The first 3 citations are actually supportive of the notion that the "prophet" Muhammad did in fact take form the moon god! In fact, the article forgot to mention that the moon god also required a journey to Mecca which is parallel to Islam.
"I think you mean the fast of Ramadan. God commanded Muslims in the Quran to fast from dawn to sunset during the month called Ramadan (see Quran 2:185, 187). The beginning and end of the month is determined by the crescent (2:189) based on the instruction of God’s Messenger, on whom be peace."
http://islamgreatreligion.wordpress.com/ 2011/05/11/exposing-fake-myth-allah-a-moon-god/
The second article is only attacking the person not the information. Could this be an act of desperation?
"A temple of the Moon-god has been excavated in Ur by Sir Leonard Woolley. He dug up many examples of moon worship in Ur and these are displayed in the British Museum to this day. Harran was likewise noted for its devotion to the Moon-god. In the 1950's a major temple to the Moon-god was excavated at Hazer in Palestine. Two idols of the moon god were found. Each was a stature of a man sitting upon a throne with a crescent moon carved on his chest. The accompanying inscriptions make it clear that these were idols of the Moon-god. Several smaller statues were also found which were identified by their inscriptions as the "daughters" of the Moon-god. What about Arabia? As pointed out by Prof. Coon, 'Muslims are notoriously loath to preserve traditions of earlier paganism and like to garble what pre-Islamic history they permit to survive in anachronistic terms.'"
"The evidence reveals that the temple of the Moon-god was active even in the Christian era. Evidence gathered from both North and South Arabia demonstrate that Moon-god worship was clearly active even in Muhammad's day and was still the dominant cult. According to numerous inscriptions, while the name of the Moon-god was Sin, his title was al-ilah, i.e. "the deity," meaning that he was the chief or high god among the gods. As Coon pointed out, "The god Il or Ilah was originally a phase of the Moon God." The Moon-god was called al- ilah, i.e. the god, which was shortened to Allah in pre-Islamic times. The pagan Arabs even used Allah in the names they gave to their children. For example, both Muhammad's father and uncle had Allah as part of their names.
The fact that they were given such names by their pagan parents proves that Allah was the title for the Moon-god even in Muhammad's day. Prof. Coon goes on to say, "Similarly, under Mohammed's tutelage, the relatively anonymous Ilah, became Al-Ilah, The God, or Allah, the Supreme Being."
This fact answers the questions, "Why is Allah never defined in the Qur'an? Why did Muhammad assume that the pagan Arabs already knew who Allah was?" Muhammad was raised in the religion of the Moon-god Allah. But he went one step further than his fellow pagan Arabs. While they believed that Allah, i.e. the Moon-god, was the greatest of all gods and the supreme deity in a pantheon of deities, Muhammad decided that Allah was not only the greatest god but the only god."
"They did not worship the God of the Bible but the Moon-god and his daughters al-Uzza, al-Lat and Manat. Dr. Newman concludes his study of the early Christian-Muslim debates by stating, 'Islam proved itself to be...a separate and antagonistic religion which had sprung up from idolatry.'"
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/moongod.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------
Yes, Jesus could have been corrupted. But the thing is this, people witnessed His miracles and many of His prophecies have come true.
Matthew 24:1-2
"Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. 2 But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”
Luke 19:42-44
42 saying, “Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. 43 For the days will come upon you, when your enemies will set up a barricade around you and surround you and hem you in on every side 44 and tear you down to the ground, you and your children within you. And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation.”
Luke 21:24
24 They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.
"The Romans then proceeded to raze the city. They tore down every building except three towers and the western wall, which Titus left as monuments to his victory (34). No trace of the Temple complex remained. The utter destruction of the Temple and the city as a whole fulfilled Jesus' clear warnings concerning the future of Jerusalem (Matt. 24:1-2; Luke 19:42-44).
http://www.themoorings.org/apologetics/prophecy/AD70/Dan9.html
The following are hostile historians referring to Jesus:
Phlegon:
“Now Phlegon, in the thirteenth or fourteenth book, I think, of his Chronicles, not only ascribed to Jesus a knowledge of future events . . . but also testified that the result corresponded to His predictions.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 14)
“Jesus, while alive, was of no assistance to himself, but that he arose after death, and exhibited the marks of his punishment, and showed how his hands had been pierced by nails.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 59)
Jewish Talmud:
“Jesus practiced magic and led Israel astray” (b. Sanhedrin 43a; cf. t. Shabbat 11.15; b. Shabbat 104b)
Josephus:
“Now around this time lived Jesus, a wise man. For he was a worker of amazing deeds and was a teacher of people who gladly accept the truth. He won over both many Jews and many Greeks. Pilate, when he heard him accused by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, (but) those who had first loved him did not cease (doing so). To this day the tribe of Christians named after him has not disappeared” (This neutral reconstruction follows closely the one proposed in the latest treatment by John Meier, Marginal Jew 1:61)
http://www.pleaseconvinceme.com/index/pg79644
-----------------------------------------------------------
The unbelievers say, 'Why has a sign (ayatun) not been sent down upon him from his Lord?' Say: 'God leads astray whomsoever He will, and He guides to Him all who are penitent.' S. 13:27
They say, 'Why has a sign (ayatun) not been sent down upon him from his Lord?' Say: 'The Unseen belongs only to God. Then watch and wait; I shall be with you watching and waiting.' S. 10:20
Then, it may be that you will give up part of what is revealed to you and your breast will become straightened by it because they say: Why has not a treasure been sent down upon him or an angel come with him? You are ONLY a warner; and Allah is custodian over all things. S. 11:12 Shakir
The unbelievers say, 'Why has a sign (ayatun) not been sent down upon him from his Lord?' Thou art ONLY a warner, and a guide to every people. S. 13:7
Muhammad did no miraculous deeds based on the Quran's own teachings. He was only sent to be a warner... and did not miraculous deeds.
Naught prevented Us from sending the signs (bial-ayati) but that the ancients cried lies to them; and We brought Thamood the She-camel visible, but they did her wrong. And We do not send the signs, except to frighten. S. 17:59
"Regarding this verse, the late Sunni scholar Muhammad Asad candidly admitted:
This highly elliptic sentence has a fundamental bearing on the purport of the Qur'an as a whole. In many places the Qur'an stresses the fact that the Prophet Muhammad, despite his being the last and greatest of God's apostles, WAS NOT EMPOWERED TO PERFORM MIRACLES similar to those with which the earlier prophets are said to have reinforced their verbal messages. His ONLY miracle was and is the Qur'an itself - a message perfect in its lucidity and ethical comprehensiveness, destined for all times and all stages of human development, addressed not merely to the feelings but also to the minds of men, open to everyone, whatever his race or social environment, and bound to remain unchanged forever… (Asad, Message of the Qur'an [Dar Al-Andalus Limited 3 Library Ramp, Gibraltar rpt. 1993], p. 427, fn. 71"
Not before this didst thou recite any Book, or inscribe it with thy right hand, for then those who follow falsehood would have doubted. Nay; rather it is signs, clear signs (ayatun bayyinatun) IN THE BREASTS of those who have been given knowledge; and none denies Our signs but the evildoers. They say, 'Why have signs (ayatun) not been sent down upon him from his Lord?' Say: 'The signs (al-ayatu) are only with God, and I am only a plain warner.' What, is it not SUFFICIENT for them that We have sent down upon thee the Book that is recited to them? Surely in that is a mercy, and a reminder to a people who believe. S. 29:48-51
http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Azmy/mhd_miracles.htm
------------------------------
"The remaining prophecy is in Sura 30:1-4 and reads:
"The Romans have been defeated in the nearest part of the land and they shall conquer in a small number of years after their defeat."
This passage refers to the defeat of the Byzantines in Syria by the Persians under Khusran Parvis. (A.D. 615 - 6 years before the Hegira). However, the defeat of the Persians should take place soon--"in a small number of years". In the light of this prediction, Abu-Bakr undertook a bet with Ubai-ibn-Khalaf that this prediction would be fulfilled within three years, but he was corrected by Mohammed who stated that the "small number" is between three and nine years (Al-Baizawi). Muslims tell us that the Byzantines overcame their enemies within seven years. The fact, however, is that the Byzantines defeated Persia in A.D. 628 (Al-Baizawi commentary). That was twelve years after the prediction of Mohammed. Consequently this passage does not qualify as a prophecy, particularly as the time between prophecy and fulfilment was far too short, and in addition the event was easily predictable."
http://answering-islam.org/Nehls/Ask/proofs.html
"Muhammad allegedly claimed that the Antichrist, called the Dajjal, was to appear shortly after the Muslim conquest of Constantinople. The following traditions are taken from the Sunan Abu Dawud:
Book 37, Number 4281:
Narrated Mu'adh ibn Jabal: The Prophet [peace_be_upon_him] said, "The flourishing state of Jerusalem will be when Yathrib [Medina] is in ruins, the ruined state of Yathrib will be when the great war comes, the outbreak of the great war will be at the conquest of Constantinople and the conquest of Constantinople when the Dajjal [Antichrist] comes forth." He [the Prophet] struck his thigh or his shoulder with his hand and said, "This is as true as you are here or as you are sitting.
Book 37, Number 4282:
Narrated Mu'adh ibn Jabal: The Prophet [peace_be_upon_him] said, "The greatest war, the conquest of Constantinople and the coming forth of the Dajjal [Antichrist] will take place within a period of seven months."
Accordingly, the Muslims conquered Jerusalem in AD 636 and Constantinople was taken over by the Muslims in May of AD 1453. Based on the preceding traditions, the antichrist should have manifested himself in December of AD 1453. This never happened! The only possible conclusion that can be made with respect to this matter is as follows: The prophecies regarding Yathrib (Medina) being in ruins and the Antichrist's arrival to take place seven months after the conquest of Constantinople never materialized. Therefore, Muhammad was a false prophet!"
http://www.kingmessiahproject.com/is_muhammad_false_prophet.html
Deuteronomy 18:22
22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him.
http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/false_prophecies.htm
Deuteronomy 18:20
20 But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or[a] who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’
"We learn about the Satanic Verses, not from Christian or Jewish sources, but from early Muslim writings. Accounts of the Satanic Verses are given in a number of early sources, including: (1) Ibn Ishaq, (2) Wakidi, (3) Ibn Sa’d, (4) al-Tabari, (5) Ibn Abi Hatim, (6) Ibn al-Mundhir, (7) Ibn Mardauyah, (8) Musa ibn 'Uqba, and (9) Abu Ma'shar.[6] According to the great Muslim scholar Ibn Hajar, three chains of transmission (isnad) in these accounts "satisfy the conditions requisite for an authentic report."[7] Moreover, Sahih al-Bukhari, Islam’s most trusted source on the life of Muhammad, gives indirect confirmation of the event (Number 4862, quoted below). Beyond this, certain verses of the Qur’an (17:73-5 and 22:52-3) were revealed in response to Muhammad’s embarrassing lapse into polytheism.
We therefore have compelling historical evidence that the story is authentic...
The polytheists were delighted that Muhammad had at last approved of their gods. To return the kindness, they "prostrated themselves because of the reference to their gods which they had heard, so that there was no one in the mosque, believer or unbeliever, who did not prostrate himself" (p. 109)...
Whatever we think of the preposterous Qur’anic explanation of the Satanic Verses (and its defense of Muhammad), it is clear that the Prophet of Islam, on at least one occasion, delivered a message that did not come from God. It is also clear that Muhammad, on at least one occasion, spoke in the names of false gods."
http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Wood/deuteronomy_deductions.htm
----------------------------------------------
No miracles were done by Muhammad. His prophecies did not come true. He spoke in the name of other gods. He proclaimed that the Old Testament was true, which in effect disproves him; he is contradictory.
Jesus, however, had witnesses and historical evidence for Him. He fulfilled the Old Testament, did miraculous deeds, and had prophecies come true.
