Islam's Critics, Sex, and Jonathan Brown

By Silas

In 2011 Professor Jonathan Brown gave a lecture on the "abiding" historical stereotypes and criticisms of Muhammad. The video is found here.

@4:13 Brown categorized and discussed several historical criticisms of Muhammad that have persisted for centuries. These are:

1. Muhammad was a religious opportunist, a fraud, an impostor.
2. Muhammad borrowed or stole his message from other religions.
3. Muhammad was a lecher, lustful, and sexually deviant.
4. Muhammad was a violent fanatic.

He reviewed various critics through the ages and how European viewpoints began to change during the Enlightenment. He believes that a more general acceptance of Islam is due to the waning influence of Christianity. On the other hand he acknowledged that there are still many harsh critics of Muhammad and Islam today.

What Brown failed to address, or even mention, is "Why have these same criticisms persisted for centuries?" If the same criticisms persist through the centuries then the question of "Why?" follows logically. “People have been saying that Muhammad is a phony, a fraud, a lecher, and a violent fanatic for about 1400 years! Why have they been saying this?” Isn’t this question a reasonable response? Doesn’t that make sense? I found it curious that Brown either missed or avoided this question entirely. He spent plenty of time criticizing those who criticize Islam but never addressed why these criticisms endure. This question, and the contexts behind it, are more interesting and far more important than Brown’s brief historical presentation. Addressing that question in full may not have been within the scope of his presentation but a thorough lecturer would have mentioned it. If people are saying the same critical things about Muhammad for some 1400 years, don’t those criticisms bear investigation? This is the question that matters, this is the question that bears relevance for today, and the listener / reader needs to have this question addressed.

"Why have these same criticisms persisted for centuries?" People study Greek, Roman, and Mongol history and based upon their research they are able to both praise and criticize those peoples, leaders, and cultures on the record of their words and deeds. In the same way Muhammad and Islam can be studied, evaluated, praised and criticized, based on their record of words and deeds.

These records of words and deeds are found in Islam’s source materials: the Quran, the traditions (hadith), and biographical/historical writings (sira). Those criticisms of Islam and Muhammad persist because people have researched these words and deeds, recorded by Muslims in the Islamic source materials, and offered their analysis.

"Why have these same criticisms persisted for centuries?" When people criticize Muhammad for murdering his critics, attacking and enslaving non-Muslims, or taking women for himself, they say so because those actions are documented extensively in the Islamic source materials. Thus the many critical books and articles use those Islamic texts as evidence. Those records of words and deeds are there for all to read, evaluate, and then praise and criticize.

Those that are honest admit that Muhammad did many brutal things. Some criticize Muhammad strongly (Muir, Spencer, Dashti), others attempt to gloss over and whitewash his brutality (Armstrong), justify his brutality and blame the victims (Haykal), and others just state the facts and add very little commentary (Watt). But all honest writers, pro or con, admit that the murders, enslavements, and attacks occurred.

I encourage all to study the actual source materials: the Quran, the traditions, and biographical/historical writings, to learn about Muhammad and Islam’s actual track record. Most of these are now available in English and some are on the internet. A number of ex-Muslims I know have left Islam because they studied those materials. One man told me that he could not reconcile Muhammad being called a “mercy to mankind” while the “trail of blood behind him grew ever wider.” He learned about this trail of blood because he read the sira. When Muslims read and understand what really happened many are unable to reconcile the actual facts, the actual track-record, with the whitewashing that modern apologists present. One ex-Muslim told me that Muslims living in the West today should be thankful that they are not treated as Muhammad and early Islam treated non-Muslims.

Back to Brown’s lecture.

Brown detailed four criticisms that have persisted through the centuries. I will address #3: Was Muhammad a lecher, lustful, and sexually deviant? Like the critics mentioned above I will base my argument upon Muhammad’s words and deeds recorded in the Islamic source texts.

Was Muhammad a lecher, lustful, and sexually deviant?

To answer this question accurately you would have to examine Muhammad’s life as a “prophet” (23 years) to see how he acted with respect to fulfilling his sexual desires. Professor Brown only mentioned two of Muhammad’s marriages but he only had 30 minutes of lecture time and could not address and answer this question in detail.

For the first 10 years or so of his "prophethood" Muhammad had been married to only one woman, Khadija, (he was married to her for a total of about 25 years). He loved her deeply and was faithful to her. By all indications they had a good, strong marriage. However, following her death, things changed, circumstances changed, and Muhammad changed. During the last 10 years or so of his life Muhammad married many women and, in addition, had slave-concubines with whom he had sex. These last ten years were also the time that his fame, wealth, and power reached their apex. Henry Kissinger said that “power is the ultimate aphrodisiac” and it appears that that was also true in Muhammad’s time. Just as there is no shortage of women available for rich and powerful men today so in Muhammad’s time there were women willing to have sex with “the Prophet.”

The two marriages Professor Brown brought up as the basis for Muhammad’s lechery were: 1) Muhammad’s marriage to Zaynab, his adopted son’s ex-wife, 2) Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha, his best friend’s daughter, when she was six years old and his sexual consummation of that marriage when she was nine years old. Brown focused upon the marriage to Aisha, and so shall we. His marriage to Zaynab is dealt with strongly by Sam Shamoun here, and by me here, and I’ll not go into its details here.

Related to the marriage to Aisha, Brown stated that people today are criticizing Muhammad for marrying a six year old girl and consummating that marriage when she was nine years old. Brown sought to defend and validate that marriage. His reasoning to justify Muhammad’s marriage is below:

 
Brown argues, like many other Muslim apologists, that what Muhammad did was normal for that time and culture. Aisha started puberty and had her menarche, had entered adulthood and as such was sexual mature and ready to bear children; therefore her husband could finally consummate his marriage with his wife. This is understandable by all adults. Consequently we should not judge Muhammad, at the age of 52, engaging in sex with Aisha, at the age of 9. We should not hold Muhammad accountable to today’s standards.

In the West, if an adult has sex with a 9 year old girl, puberty or not, he will be prosecuted as a criminal sex-offender, identified as a sexual deviant, jailed, and made to undergo psychological examination. Brown argues that Muhammad should not be held to this standard.

I see two significant problems with Brown’s argument:

#1) He blankets Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha under a generic cultural norm:nothing to do in the desert, young adults have sexual impulses, so they get married veneer. But Brown is not staying true to the Islamic sources that detail the real reason Muhammad married Aisha, and Brown is not staying true to the actual facts of this marriage. This was not a marriage of young people who were bored, and who had nothing to do, but had to deal with sexual urges. Rather this was a marriage of an older man (age 49), with a child (age 6).

Boredom was no factor. Muhammad married Aisha during a very stressful time in his life. A couple of years earlier his pagan, protector-uncle, Abu Talib, had died, (Khadija died not long thereafter), and Muhammad was now threatened by the Meccans. Muhammad went to Taif, a nearby pagan city and pleaded for their protection. They laughed, mocked, and rejected him, then ran him out of town. The Muslims were weak, persecuted by the Meccans, and Muhammad’s life was in jeopardy! If anything this may have been a poor time for a 49 year old man to marry a 6 year old girl. These times were not boring for Muhammad!

This also applies to Aisha. Brown’s argument does not agree with what the Islamic source materials state, and it is not why he proposed marriage to her. At this age Aisha was not bored; she was a playful child and had better things to do as all children do. Perhaps during times of boredom young adults want to get married and consummate the marriage, but Aisha at age 6 could not be expected to desire, let alone engage in sex with Muhammad at that age. The historical facts run counter with Brown’s generalization to cover Muhammad’s marriage. This was not a haphazard marriage that occurred as a result of boredom, or of a child who has started puberty and was dealing with sexual urges. Brown misled his audience. He used a mask of generalized culture to cover over or neglect the actual facts of the marriage.

The historical writings show that there were two factors that constitute the background for this marriage. 1) Muhammad said that he had dreamed of marrying Aisha (while she was a child), and 2) later, one of Muhammad’s female friends, Khawla, suggested to Muhammad that he marry Aisha (while she was 6), because she thought it would be good for Muhammad to have a virgin wife. Acting upon Khawla’s suggestion Muhammad followed through on the dream and her advice, and sent her to propose the marriage to Aisha’s family. She did and Abu Bakr finally consented and "married off" Aisha to Muhammad. (Ref Tabari volume 9, p129, "The Life of the Prophet Muhammad," volume 2, p92-97, Ibn Kathir, Gassick).

The details of the consummation, with Aisha at age 9, also have nothing to do with boredom. Below is a quote from Tabari's History.

 
The Islamic sources state that when Muhammad went to Aisha’s house, she was outside playing with her friends and her mom or nurse came to get her. She had no clue as to what was taking place. They washed her up, dressed her, put makeup on her, and eventually took her into the room with Muhammad. Aisha said that her mother "made me sit on his lap"!

No doubt Muhammad had a surprise waiting for the child.

Muhammad already had another wife, Sauda, with whom he was sexually active. So this was not a case of Muhammad not having a woman available to relieve his sexual tension. But Sauda was not attractive and perhaps Muhammad wanted to try something/someone different. Muhammad may have been horny, but not bored. After all, Muhammad said that he could perform sexually at least 40 times a day, and that men would be able to have sex 100 times a day in heaven! I take it that he had a very strong sex drive. Some hadith record Muhammad as having sex with his 8 wives in one night!

#2)  Brown asserts that Aisha had had her first menstruation and thus was able to conceive and bear children. Brown is incorrect here. I have found nothing in the Islamic source texts that state that she had her first menstruation, rather they show the opposite: Aisha had not yet had her menarche. Further, Islam actually allows men to engage in prepubescent sex with their child brides.

(Also, as a side note, just because a girl has her menarche does not mean she is capable of having children. Perhaps ancient cultures believed this but they would be wrong. In most cases it takes at least a year or more before a girl ovulates and get pregnant. Conversely, also against Brown’s position, in rare cases a girl can ovulate before she has her menarche!).

The Quran allows it:

Brother Sam Shamoun comments on this verse:

 
Since Muslim men are to wait three months before divorcing a prepubescent child it means that they have been engaging in sex with those children.

Sam quotes two Islamic scholars commentary related to 65:4 and the subject of sex with prepubescent children:

Al-Tabari said regarding 65:4

 
Another writer, James Arlandson, quotes Abu- Ala’ Maududi regarding sex with prepubescent children here.

 
Sex with prepubescent child brides is allowed and established by the Quran. If Brown believes that it is wrong for men to have sex with girls before their menarche, then he argues against the Quran, Ibn Kathir, Tabari, and Maududi, and Brown will be saying that they are all wrong and immoral. I’ll leave it to his fellow Muslims to discuss his rejection of the Quran’s standard with him. As Maududi stated: “No Muslim has the right to forbid a thing which the Quran has held as permissible!”

Further, this undercuts his argument that teens entering puberty have to deal with sexual urges. In this case, only the male has to deal with them. Females can be married off and engage in sex before they have those urges.

If on the other hand Brown believes it is acceptable for men to engage in sex with prepubescent child-brides, then let him say so publicly. This would be an excellent topic for one of Brown’s students, or fellow professors, to question him on. “Is the Quran right or wrong to allow men to have sex with prepubescent child-brides?”

(Note to the reader: Muslims in the West, even America, are engaging in child-bride marriage and men are engaging in sex with girls as young as 11 in the States. They are simply practicing their religion.).

HOW DO WE KNOW THAT AISHA WAS PREPUBESCENT?

We’ve seen that Islamic doctrine allows for prepubescent children to be engaged in intercourse, and that Aisha was 9 when Muhammad had sex with her for the first time. Now we’ll look at the evidence and see that Aisha was prepubescent when Muhammad had sex with her.

The hadith state that Aisha was taken to Muhammad’s house, as his bride, when she was 9 and she took her dolls with her as play toys. I’ll borrow some excerpts from Sam Shamoun’s article:

 
A Muslim scholar says that it is okay for Aisha (and other children) to play with dolls because they are not considered adults:

 
Examining the evidence from the previous sections we see:

1. Islam allows sex with prepubescent children who are married
2. Aisha was playing with dolls after she consummated her marriage with Muhammad
3. Under Islam’s rules, female children were allowed to play with dolls because they had not yet entered puberty, i.e. had their first menses

 
Brown was honest enough to admit that Muhammad had sex with Aisha when she was nine; (many Muslim apologists today bend over backwards to deny her age).  However Brown was wrong when he said that Aisha had started puberty.  Brown misled his audience into thinking that this marriage had anything to do with sexual desires on Aisha’s part, or boredom.  I think we’ll all agree there is something dark about Aisha’s mother putting her child on Muhammad’s lap.  Similar things have occurred in religious cults worldwide.

Muhammad’s example:

The only conclusion that can be made is that Muhammad was having sex with Aisha while she still was a child! The Quran allows this, Muhammad did this, Aisha stated this, and the scholars affirm this. Now Islam’s children have to deal with this.

Was Muhammad a lecher, lustful, and sexually deviant?

This is one of the four persistent criticisms that Brown categorized and the one we are addressing. Critics have been saying Muhammad was a lecher and lustful for over 1000 years. The critics are not accusing Muhammad of having lust; men are guilty as charged, rather they are saying that Muhammad had a highly charged, excessive sex drive, that at times caused him to satisfy his penis rather than do the right thing.

So let’s find out why the critics have repeated, and repeated, and repeated, this claim. We’ll do this by examining the Islamic source documents, which were written not by the critics, but by devout Muslim scholars.

Earlier I stated that we would have to examine Muhammad’s “prophethood” life of some 23 years to answer this question properly. Brown only had 30 minutes to work with and that is not enough time for anyone to examine and answer this question in detail.

What follows are summaries of various events in Muhammad life, or of his various teachings related to sex. These topics are covered in more detail here:

1. Muhammad, Islam, and Sex
2. Muhammad's Sexual Prowess
3. Slave-girls as sexual property in the Quran
4. Muhammad, Aisha, Islam, and Child Brides
5. Muhammad, Zaid, and Zaynab Revisited
6. Zaid, Zaynab, and Muhammad

 
A man’s actions are shaped by his character, appetites, and desires. Let’s start with what Muhammad wanted and desired.

What did Muhammad want?

1. The Apostle of Allah said, "I like not from worldly life but perfumes and women."
2. The Apostle of Allah did not receive from worldly luxuries except perfume and women.
3. The Prophet of Allah liked three worldly objects - perfume, women and food. He obtained two and did not obtain one. He obtained women and perfumes but did not get food.
4. The Apostle of Allah did not obtain anything from worldly objects dearer to him than women and perfumes.
5. Nothing was dearer to the Prophet of Allah than a horse. Then he said: O Allah! excuse me, nay! the women. (i.e. not dearer than women).

(All quotes are from Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, Volume 1, page 469).

For the Christian readers I’ll point out that Muhammad’s desires correspond to what John said was in the world:

These statements tell us exactly what Muhammad desired: women, perfumes, and (dainty) food. He obtained perfumes and women. Like a typical carnal man, he wanted to get and have sex with beautiful women. And Muhammad got want he wanted.

 
Now we’ll take a look at some of his actions that were shaped by his appetites and desires, and the ways in which he got what he wanted.

1)  Muhammad and his taking of Safiya.

Around 628 (A.H. 7), Muhammad attacked and conquered the large Jewish settlement of Khaybar. Many knew that the most beautiful woman of the settlement was Safiya. One of Muhammad’s soldiers, Dihya, went to Muhammad and asked if, for his share of the booty, he could take his pick of captured Jewish women to be his slave. (Because they are slaves, they are property, and Islam allows Muslim men to have sex with, even rape, their slaves). Muhammad told Dihya that he could take his pick, so Dihya took Safiya to be his female slave. Muhammad’s advisor’s told him subsequently that Safiya was very beautiful and that he should have the most beautiful woman slave. Muhammad then commanded Dihya to bring her before him and once he saw her he took her away from Dihya for himself. Muhammad did this to satisfy his lust. There were many other female slaves Muhammad could have had, but he wanted the best looking one for himself, and so he took her.

Muhammad’s example: Muhammad’s lust overcame his sense of integrity and fairness and he cheated his soldier, a man who had put his life on the line for Muhammad and Islam. Muhammad lied and broke his word. His status gave him the power of taking what he wanted to satisfy his lust, so he took it. (Ref. Bukhari, volume 1 #367, Bukhari, volume 3 #437, Sahih Muslim #3329).

2)  Muhammad and his divorce of Sauda.

Sauda was the third woman Muhammad married, Khadija being the first and Aisha being the second. Khadija died and some time later Muhammad married Aisha and then Sauda in quick succession. However Aisha was six years old and was physically unable to engage in sex with Muhammad. Sauda was an older woman who had lived as a faithful Muslim. However, she was not attractive and was described as tall and very fat.

Many years later, after Muhammad had reached the pinnacle of his prominence and power, he intended to divorce Sauda (some scholars say he actually started the divorce). However, Sauda did not want to be divorced so she gave up her (sexual) night to Aisha.

Ibn Kathir comments:

 
Reference these articles for more details:

1. Muhammad, Lord of the Sent Ones?
2. Analyzing His Treatment of Sauda Bint Zamah

The Quran, 33:51, 52 was spoken to Muhammad and it allowed him to have sex with whoever he chooses, wives and slave-concubines (instead of treating his wives equally). Aisha commented, "It seems to me that your Lord hastens to satisfy your desire." Sahih Muslim vol.2:3453 Muhammad desired sex and Allah hastened to fulfill his sexual desire.

Muhammad’s teaching and example: Muhammad intended to throw his old wife away so he could have sex with a more attractive wife. She had been faithful to him all those years, she helped Muhammad raise his daughters, she was a good Muslim woman. Now, because of her age and unattractiveness, Muhammad was going to dump Sauda much like a man discards a worn shirt. Instead doing the right thing and care for Sauda, as the Quran commands in chapter 4:3, Muhammad intended to get rid of her. His penis was thinking for him. Muhammad’s example here continues to be followed throughout the Islamic world today. Many Muslim men will either divorce or marginalize their first wives and marry a 2nd, younger and prettier wife. Some famous Muslims have married and divorced many women because they wanted to have sex with new, younger, and more beautiful women.

3)  Muhammad and his female slave Mariyah

Islam allows men the right to have sex with their female slaves, (that which their right hand possesses), because they are property.  Tabari’s History, volume 39, page 194.  We find this established by the Quran and Hadith.  You can read about that in detail here.

Muhammad was given a slave women, Mariyah, as a gift.  Ibn Sa’d records:

 
We don’t know if he forced himself upon her or not. But we do know that other Muslim men had female slaves whom they did rape:

 
These Muslims intended to sell the slave women in the slave market or for ransom. They performed coitus interruptus to prevent the slaves from getting pregnant because if the slave got pregnant the Muslim soldier would be responsible for the slave and her future child. Therefore they could not sell the pregnant slave and their profit would be lost.

Muhammad’s teaching and example: Men were allowed to use female slaves for sexual gratification because Muhammad believed that slaves were property and possessions. The Quran calls slaves "what your right hand possesses." It was their right to use them for sex. To this day Muslims are teaching this, enslaving others, and using female slaves for sex because the Muhammad and his Quran establish their right to do so.

4)  Muhammad and his wives

Muhammad’s claimed that he had the sexual power of 40 men. Here’s an example of Muhammad in action and how he viewed women, his wives in particular.

Muhammad’s example: Muhammad used his wives like a sexual buffet. Try some of her, and some of her, and some of her.... Muhammad’s example shows the shallowness of Islamic marriage and that women are marginalized. If a man spends the entire night going from one sexual encounter to another I’d say that sexual gratification was boiling in his mind. Would you call that lustful, or perhaps lecherous?

5)  Muhammad’s heaven and heavenly "Houris."

@3:40 Brown says “Every Muslim man, not just martyrs, gets 72 heavenly beauties.”

Muhammad claimed that men in Paradise can have sex up to 100 times a day. Do the math - 100 times a day is over four times an hour for 24 hours, or just under 15 minutes per ejaculation. That doesn’t leave much time for anything else does it? So, what do you think was on Muhammad’s mind?

Isn’t this image of Paradise more like a teenage boy’s or lecherous old man’s vision… engaging in sexual act after sexual act?

Further, Muhammad taught that Allah created "Houris" specifically for sexual use. These houris are described as having large breasts, translucent skin, large beautiful eyes. (If you are a Muslim woman and are fat or small breasted you can be sure that your husband won’t be spending much time with you in Islam’s paradise). They are meant to turn men on sexually and they were created primarily to satisfy their Lust. Simple, pure, unencumbered, unbridled, living, breathing, full-blooded Lust. This Lust is satiated by these Houris.

Islam’s Allah created a divine vulgarity, these heavenly whores, these automaton sex dolls, primarily for sexual pleasure. Allah is a pimp providing "ladies of the night" for his male followers. During his presentation Brown told his audience gleefully, that it is not only the martyrs who would get 72 virgins, but rather that all men would receive 72 virgins! Is Brown looking forward expectantly to having sex with these automaton sex dolls?

This leads me to one of my main points of why Islam is wrong and false: carnal pleasure was the best Muhammad could come up with because he did not know the beautiful presence of the One true God, he did not know the personal, intimate, love of Christ. Islam is a man’s religion – made by a man, for men. Consequently, Muhammad’s imagination created a heavenly Playboy mansion.

Compare this with Christianity’s heaven:

I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. 23 The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp. 24 The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendor into it. 25 On no day will its gates ever be shut, for there will be no night there. 26 The glory and honor of the nations will be brought into it. 27 Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life. Rev. 21:22-7

Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb 2 down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. 3 No longer will there be any curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his servants will serve him. 4 They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. 5 There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever. Rev. 22:1-5

A comparison of Islam’s paradise and Christianity’s heaven shows a clear distinction: Islam’s paradise is meant to give men complete fulfillment of all their lusts and desires, Christianity’s heaven puts men and women in intimate fellowship with God. Read the Quran: Islam’s heaven has beautiful gardens, beautiful houris with large breasts, peace, joy, satisfaction, delicious food and drink, shade, etc. Islam’s heaven fulfills all that a man wants, men live as kings and get all their heart desires, and unlimited sex is a component of those desires. Allah is nearby but not the focus. Christ promised intimate fellowship with God in heaven, God's presence, His love, peace, and fulfilling joy are greater than carnal pleasure. Orgasm was the best pleasure Muhammad knew and repeated orgasms was a prize Muhammad promised his male followers. (Muslim women don't get much notice or mention). Muhammad never knew the greater intimacy and the greater pleasure of intimate fellowship with God. Muhammad's heaven is not God's heaven, it is a fantasy of a man's carnal desires and fulfillment. Jesus knew intimate fellowship with God and that is why He was able to promise His disciples something greater. Muhammad promised carnal fulfillment, Jesus promised God's presence. God is greater.

CONCLUSION

Should we hold Muhammad accountable to a higher standard?

Brown argues that we should not judge Muhammad according to our standards today:

@ 29:43  I hope that from this point on we will stop holding the prophet accountable to norms that, although they seem sound and permanent to us today, have not been so in the past and are not so for others today.”

However, this is not what Islam argues or suggests. Islam sets Muhammad up as mankind’s greatest example and Muslims are commanded to follow his lifestyle, his "sunnah." Muhammad proclaimed himself as the best example for humans to follow and Muslims are instructed to follow his lifestyle. Here are four verses from the Quran:

#1)  33:21  "Surely in the Messenger of God you have a good example."

#2)  21:107  "And We have not sent you but as a mercy to the worlds."

#3)  33:45-48  "O Prophet! surely We have sent you as a witness, and as a bearer of good news and as a warner, And as one inviting to Allah by His permission, and as a light-giving torch. And give to the believers the good news that they shall have a great grace from Allah."

#4)  68:4  "And most surely you conform (yourself) to sublime morality."

 
In some of the examples of Muhammad's actions I provided above, I made a comment under the heading, "Muhammad's example." I did this to highlight his poor character and sinful action. Muhammad's words in the Quran proclaim Muhammad as a "good example," a "mercy," a light-giving torch," and a "sublime morality," then it is more than fair for us to examine his character and actions. Further, Jesus said, "You shall know them by their fruits." (Matthew 7:16) Therefore, Muhammad, proclaimed by Islam as mankind’s greatest example, should be evaluated. Isn’t it reasonable to examine his fruit? We have done so and Muhammad has come up very short, very lacking, in character, in action, and as a example.

What do you think? This is another question Brown’s students should ask him.

My goal was to show that there is just cause for Islam’s critics to claim that Muhammad was lustful, AND that he used his power over others to feed that lust. Both Muhammad’s statements and his actions prove that. We asked, "Why have these same criticisms persisted for centuries?" and answered that they have persisted for centuries because of Muhammad’s record of words and deeds. Muhammad’s character, Muhammad’s morality, Muhammad’s fruit, has been tried and been found wanting. Judge by Christ’s standards, or judge by Western secular morality. Either way, Muhammad fails the test.

Brown’s argument is that we can’t judge Muhammad by today’s standards because culture changes. Yet Jesus’ standards surpass the test of today’s standards easily. Jesus lived BEFORE Muhammad.

The evidence supports the criticism. Brown pointed out that critics have been saying that for over a thousand years, but he did not ask why. Now you know why.