Lion of the Blogosphere

Historical Mohammed?

Summary of a book by Robert Spencer explaining why Mohammed was likely not a real historical person, but rather someone who was made up after the Arabs conquered the Middle East.

It should be noted that the person who wrote the summary  is a true believer in Christ, who I also believe is not a real historical person.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

December 11, 2015 at 1:14 pm

Posted in Religion

64 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Both Jesus and Mohammed existed and to say otherwise is liberal idiocy. Most people who deny 1 or both of them existed probably support feminism and immigration.

    Otis the Sweaty

    December 11, 2015 at 1:19 pm

    • I read one of Spencer’s books, and used to read his blog, and he used to write as if Mohammed existed. Why this turn, I wonder? Except that saying some leader never existed seems to be a way to diss the religion, the way atheists diss Jesus by claiming he never existed.

      Surely the stories of these figures are embroidered over the centuries, but I just can’t believe you can create so much personal myth based on a nonexistent person. But I believe Odysseus existed, too. These things don’t come out of nowhere. Like the nobleman said, I don’t know if my ancestor really did this or that; the story’s been in the family for only 1200 years.

      Mrs Stitch

      December 11, 2015 at 7:11 pm

    • Did the Angel Moroni exist? The Lamanites? The Nephites? All from the Book of Mormon and all fervently believed as real by large masses of Mormons who are, if their propaganda is to be believed, only increasing as a percent of the population. Heck one of Lion’s favorite presidential candidates used to teach this stuff. If 200 years from now Mormons constitute the majority of people in the US will the Lamanites and Nephites suddenly become a reliable historical proposition?


      December 12, 2015 at 2:07 pm

  2. Jews believe that both Jesus and Mohamed were historical figures, but then you don’t think there was Exodus or the First Temple either. We were around, so we know.


    December 11, 2015 at 1:21 pm

    • Correct, the Moses story is pure myth, and there’s no archaeological evidence of a First Temple. Most of the “history” in the Bible is fictional or vastly exaggerated.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      December 11, 2015 at 1:27 pm

      • No archeological evidence for the first Temple? Are you insane?

        Yes the Exodus obviously really happened. Archeology also shows that Jericho was destroyed exactly as the Bible says: the walls fell down, the city was burned, it happened after the harvest and there was no siege.

        Otis the Sweaty

        December 11, 2015 at 1:31 pm

      • Will address this later, got to run Shabbat is in 2 hours.


        December 11, 2015 at 1:50 pm

      • A good question to ask is how do we separate a cult from a religion? Or a religion that is a mainstream cult.

        Islamophobes will tell that Islam is not a religion, especially in the case of the Golden Rule, which Bill Warner likes to emphasize. Anti-Semites will tell you that Judaism is not a religion based on principle, given the stereotypes of the unethical Jew.

        Christianity is still the greatest Abrahamic faith to date. It managed to accommodate many different ideologies, evolved into many different branches and proselytize so many different kinds of people.

        It’s quite interesting to know that Muslims in the Medieval Period felt Christians were superior over Jews in terms of behavior!


        December 11, 2015 at 2:06 pm

      • A religion has supernatural beliefs and rituals.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 11, 2015 at 2:37 pm

      • “A religion has supernatural beliefs and rituals.”

        Most do but not necessarily.


        December 11, 2015 at 3:46 pm

      • WTF? Heston did a documentary.


        December 11, 2015 at 6:04 pm

      • Does it really matter? We don’t know if Pythagoras existed either but the theorem that bears his name is still true.


        December 11, 2015 at 8:53 pm

      • He existed because people don’t have a religious motivation to invent him.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 11, 2015 at 8:54 pm

      • “Pythagoras made influential contributions to philosophy and religion in the late 6th century BC. He is often revered as a great mathematician and scientist and is best known for the Pythagorean theorem which bears his name. However, because legend and obfuscation cloud his work even more than that of the other pre-Socratic philosophers, one can give only a tentative account of his teachings, and some have questioned whether he contributed much to mathematics or natural philosophy. Many of the accomplishments credited to Pythagoras may actually have been accomplishments of his colleagues and successors.


        December 11, 2015 at 11:32 pm

      • OK, well I stand corrected! Makes it even more likely that Jesus also was not a real person.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 11, 2015 at 11:54 pm

      • Lion — Jews are supposedly, to be the de facto non-believers of the son of god. The mere fact that Jesus was the son of god should make him suspect or non-existent in the eyes of Jews.


        December 12, 2015 at 2:47 pm

      • JS: Muslims in the medieval period were also a lot less antisemitic than Christians.

        Obviously things are a little different than in the days of the glaive-guisarme-voulge.


        December 12, 2015 at 3:04 pm

      • @ SFG –

        That’s mostly but not entirely true. When the Almohads conquered Cordoba from the Almoravids in 1148, they denied dhimmi status to Christians and Jews, leaving them open to forced conversion, death or exile. The converts were treated with suspicion and forced to wear special clothing that set them apart from “old Muslims.”. Maimonides and his family chose exile and eventually settled in Egypt. Other Jews fled to the Spanish Christian states. Yemeni Jews were persecuted by the Zaydi Shi’a rulers both in the medieval period and again in the 17th century after Ottoman rule of Yemen ended. A majority of the Yemeni Jewish population died of starvation as part of a mass expulsion to the barren Mawza region in an event known today as the Mawza exile.


        December 13, 2015 at 2:22 pm

      • Nebbish — Correct, the Almohads were these fanatical Muslims who came to Spain from North Africa, and then started to persecute the Jews and also Christians en masse. Specifically, these folks came into Spain, because of degeneracy of the Muslims living there, where one of their rulers needed a strict enforcer to rid of its nonsense and multiculturalism, and put an unified order into Muslim society. You figure that Muslims drinking alcohol is big sin, but it’s a much bigger sin to see fellow Muslims get into a drunken revelry in a Christian establishment.


        December 13, 2015 at 2:35 pm

      • A few minority hardcore right groups in Meriprolestan, hate seeing Whites rub shoulders with non-Whites. They call this multiculturalism and its degeneracy.

        The Almohads were these folks of their heyday. They hated the sight of Muslims associating with their Jewish and Christian neighbors.


        December 13, 2015 at 2:38 pm

  3. It doesn’t matter if he existed.

    Tony Soprano: “Columbus was so long ago he might as well be a fuckin’ movie.”


    December 11, 2015 at 1:36 pm

    • That episode is amazing. Particularly anyone who reads this blog would love it.


      December 11, 2015 at 8:13 pm

  4. Jesus and Mohommed almost certainly existed.

    Somebody had to finalize the doctrinal split within Judiaism that was thousands of years in the making. Somebody had to lead the first wave of conquest on the way to establishing the 4th largest empire in World History.

    As for Moses…. Based on what’s known about the Egyptians at the time, he and the Israelites would have had to have been Blacks. (If Pharoh is a black African of Sudanese origin and Moses can be mistaken for pharoh’s tribesman, then Moses is black). There’s no archeological evidence of an Amalekite civilization, or evidence that 2.4 million people spent 40 years on the Sinai peninsula. (there should be something, garbage, anything but it’s not there).


    December 11, 2015 at 1:59 pm

    • You have far more certainty on the topic than professional researchers who have spent their lives studying the topic.

      Archaeological evidence points to the purported Muslim conquest of the Levant as Arab in nature; the figure of Mohammed was a historical projection from the first few centuries after the rise of the Arabs.

      In particular, you should read books by Christoph Luxenberg who presents compelling evidence that the Koran was an evolution of various Christian documents used used by Christians in Syria.

      Also, review the work of Yehudo Nevo, who presents coinage from the 4th – 7th century, which shows a clear evolution in the idea of the person of Mohammed (basically, starting with a view of Mohammed as the prophet Jesus and evolving into the view of his personage as the creator of Islam).

      There’s more in this field, for example, read works by Prof’s Karl Heinz Ohlig, Gerd Puin, etc. etc.

      Spencer I believe simply summarizes the works of the researchers in this field.


      December 11, 2015 at 3:38 pm

      • Steve,

        Islam is a Christian Iconoclastic heresy.


        December 11, 2015 at 5:46 pm

  5. DailyKos talks about the math of any potential brokered convention:

    Otis the Sweaty

    December 11, 2015 at 2:10 pm

    • In typical liberal fashion Kos doesn’t seem to know what he is talking about here.

      Besides the fact that he can’t do math when he claims that under his projection Trump would get 541 of 1041 delegates and says that is less than 50% (541/1041 = 52%) and besides the fact that the GOP has 2472 delegates not 1041, you can go to real clear politics interactive delegate tool and run your own scenarios. I ran one where everyone gets the percent they are currently polling in IA, NH, and SC and then gets the national average everywhere else. In reality most will drop out everywhere else and the leaders numbers should go up. But under that crude scenario Trump got 1423 of 2472 (or possibly 2475) delegates which is far more than 50%.

      Kos likes to make noise about a brokered convention and sound smart about it, but his post about it makes him look pretty dumb. Of course that’s not hard to do.


      December 11, 2015 at 4:59 pm

  6. I’ve been following Robert Spencer for quite some time, he seems like a (mostly) good and knowledgeable guy (not as much as Lion of course, but still…) but I have the impression that he is bought by the neocons and that puts some restrictions on what he can write about (David Horowitz seems to be his biggest patron, so no surprises there). He is against Donald Trump for what appear to be trivial reasons, even though Trump is obviously the best bet of seeing his own policy prescriptions put into action. Spencer’s friend, Pamela Geller, is supporting Cruz even though Cruz came out in opposition to Trump’s proposal on banning all Muslim immigration into the US.

    Count Dracula

    December 11, 2015 at 2:11 pm

  7. Islamophobia is a big business that proles or failed academics get into, and make their money off a prole audience.


    December 11, 2015 at 3:03 pm

    • It’s true. If anti-semitism is the “socialism of fools”, anti Islamism is the socialism of proles.

      Why is anti Muslim hatred so appealing to so many people? The only thing I can think of that compares to it is anti communism during the cold war.

      I used to be against Islamophobia but now I think it can be used as a bludgeon against the Left.

      Otis the Sweaty

      December 11, 2015 at 3:38 pm

      • People are Islamophobic because Muslims cause trouble where ever they go. They are a pain in the ass. If there are just a few of them around they are OK but as soon as they achieve larger numbers all hell breaks loose. France us getting close to 10% Muslim and look what is happening there.


        December 11, 2015 at 9:00 pm

      • One ought to question the motive behind Islamophobes who write books denouncing Islam. They neither eradicate Muslims or tell people to do it for them. They’re only selling propaganda and fear. These same individuals would never write a book about black dysfunctionality.


        December 12, 2015 at 11:16 am

      • Also, many of these Islamophobes who teach their history of Islam, repeatedly ignore the scientific contributions coming from its civilization.

        I can betcha hacks like Tom Holland doesn’t even know that Medieval Muslims studied Aristotle, despite his Classical Education at Cambridge University. Some people whom I’ve met with a Classics background, were in utter disbelief that there are translations of Aristotle’s work in Medieval Arabic, as with Archimedes, Euclid, and Hippocrates. This goes to show you the kind of ignorance that people have, when it comes to higher education learning. Not only that, but to ignore the Qur’anic exegesis entirely, where Islamic scholars like those of the Bible and Talmudic scholarly tradition, comment and debate over the meaning of the difficult passages in the Qur’an, is definitely serving a bias agenda of irrational hate.

        Now for those readers here, who believe Meriprolestan is prolier than it was a decade ago, can look no further to the Middle East and how it degenerated over a millennium, as a great example of prole drifting. Muslims who wrote comments about the Qur’an were definitely more talented back then than those who make scholarly comments today (if they are any, which seems not to be the case).

        HBD bloggers like HBD Chick believe inbreeding was the reason why Islamic societies failed in the long run.


        December 12, 2015 at 12:20 pm

      • Furthermore, most Islamophobes cannot read in Arabic. There is one Jewish guy, who happens to be a Islamophobe and a practicing physician, who understands Arabic, and he writes books about how Muslims vociferously hate Jews, but cherry picks historical events and not taking their context, to serve his agenda.


        December 12, 2015 at 12:41 pm

  8. I can’t really follow the train of logic here.

    Is the proposal that Islam and Christianity were founded by committee? Or that they had leaders, but for some reason, people decided to manufacture every last detail about their lives, including their names?

    I’m not aware of a similar movement arguing that Karl Marx was in fact a composite character, and the person we see in photographs was an actor named Schlomo Sanchez, but then, there are parts of the Internet I haven’t visited.

    With Christianity, I can almost see this being vaguely plausible — the idea that Christianity was like Occupy Wall Street and formed at a grassroots level without clear leadership. Unlike the actual Occupy Wall Street, somehow this leaderless movement did not fizzle out (as leaderless things usually do) and instead spiraled out of control. People sought an explanation for this preposterous chain of events, so they ex post facto invented a leader.

    OK. I don’t believe it for a second, but I understand how someone COULD believe it.

    But Mohammed was a conquering warlord. He had military accomplishments in his lifetime, unifying the Arabian Peninsula. Is the idea that one particular leaderless tribe of Bedouins managed to conquer all of the other Bedouins (some of whom certainly had leaders), and then, without leadership, spontaneously developed the idea that they had, in fact, had a leader after all, who was a prophet? Then they liked their own story so much, they decided to adopt the idea of having leaders after all?

    Further, do you think that no one thought to proclaim himself to be a prophet before, say, Joseph Smith? Or did all of the actual people who proclaimed themselves prophets escape the historical record, while only the invented prophets remained?


    December 11, 2015 at 3:36 pm

    • They made up these stories for the same reasons that the Greeks and Egyptians, etc., made up stories about gods.

      Yes, Arabs conquered the Middle East, but the point of the book is that there is no historical evidence that some guy named Mohammed led them until they wrote that stuff about him a hundred years later. One should deservedly mistrust the veracity of all religious propaganda.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      December 11, 2015 at 3:49 pm

      • But nobody argues that other ancient documented historical figures never existed, “Julius Ceasar? Just a group delusion!”

        It’s only founders of religions who get the never-existed treatment. I

        Mike Street Station

        December 11, 2015 at 4:27 pm

      • There’s a huge amount documentation of the existence of Julius Ceasar written by his contemporaries.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 11, 2015 at 5:39 pm

      • “One should deservedly mistrust the veracity of all religious propaganda.”

        Especially when it comes to the secular religions that seem to be the fashion nowadays: feminism, environmentalism, multiculturalism, anti-racism, “equalism,” etc. etc. etc.

        Sgt. Joe Friday

        December 11, 2015 at 4:30 pm

      • I don’t believe Global Warming either.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 11, 2015 at 5:40 pm

      • There’s a huge amount documentation of the existence of Julius Ceasar written by his contemporaries.

        How would Christians and Muslims have gathered such large followings in Israel and Arabia during and immediately after their founder’s deaths if they weren’t real? There would have to be thousands of contemporaries at least who could vouch saw them or know people who knew them. How would their successors build support for nobody but them had ever seen.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 11, 2015 at 7:02 pm

      • Christians were small in number initially, just one of many mystery religions in the Roman Empire. They evangelized. Then Emperor Constantine declared Christianity the offical religion of the Roman Empire.

        I don’t know as much about early Islam, I didn’t read Spencer’s book.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 11, 2015 at 7:19 pm

      • Christians were small in number initially, just one of many mystery religions in the Roman Empire. They evangelized. Then Emperor Constantine declared Christianity the offical religion of the Roman Empire.

        They were persecuted only a few decades after Jesus would have died, more or less 30 B.C. If Jesus didn’t exist or there was good reason to think Jesus didn’t, it surely would have been mentioned by Roman propaganda from the time. But not even Nero and his government, which would have had access to now lost records and testimony from living Israelite supporters and opponents of Christianity, is on record denying someone named Jesus who claimed to be the Jewish Messiah existed.

        In Mohammed’s case, assuming he didn’t exist, his supporters would have beheaded anyone around Mecca who knew Mohammed wasn’t real. But the Christians wouldn’t be powerful enough to cover up evidence for another two centuries; before then they were vulnerable to powerful opposition that would have used Jesus” non-existence to their advantage.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 11, 2015 at 7:31 pm

      • If the sect existed before the alleged death of Jesus, that’s proof that he’s just a myth invented by later Christians.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 11, 2015 at 7:34 pm

      • If the sect existed before the alleged death of Jesus, that’s proof that he’s just a myth invented by later Christians.

        Rome would have known timeline better than we do today because they had access to documentation such as execution records and profiles of any sects posing political threats. But even they didn’t claim that.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        December 11, 2015 at 7:46 pm

    • All your points are contested in Spencer’s book. Read the book. It is a good summary of skeptical questions regarding the historical figure of Muhammed.


      December 11, 2015 at 4:25 pm

      • Muhammad might not have existed as a real person. Some devout Muslims will honestly tell you that. Furthermore, he isn’t like Jesus to the Christians, where he is divine. He’s only a prophet.

        Islamophobes will tell you the same. Except, he was also a pedophile and murderer. Yes, these same haters constantly ignore and omit one thing:

        Or they might elaborate that Islam was spread by the sword, hence a large swathe of lands were conquered by Muslims. When was conquest a nice affair, especially in the pre-modern era?


        December 13, 2015 at 12:52 pm

  9. There really aren’t any good, up-to-date, books about Islam for a popular audience. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Reza Aslan, Robert Spencer, Glenn Beck, and Karekn Armstrong are some of the top authors. I don’t think any of their books offer a comperehensive understanding of the ISIS phenomenon

    No wonder no one really understands Islam. The lack of good popular material on the topic is probably due to a combination of PC softness in the West and illiteracy and ignorance in the Muslim world.

    Lion should write a short book trolling the entire religion of Islam under a pen name. He would become a multi-millionaire.


    December 11, 2015 at 3:42 pm

    • Spencer does that. Has for years. And he has a lot of easy to read books on Islam. Sheesh what does a guy have to do.

      Mrs Stitch

      December 11, 2015 at 7:16 pm

      • I once threw a cream pie at Robert Spencer. It was a nice feeling to get to him closely and cream his face!


        December 13, 2015 at 12:55 pm

      • @ JS –

        Why did you throw a cream pie at Robert Spencer? What good will come to you from an increasing radical Muslim presence in North America?


        December 13, 2015 at 2:28 pm

  10. All of this splitting hairs about what is or is not Islam or whether Mohamed was real or not is irrelevant. This is just the kind of activity designed to muddy waters and to allow grandstanding by know-nothings. It’s the equivalent of arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

    What I want to really know is this: why haven’t any terrorists attacked politicians? Does anyone remember real terrorist organizations, like Beider Meinhof and the Irish Republican Army? The IRA very nearly assassinated Margaret Thatcher…and they did not use suicide bombers.

    Real terrorist organizations have a nice symmetry between their targets and their grievances. They want to amass a body count among the leadership class to get what they want. After all, it is the leaders that make policy. Threaten those to get real change is the logic of how real terror groups operate.

    These so-called Islamic “terrorists” are hitting a bunch of nobodies. The result? Politicians grandstanding about guns, or Islamophobia, or European/American values, or “who we are.” In fact, the politicians seem so unconcerned about actually being victims of Islamic “terrorists” that it’s almost as if they had insider knowledge knowing that…they will never be victims of Islamic terrorism.


    Is the political class either compromised, incompetent or both? That is the real issue.


    December 11, 2015 at 6:26 pm

    • The political class has a lot of security, and the terrorists are too stupid. The last smart terrorists all died on 9/11.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      December 11, 2015 at 6:31 pm

      • That security means very little to a suicide bomber.


        December 11, 2015 at 8:07 pm

  11. 1. Julius Caesar wrote a book. It’s available on Amazon.

    2. Jesus of Nazareth was, without question, a real person.

    Here’s a quick hit from Professor Bart Ehrman:


    December 12, 2015 at 12:52 am

    • Is the video a joke? The guy seems righteously pissed that people think Jesus didn’t exist, but he can offer up no evidence except that everyone agrees he existed. There’s a consensus damn it. Like the consensus that there are no IQ differences between races. Or the consensus of global warming.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      December 12, 2015 at 7:56 am

  12. I’m more interested by the idea that early Islam was not a separate religion at all but rather some kind of Arab-centric pseudo-Christian movement. If this is true, we could think of early “Islam” as a kind of successful Christian ISIS marching out of the desert, that slaughtered all the moderate Christians that wouldn’t submit to it.


    December 12, 2015 at 11:13 am

    • Probably more based on Judaism than Christianity.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      December 12, 2015 at 2:01 pm

      • Well, I say Christian because the article mentions them using crosses.


        December 12, 2015 at 2:48 pm

    • There is some truth to this. In Mohammad’s Mecca there were Christian tribes and Jewish tribes. These tribes believed themselves to be the descendants of Abraham’s son Isaac (at this point the Christians considered themselves to be Jews who believe in Jesus). The Arabs were looked down on for being pagan worshipers and were considered to be descendants of Ishmael who is was considered to be of lesser status than Isaac.

      With Islam the Arabs turned the table on the Jews and Christians. Ishmael became the good son and Isaac became the bad son. And Arabs went from pagans to becoming the ultimate monotheists.


      December 12, 2015 at 6:31 pm

  13. What kind of evidence do people need that Jesus and Mohammed actually existed? Did Romulus and Remus who built Rome and were supposedly weaned by a she-wolf exist? Did Ancient Troy that a thousand ships of Greeks destroyed to rescue Helen exist?
    I suppose you can say you have never seen God, but have you ever seen an Atom? These rationalists claim there is no life but ours in the Entire Universe, because they can’t see it. They are more than willing to believe man came from apes, even though DNA has found none of the apes that ever existed are directly related to us.
    They won’t believe in the Loch Ness Monster even though hundreds of eyewitnesses have reported seeing it and there are pictures. Same with Bigfoot. Guys like these poindexters wouldn’t even believe the Mountain Gorilla existed until someone shot one and showed them the body.
    That’s an amazing amount of skepticism from people who are willing to get weather forecasts from Algore the Senator who believes he invented the internet and wants “special” massages from professional masseuses. They are just angry and indignant when people question the claims that the Government can control the weather.
    Yeah, OK. Rational or rationalizing?

    Joshua Sinistar

    December 13, 2015 at 1:55 am

    • “Did Romulus and Remus who built Rome and were supposedly weaned by a she-wolf exist? Did Ancient Troy that a thousand ships of Greeks destroyed to rescue Helen exist?”

      Thank you for proving my point. There is a large debate about whether those people existed. Troy was always assumed to be entirely myth. And probably Romulus and Remus too. But for some reason, Jesus and Mohammed get exempted from that treatment because they are part of two major religions. Yet the ancient Romans believed that Romuls and Remus were real.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      December 13, 2015 at 7:58 am

    • Humans and chimps share 98.8% of their DNA.


      December 13, 2015 at 9:41 am

  14. JS-

    “I once threw a cream pie at Robert Spencer. It was a nice feeling to get to him closely and cream his face!”

    I wonder if there is a Freudian explanation for such behaviour?

    prolier than thou

    December 13, 2015 at 2:58 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: