Doing Da’wah or being a professional troll – Mohammed Hijab needs to pick one.


Mohammed Hijab is an absolute disgrace. (His real name is Mohamad Nabil Hegab – recorded by him at Companies House in London).

He whips up the crowd with his false smile, fancy car and designer suit. Passive aggressive with a love of MMA fighting, an ego with a love myself mentality and a do as I say, not do as I do agenda.

He is an egotist who plays to his adoring crowd while he exerts a mind control over them.

He treats those opposed to him with contempt and his passive aggressive rhetoric of veiled threats and mind games is a danger to those who do not tow his line!

Hegab is also a product of the Rahman Green and Hamza Tzortzis, IERA pre programming. He is trained like a robot to deal with atheists but Rahman Green and Tzortzis are themselves passive aggressive bullies again IMHO.

I actually question Hegab’s loyalty to Islam as he does this to further one agenda: himself and his ego!!

He struts into Speakers’ Corner as the great Muslim crusader but is just a fanatic egotist obsessed with himself. This is why I actually have no time for him. I see through him. Many Muslims do not!

Here we see Mohammed Hijab giving the enemies of Islam a good reason to criticize Islam:




Categories: Da'wah, Hijab, Islam, London, Speakers' Corner

61 replies

  1. What Hijab is doing is extremely distasteful and damaging for the Da’wa scene and for himself. Superior character trump’s all the rational arguments you may have under your belt.

    Our religion came to perfect good character and Hijab is displaying little of it. I wonder what those who look on from outside see when they see such behaviour.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. “Usually the people who claim loudest the mantle of da’wa are the people who are most effective in calling people away from Islam” ~ Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad

    Liked by 2 people

    • Narrated Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman:

      The people used to ask Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) about the good but I used to ask him about the evil lest I should be overtaken by them. So I said, “O Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ)! We were living in ignorance and in an (extremely) worst atmosphere, then Allah brought to us this good (i.e., Islam); will there be any evil after this good?” He said, “Yes.” I said, ‘Will there be any good after that evil?” He replied, “Yes, but it will be tainted (not pure.)” I asked, “What will be its taint?” He replied, “(There will be) some people who will guide others not according to my tradition? You will approve of some of their deeds and disapprove of some others.” I asked, “Will there be any evil after that good?” He replied, “Yes, (there will be) some people calling at the gates of the (Hell) Fire, and whoever will respond to their call, will be thrown by them into the (Hell) Fire.” I said, “O Allah s Apostle! Will you describe them to us?” He said, “They will be from our own people and will speak our language.” I said, “What do you order me to do if such a state should take place in my life?” He said, “Stick to the group of Muslims and their Imam (ruler).” I said, “If there is neither a group of Muslims nor an Imam (ruler)?” He said, “Then turn away from all those sects even if you were to bite (eat) the roots of a tree till death overtakes you while you are in that state.”

      Sahih al-Bukhari 7084; Book 92, Hadith 35.

      Like

      • …. May need to flee to the mountains soon and bite the roots of trees given the way things are going with the state of affairs and ‘leadership’ in the Muslim world today 😦 ….

        Like

    • Very sad. It has been all down hill for Hijab since he failed against David Wood. He has lost all respect in his debates after that.

      And now he has lost all legitimacy as a Muslim debater and apologist.

      What fairminded, intellectual and respectable person would now want to engage in a debate or dialogue with Hijab after this?

      Liked by 1 person

      • Good that you admit he lost the debate against David Wood.

        Williams is right that this is very bad character by Muhammad Hijab.

        Not a good witness for Islam.

        Like

      • Qur’an, Surah 16:40
        Indeed, Our word to a thing when We intend it is but that We say to it, “Be,” and it is.

        David Wood made a great point here in debate with Muhammad Hijab.

        The Qur’an, by calling Jesus “the Word of God” (Kalimat ‘ Allah) has unknowingly affirmed John 1:1; 1:14; 1 John 1:1; Philippians 2:5-8; and Luke 1:34-35 showing that Jesus has the same nature as God the Father. The Virgin Birth proves this.

        Like

      • Surely you cannot be that desparate and misguided Kenny lol..

        Wrong Kenny, the Quran affirms that Jesus was A word from God, like Adam, he was a human being created by THE WORD OF God’s creative command ‘Be’

        “Truly, the likeness of Jesus, in God’s sight, is as Adam’s likeness; He CREATED him of dust, then said He unto him, ‘BE,’ and he was”

        In the Quran, Jesus was not THE “Be” of God Jesus was CREATED by THE “Be” of God Kenny lol…

        “‘Lord,’ said Mary, ‘how shall I have a son seeing no mortal has touched me?’ ‘Even so,’ God said, God CREATES what He will. When He decrees a thing He does but say to it “Be,” and it is”

        Some Quranic commentaries clarify this key distinctive point about Jesus referred to as ‘a word’ from God:

        Imam Qurtubi clarifies stating:

        “And Jesus was named ‘word’ because it was with The Word of Allah Almighty that was ‘Be’ (see Surah 3:59) that he was created, for he was without a Father. (Abu ‘Abdullah Al-Qurtubi, Tasfir al Jami’ li-ahkam al-Qur’an, Commentary on Surah 3:45

        Ibn Abbass also took this position…

        ((And remember) when the angels) i.e. Gabriel (said: O Mary! Allah giveth you glad tidings of a Word from Him) of a son who shall come into being by means of a Word from Allah, (whose name is the Messiah) because he travels from one country to another; it is also said: the Messiah means the king, (Jesus, son of Mary, illustrious in the world) he has standing and position amidst people in the life of this world (and the Hereafter) he has standing and position with Allah, (and one of those brought near) unto Allah in the Garden of Eden. (Ibn Abbaas, Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs, Commentary on Surah 3:45

        Also:

        “The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary) and through His word he became a created being, (Ibn Abbaas, Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs, Commentary on Surah 4:171”

        Don’t be mislead and deceived Kenny, Jesus was a human being created by THE WORD OF GOD THAT brough Jesus into existence

        “When the angels said, ‘Mary, God gives thee good tidings of **A Word** from Him whose name is Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary; high honoured shall he be in this world and the next, near stationed to God.”

        “While he was standing in prayer in the chamber, the angels called unto him: “Allah give you glad tidings of Yahya, witnessing the truth of a Word (Jesus) from Allah, and (be besides) noble, chaste, and a prophet,- of the company of the righteous.”

        Like

      • I didn’t say he lost the debate. He failed. He made too many mistakes. Like for example Hebrew mistakes. Too easy for critics.to point out he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Then he failed to understand DWs argument about “for the prophet” not “to the prophet”. Again, too easy for critics to point out that Hijab can’t follow even an unsophisticated argument. Obviously the argument is ridiculous. But the fact that Hijab couldn’t address it correctly was really bad. Then the fact he was unprofessional and couldn’t keep his cool. Instead he went with temper tantrums and Quran recitation. He was not in there to destroy his opponent, intellectually. He was in there to insult, humiliate and verbally abuse him.

        Why would a debate organizer put up with that? Didn’t he realize he was humiliating the organizer by his behavior? Why should organizers invite him to debate with a track record like this?

        If he could have just calmly pointed out the flaws of DWs argument with reasoned and well thought out arguments he might have won the debate. Instead he exposed himself as irrelevant to propper debating. Both because of unprofessional behavior and ignorance of the Bible,

        After this debate, he cemented the irrelevance. He is just another angry debater. Becomes angry like a little child, stubborn. Like the debate with Cosmic Skeptic where again he was caught in ignorance, angry attitude and most embarrassingly he was also caught doctoring the video. And as if this wasn’t enough he made unfortunate and unbecoming comments about his interlocutor afterwards.

        We need somebody who is professional, knowledgeable and can keep his cool. But you’re right many unsophisticated Muslims felt he destroyed DW. Maybe he did. But in the process he also destroyed his own legitimacy as a debater and apologist. I mean, who would like to interact with him after all this?

        it’s not like DW presented arguments that couldn’t be refuted. So why not refute them with logical and well reasoned arguments?

        But sadly I think this debate is the point marking the start of Hijab’s decline.

        Liked by 1 person

    • We have most of those words in Farsi.
      😉

      Like

      • I didn’t know you were Persian Ken.

        Like

      • learned their language and culture by being with them for many years. wonderful people, history, culture; very intelligent, passionate; wonderful hospitable nature.

        Like

      • I agree with you Paul, that M. Hijab’s behavior is terrible and a bad witness for Islam.

        It is good that someone here admitted that David Wood defeated him in that debate.

        Like

      • @ Ken

        “David Wood made a great point here in debate with Muhammad Hijab.”

        Response:

        What’s this so-called “great” point supposedly made by Mr. Wood?

        Do you really think Wood’s argument here is worth mentioning ?

        Like

      • Yes, the Qur’an, by calling Jesus “the Word of God” (Kalimat Allah) is unknowingly agreeing with John 1:1, 1:14; Philippians 2:5-8; 1 John 1, and Luke 1:34-35.
        Also listen to the clip by David Wood, where he demolishes M. Hijab’s argument, based on Surah 16:40.

        Like

      • see the video above, it is only 2 minutes and 33 seconds. Great point by D. Wood.

        Like

      • Also Islam calling Jesus “a spirit from Allah” and virgin born, together with Kalimat Allah, proves the NT is correct, 600 years earlier.

        Like

      • hahahahahaha Kenny you truly are a deluded misguided polytheist – Lol.. only if you apply your dubious false trinitarian eisegesis to the Quran, just like you falsely interpret the Bible will you get an erroneous, foolish Idea that Jesus shares the same substance as His God and the NT is correct lol…

        May Allah guide you Kenny lol… Ameen.

        Like

      • God, the true and living God of the Bible, already guides me.
        Psalm 25 & 27 & John 17

        Like

      • Don’t be mislead and deceived Kenny, Jesus was a human being created by THE WORD OF GOD – “BE” THAT brough Jesus into existence

        “Indeed, Our word to a thing when We intend it is but that We say to it, “Be,” and it is.” 16:40

        God utter HIs WORD “BE” and Jesus was 🙂

        Get it Kenny lol…. ??? 🙂

        Like

      • Sorry Kenny but God, the true and living God of the Bible is not comprised of three distinct persons that collectively form HIS one divine being,

        You are misled and misguided by a false triune idol god that has deceived you into committing polytheism by worshipping 3 distinct personal gods Kenny

        HE God Almighty is a personal deity, not a substance Lol…

        God Almighty’ in the bibe is not identified as a divine substance or an essence that is shared within persons, ‘God’ is not a WHAT , ‘God’in the bible is a WHO, throughout history of Jewish Monotheism, HE ‘God Almighty’is identified as a Personal Deity, Who possesses HIS One unique Divine Being that identifies HIM as One Divine Person

        “Well said, teacher,” the man replied. “You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but HIM”,

        May God Almighty guide you away from polytheism Kenny Ameen

        Like

      • John 4:23-24
        God is Spirit . . .

        Like

      • If you actually thik DW won that debate then you are a lost cause. We have no problem admitting that MH did make some mistakes which is btw something you can’t expect from the other side for their apologists. You’ll have more luck moving mount Everest than accomplishing that.
        But DW just got RIPPED to pieces. Just look at DW and the expressions on his face when uttering his garbage. He doesn’t even believe in them and this is obvious by his facial expressions. The damage control DW and his band of thugs tried to do afterwards is just beyond pathetic.

        As for MH’s behavior lately, I completly agree. I don’t think he sould be doing wat he is doing eventhough he is using it to showcase the hypocrasy of the Murtads and the kafirun when ‘free speech’ is used against them with insults just like the vermin do against Islam and the Prophet (saw).

        Liked by 1 person

      • @ Ken

        “Yes, the Qur’an, by calling Jesus “the Word of God” (Kalimat Allah) is unknowingly agreeing with John 1:1, 1:14; Philippians 2:5-8; 1 John 1, and Luke 1:34-35”

        Response:

        You people claim this because you wrongly think that the Arabic concept of “kalimatullah” is exactly the same as the Greek stoic concept of “logos” used in the prologue of the fourth Gospel.

        LITERALLY, the Arabic “kalimatullah” refers to God’s creative command/speech (Arabic “ﻛﻦ” pronounced “kun”) which is NOT even a person by itself but God’s attribute only.

        As Muhammad Hijab pointed out, Qur’an 3:58 clearly defines the concept when it says that Jesus (with a mother, without father) was made a living being by the same divine word just like Adam (from clay, without a mother or father) was made a living being by the same divine creative word. The same divine creative word made both to be living beings albeit created from different substances.

        In fact, each and every other creation is created by the same divine creative word “kun” (Qur’an 19:35, 2:117, 3:47, 3:59, 16:40, 19:35 etc).

        But Jesus alone is METAPHORICALLY titled as “Word from God” in the Qur’an just to distinguish his special creation (with a mother but without a mother) from all other humans.

        The same applies to the special title of Jesus “ruhullah”. It is a METAPHORICAL title for Jesus in the Holy Qur’an to show that he was specially made a breathing being by the same breath (ruh) from God breathed into all other living humans.

        Therefore, this common Christian argument is besed on the misunderstanding of the Qur’anic concept of “kalimatullah”.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. A Muslim scholar puts it beautifully:

    Like

  4. Surah 48: 29
    Surah 9.73

    Like

  5. Mohamed Hijab makes egregious aqidah errors.

    @12:15 Mohamed Hijab says, “No one says physically we say bi dhatihi, we say bi dhatihi.”

    Where did the Blessed Prophet (saw) say “bi dhatihi”?

    Like

    • Prima Quran (the Grandverbalizer 19)
      Hey
      Salaam – Peace to you!
      John 14:27

      What does “bi dhatihi” mean?

      “by one self”, ? “by essence” ?

      “by nature” ?

      Like

      • His very being , in essence, his self, it’s an innovated phrase that has no support in neither the Qur’an or Sunnah. It is heresy.

        Like

      • How is that heresy?

        Since he said, “not physically”

        God is not physical, but He has some kind of essence / being / nature / substance.

        Like

      • Ken, as mentioned this terminology “bi dhati” is not from the Blessed Prophet (saw) or his companions.

        We also have from the Blessed Messenger (saw) who is reported to have said: “Allah was when there was nothing else than Him, and His Throne was upon the water, and He wrote in the Reminder (al-dhikr) all things, and he created the heavens and the earth.”

        Source: (Narrated from ‘Imran ibn Husayn by al-Bukhari, in the Book of the Beginning of Creation.)

        https://sunnah.com/bukhari/59/2

        This is the least I can do for you. I am quite surprised that all this time on all these forums where Muslims and Christians interact that you did not know what bi dhati meant or were unfamiliar with it. I want to have husn al zhan with you. So I will give you this warning.

        “Surely, the religion with Allah is Islam. Those who were given the Scripture did not differ except after what the knowledge had come to them through transgression among themselves. Allah will be swift in reckoning with those who deny His revelations. If they dispute with you, say, I have submitted my whole being to Allah and so have those who follow me. And ask those who have been given the Book, as well as the unlettered, Do you submit yourselves to Allah in the same way? If they submit themselves to Him, they are on the right path; but if they turn away, your duty is only to convey the message. Allah is observant of all His servants.” (Qur’an 3:19-20)

        You cannot have as an excuse on the day of reckoning that you had no knowledge about Islam.

        Liked by 1 person

      • If you notice in my question, I did include the meaning, but wanted to make sure, as whenever I put the Farsi / Arabic script in a comment, it seems to not “go through”. We don’t have the “bi” as that meaning in Arabic in Farsi.

        I recognized the term “Dhat” ذات = essence, substance, nature, inner self.

        We have this in Farsi, which comes from the Arabic, and we use it in explaining the doctrine of the Trinity, that God is one in substance, essence, nature, and 3 in person.

        https://bloggingtheology.com/2020/08/15/doing-dawah-or-being-a-professional-troll-mohammed-hijab-needs-to-pick-one/comment-page-1/#comment-44998

        Like

      • husn al zhan with you

        I recognize “husn” حسن as good, but don’t know the “zhan” ? Can you translate and give the Arabic script? We might have that in Farsi, if I can see the Arabic Script, I can find it and understand it better.

        Like

      • I did recognize it, but wanted to make sure:

        Prima Quran (the Grandverbalizer 19)
        Hey
        Salaam – Peace to you!
        John 14:27

        What does “bi dhatihi” mean?

        “by one self”, ? “by essence” ?

        “by nature” ?

        Like

  6. Insulting someone’s wife is a disgraceful behavior likewise they insult prophet Muhammad pbuh.

    Both of them (Mohamed Hijab and Apostate Prophet) were showing a disgraceful behavior.

    Apostate Prophet make a living by insulting prophet Muhammad pbuh and Islam, he thinks this is okay.
    Mohamed Hijab are insulting Apostate Prophet’s wife, he thinks this is okay.

    Both of them are not okay.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Let the Angels respond for you:

    Abu Huraira reported: “A man verbally abused Abu Bakr while the Prophet, peace be upon him, was sitting down. That made the Prophet impressed by Abu Bakr and he smiled. Then, Abu Bakr reviled the man with the same harsh words as him and the Prophet became angry and he stood to leave. Abu Bakr went to the Prophet and he said, “O Messenger of Allah, the man reviled me and you were sitting, but when I responded you became angry and stood up.” The Prophet said, “Verily, there was an angel with you responding on your behalf, but the devil appeared when you responded with the same words as him and I will not sit in the presence of devils.”

    “O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah and be just witnesses and let not the enmity and hatred of others cause you to deviate from justice. Be just: that is nearer to piety, and fear Allah. Verily, Allah is Well­Acquainted with what you do” 5:8

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Oh what a lovely sublime sight to see that hot tea being poured into a beautiful, delightful cup! Enjoy! 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Also his avatar or he looks like a demon is pretty bad also

    Liked by 1 person

  10. I have no issue in you criticising Mohammed Hijab’s approach and claiming that he is going against Islamic principles, but you aren’t doing that here. The way you are condemning him, knowing who his opponents are, this reflects who you are and what you stand for.

    You say:
    He treats those opposed to him with contempt and his passive aggressive rhetoric of veiled threats and mind games is a danger to those who do not tow his line!

    I ask you, who are “those opposed to him”? And are they (ex-Muslims and other Islamic haters) not opposed by you as well, or do you have more in common with them than Mohammed Hijab?

    Do you have loyalty towards Mohammed Hijab since he is a Muslim, especially since he is opposing Islamic opponents, or did you once again apostatise from the religion of Islam?

    Disappointing!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: