What is the justification for this discrepancy in the Quran and the change in Allah's mood from peaceful to militant and conciliatory to confrontational? Muslim apologists in the West present the kinder verses of the Quran or what is known as the Early Revelation. While Islamic scholars, when have only Muslims as their audience, say that those softer verses of the Quran were abrogated and supplanted by harsher ones. The reason given is, as Al Maududi puts it, "Mohammad became strong enough to move from the stage of weakness to the stage of Jihad".

For 13 years Muhammad preached in Mecca but less than 100 people accepted him. Meccans preferred Al Nadir, another storyteller to him. Muhammad’s irreverence to their gods angered them. So he established himself in Medina where he found more attentive ears. His followers also joined him and he called them immigrants. At first they were poor and used to work as journeymen in palm plantations that belonged to the Jew of Medina. They used to give some of their food to Muhammad, who often dined on nothing but a few dates. Muhammad found this situation unbearable and started raiding the merchant caravans that were carrying goods from Damascus to Mecca. One of these raids that took place at Badr was a big success which brought him a lot of booty. Then he planned other highway robberies. He distributed the booty, including women, among those who took part in the battles and kept 20% for himself. He even made money by taking the passengers of the Caravan as hostages and asking ransom for their release or kill them. He assured his followers that if they fall in these battles, they will get more rewards in Paradise. Gradually his fortunes changed. He was no more a weak neglected preacher but a marauding chieftain who commanded absolute power over his followers. With this change of fortune Muhammad's message also changed.

Here is a comparison between some early verses he wrote in Mecca while weak and some that he wrote in Medina after becoming powerful.

This dichotomy is explained by some Muslim scholars.

Dr. Muhsin Khan the translator of Sahih Bukhari and the Quran into English writes:

Dr. Khan continues:

The "Mujahideen who fight against the enemies of Allah in order that the worship should be all for Allah (alone and not for any other deity) and that the word is Allah's (ie. none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and His religion Islam) should be upper most."

Dr. Sobhy as-Saleh, a contemporary academic, does not see in Q. 2:256 and Q. 9:73 a case of abrogation but a case of delaying or postponing the command to fight the infidels. To support his view he quoted Imam Suyuti the author of Itqan Fi 'Ulum al- Qur'an who wrote:

“The command to fight the infidels was DELAYED UNTIL THE MUSLIMS BECOME STRONG, but when they were weak they were commanded to endure and be patient. [ Sobhy as_Saleh, Mabaheth Fi 'Ulum al- Qur'an, Dar al-'Ilm Lel-Malayeen, Beirut , 1983, p. 269.]

Dr. Sobhy, in a footnote, commends the opinion of a scholar named Zarkashi who said:

"Allah the most high and wise revealed to Mohammad in his weak condition what suited the situation, because of his mercy to him and his followers. For if He gave them the command to fight while they were weak it would have been embarrassing and most difficult, but when the most high made Islam victorious He commanded him with what suited the situation, that is asking the people of the Book to become Muslims or to pay the levied tax, and the infidels to become Muslims or face death. These two options, to fight or to have peace return according to the strength or the weakness of the Muslims."[ibid p. 270]

And Nahas writes:

"the scholars differed concerning Q. 2:256. (There is no compulsion if religion) Some said: 'It has been abrogated [cancelled] for the Prophet compelled the Arabs to embrace Islam and fought them and did not accept any alternative but their surrender to Islam. The abrogating verse is Q. 9:73 'O Prophet, struggle with the unbelievers and hypocrites, and be thou harsh with them.' Mohammad asked Allah the permission to fight them and it was granted. Other scholars said Q. 2:256 has not been abrogated, but it had a special application. It was revealed concerning the people of the Book [the Jews and the Christians]; they can not be compelled to embrace Islam if they pay the Jizia (that is head tax on free non-Muslims under Muslim rule). It is only the idol worshippers who are compelled to embrace Islam and upon them Q. 9:73 applies. This is the opinion of Ibn 'Abbas which is the best opinion due to the authenticity of its chain of authority."[ al-Nahas, An-Nasikh wal-Mansukh, p.80. See also Ibn Hazm al-Andalusi, A-Nnasikh wal-Mansukh, Dar al-Kotob al-'Elmeyah, birute, 1986, p.42.]

Ibn Hazm al-Andalusi writes:

"Fight in the way of God with those who fight with you, but aggress not: God loves not the aggressors (2:190)" On the authority of Ga'far ar-Razi from Rabi' Ibn 'Ons, from 'Abil-'Aliyah who said: This is the first verse that was revealed in the Qur'an about fighting in the Madina. When it was revealed the prophet used to fight those who fight with him and avoid those who avoid him, until Sura 9 was revealed. And so is the opinion of 'Abd ar-Rahman Ibn Zayd Ibn 'Aslam who said this verse was cancelled by 9:5 "Slay the idolaters wherever you find them"[ bn Hazm al-Andalusi, An-Nasikh wal- Mansukh, Dar al-Kotob al-'Elmeyah, birute, 1986, P.27]

In fact the Qurashis were not sympathetic to Muslims. They mocked and teased them but never killed anyone for accepting Islam. The reason for this loss of love was due to the fact that Muhammad was making sacrilege of their gods and was disrespectful of their beliefs. The reaction of the Meccans was justifiable and normal.

Muhammad said that oppression is worse than killing. Apart from the fact that this statement is absurd, he himself instructed his followers to be harsh and oppressive when dealing with the non-believers.

However, as the facts stands the non-believers did not attack the Muslims. It was the Muslims who attacked Mecca, the Jews and other nonbelievers. Was it the Persians who raided the Muslims? Was it India that was preventing the Arabs from worshiping Allah? Did Spain come to fight against the Muslims?

Muhammad said anyone who does not believe in him must be killed. But he spared the lives of the Christians and the Jews provided they pay a penalty tax. In Keibar he exacted 50% of all the crops produced by the Jews from their own lands that he confiscated in exchange for their lives. Is this not oppression? The Quran is unequivocal when it comes to oppressing the non-believers.

What are those “defined conditions”? Let us make it clear that we are not talking about using force against common criminals, murderers or rapists. We are talking about violence against innocent people who do not accept Muhammad’s claim to prophecy and prefer to worship their own god, in their own way or worship none if they choose so.

Of course it goes without saying that those who murder innocent people for him in the name of Allah would go straight to paradise.

How could any fair-minded person accept this nonsense? How is it possible that people do not stop for a minute to think about the whole thing? Why we don’t ask ourselves simple questions, like:

These are simple yet important questions that every Muslim must ask himself. We are not sheep. We are humans endowed with a brain and it is up to us to use it.

After the arrival in Medina Muhammad put in march his plans. His tone changed and his lovey dovey verses of tolerance turned into call for murder.

Muhammad lost no opportunity to threaten the merchant caravans which passed through Hejaz. The Meccan’s livelihood depended on their trade with Syria. Their trade with Yeman and Taif was of lesser importance. But as the raid in Nakhla proved even those routs were not safe. Muslims did not even respect the sacredness of the forbidden months and sacrilegiously had murdered a man, stolen properties and took as hostage and threatened to kill two innocent men.

At Medina the Divine command to fight against the Unbelievers of Mecca was promulgated. Not just the Meccan immigrants but also the Muslims of Medina were encouraged to join in these raids and robberies.

Revenge was one factor, but that was not all that consumed Muhammad. He had megalomaniac dreams and grandiose ideas. Attacks on the Meccans were just a stepping stone. As we can see, soon he moved to other target and extended his aggression towards anyone who would not submit to him demands at once.

The following are the earliest passages on the subject :

To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged;- and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid;-

They are) those who have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right,- (for no cause) except that they say, "our Lord is Allah". Did not Allah check one set of people by means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of Allah is commemorated in abundant measure. Allah will certainly aid those who aid his (cause);- for verily Allah is full of Strength, Exalted in Might, (able to enforce His Will). 22.39,40

In these verses Muhammad is encouraging the Meccan immigrants to fight their own people because they have been expelled from their homes. This of course was not the case because as we saw earlier, the Meccans did not expel anyone. In fact some even went after their relatives to make them return by force if necessary. The Muslims left Mecca on their own volition and because Muhammad ordered them to. He even threatened them with hell if they did not leave and asked his followers to kill each other if anyone among them decides to return.

Yet here Muhammad is blaming the Meccans for this forced immigration and tries to rouse his followers to take revenge. Something that we cannot understand is that even if these eighty or so Muslims were indeed forced by the Meccans to emigrate, how this could justify the raids at the caravans? The goods in those caravans did not necessarily belong to the very people who allegedly persecuted the Muslims. Suppose you are mistreated in a city by some individuals, does it justify taking your revenge from any citizen of that city?

Unfortunately this idiosyncrasy has not left the Muslims. Even today the Islamic terrorists use the same logic when they bomb buildings, metros and discothèques. If they perceive a country has been unfriendly to them they consider it justifiable to kill the citizens of that country for payback.

The above verse, (permission is given to fight….22:39) was the verse Osama Bin Laden chose to start his letter to America. Can we say Islam has nothing to do with Islamic terrorism?

My intent is to prove that every action of the Muslim terrorists today is inspired by what Muhammad did or say 1400 years ago. That to understand where the terrorists come from we have to understand who Muhammad was, what he said and what he did.

So first it was revenge. But the Meccans were only a handful and Muhammad needed the help of the Muslims of Medina whom he called “Ansar” (the helpers).

The subsequent verses are directed at all the Muslims. They are addressed to the immigrants but also the Ansar are called upon to fight “in the cause of Allah”:

Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.

And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.

But if they cease, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression. 2.190-193

These verses make one to believe that Muslims were under the siege and were defending themselves from the aggression of the Quraish. However, there were no attacks from the Quraish. These verses were written down to encourage the Muslims to attack Mecca. The Muslims were the aggressors not the Quraish. So what is the meaning of “do not transgress the limit” and “let there be no hostility except those who practice oppression”?

These verses sound as if those raids were acts of self defense. But that was not the case. These are all psychological games that Muhammad played to pretend standing on higher moral grounds and justify those attacks.

If a thousand years from now, someone totally unfamiliar with world history came across Bin Laden’s letter and find this sentence, he might conclude that may be America was indeed oppressing the Muslims and attacking them.

Muslims destroyed all their opponents and they are the ones who wrote the history. This history that we have is the history written by the victor. It is a biased story. Despite that we can see the inconsistencies and contradictions that lead us to believe, what the Quran says must be taken with a big grain of salt.

Naturally people did not want to make war. Believing in Allah is one thing but killing people for it is something else. Even today there are Muslims who like to believe in Allah but do not to fight and kill for their belief. For them Muhammad brought the following verse:

Is really warfare and fighting good for us?

Muhammad not only encouraged his followers to wage war for him “in the way of Allah” but also he urged them to pay for the expenditure of those wars.

And spend of your wealth in the cause of Allah, and make not your own hands contribute to (your) destruction; but do good; for Allah loveth those who do good. 2.195

Note how Muhammad associates “doing good” with acts of war. This has psychological effects on the believers. People want to do good and please God. So Muhammad makes believe that paying for his warfare and acts of terrorism are doing good.

Today those Muslims who cannot fight personally contribute to Islamic “charities”. Those “charities” are not to build hospitals, orphanages or senior housings in Islamic countries. They are to build madrassas, train terrorists and finance terrorism.

Sometimes he would get angry and ask what is wrong with you that you do not pay.

And what cause have ye why ye should not spend in the cause of Allah?- For to Allah belongs the heritage of the heavens and the earth. Not equal among you are those who spent (freely) and fought, before the Victory, (with those who did so later). Those are higher in rank than those who spent (freely) and fought afterwards. But to all has Allah promised a goodly (reward). And Allah is well acquainted with all that ye do. 57.10

He cleverly equated the money that Muslims expend in his warfare to a loan given to God:

Who is he that will Loan to Allah a beautiful loan? for (Allah) will increase it manifold to his credit, and he will have (besides) a liberal Reward. 57.11

And sweetened the deal even more to make it irresistible:

One Day shalt thou see the believing men and the believing women- how their Light runs forward before them and by their right hands: (their greeting will be): "Good News for you this Day! Gardens beneath which flow rivers! to dwell therein for aye! This is indeed the highest Achievement!" 57.12

He makes examples of how much reward the believers get if they finance his expeditions.

The parable of those who spend their substance in the way of Allah is that of a grain of corn: it groweth seven ears, and each ear Hath a hundred grains. Allah giveth manifold increase to whom He pleaseth: And Allah careth for all and He knoweth all things. 2.261

Yet at the same time Muhammad feels uneasy when some remind him that they had contributed to his cause. Nor he likes people showing off their injuries to him lest they get the impression that they have done a favor to him.

Those who spend their substance in the cause of Allah, and follow not up their gifts with reminders of their generosity or with injury,-for them their reward is with their Lord: on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve. 2.262

Kind words and the covering of faults are better than charity followed by injury. Allah is free of all wants, and He is Most-Forbearing. 2.263

O ye who believe! cancel not your charity by reminders of your generosity or by injury,- like those who spend their substance to be seen of men, but believe neither in Allah nor in the Last Day. They are in parable like a hard, barren rock, on which is a little soil: on it falls heavy rain, which leaves it (Just) a bare stone. They will be able to do nothing with aught they have earned. And Allah guideth not those who reject faith. 2.264

This is all part of the narcissist way of thinking of Muhammad. A pathological narcissist truly believes that he is special and because he is special he is entitled to receive favors from others but he does not have to thank them for their services. Muhammad found a perfect way to make others what he wished even to the extent of sacrificing their lives for him and his cause without having to thank them at all. All he had to do is to give them empty promises of an afterlife and in this indeed he was most generous. It is like giving someone a huge postdated check for his services that only he can cash it after his death. Empty promises that fooled so many and still keeps fooling so many! Indeed mankind has not yet matured. We are living in our infancy. It is mind-boggling when one sees how a charlatan and a mentally infirm managed to fool billions of people - BILLIONS! It is amazing.

Behold, ye are those invited to spend (of your substance) in the Way of Allah: But among you are some that are niggardly. But any who are niggardly are so at the expense of their own souls. But Allah is free of all wants, and it is ye that are needy. If ye turn back (from the Path), He will substitute in your stead another people; then they would not be like you! 47.38

More exhortation to give money:

Believe in Allah and His messenger, and spend out of the whereof He has made you heirs. For, those of you who believe and spend,- for them is a great Reward. 57.7

See also 63.10.

These verses explain why so many Islamic charities have been caught financing terrorist organizations. You may think that charity and financing terrorism are two diametrically opposed concepts. But such distinction is not clear in the mind of Muslims. The Islamic charity is also meant to support the warfare “in the cause of Allah”. To us this is terrorism but to a Muslim it is Jihad.

Thus war in the cause of Allah became an ordinance of Islam, binding upon all the believers. Although revenge was used to rouse the immigrants against their own people, the real intent was to fight "until the religion became the Lord's alone."

Some of the believers were timorous of fighting. They might have thought that perhaps killing and looting is not really what Allah wants and Muhammad is doing that for his own self. But Muhammad always had his god ready to reveal for him any verse that would server him best. So this verse was “revealed” propitiously.

And those who believe say: If only a surah were revealed! But when a decisive surah is revealed and war is mentioned therein, thou seest those in whose hearts is a disease looking at thee with the look of men fainting unto death. Therefore woe unto them! 47:20

This verse shows that at lease some of the believers were reluctant to make war and Muhammad had to twist their arms by saying there was a disease in their hearts and woe to them if they do not obey.

These verses tell us one thing and that is Islam is essentially a belligerent religion and it can’t be reformed. As long as people believe in Islam and think that Quran is the word of God, Islamic fundamentalism always wins. Those who call for reform, tolerance and “dialogue of civilizations” are easily silenced by the authority of the Quran.

Many verses were written to rouse the believers to wage war.

For those who were killed in battles, paradise is guaranteed:

"They who have gone into Exile for the cause of God, and then have been slain, or have died, WE shall certainly nourish these with an excellent provision: For God is the best Provider. He will surely grant unto them an Entrance such as they will approve: For God is Knowing and Gracious."

At the same time Muhammad did not want his follower to assume that he and the success of his cause depended on their sacrifices. So after instructing his followers to smite at the necks of the disbeliever and after they have thoroughly subdued them, have bond them firmly, etc he says:

Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been Allah's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost. 47.4

So in other words God could kill the unbelievers without the help of the believers but he let them do it so he can test their faith.

It makes us wonder whether God is a mafia godfather that tests the devotion of his men asking them to kill for him. But if the Muslims stop thinking that there was a God directing Muhammad they can easily see that this man was indeed a gangster godfather.

What kind of god is this that would test the faith of his believers with their ruthlessness and brutality?

And somewhat later:--

"Prepare against them what force ye can, of your ability, and troops of horse, that ye may thereby strike terror into the enemy of God and your enemy, and into others besides them; ye know them not, but God knoweth them. And what thing soever ye contribute in the cause of God, it shall be made good unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly."

No one can describe Islam better to us than a Muslim, and who better than Ayatollah Khomeini who spearheaded an Islamic revolution in Iran and kick started the Islamic zealotry around the world.

These words were announced by Khomeini in 1981 at the celebration of the birth of Muhammad.