Narrator Ishaq (cf. p.270, A. Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad) refers to Allah as the Eternal, which means a God with an immutable, unchanging nature, but again He is described as having a changeable nature similar to that of humans. Which is it?

The anthropomorphic view of the God of Islam, like the God of Judaism and Christianity, is enhanced by the doctrine of abrogation (naskh), an Islamic doctrine explained by Robert Spencer in his Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam, (and the Crusades), p. 24f ). This doctrine assumes that Allah can change or cancel what he tells Muslims.  Cf. Sura 2:100:

Spencer points out that the violent verses of the ninth sura including the so-called Verse of the Sword (S 9:5) abrogate the peaceful verses because they were revealed later in Muhammad's prophetic career. He adds, in fact most Muslim authorities agree that the ninth sura was the very last section of the Koran to be revealed. (ibid, p. 25.) Spencer adds that some Islamic theologians have asserted that verse 9.5 abolishes no fewer than 124 more peaceful and tolerant verses of the Koran! (Cf. Spencer's references on p.25.) One Muslim commentator in particular is quoted as saying that verse 9:5 abrogated every agreement between the Prophet and any idolater, every treaty and every term, and no treaty or promise of safety thereafter (since Sura 9) was revealed. Another respected commentator viewed the purpose of the Verse of the Sword as abolishing every peace treaty in the Koran! (ibid., p.25.)

Sura 9:5, the so-called Verse of the Sword reads:

[Editor's comment: Kill? Seize? Besiege? Lay in ambush? Just how gracious and merciful is this God of the Koran?]

Rodwell notes (see note 44, p. 434, re Sura 2) that Muslims admit that there are 225 verses cancelled by later ones ! He affirms that the doctrine of abrogation is taught in the Talmud.(i.e. the body of Jewish civil and canonical law). He refers to Sura 4:84 which speaks of non-believers doubting God's word:

And Sura 16:103 speaks for Allah:

[Editor's comment: So if verse 9.5 abrogates 124 more peaceful and tolerant verses of the Qur'an, or 225 verses, as Rodwell claims, why do Muslim theologians retain them in the Koran, since God is alleged in Sura 16:103 to "change one verse for another"? Why do Muslim theologians make God speak as it were with forked tongue, or out of both sides of his mouth? Doesn't this trait define God more like humans and less like a super-natural being? Don't we think of God as immutable, unchanging, who sets the standard for human behavior? If not, aren't we defining him as anthropomorphic like humans? ]

Observe the facts related in the Traditions, Part III, The Hijra: The Names of the Jewish Adversaries (Cf. p.239, A. Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad): As the story goes...The Jewish rabbis showed hostility to the apostle in envy, hatred and malice, because God had chosen His apostle from the Arabs. They were joined by men from al-Aus and al-Khazraj who had adhered steadfastly to their heathen religion and their fathers' polytheism. Yet when Islam appeared and their people embraced it, the Jewish rabbis were compelled to fake acceptance to it in order to save their lives.

This story continues... The Jewish rabbis used to annoy the apostle with questions and introduce confusion, so as to confound the truth with falsity. The story relates that the Koran used to come down in reference to their questions although some questions about permitted and forbidden behavior came from Muslims themselves. (Cf. ibid., p. 239, A. Guillaume)

The Jewish rabbis had more troubling questions for Muhammad. Ishaq relates that he was told that Sa'id b. Jubayr said that a number of Jews came to the apostle and said they knew that Allah created creation, but wanted to know who created Allah? According to Ishaq, the apostle was so angry he turned red and rushed at them being indignant for his Lord. Then Gabriel came to calm Muhammad, and says Ishaq, an answer to what the rabbis asked came to Muhammad from God, namely that God is One, the Eternal, who neither begets nor is begotten and has no equal. (Cf. ibid., p. 270.) Sura 17:112 affirms that answer (except for the attribute "the Eternal"):

According to Ishaq, the rabbis pressed Muhammad further and asked him to describe Allah's shape to them: what were his forearm and upper arm like? Muhammad became more angry than before and rushed at them again.

Gabriel calmed Muhammad again and the answer came from God that they are not thinking of God as He ought to be thought of, that He will have the whole earth in His grasp on resurrection day and the heavens folded up in His right hand, and that He is glorified and exalted above what they associate with Him. (Cf. ibid., p. 270.) Sura 39:67 records that answer thus:

p.239f) one rabbi Labid b. A'sam bewitched the apostle of God so that he could not enjoy (lit. "come at") his wives. (ibid., p. 240.) According to A. Guillaume's commentary footnotes, Suhayll asserts that the tradition is sound and accepted by traditionists. The spell is said to have lasted a year, according to one Mu'ammar who added that two other critics rejected the tradition, on grounds that prophets could not be bewitched, as that would be committing sin, and contrary to the word of God. (Cf.Sura 5:7 which reads in part: "O Apostle! ...And god will protect thee from evil men..." ) Mu'ammar is said to have claimed the tradition was unassailable, properly authenticated and intellectually acceptable and, in his view, the prophets were not immune to bodily afflictions like sorcery. (Cf. ibid., p. 240, footnote 2, A. Guillaume.)

What was Muhammad's state of mind during his lifetime? Muhammad's subconscious mind is discussed by historian Carl Stephenson in his book Medieval History. He says the subconscious mind can perform marvels, especially in the case of Muhammad, who was extremely sensitive, nervously high-strung, and prone to attacks of hysteria, which Muhammad and others considered clear evidence that he possessed supernatural powers. (p.134.) The question arises: Could Muhammad's visions really have been hallucinations, judging by his emotional nature? Whatever they were, visions or hallucinations, Stephenson says they were real to Muhammad and his followers, and that changed the course of history on three continents (i.e. Asia, Africa and Europe. (Cf. ibid., p. 134f.)

Muhammad points out Allah's character and emotions in his arguments with the Jewish rabbis. When Nu'man b. Ada, Bahri b. 'Amr and Sha'a b. 'Adiy came to the apostle, Muhammad invited them to come to God and he warned them of God's vengeance (p. 266, op cit, A. Guillaume).

And when the apostle invited the Jews to Islam, making it attractive to them, he also warned them of God's jealousy and His retribution. They did not accept his invitation. (ibid., p. 266.)

Again when two Christian divines spoke to the apostle, he advised them to submit, i.e. become Muslims. After a long argument that there is no God but He the Living, the Merciful (cf. Sura 3:1) and what Jesus' role was according to their doctrine, Muhammad answered as in Sura 3:3:

As is repeated so many times in the Koran, God threatens unbelievers with severe chastisement, eternal punishment, yada, yada, yada.

Yet there is one major difference: The God of the Jews, at least in the view of the early Jews (the Israelites) remained a mysterious, transcendent being who was referred to only in writing --YHWH (without vowels), whose name was too awesome to be spoken in the reading of scripture (hence the lack of vowels). He was incomprehensible, transcending human understanding. His "otherness" constituted his "holiness."

Allah appears to have "sent down" one repetitive, intransigent message to Muhammad: Believers shall be saved and awarded a place in Paradise; and disbelievers - Infidels- will suffer the severest chastisement, punishment, the burning fires of Hell. It makes one wonder what Muslims find so beautiful about Allah's language and His message in the Koran, that He would create human beings, then condemn some of them to death at the hands of believers and to eternal punishment for not believing in Him. And for believers the reward is supposed to be an eternity of eating fruits of every kind in a garden with gushing fountains, and the pleasure of the company of women and wine (Cf. Koranlore Chapter 5). To Muhammad's vision of Paradise, this editor must ask: Is that all there is to man's existence in God's creation? If so, it hardly seems worth it.

A final point to be made: One often hears the phrase "God is great," which, it has been suggested, is an incorrect translation of the Arabic; rather the correct translation being "God is greater," (cf. K. Armstrong, A History of God, p. 149), i.e. He is greater than humans presumably. That suggests to this editor that God is little more than a bully who forces man to choose His way or suffer eternal punishment. Isn't that what dictators and tyrants do, giving their subjects but one choice, robbing them of the chance to think for themselves, making them virtual zombies who follow their master blindly?