After reading this book the primary thought I had is that, similar to what Christians did by creating the "New Testament," thus toning down a lot of violent ideas that are not remotely consonant with our era, Muslims NEED to do the same thing ASAP! That is create a "New Koran," toning way down the violence and hate - thus depriving radicals of their toxic justifications for mass murder. Also, at the same time, possibly making the best parts of this book more accessible to non-Muslims. However, I see no hint of this happening, perhaps it will take a mushroom cloud.

If you believe you have a grasp of the fundamentals of the people and their philosophy arrayed against us but have not read this book, you are in for a rude awakening.
Spencer shows that if we deal with the Islamic terrorist threat in ignorance, we cannot prevail. This book, fully sourced in detail, reveals what we must know about the founder of Islam AND the religion he founded. It is tightly written and profound in its ability to awaken one to built-in threats of the radical aspects of Islam. It's an excellent read. A must read.

I highly recommend this book for anyone interested in learning the history of Muhammed and Islam. I know it certainly opened my eyes. This book informs the reader on how Muhammad's views changed as he matured from a young man being more tolerant of other religions to his total intolerance of other religious views as he aged.

I also found it highly suspicious that whenever he desired someone or something that was considered "improper" he would go into a trance and he would be told by his "guiding angel" that he was allowed to have his way.

The idea that Muhammad was and is considered the "perfect man" and the goal of all Islamic men is to be like Muhammed scares the HE** out of me. In closing, I consider this book to be a "MUST READ" for a better understanding of Islam.

Robert Spencer's book is not totally vacuous. He does make many points worth considering by those who are overly apologetic. However, in many ways he misses the boat. Is Christianity a religion of peace? I don't think history would bear out such an absurd statement. Religion tends to get pretty nasty- you know, us vs. them stuff. Is Judaism a religion of peace? Well, if it is, what is Israel doing right now? Has anyone read the Old Testament lately?

I truly wish that all and sundry would drop religion and become rationalists, but I highly doubt such a miracle will happen. Regardless of such a contingency, humans will continue to murder each other and go to war. Religion may justify such actions, but it is hardly necessary to get them started.

Indeed, this is the weakest part of Spencer's book. He does not rigorously link current events to the core of Islam. Yes, he tries. Clearly his examples are anecdotal and unconvincing. I could fire off fifty examples of U.S. barbarism since WW2 and tie them to Christianity, does that mean that their is a causal link? Doubtfull.

In fairness, it is to Spencer's credit that while being controversial he rarely engages in ad hominem's or unfair rhetoric. He needs to be answered in a serious manner by defenders of Islam. I think this can be done, but invective is not the way to do so.

All in all, worth a read if you have the time. If not, you are not missing too much.

This is an excellent book with a detailed focus on the Koran and other Islamic writings. Spencer presents a chronological review of Mohammed's life replete with quotations from Islamic texts. Indeed, very little of the book is interpretation or Spencer's opinions. The Koran and Hadiths are very clear what being a good Muslim entails. For someone who has read most of the sacred texts of Chrisitanity, Buddhism and Hiduism, I found the Koran to present the least spiritual and most repugnant path that any person could embrace. The Koran presents a truely barbaric code of conduct for the believer, who holds the life and actions of Mohammed to be imitated. Most frightening is the absence of any concrete notion of good or evil behavior when it comes to believers dealing with non-believers. Spencer presents quotes from the Koran and Hadith that clearly show Islam is a religion of expediency; good is defined as that which benefits Islam, bad is what hurts it. The teachings of Mohammed that are presented by the Islamic apologists as showing the prophet's compassion to non-believers, such as Jews and Christians, are taken from his early life and were negated completely once Mohammed aquired ultimate power in Arabia. Spencer clearly understands the true nature of Islam. The following is a quote from a website for former believers:
"The core of Islam, that is, the Qur'an, Hadis and Sharia are filled with unbound hatred for the unbelievers, unbelievably intolerant and exceptionally cruel and merciless to those who dare to deviate an iota from its doctrine. We discovered that Islam is beyond alteration, because Muslims who attempt to modernize and reform its unremitting bigotry, mindless rituals and its barbaric and draconian punitive measures are targeted for annihilation. Our verdict was that the only way to escape from the tyranny of Islam is to leave it for good. That is why we discarded Islam from our lives-to be free, to enjoy a normal, pleasant and humane life, in complete harmony with all people on earth irrespective of their religion, race or creed."

I read the book and I read the reviews. The only thing that both show is the amount of hatred that people have. I even left a review several weeks ago and it was removed!!
While there were few facts in this book, the myths inserted in every page is very clear.
If you want to learn about people's history, read history books not the criticizm of their ENEMY.
Islam has more respect for Jesus and Moses than a lot of Christians.

If you want to read an honest, detailed account of the prophet Muhammad's life and learn why Islam is what it is today, read this book. It tells it all and does not pull punches.

Having written a book with a similar title myself recently ("The Truth Behind the New Atheism: Responding to the Emerging Challenges to God and Christianity"), I may be overly indulgent towards Spencer, perhaps out of a desire to justify my own vices. But an astonishing amount of lying goes on when it comes to religion. French literary critic and anthropologist Rene Girard explained a good bit of that dishonesty years ago when he noted that society tends to cover up its origins in collective violence. While Spenser doesn't frame his story of Mohammed and the religion he founded in those terms, Girard's theory (accessible on-line in an article he wrote in First Things magazine) does I think put early Islam in its proper context.

Aside from Spencer's courage in writing it, this book is good for several reasons: (1) He relentlessly examines the acts of Mohammed from early Muslim sources; (2) The book is frank without being sensationalistic; (2) Spenser shows good judgement, overall, in his choice of material and his evaluation of it; (4) He covers the main events in the life of Mohammed clearly; (5) At the same time he also shows how modern cruelties are justified by reference to the practice of The Prophet.

Doctrine does not determine how people act, but this book reveals just how foolish it is to deny (as some do) how deep the influence can be. Spenser recognizes that people of all faiths are capable of both cruelty and kindness; but the example the founder sets does make an enormous difference. (As to those who try to equate the Christian and Muslim records, see my article "Can Jesus Save Islam?" in Touchstone Magazine -- also available on-line.)

I do have a couple criticisms. First, one question Spenser doesn't resolve is whether the very telling hadith he cites are representative. (There seems to be quite a large amount.) Second, I question Spenser's sub-title -- I would describe Communism or Naziism as even more intolerant religions, and there are conventionally supernatural faiths (like the Tai Ping movement in China) quite as violent and intolerant as Islam. Third, I don't think Spenser offers very promising solutions to the problems he outlines. Simply telling Muslims not to rely on Mohammed so much probably won't do it. Might as well go whole hog and suggest they worship God in reference to the teachings of a less problematic prophet -- already tens of thousands of Muslims have come to believe in Jesus in jihad-bit countries like Iran and Algeria.

Having written a book with the words "the truth about" in its title myself recently ("The Truth Behind the New Atheism: Responding to the Emerging Challenges to God and Christianity"), I may be overly indulgent towards Spencer, perhaps out of a desire to justify my own vices. But an astonishing amount of lying goes on when it comes to religion. French literary critic and anthropologist Rene Girard explained a good bit of that dishonesty years ago when he noted that society tends to cover up its origins in collective violence. While Spenser doesn't frame his story of Mohammed and the religion he founded in those terms, Girard's theory (accessible on-line in an article he wrote in First Things magazine) does I think put early Islam in its proper context.

Aside from Spencer's courage in writing it, this book is good for several reasons: (1) He relentlessly examines the acts of Mohammed from early Muslim sources; (2) The book is frank without being sensationalistic; (2) Spenser shows good judgement, overall, in his choice of material and his evaluation of it; (4) He covers the main events in the life of Mohammed clearly; (5) At the same time he also shows how modern cruelties are justified by reference to the practice of The Prophet.

Doctrine does not determine how people act, but this book reveals just how foolish it is to deny (as some do) how deep the influence can be. Spenser recognizes that people of all faiths are capable of both cruelty and kindness; but the example the founder sets does make an enormous difference. (As to those who try to equate the Christian and Muslim records, see my article "Can Jesus Save Islam?" in Touchstone Magazine -- also available on-line.)

I do have a couple criticisms. First, one question Spenser doesn't resolve is whether the very telling hadith he cites are representative. (There seems to be quite a large amount.) Second, I question Spenser's sub-title -- I would describe Communism or Naziism as even more intolerant religions, and there are conventionally supernatural faiths (like the Tai Ping movement in China) quite as violent and intolerant as Islam. Third, I don't think Spenser offers very promising solutions to the problems he outlines. Simply telling Muslims not to rely on Mohammed so much probably won't do it. Might as well go whole hog and suggest they worship God in reference to the teachings of a less problematic prophet -- already tens of thousands of Muslims have come to believe in Jesus in jihad-bit countries like Iran and Algeria.

Great book. Very enlightening book about Muhammad. A MUST read in today's world.

A must read for those who believe in the freedom of speech and all other freedoms of any society especially the freedom to live your life in peace where ever you are in the world and not be threatened with violence if you think differently or believe differently.

Much of what Spencer here says is doubtlessly true, but that does not mean that we should take him at face value. And why not? Because he is guilty of several fallacies. First, the confirmation error: We take information that conforms to our views at face value, while dismissing conflicting information. Second, he is guilty of presenting us with cherry-picked facts. Much of what he says of Islam could just as easily be said of Christianity. How? After all, Jesus of Nazareth was not a crusader like Muhammad. Yes, but it was not Jesus who spread Christianity, at all. In fact, the popularity of Christianity as a religion has little to do with any merit of anything Jesus said. Christianity was spread by the brutality of Constantine. Without Constantine, Christianity would today be a mere footnote in history. Thus, Spencer's thesis should compare Muhammad's spreading of his religion to Constantine's spreading of his. Here the differences shrink to the inconsequential.

Much of what Spencer here says is doubtlessly true, but that does not mean that we should take him at face value. And why not? Because he is guilty of several fallacies. First, the confirmation error: We take information that conforms to our views at face value, while dismissing conflicting information. Second, he is guilty of presenting us with cherry-picked facts. Much of what he says of Islam could just as easily be said of Christianity. How? After all, Jesus of Nazareth was not a crusader like Muhammad. Yes, but it was not Jesus who spread Christianity, at all. In fact, the popularity of Christianity as a religion has little to do with any merit of anything Jesus said. Christianity was spread by the brutality of Constantine. Thus, Spencer's thesis should compare Muhammad's spreading of his religion to Constantine's spreading of his. Here the differences shrink to the inconsequential.

Spencer's Book, The Truth About Mohammad, is essential reading for anyone who would like the truth about the Prophet. This is a book about how Mohammad developed Islam, from what Spencer states "convenient revelations". If the reader wants a clear understanding of the intentions of Muslim's who believe in the strickest form of Islam, this is the book to read. The reader will have a very different view of Islam, from what many claim to be the religion of compassion.

Robert Spencer has pulled out all stops to expose the truth about Muhammad. This is not for the faint hearted or people living in denial or who belive that all is merry and wonderful (The 70+ reviewers that have derated this book). A must read for everyone who's interested in knowing more about Islamofacism and the threat it poses to the Western Democratic free societies. Robert Spencer does not sugar coat Muhammad's hatred of the Jews and the Christians. Spencer is a real sandblaster and it is evident from his extensive research of the religion. A Must Read!

If you only are able to buy one book about Muhammad -- buy this one. This book gives you an honest understanding of the man Muhammad and what his life and philosophies really were. This is not right wing propaganda -- it is a brief, but razor sharp depiction of the life of Muhammad from the texts of Islam, i.e. the Quran and Hadith. You won't find empty accusations and hysteria in this book, only solid factual stories of Muhammad's life, backed up by 17 pages of citations from Islamic sources.

This book is chilling in it's frank explanations of the foundation of Islam. Spencer is very knowledgeable about Islam and the history of the religion as well as the details about the life of Muhammad from the very texts of Islam.

There are plenty of books out there on Islam and the life of Muhammad, but none more rooted in the Islamic texts themselves. Some people may not like the truthfulness of this book but they won't be able to deny it unless they are willing to argue against the very foundation of Islam, the Quran and Hadith.

It's a wakeup call that can't be refuted by anyone who is unwilling to deny the validity of the Quran. If you believe the Quran, you have no choice but to concede to truth about Muhammad in Spencer's book.

Buy it. Make everyone you know read it. I bought multiple copies to give out to key people in my community and I recommend you all do the same.

New York Times bestselling author and Islam expert Robert Spencer offers an honest and telling portrait of the founder of Islam. This is not a politically-correct recounting of Mohammad's life and teachings.

This is the best of the books in recent years on Islam and Muhammad.

Now, it's true that the entire world in the seventh century was very different from how it is today, and our post-black-plague view of the value of the individual, and our twentieth century experience thanks to medicine, that people just don't die often or young, is a set of experiences whose cause we take for granted. It was a brutal, ignorant and cruel world. So, we cannot look at Muhammad through today's eyes. He was a man of his place and time.

While I'm at it, I don't think Spencer's opinions should be a suprise. Moses was an awful person, if what we've been able to piece together is true. Muhammad was far worse, and that evidence is far less difficult to validate. Jesus of Nazareth embraced poverty and motivated a peasantry to help topple the prosperity created by the order of the Roman empire and assisted in driving Europe into a millenium of darkness. Buddha, who gives comfort to millions, invented a godless religion to which his descendents added gods, myths and the punishments of hell - and doomed them to everlasting poverty.

None of these people is someone to admire, and Muhammed the least admirable. If the only measure of a philosophy is the economic status of it's adherents, then all these people are essentially selling abdication of reason and effort in exchange for endemic poverty.

Muhammed is just the most recent addition to the list and he is the most intolerant, antagonistic and viscious. It's too bad we can't have Zeus again - even if he was an awful god to worship. However, Spencer shows that what current voices of Islam state is not true. It is a religion of ignorance and violence because it's author was a man of ignorance and violence. And all violence is not equal in measure. Alexander's conquest was to bring something else altogether to the world, and had he lived and written his memoirs it would have perhaps been a better "book" to study than that of all the monotheists combined.

Spencer does a wonderful job, especially in the first few chapters, of creating a human being we can all understand, and judge. And it is judge that we should.

This is a great book, well researched! I cross referenced lots of the facts, to discover they all true! That "peace loving religion" is the biggest lie we have to deal with. It's hard to believe Muslim hold Muhamad as the greatest of all time, one who beheaded 800-900 people HIMSELF. No wonder today fanatics doing the same, they believe they're doing a religious duty, just as Muhammad did, You'll find a lot more shocking, historically accurate details, and who Muhammad really was and what he stood for. Please.....

This is a well-researched, eye-opening book - and a well-written fast read. I knew beforehand that Islam is no "religion of peace," but I have a much better grasp now on why the religion is so violent (and so resistent to reasonable application in the modern world). Every Western leader who has a hand in influencing foreign policy and the war on terror should read this book! This is a fast and easy way for those unfamiliar with Islam to get a peek at its "prophet" - and his "god."

or how about "Christ Said to Disembowel Nonbelievers during the Inquisition, and to Burn Children in Baghdad Today"?

or "Abraham's Truth: The Jews Must Wage Permanent War in the Holy Land to Expel All Others Who Want to Live There, Too"?

Sound a little unfair or lopsided? Well, so is this book, beginning with the title. I'm saddened, but not surprised to have to point out yet again that most Muslims are reasonable people who are just as tolerant or intolerant as anyone else. To judge them - or the historical Mohammad - by a group of barbarians who distort their religion beyond recognition is to judge Jesus by the abortion clinic bomber who doesn't mind killing a dozen secretaries in the process, or to judge Jews - and the historical Moses - by the Israeli fighter pilot who blows apart a family living next door to suspected safe house.

Wait, what's that you say? MOST Muslims, unlike Christians or Jews are intolerant? Well how many Muslim people do you personally know? Seriously, what is the number? I'll wait while you think about it - I don't mind.

I know quite a few Muslims and call some close friends. And like all other groups, most are decent people, and then there's a handful of hateful, spiteful ones I've met too - much like the author of this book.

Oh - and for what it's worth, I'm Jewish.

This book is full of lies and mistakes. If you want to know the truth about Mohammad read the "Muhammad: A Biography of the Prophet" by Karen Armstrong.

I would like to say that I am a teacher and student. My areas of interest are religion and violence. I have contributed to original research in this area as well as in the history of suicide bombing. I will have to say that it is hard to deny the emotion evoked by the violence done in the name of Islam. On the face of it one can understand the reactions that people have had to this. I have seen some of the beheadings. I can also remember clearly the planes hitting the Towers. I too wanted revenge and to strike back at anyone responsible for this and other atrocities. I cannot completely condemn the emotion as stupid or even racist.

I will however reject the rather troubling generalizations made about Islam, Muhammad, and what is to day referred to as "Jihadism"as they are tainted by what appears t be racially infused. What is commonly overlooked in such generalizations are the internal struggles (or 'jihad', as that is the accurate translation of the word) for Islam that is conducted among Muslims, and has been since the 1960's. These generalizations also obscure the "martyrdom operations' conducted by groups like the LTTE in Sri Lanka, who are neither Muslim nor, and it pains me to be so obvious, Arab. To date the LTTE are responsible for the record number of such operations by any one group. And before someone suggests that I am not aware, Al Qaida is not a monolithic structure. To say that more suicide operations have been carried out in Iraq is not to say that they are all done by the same group or even by various groups that are run by the same organization. They are not the same in any real way, other than that they operate in Iraq. They are Muslim, but that is also not a monolithic structure. There are more variations of Islam in Iraq and the world than I can explore in this short comment. Often the targets within Iraq are other, even rival, groups and not the U.S. coalition forces.

I will also point out that many religious traditions have a checkered past of violence. The Neo-pagan groups that have spread from the workings of Gerald Gardner have embraced some of the most pacifist and peace loving teachings one can imagine, and yet the warlike ways of the Celts of old and the Vikings are not a consideration. Gandhi himself admired and read often the Gita which is a tale about the Avatar of the God Vishnu telling the young warlord to kill even his relatives on the field of battle for the sake of dharma. And it should go without mention the violence advocated in the traditions of my heritage drawn from the Torah. The histories of all traditions are fraught with contradictions of peace and violence. Atrocities have been committed by many of the followers of, and even main contributors to, these and other traditions. It is a mistake to generalize on matters such as war and enemies. The reality is far too complex.

This book is a waste of time, unless you are looking for validation of an existing viewpoint. All of the content is lacking or misappropriating historical context, and his interpretations of history are simplistic at best. This writer is a male, dressed-up version of Ann coulter with marginally better writing skills and a much deeper, abiding hatred for Muslims. If you are really interested in Islam, pick up a book by an author who doesn't have an agenda.

This is a terrible piece of garbage. A joke if this is considered scholarly and Robert Spencer is an Islamophobe, not a scholar! He has an agenda of bashing Islam and always has. He takes everything that has been thrown out and proven to be not true about the Prophet and puts it in his book. Unfortunately to one who is ignorant on the manner they will believe this.

This should be required reading in any university. The book reminds me that it is a religious war for the Muslims to kill the infidels (that's us) for their "moon" God Allah. We should take the Muslims at their word, it's a religious war, to them, called Jihad. This is not a religion of peace. If we don't recognize who our enemy is, we are doomed as a Nation. See what's happening in Europe and take serious notice.

I'm sure that Spencer hasn't known Prophet Mohammad yet, however, he would love him if he have read more about him without relying and mixing up with terrorist doings.
As I read allot about Prophet Mohammad, I loved him more than my self.

Learn how Islam became what it is today, and why it isn't a religion of peace. Learn how to defend yourself against a brutal religion.