamation of the Day of Resurrection and Allah's judgment of all people is an essential part of Islam. If it had been revealed to Muhammad in his prayer that the world would end in exactly one hundred years, such a revelation would mark this night without question as being very important.

Only this interpretation really makes sense of the statement. The problem is, however, that the only meaningful interpretation of it has the consequence that Muhammad made a false prophecy. Muslims have tried to avert this by putting instead an utterly trivial, irrelevant - and most probably still incorrect - statement into Muhammad's mouth.

It must also be kept in mind that imam al-Bukhari collected these traditions roughly 250 years after Muhammad's migration to Medina (c. 622/623 AD), long after the time that Muhammad said the world was going to end. In light of this, it is not surprising that he or someone else would provide an explanation in order to avoid having to admit that Muhammad was a false prophet for falsely claiming that the Day of Resurrection would take place a hundred years after his time.

With the foregoing in perspective it is rather obvious that this narrator sure sounds just as desperate as Sami in his attempt of explaining away Muhammad's blatant false predictions.

My Response:

Foolish Shamoun asks:

Nearly fourteen centuries have gone by and there continue to be human beings alive all around the earth!

Can't Shamoun read the hadith properly?:

Narrated Abdullah:


"One night Allah's Apostle led us in the 'Isha' prayer and that is the one called Al-'Atma by the people. After the completion of the prayer, he faced us and said, 'Do you know the importance of this night? Nobody present on the surface of the earth tonight will be living after one hundred years from this night.'"

The Prophet (peace be upon him) is clearly talking about those present during his time. He said that not a single one of them alive at that time would be alive after a hundred years. He didn't say that after one hundred years there will be no more people!!!

Shamoun poses other questions that I believe Sheikh Salih Munajjid addresses sufficiently:

Question:


Could you please explain this hadith: Narrated by Abdullah ibn Umar (RA): Once the Prophet led us in the 'Isha' prayer during the last days of his life and after finishing it (the prayer) (with Taslim) he said: "Do you realize (the importance of) this night?" Nobody present on the surface of the earth tonight will be living after the completion of one hundred years from this night." -- Sahih Bukhari (1.116)

Answer:

 

Praise be to Allaah.

 

The meaning of the hadeeth is clear and apparent, and was borne out by  real events. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was stating that none of the people who were alive at that time would live for more than a hundred years, and this is what in fact happened. The last of the Sahaabah to die passed away in 110 AH, i.e., he died one hundred years after the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) died. His name was Abu'l-Tufayl ibn Waathilah. 

 

Shaykh Sa'd al-Humayd 

 

This hadeeth was narrated by Imaam al-Bukhaari (may Allaah have mercy on him) in his Saheeh, from 'Abd-Allaah ibn 'Umar, who said: "The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) led us in praying 'Ishaa towards the end of his life. When he had said the salaam, he stood up and said: 'Do you see this night of yours? One hundred years from now, there will not be anyone left of those who are on the face of the earth.'" 

There follow some comments made by Ibn Hajar (may Allaah have mercy on him) on this hadeeth: 

"Led us in prayer" means as an imaam.

"Towards the end of his life". A corroborating report narrated by Jaabir states that this was one month before he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) died.

"Do you see" means, "Think about (this night)."

"One hundred years from now" means, when one hundred years have passed.

 

"There will not be anyone left of those who are on the face of the earth" means, anyone who was alive at that time. 

Ibn Battaal said: What the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) meant was that during this time-span their generation would pass away. He was pointing out to them how short their lives were and that their lives were not like those of the nations who came before them, so that they would strive hard in worship. 

Al-Nawawi said: What is meant is that everyone who was on the face of the earth on that night would not live for more than one hundred years after that night, whether he was young on that occasion or not. It does not mean that anyone who was born after that night would not live for a hundred years. And Allaah knows best. 

 

This hadeeth is one of the signs of the Prophethood of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). He was speaking of future events which came to pass as he described them. The trustworthy scholars use this as evidence in refuting some of the Sufis who say that al-Khidr is still alive until now. (Source)

 

 

To prove the Prophet's (peace be upon him) statement to be false, Shamoun must prove that someone living at the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) did actually end up living for a hundred years after the Prophet (peace be upon him) uttered that statement. It is not enough to assert the possibility that someone did. He has to prove it and I have no clue how he can do such a thing.

So much for Shamoun and his silly arguments; he should go and deal with the problematic passages in his Bible first such as Thessalonians or Matthew 24 before he can dream about finding mistakes in Islam.

 

 

Appendix

Shamoun tried responding to the above in an addendum in one of his articles over here. The only thing that I personally saw useful from his rubbish response is that he pointed out a spelling mistake on my "What's New" page, which I went ahead and corrected.

 

He said:

 

Zawadi lives under the mistaken impression that just because a person writes tons of articles this somehow means that s/he has provided a meaningful response, a solid refutation of the opposing view. In order to help Zawadi see reality more clearly we need to remind him that it is not the number of articles one produces, but the level of argumentation that one provides which will determine whether the person is really addressing the issues. Sadly for Zawadi, his "rebuttals" do far more damage to Islam than good and only prove that he has no business defending his religion or criticizing ours.

 

Trash talking is one of Shamoun's hobbies. Let's see if he can actually prove his statements to be true by exposing the supposed weaknesses in my arguments.

 

Also, Shamoun is the last one to talk. What is actually funny is that Shamoun himself actually thinks that the ridiculous articles that he writes are convincing to Muslims.

 

My friends and I can't stop laughing when I read out to them Shamoun's ridiculous response to John 17:3 when he says:

 

  • The Trinity is the only true God.
  • Each specific member of the Trinity is the only true God.
  • Therefore, the members of the Trinity are the only true God, whether individually or collectively. (Source)

 

What is also very laughable is his ridiculous response over here when he completely distorts the plain reading of the text in Mark 10 where Jesus denies being God.

 

Shamoun has to wake up and smell the coffee and realize that his responses to Muslim arguments are just absolutely absurd. I have no idea how he thinks he has any right to speak about the quality of someone's arguments.

 

Shamoun said:

 

To give you an example of the quality of arguments produced by Zawadi notice what he says regarding the contradiction within the Quran concerning Muhammad being nothing more than a warner:

This is a result of Shamoun taking things TOO LITERALLY [sic] as we will show. (Rebuttal to Sam Shamoun's Article "Quran Contradiction: Is Muhammad Only A Warner or a Prophet/Messenger?; Capital emphasis ours; source)

And this is supposed to be a convincing argument against our article, the response which ?refutes us badly'!

Notice that there is no winning with these Muslim dawagandists since if we take the Quran at face value then they attack us for reading the text too literally. If we understand a passage a certain way then either we don't understand the Arabic or have not taking the reference literally enough! In either case we are in a lose-lose situation.

Just to expose how desperate this "response" truly is, we take the passages which say that Muhammad was no more or nothing but a warner as literally as we do those passages which we use the same Arabic terms in regards to Allah being the only god there is. Thus, if we shouldn't take the verses which speak of Muhammad being nothing but a warner literally than consistency demands that we shouldn't take those statements concerning there being no god except Allah literally either. For the details please consult our article (*)

 

If Shamoun wants to address this article of mine then he should do so in a separate article. I am not going to divert the topic here. However, I do want to say that Shamoun is right about one thing. It is a "lose-lose situation" for Shamoun simply due to the fact that Islam is the true religion of God. So of course I believe Shamoun can never win. However, that does not mean that I don't believe that Islam is falsifiable. Of course if someone were to show me clear cut examples of scientific errors in the Qur'an (like in the Bible), clear cut examples of misquotation of statements in the Qur'an (like in the Bible) or any of the many other kinds of errors found in the Bible then I would definitely acknowledge that this proves Islam to be a false religion.

 

However, this is not the same with Christians. Christian intellectuals such as Wolfhart Pannenberg could still be Christians even though they believe that legends such as the virgin birth do exist in the Gospels (See here and here)

 

Christian apologists such as Dr. William Lane Craig even go as far as saying that discrepancies in the Bible are not threatening to the truth of Christianity. He even admits:

 

Inerrantists freely admit that no one reading through the Bible and keeping list of difficulties encountered along the way, whether inconsistencies or mistakes, would come to the conclusion at the end of his reading that the Bible is inerrant.  He would likely conclude that the Bible, like almost every other book, has some errors in it. 

After this he goes on to defend the notion and possibility of the Bible being inerrant, however he continues and admits:

 

But secondly, suppose you've done all that and are still convinced that Scripture is not inerrant.  Does that mean that the deity and resurrection of Christ go down the drain?  No, not all.  For the far weaker premiss in the above two syllogisms will be premiss (5), rather than premiss (2).  As you recognize, we have a very strong case for the resurrection of Jesus.  That case in no way depends on the Bible's being inerrant.  This became very clear to me during my doctoral studies in Munich with Wolfhart Pannenberg. (Source)

 

Notice, that even if us Muslims were to be successful in pointing out error after error after error in the Bible it would still not be good enough for the Christian to leave his faith. He can still remain a Christian and believe that the Bible is errant.

 

Muslims who are trying to point out that the Bible contains words of human beings and the word of God mixed with each other and not only God's word alone probably should not even waste their time since Christians like William Lane Craig would simply agree with them:

 

In the providence of God, the Bible is thus both the Word of God and the word of man. (William Lane Craig, 'Men Moved By the Holy Spirit Spoke From God' (2 Peter 1.21): A Middle Knowledge Perspective on Biblical Inspiration, Source)

 

Talk about a "lose-lose situation"!

 

Shamoun then argues:

 

Zawadi writes concerning Muhammad's mistaken claim that the Last Hour would arrive during the lifetime of a specific child who was living during his time:

Now when we bring all the narrations together we know that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was speaking about the hour of the death of the individuals he was speaking to [sic]. In Islam we consider the Last Hour of someone to be his death as brother Shamul Hameed states .

That is what the Prophet (peace be upon him) was saying [sic].

It is obvious once again that Bassam has no clue what he is talking about and that he didn't even bother reading the hadiths carefully. Here, once, again is the "prophecy":

'A'isha reported that when the desert Arabs came to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) they asked about THE Last Hour as to when that would come. And he looked towards the youngest amongst them and said: If he lives he would not grow very old that he would find your Last Hour coming to you (he would see you dying). (Sahih Muslim, Book 041, Number 7050)

Pay close attention to the fact that the Arabs did not ask when their deaths or THEIR Last Hour would approach, but specifically asked concerning THE Last Hour; nor did Muhammad say that by the Last Hour he meant their deaths. That is merely Zawadi's desperate attempt of reading into the text something that is simply not there. This next report again indicates that by the Last Hour Muhammad meant that the end of the world would come upon his followers:

Anas b. Malik reported that a person asked Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him): When would THE Last Hour come? Thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) kept quiet for a while, then looked at a young boy in his presence belonging to the tribe of Azd Shanilwa and he said: If this boy lives he would not grow very old till THE Last Hour would come to you. Anas said that this young boy was of our age during those days. (Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 7052)

And isn't it obvious that when the Last Day comes this would mean that it is the Last Hour for Muhammad's companions as well since this would mark the end of the age?

Interestingly, the translator is actually improving on Muhammad's speech since he inserts words in the parentheses that are not part of Muhammad's statements, i.e. "he (the child) would see you dying." For one who was supposed be the master of eloquence Muhammad sure failed to convey his point clearly (assuming of course that Zawadi and the translator are correct in their interpretation which they aren't).

 

Shamoun is just rehashing the same argument without refuting what I said.

What are the narrations saying? The narrations are saying that the companions came and asked the Prophet (peace be upon him) when the Last Hour (i.e. Day of Judgment) is coming. The Prophet (peace be upon him) replied back and said that the little child will not grow old until The Last Hour COMES TO THEM. When the Prophet (peace be upon him) said "The Last Hour would come to you", the "would come to you" signifies that he is speaking to the questioners on a personal/individual level. That the Day of Judgment for them (i.e. their deaths) is approaching and not the actual Day of Judgment in reality itself occuring on earth.

I further strengthened this argument by appealing to the wording in narration 7050, which clarified the issue when it said "find your Last Hour coming to you" So now we know what it means when the Prophet (peace be upon him) said "The Last Hour would come to you". It is meant on a personal/individual level for those who were questioning the Prophet (peace be upon him).

Again, let me reiterate the fact that Muslims believe that the Day of Judgment for each person begins with his death. So when the companions questioned the Prophet (peace be upon him) about when the Day of Judgment would come, he was letting them know that it was at the time of their deaths and that they would die before that little boy grew old.

Shamoun continues:

To further substantiate that Muhammad was speaking of THE Last Hour, and not the death of the people he was addressing, notice the subheading of this particular section of Muslim as well as these specific narrations which follow immediately:

Chapter 25: APPROACH OF THE LAST HOUR

Abdullah reported Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) as saying: The Last Hour would affect (most terribly) the wicked persons. (Sahih Muslim, Book 041, Number 7043)

This hadith has been reported by Sahl b. Sa'd that he heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: I and the Last Hour are (close to each other) like this (and he, in order to explain it) pointed (by joining his) forefinger, (one) next to the thumb and the middle finger (together). (Sahih Muslim, Book 041, Number 7044)

Anas reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: I and the Last Hour have been sent like this and (he while doing it) joined the forefinger with the middle finger. (Sahih Muslim, Book 041, Number 7049)

The reference to Muhammad joining his middle and forefingers together implies that he believed that only a short time would go by before the end would come. The hadiths which follow right after these narratives give us an idea of just how short Muhammad thought this time would be, e.g. the end would come before the child grew old which clearly didn't happen.

To top it off this part of Muslim immediately precedes the following section:

Chapter 26: THE INTERVAL BETWEEN TWO BLOWINGS OF THE TRUMPET

In light of the foregoing, isn't it obvious that Muhammad was speaking of the end of the age, not the deaths of his immediate followers? Yet in spite of the above Zawadi would still have us believe that Muhammad wasn't speaking of the end of the world but only about the approaching death of the people he was communicating to!

No it is not obvious. Clearly, Imam Muslim found it useful to club these hadith together under the same chapter since they all related to the concept of the Day of Judgment.

If Shamoun wants to disagree with Imam Muslim's ordering of the hadiths then he is free to do so, but at the end of the day he hasn't really proven anything. 

Shamoun then argues:

Finally, Zawadi just soundly refuted his own colleague Sami Zaatari since that is not how the latter explained these hadiths. Zaatari said that the hadith means that the Last Hour would get nearer as the child grew older since the passing of time means that the Last Day is approaching closer and closer.

First of all, if it is me who refutes the argument and not Zaatari then it doesn't change the fact that the argument has been refuted.

Secondly, I haven't listened to the debate yet and I don't know what Zaatari actually said. Based on what Shamoun said that Sami said I don't see anything wrong. Obviously as the child grows older, more time elapses. As more time elapses, the closer the Day of Judgment gets. So I really don't know what the problem is.

Shamoun continues:

He then says regarding Muhammad's assertion that the world would end in 100 years:

Can't Shamoun read the hadith properly?:

Narrated Abdullah:

"One night Allah's Apostle led us in the 'Isha' prayer and that is the one called Al-'Atma by the people. After the completion of the prayer, he faced us and said, 'Do you know the importance of this night? Nobody present on the surface of the earth tonight will be living after one hundred years from this night.'"

The Prophet (peace be upon him) is clearly talking about those present during his time. He said that not a single one of them alive at that time would be alive after a hundred years. He didn't say that after one hundred years there will be no more people!!!

And this is the gentleman who calls me foolish and my arguments garbage! The real question is whether Zawadi can read properly. What is clear is that Zawadi misread his prophet's words since the latter clearly speaks of THE SURFACE OF THE EARTH:

Narrated Abdullah:
"One night Allah's Apostle led us in the 'Isha' prayer and that is the one called Al-'Atma by the people. After the completion of the prayer, he faced us and said, 'Do you know the importance OF THIS NIGHT? NOBODY PRESENT ON THE SURFACE OF THE EARTH tonight will be living after one hundred years from this night.'"

Once again, the alleged master of eloquence didn't say that none of his companions would live beyond a hundred years. Nor did he even say that all those living in Arabia would be dead within that time.

The text of the hadith is clear that by tonight Muhammad meant that no person living in the world would be alive a hundred years from that very moment or hour, obviously because he thought the world was going to end.

First of all, no Muslim said that Muhammad (peace be upon him) is a master of Arabic eloquence. What we say is that the Qur'an is a mastery of Arabic eloquence. Shamoun supposedly studying Islam for 15 years should have known this by now.

Secondly, what is Shamoun trying to refute here? It appears that he is attacking straw man. He indirectly alleges that I have argued that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was only talking about his companions and not about everyone on the surface of the earth. I have said no such thing! This is all that I said (see above as well):

The Prophet (peace be upon him) is clearly talking about those present during his time. He said that not a single one of them alive at that time would be alive after a hundred years.

Where did I say that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was only talking about the companions? On the contrary I said that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was talking "about those present during his time." I did not limit the location or geography of whom the Prophet (peace be upon him) was speaking about. I was only limiting the time due to the fact that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said "nobody present on the surface of the earth TONIGHT".

I am already aware that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was speaking about everyone on the surfrace of the earth, however I also argued:

To prove the Prophet's (peace be upon him) statement to be false, Shamoun must prove that someone living at the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) did actually end up living for a hundred years after the Prophet (peace be upon him) uttered that statement. It is not enough to assert the possibility that someone did. He has to prove it and I have no clue how he can do such a thing.

Shamoun did not meet my challenge.

He goes on to say:

Interestingly, Zawadi conveniently ignored the fact that even Muhammad's companions thought that he was speaking of the end of the world:

Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar:

The Prophet prayed one of the 'Isha' prayer in his last days and after finishing it with Taslim, he stood up and said, "Do you realize (the importance of) this night? Nobody present on the surface of the earth tonight would be living after the completion of one hundred years from this night."

The people made a mistake in grasping the meaning of this statement of Allah's Apostle and they indulged in those things which are said about these narrators (i.e. some said that the Day of Resurrection will be established after 100 years etc.) But the Prophet said, "Nobody present on the surface of earth tonight would be living after the completion of 100 years from this night"; he meant, "When that century (people of that century) would pass away." (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 10, Number 575)

And yet when the end of the world did not come a hundred years later Muslims had to come up with desperate answers in order to cover up their prophet's false predictions. So much for Muhammad's eloquence since he left his followers more confused than enlightened!

First of all, why isn't it possible that some (not all) of the companions misunderstood the Prophet's statement just as the disciples might have misunderstood some of Jesus' statements?

Secondly, let us only look at the plain reading of the text:

Nobody present on the surface of the earth tonight would be living after the completion of one hundred years from this night

Forget personal interpretations. Only look at the plain reading of the text. It says that nobody living on the surface of the earth during the Prophet's time would be living after one hundred years (after the Prophet uttered that statement).

Why is it wrong to understand this hadith in its plain reading to basically mean that everyone living during that time wouldn't live more than a hundred years? I don't see why it is wrong.

Shamoun goes on:

Zawadi sourced Sheikh Salih Munajjid who really doesn't disprove anything since he, much like Zawadi, erroneously assumes that Muhammad was only referring to his companions. These gentlemen need to stop assuming things and start proving their case, which Muslims like Zawadi have yet to do.

I believe my citation of Sheikh Salih Munajjid was very useful, especially what I highlighted since it addressed Shamoun's questions in regards to why the Prophet (peace be upon him) laid emphasis upon the statements he was making.

By the grace of the Lord Jesus, we will be addressing the rest of his "rebuttals" in due course in order to further expose just how shallow and desperate his "responses" truly are and to document how his points backfire against him and his religion. As we did here, we will be demonstrating how Zawadi's arguments only provide further evidence that Islam is a false religion.

I am amused. If this is how Shamoun can show me proving Islam to be a false religion then I can't wait for the more "rebuttals" that he has got coming for me. Shamoun is funny. He should probably take Jay Leno's place when he retires in 2009.

Return to Refuting Sam Shamoun

Return to Homepage

click here to view site

HomeWhat's new?IslamChristianityRefutations LanguagesMultimediaE BooksLinksContact Me