Islam, Jack Chick and the Battle for Souls – Response to the Chick Tract “The Prophet”, Part I
“To such as Allah rejects from His guidance, there can be no guide: He will leave them in their trespasses, wandering in distraction.”
– The Quran, Surah Al-A’raf, 7:186
This article is a continuation of the series “Islam, Jack Chick and the Battle for Souls”. We will now discuss the tract titled “The Prophet”. Due to the length of the tract and the analysis, it will be divided into three parts. Part I will be a summary of the tract, whereas Parts II and III will consist of the analysis.
“The Prophet” – The Plot
The basic plotline revolves around a journalist named “Roscoe”, who is covering the Lebanese civil war in 1983. The coverage of the war has left its mark on Roscoe, who desperately wants to leave the war-ravaged country. Unfortunately, he is given one more assignment to report on the war from the streets of Beirut. While there, he is harassed by a Lebanese Muslim soldier, but the Lebanese soldier doesn’t seem to mind the elderly Christian missionary who is apparently walking around the dangerous streets without a care in the world. This missionary informs Rosco that the war in Lebanon is not between Christians and Muslims, because the Lebanese Phalanges are not Christians, but rather Roman Catholics.
After finishing his last assignment, Roscoe finally gets to go home. Upon arriving in Los Angeles, he meets an old acquaintance, who introduces Rosco to “Dr.” Alberto Rivera. Rivera tells Roscoe that he saw his report in Beirut, a topic that Rosco obviously does not want to discuss. But Rivera begins to tell him the real story behind the conflict in Lebanon, and Roscoe is apparently ready to listen (rather than going home). Rivera informs Roscoe that everything he is about to tell him was learned during “secret briefings” conducted at the Vatican when Rivera was a Jesuit priest (Rivera had since converted to Protestantism). During one such “briefing”, Rivera claims that a Jesuit cardinal named Augustine Bea:
“…showed us how desperately the Roman Catholics wanted Jerusalem at the end of the third century.”
To bring the city of Jerusalem under the control of the Vatican, the Jesuits developed a “scheme” which involved using the “great untapped source of manpower” of the “children of Ishmael” (i.e. the Arabs). Apparently, the Vatican would use the “poor Arabs” in their “clever” plot (but apparently not so clever, as we will see) to seize Jerusalem.
Rivera then describes the ministry of Jesus (peace be upon him) as told in the Bible. He claims that “great Bible prophecies were fulfilled” during this time. John the Baptist appeared first, and then the “the word of God in the flesh”. The message of this “word” brought the “wonderful news” that sinners could have “eternal life” if they made Jesus “their lord and savior”. To counter this, the “prince of darkness” (i.e. Satan):
“…has launched constant attacks against the minds of men to kill this message of hope.”
Despite persecution from the Jews and Romans, “believers” fanned out “with the gospel” and set up churches, even in Africa. Meanwhile, the Jews rebelled against Rome and were defeated in 70 CE. The Roman general Titus destroyed the Jewish temple as well as Jerusalem, in apparent fulfillment of a prophecy made by Jesus (peace be upon him). Some Jews managed to escape into Africa, surviving as nomads, but they were constantly under surveillance by “the agents of Rome”.
But Rome was also facing its own problems. It was “ready to collapse” because of “apathy, greed, cruelty, perversion and rebellion”. Its campaign against Christians was failing as “believers in Christ” were sacrificing “their lives for the gospel”. Apparently desperate to “stop this thrust”, Satan decided that the best way to do so “was to create a counterfeit ‘Christian’ religion to destroy the work of God”. He decided to use the Roman religion, which had its origins in “ancient Babylon”, but with a “facelift”. The process started with the writings of the “early church fathers” such as Augustine. Through his pawns, Satan converted the “statue of Jupiter” into Saint Peter, and the “statue of Venus” into the Virgin Mary. These idols would be erected on the hill of “Vaticanus”, the same place where the “Satanic temple of Janus” once stood. This new “counterfeit” religion was called “Roman Catholicism”, which Jesus apparently referred to as “the mother of harlots” in Revelation 17:5. According to Rivera, the purpose of this religion was to:
- Block the gospel.
- Slaughter “believers in Christ”.
- Establish religions.
- Create wars.
- Make the nations “drunk with the wine of her fornication” (whatever that means).
The new religion also kept the old policy of “spying on Jews and Christians and plotting their destruction.” It also began strategically installing monasteries near Christian settlements (presumably to keep an eye on them) as well as watching the “descendants of Ishmael” who were living in North Africa as nomads, apparently waiting for the right time (over the course of hundreds of years) to use them for its nefarious plot.
Rivera then gives a short summary of the Biblical story of Hagar and Ishmael. According to Rivera, in modern times (at least by 1983), the “offspring” of Ishmael numbered “almost one billion souls”.
Rivera continues and informs Roscoe that by the 4th century, the Pope had “replaced the Caesars” and commanded great “fear” and “respect”. His followers “fasted, prayed and helped the poor”. Meanwhile, also in the 4th century (354 CE to be exact), the future “church father” Augustine was born. According to Rivera, Augustine’s two most famous writings, “The City of God” and “Confessions” would greatly affect the lives of Arabs for centuries. Augustine was converting Arabs to Roman Catholicism, but many Arabs despised the religion and refused to convert. By this time, the Vatican began sending “spies” to the Arab tribes who had “rejected Catholicism” to spread the rumor that “one day…a great leader would appear, who would gather the Arabs together.” About 200 years later, in 570 CE, the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was born, and according to Rivera:
“[t]his man would change the course of world history.”
Rivera states that Muhammad (peace be upon him) called himself “The Messenger of God” and established the “great religion of Islam”. Within 20 years of his death (in 632 CE), “his armies defeated the Byzantine and Persian empires” and also “swept into Europe”. According to Rivera, the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) “…was an amazing man.”
This is where things get really interesting. Rivera proceeds to explain Islam “as the world sees it” compared to the “shocking” things he learned from the Vatican about “how Islam actually came into existence”. Here are some of the major points in Rivera’s summary about how Islam is viewed by the world:
- Islam’s most sacred city is Mecca, in modern-day Saudi Arabia. It was also the birthplace of Muhammad (peace be upon him).
- “Islam claims that Abraham and Ishmael built ‘the House of God” beside the well (Zamzam) which saved the life of Ishmael and…Hagar.”
- The “Kaaba” (the “House of God”) was originally smaller compared to the modern “cube-like stone structure”.
- Faithful Muslims pray in the direction of the Kaaba five times a day to Allah (Glorified and Exalted be He) “without an intermediary”, and seek His “company in Paradise”.
- “In the beginning” (whenever that was), visitors to the Kaaba would bring “gifts”, including idols. Apparently eager not to “offend” the gift-givers, the keepers of the Kaaba placed the idols inside the holy sanctuary.
- These keepers, the Jurhumites, were unjust and were eventually driven out by the people. But before they left, the Jurhumites took some of the “treasure of the Kaaba” and dumped it into the well of Zamzam. The Khuzaites took over from the Jurhumites, but introduced the idol of the Moabite god “Hubal” to the Arabs and placed it in the Kaaba. The Khuzaites were then replaced by the Quraysh, who were descended from Ishmael (peace be upon him).
- When Muhammad’s father Abd Allah was a young boy, he was almost sacrificed by his father Abd Al-Muttalib because the latter had “prayed to his god” that he would sacrifice one of his sons. Abd Allah was chosen during a divination ceremony in front of the idol of Hubal. He was saved when a second ceremony was done and which favored the sacrifice of 100 camels instead.
- Meanwhile, the Catholics had been “pushing the concept of looking for an Arab prophet” who “would be capable of ridding the Arabs of their worship of false gods”.
- Abd Allah eventually married a woman named Aminah in 569 CE, but while she was pregnant, he went with a caravan on a business trip and died shortly thereafter. According to tradition, Aminah would hear a “voice” say to her that she was carrying “the lord of his people” and that when he is born, she should pray to God for his protection and name him Muhammad (peace be upon him). When Muhammad (peace be upon him) was born, his grandfather Abd Al-Muttalib carried him to the Kaaba “and prayed a prayer of thanksgiving to Allah…”
- When he was a small boy, Muhammad (peace be upon him) was taken by two men who opened his chest and took out a black clot from his heart and washed the heart with snow. While the mark was not visible on his chest, he did have a birthmark on his back.
- When Muhammad (peace be upon him) was six years old, his mother died. Two years later, his grandfather also died.
- When he was nine years old, a “Roman Catholic” monk saw the birthmark on Muhammad’s back and exclaimed that “it is the seal of prophethood.” The monk then warned Muhammad’s uncle that he should protect him from the Jews, because if they found out about him, they would “construe evil against him.” According to Rivera, this “Roman Catholic” monk had “fanned the flames for future Jewish persecutions…”
- Muhammad (peace be upon him) married Khadijah (may Allah be pleased with her), who was 15 years older than he was.
- Around the year 610 CE, Muhammad (peace be upon him) “claimed he had a vision from Allah of…the angel Gabriel…” who informed him that he was “the messenger of Allah.” He would continue “to receive messages…until his death”. Early on, these visions were “interpreted” by “Waraquah”, whom Rivera claims was Khadijah’s “Roman Catholic cousin”.
- Rivera then claims that “some of his revelations were placed in the Koran” in 650 CE, whereas “other writings of Muhammad were never published”.
- After persecutions of Muhammad and his followers began, he instructed some of his followers to go to Abyssinia, which was ruled by a…“Roman Catholic king”. The king “accepted” the refugees “because of Muhammad’s views on the virgin Mary which were so close to Roman Catholic doctrine.”
- Eventually, Muhammad (peace be upon him) had to leave Mecca in 622 CE and went to Medina. From there, he led “attacks on caravans from Mecca” and also ordered assassinations of those who opposed him. He also “began to show his hostility towards the Jews by raiding Jewish settlements.”
- After a prolonged conflict, Muhammad (peace be upon him) eventually defeated his enemies, conquered Mecca and cleared the Kaaba of idols in 630 CE. Here, Rivera apparently borrows verbatim from one of Chick’s tracts to repeat the claim that Muhammad (peace be upon him) chose the “moon god” Allah as the one God and declared himself to Allah’s prophet.
Having summarized the early “history” of Islam, Rivera then proceeds to explain the Vatican’s involvement in the momentous rise of Islam. As previously stated, the Vatican “desperately wanted Jerusalem because of its religious significance”. But for some reason, despite its power, it was “blocked by the Jews” and “the true Christians in North Africa”. And this is why it had the…ahem…brilliant idea to use the manpower of the Arabs to eliminate the pesky Jews and “true Christians”! Some of the Arabs had converted to Roman Catholicism and could serve as spies for the Vatican, whereas others could serve as a “Fifth Column” to “control the…Arabs who had rejected Roman Catholicism”. The Vatican “wanted to create a messiah for the Arabs” and create an “army that would ultimately capture Jerusalem for the pope”.
One such “Catholic” Arab, according to Rivera’s “secret” information received from Cardinal Bea, was none other than Khadijah (may Allah be pleased with her) herself. She had lived in a convent until she given an “assignment” to “find a brilliant young man who could be used…to create a new religion and become the messiah for the children of Ishmael” (it all sounds so simple, doesn’t it?). Muhammad (peace be upon him) was evidently chosen, and his “intensive training” began, first with Waraqah (who was of course a Catholic spy), and then with other “teachers”. Rivera claims that Muhammad (peace be upon him) even read the words of Augustine and “became a devotee of his works”!
As part of Muhammad’s “grooming”, he was told that Roman Catholics were the “true Christians” and that the Jews were his enemies. Any non-Catholic Christians, as well as the Jews, were thus his enemies “who should be destroyed.” According to Rivera, “this satanic teaching…destroys the efforts of reaching [Muslims] for Christ…” As a result of Muhammad’s revelations, the “Koran” was formed, which Rivera asserts contains “Muhammad’s writings”. But apparently, this is not the only work of Muhammad (peace be upon him), as Rivera claims that there are “unpublished works” that are apparently in the possession of “Ayatollahs” (Rivera refers to them as “high ranking holy men in the Islamic faith”). Rivera explains that in his secret meetings with Cardinal Bea, the priest explained that these documents are kept well-guarded because they link “the Vatican with the creation of Islam”, and that both sides have “information” which would lead to a major “scandal” for both religions.
Rivera goes on and explains that in the Quran, Jesus (peace be upon him) is “only a prophet”. He then asserts that if, according to Catholic teachings, the pope was Jesus’ “representative on earth”, then the pope must also be a “prophet of God”. As a result of this “logic”, Rivera asserts that the “followers of Muhammad” feared and respected the pope as a “holy man”. The pope, using his influence on the Muslims, issued “papal bulls” giving them “permission to invade and conquer the nations of North Africa.” He also financed the Muslim armies, “in exchange for three special favors”:
- Eliminate the Jews and the “true believers”.
- Protect Roman Catholics.
- Conquer Jerusalem for the pope.
As a result of the pope’s support, Islam’s power grew, Jews and “true” Christians “were slaughtered” and Jerusalem was conquered. But when the pope asked for Jerusalem to be handed over, the “Arab generals” reneged, driven by the “exhilaration of victory”.
Rivera further explains that “under Waraquah’s instruction”, Muhammad (peace be upon him) “had written in the Koran…that Abraham offered Ishmael as a sacrifice”. Rivera refers to this as “the great lie” since the Bible states that it was Isaac (peace be upon them both) who was offered as the sacrifice. Because of this belief, the Muslims built the Dome of the Rock on the site of the temple “in Ishmael’s honor”.
By now, the pope had realized that the Vatican’s “creation” was “out of control”. Muslims were now calling him an “infidel”! Apparently, these same Muslims were now targeting Europe for invasion, and asked the pope for “permission” to do. Jumping ahead a few hundred years, another pope started the Crusades “to hold back the children of Ishmael from grabbing Catholic Europe.” These wars lasted centuries and the pope lost his grip on Jerusalem. But apparently going back in time again, Rivera mentions that Spain and Portugal were invaded, and Turkey also fell to them. One particular village in Portugal was even given the name “Fatima”, in honor of the Prophet Muhammad’s daughter.
But during the attempted invasion of the islands of Sardinia and Corsica, the Muslims realized they were “too far extended” and had to negotiate with the Vatican. One of the negotiators was Francis of Assisi. As a result of these “negotiations”, the Muslims would be able to occupy Turkey while the Catholics would occupy Lebanon. Even more amazingly, Rivera claims that Muslims would be allowed to build mosques in Catholic countries, so long as Catholicism “could flourish in Arab countries”! In Rivera’s view, which he based on Cardinal Bea’s “briefings”, the Catholics and Muslims also agreed to destroy “their common enemy…Bible believing Christian missionaries.” Not only that, but through these “concordats”, the Vatican “engineered a campaign of hatred between the Muslim Arabs and Jews”, whereas “they had co-existed peacefully” before! Because of these agreements, the efforts of missionaries to convert Muslims have failed, leaving the missionaries “bewildered” as to why they cannot seem to convert more than “a handful of converts” after years of efforts. Of course, the answer is that these poor missionaries are not aware of the “secret agreements between Mecca and the Vatican”.
Jumping ahead to the 2oth century, Rivera claims that the Vatican was concerned with events in Portugal. In 1910, socialism was beginning to spread and the power of the church was decreasing. The Vatican decided it would use a “vision” of the Virgin Mary at the village of Fatima to counter the socialists. According to Rivera, this “production” led to a “major defeat” for the socialists.
But the Vatican also wanted to use the Fatima apparition to bring Islam to “Mother Church”. Rivera claims that “the Jesuits invented the Novenas to Fatima” (special prayers that last for 9 days) and spread them in Muslim lands. To the Arabs, it would appear as if “they were honoring the daughter of Muhammad”, but in fact, they would be honoring the Virgin Mary.
Also targeted by the Fatima hoax was Russia. The Vatican wanted to convert the Orthodox Christians in Russia to Roman Catholicism. Thus, Pope Pius XII used “his Nazi army to crush Russia”. When World War II ended in defeat, Pius then used a phony miracle of the “dancing sun” to “keep Fatima in the newspapers”. The “whole world swallowed it”, despite it being a Catholic “miracle”.
Coming back to Islam, Rivera explains that to the Vatican, the apparition of Fatima was a “turning point” in its effort to convert Muslims to Roman Catholicism. Rivera quotes the late Bishop Sheen, who stated, among other things, that:
“[a]fter the death of his daughter, Fatimah, Muhammad wrote of her that she ‘is the most holy of all women in Paradise, next to Mary’.”
Besides Russia, the Vatican was also keeping an eye on Spain. Political instability in the late 1800s was threatening the Catholic monarchy. A series of governments, both republics and monarchies, eventually led the Vatican to take firm action. In the name of fighting communism, the Vatican launched a vicious campaign to bring Spain under a fascist regime. In order for this plan to work, it contacted “the Islamic leaders” (whoever these were) since they apparently “owed a debt to the Vatican” for not handing over Jerusalem, but also because the concordat signed hundreds of years before required them to aid the pope if he needed their help. An Arab army was raised to help General Franco. The resulting civil war, in which the Arabs took part, slaughtered “unfaithful Roman Catholic men, women and children”. Rivera even witnessed the Arab troops when he was only 3 years old. Four million Muslim soldiers occupied Spain, and Islam’s “debt to the antichrist” had been paid. Rivera adds that in their agreement to help the pope in Spain, the Muslims asked the Vatican to never recognize the state of Israel, since the Jews were demanding such a state. The Vatican honored this pledge until 1994, when it formally recognized Israel.
At this point, Roscoe (whom the reader may remember from the beginning of the tract) finally gets a chance to get a word in. He asks Rivera if it was a Muslim who shot the pope (in 1981), to which Rivera replied in the affirmative. Of course, it was all part of the Vatican’s grand design. In fact, the Muslim word was “humiliated”, because how could a Muslim try to kill the man who represented the prophet Jesus on Earth? As a result, “condolences and apologies” came to the Vatican from the “Ayatollahs”. And according to Rivera, both the pope and the Muslim world “thanked the virgin Mary that he didn’t die”.
Rivera then moves on to the American involvement in Lebanon in the early 1980s. The reason for this, according to Rivera, was because President Reagan and the pope has become “friends” (because they had both been shot), and so Reagan decided to send troops to Lebanon, which was allegedly a “Roman Catholic” nation.
Rivera finishes his conspiratorial diatribe by referring to the Vatican as the “Whore of Revelation 17”. He claims that the Vatican is still trying to gain control of Jerusalem, and the Muslim nations will assist him in this endeavor. Rivera uses the “Gog and Magog” prophecies in the book of Ezekiel to predict that the Muslims and Communists (the tract was first published in 1988) will attack Israel but will be destroyed themselves. After this event, Satan will start the “battle of Armageddon”, which will prompt Jesus (peace be upon him) to descend to Earth and kill the Antichrist (who will supposedly be the last pope) and begin his 1000 year rule.
Rivera ends his epic conspiracy theory with a lamentation for the billions of Catholics and Muslims who have been deceived by Satan and the Vatican. He blames “Rome” for “this unspeakable crime”. The tract then ends with a warning to Muslims that “some Ayatollahs, who are in command of your religion” are aware of the “unprinted works of Muhammad”, that all of Rivera’s claims are true, and that the only way to salvation is to accept Jesus as savior.
 To Chick, Roman Catholics follow a false religion which will lead them to hell. In his view, they are not Christians.
 As we will see, the quotation marks around Alberto Rivera’s title as “Dr.” are for good reason. Rivera was probably pretending to have a PhD, among other reputable degrees.
 Here, Chick adds the following “note”:
“[o]n this holy place today…stands the Dome of the Rock Mosque (Islam’s second most holy place).”
Of course, anyone with even a little bit of knowledge can see that this statement is only half right. In actuality, the Dome of the Rock is not Islam’s “second most holy place”. In fact, it’s not even the third most holy place. Of course, it is sacred to Muslims, but in terms of importance, the three most “holy” mosques in Islam are the Grand Mosque in Mecca, which houses the Kaabah, the Prophet’s Mosque in Medina and the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, which is situated close to the Dome of the Rock.
 Vaticanus is described as one of the “7 hills” of Rome. It is obvious that Rivera is making a reference to Revelation 17:9. While it is clear that the author of Revelation was referring to Rome, it is not proven that he was also referring to Roman Catholicism, which is why the fanciful interpretations of fanatics like Jack Chick and Alberto Rivera are both laughable and absurd. For more on the book of Revelation, see our article here: https://quranandbibleblog.wordpress.com/2015/05/31/the-book-of-revelation/
 This is where Islam comes into play in Rivera’s conspiracy theory.
 We have discussed this story in another article: https://quranandbibleblog.wordpress.com/2014/01/11/ishmael-and-isaac-in-the-bible-and-the-quran/
 This is of course inaccurate because Rivera was conflating Arabs with Muslims, even though not every Arab is a Muslim, nor do Arabs comprise the majority of Muslims. In fact, Arabs are a small minority of Muslims because Islam is a global religion, with followers from multiple nationalities and ethnicities, alhamdulillah. This inaccurate conflation between Arabs and Muslims has been repeated in other Chick tracts, such as “Camel’s in the Tent”, which we have discussed in a previous article: https://quranandbibleblog.wordpress.com/2017/12/18/islam-jack-chick-and-the-battle-for-souls-camels-in-the-tent/
 This is one of the few times where Rivera actually makes an accurate statement!
 This is also true, but as of this point, Rivera’s rate of accuracy will decrease exponentially!
 Actually, the word “Kaaba” literally means “cube”, not “House of God”.
 Rivera adds that the Jews:
“…looked upon the Kaaba as an outlying tabernacle of the Lord with veneration, until it became polluted with idols.”
 Apparently, without warning, Rivera has already moved from the story of Islam as the world knows it to his allegedly more “accurate” and “shocking” version.
 Rivera sidetracks a bit here by referring to an “incredible statement” Muhammad (peace be upon him) made as an adult:
“Satan touches every son of Adam the day his mother beareth him, save only Mary and her son.”
Rivera then credulously asks (emphasis in the original):
“[w]hy would Muhammad be pushing Roman Catholic teaching? Isn’t this strange?”
We will answer this rather strange question later, inshaAllah.
 We will discuss whether this monk was actually a Catholic or more likely a member of one of the “heretical” sects of Christianity.
 In order for his conspiracy theory to line up, Rivera simply assumes that the monk (“Bahira” or Sergius), Waraqah (not “Waraquah”) and also Khadijah were all “Roman Catholics”, but there is no evidence provided. We are just supposed to take his word for it. But as we will see, the reason Rivera does not offer evidence and simply accepts it on faith that they were Roman Catholics is because there is no such evidence.
 This is a laughable and bizarre claim, and yet again, Rivera offers no proof! We are once again just supposed to accept his word. Unfortunately, as is typical of conspiracy theorists, when their theories are challenged with facts, they tend to fall apart. We will discuss Rivera’s absurd claims about the Quran in the analysis section below.
 Again, Roman Catholics are the dark agents in this conspiracy theory. We are once again told that Roman Catholics came to the aid of Islam, but we are given no evidence. Was the Negus actually a Roman Catholic, or was he a member of a different sect of Christianity? We will find out in the analysis.
 Of course, it was not yet known as “Medina”. Instead, it was called “Yathrib”, but we can forgive Rivera for his of attention to detail. He was a conspiracy theorist after all!
 We have dealt with this polemic previously and will discuss it briefly again. Chick and his cronies liked to repeat this claim but it is sensationalism at its core, rather than an honest retelling of history.
 This is another often-repeated polemic which is bereft of facts, and is nothing more than sensationalist drivel.
 Among the repeated claims are that Allah (Glorified and Exalted be He) was really a “moon god”, that “history proves that …the Sabeans in Arabia worshipped the moon-god who was married to the sun-goddess” and that they had three daughters who were known as the “daughters of Allah”. We will briefly deal with these debunked claims again.
 One wonders why such a powerful organization could not simply conquer Jerusalem and would simply brush aside any opposition from the Jews or “true Christians” in North Africa. What did the Jews have to do with Jerusalem, since they had been exiled from the city? What did the “true Christians” in North Africa have to do with Jerusalem? As is typical of conspiracy theories, we are supposed to take leaps of faith and logic in order to fit all the pieces. Otherwise, using evidence and reason, the conspiracy theory would not make sense.
 And what evidence does Rivera provide for all these sensational claims? None whatsoever.
 As usual, no evidence is given. We are supposed to just accept Rivera’s word. Of course, it is rather strange that the “Ayatollahs” would have such documents, given that they are leaders of the Shiite branch of Islam, not the majority Sunni branch! Rivera’s claim that the “Ayatollahs” are “high ranking holy men” is pure sophistry, since they are only referred by that title among Shiite Muslims.
 These are the sort of leaps of logic that conspiracy theorists have to indulge in. In order to confirm his own absurd theory, Rivera has to make non-sequiturs and logically-flawed statements which have no basis in fact. We will discuss this ridiculous non-sequitur in the analysis.
 Chick makes an “interesting note” that Roman Catholics or their shrines were never attacked at this time, but the churches of “true” Christians were destroyed. This claim will be fact-checked in the analysis.
 Rivera says that Muhammad (peace be upon him) had “removed Isaac’s name and inserted Ishmael”. We will briefly revisit the Biblical story of Ishmael and Isaac (peace be upon them), and show that the Biblical account is confusing and contradictory, and that some Jews had tried to remove the confusing parts of the story!
See note #7 for the link to the article on Ishmael and Isaac.
 Rivera doesn’t seem to realize the contradiction: how could Muslims be calling the pope an “infidel” and yet also be asking for “papal bulls” to give them “permission” to invade Europe?
 Rivera doesn’t seem to realize that, during the Crusades, the Christians managed to conquer Jerusalem on two occasions. In fact, on one occasion, a Muslim ruler even offered to hand over Jerusalem in exchange for the withdrawal of the Crusaders from Egypt. The pope had his prize!
 This is, of course, inaccurate. The name of the village was not given by the Muslim conquerors, as we will see. One must ask why the conquerors would have chosen a small, obscure village to give such an honorific name. Also, why didn’t they give the village the name of Muhammad himself, or one of the caliphs? Clearly, even before fact-checking Rivera’s claim, we can see it is absolutely ridiculous.
 We will briefly discuss this event as well. As it may already be obvious to the reader at this point, Rivera is just blowing hot air. The reality of this historical encounter between Francis of Assisi and the Muslims is actually more interesting that Rivera’s conspiracy-minded revisionism. Another problem is Rivera’s ineptitude in maintaining the historical chronology.
 Rivera claims that the signing of the “concordats” allowed the Vatican to maintain “a tight control” on the Muslim world, even the “Ayatollah” and “the Islamic priests, nuns and monks”. Anyone with even a minute amount of knowledge about Islam can see that Rivera is full of hot air, and is nothing more than an ignoramus. Since when do Muslims have “priests, nuns and monks”? And since when is the “Ayatollah” a title for any Muslim leader other than the Shiite Ayatollahs?
 Apparently blinded by his rants, Rivera doesn’t seem to realize the obvious contradiction in claiming that the Muslim Arabs had “co-existed peacefully” with Jews before the “concordats” signed by the Vatican and the Muslims. Earlier, he had claimed that the Vatican had instilled hatred for Jews and “true believers” since the time of Muhammad (peace be upon him)! How could Arab Muslims and Jews have “co-existed” if hatred for Jews was instilled in the minds of Arab Muslims from the beginning of Islam’s history?
 Referring to “Mecca” as if it is the Muslim equivalent of the “Vatican” is ludicrous, of course.
 This is complete nonsense. When we fact-check this claim, we will find that the “Novenas” have nothing to do with the daughter of Muhammad (peace be upon him), Fatima az-Zahra. The prayers are very literally to the Virgin Mary. Even if they were directed at Fatima, no true Muslim would recite these prayers, as it would be an act of shirk. Praying to anyone other than Allah (Glorified and Exalted be He) is the gravest sin in Islam. The same would apply to any prayers directed to Mary, the mother of Jesus (peace be upon them). Also, it is ludicrous to allege that Muslims would be none the wiser about the true nature of the prayers.
 This seems hard to believe. Perhaps Catholics believed in the Pope’s “vision”, but it is unlikely that the “whole world” took him at his word and believed that such a miracle occurred.
 As any Muslim or knowledgeable non-Muslim would immediately see, this statement is completely false since the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) died before his daughter Fatima (may Allah be pleased with her)! Moreover, as we will see later, while Fatima was described as one of the greatest of all women, there were others who were given a higher rank, including the Prophet’s first wife, Khadijah, as well as Mary and Asiya, the wife of the Pharaoh.
 Unfortunately, Rivera’s chronology is once again inaccurate. The fact is that the Vatican had maintained a strict policy regarding the Jews’ presence in the Holy Land for centuries, even before the rise of Islam. Also, the opposition to the Jews was maintained by non-Catholic Christians as well.
 The pope is sort of like Emperor Palpatine in Star Wars!
 As already stated, Rivera’s pathetic logic and ignorance is in full view.
 Rivera still has not figured out that the “Ayatollahs” are Shiite Muslim religious leaders, not Sunni Muslim. The latter represents more than 90% of the Muslim world. One would think that “Dr.” Rivera would be able to know the difference!
Amazingly, Rivera also insinuates that the pope was actually a communist!
Not only that, but the Muslim assassin was allegedly ordered not to actually kill the pope. Despite being “an expert marksman”, he shot the pope below the navel, as per his instructions from the Jesuits.
 This is, of course, another lie. Muslims would never “thank” the Virgin Mary or any person, living or dead, not even the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)! It is a fundamental teaching of Islam that prayers of thanksgiving should only be directed to Allah (Glorified and Exalted be He).
 The reader may recall that in the beginning of the tract, Chick had insinuated that the Lebanese Maronite Christians were actually Catholics. Even if this was true (which it is not), Lebanon was still NOT a “Roman Catholic” nation. It is, in fact, a majority Muslim country (with both Sunnis and Shiites).
 It seems rather amazing that despite all its power and more than 1500 years of trying, the Vatican has never held Jerusalem, except for the brief occasions during the Crusades. Curiously, Rivera never refers to these events.
Also, one must ask why Muslim countries would still be willing to help the Vatican conquer Jerusalem after centuries of intrigue.
 Of course, the Cold War ended shortly after the tract was published, and the Soviet Union was dissolved. Naturally, fanatics such as Rivera, Chick and Pat Robertson (among others) who were hoping for a cataclysmic war with the Soviet Union had to find a new enemy for their end times scenario. For more on Christian predictions during the Cold War, see Grace Halsell’s book Forcing God’s Hand: Why Millions Pray for a Quick Rapture and Destruction of Planet Earth (USA: Amana Publications, 2003).
 Anyone familiar with the Bible will immediately see Rivera’s atrocious ignorance of the chronology of Biblical prophecies. The “battle of Armageddon” is supposed to happen after Jesus’ descent, not before (Revelation 20)! Why is it that a Bible-thumper, who claims that the Bible is the “final authority”, misquotes the Bible?
 One cannot help but respond to such a warning with laughter!
One thought on “Islam, Jack Chick and the Battle for Souls – “The Prophet”, Part I”
Pingback: Deceitful Christians are afraid of seeing the “Vatican-Islam” conspiracy theory being blown to smithereens… – The Quran and Bible Blog