Tuesday, December 9, 2025

The Qur’an Admits that Satan Dwells on the Straight Path: A Theological Critique of Islam

The Qur’an Admits that Satan Dwells on the Straight Path: A Theological Critique of Islam

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute

Abstract

This paper critically examines the theological contradictions within the Qur’an concerning the nature of sin, salvation, and the role of Satan. It argues that the Qur’an implicitly acknowledges that Satan operates within Islam’s “straight path,” thereby challenging the claim of Islam as a purely divine religion. Furthermore, it explores how the Qur’an inadvertently affirms central Christian doctrines such as the redemptive role of Jesus Christ, the bearing of human sin, and divine salvation. The discussion integrates Qur’anic and Biblical texts, demonstrating that the Christian concept of the Savior is both scripturally and logically superior.

1. Introduction

Islamic theology maintains that no person can bear the sin or burden of another. However, several Qur’anic verses appear to contradict this assertion. In contrast, the Bible provides a clear framework for redemption through the atoning work of Jesus Christ, the Lord and Savior. This paper will explore four primary theological admissions in the Qur’an:

  1. The Qur’an acknowledges Jesus as Savior.

  2. The Qur’an acknowledges that Muslims bear heavy burdens of sin.

  3. The Qur’an acknowledges that Satan dwells on the straight path — which it identifies as Islam.

  4. Muhammad is recorded to have converted Satan to Islam.

2. The Qur’an Acknowledges That Some Bear the Sins of Others

Islamic preachers often teach that everyone is responsible for their own sins. Yet, the Qur’an provides a different perspective.

“And when we heard the guidance, we believed in it; and whoever believes in his Lord shall not fear loss or being burdened with the sins (of others).”
(Qur’an 72:13)

This verse implies that those who do not believe in Allah may bear the burdens of others’ sins. Further clarification is found in:

“That they may bear their own burdens in full on the Day of Resurrection and also part of the burdens of those whom they mislead without knowledge. Evil indeed is that which they shall bear!”
(Qur’an 16:25)

The Qur’an therefore acknowledges that some individuals can carry both their own sins and the sins of those they have misled. These “burdens” are described as grievous and intolerable.

3. The Biblical Response: Jesus as the Bearer of Our Burdens

While the Qur’an leaves the burden of sin unresolved, the Bible provides the divine remedy:

“Cast your burden on the Lord, and He shall sustain you; He shall never permit the righteous to be moved.”
(Psalm 55:22)

This is echoed in the New Testament:

“You call me Teacher and Lord, and you say well, for so I am.”
(John 13:13)

Jesus is not only the Teacher but also the Lord who carries our burdens. Jeremiah affirms His divinity:

“But the Lord is the true God; He is the living God and the everlasting King.”
(Jeremiah 10:10)

Thus, while the Qur’an burdens believers with sin, the Bible offers deliverance through Jesus Christ, the true and living God.

4. The Qur’an Acknowledges Jesus as the Living Savior

In the Qur’an we read:

“All that is in the heavens and the earth ask of Him: every day He is bringing about a matter.”
(Qur’an 55:29)

This verse implies that all creation looks to Him — a concept resonating with Christ’s divine sustenance over all creation. The Christian scriptures explain that Christ’s redemptive work was accomplished through His death and resurrection:

“For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit.”
(1 Peter 3:18–19)

The distinction between body and spirit clarifies that Jesus’ divine nature remained eternal and unkillable:

“He alone is immortal and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see.”
(1 Timothy 6:15–16)

Hence, the Savior who died bodily yet lived spiritually is the same eternal God revealed in Scripture.

5. The Qur’an Admits That Satan Dwells on the Straight Path

Muslims often describe the Sirat al-Mustaqim (“the straight path”) as the true path of Islam. Yet, the Qur’an contains a startling admission:

“He said: Because You have sent me astray, surely I will lie in wait for them on Your straight path.”
(Qur’an 7:16)

Satan explicitly vows to reside on Allah’s “straight path.” To identify what this path is, the Qur’an defines it:

“And this is the path of your Lord, a straight path. We have detailed Our revelations for people who take heed.”
(Qur’an 6:126)

If the Qur’an itself identifies Islam as Allah’s straight path, and Satan has sworn to remain upon that path, then logically, Satan operates within the sphere of Islam’s religious system. This revelation has profound theological implications: Islam’s straight path is not exempt from satanic infiltration but, according to the Qur’an itself, is the very place Satan vowed to dwell.

6. Muhammad’s Alleged Conversion of Satan

The book Asili ya Majini (“The Origin of the Jinn”) states:

“It is unfortunate that Adam and Eve did not make an effort to enable Satan and his offspring to seek forgiveness from God. It was only the Prophet Muhammad who converted Satan to Islam.”
(Asili ya Majini, p. 20)

If Muhammad indeed converted Satan, this affirms two theological points:

  1. Satan exists within Islam’s spiritual structure.

  2. Satan is acknowledged as a Muslim in Islamic tradition.

Such a doctrine is profoundly disturbing, as it merges the very being of evil with the framework of Islamic piety.

7. Theological Implications

From this comparative theological analysis, several conclusions emerge:

  1. Satan’s residence — According to the Qur’an, Satan dwells on the “straight path,” which is Islam (Qur’an 6:126; 7:16).

  2. Human burden of sin — The Qur’an admits that humans may bear others’ sins (Qur’an 16:25), contradicting its own principle of individual accountability.

  3. Jesus as Redeemer — The Qur’an inadvertently points toward the Biblical revelation of a Savior who alone bears sin (Psalm 55:22; 1 Peter 3:18–19).

  4. Muhammad and Satan — Extra-Qur’anic sources allege Muhammad’s reconciliation with Satan, further complicating the monotheistic claim of Islam.

Thus, from both logical and theological reasoning, the Qur’an cannot consistently uphold the divine holiness of Allah, for its text accommodates both sin-bearing humans and a “straight path” inhabited by Satan.

In contrast, the Bible reveals a holy God without religious contradictions — a God who is Spirit (John 4:24), perfect, and free from darkness (1 John 1:5).

8. Conclusion

This analysis establishes that the Qur’an itself acknowledges the presence of Satan within Islam’s spiritual structure. Therefore, Islam cannot represent the pure and holy path of God. Only Jesus Christ, the true and living Savior, can bear the burdens of humanity, offering redemption through His divine sacrifice and resurrection.

As written in Titus 2:13:

“Looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.”

References

Primary Sources:

  • The Holy Qur’an, Surah 6:126; 7:16; 16:25; 55:29; 72:13.

  • The Holy Bible (NKJV): Psalm 55:22; Jeremiah 10:10; John 13:13; 1 Peter 3:18–19; 1 Timothy 6:13–16; Titus 2:13.

  • Asili ya Majini (The Origin of the Jinn), p. 20.

Secondary Sources:

  • Ibn Kathir, Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Darussalam, 2000).

  • Al-Tabari, Jami‘ al-Bayan fi Tafsir al-Qur’an (Cairo: Dar al-Ma‘arif, 1968).

  • Shimba, Maxwell. Max Shimba Ministries Org, 2016.

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Servant of Jesus Christ, Our Great God and Savior
For Max Shimba Ministries Org ©2016
All Rights Reserved


at No comments:

Refuting the Claim That “Jesus Did Not Come to Die”

Refuting the Claim That “Jesus Did Not Come to Die”

1. Jesus’ Mission and the Foreknowledge of His Death

The assertion claims that Jesus came only to preach the Law and the Gospel and that he never intended to die. This directly contradicts both prophetic statements in the Hebrew Scriptures and explicit statements in the New Testament.

  • Prophecies in the Old Testament clearly indicate that the Messiah would suffer and die:

    • Isaiah 53:5-6: “But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities… the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.”

    • Psalm 22:16-18: “They have pierced my hands and my feet; I can count all my bones; they stare and gloat over me.”

  • Jesus’ own predictions of His death appear multiple times in the Gospels:

    • Matthew 16:21: “From that time Jesus began to show to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised on the third day.”

    • Mark 8:31: “And he began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected… and be killed, and after three days rise again.”

    • Luke 9:22: “The Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected… and be killed, and on the third day be raised.”

These verses make it clear that Jesus was fully aware of the purpose of his mission, which included his sacrificial death for humanity. Suggesting otherwise is a selective reading of the Gospels.

2. The Misinterpretation of “I Came to Preach”

The passages cited (Mark 1:38, Luke 4:43, Matthew 18:11, Luke 19:10, etc.) are often used to argue that Jesus came only to preach. However, this is a partial truth:

  • Jesus’ ministry involved preaching the kingdom of God, healing, and calling sinners to repentance.

  • Preaching and dying are not mutually exclusive; rather, preaching prepared the way for his sacrificial death.

  • Jesus’ preaching was a component of his mission, not the totality of it. His death was the climax of his redemptive mission: John 12:27: “Now is my soul troubled… for what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour? But for this purpose I came to this hour.”

Thus, claiming he “never came to die” misrepresents his words and the narrative of the Gospels.

3. On the Historical Claim About “Palestine”

The statement claims Palestine did not exist during the time of Jesus. Historically:

  • The region was known as Judea, Galilee, and Samaria under Roman rule during Jesus’ lifetime.

  • The name “Palestine” (Palaestina) was introduced by the Romans after 135 CE, following the Bar Kokhba revolt, to rename Judea and suppress Jewish identity.

  • Using “Palestine” anachronistically to describe Jesus’ time is historically inaccurate. At the time, Jesus lived in first-century Roman provinces: Galilee and Judea.

4. The Crucifixion is Historical and Theologically Central

  • Crucifixion of Jesus is widely attested historically, even in non-Christian sources (Josephus, Tacitus).

  • Denying Jesus came to die ignores both biblical prophecy and historical evidence.

Summary:

  1. Jesus explicitly predicted and accepted his death.

  2. Preaching was part of his mission, not a replacement for the sacrificial purpose.

  3. Historical “Palestine” did not exist in Jesus’ time; using it misleads.

  4. Denying Jesus’ crucifixion contradicts Scripture, prophecy, and historical record.


at No comments:

Who Is the Creator, Allah or Jehovah?

Monday, August 3, 2015
Who Is the Creator, Allah or Jehovah?
By Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute

All adherents of religion generally believe that God is the Creator of humanity, animals, and everything visible and invisible. But it is important to examine critically what Jehovah (Yahweh) says about creation and compare it with what Allah says in the Qur’an. Do their statements align, or do they differ?

1. The Image of Humanity

Allah declares in the Qur’an:

“Say, He is Allah, [who is] One, Allah, the Eternal Refuge. He neither begets nor is born, Nor is there to Him any equivalent.” (Qur’an 112:1–4, Surah Al-Ikhlas)

According to this verse, Allah emphasizes that He neither begets nor is born and that no one resembles Him.

In contrast, the Bible says:

“Then God said, ‘Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.’ So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.” (Genesis 1:26–27, NIV)

Here we observe a key difference: Jehovah (Yahweh) created humanity in His image, whereas Allah asserts that no one resembles Him.

Questions for Reflection:

  • Does this suggest that Allah and Jehovah are the same entity?

  • If humans are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26–27), in what way does God resemble us? (See also Genesis 5:1–2; 9:6; 1 Corinthians 11:7; Colossians 1:15; 3:10; Acts 17:28–29; James 3:9)

  • Given that God is Spirit (John 4:24), how can humans reflect His image spiritually and morally?

2. Oaths and the Creator’s Authority

The Qur’an also records Allah swearing by His creation:

“By the sun and its brightness, and by the moon when it follows it, and by the day when it displays it, and by the night when it conceals it, and by the heavens and Him Who built them, and by the earth and Him Who spread it, and by the soul and Him Who proportioned it.” (Qur’an 91:1–7, Surah Ash-Shams)

“By the night when it covers, and by the day when it shines, and by He who created male and female.” (Qur’an 92:1–3, Surah Al-Layl)

Here Allah swears by the heavens, the earth, and the Creator of both. But who is this “Builder of the heavens and Expander of the earth”?

Further verses assert:

“And Allah has created the heavens and the earth in truth…” (Qur’an 45:22, Surah Al-Jathiyah)

“The Lord of the heavens and the earth and whatever is within them; if you are certain [of faith] then believe in Him alone.” (Qur’an 44:7–8, Surah Ad-Dukhan)

In comparison, Jehovah declares:

“Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb: I am the LORD, who makes all things, who stretches out the heavens alone, who spreads out the earth—who was with me?” (Isaiah 44:24, ESV)

And:

“I have sworn by myself, the word has gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return: ‘Before me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.’” (Isaiah 45:22–23, ESV)

Notice that Jehovah swears by His own self, not by His creation, unlike Allah, who swears by the heavens and the earth.

3. Key Observations and Debate Questions:

  1. Jehovah asserts His sovereignty as the sole Creator and swears by His own being. Allah swears by His creation. What theological implications arise from swearing by created things versus swearing by the Creator Himself?

  2. If Allah is truly the Creator, why does the Qur’an not specify what was created on the first day? (See Qur’an 41:9–12 for creation sequences—still debated)

  3. Are Allah and Jehovah the same being if their statements about creation, humanity, and oaths differ?

  4. Why does the Qur’an emphasize that Allah has no equal, yet humans are created without His image, whereas Jehovah explicitly created humans in His image?

  5. Who truly is the Creator of all things—Allah as described in the Qur’an, or Jehovah as depicted in the Bible?

This reflection invites deeper study and comparative theological discussion. Scholars, students, and followers are encouraged to examine scripture critically and question apparent contradictions.

References:

  • The Holy Bible, New International Version (NIV)

  • Qur’an, Translations by Saheeh International

  • John 4:24, Genesis 1:26–27, Genesis 2:7, Genesis 5:1–2, Genesis 9:6

  • 1 Corinthians 11:7, Colossians 1:15, Colossians 3:10, Acts 17:28–29, James 3:9

  • Isaiah 44:24; 45:6–7, 22–23; 14:24; Jeremiah 27:5

  • Hebrews 12:9, Ezekiel 18:4, Numbers 16:22

Maxwell Shimba Ministries Org ©2015. All Rights Reserved


at No comments:

ALLAH REVEALS SORCERY AND FORCES MUSLIMS TO PRACTICE IT

 ALLAH REVEALS SORCERY AND FORCES MUSLIMS TO PRACTICE IT

By Dr. Maxwell Shimba
Shimba Theological Institute
Originally written on August 8, 2015 – Academic English Edition (2025)

Abstract

This article critically examines the Qur’ānic claim regarding the origin and practice of sorcery (uchawi) within Islam, as recorded in Surat Ṭā Hā 20:73. The Qur’an itself suggests that Allah not only revealed sorcery but also compelled its practice. This study analyzes the implications of such a theological assertion and contrasts it with the biblical worldview, where sorcery is condemned as rebellion against God. The discussion also engages with Islamic tafsīr (commentary) sources and raises theological and moral questions concerning the nature of divine holiness and the ethical character of Allah as presented in the Qur’an.

Introduction

Throughout history, scholars and theologians have debated the origins of magic and sorcery. Within the Judeo-Christian tradition, sorcery is consistently condemned as a form of rebellion against the Creator (cf. Deuteronomy 18:10–12). However, the Qur’an presents a distinctive narrative that attributes the revelation of sorcery to Allah Himself. This raises profound theological and moral questions about divine nature and the Islamic understanding of good and evil.

The focus of this study is Surat Ṭā Hā 20:73, a verse which states that Allah compelled people to perform sorcery. The implications of this statement suggest divine involvement in acts that the Bible categorically condemns.

Qur’ānic Evidence

Surat Ṭā Hā 20:73 (Translation by Sheikh Ali Muhsin Al-Barwani):

“Indeed, we have believed in our Lord that He may forgive us our sins and the magic which you compelled us to perform. And Allah is better and more enduring.”

This verse reveals that Allah forced individuals to learn and practice magic. Sheikh Ali Muhsin Al-Barwani’s tafsīr (Swahili translation and commentary) clarifies this as:

“We have believed in our true Lord so that He may forgive our past sins and the sorcery which we were compelled to learn and practice. And our Lord’s reward is greater and everlasting.”

Thus, two critical points emerge:

  1. Muslims were compelled to learn sorcery.

  2. Muslims were compelled to practice sorcery.

If Allah truly compelled His followers to perform sorcery, it invites a theological crisis: Since when does God act as a sorcerer or require His followers to engage in magic? What benefit could divine-revealed witchcraft bring to humanity or to the moral order of creation?

Theological Implications

The idea that Allah “revealed” or “forced” sorcery contradicts the moral nature of divine holiness as understood in biblical theology. In Scripture, witchcraft is consistently categorized as an abomination before God. The Apostle Paul condemns it among the “works of the flesh” (cf. Galatians 5:20), and the prophet Samuel equates it with rebellion:

“For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry.”
— 1 Samuel 15:23 (KJV)

If the Qur’an attributes the origin and practice of magic to Allah, then it presents a deity who is morally inconsistent with the biblical concept of holiness, justice, and goodness. This raises an essential theological question for Muslims: Can a God who sanctions witchcraft be the same as the Holy God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob?

Prophet Muhammad and the Use of Magic

Islamic Hadith literature further complicates the issue. According to Sunan Ibn Mājah, Vol. 5, Hadith No. 3525 (p. 48), Muhammad himself practiced forms of magical protection (ndumba) against the evil eye and poisonous creatures:

“The Prophet used incantations and charms against the evil eye and venomous creatures.” (Sunan Ibn Mājah, Book 31, Hadith 3525)

This practice raises ethical and theological questions:

  • Why would a prophet of God rely on magic (ndumba) instead of divine power?

  • Does Allah lack the ability to heal or protect without the use of occult means?

In contrast, biblical prophets never resorted to witchcraft or magical arts. Their authority came directly from the Spirit of God, not from charms or incantations.

Biblical Position on Sorcery

The Bible firmly prohibits witchcraft in all its forms. God warns His people:

“There shall not be found among you anyone who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells.”
— Deuteronomy 18:10–12

Furthermore, Scripture declares the ultimate judgment of sorcerers:

“But the cowardly, unbelieving, vile, murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts... their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”
— Revelation 21:8 (NIV)

Hence, any divine endorsement or revelation of sorcery is incompatible with biblical theology. The God of the Bible is holy and cannot participate in or endorse evil.

Conclusion

The Qur’anic assertion that Allah revealed and compelled the practice of sorcery introduces profound moral and theological contradictions. A holy God cannot be the source or promoter of witchcraft. Islam’s acceptance of such narratives undermines the moral purity and transcendence that define divine nature.

Christianity, by contrast, affirms a God of holiness who forbids sorcery and delivers humanity from its bondage through Jesus Christ. The invitation remains:

“Accept the living Jesus Christ and receive eternal life. Religion cannot save you; only a relationship with the true God through Christ can.”

References

  1. The Qur’an, Surat Ṭā Hā 20:73 – Translated and Commented by Sheikh Ali Muhsin Al-Barwani (Dar es Salaam: Al-Barwani Publications).

  2. Ibn Mājah, Sunan Ibn Mājah, Vol. 5, Hadith No. 3525 (Book of Medicine).

  3. The Holy Bible, King James Version (KJV), 1 Samuel 15:23; Deuteronomy 18:10–12; Revelation 21:8; Galatians 5:20.

  4. Al-Tabari, Tafsir al-Tabari, commentary on Surat Ṭā Hā 20:73.

  5. Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute Journal of Biblical Apologetics, Vol. 2 (2015).

© 2015–2025 Dr. Maxwell Shimba, Shimba Theological Institute
All rights reserved. Reproduction or citation of this article requires proper attribution.


at No comments:

THE COUSIN OF MUHAMMAD WHO RENOUNCED ISLAM

THE COUSIN OF MUHAMMAD WHO RENOUNCED ISLAM

Ubayd-Allah ibn Jahsh is a name not very well known today, but he is among the earliest witnesses of the power of the Gospel even in difficult and unexpected circumstances.

He was a close cousin of the Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W), and also among the first people to accept Islam as soon as it began to be proclaimed in Mecca.

Because of the severe persecution that faced the early Muslims, Ubayd-Allah was among the small group of people who decided to flee Mecca in the year 615 A.D. and migrate to the land of Abyssinia (present-day Ethiopia), which was under a Christian king called Negus, a leader known for his justice and mercy toward refugees and the oppressed. In that land of protection and religious freedom, Ubayd-Allah encountered in depth the teachings of Christianity, and through the Gospel of Jesus Christ his heart was uniquely touched.

He reflected, he prayed, and finally he decided to renounce Islam and follow Jesus Christ.

“I came to know Christ here, and in my heart I felt a new light that I did not know before. I follow Christ, the Son of the Living God,”

these words are quoted in the traditional accounts of early Christians who knew him.

His decision was not received with joy by the Muslim community that was with him, nor by his relatives who remained in Mecca.

But despite pressure, insults, and blame, he remained firm in his faith until his death while still in Abyssinia.

But what followed was a shocking event that raises many questions. After Ubayd-Allah renounced Islam, the Prophet Muhammad decided to take his wife Umm Habiba bint Abi Sufyan and marry her himself. Meaning Muhammad saw it fit to snatch the wife of his cousin because he had left Islam. 😂😂

This action has been explained by many Islamic historians such as Ibn Ishaq, al-Tabari, and others, though from a perspective that criticizes Ubayd-Allah and defends the Prophet...

This created pain and shock, for a man who decided to follow his spiritual conscience and leave the religion of his people lost his honor and even his family for the price of following Christ.

Although his personal feelings about this act were not written clearly, the situation itself leaves questions of justice and humanity.

“He decided to seize the wife of a man who left Islam—was that justice or revenge?”

Ubayd-Allah did not base his faith on customs, but followed it through inner conviction and spiritual testimony.

While others feared losing position or honor, he chose the way of the cross and renounced the religion of Islam and said “yes” to the living Christ.

Today, the story of Ubayd-Allah ibn Jahsh is a symbol of courage, a pure conscience, and a testimony of the love of God that crosses the boundaries of religion, family, and even nation.

This man was not just a cousin of Muhammad, but a witness of the Gospel who stood in the midst of the storm. To me, he is my role model.

The Bible says:

“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ; for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth...” — Romans 1:16

This is the story of one man, but it is the voice of all who have ever stood for the truth even when it hurt them.

THIS STORY IS VERY RARELY TOLD IN ISLAM.


at No comments:

The Cousin of Muhammad Who Renounced Islam

 Shimba Theological Institute

Scholarly Newsletter Article
Title: The Cousin of Muhammad Who Renounced Islam — Ubayd-Allah ibn Jahsh: A Forgotten Witness of the Gospel
By Shimba Theological Institute

Introduction

The name Ubayd-Allah ibn Jahsh is not widely known today, yet he stands among the earliest and most compelling witnesses to the transformative power of the Gospel—even within the challenging and hostile environment of early Islam. A close cousin of the Prophet Muhammad, Ubayd-Allah’s life story provides a unique historical and theological reflection on the encounter between Islam and Christianity in the formative years of the 7th century.

Background: A Noble Lineage and Early Faith

Ubayd-Allah ibn Jahsh was a near relative of Muhammad (peace be upon him) and was among the first individuals to accept Islam when it began to spread in Mecca. However, the early Muslims faced intense persecution from the Quraysh tribe, prompting a small group to flee Mecca in 615 A.D. and seek refuge in the Christian kingdom of Abyssinia (modern-day Ethiopia). This migration, known in Islamic history as the First Hijra, was made under the reign of Negus—a just and compassionate Christian ruler renowned for his kindness toward refugees and the oppressed.

It was in Abyssinia, a land of religious freedom and Christian heritage, that Ubayd-Allah encountered the teachings of Jesus Christ more intimately. Through his exposure to the Gospel, his heart was deeply moved and transformed in a profound way.

Conversion to Christianity

Historical traditions recount that Ubayd-Allah reflected deeply upon the message of the Gospel. After a period of contemplation and prayer, he made a bold and life-altering decision—to renounce Islam and embrace Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. He reportedly declared:

“I have come to know Christ here, and in my heart I have felt a new light that I had never known before. I now follow Christ, the Son of the Living God.”

These words, preserved in early Christian oral traditions, reveal the depth of his spiritual conviction. His decision, however, was met with dismay and hostility from his fellow Muslim emigrants and from his relatives who remained in Mecca.

Persecution and Faithfulness unto Death

Despite pressure, insults, and condemnation, Ubayd-Allah remained steadfast in his newfound faith until his death in Abyssinia. His unwavering commitment serves as a testament to personal conviction and spiritual courage in the face of adversity.

Yet, his story took a dramatic and controversial turn. After Ubayd-Allah’s conversion and subsequent death, the Prophet Muhammad took his widow, Umm Habiba bint Abi Sufyan, as one of his wives. Islamic historians such as Ibn Ishaq and al-Tabari record this event, often in defense of Muhammad’s action and as criticism toward Ubayd-Allah’s apostasy. Nevertheless, this act raises moral and theological questions regarding justice, compassion, and divine retribution.

Moral and Theological Reflections

The incident leaves behind a trail of ethical inquiry. Was Muhammad’s decision to marry the wife of a man who had renounced Islam a matter of divine justice—or personal retaliation? Historical silence on Ubayd-Allah’s own perspective invites reflection on issues of human dignity, religious freedom, and conscience.

Ubayd-Allah’s faith journey was not built upon cultural conformity but upon spiritual revelation and conviction. While others feared losing status or reputation, he chose the way of the cross and bore the cost of discipleship, affirming his allegiance to the risen Christ.

Legacy of Faith

Today, the testimony of Ubayd-Allah ibn Jahsh stands as a symbol of courage, integrity, and divine love that transcends religious, familial, and cultural boundaries. He was not merely Muhammad’s cousin—he was a witness to the Gospel amidst the tempest of opposition.

As the Apostle Paul declares:

“For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth.” — Romans 1:16 (KJV)

Ubayd-Allah’s story is a voice echoing across centuries, reminding believers that truth is worth standing for—even when it costs everything.

Conclusion

Although rarely recounted within Islamic narratives, the life and faith of Ubayd-Allah ibn Jahsh challenge both historians and theologians to re-examine the early intersections of Islam and Christianity. His spiritual journey illustrates the enduring power of the Gospel to illuminate even the darkest contexts.

To the Christian believer, he remains a model of spiritual conviction—one who discovered the light of Christ amidst the shadows of uncertainty and chose eternal truth over temporal allegiance.

References

  • Ibn Ishaq. Sirat Rasul Allah (The Life of Muhammad). Translated by A. Guillaume. Oxford University Press, 1955.

  • Al-Tabari. Tarikh al-Rusul wa al-Muluk (History of the Prophets and Kings). Vol. II. State University of New York Press, 1987.

  • The Holy Bible, King James Version. Romans 1:16.

  • Trimingham, J. Spencer. Christianity Among the Arabs in Pre-Islamic Times. Longman, 1979.

  • Cragg, Kenneth. The Call of the Minaret. Oxford University Press, 1956.


at No comments:

ISLAM IS A RELIGION OF WAR AND COERCION

Thursday, October 27, 2016

ISLAM IS A RELIGION OF WAR AND COERCION

What does Islam teach about forcing others into religion?

Dear reader,

Muslims are commanded to fight the unbelievers or kill them unless they accept joining the religion of Muhammad. Islam does not allow people of other beliefs or religions to worship freely. This is why in Arab countries like Saudi Arabia, especially in Mecca, there is not a single church. Allah does not like freedom of worship.

Surah At-Tawbah 9:29 – “Fight those who do not believe in Allah nor in the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the jizyah with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.”

Surah Al-Anfal 8:38–39 –
38. Say to the disbelievers: If they stop, all that has passed will be forgiven. But if they return (to disbelief), then the example of the former peoples has already passed.
39. And fight them until there is no more fitnah (persecution or disbelief), and the religion is entirely for Allah. But if they cease, then surely Allah sees what they do.”

Surah At-Tawbah 9:5 –
“When the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them, capture them, besiege them, and lie in wait for them in every ambush. But if they repent, establish prayer, and give zakat, then let them go their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.”

Surah Al-Baqarah 2:193 –
“And fight them until there is no fitnah and the religion is for Allah alone. But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the wrongdoers.”

Surah Aal Imran 3:84 –
“Say: We believe in Allah and what has been revealed to us, and what was revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and what Moses, Jesus, and the prophets received from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and to Him we submit.”

Muhammad’s efforts to spread Islam peacefully failed completely. For 13 years Muhammad had only about 100 followers, most of whom were his own relatives and close family. After failing miserably to spread Islam using peaceful methods, Muhammad changed tactics and “revealed” the verses above—verses commanding that people be forced to join his religion, or else face severe consequences including death.

He told his followers that Allah had commanded him to compel people to join his religion.

In the final years of his life, before his death, Muhammad no longer cared whether or not people willingly joined Islam; he forced everyone to join by threatening them with death. This included his greatest enemy, Abu Sufyan, and his wife Hind.

According to Islamic historians, Abu Sufyan went to Muhammad seeking peace after years of conflict, but Muhammad forced him to convert to Islam or else be killed. Muhammad’s exact words to him were:

“Submit and testify that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger, or if you refuse, your head will be cut off.”
(Read Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 814)

Therefore Abu Sufyan agreed.

The entire city of Mecca submitted by force when Muhammad invaded it with his army. Many refused but were forced into Islam; those who resisted were beheaded by Muhammad himself.

Others were expelled from Mecca after the final pilgrimage, as recorded in Qur’an 9:5.

Christians and Jews in Arabia at that time suffered the same fate: Muhammad forced them either to convert to Islam or face death. Many were given only one option: convert to Islam or be expelled from their own lands.
(Read Sahih Muslim 19:4366)

Before his death, Muhammad sent his armies to force the pagan Arab tribes, such as the tribe of al-Harith, to accept Islam. He told them they had only one option—to join him or be killed by the sword. Fearing his threats, the tribe converted.

Later, Muhammad cursed all Christians and Jews.
Read Sahih Bukhari 8:427.

According to Al-Shafi’i in “The Ordinances of the Quran,” Muhammad forced people to join him or he killed those who rejected him.
See Bukhari 53:386.

Similarly, Abu Bakr, who succeeded Muhammad, launched even more violent jihads in neighboring lands against those who rejected Islam. In a letter sent to the Persians, Abu Bakr wrote:

“Accept Islam and you will be free; but if you refuse, then know that I have come to you with an army that loves death as you love life.”

These same characteristics of Muhammad can now be seen in Boko Haram, Al Qaeda, Al Shabab. Evidence of this culture is also present in ISIS, which has killed millions in Syria. Even in Africa, particularly in Nigeria, Boko Haram has been at the forefront of implementing Muhammad’s command to kill Christians. Muslims believe that doing this fulfills Allah’s desire and earns them paradise for forcing people to join Islam.
See Bukhari 52:254.

Muhammad also forced Jews to pay JIZYA, simply because they refused to convert to his religion. This was a method of hurting and oppressing the Jews so they might convert.
See Bukhari and Ahmad (5114 or 4869 depending on commentary).

One thing you must understand is this: in Islam, actions are more important than mere belief in Allah. Even today, in countries with large Muslim populations, they do not like the presence of other faiths or religions—examples include Saudi Arabia, Zanzibar, Somalia, etc.

In the end, Abu Sufyan’s son Muawiyah overpowered and defeated Ali, Muhammad’s adopted son. He also poisoned Hassan, one of Muhammad’s beloved grandsons. Abu Sufyan’s grandson Yazid became Caliph and killed Muhammad’s grandson Hussein.

This is Islam and the way it forces people to join it—unlike Christianity, which does not force anyone, but proclaims the message of Jesus. In Christianity, there is no compulsion as found in the Islam of Muhammad.

Questions for reflection

  1. What kind of god uses swords to force people to join him?

  2. What kind of god kills people and claims that is the way to paradise?

  3. Why is there no compulsion in the Bible?

  4. Why are there no apostles in Christianity who use swords and knives to force people to join, as in Islam?

  5. Why is the Christian God not filled with hatred like Allah of Islam?

Today we have learned that Islam contains coercion, unlike Christianity. Furthermore, Allah is not Jehovah, the God of the Bible, because their actions are completely different. Therefore, it is not wrong to say that Adam, Abraham, David, Jesus, and all the prophets of the Bible were not Muslims and never worshiped Allah.

God bless you greatly.

Max Shimba, servant of Jesus Christ
For Max Shimba Ministries Org.

Such are the perils of forcing others to say that you are a prophet when they do not believe it to be true.

at No comments:

HAS ALLAH FABRICATED (DISTORTED) SCIENCE AND CREATION?**

**Wednesday, October 26, 2016

HAS ALLAH FABRICATED (DISTORTED) SCIENCE AND CREATION?

1. The Qur’an allegedly anticipated modern science:
It teaches that the sun and the moon each follow an orbit and revolve on their axis (Surah 21:33; 36:27–40). The Qur’an also supposedly teaches the Big Bang theory that caused the creation of the world (Surah 21:30; 51:47–48).
The Arabic word falak means “orbit.” Astronomers tell us that the sun revolves around the center of the galaxy once every 250 million years. The Arabic word yasbahuna (from sabaha) means “to swim,” but some Muslims claim it means “to rotate in its own course.”

Response: This is daydreaming for two reasons:

  1. The words are not clear:
    Falak is an Arabic word that can mean path or flowing in a course, and yasbahuna can mean “to hurry,” even though its more straightforward meaning is “to swim.”

  2. Muhammad himself clearly told us what it means, and he meant that the sun and the moon travel above the earth, moving across a dome-like sky over the world.

There are two primary Islamic sources that record Muhammad’s explanation:

“God created a sea three farsakhs (18 km) from heaven. The clouds are restrained, standing in the air by God’s command. None of its water falls. The seas do not move, but the sea moves with the speed of an arrow. It has the freedom to move in the air with equal measure, as if it were a stretched rope between east and west. The sun, the moon, and the returning stars [the five planets] run in the depths of its belly. This is what the word of God means: ‘Each one swims in its orbit.’ ‘The sky’ is the circle of chariots pulled by horses in the depths of that sea.”
— Al-Tabari, vol. 1, p. 235.

Abu Dharr narrated:

“One evening the Prophet asked me, ‘Do you know where the sun goes when it sets?’ I replied, ‘Allah and His Messenger know best.’ He said, ‘It goes (that is, it travels) until it prostrates beneath the Throne, and it seeks permission to rise again, and it is permitted. But a time will come when it will want to prostrate but its prostration will not be accepted…’”
— Bukhari, vol. 4, book 54, chapter 4, no. 441, p. 283; Sahih Muslim, vol. 1, book 1, chapter 73, no. 297–300, pp. 95–96 (also gives a more detailed account).

2. The Qur’an describes the sun’s axis near the center of our galaxy

Response:
The sun does not have its own unique axis around the galaxy. If the Qur’an was truly teaching modern science, it would have said that the sun, moon, earth, and the retrograde planets all rotate together around a single galactic center.

Again, we know exactly what Muhammad meant, because he explained it, as recorded in Bukhari and Al-Tabari (references above).

3. The “resting place of the sun” supposedly refers to the sun shining on the other side of the earth

Response:
No. We know exactly what Muhammad meant, because he explained it — and Bukhari and Al-Tabari recorded it. (References above)

4. The “resting place of the sun” supposedly means the sun’s complete destruction

Response:
Anyone reading this in any language can see the text refers to cycles, not literal destruction of the sun.

5. Poetic language: The sun, moon, and planets simply mark out a path in the sky

Some argue these verses were not meant to endorse or deny modern science, but were simply poetic descriptions showing that Allah controls the objects people saw in the sky.

Response:
This argument might make sense if Bukhari and Al-Tabari had not recorded Muhammad’s detailed explanations.
If Bukhari and Al-Tabari were wrong on this point, then what standard is there to claim they were right about anything else?

**That is why I say Allah is not Yahweh, the Almighty Creator of all things.

Allah has fabricated (distorted) the narrative of creation.**

I am Max Shimba,
A servant of Jesus Christ.

October 26, 2016


at No comments:

A GREAT CONTRADICTION AND CONFUSION IN THE QURAN ABOUT MOSES ACCUSING AARON AND THE SAMARITAN OF MAKING THE GOLDEN CALF

Sunday, October 16, 2016

A GREAT CONTRADICTION AND CONFUSION IN THE QURAN ABOUT MOSES ACCUSING AARON AND THE SAMARITAN OF MAKING THE GOLDEN CALF

Dear Reader,
Let us turn to Surah Taha, which was revealed in Mecca, verses 92 to 95:

92. (Moses) said: O Aaron! What prevented you, when you saw them going astray,
93. That you did not follow me? Have you disobeyed my command?
94. He said: O son of my mother! Do not seize me by my beard or my head. I was afraid that you would say: You have caused division among the Children of Israel, and you did not wait for my word.
95. (Moses) said: O Samaritan! What do you want?

The verses above state that Moses rebuked Aaron and “the Samaritan” for making the Golden Calf for the Israelites when Moses was on Mount Sinai. But is this claim true?

LET US EXAMINE THE HISTORICAL EVIDENCE

The Assyrians conquered the Jews of the Northern Kingdom in 722 BC (Before Christ). They took them into exile and brought with them captives from various other kingdoms. These foreigners later intermarried with the remaining Jews from the lower tribes who were allowed by the Assyrians to remain in the land.

Their children were the ones called “Samaritans” because they lived in the land of Samaria, which was named after the landowner known as “Shemer.” (See 1 Kings 16:24.)

1 Kings 16:24 – “He bought the hill of Samaria from Shemer for two talents of silver and built a city on the hill, calling it Samaria, after Shemer, the name of the former owner of the hill.”

The Jews despised the Samaritans for two reasons:

  1. Because of their mixed blood (“mixed race”)

  2. Because they established their own temples in opposition to the Temple in Jerusalem.

THE CONFUSION AND CONTRADICTION BEGINS HERE

The incident of the Golden Calf, which occurred near Mount Sinai as described in the Quran (Surah 20:92–95 above), took place in 1446 BC, which is 725 years before the first Samaritan was born in 721 BC.

My brothers and sisters,

Once again we see how the Quran is filled with confusion and contradiction at every turn.

In the Quranic verses cited above, and when compared to the historical record of the Samaritans, there is a massive discrepancy between the time Samaritans first appeared and the actual event of the Golden Calf.

The Golden Calf incident occurred in 1446 BC, which is 725 years before the first Samaritan was ever born, yet Allah claims there were Samaritans during that event.

Why is Allah unable to present His dates accurately?

QUESTIONS

  1. Why did Allah fail to tell the truth about the Golden Calf incident and insist that it happened during the time when Samaritans existed?

  2. Is it possible that Muhammad’s lack of knowledge caused him to misunderstand what Gabriel was telling him?

  3. Is it possible that when Allah gave the message to Gabriel, Gabriel also failed to convey it to Muhammad correctly?

  4. Can we trust the Quran—which fails to present accurate historical data—as a book “with no doubt in it”?

The history of the Golden Calf is found not only in religious texts but also in secular historical writings. But in the Quran, this account is presented with a major falsehood.

If truly Allah is the one who gave the Torah to Moses, why did He fail to state the truth?

If truly Allah gave the Torah to Moses, can Muslims and Allah show us where that original Torah revealed before the Quran exists today?

Dear readers,
The Quran was not revealed by Allah—it was written by people here on earth. If Muslims disagree, let them explain why Allah is unable to state the truth and instead fills the Quran with contradictions.

Indeed, the foundation of the Islamic religion is a god who has already been described as the father of lies. Return to these words from the Bible, the book of God:

John 8:44 – *“You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there...

The Bible has already answered that the father of lies is the Devil, and he speaks what belongs to him. Therefore, that is why the Allah of the Muslims also speaks what is his.

I invite you to the Great God, who is not the father of lies but is the Creator of everything and who died for your sins.

Receive Jesus today and obtain Eternal Life.

God bless you greatly.

Max Shimba Ministries Org.

MAX SHIMBA MINISTRIES ORG ©2015. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.

at No comments:

The Mawlid of Prophet Muhammad is Haram

Chapter X: The Mawlid of Prophet Muhammad – Pagan Origins and Historical Examination

Introduction

The celebration of the Mawlid of Prophet Muhammad has become widespread among many Muslims. However, a critical examination of Islamic sources raises important questions:

  1. Which verse of the Qur’an commands Muslims to hold the festival of Mawlid?

  2. Whom do Muslims truly follow—Allah, the Qur’an, the authentic Hadith, the Prophet Muhammad, the Pillars of Islam, or Sharia?

This chapter explores the history, scholarly views, and religious implications of celebrating Mawlid, demonstrating that its origins are not rooted in the Qur’an or the practices of the Prophet and his companions, but rather in later historical innovations.

1. Historical Background of Mawlid

1.1 Early Islamic Practice

A careful examination of Islamic history shows three key points:

  1. Neither the Prophet Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) nor his companions (may Allah be pleased with them) celebrated Mawlid.

  2. Mawlid was introduced over three centuries after the Prophet’s passing.

  3. Its founders were associated with non-Islamic practices and lineages.

Al-Haafidh as-Sakhawi emphasizes:

“The practice of celebrating the noble Mawlid was not accepted by the early righteous generations (Salafus Salih) of the first three centuries. Indeed, this matter was innovated afterward.”
(Subulul Hudaa war-Rashaad, Vol. 1, p. 439)^1

1.2 The Emergence of Mawlid under the Fatimids

According to Sunni scholar Al-Imam al-Maqrizi:

“During the rule of the Fatimids in Egypt, these celebrations were treated as festive seasons where rulers would distribute wealth and generosity. They observed various festivals, including the Prophet’s Mawlid, the Mawlid of Ali, Hasan, Husayn, Fatimah, and other leaders.”
(Al-Khutwat, Vol. 1, p. 490)^2

The Fatimids, a Shia Ismaili dynasty, institutionalized these celebrations to legitimize their political and religious authority. They compelled people to light lanterns and observe festivities, particularly during Rabi’ul Awwal. Mawlid was officially observed as a custom rather than a divinely mandated practice.

1.3 Scholarly Commentary on the Fatimids

Historical records describe the Fatimids (Banu Ubayd) as rulers who claimed lineage from Fatimah, though this was disputed by scholars. Imam Shamah notes:

“The Fatimid rulers falsely claimed noble descent, oppressed people, and allied with foreign invaders. They introduced corrupt practices under the guise of religious celebration, including the Mawlid, to consolidate power and promote innovation over authentic Islamic practices.”
(Ar-Rawdatayn, pp. 200–202)^3

Abdullah Saleh Farsy writes:

“Those who started Mawlid were Shia Ismailis. They ruled Sunni lands from 297 A.H. (909 CE) to 567 A.H. (1171 CE). When they left, Sunnis continued the Mawlid of the Prophet alone, discarding other celebratory innovations.”^4

The first official Sunni Mawlid was organized by King Mudhaffar al-Din, brother-in-law of Salahuddin Ayyubi, in the 12th–13th century.

2. Absence of Qur’anic or Hadith Evidence

The exact birth date of the Prophet Muhammad is not mentioned in the Qur’an or in any authentic Hadith. Scholars have only speculated:

  • Safi-ur-Rahman al-Mubarakpuri (Ar-Raheeq al-Makhtum, p. 62) estimates the Prophet’s birth as Monday, 9 Rabi’ul Awwal, in the Year of the Elephant (571 CE)^5.

  • Sirajur Rahman suggests the date corresponds approximately to late February or early March 571 CE (Al-Mustafa, 1993, p. 11)^6.

Thus, the Mawlid cannot be derived from any Qur’anic directive or prophetic instruction; it is a post-hoc historical innovation.

3. Scholarly Opinions on Mawlid as Bid‘ah (Innovation)

Many Islamic scholars have condemned the Mawlid as an illegitimate innovation (bid‘ah):

  • Imam Ash-Shatibi (Al-I’tisam, 1/34) lists Mawlid among condemned innovations^7.

  • Imam Al-Fakihani denounces it in his treatise on bid‘ah^8.

  • Imam Al-Hajj Al-Maliki calls it bid‘ah in Al-Mudkhal (2:11–12)^9.

  • Abu at-Tayyib Shamsul-Haq Al-Adhwiym Abaadiy and his teacher Bashirud-Din Qanuji declare it forbidden, citing authentic Hadith^10.

  • Abu ‘Abdillah Al-Haffaar Al-Maalikiy confirms that neither the Prophet nor his companions performed Mawlid, and it was never part of early Islamic practice^11.

4. Questions for Reflection

  1. Where in the Qur’an are Muslims permitted to celebrate the Prophet’s Mawlid?

  2. Where in the Qur’an does it state that Muhammad was born and lived?

  3. Why do Muslims celebrate the Mawlid, which is not mentioned in the Qur’an?

  4. Muslims, whom do you truly follow—Allah, the Qur’an, the authentic Hadith, the Pillars, or Sharia?

Conclusion

The celebration of the Prophet Muhammad’s Mawlid is a pagan innovation that emerged centuries after his passing. It was introduced for political and social purposes by the Fatimid rulers and is not rooted in authentic Islamic teachings. Understanding the historical and religious context of Mawlid invites Muslims to reflect on the importance of following Allah, the Qur’an, and the Sunnah of the Prophet, rather than cultural or political innovations introduced centuries later.

Max Shimba Ministries Org.
October 16, 2016

Footnotes

  1. Al-Haafidh as-Sakhawi, Subulul Hudaa war-Rashaad, Vol. 1, p. 439.

  2. Al-Imam al-Maqrizi, Al-Khutwat, Vol. 1, p. 490.

  3. Imam Shamah, Ar-Rawdatayn Fiy Akhbaar Dawlatayn, pp. 200–202.

  4. Shaykh Abdullah Saleh Farsy, Tafsir Mawlid Barzanji, Zanzibar, p. iv.

  5. Safi-ur-Rahman al-Mubarakpuri, Ar-Raheeq al-Makhtum, p. 62.

  6. Sirajur Rahman, Al-Mustafa, 1993, p. 11.

  7. Imam Ash-Shatibi, Al-I’tisam, 1/34.

  8. Imam Al-Fakihani, Risaalah Maalooma.

  9. Imam Al-Hajj Al-Maliki, Al-Mudkhal, Vol. 2, pp. 11–12.

  10. Bashirud-Din Qanuji, Ghaayatul Kalaam fi Ibtwaal ‘Amal al-Mawlid wal-Qiyaam.

  11. Abu ‘Abdillah Al-Haffaar Al-Maalikiy, Al-Mi’yaar Al-Mu’arab, 7/99.

Bibliography

  • Al-Haafidh as-Sakhawi, Subulul Hudaa war-Rashaad, Vol. 1.

  • Al-Imam al-Maqrizi, Al-Khutwat, Vol. 1.

  • Imam Shamah, Ar-Rawdatayn Fiy Akhbaar Dawlatayn.

  • Shaykh Abdullah Saleh Farsy, Tafsir Mawlid Barzanji, Zanzibar.

  • Safi-ur-Rahman al-Mubarakpuri, Ar-Raheeq al-Makhtum.

  • Sirajur Rahman, Al-Mustafa, Ansaar Muslim Youth Organisation, 1993.

  • Imam Ash-Shatibi, Al-I’tisam.

  • Imam Al-Fakihani, Risaalah Maalooma.

  • Imam Al-Hajj Al-Maliki, Al-Mudkhal.

  • Bashirud-Din Qanuji, Ghaayatul Kalaam fi Ibtwaal ‘Amal al-Mawlid wal-Qiyaam.

  • Abu ‘Abdillah Al-Haffaar Al-Maalikiy, Al-Mi’yaar Al-Mu’arab.


at No comments:
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)

TRENDING NOW