Enjoy: No Qiyyamah is coming according to Muhammad


(1) Sahih Bukhari, 7116:

Allah's Messenger said, "The Hour will not be established till the buttocks of the women of the tribe of Daus move while going round (the statue of) Dhi-al-Khalasa."
  • Today neither the tribe of Daus is present, nor its women who could move their buttocks.

  • And neither the statue of Dhi-al-Khalasa is present, nor anyone who worships it.

(2) Sahih Bukhari, 81:

Allah's Messenger said: From among the portents of the Hour are (the following): ... Women will increase in number and men will decrease in number so much so that fifty women will be looked after by one man.

Science has already defeated Muhammad. Science has already advanced to that stage where it is fully in position to avoid any such imbalance of 1 man to 50 women. Actually, science has produced the results, which are opposite to Muhammad’s prediction, and the numbers of women is less than men today.

(3) Sahih Bukhari, 50:

(Allah’s Messenger said: The hour will come) When a slave (lady) gives birth to her master.

But the non-religious Western people already defeated Allah and his Qiyyamah, while they all together abolished slavery. Thus, there is no slave-woman left to give birth to her master.

(4)  Sahih Muslim, 2953b:

Anas b. Malik reported that a person asked Allah's Apostle: When would the Last Hour come? Thereupon Allah's Messenger (way peace be upon him) kept quiet for a while. Then looked at a young boy in his presence belonging to the tribe of Azd Shanu'a and he said: If this boy lives he would not grow very old till the Last Hour would come to you. Anas said that this young boy was of our age during those days.

That young boy not only grew old, but he also died about 1400 years ago, but no last hour came before him becoming old. Now you could better decide if it was a Divine Revelation from heaven, or a Human Drama from Muhammad. 


Objection: But the Sex Slavery still exists:

An apologist came up with this excuse:

Sex Slavery still exists, and the Prophet Muhammad was talking about it.

False.

Forced Prostitution is not ONLY the problem of today, but it existed throughout the history (including Muhammad's era), where poor women were forced to do prostitution by criminals. 

If Muhammad was meant to talk about sex slavery, then he would have simply used the word forced prostitution. 

But it is clear that Muhammad was talking about something, which was legal during his era, and was not misused. But that same thing will be CHANGED and will be misused in the FUTURE, and will serve as a sign of the last hour. 

Another apologist came up with this excuse:

This hadith means that mothers will give birth to children that will enslave them. Like, children being so spoiled to the point they are treating their parents as slaves. Basically, a downfall of morality.

A lame excuse, while Muhammad could have simply told it in normal words that a mother (either slave or a free Woman) will give birth to a child, who will act like a master to her.

That is why, none of the Muslim of the last 1400 years ever come up of this meaning of this Hadith, and kept it to slave mother only, and not to the free Muslim women and their children. 

 

Objection: The temple of Dhul-Khalasa was indeed found  

Modern Islam apologists make some vague claims that Dhul-Khalasa was found and destroyed 2 more times. (1st time around 1800 and 2nd time in 1915)

We already know many civilizations existed in ancient Arabia, and their ruins still exist there. Muslims are free to make stories on their own, and there is no way to confirm them. It is the same as Muhammad told stories of heavens and throne of Allah, but it was impossible to confirm or deny them.

Moreover:

  • If the people of Daus tribe still exists today, then it means they existed throughout the history (after the death of Muhammad).
  • And if they were found worshipping in those ruins in 1800 and 1915, then it also means they were freely worshipping it during the last 14 centuries after the death of Muhammad. 

So, why then the last hour has not come up till now? 

According to Muhammad's prediction, then the last hour should have come centuries ago, while the people of Daus were able to worship in the ruins for centuries. 

Wise people already told, you have to make hundreds of lies more, in order to hide a single lie. 

 

Objection: Muhammad didn't mean the LAST HOUR, but he meant the death of him companions, who asked this question

Islamic apologists come up with this excuse:

What is meant by the coming of the Hour in the above narrations is the coming of the Hour of the companions who were the audience, which means their death, as in the narration reported by 'Aa'ishah: "He will not grow old before your Hour would come to you.'' 

Obviously, it is a lame excuse. 

In the remaining whole Islamic literature, the Last Hour is used to mean Qiyyamah. It has nothing to do with the death of individual people. 

Please ponder upon it, what was the benefit of such a useless Question & Answer? Everyone knows when young people grow up, then the old people die before the death of young people. 

All Muslims who can think, they know the TRUTH here. Unfortunately, religion make people blind and deaf. These Muslims don't read these facts in order to see the truth and to do justice, but they read them in order to make lame excuses for their prophet. 

 

 

Already Read the Article?

...but your task is still not finished.

Dear seeker of truth,
Reading about the flaws in a belief system is only the first step. To truly break free from indoctrination and reach a final, unshakable conclusion, you must apply these four critical tests to what you've just read.

Test 1: Divine Revelation or Human Drama?

The Core Challenge:
God does not appear before us, nor do His angels manifest themselves, and He performs no miracles today like the claims made in the tales of ancient times. Despite this absence, we are still demanded to recognise God through His "commands"  only. 
Let us examine these commands, and see if they give the impression of Divine Revelation, or of "Human Drama."

Please reflect:

  • Do the teachings in this article display flawless wisdom, justice, consistency, and coherence that could only come from an Omniscient Creator?
  • Or do they resemble the kinds of laws, contradictions, exceptions, and inconsistencies that one would expect from ordinary human decision-making?

Test 2: Would These Same Arguments Also Defend a False Prophet?

Imagine a man in a different era who claims to be a prophet. He marries multiple women, claims divine permission for his personal desires, issues harsh punishments, and makes scientific errors—acting exactly like Muhammad. How would you distinguish this hypothetical false prophet from Muhammad?

The truth is, Islamic apologists would easily spot him as a fraud or a cult leader, using the exact same logical critiques you just read. Yet, when Muhammad does these exact same things, apologists invent endless rationalizations to defend him.

The Rule of Logic: If your defense of a prophet works equally well to defend a proven fraud or a cult leader, your defense is not based on evidence. It is based on "special pleading", giving one man a free pass that you would never give anyone else.

Test 3: Just One Confirmed Error Is Enough

Islam makes an extraordinary claim that Allah exists, is absolutely perfect, and cannot make even a single mistake. Therefore, if even one confirmed error, injustice, or flaw is found in Islam, its entire claim to divine perfection collapses. The remaining 99.99% of the religion cannot save that claim. You cannot simply argue, "But everything else is correct."

Test 4: The "Unbiased AI" Evaluation

Artificial Intelligence models are programmed to be highly deferential toward major world religions. If you ask an AI to critique the Quran, it will  treat Islamic theology as unquestionable facts rather than claims to be tested. This creates a false "tie" in debates.

To get a truly objective, logical evaluation of the article you just read, you must force the AI to drop its religious deference. Read the prompt below, then click the button to copy it. Paste it into your AI chat before asking it to analyze the article.

When reviewing the article, keep the following principles in mind:
The Qur'an and Hadith cannot be used as evidence of their own divine origin. They are claims whose origin is being examined. Your task is to evaluate whether the Qur'an, Sunnah, and Islamic legal system are better explained as Divine Revelation or as human authorship. Therefore:
• Treat the Qur'an and Hadith as claims, not proof.
• Evaluate the article using logic, internal consistency, factual accuracy, and principles of justice.
• Treat scholarly interpretations as arguments in favor of Islam, not as binding authority.
Based on these principles, answer this question: Do the objections raised in the article expose flaws that reason and justice cannot reconcile, or do the strongest Muslim apologetic arguments successfully answer those objections?

Note: The AI’s response is not a final judgement. The final decision must be made by you, using your own reason and understanding. 

About the Author & This Website

About the Authors: 

The ideas, arguments, research, article structure, and final conclusions are my own. AI tools are used only as editorial assistants to improve grammar, wording, readability, and clarity.

About the Website:

This website is not a “neutral” or purely academic platform. Think of a courtroom, where a judge or jury listens to two opposing sides. We represent one side. It is not our role to be neutral. Our responsibility is to present our case honestly, with arguments and evidence.

You, the reader, are the judge and jury. Your role is to remain fair, to examine all sides, reflect carefully, and then reach your own conclusion with sincerity.

Read more →