When somebody converts to Islam, he/she is usually given an Arabic name(s) if he/she doesn’t already have one, and so Billy was given the Muslim name Mohammed Abdullah and Kalliope (his ex-wife) the name Ayesha Abdullah. As we have seen in the original teachings of Jmmanuel in the TJ, the prophet of the new time is mentioned. Did the Prophet Mohammed also mention this the prophet of the new time in his teachings? Like Christianity after many years of falsifications it is hard to know for sure if the Prophet Mohammed did speak of the prophet of the new time or if it was falsified, because mentioning the prophet of the new time would create a paradox to the well known Islamic teaching where the Prophet Mohammed is considered to be the final prophet. Nevertheless the name of the prophet of Islam is known as Mohammed Abdullah, and therefore the Mahdi/Mehdi, as Stated in one of the above Hadith, would have the same name, i.e. Mohammed Abdullah. Can it really be so? What are the chances that Billy was given the combination of those two names out of thousands of Arabic names? On one hand we can imagine that the reason is that such a thing could have been set in motion a long time ago, and is a result of a direction taken in the distant past whereby the prophet of the new time would carry this name as well, because in most cases this person would not have survived in Islam’s writings for so long if the name was not an Arabic one. On the other hand one can also claim that it was all a lie and that Billy gave himself this name knowing what it might cause. As the person that gave him this name has not been interviewed and nobody has claimed to have given him this name, it cannot be verified for sure (as proof of the genuineness of Billy’s statements, see the photocopy of the corresponding certificate of June 26, 1967/Karachi, West Pakistan, which is included in the German version of this article). What can be done, is to try to analyze Billy’s position and what could have prompted him to fabricate such a lie. Billy has never intentionally lied about anything; he might have told incorrect things in the past but that was a result of being misinformed and was therefore not an intentional lie; but after all these years no one has proved nor has it been documented anywhere that he had deliberately lied to deceive or cheat someone.