I used Muhammad for the specific reason that you guys wouldn?t even considered the possibility of him renouncing his religion. The very point was to show up your bias toward the issue. You are placing special importance on Islam and degrading paganism, when this same importance is shown in the reverse you complain. Lol wut? No, all that would have happened would be that Muhammad said that he got a revelation that Abu Lahab was pretending to be a Muslim, that he was still a pagan and that he was burning in hell. As it is a revelation from god, it must be true. Unless you think that you can doubt Muhammad on his word, and if you are going to doubt him on his word, then you would have done so already and wouldn't be a Muslim in the first place. Or better yet, even if this guy truly converted to Islam, god to keep this prophecy could burn him in hell because of his past crimes, EVEN THOUGH he converted to Islam. Can you show me where it says that if he converts to Islam he will go to heaven, and not just the assumption that if he did he would. I doubt what they predicted would be written down for us to read. But it doesn?t really matter, it is the principle that matters. The principle being that trying to establish validity based off of such an example is flawed.