1000+ MISTAKES IN THE QURAN
1000+ MISTAKES IN THE QURAN (the list)
This is not meant to be read page by page. IF YOU HAVE A VERSE NUMBER, FIND THAT VERSE NUMBER HERE, AND SEE IF THERE IS A COMMENT - there are very many errors in the Quran, errors no god would make.
A proof of mathematical strength and 100% proveable for that the Quran (and thus the Muslim version of al-Lah/Allah) is fake and made up - highly likely by Mohammad.
The main thing is not to read this book, but to know it and its strong proof for that it is made up, and Islam thus made up (started as a swindle?) exists.
Islam and Muslims/Mohammadans go to long lengths to discredit this book, so just check the information yourself if you are in doubt.
THE FORWORD OF THE BOOK ITSELF STARTS 32 CM DOWN. THE FOREWORD TAKES SOME 70 CM, AND THE LIST OF ERRORS STARTS AFTER THAT. IT SIMPLY STARTS WITH "SURAH 1".
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1000+ MISTAKES IN THE QURAN (Part II of the book - some errors listed in accordance with the numbers of the verses in the Quran.) Pages 229 through 492 of "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" also written "1000 Mistakes in the Quran"). You find the full book f.x. at Amazon. The full "1000 Mistakes" lists unbelievable 1750 wrong facts, 350 other errors + 400 contradic)tions no god would make. This proves that the Quran is not words from a god. F.x. "THE 13 PROOFS" has more proofs. We may add that the Quran also havs 600 points positive to violence and blood (f.x. "Verses of War in the Quran") and there exists a list of 1300 racist points (racism based mainly on religion, but som on gender or homosexuality), and one of 110 points anti integrety. And "Mohammad Lying in the Quran" may be informative.
"THOUSAND MISTAKES" I S O N E O F T H E S T R O N G E S T P R O O F S F O R T H A T T H E Q U R A N I S A M A D E U P B O O K, AND I S L A M T H U S A M A D E UP - A F A KE - "R E L I G I O N" O R R E A L L Y A M A D E U P S U P E R S T I T I O N. Use this proof and/or spread it
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MISTAKES AND ERRORS - MISTAKEN FACTS - IN THE QURAN, THE HOLY BOOK OF MUHAMMAD, MUSLIMS, ISLAM, AND ALLAH. THE "COMPLETE" LIST - THE "ENCYCLOPAEDIA" - BASED ON SURAH AND VERSE NUMBER
Comments numbered by 3 numbers (included 00 or 0) a few places followed by one small letter = clear mistakes. Comments numbered by 00 or 0 followed by 1, 2 or 3 letters (big or small) = likely mistake.
All verses or parts of verses where we have found mistakes are included with three exceptions:
1. There surely are mistakes we have overlooked.
2. There are some mistakes that needs long explanations. If they are not essential, they often have been omitted – long explanations for small things are boring for most readers - - - and also often a hallmark for someone tryingto lead you by your nose.
3. There are all the borderline cases: Is it easy to see that this is wrong? Or may there exist explanations that may make it less clear if this really is a mistake? If not we have normally not included it here. As for using this "encyclopaedia of mistakes", just look for the surah and verse number in your Quran, and it is easy to find here if there is a mistaken fact
in that verse.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Errors listed in accordance with the verse numbers in the Quran:
1. Clearly wrong information/statements are numbered with serial numbers - 3 numbers, sometimes followed by a
small letter.
2. Highly likely wrong information/statements are numbered with letters.
3. The numbers that are not serial numbers are surah numbers and verse numbers in Abdullah Yusuf Ali's translation of the Quran to English.
4. Comments in () inside quotations and marked by * are inserted by us, like this: (xxxxxx*). And * in front of the serial number: Big or "new" mistakes - though actually all mistakes are big even if they are small, as an omniscient god simply should never make mistakes. ** or *** = NB or NB!! In addition we use colour and/or special writing on some significant
ones.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AS FOR "EXPLAINING" AWAY ERRORS, ETC. IN THE QURAN:
Forword:
The Quran says f.x.:
3/7a: "But those in whose hearts is perversity - - - (seek) for its (the Quran's) hidden meaning - - -." Where there are errors in the Quran, Muslims seek for hidden/other meanings in the words, to "explain away" the errors. = "in their hearts is perversity. Also see 3/7b.
3/7b: "- - - no one knows the hidden meanings, except Allah." = The claimed differnt meanins of texts, different from what the words in the texts says, Muslims try to use to explain away errors, etc.are made up and invalied according to the Quran.
4/82: "Had the Quran been from other than Allah, they would surely have found much discrepancy therein." WHAT THEN DOES IT MEAN WHEN THER PROVABLY ARE MUCH DISCREPANCY IN THE QURAN? DISCREPANCIES NO GOD WOULD MAKE.
6/34: " - - - there is none that can alter the words (and Decrees) of Allah." That is just what Muslims try to do, when they try to explain away errors, etc. by claiming words in the Quran mean something different from what the words really say.
6/114: Allah has sent the Quran "explained in detail." = When Muslims try to explain away errors, etc. in the Quran, that means that they claim to knoe better than Allah what Allah "really" wanted to say, or claiming that the are better to explain things than Allah.
7/32: "Thus We (Allah*) explain the Signs in detail - - -." Muslims "explaining what Allah really means" then claim that Allah was unable to explain exacty what he meant, that they know better than him his real meanings and/or ar better at explaining.
7/52: "- - - a Book (the Quran*) which We (Allah*) explained in detail - - -." When Muslims explains "what Allah really meant" to explain away errors, etc., that means they know better and are better at explaining, than Allah.
7/174: "Thus do We (Allah*) explain the Signs (the information*) in detail." See 7/52.
words in the Quran a meaning different from what the words in the Quran really say, is trying to change Allah's words and meaning.
11/1: "(The Quran is*) a book - - - (of established meaning)), further explained in detail - - - from (Allah*)". See 7/52.
15/1: "- - - a Quran that makes things clear." Muslims who claim they can explain better than Allah's(?) words in the Quran, pretend they know better than the Quran what Allah wanted to say, and/or that the are better at explainming than a god.,
17/12: "- - - all things have We (Allah*) explained in detail." ALL THINGS HAS ALLAH EXPLAINED, AND IN DETAIL. But Islam and Muslims often pretend they are better explaining and know better than Allah what Allah "really" wanted to say. To be better than a god, they have to be clever, yes.
17/89: "And We (Allah*) have explained to man, in this Quran, every kind of similitude - - -." STILL ISLAM AND MANY MUSLIMS CLAIM THEY KNOW BETTER, OR ARE MORE CLEVER THAN ALLAH TO EXPLAIN AWAY ERRORS, ETC. THAN ALLAH.
17/105: "We (Allah sent down the (Quran) in truth, and in truth it descended - - -." But Islam and Muslims claim that the Quran is not the full truth, or sometimes even wrong, so that they have to correct the clumsy Allah's words, and "explain what he really meant".
18/1: "(Allah*) hat allowed therin (in the Quran*) no Crookedness (= no errors*)". When a Muslim "corrects" words or meanings in the Quran, he claims Allah's words are wrong, or at least not a good enough explanation, and claims he himself knows better or is better explaining "what Allah - or the Mother of the Book in Heaven - really meant.
18/2: "(He (Allah*) hath made it (the Quran*)) Straight (and Clear)." But Islam and Muslims claim that in many points they have to explain "what Allah really meant". A parallel to 17/105, 18/1, and more.
18/54: "We (Allah*) have explaines in detail in this Quran - - - every kind of similitude - - -." But in order to "explain" away f.x. errors no god would make, Islam and many Muslims claim Allah here and other places is wrong, and had not explained points and details correctly,so that they have to correct his words or meanings in the Quran.
19/97: "So We (Allah*) made the (Quran) easy in your own tongue - - -." Islam and many Muslims claim that the clumsy(?) Allah was unable to explain correctly, but that they know what Allah "really" wanted to say, and that they ar better at explaining than Allah.
20/52: "- - - my Lord (Allah*) newer errs - - -." Well, Islam and many Muslims claim that Allah's words or explanations in the Quran often are unclear or errors, so that they have to explain what they know he really meant to say.
24/34: "We (Allah*) have already sent down to you (humans*) making things clera - - -." Islam and many Muslims mean that Allah lies whan he claims that his words are clear, and that they know what he "really meant", that they - not Allah/the Quran are the ones who tell and explain correctly Allah's real intentions.
25/33: "- - - We (Allah*) reweal to thee (Mohammad/people*) THE TRUTH AND THE BEST EXPLANATIONS (THEREOF)". Well, Islam and many Muslims states that it is a lie that Allah in the Quran have the best explanations, and that they have to correct his(?) words by giving better(?) explanations.
26/2: "- - - the Book (the Quran*) that makes (things) clear." Islam and many Muslims often claim that the Quran/Allah are unclear , and that they have to clearify what the clumsy Allah has said, and often correct the meaning of his/the Quran's words.
28/2: The same like 26/2.
36/69: The same like 26/2.
37/117: Similar to 26/2.
39/28: "(It is) a Quran - - - without any crookedness (therein). A parallel to 26/2. And there provably are many errors in the Quran.
41/3: A Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail". A parallel to 26/2.
43/2: "By the Book that makes things clear." Once more Islam and many Muslims claim that statements like this are wrong, and that they have to correct the meaning of the words - f.x. to "explain" away errors, etc. A parallel to 26/2.
44/2: A copy of 43/2.
44/13: "- - - a messenger (Mohammad*) explaining things clearly - - -." Well, the Quran was told by Mohammad - the claimed perfectly honest prophet. But the man errors in his Quran have to be explained away. A parallel to 26/2.
**53/10: "- - - (ALLAH*) (CONVEYED) WHAT HE (MEANT) TO CONVEY." I T I S H E R E C L E A R T H A T A L L A H I S S A T I S F I E D W I T H T H E T E X T S I N T H E Q U R A N = T H E Y A R E C O R R E C T A C C O R D I N G T O H I M. BUT ISLAM AND MANY MUSLIMS "CORRECT" HIM IN ORDER TO EXPLAIN AWAY ERRORS, ETC.
54/17: "AND WE (ALLAH*) HAVE INDEED MADE THE QURAN EASY TO UNDERSTAND." Well according to Islam and many Muslims, it has many points which needs explanations - f.x. explaining that the words mean somethin differently from what the words really say. This f.x. to explain away errors in the book.
54/32: Similar to 54/17.
54/40: Similar to 54/17.
65/11: "- - - the Signs of Allah (the Quran*) containing clear explanations - - -." A parallel to
54/17.
75/19: "- - - IT IS FOR US (ALLAH) TO EXPLAIN (AND MAKE IT (THE QURAN*) CLEAR." Well Islam and many Muslims ofte forget(?) this, and "explains" that Allah's words in the Quran often mean someting different from what the words say. . F.x. when the words in the Quran are wrong.
There is no doubt that the Quran says it shall be read and understood like the words say. After all it claims that that the words are excact copy of Allah's words. We repeat:
1. It is Allah who sent down the Quran, according to the book and to Islam. Nobody knows better what a god wants to tell, than the god himself. And no human are better at explaining, than an omniscient god, 18/2.
2. Allah never errs, according to the Quran, 20/52.
3. The Quran makes things clear = It uses clear words, 15/1, 26/2.
4. The Quran explains the things in detail = The Quran gives exact and top quality explanations, 7/52.
5. The texts in the Quran are of established meaning = The words are exactly what Allah mean, 11/1.
6. Allah is it who gives the best explanations, 25/33.
7. To claim you can explain better than Allah, or explain "what Allah really means" = to claim you are more clever than Allah, and that you know what Allah really tries to explain, but arre unable to.
8. Only Allah knows if there are hidden meanings behind words in the Quran. To clime one sees other meanings than what the words really say, is either to lie, or to claim Allah lies.
9. BUT ALLAH CONVEYED WHAT HE MEANT TO CONVAY = HIS WORDS IN THE QURAN, ARE EACTLY WHAT HE WANTED TO SAY = THE TEXTS ARE TO BE UNDERSTOOD LITERALLY. 44/13.
10. Not least: IT IS FOR ALLAH TO EXPLAIN AND MAKE THE QURAN CLEAR. 75/19, 3/7b.
11. Only perverse persons seek other meanings in the Quran, than what it's words really says. Thus it is perverse to explain away errors in the Quran, by claiming it means something different from what the words really say, 3/a.
12. And if there should happen to be hidden meaning somewhere, only Allah can understand it. 3/7b. Thus you are lying if you claim to see other meanings in the Quran than what it's words really say.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SURAH 1–5:
SURAH 1:
**001 1/1 – 7. "In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. Praise be to Allah The Cherisher and Sustainer of the Worlds; Most Gracious, Most Merciful; Master of the Day of Judgement. Thee do we worship and Thine aid we seek. Show us the straight way, The way of those Thou hast bestowed Thy Grace, those whose (portion) is not wrath, and who go not astray".
This really is a bad one as it is a prayer to Allah, it is not Allah speaking (When Muhammad is to repeat what Allah says, Allah gives the order "Say") - and besides Allah does not pray to himself!! A clear mistake compared to what Islam claims: It is all sent down by Allah (The Quran is said to be either made by Allah, or never made, but has always existed - the last claim is impossible, though, as angels are speaking at least one place in the Quran (also according to Muslim scholars), which proves that the Quran cannot have been made until after at least the first angels were created).
There are more places where it is clear that it is Muhammad that is speaking - also in contradiction to the statements that the Quran is from Heaven, made by Allah or never made but existed from eternity.
It tells something that in the very beginning, and in what is said in a way to be the essence of the book, there is something seriously wrong, compared to the for Islam very fundamental -but unproved - statement that the book is sent down by an omniscient god, and is perfect and without mistakes.
Surah 1: At least 1 mistake.
SURAH 2:
001 2/1: "- - - the Worlds - - -". Already a reference to the 7 Earths that exists according to the Quran. (One above the other, according to Hadiths). Wrong – there are no 7 Earths in spite of 65/12. See 2/22a.
*002 2/2: "This is the Book (the Quran*); in it is guidance sure, without doubt - - -". As you will see, there are a lot of mistaken facts, contradictions, and unproven arguments, etc. in the Quran. That means that the guidance is far from sure. All the mistakes etc. also produce a lot of doubt about the rest of the text.
*003 2/4: "- - - the Revelation (the Quran*) sent to thee (Muhammad*), and sent before thy time (= the Torah/Bible*) - - -." Wrong. The Quran is not the same as the Torah or the Bible, and science has proved beyond any reasonable or judicial doubt that the NT in the Bible never was falsified + that if the Torah/OT is falsified, it must have happened at least 300 years BC, and most likely at least 500 – 800 BC or earlier, if ever. It also is very clear that Islam has not the slightest documentation for their repeated claims – guess if they had been quick to produce it if they had had even a tiny wee bit of a proof!!
004 2/5: "They (the believers*) are on true guidance - - -". With so many mistaken facts, the guidance at best is partly true.
005 2/22a: "- - - the heavens, your canopy - - -". Plural and wrong – referring to the 7 heavens of the Quran - - - and of wrong Greek and Persian astronomy at the time of Muhammad. See 2/29 – 23/17 – 23/86 – 41/2 - 65/12 – 67/3 – 78/12, and also 10/6 – 31/10.
*006 2/22b: "- - - and the heavens (plural and wrong – see 2/22a just above) your canopy - - -". The heaven/sky is no canopy. The "heaven" we see at daytime, really is an illusion caused by bending and splitting of the sunlight, and the "smooth" heaven we see at night, also is an illusion, as we are unable to see the third dimension at those distances, and get the impression that the stars all are at the same distance from us. Any god had known this, but Mohammad not. Also see 67/3a – 67/3b – 67/5a - 67/5b. Muslims tend to explain the heavens (plural and wrong) with wague claims about space and stars and galaxies - but each time they then "forget" to explain f. ex. how the stars are fastened to the lowermost of the 7 heavens the Quran tells exists. And they forget the moon (and the sun?) among the heavens – beyond the stars! They also sometimes tell that the 7 heavens = 7 layers in the atmosphere. No comments - but think about stars like Aldebaran - a giant star - fixed to a layer in our atmosphere below our moon. A joke.
007 2/22c: "- - - rain from the heavens - - -". Plural (7 heavens) and wrong. See 2/22b above.
008 2/22d: "- - - when ye (people*) know (the truth (the Quran*)". The Quran at most represents partly the truth, as you will see. See 13/1 – 40/75 – 41/12.
**009 2/23: "- - - what We (Allah*) have revealed (the Quran*) - - -". Wrong. No omniscient god has made or cherished (cfr. "the Mother Book – f. ex. 13/69) a book with that many mistaken facts, contradictions and other errors. Either it is not made by Allah or Allah is not omniscient – if he exists.
010 2/24: "But if ye cannot – and of surety ye (non-Muslims*) cannot (produce a surah of the same quality like in the Quran*) - - -". The surahs are no good literature – more or less copies
of Arab folklore, legends, fairy tales, and stuff Muhammad had been told from the Bible - and mainly not from the Bible itself but from apocryphal (made up) stories. In addition the composition and presentation of the texts belong in primary school. Many a good writer could collect such stories and do much better (on these points f. ex. the Bible is far better written). The Arab language itself is said to be excellent – but when you know that the language was polished for some 250 years by top intelligent and top learned men, until it got its somewhat final form around 900 AD (the Arab alphabet was not completed until then), that point tells nothing about the original Qurans from around 650 – caliph Uthman's and others'. The claim is wrong.
**011 2/25: "- - - glad tidings - - -." Wrong. At the very best one can say that the Quran brought some glad tidings for all the bad ones, wanting loot and slaves and power, and for some longing for a strong religion - - - if it was not because the Quran itself proves 100% that something is very wrong in the book. So wrong that it neither can be made nor revered by any god – not even by a small mini god. Too much is wrong in the book. Also see 61/13.
012 2/29a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong – no 7 heavens. See 2/22b.
*013 2/29b: "- - - He gave order and perfection to the seven firmaments - - -". Firmament is another word for the heaven we see, though mostly used for the night sky. The Quran many places tells about the seven heavens or firmaments or tracts (the word "heavens" or similar is used in plural in the Quran at least 199 times) - there is no doubt that according to the Quran there are 7 (material) heavens. (Islam also "knows" who inhabit the different heavens - f. ex. Jesus in the 2. heaven, Joseph in 4., Aaron in 5., Moses in 6., and Abraham in the 7. heaven, and Allah above the 7. heaven, to mention some. This is not said in the Quran, though). There also is no doubt that the Quran believes the heavens are material - if not it was not possible to build it or to fix the stars to the lowermost heaven, like the Quran states several places. No god had believed this - but Muhammad did, as this was what one believed in the Middle East at the time of Muhammad. The seven heavens are taken from old Greek astronomy - or perhaps from Persian astronomy, which also believed in 7 heavens. Any god, but not Muhammad, would have known it was very wrong. Islam has several "explanations"
concerning this very obvious mistake, but we have never seen or heard any Muslim mention even the possibility that Muhammad's picture about astronomy could be explained by his believing in Greek or Persian astronomy.
Muslims sometimes explains that 7 in old Arab was a synonym for "many" (and 70 for "very many"), and that the Quran consequently does not mean 7 but many. But honestly "many" is at least as wrong as "7".
*014 2/32: "- - - it is Thou (Allah*) who art perfect in knowledge and wisdom". All the mistakes prove that the maker of the Quran was not perfect in knowledge, and all the invalid logic proves he also was not perfect in wisdom. At least something is wrong.
015 2/39: "- - - Signs - - -" also written "Sign", "His Signs", "Our (Allah's*) Signs" or "My (Allah's*) Signs" or other variations. In "Quran-speak" it means an indication or a proof for Allah's and/or the Quran's existence. In reality it proves absolutely nothing, as without exception they only are lose statements or as loose claims just hanging in empty air, all built on nothing, because it never is proved or documented that Allah really said or did or created what the Quran in each case claims he said or did or created, and then uses as a "sign". Or they rest on other claims that are not proved. According to all human thinking, all judicial laws, and also according to the even more strict laws of logic such "proofs" flatly and simply are invalid and without any value. After all a valid proof is: "One or more proven facts that can give only one conclusion", and in the Quran all "signs" without exception builds on claimed "facts" that neither the book nor Islam proves – or are able to prove (well, there may be a few exception in the "signs" taken from the Bible, but they in case proves Yahweh, notAllah – we know that Muslims and the Quran likes to say that those two just are different
names for the same god, but that is not true unless the god is strongly ill mentally (schizophrenic), as the teachings fundamentally are too different (more about this other places in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran".)). In addition there is the fact that any priest in any religion can claim exactly the same for his god(s) as Muslims claim for Allah, in absolutely all cases where the word "sign(s)" in the Quran is not borrowed from the Bible, as long as no real proof or no real documentation is demanded brought forth – words are that cheap. "Baal makes the sun rise in the east. Allah cannot make it rise in the west. Then Baal is the real god and Allah a fake one." Infantile "proofs", but this is the kind of level you find on the "signs" and "proofs" in the Quran (This example is taken from the Quran – Abraham is proving his god Allah, but of course with Allah as the hero. Totally invalid as a proof). ***As said the claims logically are absolutely without any value as indication/proof for a deity, not to mention for a specific god – f. ex. Allah. And it documents an interesting fact:
Islam has not got one single proof neither for Allah, nor for verification of the Quran, nor for Muhammad's connection to a deity. IF THEY HAD HAD ONE SINGLE SUCH PROOF – EVEN A SMALL ONE – YOU BET THEY HAD TOLD ABOUT IT AND USED IT! Islam is only built on lose words and as loose and unproven claims - - - made by a man whose words hardly would have been accepted as "bona fide" proofs in Old Bailey, London. The underlying claims that the so-called signs have any value as proofs or at least indications for Allah simply are wrong unless Islam first proves that Allah really was/is behind the "signs".You find the word used many places in the Quran.
016 2/41a: "And believe in what I (Allah*) reveal (the Quran*) - - - ". An omniscient god had not revealed a book with so many mistakes.
017 2/41b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
**018 2/41c: "(The Quran*), confirming the revelation (the OT - Old Testament*) which is with you (Jews*) - - -". The Quran is not confirming OT and absolutely not NT - the fundamental thoughts and teaching are too different especially from NT and the new covenant (Matt. 26/28, Mark 14/24, Luke 22/20) – the new covenant that Muslims never mention, and
except for the educated ones have never been told about.019 2/42a: "- - - and cover not Truth with falsehood - - -". See 40/75.
*020 2/42b: "- - - nor conceal the Truth when you know (what it is)". For "truth" see 40/75. The contents of this and the entrance above: This is said to be aimed at the Jews that did not want to misunderstand 5 Mos. 18/15 (and 18/18) to mean that this verse foretells Muhammad - (translated from Swedish): "A prophet from among your own people, from your brothers, the Lord, your God, let come to you. Listen to him". That means God is saying: "I will let a prophet come forth from among your brothers - - -".Muslims say "brothers" here mean the Arabs, and that the Bible here talks about Muhammad. But very honestly: The brother of Jews is another Jew especially as it is said he shall come "from among your own people" - the Jews' own people. (We use the word Jew, because that is the normal word today, even if the
word is much younger than the time of Moses. Also Yusuf Ali uses it). This simply may be foretelling about Jesus, but Muslims has "adjusted" the meaning.Actually the word "brother" or similar is used in figurative meaning at least 55 times in OT, nearly always meaning another Jew or other Jews (1 exception: A king talks to another king. A very few other exceptions: About Lot's people and about Edomites - descendants of Esau, the brother of the patriarch Jacob), and absolutely never about Arabs. Arabs and Arabia are mentioned half a dozen times in the Bible – without exception either in neutral forms or as enemies, never as friends or relatives. Worse – and never mentioned by Muslims: The word is
used in the Quran some 30 times, and always about fellow (Muslim) Arabs (one exception, where the main point is that the bad hypocrites stick together). There simply exists no place neither in the Bible nor in the Quran expressing brotherhood between Jews and Arabs (but many to the contrary). Besides 5. Mos. 15. and 18. continues into 21. (NEVER mentioned by Muslims) that explains that one will recognise the Lord's prophet on that they make prophesies, and correct prophesies. Muhammad never made real prophesies – he did not even pretend to or claim to have that gift, not one single time in all the Quran. (He simply was no real prophet, but borrowed that imposing and impressive title.) On the contrary he was busy explaining away why he was unable to make miracles (prophesying is a kind of miracle).
Muhammad thus could not – also because of 21. – be Yahweh's promised prophet. And as he in reality was no prophet at all – he had as mentioned not that gift – he absolutely could not be a special prophet as he in reality was no prophet (well, there are made other definitions for a prophet, but without being able to make true prophesies you are no real prophet), and the claim is out of the question.It simply is a case of a word that is possible to give more than one meaning, and a religion in dire need from lack of proofs for their presumed god, and from sheer necessity because they falsely were promised to find proof or at least indications in the Bible, cling to a meaning that is foreign to the Bible's normal use of the word, and quote it out of context (5. Mos. 18/21 even makes Muhammad impossible as an explanation here), but full of wishful thinking.**Islam will have to produce strong proofs. After all it is they that produce this unlikely claim, and then it is up to them to prove it – not up to others to disprove it. (But then Islam lives on unproven claims and statements and blind belief).
00a 2/50: "- - - We (Allah*) divided the sea for you (Moses and his Jews*) - - -". From other places in the Quran (and in most translations of the Bible) it is told that this was the Red Sea. But in the Hebrew original the name is Yam Suph, which as well can mean "The Sea of Reeds" (this also is confirmed in many footnotes in NIV ("New International Version" of the
Bible)). The Sea of Reeds (also called Timsah Sea) used to be a big lake where the Suez Canal now runs – not far from the Bitter Seas. The name tells it was just a shallow lake – the longest reeds we have been able to find, is a kind of rice that can be up to 5 -7 m long and grows in the big sea Tonle Sap in Cambodia, and the reeds growing in this area of Egypt are shorter - - - and the water cannot be deeper than the reeds get their "heads" above the water".Also look at the map: Goshen where the Jews settled were in the river delta of the Nile. To get to Sinai they had to go south-south-east. It would be stupidity beyond any credibility to go so far west that they ended at the western side of the Red Sea, and thus force such a huge number of people and animals to cross the sea by boats they did not have (remember they did not
know about the opening of the sea – fire/smoke-column or not (= the pathfinder/Yahweh according to the Bible)). After all they according to the Bible were 600ooo men + women + children + animals and belongings. (Theoretically it is quite possible for 70 – 100 (depending on how many wives his 11 sons in the group had) persons that came with Jacob + Joseph and his family, to become may be 2000ooo "Jews" 430 years later. Science tells that – if the Exodus took place – the "Jews" quite likely were overtaken as they marched or camped along that lake.
*021 2/53: "- - - We (Allah*) gave Moses the scripture - - -". The books named after Moses (the Torah) are not written by Moses. Moses lived (if he is not a fiction) around 1300-1200 BC (if the Exodus from Egypt really took place, it took place ca. 1235 BC during the reign of Ramses II according to science), and those books were written not earlier than ca. 800 BC -perhaps as late as 500 BC - also according to science. A god had known that, whereas Muhammad knew nothing about their real age, and had to guess. (To be exact: The Bible says that Yahweh told Moses the law – nothing material except the two stone tablets where the ten Commandments were inscribed, were brought down from the mountain – and that he was told the law and himself wrote it down afterwards. OT also says that when Solomon moved the
Ark of Covenant into the Temple in Jerusalem (1.Kings 8/9); it only contained the two stone tablets. There is nothing about "the Books of Moses", though the OT makes it clear that the laws existed in writing and were found again later – but science is unanimous that the Books of Moses (you also see it written in singular) are written much later. If Muslims claim something else, they will have to produce proofs.) The law really is part of the Torah/Books of Moses.
022 2/61: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
00b 2/65-66: "We (Allah*) said to them 'Be ye apes, despised and rejected'. So We made it an example to their own time and to their posterity, and a lesson for those who fear Allah". That humans are changed into apes is an extraordinary statement. An extraordinary statement needs an extraordinary proof. The Quran here offers no proof at all.
00c 2/73: "Allah said: 'Strike the (body) with a piece of the (heifer)'. Thus Allah bringet the dead to life - - -". It is not possible to wake up a dead this way. Islam will have to produce a solid proof – especially as this story is not in the Bible, and thus is taken from a legend.
**023 2/75: "- - - seeing that a party of them (the Jews in Medina*) hear the word of Allah, and perverted it knowingly after they understood it - - -." Wrong. Science have shown very clearly that the Bible is not falsified – and consequently that it has never been something like the Quran. If Islam means something else, they will have to bring proofs, not only loos claims and even looser statements. If Islam had had even a small proof, the world had been
forced to hear it every two hours or more – at least.*We may add that Islam and Muslims here try to use the Bible to prove their words – f. ex. Jeremiah 23/36: "Ye have perverted the words of the living God." This one is dishonesty on
two levels:
1. It is for one thing quoted out of context. Jeremiah tells: "If a prophet or a priest or anyone else claims, 'This is the oracle of the LORD (Yahweh*), I (Yahweh*) will punish that man and his household. - - - But you must not mention 'the oracle of the LORD' again because (if you do*) every man's word becomes his oracle and so you distort thewords of the living God". (NIV). There is an abyss between this meaning and the meaning in the above slightly twisted quotation from the Bible. Dishonest and slightly disgusting – and quite revealing about some Muslim methods and lacks of real facts and arguments.
2. *(Muhammad lived to loose all his children except one daughter - a punishment for claiming to represent Yahweh alias Allah?)
3. Even if it had been true – even if Jeremiah had said that the Jews had perverted (though "perverted" is a stronger word than "distorted") this did not tell one millimetre about distorting Quranic texts, like here is indicated, only distortion of the Torah. Knowing that this is taken from the widely distributed and highly prised "The Message of the Quran", canonized or at least certified by the foremost Islamic intellectual institutions in the world, cases like this gives us a bad taste on their behalf: To resort to intellectual dishonesty of this kind is humiliating when found out. And for what reason? Just in order to be right, instead of to try to find out what is right. This in spite of the fact that the price if they are
wrong, is the loss of the soul of each and every Muslim - - - if there is a Hell in the perhaps next life.
*024 2/79: "Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands (= falsify*) - - -." See 2/75 just above. (And no god made a book with so many mistaken facts and other mistakes like you find in the Quran: What if it is a falsification - is it then "Woe to" Muhammad? - he f. ex. got nearly no children with all his wives and lost nearly all the few children he got. And there is no proof for whether he ended in Hell or Paradise - if such ones exist.)
025 2/87: "We (Allah*) gave Moses the Book - - -". See 2/53.
*026 2/89a: "And then there comes to them (Jews in Medina*) a Book (the Quran*) from Allah - - -". A book with that many mistakes, invalid "proofs" etc., is not from an omniscient god? See 41/12.
*027 2/89b: "- - - (a Book (the Quran*)) confirming what is with them (Jews and Christians*) (the Torah and the Bible) - - -", which means that the Quran confirms the Torah and other holy Jewish scriptures and the rest of the Bible. But too many fundamental principles are different - the Quran is no confirmation of neither the Torah, etc., nor of the Bible, not to mention of the New Testament (NT) on which the Christian religion is built. F. ex. "You shall not kill" vs. "You shall not kill without a good reason", the value of and strife for "the lost lamb", vs. "You shall not mourn the wrongdoers that ends in Hell", "Love your enemy" vs. "Kill the enemy wherever you find him", and "Love your enemy" vs. incitement to and orders
of war and hate and discrimination of "infidels", just to mention some of the deep differences. Not to mention "my empire is not of this world" and "give onto God what belongs to God, and onto the Emperor what belongs to the Emperor" - the last meaning money - (translated from Swedish), compared to: Fight for Allah and Muhammad till all non-Muslims are utterly suppressed and pay extra tax
028 2/89c: "- - - when there comes to them (Jews in Medina*) that (texts that later became the Quran*) which they should have recognized (indicating they should have recognized the texts from Muhammad in their OT/Torah). Wrong – the underlying basic thinking and a lot of details are so different, that the only thing possible to recognize, is that something is very wrong.
029 2/90: "- - - (the revelation (the Quran*)) which Allah has sent down - - -". No omniscient god ever made, sent down or revered a book with that many mistakes and that much invalid logic.
030 2/91a: "Believe in what Allah hath sent down (= the Quran*)". Is it really Allah that has sent down a book with so many mistaken facts? Simply no - not if he was omniscient.
031 2/91b: "- - - yet they reject all besides, even if it be the Truth (the Quran*)". A book with so many mistaken facts is at best only partly the truth.
032 2/91c: "- - - confirming what is with them (the Torah, etc., (= OT*) and the Bible*)". The Quran is no confirmation of neither the Torah nor the Bible - see 2/89 above + 3/3 below.
***00d 2/93: "We (Jews in Medina*) hear and we disobey". Muhammad Asad adds (com.77): "Even if they did not say those words, their later behaviour justifies this quote". But words that are not said, are not said, and cannot be quoted in honesty – would a god resort to such arguments? And how come that this quote is in the Quran – may be billions of years old and infallible and revered by Allah – if they did not say it? - and how many other made up arguments do you in case find in the Quran?
***033 2/94: "If the last Home, with Allah (Yahweh*), be for you (Jews*) specially, and not for anyone else, then seek for ye death, if ye are sincere - - -". Wrong. A Jew (or a Christian) cannot seek death to go to Heaven, because self murder – also indirectly – is a serious sin (destroying the gift from God - your life) = end in Hell. Any god had known – but obviously not Muhammad. Worse: Muslaim scholars today know this, but use the argument anyhow in their congregations.
00e 2/95: "But they (Jews*) will never seek for death, on account of the (sins) which their hands have sent on before them." The reason more likely is the one mentioned in 2/94 just above.
034 2/97a: "- - - he (Gabriel*) brings down the (revelation (the Quran*)) to thy heart by Allah's will - - -". No omniscient god sends down a book with that many mistakes and contradictions and that much invalid logic.
035 2/97b: "- - - a confirmation of what went before (Torah + Bible*)". Wrong. See 2/89above and 3/3 below.
*036 2/97c: "- - - glad tidings - - -". Wrong. At the very best one can say that the Quran brought some glad tidings to all the bad ones, wanting loot and slaves and power, and to some0nes longing for a strong religion - - - if it was not because the Quran itself proves 100% that something is very wrong in the book. So wrong that it neither can be made nor revered by any god – not even by a small mini god. Too much is wrong in the book. Also see 61/13.
037 2/99a: "We (Allah*) have sent down to thee (people*) manifest Signs - - -". The Quran is overloaded with what it says are "signs" (indicated to be proofs) and "Clear Signs" or like here "manifest Signs" (indicated to be strong proofs) – and not one single of them proves anything about Allah or the Quran or Muhammad, as the book NEVER proves, only claims, that Allah did this or that which it then calls a "sign" or a "clear sign" or a "proof" (there may be some exceptions for signs taken from the Bible, but those in case prove Yahweh, not Allah – and only Islam claims that Yahweh and Allah is the same god (which they cannot be, unless the god is schizophrenic – they are too different, especially when Yahweh is acting according to the New Covenant from NT (f. ex. Luke 22/20), which came some 580 years before Muhammad started his preaching, but which Muslims never mention). Especially claims for "Clear Signs" are so obviously wrong, that it is impossible not to include them in these columns: "Mistaken facts". They are not signs – and definitely no clear signs - for a god, and even if they were, they absolutely were no clear signs for Allah,because any priest in any religion can make just the same claims for his god or gods – words are that cheap - - - also for Muhammad.
*038 2/99b: "We have sent down to thee (people*) manifest Signs (ayat); and none reject them but those who are perverse - - -". Wrong. To question "signs" that are not proved coming from Allah, and thus logically invalid as signs, not to mention as proofs, is not a sign of being perverse – on the contrary; blindly to believe in it without even asking
questions is a strong indication of being naive, especially when one knows how morally degenerated the only source for the Quran – Muhammad – was.
*039 2/101a: "And when there came to them a Messenger from Allah - - -". Can a man making so many mistakes in the book he dictated - presumably on behalf of Allah -really be a messenger of an omniscient god? Or if he made no mistakes, and the Quran is faked - is he then from Allah? An omniscient god simply did not send down a book with that many mistakes, etc.
040 2/101b: "- - - a party of the People of the Book (here Jews – the People of the Book = Jews and Christians, and "the Book" in this connection is the Bible*) threw away the Book of Allah (the Quran*), as if (it had been something) they did not know!" The Quran here tells that the Jews recognized the Quran from the OT. That is wrong – there are so fundamental differences and so many points that are different between the Quran and the Bible, that the only thing that is possible to know, is that something is utterly wrong. One of the proofs for this, is that the absolute majority of the thousands of Jews in the region refused to accept Islam – even in the face of ruin or slavery or death.
041 2/101: "(Muhammad was*) confirming what (the Bible, etc.*) was with them (the Jews and the Christians*)". Wrong. See 2/89.
042 2/102: "- - - the buyers of (magic) - - -". Magic is just superstition - any god had known this.*00f 2/105: "But Allah will choose for His special Mercy whom He will - - -". Muhammad Asad here explains that this is stating that Jews and Christians refused to believe in Muhammad and his Quran, because Muhammad was from the "outside" – the Quran, Islam and Muslims repeats and repeats this unproven claim and disuses it as an "explanation", whereas the real main reason why they did not accept Muhammad's new religion, was that there were such a number of and such fundamental differences from the Bible, that something obviously was very wrong. Besides, the Jews – the absolute majority of non-Arabs in the area – believed they had a covenant with Yahweh, and both the Quran and modern time Islam and Muslims are dishonest enough never to mention this fact as a main reason for why the Jews were not interested in Muhammad's teachings: The covenant and the very different religion were the two reasons why they were not interested in Islam – not what the Quran and Islam claims and claims and claims (as normal for them absolutely without any proof or documentation): – that the reason was that Muhammad was not a Jew.
043 2/107a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong (no 7 heavens). See 2/22a.
*00g 2/107b: "And besides Him ye (people*) have neither patron nor helper." Well, Jesus told many times and in front of lots of witnesses that he could help, and even the Quran admits that Jesus was honest.
044 2/108: "But whoever changeth from Faith (Islam*) to Unbelief, hath strayed without doubt from the even way (the road to Paradise*)". With all the mistakes, contrasictions, and wrong logic in the Quran, there is a most real doubt, and reason for doubt, for that Islam can be "the even way" to Paradise – this even more so when one knows that the only source for the stories in the Quran, was the very morally degenerated man and self proclaimed prophet Muhammad (who did not have the gift of being able to make prophesies, but used the nice title all the same) – nearly all self proclaimed prophets through the time have turned out to be false prophets wanting something in this life – normally money, women and/or power -without caring too much for the means they used. Muhammad at least wanted women and
power. (And where do all Muslims end if Islam is a wrong way and they discover it too late?)
045 2/109: "- - - after the Truth (the Quran*) hath become manifest - - -". The Quran at best is partly the truth – too many mistakes, too many contradictions, too mush twisted logic, etc.
046 2/113a: "- - - they (Jews and Christians*) profess to study the (same) Book." Wrong for two reasons: One: Jews only have the Old Testament (OT). Two: The Christian religion is built on NT, with OT mainly as historical background – a fact that opponents often forget or "forget".
**047 2/113b: "Yet they (Jews and Christians*) (profess to) study the same Book". This is only partly true. Jews study only OT. Christians build their religion on the much milder and more human NT and the new covenant (Luke 22/20) – the covenant Muslims never mention -with OT mainly as historical background. This is a fact that often is forgotten or "forgotten" when one talks about the Christian religion - especially when one wants to paint the religion as black as possible.
*048 2/116a: "They say; 'Allah has begotten a son", (which the Quran vehemently denies*). But Jesus often called God/Yahweh father - there were many, many witnesses to this. If he spoke the truth - and even the Quran says he was an honest person - this in case means the Quran is wrong here. (Yahweh is called the father of Jesus at least 163 times in the Bible, and Jesus the son of Yahweh at least 66 times. And remember: In spite of undocumented claims
from Islam, science has shown that the Bible is not falsified).
049 2/116b: "And on earth: everything renders worship to Him." From other places in the Quran one knows that "everything" is meant literally – every living being and all inanimate things. As one never observes any other living beings, not to mention inanimate things, than Muslims worship Allah – and except for humans even no god – and the same for inanimate things, and the nature thus shows that the claim is not true, this is one of the claims that must
be deemed untrue unless Islam proves it. Proves, not only states or claims. (To quote remark 120 in Abdullah Yusuf Ali: "The Meaning of the Quran": "- - - everything in heaven and earth celebrates the glory of Allah". But like normal for Muslims it only is a claim – no documentation, no proof, and no real explanation).
050 2/117a: "Verily, We (Allah*) has sent thee (Muhammad*) in truth - - -". All the mistakes, etc. in the Quran tells that this cannot be true - that he was not sent by an omniscient god.
051 2/117b: "- - - We (Allah*) have sent thee (Muhammad*) in truth - - -". Well, that is a very central question: How much of what Muhammad told, was true?
052 2/118: "We (Allah*) have indeed made clear the Signs unto any people who hold firmly to Faith - - -." There simply are no valid clear signs – proofs – for Allah anywhere in the Quran. See 2/99 above.
053 2/119a: "Verily, We (Allah*) have sent thee (Muslims/people*) in truth a bearer of glad tidings and a warner (= Muhammad) - - -." No omniscient god has sent a bearer of tidings in which so much is wrong.
054 2/119b: "- - - glad tidings - - -". That the Quran is "glad tidings" at very best is only partly true. See 2/97c above and 61/13 below.
055 2/120: "The Guidance of Allah (the Quran*) – that is the only Guidance". A book with so many mistakes, so much invalid logic, and so much inhumanity is not at all a guidance – at best a misguidance.
056 2/125a: "- - - take ye the Station of Abraham (in/near Kabah*) - - -". Abraham never was in Mecca. See 2/127 below.
057 2/125b: "- - - the Station of Abraham - - -" is a mark in a stone. Muhammad indicated and Islam says that mark was made from Abraham's feet when he stood there and built the Kabah. Let the fact that Abraham never was in Mecca (unless Islam proves it – see 2/127 below) aside: No worker building something ever stood so long at one and the same place, that his feet made a mark in a solid natural stone - marks visible centuries later. Now, Islam tells the mark (actually 2 - one for each foot) is a result of a miracle, as they claim the stone turned so soft that Abraham's feet sank into it. (They also claim that the stone is from Jannah - (the gardens of Heaven)). Well, Islam has till now even proved that Abraham even ever visited Mecca, a place that was very prohibitting for him and his big flocks of animals - a barren desert to quote Muslims, and his claimed first trip even before the Zamzam well even was found, according to Islam - laying behind forbidding desert lands through which he had to lead all his sheep, goats, cows, etc. and find food and water for them - and he had many as he was a rich man. And on top of all a place very far from where he lived and a place without
any attractions for a big owner of cattle, etc. Believe it whoever wants - but go to a doctor if you believe this and the rest of that story (big mosque built by 2 nomads, Ishmael bringing a big stone - too big to lift - for his father to stand on, and a stone shining so strongly that Allah had to switch off its light) without reasonable proofs.
058 2/125c: "- - - We covenanted with Abraham and Ishmael, that they should sanctify my House (Kabah in Mecca*)". Abraham and Ishmael had nothing to do with the building of the Kabah - see 2/127 below.
059 2/126: "- - - Abraham said: 'Make this (Mecca*) a City Of Peace - - -." Wrong. Abraham never was in Mecca, unless Islam produces solid proofs for it. See 2/217 just below.
**060 2/127a: "And remember that Abraham and Ishmael raised the foundations of the House (Kabah*) (with this prayer): - - - ". Abraham never built the foundation of Kabah (and a contradiction; other verses say he built the building, not only the foundation of it) - and there are several reasons for that:
1. He was born in Ur in Chaldea (if he really existed) in what is now south Iraq. Together with his father, (Tarah according to the Bible), he later travelled northwest up along the Euphrates valley to Karan in what is now north Iraq. Years later he continued south southwest to Kaanan and the town Sikem in what is now Israel (Sikem is north of Jerusalem. It is now named Nablus). That is to say he travelled along the so-called Fertile Crescent - the natural route when you travel with flocks of animals. The alternative was to take a shortcut through the Arab desert, but few of his numerous sheep and goats and cows would survive such a trip. He never visited Mecca on his way from Ur to Sikem. (Besides this was too early in the story -Ishmael was not born yet, and he is a part of the building of the Kabah according to the Quran).
2. Abraham then settled in the western part of Kaanan (now approximately Israel), whereas his nephew Lot settled in the Jordan valley further east. Later Abraham moved south toNegev in Sinai. Negev today is most known for its desert, but not all was desert. All this is according to the Bible, but the Quran has no conflicting information, except that his father
had another name. The point is that between Kaanan and Mecca and even more between Negev and Mecca are hundreds and hundreds of kilometres of the tough and dry and hot Arab desert. Abraham was rich and had huge flocks of animals. He could not take those huge flocks of sheep, etc., through that desert.
3. Abraham lived hundreds of kilometres from Mecca - and had to cross harsh terrain to get to and from. Nobody builds a big temple for himself and his family at a place they can never or nearly never visit.
4. Abraham was a nomad. Nomads do not have the know-how and technology to build large stone buildings. Abraham simply was not involved in the building of Kabah, and it is highly unlikely he ever visited Mecca and even the Arab
peninsula. It looks like a fairy tale made up to give weight to Kabah and to Islam. And not least to Muhammad, who 2500 years later could tell he was direct descendant from Abraham - without the slightest written paper from all those years. 2500 years of mostly analphabetic nomads without any written history. Believe it if you want – and if you know who was your forefather the year 500 BC (= ca. 2500 years ago).It also is worth adding that Muslims say that Mecca was where Abraham's (or actually Sarah's) slave, Hagar, and his and her child Ismael (Ishmael) were sent away from Abraham's camp, that the two lived there, and that Abraham frequently visited them later. There is no source of information for this.
The OT says they lived in Negev, which is weeks by camel from Mecca - and much, much longer for large flocks of sheep, goats, and cattle (American cowboys driving flocks of cattle to the railway, made 10-12 miles –16-20 km - a day. The nomads in the south hardly moved any faster - - - if they could find water). In addition to the long time it would take, many animals hardly would survive the long trek through the harsh Arab desert. And there was in addition no reason for him and his family to take such a dangerous and meaningless trip with their animals to a barren and dry valley. And as he
never visited Mecca, he could not have left Hagar and Ismael there (this even more so as the Bible mention that Ishmael lived near the border of Egypt and got his wife from Egypt (see just below) - - - and science has proved that the Bible is not falsified - the easy way out for Muslims when the Bible mentions things they do not like). If Islam wants to insist that he ever visited Mecca, they have to produce strong proofs, as it is extremely unlikely - and "special statements demands
special proofs". It is highly likely this just is a story made up or "borrowed" from f. ex. folklore to give the teachings of Muhammad credence.
5. One more fact: The Bible – a book that Islam insists is correct every time there is some text they like, but that may be the truth other times, too, says (1. Mos. 21/21): "While he (Ishmael*) was living in the Desert of Paran, his mother got a wife for him from Egypt". Except for religious Muslims that strongly wishes this to be a reference to Paran or Faran near Mecca, all serious scientists say that this was Paran in Sinai - - - which also made it easier for his mother (who was from Egypt) to find him a wife from Egypt even though that made his children ¾ Egyptian and only ¼ descendants of Abraham's stock (there is mentioned only one wife for Ishmael).
6. Further (1. Mos. 25/18): "His (Ishmael's) descendants settled in the area from Havila to Shur, near the border of Egypt, as you go toward Asshur". The border of Egypt means near the Red Sea. Just where most scientists place Paran. (It is a bit ironic that Islam say the Bible has the name correct, but all the rest of the information about place, wife from
(neighbouring) Egypt, etc. wrong. But if you go looking, you will find that according to Islam, the Bible never has a mistake and is reliable when what it says fits Islam. But when it tells things or facts that contradicts Islam, the Bible is falsified - or like here one simply omits the contradicting facts - - -which one safely can do, as hardly any Muslim knows tha Bible well enough to see the cherry-picking of information). And NB: This was written 1000 or more years before
Muhammad, and with no reason to place Ishmael far from Arabia if it was not the truth.To go all the way to Mecca was too forbidding for a man with large flocks of animal –and there never was a reason to go there for Abraham. On the contrary: Little food for his animals, no water in Mecca before the Zamzam was found later (?) – and Ishmael living "near the border of Egypt". He never was in Mecca and consequently never built the Kabah – the big temple that he anyhow did not have the know-how to build, and worse; could not use, because he lived the better part of 1000 km away.
061 2/127b: "And remember Abraham and Ishmael raised the foundations of the House (Kabah*)". See 2/127.
062 2/129: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
00h 2/130: "- - - the religion of Abraham (= Islam*) - - -." The Quran often claims that Islam = the religion of Abraham. But it always was and only is a claim – no proof, no documentation - not even a try to explain, except the undocumented and not proved claim that everyone that say something else are lying, and that other scriptures that science deems more
reliable (not proven 100%, but far more likely to be true) are falsifications, even though science has shown that they are not falsified – may be are not everything true in the Bible, too, but science has clearly shown it is not falsified. (To prove it 100.0% of course is impossible – there always will be theoretical or made up possibilities. But it is proved at least 99.5% - far beyond any judicial definition of the word - and if Islam claims something else, they will have to produce proofs, not only claims that are not even based on a likely theory about how all the thousands of different manuscript shall have had so many chapters and verses falsified in exactly the same way – spread over all the world one knew at that time. All that Islam offers, is a stubborn claim – not even a theory about how it should be possible to falsify everything, or about why all the thousands of old manuscripts that science knows,
show it is not falsified. For comparison: Islam's claims about falsifications of the Bible are not
proved even 0,5%. They only are claims.No proof. No documentation even though there exist thousands of documents. Only a stubborn claim based on nothing but a book with lots of mistakes dictated by a man with questionable moral and a lust for power to say the least of it.
063 2/131: "Lord of the Worlds". The Quran tells about 7 (flat) worlds (65/12) – one above the other according to Hadith. Wrong (One small detail: In Abdullah Yusuf Ali (the same Yusuf Ali, but revised after his death): "The Meaning of the Holy Quran", 11. edition, the word is changed from "the Worlds" to "the Universe" – one my guess why.
064 2/135: "- - - the Religion of Abraham, the True (religion*) - - -". According to the Quran, Abraham was a Muslim. But looking at all the other mistakes and twisted logic and stories in the Quran – Islam will have to produce real proofs for that that was true. Also see 2/130 above.
065 2/136a: "- - - the revelations (the Quran*) given to us (Muhammad/Muslims*)". Were they really given? – and were they really revelations? Under no circumstances did such revelations/the Quran come from an omniscient god – not that full of mistakes, etc.
*66 2/136b: "We (Allah*) make no difference between one or another of them (prophets*) - --". There is one distinction at least Yahweh makes: Between real and false prophets. The criterion for being a real prophet, is that you make prophesies – and that the prophesies come true. If not he is a false prophet (5. Mos. 18/21). Muhammad made during all his life not one real prophesy. (There were a few sayings that were remembered because they happened to become true – the others were forgotten like normal in such cases – but no real prophesies. He never – no place in the Quran and hardly in all the Hadiths – even claimed to have the gift ofmaking prophesies). Was he then really a prophet – or did he simply "borrow" an impressive title? He simply was not a prophet. A messenger for someone or something perhaps – or an apostle, but no prophet. But if either the Quran or the Bible or both speak the truth concerning this, Jesus clearly was. The Quran, though, reduces Jesus as much as possible, and simply skips the question of Muhammad's right to the title – as so often the book treats things for a fact without the slightest proof or documentation.
067 2/136b: "We (Allah*) make no difference between one or another of them (prophets*) - --". Wrong. The Quran makes a great difference between Muhammad – even though he was no real prophet, as he did not have the gift of being able to make prophesies – and all other prophets. If Allah made no difference between them, then why is there so big
difference in the Quran?
00i 2/137: "- - - (Muslims are*) on the right path - - -". Can a "path" based on a book full of mistakes and dictated by a man of very doubtful moral, really be said to be "the right path"?
068 2/139: "- - - (Allah*) is our (Muslims'*) Lord and your (non-Muslim's*) Lord - - -". As this claim only is based on other, not proven claims, and especially as there exists other possibilities where at least some are based on stronger traditions, this is an invalid statement,
unless it is proved.
00j 2/140: "- - - do ye know better than Allah?" (- about the old patriarchs, etc. of Israel.)
1. No – if Allah really exists and is omniscient and contacted Muhammad. All of which seems to be doubtful judging from all the mistakes, etc. in the Quran.
2. Perhaps – if Allah really exists, but is not omniscient, but contacted Muhammad –which Muhammad only claimed, never proved, even though it should be possible for Allah.
3. Yes – if Allah really exists, but did not contact Muhammad. Modern science knows a lot more than Muhammad did – and are not going all out for power, etc. = more reliable.
4. Yes, definitely – if Allah does not exist and just was a fiction from a perhaps sick man (TLE?) building a platform of power.
069 2/144a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
*070 2/144b: "The people of the Book (= Jews, Christians and Sabeans*) know very well that that (the reason for changing the kiblah = direction of praying*) is the truth from their Lord".
1. Jews and Christians definitely do not know this - and neither did the Sabeans know it (Sabeans lived in Sabah, in what now is Yemen. They had become Christians via influence from Christians in East Africa. (Though Islam says the Sabeans were a sect in Arabia – though with very vague ideas about where and who.))
2. As the Quran contains a lot of mistakes, it is a question if also the rest is wrong.
3. As the Quran contains a lot of mistakes, it also is a question if this is from our Lord, Yahweh. It even is a question if a god was involved in the Quran at all - a god does not make mistakes, not to mention such a number of mistakes - or loose statements and false "signs" and "proofs" - the hallmarks of cheats and deceivers.
071 2/145: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
*072 2/145+146: "If thou, after the knowledge (of the new qiblah = what direction to face when you are praying*), wert to follow their (the People of the Book's*) (vain) desire - then wert thou indeed (clearly) in the wrong. The People of the Book know this as they know their own sons." But it is most obvious that this is not true - neither Jews nor Christians know this -- - and especially not Christians, who have no qiblah (churches mostly make their congregation face east, but there is no qiblah).
073 2/146: "- - - but some of them (Jews, Christians*) conceals the truth (the teachings of the Quran*) - - -". With that many mistaken facts and that much wrong logic, it at best is partly the truth. See 40/75.
074 *2/146: "- - - the truth (the teachings of the Quran*) which they (Jews, Christians*) themselves know." There are so many and so fundamental differences between the Quran and the Bible – especially the NT – that the only thing that is possible to know, is that something is very wrong in Islamic claims like this (as normal; a not proved claim).
075 2/147a: "The Truth - - -", see 40/75.
076 2/147b: "The Truth is from thy (people's*) Lord (Allah*) - - -". With so many mistakes in the Quran, it is not from a god, as gods do not make mistakes.
077 2/147c: "The Truth (the Quran*) is from thy (people's*) Lord, so be not at all in doubt". With that many mistakes and that much wrong logic, etc., there is every reason for doubt.
00k 2/149: "- - - that (the new qiblah) is indeed the truth from thy Lord". With so manymistakes in the Quran, it is an open question if this is the truth or not. It is worth mentioning that Muslims states that the direction towards Kabah was Abraham's kiblah. We have been unable to find out why they say so - there is no reliable source telling that Abraham even had a kiblah, not to mention that it in case was direction Mecca, a place he hardly had ever heard about (it was only during the last few generations before Muhammad that Mecca had grown to a reasonable wealthy town of some size).
078 2/159: "- - - clear (Signs) - - -." See 2/99a and 2/99b.
079 2/160: "Except those who repent and make amends and openly declare (the Truth)". With so many mistakes in the Quran, the book at the very best is partly true. See 40/75.
080 2/164a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
*081 2/164b: "- - - the rain which Allah sends down from the skies and the life which He gives to an earth which is dead". Any god had known it was alive with roots or seeds, not dead - it only looked so.
082 2/164c: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
083 2/173: "He (Allah*) hath only forbidden you dead meat, and blood, and the meat of swine, and that on which another name hath been invoked besides that of Allah". Wrong. You also are forbidden to eat meat from animals you kill by strangulation, or are gored to death, and Hadiths – f. ex. Al-Bukhari - very clearly prohibits you to eat meat from donkey.
084 2/176a: "- - - Allah sent down the Book". With so many mistaken facts, it is impossible that the Quran is sent down by a god.
085 2/176b: "- - - Allah sent down the Book (the Quran*) in truth". With that many mistakes and other dubious arguments, it at best is partly true.
086 2/177: "- - - to believe in Allah and the last day, and the Angles, and the Book, and the Messengers - - -". Muhammad Ali says this is like accepting the "heavenly revelations" as facts – clearly Islam's meaning also today is, even though absolutely nothing is proved or documented, it all rests well on blind belief in what a morally very suspect and perhaps sick (TLE?) person once told.
087 2/185: "- - - clear (Signs) - - -". There exist no clear sign (proof for Allah or Muhammad) in all the Quran – see 2/99.
088 2/187: "- - - Allah makes clear His Signs to men - - -". There exists no clear sign (proof for Allah or Muhammad) in all the Quran – see 2/99.
*089 2/189: "They (the new moons*) are but signs to mark fixed periods of time in (the affairs of) men, - - -". Wrong - the new moons simply is a natural phenomenon. Man often uses to calculate time but it is not made for that purpose. If Islam insists on that, they will have to prove it.
090 2/213a: "Mankind was one single nation - - -." Mankind never was a single nation. Some 160ooo-200ooo years ago PERHAPS one tribe, but never one nation - and absolutely not within these last few millennia that is covered by the Quran.
091 2/213b: "- - - glad tidings - - -". Wrong. See 2/97c and 61/13.
092 2/213c: "He (Allah*) sent the Book (the Quran*) - - -". An omniscient god did not send a
book with that many mistakes, contradictions, and invalid proofs, etc.
093 2/213d: "He (Allah*) sent the Book in truth, - - -". With so many mistaken facts at best it is only partly the truth. See 40/75.
094 2/213e: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". There are no clear signs – proofs for Allah or Muhammad - in all the Quran. See 2/99.
095 2/213f: "Allah by His Grace guided the believers (by means of the Quran*) - - -". A book with that many mistakes and invalid proofs, etc. is no guidance.
096 2/213g: "Allah by his Grace guided the believers to the Truth, - - -". Allah's presumed book containing so many mistakes, is not the truth. At best the book is partly true.
097 2/219: "Thus does Allah make clear to you His Signs - - -". There is not one clear sign –proof for Allah or Muhammad – in all the Quran. See 2/99.
098 2/221: "But Allah - - - makes his Signs clear to mankind - - -". There is not one clear sign – proof for Allah of Muhammad – in all the Quran, as it nowhere is proved that Allah makes the signs. See 2/99.
099 2/231a: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
100 2/231b: "- - - the fact that He (Allah) sent down to you the Book - - -". Is it a fact that a god has sent down a book with so many mistaken facts? Impossible.
*101 2/231c: "- - - the Book of Wisdom, - - -". A book with so many mistaken facts is no book of wisdom. At best partly a book of wisdom. (But which parts are wisdom and which not?)
102 2/242: "Thus doet Allah make clear His Signs for you - - -". There is not one single clear sign – proof for Allah or Muhammad – in the entire Quran. See 2/99.
00m 2/247a: "Allah hath appointed Talut (Saul*) king over you (Jews around 1100 - 1000 BC*)". Most likely it was Yahweh (God) that did so, or what? Allah and Yahweh is not the same god no matter what Islam wants – the fundamental differences are too big and too many. Not unless the god is mentally ill – if he exists.
00n 2/247b: "- - - there shall come to you (the Jews) the Ark of Covenant". Well, according to the Bible the Ark of Covenant did not come to the Jews – they built it themselves in accordance with a description they got from Yahweh. That was done around 1330 BC under Moses.
103 2/248a: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
00o 2/248b: "- - - there shall come to you the Ark of the Covenant - - - carried by angles - - -". This needs strong proof, especially since the Bible has a much more likely explanation. See 2/247b above.
104 2/248c: "- - - a Symbol (= Sign*) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
105 2/252: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
106 2/255: "- - - all the things in the heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
*107 2/253a: "- - - We (Allah*) gave Clear (Signs) - - -." There does not exist one single clear sign (in Quran-speak = proof) for neither the Quran, nor for Allah, nor for Muhammad's connection to a god in all the Quran – only loose claims and demands for blind belief.
108 2/225b: "- - - after Clear (Signs) had come to them - - -." Wrong. See 2/253a just above.
109 2/255: "- - - over the heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
***110 2/256: "- - - no compulsion in religion - - -". This "flagship" for "proving" the peaceful Islam, disused daily by most Muslims and very frequently by Islam itself, is very wrong, because it is abrogated (made invalid) by at least these (ca. 30 all together) from the more bloody and inhuman later Medina surahs: 2/191 – 2/193 – 3/28 – 3/85 – 4/91 -5/33 – 5/72 – 5/73 - 8/12 – 8/38-39 – 8/39 - 8/60 – 9/3 - 9/5 - 9/14 – 9/23 – 9/29 – 9/33 - 9/73 – 9/123 – 14/7 – 25/36 - 25/52 – 33/61 – 33/73 – 35/36 - 47/4 – 66/9 (as for 5/33: Remember that all the wars and raids Muhammad fought, were wars of aggression, even if he called it jihad – even Badr, Uhud and the Trench (Medina) were battles of defence in a war of
aggression started and kept alive by Muhammad's raids. Non-Muslims should not defend themselves and their belongings, according to 5/33).In addition to this there are other kinds of compulsion than the sword – economy, brutal
taxes, social stigma, "Berufsverbot" (good jobs prohibited), physical insecurity, etc. And all of them were backed by the sword – "conform and obey and pay or else - - -"!!It must be added that some Muslims say this nonsense in good faith. But not one single Muslim educated in his religion, does not know he is lying each time he says that there is no
compulsion in religion under Islam – but then defending and promoting Islam are two of the cases where Al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) and Kitman (the lawful half-truth), are not onlylawful, but compulsory in Islam, if it is necessary to use it. (A small PS: One or two of the verses abrogating 2/256 may or may not be a little older than 2/256 itself, but there once was a
long debate in Islam if an older verse could abrogate a younger, and the conclusion was that that was possible).
Beisdes Muslims normally misquote the verse, and tell you it says: "There is no compulsion in religion". What it really says is: "Let there be no compulsion in religion" - a wish or a demand, not a fulfilled fact.If this verse had not been abrogated, it had been "Glad Tidings". Yes, even if Muslims had been honest and told the verse is abrogated by at least some 30 harsh later verses it had helped – at least it had helped the moral standard of Muslims to be that honest.
111 2/259: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
112 2/266: "Thus doth Allah make clear to you (people*) (his) Signs". There are no clear signs for Allah or Muhammad in the Quran – not one. See 2/99.
113 2/284: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
114 2/286: "(Pray:) 'Our Lord! - - -'". The word (Pray:) does not exist in the original Arab text – Yusuf Ali has added it to"camouflage" the fact that this is Muhammad praying to Allah. How is it possible to explain that Muhammad is praying to Allah in a book made by Allah or may be never made, but existed since eternity?There are a few more places where it clearly is not Allah who is speaking. See 6/114a.
Surah 2: At least 114 mistakes + at least 15 likely mistakes.
SURAH 3:
001 3/3a: "It is He (Allah*) Who sent down to thee (Muhammad*) (the Quran*) - - -". A book with that many mistakes, etc. is not sent down by an omniscient god.
002 3/3b: "It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth - - -". It at best is partly the truth. See 13/1, 41/12 and especially 40/75.
**003 3/3c: "- - - the Book, confirming what went before it; (the Torah and the Bible*) - - -". There are so many fundamental differences between the Quran and the Torah/Bible (especially NT), that the Quran definitely is no conformation of any of the two others(see 2/89). The Quran and Islam tell that it is because those books are falsified, but for 1400 years no Muslim has ever offered proofs for that - only statements - and today it is proved by science that those statements are wrong. Acrually it also is proved by Islam: If there had existed any proof for falsification, Islam had screamed about it at once - but the only thing they serve, is claims.Be sure: Had Muslims found any proof for this, it had been written with BIG words every relevant and many irrelevant places.Never any proof for that the Quran - or Muhammad - really was from a god. Never.
004 3/4a: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
00a 3/4b: "The Message of the Quran" here tells that the sign here refers to the Gospel (or Evangelion – both words mean "glad tidings". "The Message of the Quran" in English pretends that "Evangelion" is something special, but it simply is Greek for the same meaning. In Swedish (and some other languages) – this kind of small dishonesty that you meet too often in Islamic religious literature, is not possible in just this case, as they do not use the word"Gospel" – they use the word "Evangelium") that Jesus got. Our remark about that simply is that absolutely nowhere there is found a trace of an Evangelion/Gospel that existed at the time of Jesus (science say there may have been one older than the existing ones, but this one in case also had to be written after Jesus' death, as an Evangelion – Gospel in English – is the story about Jesus' life, death and resurrection, and could not be written until after this had happened. The absolute only place you find this claim – and only as a not documented claim –is in the Quran (and later Islamic relevant (?) literature built on or around the Quran). A book with lots and lots of mistakes, told by a man with a very doubtful moral who on top of all
used the stories as his platform of power – and a book made 600 – 650 years later using mainlyreligious legends, etc. as sources, Islam will have to produce solid evidences to make this claim believable – not necessarily true, bur at least believable.
005 3/5: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
006 3/7a: "He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book: - - -". There are too many mistakes in the Quran - it cannot possibly be sent down by a god, not to mention by an omniscient god.
**007 3/7b: "- - - the whole of it (the Quran*) is sent down from our Lord: - - - ". See 2/231 and 3/7a.We also want to add a little more from this verse, as the addition is essential in some of all the places Islam/Muslims try to "explain" away statements, etc., that obviously are not true, by saying they are allegories:
***00b 3/7c "It is He (Allah*) Who has sent down to thee the Book (the Quran*): in it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning) (= to be read literally*); they (the verses to be read literally*) are the foundation of the Book (the Quran*): others are allegorical (there are a number of allegorical or similar verses in the Quran - they either are easy to see are allegorical, or the meaning is explained, or both*). But those in whose hearts is perversity (,*) follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking disorder, for its hidden meaning (= only bad persons seek the hidden meanings - alsofrom the allegories*), but no one knows the hidden meanings except Allah (= the possibly hidden meanings are not forhumans*)".****In clear text: The Quran is to be read literary if nothing else is said or indicated - hidden meanings are for Allah and trying to find hidden meanings are done by perverts. This is very essential for Muslims to remember when they are tempted to explain away mistakes and blunders as allegories with hidden meanings ever so often. There is no hidden meaning unless it is indicated this verse says, and only the bad humans looks for such.
008 3/9: "- - - a Day about which there is no doubt - - -". Wrong. Once the end of the world will come. But if it will happen like told in the Quran, well, there is a good reason for doubt about, as so much more is wrong in that book.
009 3/11: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
010 3/13: "- - - Sign - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
011 3/15: "- - - glad tidings - - -". Wrong. See 2/97c above.
*012 3/18: "- - - that is the witness of Allah - - -." The problem is that there exists not one single witness from Allah – no miracle that could have been a witness, and nothing else. Only the words of a very doubtful man written in a book with very many errors, contradictions, etc. Muslims her often talk about "signs" from the nature, but the nature is not a proof for Allahuntil it first is proved that it is created by a god, and then is proved that that god is Allah –words are very cheap. This claim is wrong until Islam proves that Allah really made it – and proves, not only claims like Muslims nearly always do.
013 3/19: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
014 3/21: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
**015 3/24: "- - - their (Jews, Christians*) forgeries (of the Bible*) - - -". The Quran, Muhammad, Islam and most Muslims claim that the Bible is falsified – claim, but NEVER document or in other ways prove it. Not only claim it is falsified, but that it is falsified on purpose. This in spite of the fact that science long since has proved it is not falsified - one knows literally thousands of relevant old papers and scraps of paper (some 13000 older than 610 AD + some 32000 relevant references to the Bible), which documents it has not been falsified – and with royal disregard for the fact that as the Bible was spread over enormous distances, here, there and everywhere. It was physically impossible to co-ordinate the
falsification of each and every copy all over so that all the falsifications were identical, not to mention that all similar points and all references to all these in other papers also had to be falsified correspondingly. ***Demand proofs next time a Muslim tells you this. His game is to throw not documented claims around,and demand proofs from you for the opposite – which can be difficult if you do not have enough knowledge. But it his duty to prove his claims – not yours to disapprove them. NB: They do not have such proofs – if they had had only a feeble one, be sure you and the rest of the world had heard about it by some ones using big letters (actually the lack of documentation from Islam is the best of proofs for that the claim is something made up. And as actually; to throw loose claims and statements around, pretending that they are facts, are typical for Muslims and Islam in religious debates not to mention in religious propaganda).But to claim that the Bible was falsified, was the only way out for Muhammad – and it still is the only way out for Islam. If they admit that the Bible is not falsified each and every place the Quran "collides" with it, that means to admit that Islam is a made up religion – which is too difficult for the believers, and too expensive for the leaders. We may add that it is quite normal for fringe sects – which Islam once was – to claim that the mother religion(s) is wrong and they themselves are the only ones that are right. To be believed on this point by us, Islam will have to produce real proofs, not only cheap and loose words to back up their claim. As there exist so many old papers, proving it should be very
easy - - - if it were true.Islam's claim here simply is proved wrong by science – unless Islam produces proofs showing the opposite. But proofs, not only loose claims like they normally use.
016 3/25: "- - - a Day about which there is no doubt - - -". Wrong. See 3/9 above.
017 3/27: "Thou (Allah*) causest the Night to gain on the Day, and Thou causest the day to gain on the Night - - -". Night and day is a natural result of the Earth spinning in the light from the sun. If Islam claims what the Quran says above, they will have to prove it.
017 3/29: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
*018 3/35: "Imran's wife said". The Quran here is talking about the mother of Mary (see also
3/36 in the Quran: "I have named her Mary"). But Imran was the father of Aaron, Moses and Miriam, who lived some 1200 years earlier! Muhammad did not know the Bible very well, and it is clear that he thought Mary was the sister of Aaron and Moses. In 19/28 this is directly said, when talking about Mary: "O sister of Aaron". It is likely that the reason for this
mistake is that in Arab Mary and Miriam (the older sister of Moses and Aaron) are written the same way: Maryam. With his limited knowledge of the Bible he believed it was the same woman. Any god had known better. We may add that some Muslims say it is not the same Imran, but scientists agree on that Muhammad meant the same man - the Imran that was chosen by Allah like Adam, Noah and Abraham (see 3/33 in the Quran) - the father of Aaron, Moses - - - and Maryam/Miriam/Mary. That Muhammad really was wrong here, and thought Mary was the sister of Aaron and Moses, is documented by the fact that according to Hadith (the other Muslim source of information about their religion and about Muhammad) Muhammad was corrected, and he tried to find explanations to repair the mistake (without success). He also did not add information showing that he and Allah for some reason was right in his mistaken statement all the same. You will also meet Muslims telling that the Quran does not mean that Mary really was the sister of Aaron (they say it was meant figuratively – the normal way out for Muslims, when things are difficult to explain), and that the book does not mean that she was the daughter of Imran - only a descendant of him. Islam should after so many hundreds of years have found better "explanations" - "explanations" that on top of all is said to be contradicted by the fact that already Mohammad himself tried to correct the mistake, but without success as mentioned. But there is no other explanation they can try to use. Also see 19/28.**** There also is another aspect of all the points which are wrong or helplessly
expressed or something - may be unbelievable some 3000 places - very roughly one in every second verse on average (there is said to be 6247 verses). Who is willing to believe that an omniscient and intelligent god is so helpless expressing himself in a book where he tells he uses a language simple to understand, and so uneducated that he uses
hundreds of mistaken facts, so that mere humans time and again and again and again have to step in and explain or "explain" what he "really means"? - not to mention "explain" or explain away mistakes? It takes a lot of naivity, brainwashing and plain old blindness and lack of moran curage not to at least ask questions. You believe just
ecause your grandmother told you so, and it is difficult to question your old beliefs and the basis of your "facts of life"?
019 3/37: "Every time he (Zakariyya*) entered (her) chamber to see her, he found her supplied with sustenance. He said: 'O Mary! Whence (comes) this to you?' She said: "From Allah: for Allah provides sustenance to whom He pleases without measure' ". This means that she by a miracle got her food from the god. This is a made up fairy tale. There is not one
single chance that a miracle like this had been omitted from the NT - this even more so if Islam had been right in their statements that Christians (and Jews) had falsified the Bible and made Jesus "bigger" - though how do you make Jews falsify their copies of scriptures to make Jesus "bigger"? (Muhammad was not well versed in the Bible, and frequently made mistakes when he referred to it or took stories from it. He always explained such mistakes with that he was right, and that the unholy Jews and Christians had falsified the Bible. Actually just this story is one the many the Quran has not "borrowed" from the Bible at all, but from one of the made up religious legends that flourished at that time. These mistakes were the reason why the Jews did not accept him when he came to Yathrib/Medina - the Jews said his teachings were wrong and that he consequently was a false prophet. (Muslims have "a tendency" not to mention this fact, but to instead tell a, to Muhammad, more flattering story: He was not accepted because the Jews were angry because Allah had called a non-Jew for a prophet.))But if Christians had falsified the Bible, their main object would have been to strengthen Jesus' position and his connections to Yahweh - the Jewish and Christian god. There is no chance at all that they had omitted a wonder connected to his mother, telling about a direct connection between Yahweh and her. (That she served in the Temple, which also is told in the Quran, also is new to the Bible – and had never been omitted there if it was true).It also tells something that when Muhammad differs from the Bible, his/the Quran's stories often correspond with proven untrue religious fables and legends (often based on apocryphal scriptures – and often Gnostic). This tells it is not the Bible that is wrong, but that the Quran may have used fairy tales as sources. Would a god need fairy tales as sources?
020 3/41a: "- - -a Sign - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
021 3/41b: "- - -Thy Sign - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
*022 3/45: "- - - his name will be Christ Jesus - - - ". His name was only Jesus. The word Christ was not even a name, but a title of honour, and it only emerged years after his death -originally in what is now Turkey. But Muhammad did not know the Bible well. (Christ in Greek means the same as Messiah in Hebrew – the anointed one. Because of this some
editions of the Bible use Christ instead of Messiah in NT, but the name - or title really - Christ in reality did not exist connected to Jesus, until well after his death).
**023 3/48: "And Allah will teach him (the child Jesus*) - - - the Gospel". One thing is that the word "Gospel" is in singular - there are 4 Gospels. It is not uncommon to use "Gospel" in singular, but it seems that Muhammad did not know there were more than one. But the real screamer is that the Gospels did not exist at that time - could not exist, as they are the
story of Jesus' life, death and resurrection. The oldest one is written some 25 years after his death (or may be a little earlier, according to new science - source: New Scientist). Show us one single god that did not know that. But as said before: Muhammad did not know the Bible well. Also see 3/3. We may add that many a Muslim will tell you that the Quran is not talking about the 4 known Gospels, but about an older one they claim has disappeared. And they may be partly right on one point - it may be that once there was another and older Gospel, (though not so old that Jesus could read it, neither as a child, nor as an adult). 3 of the Gospels are so similar, that it is clear there is a connection, and one of the possible explanations is that they all took material from an older Gospel. But strangely Muslims never mention the other possible explanation:That the two youngest simply took material from the oldest of the 3. And as strangely the
Imams never tell their congregation what a Gospel really is. For the for Muslims damaging points are:
1. A Gospel is the history of Jesus' life, death and resurrection, with the main point being his death and resurrection – the final proof for his connection to something supernatural. There had been lots of proofs before according to both the Bible and to the Quran – his many miracles. But his resurrection made any dispute about or denial of the involvement of something supernatural impossible. But as the main points in all Gospels are his trial, his death, and his resurrection, no Gospel could exist until after his death. And no tale not including his trial, death and resurrection is a Gospel, because the very points that make it a Gospel – his resurrection and thus the final proof and the final victory over the dark forces – are not there. (Also see point C below).
2. It is known that Muhammad did not really know the Bible, and especially not NT, and it seems like he used the word "Gospel" without really knowing what it meant. Also modern Muslims – at least the ones with little education – have vague ideas about what a Gospel is, and just states that there must have been an older one that Jesus read, which as
you see is an impossibility. (Of course some then try the all-conquering argument that Allah knew and could tell - - - but then we once more are up against the fact that full clairvoyance for Allah combined with free will for man, also is an impossibility, a fact that even Islamic scholars admit, though most reluctantly, and with the very lame addition that "all the same it must be true, because it is told in the Quran" (!!!))
3. We know that if there ever existed an older Gospel, we automatically know that also this was written after Jesus' death, so Jesus could not have studied it. This because a Gospel as said is the story of Jesus' life, death and resurrection (which most Muslims do not seem to know), and thus cannot have been written until after his death and resurrection - and thus we know it in case was not written until after the year 33 AD. (A small scientific correction: It is known that Jesus was 33 years old when he died. But when Rome later calculated when Jesus was born, they made a mistake of may be as much as 5 – 6 years. Therefore Jesus in reality was born some 5 - 6 years before our time-table has its point of zero – and his death correspondingly may have been around 27 – 28 AD).
4. If there ever was such an older Gospel, that means that it was even closer in time to what happened, and thus makes the 3 mentioned Gospels even more reliable as they in case took their material from a Gospel written very shortly after Jesus died, and thus at a time when what happened was even more fresh in the minds of people and society and the
writer. But still impossible for Jesus to study, as it did not - could not - exist until after his death.(We may add that "Gospel" means "good news" or "glad news" or "glad tidings". You meet the word used like that in some Bibles and other literature, but then it normally is written "gospel" not "Gospel".)
*024 3/49: "I have come to you, with a Sign from your Lord, in that I make for you out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, and breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by Allah's leave". Also this wonder had never been omitted from NT if it had been true - see 3/37. But actually it is taken from the made up legends in one of the "fairy tale" Child Gospels (actually it came from Thomas Child Gospel - also called "The Thomas' Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus
Christ"- an apocryphal one from 2. century ). A god had known the Child Gospels were made up. Besides: What does it tell the world that the Quran uses a made up story as an indirect proof for Allah? And what does it tell about the reliability of Muhammad's many statements when there is divergence between the Bible and the Quran, that the reason is that the Bible is falsified, when it is clear that the reason is that the Quran often is referring to fairy tales?
**025 3/51: (Jesus said*): "It is Allah who is my Lord and your Lord; then worship Him". This must be written/told by someone with no knowledge of Israel at the time of Jesus. It was one of the periods when the Jewish religion was strong and the religious establishment powerful. Further the name of the (Muslim) god was not Allah until after Muhammad
changed his name slightly - it was al-Lah (which means "the god" - not "god", but "the god". Muslim missionaries in the west, today often use the word God instead of Allah, because then a number of the differences between Yahweh (our god) and Allah are more difficult to see.They say that Allah means God, but strictly speaking "al-Lah" = "the god"). The Jews of that time were a travelling people, and they knew Arabia and the polytheistic religion there.
1. If Jesus had preached that people should pray to a known polytheistic god from another country (and remember that at that time gods in addition were at least to a degree thought to take care mostly of their own country or tribe or whatever) - call him al-Lah or the older El - he would have gotten very few followers.
2. If Jesus had preached about al-Lah - a known polytheistic foreign god - the Jewish religious establishment had had him killed years before for heresy, disrespect for Yahweh and things like that.The statement is made up by someone not knowing the religious and political situation in Israel around 30 AD (the purpose for making it up is very obvious).
026 3/52a: "(Jesus*) said: 'Who will be the helpers to (the work) of Allah?" See 3/51.
027 3/52b: "Said the Disciples (of Jesus*): 'We are Allah's helpers:" See 3/51.
028 3/52c: Said the disciples: "- - - we believe in Allah, - - -". See 3/51.
*029 3/52d: Said the disciples: "- - - and thou (Jesus*) bear witness that we are Muslims". See
3/51. Besides the word hardly had a meaning 600 years before Muhammad.
030 3/58: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
00c 3/59: "The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam - - -". That is to say in "Quran-speak": He was a prophet, but but for that an ordinary human. Well, Jesus called God/Yahweh "father", which Adam could not. And according to science, Adam never existed.
*031 3/59: "He (Allah*) created him (Adam*) from dust, - - -". The Quran tells about many ways man was created - 13 different if you are strict, 5 - 7 if you are less strict. Only 1 can be true, as man (Adam) was created only once. Actually all of them are wrong. Some Muslims take pride in that archaeologists has found that the human race has passed through so-called bottlenecks, and that all may have one "mother" in common - the archaeological Eve - and one common "father" - the less known archaeological Adam. "Hip, Hurray! Science has proved the Adam and his wife in the Quran!!" What not a single of them has ever mentioned as far as we have heard, is the fact that this "Eve" lived some 160ooo to 200ooo years ago in Africa, whereas the corresponding "Adam" lived much later - may be as late as 60ooo - 70ooo (64ooo?) years ago and in Asia. Some marriage!!! (And actually the Adam from the Bible and the Quran most likely never existed - man developed from a primate, he was not created into sudden existence). See also 6/2.
032 3/60: "The Truth (comes) from Allah alone; - - -". With so many mistaken facts that you find in that book, it can at most be partly true, if this refers to the presumed truths in the Quran. Also see 40/75.
033 3/61: "- - - now after (full) knowledge hath come to thee - - -". With so many mistakes in the Quran, it is at best partly knowledge.
*034 3/64: "- - - that we (Muslims and Jews/Christians*) worship none but Allah (= Yahweh and Allah is claimed to be the same god*)". This is not possible as the fundamental differences between the Quran and the Bible/NT are too big and too many – not unless the god is schizophrenic. Mainly only Muslims say this – and they will have to bring strong
proofs.
00d 3/67: "Abraham was not a Jew nor yet a Christian - - -". He definitely was no Christian, as he lived – if he ever lived - some 1800 – 2000 years too early. But it may be correct to call the forefather of all Jews a Jew. (We know the word did not exist at that time, but it is normal to use the word also for the people who later got the name Jews. The word "Jew" is made from "Judah" - the name of one of the sons of the Jewish patriarch Jacob - grandson of Abraham.)
00e 3/68: "Without doubt, among men, the nearest of kin to Abraham, are those who follow him - - -".
1. You do not get related to a man just because you are a follower.
2. Is Islam really following Abraham's real religion? – only the Quran says so, and the Quran has proven that it has lots of mistakes –lots of.
3. If Muhammad included himself here: Was he really a descendant of Abraham? – Abraham lived some 2500 years earlier, and how many even today know their forefathers 2500 years back? – people have lied for political or personal reasons throughout both history and pre-history, also about honourable ancestors.
4. Even if Muhammad had been a descendant of Abraham – then how close after 2500 years? His first forefather in case was Ishmael. Ishmael was half Egyptian (his mother Hagar was a slave maiden from Egypt (1.Mos. 16/1), and Ishmael himself married a woman (only one wife is mentioned) from Egypt (1. Mos. 21/21) and his family settled near the border of Egypt (1. Mos. 25/18) in Sinai. The border of Egypt never was in the middle of Arabia, even though Muslims want Hagar and Ishmael to have settled in Mecca). In addition modern DNA has shown that Arabs far from is a pure race. Arabs were traders – and brought home wives and slaves and got children with them. Also foreign traders crossed Arabia and made a child now and then – the sexual taboos were far looser before Muhammad. The Arabs simply is a mix of local and a lot of not local DNA – in addition to the already mentioned fact that already after 2 generations only ¼ of the relationship was with Abraham - - - and the 25oo years up to Muhammad meant some 100 generations.There is much reason for doubt.
035 3/70: "Why do ye (the Jews*) reject the Signs of Allah, of which ye are (yourselves) witnesses?" The word "Sign" may here refer to these statements:
1. Islam say Muhammad is foretold in the Bible, and especially refers to 5 Mos. 18/15 and 18/18. But the brother of a Jew is a Jew, not an Arab, and the Jews' fellow countrymen also are Jews, not Arabs. See the chapter about "Muhammad in the Bible?" Wrong.
2. The other "main" claim is that when Jesus talked to his disciples about a helper that should come to them, Muslims claim that that meant Muhammad, even though they have to twist their "explanation" not a little (they need at least onefrom GT and one from NT, because it is said that Muhammad is foretold in both) - and even though Muhammad was
born 500 years after the disciples were dead! -how could he be the helper of the disiples?!!(Jesus was talking about The Holy Ghost/Holy Spirit/etc. that came to the disciples some days later)
3. The Quran refers to one or two learned Jews that Islam claims accepted Mohammad as a prophet. But even if this may be (or may be not) was true, it is in no way correct to say that "ye" (all the Jews) did so. Wrong.See the chapters "Muhammad in the Bible?" and "Falsified Bible?"*Islam only has produced claims and twisted logic for this – well, claim. They will have to produce documentation or proofs if they want to be believed by others than the brainwashed and the naïve.
036 3/71: "- - - conceal the Truth (of what the Quran tells*) - - -". With so many mistakes, the Quran at best is only partly true. Also see "Muhammad in the Bible?"
037 3/71a: "Why do you clothe the truth with falsehood (= falsify the Bible, the Torah, and the other Jewish scriptures - this is strongly stated in the Quran (if it is not true, then the Quran is a falsified book*)*), and conceal the Truth, - - -?" Always when there was a discrepancy between the Quran and the Bible, Muhammad said it was he who was right and
the Jews and the Christians who had falsified the Bible (even in cases where it is clear the story in the Quran corresponds to a made up legend known in Arabia at that time) - a most convenient explanation for a man that knew little about the Bible. But does the Quran represent the truth? - with that many obvious mistakes, etc., it at most can be partly true.
038 3/71b: "- - - conceal the Truth (of what the Quran tells*) - - -". With so many mistakes, the Quran at best is only partly true. Also see "Muhammad in the Bible?" and 3/71a just above.
039. 3/75: "But they (Jews and Christians*) tell a lie against Allah (= they have falsified the Bible*), and well they know it." Wrong. See 2/75 above.
**040 3/78: "(Many Jews and Christians*) distort the Book (the Bible) - - -". This an unproven claim without which Islam is dead. But the fact is that in 1400 years Islam have been unable to produce only claims and words – both of which are very cheap – whereas science has some 13000 relevant old papers and fragments (of them some 300 from the 4 Gospels) from all over the then known world, plus some 32000 relevant quotations from the Bible in other manuscripts, which document that the Bible is not distorted. (And you bet: If Islam had found a single real proof for their claim, they had screamed about it). This actually is the best of all proofs for that no proofs exist. Also see "Muhammad in the Bible",
and "Falsified Bible?"
*041 3/83a: "- - - all creatures (= angels, jinns, man and animals*) in the heavens and on the earth have, willing or unwilling(what about 2/256: "- no compulsion in religion –"?*) bowed to His (Allah's*) will (accepted Islam)". Muslims will have to produce very strong proofs to make us believe that everything, included snails and flatworms and mosquitoes pray to Allah.
042 3/83b: "- - - heavens - - -". See 2/22a.
*043 3/84: "- - - in (the Books) given to Moses". Wrong. Moses (if he existed) lived 1300-1200 BC (if the exodus from Egypt ever happened, it took place ca. 1235 BC - during the reign of pharaoh Ramses II according to science). These 5 books (the Torah) were written not earlier than ca. 800 BC, and may be as late as 500 BC, but named after Moses. Moses was
never given those books (though he was oraly given the law, which he himself wrote down later, according to the Bible – the laws later became part of "The Book of Moses" some hundred years later) - but this Muhammad did not know - - - whereas a god had known it. See 2/53.
044 3/75: "But they (Jews/Christians*) tell a lie against Allah (= they have falsified the Bible)". Wrong. See 3/24 above.
045 3/78: "- - - distort the Book (= falsify the Bible*) - - -." Wrong. See 3/24 above.
046 3/86: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". See 2/99.
*047 3/96: "The first House (= Kabah*) (of worship) appointed for man was that at Bakkah (= Mecca*)". Wrong. Even if we should accept that Abraham "made the foundations" of the Kabah in Mecca, he lived (if he is not fiction) around 2000-1800 BC. At that time the first temples, etc. in f. ex. Egypt and Mesopotamia were old. Today it is possible to find the real
age of many things. It is symptomatic that as far as we know, Islam has not tried to see if it is possible to find the real age of the oldest parts of the Kabah. Wagging tongues insinuates that may be the reason is that they are afraid it is younger than 3800 years. - what if it turns out it is built around 100 BC - or AD - f. ex? Islam also have one problem concerning measuring the age of the Kabah: They will have to use qualified western experts. If they use Muslim experts - who may be well qualified to do it - and find that it f. ex. is 5630 years old, not one single soul will believe them uncondotianally, because of "al-Taqiyya" - the lawful lie - that Muslims not only are permitted to use, but are obliged to use if necessary, when it comes to promoting or defending Islam. (And non-Muslims are not permitted to visit Mecca.) We may also add that it is further said that Abraham built on the even older ruins of a temple made by Adam - of course Adam like Abraham went all the way to the desert proto-Mecca and built a big temple he never could visit from his home a thousand kilometres off (Adam - and his Paradise - real of fiction, mostly are believed to have been placed somewhere in the rich wetlands in what is now South Iraq), but destroyed at the time of Noah - but as often before
Muslims only tell, seldom prove, so believe it who wants.(We may ad that some Muslims have corrected this verse to that the Quran is talking about the first house of worship for a monotheistic god, but that is not what the Quran says. Besides: If the Quran or the Hadiths is correct and there have been prophets to all times and every people – 124ooo the Hadith says – Islam will have a though time to prove that not one single all those prophets or their followers in the very early time before Abraham, have ever built even a small house for worship." Also see 2/127.
048 3/97a: "- - - Signs manifest - - -". See 2/99.
049 3/97b: "In it (Kabah in Mecca*) are Signs manifest; (for example), the Station of Abraham - - -". For one thing Abraham never was in Mecca (see 2/127) and never built Kabah or its foundations. And if he had ever been there and built it: There is a stone there, with a mark in it. Islam calls it the Station of Abraham and is said to tell that the mark is from Abraham's feet when he was building the Kabah. Which worker building a house has ever in all the history and far before, been standing so long on the same hard natural stone, that his feet made a mark in that stone lasting for millennia?This is the kind of sure proofs the Quran tells about and some of the Muslims even believe in.
050 3/98a: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
051 3/98b: "(Jews and Christians*) ye were yourselves witnesses (to Allah's covenant)". Wrong. They were witnesses to Yahweh's covenant(s). Allah is not the same god as Yahweh, unless the god is seriously schizophrenic, as the teachings fundamentally are too different. If Islam still insists on the opposite, they will have to bring proofs, not only the old and still not documented loose claims.
00f 3/101: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
052 3/103: "Thus doth Allah make His Signs clear - - -". There is not one single real sign/proof not to mention clear sign or proof for neither Allah nor Muhammad in the Quran –see 2/99.
053 3/105: "- - - clear Sign - - -". See 3/103 just above and 2/99.
054 3/108: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
055 3/109: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong – see 2/22a.
056 3/112: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
057 3/113: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
058 3/118: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
059 3/128: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong – there are no 7 heavens. See 2/22a.
060 3/132: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong – see 2/22a.
*00g 3/137a: "- - - travel through the earth, and see what was the end of those who rejected the truth". In Arabia there were scattered old ruins. Muhammad told they were all remnants after peoples Allah had punished for their sins. There are more likely explanations.
061 3/137b: "- - - those who rejected the Truth". With that many mistaken facts in the Quran, it at best tells partly the truth.
**062 3/154a: "Even if you had remained in your homes (instead of taking part in the battle of Uhud, where many were killed), those for whom the death was decreed would certainly have gone forth to the place of their death (= they had died anyhow*)". Here we have the predestination. You can as well do battle, because Allah has decided long time ago (5 months before you were born according to Hadith) when you are to die. If your time is up, you will die no matter, even if you are lying in your bed. That means that to do battle is not dangerous, but you can win a lot of wealth - and slaves - and if you die in battle, you are sure to go to Paradise with its luxury life and willing houries (in addition to your wives), which you are not sure of if you die at home. The only intelligent thing to do is to fight for your prophet - or his successors. "The religion of Peace"? - or a religion of war?Today it is easy to prove by statistics that it is very wrong - but Muhammad did not know about statistics (and a god had not even needed statistics to know it was stupidity). On the
other hand this claim is so contra all logic, that this is one of the points where Muhammad knew he was lying - he was too intellighet to believe in this. Actually Islam today back-pedals very much concerning predestination telling f. ex. that the Quran does not mean real predestination (but not explaining what they claim it means). But in some cases the book is so clear, that it is impossible to explain it away.) f. ex. many places connected to statements that when your time is out, you will die anyhow, and therefore you can as well go to war. See f. ex. 3/154b below).
**063 3/154b: "Even if you had remained in your homes, those for whom death was decreed would certainly have gone forth to the place of their death". This is one of the arguments Muhammad used to incite to battle; predestination. Today it as said is very easy to prove by means of statistics that it is utterly wrong - it is far less likely to die in your home, compared to spending the same time in a battle. (But Muhammad needed - or at least wanted -warriors, even if he had to know he was lying.)
064 3/161a: "- - - prophet - - -". But Muhammad was not really a prophet – he just "borrowed" the impressing title: He did not have the ability to make prophesies – he did not even pretend or claim he had it. Even Islam admits this indirectly: Prophesies is a special kind of miracles, and Islam says that the only miracle connected to Muhammad, is the making of
the Quran.
00h 3/16b1: "No prophet could (ever) be false to his trust." Some of Mohammad's highwaymen (this was in 625 AD when the Muslims lived from stealing/robbing and extortion) were dissatisfied and told Mohammad cheated when splitting the spoils. Then this verse arrived very conveniently from the veneered Mother Book in Heaven written by Allah or existed since eternity. Islam says it proved Mohammad did not cheat. That may be correct if Allah made the Quran, but not if Mohammad or someone else did so.**There also is another and much more serious fact here: Through the times most – not to say (nearly?) all – self-proclaimed prophets have been false prophets. Most of the false prophets have been (and are) men, and in religion they have found a way to money, women, esteem, and power – the 4 normal reasons for impostors. Some are mentally special or ill –Muhammad is among those if he had TLE (see the chapter "What is TLE – Temporal Lobe Epilepsy"). Some really believe they are prophets, others just are cheats – if Muhammad had TLE, he may honestly have believed he had some connection to a god, but it also is very clear from the Quran that he at least sometimes knew he was cheating; some of the arguments he used in the book, any intelligent person knows are lies (f. ex. that miracles would not make doubters believe), and Muhammad was an intelligent man. And some of the self proclaimed "prophets" simply were/are cold and calculating – sometimes even psychopathic - - - and when one looks at Muhammad's cold-blooded treatment of victims and opponents, his total disregard for the life and well-being of everybody that stood between him and power and riches (to use for bribing greedy warriors and chiefs to come to his religion and his army), and his clever psychological (every clever salesman knows much about human nature and
psychology) manipulation of his uneducated, naïve early followers, it is easy to believe Muhammad belonged to these – may be combined with the effect of the possible TLE or something.
00i 3/164a: "- - - He (Allah) sent among them (Muslims*) a Messenger (Muhammad*) from among themselves - - -". The Quran and all the mistakes and wrong logic, etc. there, makes it clear that Muhammad was not sent by any omniscient or omnipotent god (f. ex. no miracles –even though any god knows it is a lie that miracles would not give lots of followers - - - and so did Muhammad). But there is a small possibility that he was contacted by a minor god, and a larger possibility that what he believed was Gabriel, in reality was the Devil/a devil in disguise (Muhammad's inhuman behaviour and the inhuman religion he introduced – stealing/robbing, raping, enslaving, torture, murder, mass murder, hate,
discrimination, and war – may indicate this). Finally there is a not small possibility that it was all man-made.
065 3/164b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
066 3/180: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22.
067 3/183: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". There are no clear signs (= proofs for Allah or Muhammad) in the Quran – not one. See 2/99.
068 3/184: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". Wrong. See 2/99.
069 3/189: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
070 3/190a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong – there are no 7 material heavens. See
2/22a. Any god had known, but Muhammad not. Who made the Quran?
071 3/190b: "- - - Signs - - -." As long as it is not proved that it really was Allah who created it, it is invalid as sign or indication or proof for Allah or anything related to Islam. See 2/39 above.
*072 3/190c: "- - - there are indeed Signs for men of understanding - - -". Psychologically a good slogan; who does not want to belong among the wise men, and who is not flattered by being included among the wise ones by the demi-god of a leader? – especially the uneducated and naïve followers - - - or the brainwashed ones. But the only two things a man of real understanding can learn from statements that are clearly invalid, because they just are cheap words that never are proved – only backed by demands and flattery for blind belief:
1. A. And the first possible conclusion a man of understanding can make is: Muhammad had no valid arguments – if he had had real and true arguments, he had not had to use invalid ones.
2. B. The other possible conclusion a man of understanding can make from this is that something is seriously wrong. Wrong information, invalid logic, and sometimes lies, after all are the hallmarks of a deceiver, a cheat, and a swindler.
Also see 2/99.
073 3/191: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
Surah 3: 73 mistakes + 9 likely mistakes.
SURAH 4:
001 4/1a: "Reverence your Guardian-Lord, who created you (people*) - - - ". Man was not created, according to science, but developed from earlier primates. Besides: Even if man had been created, Islam has never brought a proof for that he was created by a god (not by f. ex. a devil), and neither for that the god in case was Allah.
002 4/1b: "- - - created you from a single person - - -". Man could not come from a single person, there had to be at lest 2 – male and female. But even if there was a couple, that would be too little – the DNA variety would be too small for the "tribe" to be viable. Man simply developed little by little – like the Quran – from earlier primates (as for the archaeological
Eve and the archaeological Adam that science talks about, and that some Muslims disuse trying to "prove" something: See the chapter: "Some wrong arguments – and their answers".)
003 4/11+12: The verses about inheritance are far from clear in Islam. Muhammad stated fixed proportions. But the trouble is that those proportions may add up to more than the full value of the property. If there f. ex. are these inheritors after a man's death: 1 wife = 1/8
(3/24), 3 daughters = 2/3 (16/24), 1 father = 1/6 (4/24) and 1 mother = 1/6 (4/24). If you ad these you will see that they are to inherit 27/24, which is mathematically and practically impossible. Or if a man dies and leaves only a sister and a brother: The sister gets ½ and the brother the double of what the sister gets = 3/2, which is an absurd joke. And what if a manhad 2 wives, one with a child and the other not? Does the one with child get 1/8 and the other ¼? Etc. Juridical problems concerning inheritance are complicated under Islam because of these mistakes. But the shares are said to be ordained by Allah, the All-knowing!!!
003a 049 4/29 (A38): "Eat not up your property among yourselves in vanity". But is that the correct meaning? "The Message of the Quran" has: "Do not devour one another's possessions wrongfully – not even by way of trade based on mutual agreement" – which roughly says the same (something like "do not cheat each other" or worse) in a few more words. But the Arab word "illa" in front means "except" or "unless it be", which means that the literal meaning in reality is "do not eat up one another's possessions wrongfully, unless it be (an act of) trade based on mutual agreement" - - - which means that wrongful profit is ok if the parts agree on it – f. ex. by sheer a swindle where the buyer believes he/she gets a fair deal. This strongly contradicts other Islamic laws. It takes some highly advanced verbal gymnastics to explain it
away. Every scholar agrees that the literal meaning must be wrong, but words have to be used in special meanings to make that meaning disappear. At very best very unusual use of the language – in spite of that the Quran itself boasts of that the language it to be understood literal, and that it is easy to understand. More likely it simply is a big mistake a la 6/151.
***004 4/40: "Allah is not unjust in the last degree - - -." Wrong. Examples: Suppression of others is "good and lawful and just". The same is stealing and robbing if it is possible to find an excuse to call it jihad – and the same for rape of any not pregnant female prisoner or slave. But the top of injustice is: A raped woman is to be punished strongly for indecency if she cannot produce 4 male witnesses to the actual rape. Allah in the Quran at times is extremely unjust.
*005 4/47: (The Quran is*) "confirming what was (already) with you (= the Bible, the Torah, etc.*) ". There are too manybasic thoughts that are different between the Quran and the Bible – especially compared to the NT and the new covenant (f. ex Luke 22/20). Incitement to war against non-believers, the "lost lamb", "do not kill" vs. "do not kill except for a good reason", all the incitements to war, etc., etc. The Quran is no confirmation of the Bible, and definitely
not of NT. It is also not possible that the same god is behind so different ideas, unless he is mentally ill. See also 2/89 and 29/46.
006 4/56: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
**007 4/82: "Had it (the Quran*) been from other than Allah, they would surely therein found much discrepancy." What a proof!!! In addition to all the mistakes, contradictions, etc. (roughly at least unbelievable 3000(!!!) everything included), the Quran, that Islam has a special rule how to solve such problems - the so called rule of abrogation: If there is discrepancy between two (or more) places in the Quran, the youngest one normally is the correct one - the omniscient Allah so often had to change his mind or got new information that forced him to change his words, that one needs a special rule how to
behave in such cases (this is one of the reasons why it is essential for Islam to know the age of the surahs and verses, or at least which is older than which). And there is so much discrepancy between the Quran and modern knowledge, that it is clear that either Islam has a lot of good explaining to do, or the Quran is not made by an omniscient god. (Islam has a lot of explanations, but most of what is concerning explaining away mistakes, etc. is invalid or highly dubious - use your brain and knowledge when you listen or read, and you will see this is true). The quoted sentence really is an indirect, but strong proof from the Quran itself that the Quran is not sent down from an omniscient god - and a reason why Muslims cannot afford to admit there is one single mistake in the book, no matter how unlikely explanations they have to use to "explain" the mistakes: If there are mistakes, there is something fundamentally wrong with the religion.(It should be mentioned that some Muslims denies there is a rule of abrogation (an omniscient god would not need to adjust or further specify his own rules - it spoils the picture of perfection and of omniscience), but anyone can read and see for him/herself: Many points are adjusted, extended or given other limits - larger or smaller - in the Quran. We have never counted, but we have read numbers from ca. 100 to more than 500 abrogations depending on how strictly you judge. Actually it is said by some Islamic scholars that only 9/5 – "the Verse of the Sword" – abrogates 124 older mild verses).
In addition one has all the mentioned mistakes – they are discrepancies compared to the reality.
008 4/105a: "We (Allah*) have sent down to thee the Book (the Quran*) - - -". With so many
mistakes and dubious arguments - can it really be sent down by a god? No.
009 4/105b: "We (Allah*) have sent down to thee the Book (the Quran*) in truth, - - -". With so many mistakes, it is without doubt that it at best can be only partly true (if not there had been no mistakes).
010 4/113a: "For Allah hath sent down to thee the Book (the Quran*). See 4/105.
011 4/113b: "For Allah hath sent down to thee the Book (the Quran*) and Wisdom - - - ". As said before - f. ex. in 4/105 - there is reason for doubt as to if the Quran is sent down by a god, and no reason for doubt that some of the contents are not true.
012 4/126: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
013 4/131a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
014 4/131b: "- - - We (Allah*) have directed the People of the Book (Jews and Christians*) before you (Muslims*) - - -." Wrong. Allah and Yahweh is not the same god – not unless the god is seriously ill mentally – the teachings are too different and Islam also never has been able to do anything but claiming that it is the same god – never a proof or any kind of documentation. They only show you to a book with very many mistakes, (told by a very doubtful man who also never was able to prove anything) and claim – without documentation also here – that this is a proof. After all a proof is "one or more proven facts that can give only one conclution". The "signs" and "proofs" in the Quran proves invalid mostly because they do not build on proven facts, only on claims.
015 4/131c: "- - - heavens - - -". Even if the statement is repeated 2 times in the same verse, there still are no 7 material heavens (see 2/22a). Any god had known, but Muhammad believed in the contemporary Greek and Persian wrong astronomy – Muslims NEVER mention that 7 heavens was the astronomy of the area at the time of Muhammad, and neither does Islam. Everybody is free to wonder why.
016 4/132: "- - - heavens - - -". See 4/132 just above and 2/22a.
00a 4/136a: "Believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -". There is nowhere proved that Muhammad was the messenger of a god. Not even that he really had any connection to a god.
017 4/136b: "- - - and the scripture which He (Allah*) hath sent to his Messenger". It is very obvious to anybody with some knowledge and the ability to read and think, that there are many mistakes in the Quran. It is a question if it is advisable to believe in a book where you know there are many mistakes - and may be many more you do not see. The fact that there are many mistaken facts - and dubious statements + contradictions + numbers of invalid "signs" and "proofs", also makes one doubt the not proven claim that the book is sent down by an omniscient god and a copy of a book revered in Heaven. It simply is impossible that it can be true.
*00b 4/136c: "Any who denieth Allah, His Angels, His Messengers, and the Day of Judgement, hath gone far, far astray". Hardly. When you know how full of mistakes and wrong logic the book that all Islam rests on is, it takes some more proof to decide that it is the non-Muslims that are "far, far astray".
018 4/140 "Already has He (Allah*) sent you word in the Book (the Quran*)." Wrong. A book with so many mistakes and so much invalid logic is neither made nor sent down by a god – omniscient or not.
*019 4/156: "- - - they uttered against Mary a grave false charge (that Jesus was crucified and dead*)". There were so many witnesses, included many that knew Jesus, and included so many that hated him and definitely had made revolt if he was not executed – the Jewish clergy was powerful - that this charge was definitely not false. If Islam says something else, they will have to provide good proofs, not only bring forth lofty statements taken out of thin air 600 years later. Because that is all the Quran has got to offer: A few lofty statements backed by nothing - no proofs and not even an indicium indicating that all those witnesses - and the rulers and the hateful Jewish clergy - were wrong. Words are very cheap - - - and the only fact Islam can produce is that neither Muhammad nor Islam can accept that Jesus died and was
resurrected - in that case he clearly was a greater prophet and/or had closer connections to the god than Muhammad, and that is taboo for Muslims. It simply is unacceptable for them.
020 4/157a: "We killed Christ Jesus - - -". Wrong name. The word Christ did not exist as a name for Jesus until many years later, and then it came from Asia Minor, and then as a title, (the Turks had not arrived at that time), not from Jerusalem originally (see 3/45). Any god had known this. (Christ in Greek = Messiah in Hebrew (= the anointed one). Because of that some translations of the Bible use Christ instead of Messiah in the NT. But the title Christ – not a name originally, but a title – in reality was not used for Jesus until years after his death.)
021 4/157b: "- - - (Jesus*) the Messenger of Allah". It is absolutely sure the Jews did not say this. See 3/51.
*022 4/157c: "- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear for them - - -". See 4/156. In addition: If no one else made sure that it was no impostor and that the execution really took place, the angry and spiteful Jewish clergy would see to that. This claim is made up by someone that could not accept that Muhammad was not the
greatest prophet (even though Muhammad in reality was not really a real prophet – he did not have the gift of being able to make prophesies). If Islam wants to say something else, they will have a lot of explanation and proving to do - this even more so as the Quran always demands proofs for what non-Muslims say about their religion, but it NEVER itself offers any real proofs for Islam or Allah. In spite of all the "signs" it boasts of, not one single of those "signs" - with the possible exception of some taken from the Bible - proves any god at all, and definitely not one single one proves anything about Allah or the teachings of Muhammad. Words are very cheap, and there is not one single of those "signs" that can not as well and as easy be used by priests or believers or prophets of other religions: Manito did this,
Thor did that, Kali made something, Osiris something else, Baal created the Earth, and alUzza is great. Islam always onlyclaims that Allah did this and this and that this is a "sign" or a "proof" for Allah. But they NEVER prove that it really was Allah that did this and this. Because of that each and every such "sign" and "proof" are intuitively and logically invalid as an indication or a proof – and for the same reason any priest in any religion can say exactly the same valueless words about his god(s). The claims are totally invalid as indications or indicia, not to mention as proofs. There is not one single valid proof for Allah or for the teachings of Muhammad anywhere - - - or for that Jesus was not crucified and died.
023 4/157d: "- - - of a surety they killed him (Jesus*) not - - -". If Islam is not able to produce really hard proofs for this statement, it is very obviously wrong. See 4/156 and 4/157c for further explanations.
*024 4/159: "And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him (Allah*) before his death - - -." Wrong. If some of the People of the Book believe, they believe in Yahweh, not in Allah. It is not the same god unless something is very wrong with the god. Islam will have to prove so in case.
025 4/163: "- - - to David We (Allah*) gave the Psalms". Wrong: According to science they are some centuries younger than King David. (And besides – Allah hardly was involved. If there was a god, it was Yahweh).
00c 4/167: "Those who reject Faith (Islam*) - - - have verily strayed far, far away". See 4/136.
00d 4/170a: "The Messenger (Muhammad*) hath come - - - from Allah - - -". There is no place proved that Muhammad is a messenger from any god - Allah or someone else.
*026 4/170b: "The Messenger (= Muhammad*) hath come to you in truth from Allah: - - -". With so many mistaken facts in Mohammad's tales (the Quran), it is impossible he really got the surahs and verses from a god, at least not from an omniscient god. Also see 40/75.
027 4/170c: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
00e 4/171a: "- - - Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, was (no more than) a Messenger- - -." Well, he frequently called Yahweh (the Jewish and Christian god) his father.
028 4/171b: "Christ Jesus was - - - a Messenger of Allah, - - -". If Islam does not have strong proofs for this, he definitely was no messenger of Allah - for explanations about this see 3/51.
00f 4/171c: "- - - (far Exalted is He (Allah*)) above having a son". If the Quran here talks only about Allah, that may be correct. But if it talks about an Allah identical to Yahweh, we have to remind Muslims of the fact that Jesus many times and in front of many witnesses called Yahweh his father – the word "father" as a statement of the relationship between Jesus and Yahweh is used at least 163 times in the NT, and the word "son" at least 66 times, many of those times by Jesus himself. And even the Quran agrees to that Jesus was reliable. And we remind you that in spite of what Islam and the Quran claim without any documentation about falsifications of the Bible, science clearly has documented that those undocumented claims are not correct.
029 4/171d: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
030 4/172: "Christ disdaineth not to serve and worship Allah." In 3/51 is implicated in the explanation why this is wrong. The only possible exception is if Yahweh and Allah really is the same god. But only Islam states that, and the teachings of Yahweh (especially in NT and the new covenant – f. ex. Luke 22/20) are so different at essential points from the teachings of Allah, that they cannot be the same god. Islam will in case have to prove it, not only to claim it.
031 4/174: "- - - there hath come to you (Jews, Christians*) a convincing proof (the Quran*) from your Lord (Allah*) - - -". With that many mistakes, contradictions, etc., and so much wrong logic, etc., etc. the Quran is not very convincing, and its "proofs"/"signs" no more convincing. See 2/99.
032 4/176: "And Allah hath the knowledge of all things". Obviously not in this case. F. ex.: Given the right combination of inheritors, their shares add up to 112.5% and even 125% or 150% of the inheritance (this has given lawyers and lawmakers much work – and at least the lawyers much money - through the times.)
Surah 4: At least 32 mistakes + 6 likely mistakes.
Surah 5.
001 5/1 (A2): "Lawful (as food*) for you (Muslims*) are all four-footed animals, with the exceptions named - - -". But the literal meaning of Arab "bahimat al-an'am" is "four-footed cattle" or "beast of cattle". But "cattle" is something very different to "all four-footed animals". To add to the mystery Rezi and others say: "- - - all animals that resembles (domesticated) cattle insofar as it feeds on plants and is not a beast of prey." (One essence of this is that Muslims cannot eat marine mammals – not 4-footed and most of them are beasts of prey. But we have not seen any prohibition about this.) The main essence of this verse is that no Arab scholar really is sure how to understand exactly what it means, but that they agree on that "four-footed cattle" is a tautology that must be wrong – one more case where the majority agrees on that some text in the Quran is wrong (there are a few like this – see separate small chapter. And when not even the greatest Muslims scholars understand what the text really means, it is not "a clear and easily understood language".
It must be added to the defence of the Muslims scholars who try to "adjust" the meaning of this verse, that the Quran clearly permits hunting, and mostly they did go hunting for food - - -and you do not go hunting for cattle. It thus is very clear that they are right when they say this tautology is wrong.
001a 5/10: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
002 5/12: "Allah did aforetime take a covenant from the Children of Israel - - -." Wrong. See 4/159. The covenant was with Yahweh.
**003 5/13: "- - - they (the Jews*) change the words (of the OT*) and forget a good part of the Message that was sent them (OT*)". There exist some 13000 scriptures or fragments older than 610 AD (when Muhammad declared himself a messenger) plus some 32000 references to Biblical verses in other manuscripts. They show that neither OT nor NT is falsified – nor is anything forgotten (omitted). But Islam HAS to insist on this. For one thing this was theexcuse Muhammad used when explaining the differences between the Bible and the Quran –and Muhammad and the Quran has to be speaking only the truth, because if not the very foundation under the religion collapses. And for another thing – if the Quran is wrong and the Bible correct, Islam is a made up religion. But one fact remains: Islam has not found any
proof for their claim, even though they have searched for it for 1400 years. They have trumped up a number of arguments, but like so often Islam only have cheap words behind their claims – if they had found one single real proof for their claim among the 13000 scriptures or other places, you can bet large money on that the world had been informed quickly and thoroughly about it. When science then tells that the Bible is unabridged except for better translations and the small varieties normal for handwritten manuscripts spread over hundreds of years and thousands of kilometres - and there were many thousands of scriptures spread all over - and each and every single one had to be falsified in just the same ways (facts Muslims never mention or explain) – well, when all this is added up, it is up to you to decide which – if any – of the two books is most reliable. (Also see 2/75 and 3/24).
004 5/14: "- - - but they (Christians*) forgot a good part of the Message (Bible/NT*) that was sent them - - -". See 3/24 and 5/13 (just above). When it comes to NT, science is on even more secure "ground" than for OT, as one has original documents going back nearly to the first churches – included some 300 Gospels or fragments of Gospels – and there are found no falsifications. The texts simply are the same as today. Islam will have to offer proofs, not only claims taken out of the air like they normally only do. With so many old documents it should have been easy enough to find falsifications - - - if it had been true. Also see 2/75!
005 5/15a: "- - - revealing to you (Jews and Christians*) much of that ye used to hide in the Book (the Bible*) - - -". To believe in the theory that the Bible is falsified, one has to know very little about how to make identical falsifications of thousands of copies of many different manuscripts, where on top of all all the different falsifications have to be synchronized in all the different manuscripts, so that the different manuscripts do not tell widely different facts. And not least: All references to and from the different papers must have been synchronized –try to do that even today with 100ooo papers spread over large areas and with no masscommunications, not even a good post office (with 13ooo relevant papers or scraps of papers still existing today, there must have been at least 100ooo and many more in the old times, spread all over – papers are destroyed or rot or disappear over the centuries, all identically falsified, because at that time nobody knew which papers would survive until today!!!)Judge for yourself after you also have read 2/75, 3/24, 5/13 and 5/14.
*00a 5/15b: "- - - there hath come to you (Jews, Christians*) from Allah a (new) light (Muhammad*) - - -". Well, that is one of the questions: Did a man so morally degenerated and preaching a religion based on a book with so many mistakes, etc. and so much wrong logic, really represent a god? And did a war religion represent a benevolent god?
006 5/15c: "- - - (Allah has sent down*) a perspicuous Book (the Quran*)". No god has sent down – not to mention revered it as the Mother Book in his own Heaven – a book with that many mistakes and that much wrong and invalid logic.
**00b 5/17a: "Why then doth He (the god*) punish you for your sins (if he loves you*)". Wrong psychology, and a naïve question, as anyone knows you sometimes have to punish even children you love.
*007 5/17b: "In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ, the son of Mary". No Christian says that Jesus is Allah. Neither do they say that Jesus is Yahweh. Muhammad never understood the trinity dogma of the Christians. (He also believed the trinity consists of Yahweh, Jesus and Mary!!!). But if one looks only at that dogma, Islam may be right that it is not correct - may be. It is only a dogma decided on by humans after much quarrel and discussion; it is not part of the Bible. But no-one in his right mind and with some knowledge about the Bible, would ever believe Mary was part of the trinity.
008 5/17c: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
*009 5/18a: "(Both) the Jews and the Christians say: 'We are sons of Allah, and His beloved'". Neither Jews nor Christians say they are real sons - or daughters - of Yahweh (not of Allah) (though they often figuratively - but only figuratively - refer to him as the "Father in Heaven" or humans as "Children of God".).
010 5/18b: "(Both) the Jews and the Christians say: 'We are sons of Allah, and His beloved'.Say: 'Why then doth He punish you for your sins? - - -'". The question is not even rhetoric, but naïve - sometimes you have to punish even beloved children to teach them the difference between right and wrong, good and bad.
011 5/18b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
012 5/19a: "O People of the Book (mainly Jews and Christians, but also Sabeans - a Christian sect in Sabah, now part of Yemen (Islam also have another explanation) - and later after a fashion and in some circles also Zoroastrians*)! Now hath come unto you, making (things) clear unto you, Our Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -". Some may question if really Muhammad was the messenger of a god - he did not always behave like the representative of a good and forgiving god, and his message (the Quran) is full of mistakes an omniscient god had not made. But what is not possible to doubt, is that a message with so many mistaken facts at best can make things partly clear (and at worst really mess up things).
013 5/19c: "- - - glad tidings - - -." Wrong. See 2/97c and 61/13.
00c 5/19b: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -". Can a man so morally degenerated like Muhammad – and preaching a book so full of mistakes and invalids logic -really represent a good and omniscient god?
*014 5/20: "Remember Moses said to his people: - - - Allah - - - made you kings". Wrong. The first Jewish kings were Saul (Talut in the Quran) and then David some 200 years after Moses. Any - even minor - god had known this. We have heard Muslims explain that this is not what the Quran means, but that Allah made all Jews like kings. But anyone who knows a
little about Jewish history and about Jews before and now, knows very well that most Jews never were or are or behave(d) like kings. It is an obvious "explanation".
00d 5/21: "- - - the holy land which Allah hath assigned unto you (Moses and his Jews*) - - -". Allah or Yahweh? (See also 3/51).
00e 5/23a: "- - - two (of Moses' Jews*) on whom Allah hath - - -". Allah or Yahweh? See also 3/51.
00f 5/23b: "- - - but on Allah put your (Jews*) trust if you have faith". It is highly unlikely Jews at the time of Moses told their fellow Jews to trust Allah, as the name of the god of the Jews was Yahweh (and besides the name Allah was introduced by Mohammad only some 2000 years later (as a substitute for al-Lah)).
015 5/40: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
016 5/44: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
00g 5/46a: "We (Allah*) sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law (of Moses*)". According to the Bible Jesus was not sent to change the old laws – that was not his main purpose. All the same he did so – changed some and even nullified some of them, especially of all the additions made through the times by Jewish religious thinkers and leaders. This was more or less formalized during his last Easter, when the new covenant (f. ex. Luke 22/20) was introduced. (This covenant is never mentioned by Islam, and most Muslims without religious education have not even heard about it. This even though it is one of the main and most central facts in the Christian religion).
*017 5/46b: "We (Allah*) sent him (Jesus') the Gospel". Any god had known that the Gospels did not exist at that time. See 3/3 and 3/48.
018 5/48a: "To thee (Muhammad*) We (Allah*) sent the scripture - - -". As there are many mistakes in the Quran, there are reasonable doubts about if a god really sent down the Quran. These even more so as a number of the mistakes are in accordance with what one believed to be true at the time of Muhammad in the Middle East. Muhammad would have believed it was the truth, a god had known it was wrong. Then who made the Quran?Islam will have to prove the statement to be believed by rational thinkers with some knowledge.
019 5/48b: "- - - We (Allah*) sent the scripture in truth - - -". With all the mistaken facts - and perhaps other mistakes - in the Quran, it is at most partly the truth.
*021 5/48c: "- - - confirming the scripture (the Bible*) that came before it, - - -". There are so many and so fundamental differences between the Quran and the Bible - especially NT - that the Quran is no confirmation of the Bible, and especially not of the NT. See 2/89 and 3/3.
022 5/48d: "- - - diverging from the Truth (the Quran*) that hath come to thee." With that many mistakes, the Quran at best is only partly the Truth. Islam repeats and repeats and repeats the claim that this is "the Truth". It is tempting to remember Minister of Propaganda (!) in "Das Reich" – Nazi Germany – Joseph Goebbels: "If you repeat a lie often enough, people starts believing it". (There also are many other similarities between Islam and Nazism, and Nazism was liked and respected in large parts of the Muslim populations in the Nazis' satanic days.)
00h 5/59: "- - - the revelation (the Quran*) that hath come to us (Muhammad) - - -". Well, one of the central questions about Islam is if there really were revelations – and if there were: From whom? There are these alternatives:
1. Revelations from a god – which the Quran proves is not the case, as no god, omniscient or not, had made so many mistakes and contradictions, etc., and so much wrong logic, etc.
2. Or revelations from an impostor – f. ex. the Devil – pretending to be Gabriel or working on Muhammad's brain (an illness like TLE easily would explain that – see BBC "God on the Brain", 20. March 2003) – and the inhuman and on some points highly immoral religion Muhammad founded, may indicate that this really is a possibility.
3. Or the "revelations" simply came from a human brain with an illness – if Muhammad f. ex. had TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) like medical experts according to f. ex. BBC suspect, that easily explains his "experiences".
4. Or it is all a "scenario" made by a cold and scheming brain – and Muhammad's inhuman ruthlessness and easily recognized lust for power (see f. ex. how he glues himself to Allah) may indicate this.A combination of points 3 and 4 also is possible.
00i 5/60: "Those who incurred the curse of Allah and his wrath, those of some he transformed into apes and swine - - -". Hardly likely. This needs strong proofs.
023 5/64: "The revelation (the Quran*) that cometh to thee (Muhammad*) from Allah - - -". A book with that many mistakes, etc. is not from an omniscient god. See 5/59 above.
024 5/67: "- - - the (message) which hath been sent to thee (Muhammad*) from thy Lord." There is no chance that a message (the Quran) that full of mistakes, wrong logic, etc. is from an omniscient god. See 5/59.
*025 5/72a: "They do blaspheme who say: 'God is the son of Mary'". No Christians say that Yahweh is the son of Mary, Jesus. (Though catholic people use the expression "Mother of God" meaning "Mother of (the holy) Jesus", but they clearly know the difference between God/Yahweh and Jesus).
**026 5/72b: "But said Christ; 'O Children of Israel! Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord'". If Jesus had tried to teach about the in Israel known polytheistic god al-Lah from a heathen neighbouring country, he had got very few followers and had been quickly killed by the clergy in the religious climate in Israel at that time.
00j 5/73: "They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a trinity". Our sources tell that the 3 last words does not exist in the Arab edition, but is added by Yusuf Ali. Then the correct text in case ends: "Allah (Yahweh*) is one of three (gods*)." Which obviously is wrong, as Christians only believe in one god. Besides it is a most dubious praxis to make additions to a text without making the readers aware of that it is an addition – f. ex. by at least putting the addition in ( ).
00k 5/75a: "Christ, the son of Mary, was no more than a messenger; - - -". The Bible says something else – that Jesus called Yahweh his father (this relationship is mentioned at least 163 times as "father" + 66 times as "son" in the NT - frequently by Jesus himself), and far from always only his spiritual father - and as the Bible is written relatively short time after Jesus' death, and on this point on the basis of thousands of witnesses that could tell what Jesus said, and protest if the narrators quoted Jesus falsely, it is likely that the Bible is more reliable here, than the Quran. The Quran is written 600 years later, and offers only unfounded statements and claims without any proof or even indicia backing up the claims. This even more so as the only Islamic source for the claims was a man who demanded to be the greatest
prophet of all times, something he definitely could not be if Jesus was a relative of Yahweh –and this even more so as Muhammad in relity was not a prophet: He did not have the gift of being able to make prophesies (he did nor even claim to or pretend to have it) – perhaps a messenger for someone or something, or an apostle, but not a prophet.Also as mentioned Jesus himself frequently called Yahweh his father - and Jesus is reliable also according to the Quran (but as said the Quran/Mohammad cannot accept that Jesus may be the son of Yahweh, because then Muhammad is not the greatest of "prophets" – and the defence of Muhammad also is essential, as he in reality was a dubious and immoral
character).
027 5/75b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
00l 5/75c: "- - - deluded - - -." The mistakes, etc. in the Quran makes it an open question who is deluded and who not.
028 5/75d: "- - - they (the non-Muslims*) are deluded away from the truth." With all the mistaken facts - and perhaps other mistakes - in the Quran, it at best tells only partly the truth.
****029 5/81: "- - - the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -". But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:
1. **** Has the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. ****Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true. If not he is a false prophet.
3. ****Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.
A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and says that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories).Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.
030 5/83: "- - - they (Christians*) recognised the truth (corresponding to the Quran*)". As said before: With that many mistakes in the Quran, the teachings of Muhammad at best are partly the truth.
*00m 5/84a: "What cause can we (Muhammad and the people*) have not to believe in Allah - - -?" Well, there are strong answers to that – all the mistakes in the Quran, the inhumanity of Muhammad and Islam, the at some points sick morality of Muhammad and Islam, etc., etc., etc. But the main point is that the question is wrong. The correct and relevant question had been: "What cause can we have to believe in Allah?"
**031 5/84b: "What cause can we have not to believe in Allah and the truth (the Quran*) which has come to us, - - -?" See among others 5/75 and 5/83. In addition - to answer the question: There are heavy reasons for not believing: The fact that the Quran - the basis of the religion - contains so many mistaken facts in a book that claims to be sent down from their god. Then how many mistakes are there in the religious points that are wrong? Is it really sent down from a god, or is it made up by someone here on Earth? And if it is sent down: In that case Allah very clearly is not omniscient - and not benevolent.
032 5/86: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
033 5/89: "- - - Signs - - -". Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39 above.
034 5/97: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
**035 5/110a: "I (Allah*) thought thee (Jesus*) - - - the Gospel". Wrong. The Gospels did not exist until some 25 years after Jesus died (the oldest Gospel). See 3/3 and 3/48.
036 5/110b: "And behold, thou (the child Jesus*) makest out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, by My leave, and you brethest into it and it becometh a bird by My leave, - - - ". A made up story form the made up legends in the made up (apocryphal) Thomas Child Gospel. See 3/49 - Muhammad often repeats himself, even if that makes no good literature. Besides: A wonder like this had not been forgotten in the Bible - and especially not by "wrongdoers" wanting to falsify the Bible to make Jesus more holy, like the Quran frequently says/indicates.
037 5/111: "(the Disciples*) said: "We have faith, and do thou bear witness that we bow to Allah as Muslims". Made up story - see 3/51 for explanation.
038 5/114a: "Send us (Jesus and the Disciples*) from heaven a Table set (with viands), - - -". A made up story - there is no chance that such a miracle that clearly shows Jesus' connection to Yahweh, would be omitted from the Bible. Not one single chance. Even if Muhammad had been right and Christians had falsified the NT, this is the kind of stories they had added, not omitted. Some Muslims say this may refer a little to "The Prayer of God" - give us our daily bread - in the Bible. Much more likely it is a contorted version of the last Easter dinner.
039 5/114b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
040 5/116a: "Didst thou (Jesus*) say unto men, 'worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of Allah'?" Jesus was not involved with Allah - see 3/51 for explanation. As for a divine Jesus, that is not explicitly said in the Bible, but many places it is understood that he was (f. ex. if Yahweh really was his father in some way, and also all his miracles – confirmed by the Quran – indicates something). But when it comes to Mary, Islam is right - saints are not a part of the teaching of the Bible (on the other hand also some Muslims have saints, notably the Shi'ites). But no Christian - not one single - prays to Mary as a god.
*041 5/116b: Mohammad believed the Trinity consisted of God/Yahweh, Jesus and Mary. Wrong. Both Muhammad and the Quran were wrong in the extreme when he/they thus believed Mary was part of the Trinity. (It consists (?) of God/Yahweh, Jesus and the Holy Spirit – also called the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of truth, the Spirit of God, or only the Spirit). Muhammad never the trinity and he never understood the Holy Spirit, even though he used the Spirit a few times in the Quran – and some Muslims refer to the Holy Spirit in the Quran as another name for the arch angel Gabriel(!) as it is "known" that Gabriel brought surahs and verses, but it is also said in the Quran that the Spirit brought some. Also see 5/117.
*042 5/117: (Jesus said*): "Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord". A story made up to strengthen Islam. If Jesus had said things like that about al-Lah, he had had very few followers - - - and had been killed within months by the Jewish clergy. See 3/51 for further explanation.
043 5/120: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
Surah 5: At least 41 mistakes + 13 likely mistakes.
Subtotal till here: At least 263 mistakes + 43 likely mistakes.
PART II, CHAPTER 1, Subchapter 4, Section 2 (= II-1-4-2)
MISTAKES AND ERRORS - MISTAKEN FACTS - IN THE QURAN, THE HOLY BOOK OF MUHAMMAD, MUSLIMS, ISLAM, AND ALLAH. THE "COMPLETE" LIST - THE "ENCYCLOPAEDIA" - BASED ON SURAH AND VERSE NUMBER
(PART II, CHAPTERS 1 - 10 included subchapters = MEGA MISTAKES, MISTAKES, ERRORS, CONTRADICTIONS, INVALID LOGIC, ABROGATIONS, ETC. IN THE QURAN - THE HOLY BOOK OF MUHAMMAD, MUSLIMS, ISLAM, AND ALLAH. AT LEAST 100% PROOF FOR THAT SOMETHING IS WRONG - NO OMNISCIENT GOD MAKES MISTAKES)
For the fact mistakes and errors based on themes, see Part II, Chapter 1, Subchapter 3, Sections 1 through 16.
SOME CLEAR FACT MISTAKES AND ERRORS IN SURAHS 6 THROUGH 10 IN THE QURAN - THE HOLY BOOK OF
MUHAMMAD, MUSLIMS, ISLAM, AND ALLAH
Comments numbered by 3 numbers (included 00 or 0) a few places followed by one small
letter = clear mistakes. Comments numbered by 00 or 0 followed by 1, 2 or 3 letters (big or
small) = likely mistake.
Surah 6
001 6/1: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
***002 6/2: "He (Allah*) it is Who created you from clay, - - -". This is one of the many ways man (Adam) was created according to the Quran - even if Adam was created only once, according to that book. He was created in these ways:
a. From clay: 6/2 7/12 17/61 32/7 38/71 38/76.
b. From sounding clay: 15/26 15/28 15/33.
c. From ringing clay: 55/64
d. From sticky clay: 37/11
e. From essence of clay: 23/12
f. From mud: 15/26 15/28 15/33.
g. From dust: 3/59 22/5 35/11 40/67.
h. From earth: 20/55
i. From a clot of congealed blood: 96/2
j. From semen:# 16/4 75/37 76/2 80/19.
k. From nothing: 19/9 19/67.
l. From water: 21/30 24/45 25/54.
m. From base material: 70/39.
#(It is not told where the semen came from).**
** Mostly when the book talks about semen, it is in connection with (making) children. But also children are not made from semen - it only is 50% of the truth. A child is made from semen + an egg cell, but an egg cell is so small, that Muhammad did not know about it -human eggs can hardly be seen in the blood and gore in a carcass or a slaughtered animal. Actually at the time of Muhammad one did not know how conception happened - one theory was that semen was a seed that grew when placed in a woman - though far from each time. Strangely this is how the Quran explains it. Any god had known better.Strictly speaking all the different ways of creating man/Adam means that the Quran tells that
man/Adam was created in 13 different ways, even if Adam was created only once (in reality he never was created and never existed – man developed from earlier primates). If one lump similar "creations" together, there still remains at least 5-7 different creations. Only one can even according to the Quran be right (as Adam was created only once even according to the Quran and to the Bible) - and the irony is that science long since has shown that all alternatives are wrong, as man as said evolved from a prehistoric primate.Some Muslims explain that Adam was created from a little clay, a little dust, a little earth, a little blood, a little semen, a little nothing and some water. But that is far from what the Quran tells - and even if it were true story of whatthe Quran tells, it is wrong, as man evolved from earlier beings. And where in a man do you find clay, etc.?
003 6/3: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
004 6/4: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
005 6/5a: "And now they (non-Muslims*) reject the truth (the Quran*) - - -". With that many mistakes, etc. the Quran at best is partly the truth. Also see 13/1.
006 6/5b: "And now they (man/wrongdoers*) reject the truth (Muhammad's teachings*) when it reaches them: - - - ". The Quran has so many mistakes - mistaken facts, and other mistakes - that at best it only is partly the truth.
***007 6/7: "If We (Allah*) had sent onto thee (Muhammad*) a written (message) on parchment - - - the Unbelievers (would not believe anyhow*)". Wrong – and Muhammad was too intelligent and knew too much about people not to know it was and is a lie: A real miracle - or more than one - had made new believers, even if some would try to call it magic. This is
one of the places where an intelligent man like Muhammad knew he was lying.
*008 6/11a: "Travel through the earth and see what was the end of those who rejected the Truth". Scattered around in Arabia and neighbouting countries there were ruins of old houses, villages and towns. Muhammad told these were the remains left by people destroyed by Allah because of not believing in Allah - which hardly is true in most cases. To tell the truth: Not one serious professor of history believes in this. And not one serious scientific book about history mentions such claims as a credible reason for why houses or villages or towns or cities became empty. It will take heavy proofs from Islam to convince them.
009 6/11b: "- - - see what was the end of those who rejected the Truth". The truth is not more reliable here than in f. ex. 6/5 and 6/11. Also see 13/1.
010 6/12a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
011 6/12b: "That He (Allah*) will gather you together for the Day of Judgement, there is no doubt whatever." With so many mistakes, contradictions, so much wrong logic in the teachings, there is serious doubt about anything in the Quran and in Islam – and with a good reason – included the so-called last day and judgement by a god.
012 6/14a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
**00a 6/14b: "But I (Muhammad*) am commanded to be the first of those who bow to Allah - - -". How can that be possible? – Adam and Noah and many others were Muslims according to the Quran. (Muslims tells that it means each of the persons mentioned in the Quran in this way, was the first in his group or tribe or nation or something, but that is not what the Quran says. But in this one case the Quran may be correct – it may well be that Muhammad was the first. The very first).
013 6/20: "Those to whom We (Allah*) have given the Book (Jews, Christians*) know this (that the Quran was revealed to Muhammad, etc.*) as they know their own sons". Very wrong – they had lots of reasons to suspect that something was wrong – very wrong – with both Muhammad and with his religion.
014 6/21: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
015 6/27: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
**016 6/28: "But if they (sinners*) were returned (from Hell to Earth*), they would certainly relapse to the things they were forbidden". This is one of the places an intelligent man with lots of knowledge about people, like Muhammad had, knew he was lying – most persons having seen and experienced a Hell like the one described in the Quran, would do practically anything not to end up there if they got a second chance.
017 6/33: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
018 6/35: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
019 6/37: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
*020 6/38a: "Nothing have We (Allah*) omitted from the Book (the Quran*)". Wrong. A lot is omitted even of essential things (that f. ex. is why Islam has had to make many more laws than quoted in the Quran), and a lot of the facts - and may be other statements - are wrong.
021 6/38b: "There is not an animal (that lives) on the earth, or a being that flies on its wings, but (forms part of) communities like you". Wrong. There are many animals and birds, not to mention insects, that live alone - among insects and some carnivores and even birds it even may be dangerous to come close to one of your own species, especially if you are male.
022 6/38c: "Nothing have We (Allah*) omitted from the Book (the Quran*) - - -". There is a lot of things you do not find in the Quran – f. ex. the laws are incomplete for human life, and even more so in modern societies.
023 6/39: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
024 6/45: "Praise be to Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds". There are no 7 worlds like this refers to (65/12).
025 6/46: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
026 6/49: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
027 6/55: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
028 6/75: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
029 6/57: "- - - clear Sign - - -". There are no clear signs for Allah or Muhammad in all the Quran. See 2/99.
*030 6/57: "He (Allah) declares the Truth". May be he does, but in that case outside the Quran, as what is referred in the Quran, is only partly the truth - too many mistaken facts, too many contradictions, too many mistakes in the Arab language according to literature, too many invalid "signs" and "proofs" - and may be some other mistakes, too - - - perhaps even religious mistakes (why should they be exceptions?) Actually: With so many mistakes that you find in the Quran, it at best is partly the truth.
031 6/71: "- - - worlds - - -". Referring to the 7 worlds that exist according to the Quran. Wrong. See 65/12.
032 6/73a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
033 6/73b: "His (Allah's*) Word (the Quran*) is the Truth". With that many mistakes, it at best is partly true.
034 6/75: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
035 6/79: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
036 6/91a: "Who sent down the Book which Moses brought?" Wrong – no book. Moses only brought down the 10 Commandments. (He also was told the law, and later wrote it down, but nothing else, according to the Bible). The 5 books of Moses - the Torah - were written some 400-700 years later according to science. (To be exact: According to the Bible he got the 2 stone tablets with the 10 Commandments, and in addition he was told the law, which he himself later wrote down. The law later became a part of the Book of Moses – the Torah. The Book of Moses often is referred to as "the Law", but in reality the laws make up only a minor part of it – like when Islam takes a central word in a surah, and uses that as a name for that surah). The Bible also mentions that when Solomon brought the Ark of Covenance to the temple he built in Jerusalem, it only contained the two stone tablets (1. Kings 8/9). It is mentioned, though, that (the book of) the law was found again later under King Josiah (2. Kings 22/8).
037 6/91b: "Allah (sent it (the books) of Moses*) down)". As Moses never had - or brought -those books according to the Bible, they could not have been sent down by anyone. They were written several hundred years later, according to science. But see 6/91a just above.
*038 6/91c: "- - - ye (Jews*) conceal much (of its (the Torah's = first part of the OT*) contents - - -)". Science has ever so clearly shown that this Islamic claim is wrong - many really old documents have shown that the texts of today are like the really old ones.Islam will have to bring real proofs for the repeated claims in the Quran and elsewhere – till now they only have produces unfunded claims and loose words, and we are back to the old fact: If Islam had found a hard fact showing that the Bible in any way was falsified, the world had been told quickly and with large letters. This because Islam does not have one single real proof for the existence of Allah, for Gabriel as a messenger, for Muhammad's connection to a god or anything at all – everything rests only – only – on what Muhammad told, and the historical Muhammad (in contradiction to the Islamic glossy picture) was a man that would not have been accepted in any serious court as a reliable witness. A proof for falsification of the Bible would be an indication for that the Quran was correct at lest on this one point, and thus very welcome. But in 1400 hundred years no real proof has been found – only claims and words. Therefore a real proof for a falsified Bible had been big news in all Muslim media and for all Muslims debating religion forever after. No such proof has ever been produced by Islam.Also see 3/24, 5/13, 5/14, 5/15.
039 6/91d: "Say: 'Allah sent it (the Quran*) down - - -". No omniscient god ever sent down a book with that many mistakes, wrong logic, etc., not to mention kept it as a revered Mother Book in his own Heaven.
040 6/92a: "And this is a Book (the Quran*) which We (Allah) have sent down". It is a question if a book with that many mistakes can be sent down by an omniscient god. But the answer to that question gives itself: No.
*041 6/92b: (The Quran is*) "confirming (the revelations) which came before it (the Bible*)". Wrong. There are so many fundamental differences, that the Quran is no confirmation of the Bible. See f. ex. 2/89 and 3/3 for further explanation.
*042 6/92c: "Those who believe in the Hereafter believe in this (Book) (the Quran*), - - -". Wrong. There are many who believe in a next life, but do not believe in the Quran - f. ex. Jews and Christians, but also many others.
043 6/93: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
044 6/95: "- - - then how are ye (non-Muslims*) deluded away from the truth? (the Quran*)". With that many mistakes and that much wrong logic, etc., the Quran at best is partly the truth. And it is an open question who is deluded away from the truth.
00b 6/96a: "He (Allah*) makes the night for rest and tranquillity - - -". One more natural phenomenon that Muhammad claimed for his god – and as always without a single proof. But the main thing just here is that sleep is not a prerequisite for life – on the contrary sleep is an adaptation made by life to the fact that it is dark parts of the time.
045 6/96b: "He makes - - - the sun and the moon for the reckoning (of time)". Wrong. They -and especially the sun - are natural phenomena that are essential to life on Earth (the moon may have been essential to the emergence of life, at least on dry land). It so happens that they are ok for reckoning time, but they are not made for it. (Actually they hardly are made even especially for sustaining life on Earth.)
046 6/97: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
047 6/98: "It is He (Allah*) Who hath produced you from a single person (Adam*) - - -". One thing is that Adam never existed – man developed from earlier primates according to science. Another thing is that 1 person – even 1 pair of persons – would give too little DNA-variety to make man as a race viable.
048 6/99: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
049 6/101a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
00c 6/101b: "- - - how can he (Yahweh*) have a son when He hat no consort?" Wrong - and the Quran has itself given one possible solution: It declares that the god may just say "Be" and it is. May be Yahweh just said "Be a son", and Jesus was.
**But there is another, but little known fact: In the very old Jewish religion there was a female god, too. They spoke about the god and his Amat (source among others "New Scientist"). In the very masculine society of the old Hebrews, the goddess was forgotten, though, - - - but it was possible for Yahweh to have a son "the natural way". Gods would have
known this, but Muhammad not.But why should gods make children the same way as humans? A naïve statement.
050 6/101c: "- - - He (Allah*) hath full knowledge of all things." Something is seriously wrong here: The Quran proves that either Allah did not make the Quran, or he had far from knowledge of all things.
051 6/104a: "Now have (the Quran*) come - - - from your Lord (Allah*) - - -". No omnipotent god ever created a book with so many mistakes, so many contradictions, so much wrong logic, and honestly so low quality literature (in spite of all the glorious words from religious Muslims), not to mention kept it as a revered Mother Book in his own Heaven, like
the Quran itself claims at least 2 places. See 13/39.
*052 6/104b: "Now have (the Quran*) come to you (Muslims*), from your Lord (Allah*), proofs - - -". Wrong. In all the Quran there is not on single valid proof for Allah or for Islam - or for Muhammad being a real prophet. Not one single proof that proves any god at all. There MAY BE are a few exceptions in the tales taken from the Bible, but they in case talk about Yahweh, and Islam in case will have to prove that Allah and Yahweh really is the same god - a statement only based on unproven claims in the Quran and in Hadith, and a statement that have never in any way been documented. All the statements not from the Bible (and perhaps they, too), are only based on thin air and cheap words - words that any priest in any religion can use about his or her god(s). They are worth nothing as proofs or even as indications.The Quran some places talks about "proofs" and many places where it talks about "signs" (which is Islam-speak for proof). They all have that in common that they without exception are without value as proofs, as the Quran and Islam NEVER proves that it really is Allah that does this and this. Remember: A proof is one or more PROVEN facts that can give only one conclution. If heaven and earth shall be proofs for Allah, Islam first has to prove that it really was Allah that made them - not only say so. If rain shall be a proof for Allah, Islam first has to prove that it really is Allah that makes and directs the rain, not just
say so, because that any religion can say - valueless as a proof (Baal makes the rivers run downwards. Allah cannot make them run upwards. ERGO: Baal is the real god and Allah just an impostor. Etc., etc., etc. Valueless "proofs".) If life on Earth is to be a proof for Allah, Islam first have to prove that it really was Allah that created it - not just use empty claims and statements any priest in any religion can use free of charge. Etc., etc., etc.**The Quran is very good at demanding proofs from all other religions, but it never, NEVER, offers any valid proofs itself when it comes to disputed "truths" (it offers "proofs" and "signs", but they are built just on unproven claims or on nothing and are not valid). And it is extra thought-provoking that the times it says that this and this is a proof, and the many, many times it says that this and this is a sign, the statements without exception as said are just claims or statements taken out of thin air or in other ways not built on real evidence - nothing that a judge would accept as proofs in a neutral, good quality court. Nothing. Any god would know the statements were without value as real proofs, and not call them - or hint that they are - proofs. It is just cheap words and demagogy that any priest in any religion can use. Sorry, but that is the very plain truth - and in reality even worse - - - and this is what is thought provoking: Who use loose claims and statements, invalid arguments and invalid proofs? -cheats and deceivers and impostors. It actually tells something about a god if he is trying to cheat simpleminded, uneducated people - not to mention what it tells about him if he did not know or understand that one time humans would get enough knowledge to see through the cheating, and even more so if Allah did not understand what effect such proofs of mistakes and bluffing would have on educated, thinking persons. As thought provoking: Some of the mistakes etc. it is clear that Muslim scholars see, and others - a lot others - it is inbelievable if they do not see, but they do not tell their audiences about it. On the contrary: They tell that everything in the Quran is perfect. The old question reappears: If Islam is a made up religion, and there somewhere exists a real religion that Muslims have
been denied or cheated from getting information about - what then to all the Muslims in a possible next life?
**053 6/104c: "- - - I (Muhammad*) am not (here) to watch over your doings". This verse is directly quoted from Muhammad – it is Muhammad who is speaking completely on his own. How come – in a book from eternity and a copy of the revered Mother Book in Allah's own heaven? There are some 8 such cases in the Quran, and at least one case where angels are speaking - see 6/114a below.
054 6/105: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
**055 6/109: "- - - what will make you (Muslims) realise that (even) if (special) Signs came, they will not believe?" Wrong. If there were real proofs of a god, at least a good number of people would believe - that is a psychological fact (look f. ex. at the Pharaoh's magicians and at the results of Jesus' miracles). The sentence really sounds like fast-talk to "explain" why Allah/Muhammad was unable to produce unmistakeable proofs for Allah. Worse: An intelligent man like Muhammad knew this argument is a lie - and all the same he used it frequently. This simply is one of the places in the Quran where
Muhammad knew he was lying.
056 6/111: "But most of them (non-Muslims*) ignore the (truth (the Quran*))." With that many mistakes, that much wrong logic, etc., that book at best is only partly the truth.
*057 6/114a: "Say: 'Shall I seek for judge other than Allah?'" According to Ibn Warraq "Why I am not a Muslim", the word "Say" is not to be found in the original Arab text. Yusuf Ali has added it to hide that here once more Muhammad is speaking in a book he pretended was made by a god a long time ago, and a copy of a revered Mother Book in Allah's own Heaven. (Ibn Warraq points to at least 8 such places in the Quran: 2/286, 6/104, 6/114, 11/2-3, 19/36, 27/91, 42/10/, 51/50-51).
058 6/114b: "- - - He (Allah*) it is Who hath sent unto you (Muslims*) the Book (the Quran*)". Taken into account the many mistakes, that is doubtful - at least it needs solid proofs.
059 6/114 c: "- - - it (the Quran*) hath been sent down from thy (Muslims'*) Lord (Allah) - --". No omniscient god ever sent down a book with that many mistakes, contradictions, logical blunders, etc., not to mention kept is as a revered Mother book in his own Heaven (13/39), like the Quran also claims – as usual without any documentation or proof.
060 6/114d: "- - - it (the Quran*) hath been sent down from thy (Muslims*) Lord (Allah*) in truth". At best partly the truth.
061 6/115a: "The words of thy Lord (Allah*) doth find its fulfilment in truth". As said many times: With that many mistakes, it maximum is partly the truth.
*062 6/115b: "- - - none can change His (Allah's*) Words ". Perhaps no Muslim can, because that means that something is wrong in the foundation and fundaments of Islam - they can not afford to change any word in the Quran for that reason. But f. ex. science can show if some of the words in the Quran are wrong. Which they are. Also there are changes in the Quran – the differences in the old Qurans, the different "ways of reading" (a camouflaged way to talk about what in reality are varieties of the texts), the abrogated verses and the change in the religion around/after 622 AD – by whom and why?
063 6/118: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
064 6/124: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
065 6/126: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
066 6/130: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
00d 6/145: "I (Muhammad*) find not in the Message received by me by inspiration any (meat) forbidden to be eaten - - - unless it is dead meat, or blood poured fort, or the flesh of swine – for it is an abomination (nobody knows why it is prohibited*) – or - - - (meat) on which a name has been invoked, other than Allah's". This surah "appeared" ca. 621 AD.
Some 6 years later Allah or Muhammad obviously discovered they had made a mistake and forgotten that also meat from donkey is forbidden for Muslims – this according to Hadiths (f. ex. Al-Bukhari) Then this verse was abrogated in order to add that kind of forbidden meat. This is one of the cases where the Quran is abrogated by Hadith. (But note that if a Muslim is forced to eat these kinds of meat – f. ex. from sheer hunger – or is cheated to eat it – f. ex. someone tells him wrongly that the sausage contains no pork and he trusts what is said - then it is no sin).
067 6/146: "For those who followed the Jewish Law, We (Allah*) forbade (to eat*) every (animal) with undivided hoof, and We forbade them the fat of the ox and the sheep - - -". Skipping the fact that Allah and the god of the Jews, Yahweh, is not the same god – not unless he is schizophrenic – the correct is: - - - "the fat of cattle, sheep or goat" (3. Mos. 7/23). A
minor mistake, but an omniscient god had not forgotten the goat.
****068 6/149: "With Allah is the arguments that reaches home - - -". Which means: Allah decides everything. But what then about the claimed free will of man? "The Message of the Quran" explains this in its comment 141 to this surah (translated from Swedish): "With other words: The real connection between Allah's knowledge about the future (and consequently about the unavoidable in what is to happen in the future*) on one side and man's relatively (!!*) free will on the other – two statements that seems to contradict each other – lies outside what is possible for humans to understand, but as both statement are made from Allah (in the Quran*) both must be true".This argument is the ultimate defeat for the very meaning behind the word "the Truth". A man of the morally doubtful character like the historical real Muhammad, has told an unproven and undocumented tale - - - and that is the ultimate truth also in the face of hundreds of mistakes, contradictions, and other wrongs, and here in the face of the absolutely impossible!!
***069 6/151a : "Come, I (Muhammad*) will rehearse what Allah hath (really) prohibited you from - - - (f. e x.*) be good to your parents". This very obviously is wrong and a bit of a contradiction compared to other places in the Quran – Muhammad very obviously meant exactly the opposite; that you were ordered to be god to your parents. An omniscient god would not make such a mistake. Who made the Quran?Also Muslim scholars agree that here the text is wrong – it is absolutely contrary to what the Quran says about this all other places. Which give you an unbeatable proof against any Muslim boasting that the book being without any mistakes at all. A proof and a fact sanctioned by Islam!
Also see 6/151b just below.And besides: If here is a mistake, how many more are there? Also see 6/151b just below. Just remember: 6/151 (6 in Scandinavian = sex, and 151 has sex in both ends (1 + 5 = 6, and 5 + 1 = 6). Easy to remember.
070 ***6/151b : "Come, I (Muhammad*) will rehearse what Allah hath (really) prohibited you from - - - (f. e x.*) kill not your children on a plea of want - - -" = kill your children if you are too poor. Obviously wrong compared to what the Quran says about such things other places.Also here (see 6/151a just above) Muslim scholars agree that here the text is wrong – it isabsolutely contrary to what the Quran says about this all other places. Which give you another unbeatable proof against any Muslim boasting that the book being without any mistakes at all. A proof and a fact sanctioned by Islam!
071 6/154a: "We (Allah*) gave Moses the Book, - - -". As said some times before: The 5 books of Moses – also called "the Book of Moses" - (the Torah) were written 400-700 years later according to science. Moses only got the 10 Commandments in writing. That is to say: He also got "the Law" – which is part of "the Book of Moses"- but only verbally, and then wrote it down himself later according to the Bible. But the law for one thing is just part of the book, and for another: Science all the same means the full book is written centuries later.
*072 6/154b: "(The Quran*) is explaining all things in detail". It is explaining far from all things, and definitely not in sufficient details - among other facts there are not enough laws in the Quran to run a society, which is why Muslims have had to make many supplements.
073 6/155a: "And this is a Book (the Quran*) which We (Allah*) have revealed - - -". With that many mistakes - is it really made by a god? - and is a book with many mistakes and much incitement to hate and war and suppression of other people and of women, a blessing? No to both.
074 6/155b: "- - - a Book (the Quran*) which we (Allah*) have revealed as a blessing". A book with many mistakes and invalid and even wrong proofs is no blessing.
*075 6/156: "The Book (in this case the Bible*) was sent down to two Peoples before us (Mohammad and/or the Arabs*)". Wrong. The OT was for one people primarily - the Jews. But the NT was written - not sent down - for many peoples. Chapters/letters are even addressed to very different peoples. Besides there were other religions with books – f. in
Persia. Or to see it another way – like "The Message of the Quran" explains it: The Bible was sent down to the Jews and the Christians "the only ones that according to what the Arabs knew had scriptures based on revelations from a god". The interesting part of this explanation is the reason Islam gives for the mistake: That reason was that the Arabs –
Muhammad - only knew about the book(s) of the Christians and the Jews. What the Arabs knew around 621 AD when Muhammad dictated this surah, should be totally irrelevant for an omniscient god when he made (?) the Quran many aeons earlier – a Mother Book which he and his angels revered in his own heaven, now with one more mistake. Then who made the Quran?
076 6/157a: "- - - a Clear Sign - - -". There are no clear signs/proofs neither for Allah nor for Muhammad's connection to a god in the Quran. See 2/99.
077 6/157b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
078 6/158a: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
079 6/158b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
080 6/162: "- - - worlds - - -". See 65/12 below.
00e 6/163a: "No partner hath He: - - -". If the Quran here means Allah, it may be correct. If it is indicating Yahweh, words of Jesus may be understood like the Quran here is wrong. Also see 6/101b.
081 6/163b: "- - - I (Muhammad*) am the first of those who bow to His (Allah's*) will. " How is that possible if the Quran is correct and lots of people had been Muslims before him, and bowed to Allah? (Though in reality it is highly likely he was right: That he was the first one ever). Muslims explain that it means the first in a community, but that is not what the
Quran says.
Surah 6: At least 81 mistakes + 5 likely mistakes.
SURAH 7:
00a 7/2: "A Book (the Quran*) revealed unto thee (Muhammad*)". Can a book with so many mistakes be revealed by an omniscient god?
001 7/3: "Follow (O People!) the revelations given onto you from your Lord, - - -". See 7/2 and many more. No omniscient god has made such book. Either Allah is not omniscient, or someone else has made it.
*00b 7/4: "How many towns have We (Allah) destroyed (for their sins)?" There were scattered ruins in Arabia. Muhammad said they all were destroyed as punishment for their sins. That hardly is true.
002 7/9: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
00c 7/11: "- - - We (Allah*) bade the angels bow down to Adam, and they bowed down; not so Iblis (the future Devil) - - -." But Iblis was no angel, like it is indicated here. It is said several places in the Quran that he was created from fire (f. ex. 7/12), which means he was a jinn (angles are created from light, according to the Quran).
*003 7/12: "Thou (Allah*) didst create - - - him (Adam*) from clay". One of the many ways Allah created Adam according to the Quran. Wrong. For more information see 6/2.
004 7/26: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
**005 7/28: "Allah never commands what is shameful".
1. Allah commands/permits sex with children. For an adult to enjoy sex with a child is utterly shameful. For an adult to introduce a child to sex is inhuman and even mot shameful. Muhammad not only said, but even demonstrated that it was ok at least from the girl is 9 – and worse: She –Aishah - became his favourite wife for the rest of her childhood.
2. Allah commands that one can take slaves in a jihad - and any skirmish or war where Muslims are involved, is declared jihad. For centuries (till ca. 1930 – 1940) all the four law schools of Islam said that if the opposite part was non-Muslims, that was good enough reason to declare jihad – theoretically even any slave hunter could be waging jihad. To force fellow humans to become slaves, to toil for free for you, to be free for you to sell or mistreat or use for a sex toy, is utterly
inhuman, utterly selfish, utterly immoral –and utterly shameful. Not to mention that it is a grotesque act to commit in the name of a presumed god good.
3. To rape a child prisoner/slave/victim is grotesquely selfish, immoral, inhuman and grotesquely shameful - - - but Allah has commanded that it is ok.
4. To rape any woman prisoner/slave/victim – a fellow human being – is nearly as selfish and shameful and bad as raping a chiQld. But in the Quran it is "good and lawful" as long as the women is not pregnant.
5. To murder opponents – also personal opponents – in the name of a presumably good god is something much more than shameful. But practiced by Muhammad.
6. To incite to discrimination, hate and war, in the name of a presumably good god is even worse than murder – and a proof of a good or a "prophet" full of hypocrisy.
7. To steal/rob/plunder and extort in the name of such a god – and with his permission as "good and lawful" is nearly a bad and as much hypocrisy as murders, hate, suppression and war.But all these points have this in common:
a. They attract selfish, greedy warriors to a robber "prophet's" army – and to his successors'.
b. They attract inhuman warriors to a robber "prophet's" army – and to his successors'.
c. They attract primitive warriors to a robber "prophet's" army – and to his successors'.
d. It is a cheap way for a robber "prophet" – and for his successors – to get an army – a cheap army.
Finally: Severe or capital punishment for a woman who has been raped, but is unable to produce 4 male eye witnesses to the very act most likely is the most inhuman, most immoral, most unjust, and most shameful law we have ever come across in any at least half civilized religion or culture, and Allah and/or Muhammad have introduced it. And to force a woman who wants to remarry her former husband under some circumstances to have sex with another man to be permitted to remarry him, also is rotten and shameful.
006 7/29: "My Lord (Allah*) has commanded justice - - -". This only is partly true. See 7/28 just above.
007 7/33: "The things my (Muhammad's or Muslims'*) Lord (Allah*) hath indeed forbidden are: shameful deeds - - -". This only is partly true – see 7/28 above.
008 7/35: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
009 7/36: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
010 7/37: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
011 7/40: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
00d 7/42: "- - - no burden do We (Allah*) place on any soul, but that which it can bear - - -". Can this be true? – also among Muslims self murder (or seeking death for Allah, when the real reason is a too difficult life), deserting one's family or child, resorting to crime to be able to live on, etc. happens.
012 7/52a: "We (Allah*) had certainly sent unto them a Book (the Quran*), - - -". The recurring question: Is a book with that many mistakes – wrong facts, contradictions, invalid proofs, orthographic and perhaps even religious mistakes - really sent down by a god? Impossible - not to say heresy against any omnipotent or omniscient god.
*013 7/52b: "- - - a Book (the Quran*), based on knowledge, - - -". With that many mistakes, the book is based just partly on knowledge - or for the better part of the mistakes; on outdated and wrong knowledge. An omniscient god would not have knowledge that would become outdated.
014 7/52c: "- - - a Book, based on knowledge, which We (Allah*) explained in detail - ". See 6/154.
015 7/54a: "- - - Allah, who created the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth in six Days - - -". The creation took millions of years - a god had known that, Muhammad not. (Besides: Another place in the Quran it took 8 days.)
016 7/54b: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
017 7/54c: "He draweth the night as a veil o'er the day - - -". The night is just the absence oflight. Nothing. It is not possible to use nothing as a veil or to draw it over anything - and absolutely not over the light of day. Muhammad had this completely wrong: Daylight can influence the darkness, but the darkness of night cannot influence the daylight. Totally wrong.
00e 7/56: "Do no mischief on earth, after it has bee set in order - - -". According to our book, murder, rape, stealing/robbing, hate, suppression, enslaveing, murder, war, etc. are mischief. But may be it only is against Muslims that is immoral and forbidden?
00f 7/57a: "It is He who sendeth the winds - - -". The winds are made by differences in temperatures and air pressure. Islam will have to prove that Allah is doing it - if he does.
018 7/57b: "- - - a land that is dead, make rain to descend thereon, and produce every kind of harvest therewith: - - -". A land that only takes water for plants to emerge is not dead - it is full of live seeds and perhaps roots.
019 7/58: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
020 7/61: "- - - the Worlds!" The Quran tells there are 7 (flat) worlds (65/12). Hadiths adds the names, and that they are placed one above the other. Wrong to say the laest of it.
021 7/64a: "- - - We (Allah*) overwhelmed in the Flood those who rejected Our Signs". And everybody except those in the Ark were drowned. Well, Islam claims quite correctly that the Quran does not directly say that the Big Flood covered all the Earth (but it says so indirectly, as it tells the ark ended on a mountain in Syria - impossible if the flood did not cover all the world - the water in case had disappeared to not flooded areas). But when they try to explain the Flood as described in the Quran, they not only stumble, but fall head-over-heel down a full hill. This especially as some of the facts they twist, are so well known among learned people, that they obviously have to know they are making up things and conclusions to cheat naïve and/or not learned people - - - some small al-Taqiyyas and/or Kitmans? (lawful lies and half-truths) – that is lawful (yes, al-Taqiyya even is an obligation) if necessary in promoting and/or defending the religion, which is much more essential than to find out what is the truth. But a religion that has to lie, also has things to hide - f. ex. that neither Muhammad nor Allah ever were able to prove anything about Islam.***F. ex. they try to explain the flood withthe filling up of the Mediterranean Sea and the Black Sea – which is not even rubbish scientifically:
1. The Mediterranean Sea was filled up via Gibraltar some 4-5 million years ago – long before Homo Sapiens – modern man – ever existed (Homo Sapiens developed in Africa some 160ooo-200ooo years ago, came out of Africa perhaps some 70ooo years ago, and then something happened in Asia (?) some 60ooo-70ooo (64ooo?) years ago that put him
on the trail to or made him to what we are today.)
2. The filling up took many years – to the tune of a hundred years, this because the opening was not very big in the beginning and the basin enormous. Therefore the water rose slowly – some meters a year. Drama and waves of the kind described in the Quran simply did not exist.
3. Look at a map and please explain us how the slow filling up of the Mediterranean Sea could make a flood in south Mesopotamia –now approximately south Iraq – where Noah is presumed to have lived?
4. The filling up of the Black Sea had no connection with the original filling up of the Mediterranean See at all – in stark
contradiction to f. ex. 7/64, comment 46, in "The Message of the Quran".
5. The filling up of the Black Sea happened when the oceans had nearly finished rising because of the melting of the ice from the last Ice Age – we have seen 5700 years ago, (the main melting ended 10ooo - 12ooo years ago, but there have been som ups and downs -cooler and warmer periods) but the calculated time varies some. This happened faster, but
far from fast enough to produce cataclysms like the ones described in the Quran – months or a few years. All the same one of the theories trying to explain the story of the Big Flood, is this filling up – the story have travelled (or Noah may be lived there and moved later?) and also it has been made more dramatic.
6. **Islam claims the ark stranded on a mountain in Syria (not Ararat in Turkey). For the ark to get stranded on a high mountain, the water according to all physical laws must have covered the entire Earth – if not it had streamed to the empty lower places and disappeared/fallen. Muslim scholars know the elementary physical laws as good and well as
anybody else. They know that these "explanations" about what the Quran may talk about a "local" flood are all sheer dishonesty. Or what the Quran tells about where the Ark ended, is wrong. At least one of these two has to be wrong – and they know it, but all the same tell what they know must be wrong to naïve and/or uneducated followers and
proselytes.
7. There also is a highly speculative theory that the flood was caused by the impact of an asteroide into the Indian Ocean. References to Chinese history and astronomical constallations in Hindu legends in case dates the start of the flood to 10. May 2807 BC. But as said the theory is highly speculative - and no traces of the impact have been found.
8. The most likely explanation, though, and one we have not heard from Islam at all, is the fact that there have been found traces of an extreme flood in Iraq from a time that can roughly correspond with Noah (5200 years ago). It is strangely little known – we have seen it mentioned only 2-3 times, and we read a lot of such stuff. The clear traces were
found - as far as we remember - in the 1920s by a British team, and we remember that in the 1990s (no. 7/1994?) the popular science magazine LEXICON had an article with picture from the deep layer of clay that flood had left behind. There were traces of human activity under that layer, which indicates that people lived there when it happened.
9. In none of the explanations Islam gives, it is possible to explain the enormous weather the Quran describes. That only is possible in the last point just above and perhaps the asteroide impact – explanations we never have met from Muslims. And explanations that cannot explain how the ark could end up on a mountain in Syria like the Quran claims.
022 7/64b: "- - - Our Signs - - -". "Our signs" is Quran-speak for "proof for Allah". But there exists not one single proof for Allah – not in the Quran and not anywhere else. (Actually the only thing that can prove a deity, is a miracle – or more one. There are no miracles proving neither Allah, nor the Quran, nor Muhammad's connection to a god in all the Quran. And the claimed miracles connected to Muhammad according to Hadiths, the Quran very clearly proves are made up legends - a fact that is admitted by Islam who says that the only miracle connected to Muhammad, is the Quran (a most questionable miracle, but that is another story), but all the same propagated to their audiences by Muslim "clergy".)
023 7/67: "- - - the Worlds!" See 65/12 below.
024 7/73a: "- - - clear (Sign) - - -". There is not one single unmistakable (= clear) sign from a god in all the Quran, with the possible exception of some taken from the Bible – but they incase are signs of Yahweh, not of Allah. Also see 2/99.
00g 7/73b: Connected to the legend about the tribe Thamud, you time and again are told in the Quran that the self-proclaimed prophet Salih brought them a camel and told it was a sign – a proof – from Allah. Like it is told in the Quran it gives absolutely no meaning – just a claim hanging in the thin air. How can a camel be a proof for a god in a country where there are 15 camels to a dozen?*But then we run across the explanation: This is taken from old Arab folklore – an old legend that everybody in Arabia knew at the time of Muhammad (but would an omniscient god who wanted to reach all the world, use an old fairy tale known only to Arabs – and in such a way that one does not understand if one does not know the rest of the story?)Very briefly the legend runs like this: There once was a mountain cliff. Out from that solid
cliff one day there came a camel. This camel then became a prophet for a god. With such a background the camel was so special, that it was a sign for something – only that the Quran just told part of the story, because everybody there and at that time knew the rest. But as we asked: Would an omniscient god wanting to reach the entire world, tell just part of
the story, when he knew most of the world would not understand the point? (But as expected; in modern times you find Muslims telling that it was not this camel from the superstitious tale, but without giving a credible alternative.)
025 7/78: "So the earthquake took them (the tribe of Thamud*) unawares, and they lay prostrate (dead*) in their homes in the morning". Wrong. There never was an earthquake that killed absolutely everybody – nowhere on the whole Earth, and never. With the exception of for low quality high-rise buildings, it is a very serious earthquake that kills more than some30% of the inhabitants. (Another fact is that in 69/5 Thamud is killed by a storm – one of the contradictions that according to Islam do not exist in the Quran.)
026 7/80a: "- - - he (Lut/Lot*) said to his people (the people in Sodom and Gomorrah*)." Wrong. The local people were not Lot's people. Both the Bible and the Quran are unanimous: Lot was a stranger to the land and had come from Ur in Chaldea in south Iraq (together with Abraham). It also from both books is clear that he had not mingled enough with the locals to become one of them. (Muslims all the same use that for an explanation).
*027 7/80b: "- - - lewdness (homosexuality*) such as no people in creation (ever) committed before you?" Wrong. Homosexuality is an integrated part of some peoples' nature. Science has even found what gene it is connected to – and that the reason why it has not died out, is that the same gene gives a tendency to cause many children when the person is hetero- or bisexual, without anybody can explain the mechanism. You even find homosexuality with some animals – there it sometimes is a proof of dominance.
028 7/85: "- - - a clear (Sign) - - -". See 2/99.
029 7/91: "But an earthquake took them (Shu'ayb's people, the Madyans*), and they lay prostrate (dead*) in their homes before the morning." Wrong. See 7/78 above.
030 7/96: "- - - they (non-Muslims*) rejected (the truth) (= the teachings of Muhammad*)". With that many mistaken facts (and who knows how many mistaken religious points?) it at best is partly the truth. Also see 13/1.
031 7/101: "- - - clear (Signs) - - -". Wrong. See 2/99.
00h 7/102: "Most of them (people*) We (Allah*) found not men (true) to their covenance - - -". "The Message of the Quran" (7/102, comment 81) tells that the exact word-for-word translation is: "We found by them nothing that tied them to what is truth and right". And that book continues by telling that this may include man's capability to instinctively to see the
difference between right and wrong.Now the fact that some of the most fundamental moral questions get the same answer in many societies indicates that something deep inside man tells some common moral truths: You shall not steal, you shall not be a nuisance – or worse – to others, you shall not rape, you shall not kill, etc. But Islam and the Quran is the best proof for that these inner messages are easy to override for a charismatic leader and for a society, and make
immoral behaviour praiseworthy a moral codex: To steal/rob, rape, enslave, murder, and more – it all is "good and lawful" if you just observe the right formalities in Islam.
032 7/103a: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
033 7/103b: "- - - see what was the end (drowning*) of those who made mischief. (Pharaoh and his men*)". According to science the exodus happened (if it happened) around 1235 BC, during the reign of Ramses II. Ramses II did not drown. (Also the Bible - from where it is likely Muhammad got this story, at least indirectly - tells that the pharaoh drowned. But the Bible was made by humans. Humans might have mixed Ramses II with one of his generals or one of his 67 sons. A god had known the truth).
034 7/104: "- - - the Worlds - - -". Wrong. There are no 7 worlds, (one above the other according to Hadith). See 65/12 below.
035 7/105: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
036 7/106: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
00i 7/114: "- - - ye (the sorcerers*) shall in that case be (raised to posts) nearest (to my person)." It needs strong proofs to certify that the mighty pharaoh Ramses II promised so incredibly much for so little - they were after all just sorcerers and Moses was no great danger to him.
***00j 7/120: After Moses made his miracle "the sorcerers fell down prostate in adoration" and convinced that the god of Moses was a strong and real one. This is one of the proofs for that Muhammad knew he was lying when he time and again told his audiences that it would have no effect to perform miracles, because disbelievers would not believe
anyhow, and thus explained away the fact that he (and his presumed god) was unable to make miracles. Here he tells just the opposite - a psychologically much more correct tale on just this one point.
037 7/121: "- - - the Worlds - - -." Wrong. There are no 7 worlds. See 65/12.
00k 7/124a: "Be sure I (Ramses II*) will cut off your hands and feet on opposite sides - - -". As far as we have been able to find out, Egypt at the time of Ramses II did not use this Arab way of punishment.
038 7/124b: "- - - and I (Pharaoh Ramses II*) will cause you all to die on the cross". In Egypt at that time crucifixion was not used.
039 7/126: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
040 7/127: "He (Ramses II*) said: 'Their (the Jews'*) male children will we slay - - -". But they were already slaying the male children of the Jews – that was why the baby Moses had to be put on the Nile according to the Bible and not contradicted by the Quran. Both a mistake and a contradiction. And contradictions do not exist in the Quran? See f. ex. 7/141 below.
00l 7/130: "We (Allah*) punished the people of the Pharaoh with years (of draught) - - -." There is nowhere said directly how long time it took Moses to get his people free and out of Egypt. But the few sources indicate a limited time. But the Bible has one piece of information that gives a clear indication – and we had better once more mention that science has proved beyond any legal and any reasonable doubt that the Bible never was falsified, in spite of never documented lose claims and lose statement from the Quran and from Islam: Moses was 80 years old when he came to the Pharaoh to get the freedom for the Jews. Afterwards he and his people spent 40 years in Sinai, and he died 120 years old – which means it must have taken less than one year, because if not the numbers do not add up.
041 7/132: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
042 7/133: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
043 7/136: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
*044 7/137: "- - - We (Allah*) levelled to the ground the great works and fine Buildings which Pharaoh and his people had erected - - -". There is no trace neither in archaeology, nor in history, literature or art, of such a catastrophe around the year 1235 BC (some years before the end of the reign of Ramses II) when this should have happened – at the time of the exodus from Egypt. On the contrary; Ramses II was one of the strongest and most successful of the pharaohs, and also a great builder leaving MANY great buildings behind after many years of -among other things - building. Has Muhammad put more drama to his story, believing it would be impossible to control if it were true?
045 7/143: "- - - and I (Moses*) am the first to believe". Impossible, as according to the Quran Noah and Abraham and Ishaq and Jacob and a lot more were believers in Allah before him. And Moses and all the others were making a lie out of Muhammad's saying that he –Muhammad – was the first. A number of contradictions. (2/127-133, 3/67, 6/14, 6/163,
26/51). Muslims like to say that in such cases it means the first if a group or something, but even that "explanation" is not possible here – many of Moses' forefathers were Muslims according to the Quran and to Islam. But may be - may be Muhammad really was the first Muslim anyhow?
046 7/145a: "(Allah gave Moses the Law*) explaining all things." The laws in the book of Moses explains far from all things.
047 7/146a: "- - -My Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
00m 7/146b: "- - - even if they (non-Muslims*) see all the Signs (of Allah*), they will not believe in them". Wrong: They would - - - if the "signs" of Allah really had been real signs of Allah. F. ex. see the pharaoh's magicians.
048 7/146c: "- - - Our Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
049 7/147: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
050 7/149: "When they (the Jews) repented (before Moses came down from the mountain with the 10 Commandments*) - - -". Wrong. Both the Quran itself and the Bible tell that this did not happen until after he came down – and was very angry.
051 7/149-150: Here more is wrong. The Jews make the golden calf, but repents before Moses returns. Other places in the Quran - and in the Bible - they definitely did not repent until afterwards.
*00n 7/157a: "- - - the unlettered Prophet (Muhammad) - - -". Islam frequently tells that Muhammad was an analphabetic (then he could not have made up the Quran, they say - which he could anyhow). But in science there is serious doubt about this - he was from a good family, he was intelligent and he run first a big business (the one of his first wife) and later a large organisation. It is highly unlikely that such a man did not learn how to read and write -and unlikely that his first wife had accepted him as the manager of her business if he was analphabetic). You also can meet Muslims telling you that the "fact" that Mohammad could not read, "proves" that all his knowledge about the Bible he had to have gotten via holy inspiration - he could not have read about it. We find it distinctly dishonest to omit all the vocal storytelling that was very rife in Arabia (and most other countries) – and the fact is that most of the Biblical stories in the Quran are such tales and not really from the Bible itself.
052 7/157b: "Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -". Remember that here according to the Quran Allah is now speaking to Moses. How could the people of Moses follow Muhammad who was born more than 1800 years later?(Islam tries to explain this away by saying it is just an incursion – which it most clearly is not: It is a contradiction).
**053 7/157c: "(Muhammad, whom they – the people of Moses*) 'find mentioned in their own (Scriptures) – in the Law and the Gospel - - -'". May be the Law existed, that depends on when Yahweh (or Allah as the Quran claims) told Moses this and when the Jews really got the Law. But how could the people of Moses find the Gospels? – they did not exist until nearly 1400 years later!! Another strong mistake and another strong contradiction.
*054 7/157d: "- - - the unlettered Prophet (Muhammad*), whom they find mentioned in their own (Scriptures)". You often meet Muslims claiming or stating that Mohammad is foretold in the Bible - as normal for Muslims without documentation. But we have never been able to find a complete list of where he is said to be mentioned – obviously because the educated Muslims mainly speak about 1 in OT and 1 in NT. In OT 5. Mos. 18/15 + 18 are mentioned, (and in NT mainly some verses from the Gospel after John). But here it is talk about a Jew (one translation says to the Jews "one from your own people, from your fellow countrymen", another talks about a brother - but the brother of a Jew is a Jew, not an Arab, and the same for a fellow countryman of a Jew – he is a Jew. It may talk about Jesus, but not about Muhammad. Actually the word "brother/brothers/brethren/brotherhood" is used figuratively at least 255 times in the Bible, practically always about a closed group (Practically always Jews in OT – one exception for one country-to-country speech, one for Lot and some 3 about Edomites, as far as we se. And practically always Christians and/or Jews in NT, except a few places where everybody are potential brothers in Jesus) and never specifically including Arabs. The only (some 5 - 6) times we have found Arabs mentioned in OT, the tale is either neutral, like telling they paid tribute to King Solomon, or they were enemies – never anything like brothers.What is worse: In the part of the Book of Moses where one finds the two quotes Muslims use as flagship, Deuteronomy (= 5. Mos.), you find the word brother/brothers used no les than 13 or 14 times in chapters 18 – 24 (the debated two are in chapter 18 – 18/15 and 18/18). The only one that is not about Jews, are mentioned specially by name – Edomites – and all the other 12 – 13 cases clearly are about Jews. The context is very clear (also not one single word is mentioned about Arabs or Ishmaelite - the claimed forefathers of the Arabs). There also is an interesting verse just after the two debated ones: 18/21. This one tells that the hallmarks for real prophets are that they make prophesies, and prophesies that come true. Muhammad never made prophesies. There were a few times where things he said were remembered because they came true – like always in any person's life – but never real prophesy. It even is very clear from the Quran that Muhammad did not even pretend or claim to have the gift of
prophesying. (Per definition a prophet is a person with the gift of prophesying). Muhammad did not have that gift and consequently was no prophet – he only had "borrowed" that impressive title. How could he be "a prophet like Moses" when he was no real prophet? The claim is not even wishful thinking, but rubbish. (Muslims never mention this verse). Islam also confirms that Muhammad was unable to make prophesies, as a prophesy is a kind of a miracle, and Islam admits that the only miracle connected to Muhammad, is the Quran (!)*And last, but not least: The word brother/brothers/brethren/brotherhood also frequently is used in the Quran (more than 30 times figuratively) – and in just the same way as in the Bible: About members of a group – here either Arabs or Muslims as groups. And as far as we can
see, real Arabs are never any kind of brothers to Jews also in the Quran. We have found one small exception – hypocrites of any breed may be brothers to Jews (!). Impressive in this case.Islam always demands that points in their stories must be read and understood in the full context – especially when they run into trouble explaining some difficult points. But in this case the context completely destroys their wishful thinking and desperate need for a proof for
Muhammad in the OT – desperate because the Quran declares he is foretold there, and no clear foretelling is to be found (this is a clear fact) – so they drop their own rules and quote two words far out of context and declare that the brother of a Jew is an Arab, even in a context where it is obvious that Moses talked to and about Jews, and where the context also directly tells that it could not be Muhammad he was talking about, because he talked about a future
prophet, whereas not even Muhammad himself pretended to have the gift of prophesying. He was in reality no prophet - may be a messenger or an apostle of someone or something, but not a prophet - he only used that imposing title. Moses' foretelling of a future great prophet may have been talking about Jesus, who very clearly was a prophet both according to the Bible and to the Quran. But he could impossibly have talked about Muhammad who among other facts as said in reality was no prophet – he as said only "borrowed" that nice title without even pretending to have the gift the title in reality demanded – and also he was no Jew like Moses spoke about. But without caring about or even mentioning such facts, Islam very straight forward and straight facedly claims that when Jews talk about brothers in 5. Mos. 18/15 + 18 they talk about Arabs and foretell Muhammad because that is the only person Moses here can have spoken about. What that chapter really is about, is that Moses tells his Jews (we use the word Jews because of convenience – we know the word first was used centuries later) things about their future - that the Levites (one of the 12 Jewish tribes) shall not have any inheritance among their brothers (5. Mos. 18/1 – never mentioned by Muslims) – the rest of the Jews –and f. ex. that there once will raise up a prophet like (as great as) himself from among their brothers – from among the Jews.To make an overview:
1. Muhammad never even tried to make foretelling. There are a few quotes where what he said, happened – but so much as he spoke, it would be unnatural if not a little came true. But as for real prophesies, he never even tried to make such ones – and what real prophet is unable tell things about the future? – it was such a matter of course that a real prophet did so, that Moses not even mentioned such a case. No prophesies = no prophet. Not correct foretellings = false prophet - both according to Moses (5. Mos. 18/21).
2. What a prophet tells that is not correct, is not from the Lord = a false prophet, according to the chapter (5. Mos. 18/21) and the man that Islam itself strongly quotes. Look at all the mistakes in the Quran and weep. (Also see separate chapter about the claim that Muhammad is mentioned in the Bible).
3. 5.Mos. 18/18 - in reality it says just the same as 5. Mos. 18/15.
4. Then from NT: John 1/21 - but that one is talking about John the Baptist. He says he is not the prophet. And Islam omits John 1/26-27 where John the Baptist tells that "the Prophet" was standing among the people just then" = was living just
at that time - and definitely not was expected only 600 years later. "Cherry-picking" of words.
5. ***From the NT the main claim is John 14/16 where Jesus tells his disciples:"And I will ask the Father (God/Yahweh*), and He will give you another Counsellor to be with you forever". To give the disciples Muhammad had no meaning – he was born some 500 years after they were dead, and could be of no help to them. But that is what Muslims claim, as they need a quotation from the NT, because the Quran tells he is foretold also to the Christians in the Gospels, and this is the
only place where the texts can be twisted enough – because it takes a lot of twisting (see the chapter about the claim that Muhammad is foretold in the Bible). (This verse really is foretelling the Holy Spirit - it arrived some days later according to the Bible.) Muhammad also was not "with them forever" – he was not with them at all.Strangely enough Islam never mentions the next verse (John 14/17) that continues: "- the Spirit of truth (Muhammad neither was a spirit, nor the truth (he cheated and lied – cfr. alTaqiyya, and according to his point of view concerning this even his oaths could be broken*). The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you". Try to make this fit Muhammad!! Also see separate chapter about the claims that Muhammad was foretold in the Bible.*That is to say: from 14/17 they mention that the spirit is called "the Spirit of truth" and thus
cannot be "the Holy Spirit". But just like Allah and just like Muhammad it had more names –at least 5 – and besides it in the entire Bible is very clear that there only existed/exists (?) on Spirit closely connected to Yahweh."The Message of the Quran" solves the problem very simply: It tells that a verse in the Quran explains what the NT tells about Muhammad (surah 61, verse 6). The problem is that the Bible says nothing remotely similar to verse 61/6. (An "elegant" explanation is that it shall have been mentioned in the hypothetical Gospel Islam talks about because it is needed to explain how the child Jesus could learn the Gospel(s) before they were written - a Gospel that Mary and others 100% sure had taken care of or at least told about if it was not a fairy tale, because it would really have cemented an even more a special connection between Jesus and Yahweh/God. But a Gospel that could not exist, because no Gorpel could be written until after Jesus' death). **The relevant part of surah 61/6 says: "(Jesus said*): - - - I am giving glad Tidings of a Messenger to come after Me, whose name shall be Ahmad (= another version of the name Mohammad*)". But nothing remotely like this is to be found in the Bible. Islam of course explains that with falsification of the Bible - that is the standard and cheap explanation whenever there is divergence between the Quran and the Bible, even though it is documented by science that Islam's undocumented claim about such a falsification is wrong. Also a falsification would not work among all the thousands that had heard Jesus talking - and then the life and time scale (they expected Jesus back any month or year - if there was to come another prophet first, it would be likely to take at least a generation or more before Jesus would return) of the first Christians would have been different - not to mention that the contents of all the letters and the Gospels written by persons who really knew the story, had been different. Surah 61/6 smells too much of something made up to give Mohammad credence. ***One small tit-bit: ForetelliNG in the Bible never mention names of persons in distant future, but in 61/6 ONE MOST CONVENIENTLY FIND AN UNMISTAKEABLE NAME. If a Muslim insists it is true, he has to produce heavy proofs.**Finally there is a Greek word, "Parakletos". This word in the Greek Gospel after John they
use as an explanation .Muslims say must be misspelled, because if you take another word,"Periklytos" that looks rather similar, and translate it to Aramaic, you get a word that in Arab can be interpreted as Mohammad. Very convincing (but remember that Arabs since prehistoric times have lived in cultures where theories of conspiracies have been rife - perhaps because they never have had information they could rely on, and then they have made up guesses and stories. The situation actually to a large degree is the same in modern Muslim countries - and even more so in the ones that still are not much modern. Go to most of the Muslim countries and you can immerse yourself in such stories and theories). Also see 61/6 and see the chapter "Muhammad in the Bible." The claim is very incorrect.
***055 7/157e: "- - - the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -". But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:
1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.
A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and says that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories). ***Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.
056 7/158a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22.
00o 7/158b: "- - - the unlettered Prophet - - -". See 7/157.
057 7/158: "- - - the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -". But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:
1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.
A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and says that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories).Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.
058 7/160: "We divided them (the people of Moses*) into twelve Tribes or nations." Wrong: They consisted of 12 brothers, then 12 families, then 12 tribes already since after Jacob (some 430 years earlier according to the Bible).
*059 7/162: "But the transgressors (Jews and Christians*) among them changed the word (of the Bible*) from that which had been given them - - -". Well, well. The only way for Muhammad to save his religion and his power, was to claim that the Bible was falsified –and this he claimed and claimed without ever producing one single real proof. That is exactly the situation for Islam today: To save itself – and the positions of the leaders – it has to claim and claim - this and other things - without being able to prove one single thing. But today the position is more difficult, because science has so many old documents and fragments, that they know Islam is not speaking the truth. See f. ex. 7/157a-d. The Bible never was falsified according to science.
060 7/163: "(Fish*) openly holding up their heads (above the water*) - - -." It is not physically possible for fish in the sea to hold their heads over the water – they can jump and they can touch the surface, but they cannot keep their heads above the surface. Marine mammals can, but not freely swimming fish. Any god had known – but not the desert dweller
Muhammad.
00p 7/166: Allah said to some "bad" people (according to the Quran): "Be ye apes - - -". Hardly likely that they were transferred into apes.
061 7/171: "When We (Allah*) shook the Mount (Sinai*) over them (the Jews*) as if it had been a canopy - - -". This needs strong proof from Islam, especially as it in reality is from a fable taken from the old Jewish book "Abodah Sarah".
062 7/181: "Of those We (Allah*) have created are people who direct (others) with truth, - - -". If this refers to the truth in the Quran, it can at best be partly the truth.
063 7/174: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
064 7/175: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
065 7/176a: "- - -with Our Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
066 7/176b: "- - - reject Our Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
067 7/177: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
068 7/181: "Of course We (Allah*) have created are people who direct (others) with truth (Islam/the Quran*) - - -". With so much wrong in the Quran, it at best is partly true.
069 7/185: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
070 7/187: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
071 7/188: "- - - glad tidings - - -". See 2/97c above and 61/13 below.
072 7/189: "It is He (Allah*) who created you (man*) from a single person (Adam*) - - -". Wrong. Adam never existed, as man developed from earlier primates. And even if it had started with Adam and EVe (her name is never mentioned in the Quran), the DNA pool had been too small to make the race viable.
073 7/196: "- - - Allah, who revealed the Book - - -". Well, that is an essential question: Is it really Allah who made a book with so many mistakes? Impossible.
Surah 7: At least 73 mistakes + 16 likely mistakes.
SURAH 8:
001 8/1: "- - - the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -". But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:
1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and says that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad
mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories).Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.
002 8/2: "- - - His Signs - - -". There are no signs proving Allah or anything else in the Quran. See 2/39.
00a 8/5: "Just as thy Lord (Allah*) ordered thee (Muhammad*) out of your house in truth - - -". That is one of the main questions – was Muhammad ordered? – and in case by whom? (The surahs from Medina makes one think more about the Devil than about a good god.)
003 8/6: "- - - the truth after it was made manifest (had appeared in the Quran*)". That something appears in the Quran does not prove that it is true – far from it, as there are too many mistakes about a lot of things. Islam will have to produce proofs, not only claims about what is true and what not.
004 8/7: "- - - the Truth according to His (Allah's) words (the Quran*) - - -". With that many mistakes, etc. in the Quran, it at best is partly true.
005 8/20: "- - - the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -". But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:
1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and says that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad
mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories).Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.
005a 8/24: "- - - His (Allah's*) Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -". But Muhammad was no real prophet. See 8/20 just above.
006 8/41: "- - - the revelation (the Quran*) We (Allah*) sent down - - -". A book with that many mistakes, that much invalid logic, etc. is neither made by a god, nor revered as a Mother Book in his heaven, nor sent down by an omniscient god.
007 8/42: "- - - clear Signs - - -". There is not one single clear sign/proof in the Quran – neither for Allah, nor Muhammad having connection to a god, nor for warriors going to Paradise, nor for Paradise as described in the Quran. See 2/99.
*008 8/51: "Allah is never unjust to his servants". Wrong. A star example: That a woman is to be strictly punished for illegal sex after being raped, if she cannot produce 4 male eye witnesses to the rape, is one of the most inhuman, immoral and unjust laws that exists on this Earth – at least in civilized or semi-civilized cultures.
009 8/52: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
010 8/54: "- - - Signs - - -". Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
011 8/65: "- - - the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -". But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:
1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and says that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad
mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories).Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.
011b 8/67: "- - - a Prophet - - -". But Muhammad was no real prophet. See 8/65 just above.
012 8/70: "- - - Prophet - - -." Wrong. See 8/65 above.
Surah 8: At least 14 mistakes + 1 likely.
SURAH 9:
001 9/9: "The Signs of Allah - - -". There is no – not one single – sign in the Quran that with correct logic proves Allah. (There is not one single case in the entire book where it is proved that it really is Allah that has caused what is said to be signs. And then it proves nothing and signifies nothing – any priest in any religion can say just the same about his god(s)!! Words are that cheap).
002 9/21: "- - - glad tidings - - -". At best only partly right. See 2/97c above and 61/3 below.
003 9/29: (Islam is)"the religion of Truth". It is not 100% - an understatement - the truth with that many mistakes, etc. in the Quran. The difficult additional question is: With that many mistaken facts - are there also mistakes in the religious parts? And in addition there are the facts of "al-Taqiyya" (the lawful lie) and Kitman (the lawful half-truth): At least it is not
made by an omniscient god.
004 9/30a: "The Jews call 'Uzayr (= the prophet Ezra*) son of God - - -". This is wrong, and even Muslim sources admit that. But they say Jews in Arabia said so (which may or may not be correct) - which may have cheated Mohammad, but an omniscient god had known the truth. Then who created the Quran?
*00a 9/30b: "- - - the Christians call Christ the son of God - - - (in this) they but imitate what the Unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: - - -". We are back to the old facts: Jesus himself called God "father". There were lots of witnesses to this. It was written down a few years later. The Quran vehemently denies it. The Quran has neither witnesses nor any other proofs. The Quran was written more than 600 years later and all the same offers only claims and statements. Muhammad had a lot to gain if Jesus is not the son of God - if Jesus is closely related to God, Muhammad obviously is not the greatest of prophets, and though Muslims may be right that Muhammad personally did not care all too much about money, there is no doubt that he liked power - and women -and that he spent large sums for bribes "buying" followers (his lust for power is easy to see from the texts in the Quran and the Hadits). The end of the quote is rather sympathetic (?!) - - - and very different from the mentality in NT.
00b 9/30c: "- - - how they (among others the Christians*) are deluded away from the Truth! (that the god has no son*)". For comments see among others 9/30b just above.
005 9/30d: "- - - the Truth! (the teachings of the Quran*)". With that many mistakes in the book, the Quran at best is partly the truth. Also see 13/1.
**00c 9/33a: "It is He (Allah*) Who hath sent Muhammad - - -". That is one of the really big questions: Was he really sent? There are too many indications for that the Quran is not made by an omniscient god – actually it is 100% sure that no such god would make that many mistakes, etc. And if he all the same is sent, the some 22-24 surahs from Medina makes it as 100% sure that he was not sent by a good or benevolent god – the religion as it is painted in the Quran is by far too inhuman, immoral, and diabolic for that. In case he was sent, the surahs from Medina prove he in case was sent by some dark forces. May be by the Devil pretending to be Gabriel? Or by a sick brain? – f. ex. TLE.
006 9/33b: (Islam is*) "the Religion of the Truth, - - -". For comments, see 9/29 and 13/1.
007 9/36a: "The number of months in the sight of Allah, is twelve (in a year) – so ordained by Him (Allah*) - - -". A year is the time the Earth needs to make a full circle around the sun. A month is the time the moon needs to make a full circle around the Earth. These two circles are not synchronized. Because of this something is wrong in this statement, as 12 months (here moons) are some 11 days less than a natural year. The Islamic year is an artificial construction whether ordained by Allah or not. The Muslim year is not really a year (103 Muslim years = roughly 100 real years). You will find Muslims glorifying the Muslim year that slides along the real year, but the plusses are much smaller than the minuses - - - plus it makes something wrong with this verse: A Muslim year simply is not a year.
008 9/36b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22.
009 9/48a: "- - - until the Truth (the Quran*) arrived, - - -". With that many untrue facts, mistaken grammar, contradictions, and perhaps mistakes in the religious statements (why should they be exceptions?), the Quran at best is partly true. Also see 13/1
010 9/48b: "- - - the Decree of Allah became manifest - - -". The "decrees from Allah" – the Quran - contains so many mistakes, etc., that they are not from an omniscient god. That is: Either Allah is not omniscient or it is not from Allah. Something is seriously wrong.
011 9/52: "Can you see for us (Muslims*) (any fate) other than the two glorious things – (martyrdom or victory)?" Definitely yes: We can see the war invalid. We can see the families destroyed because the husband/father is dead – or an invalid. We can on the other hand see men building their country instead of destroying neighbouring countries. And we are able to see the prise of war: Brutalized humans and destruction – a war never builds anything, it destroys. It may give some of the victors a chance to steal and suppress and become rich – but for a terrible price. But this price the Quran never mentions and never cares about.***Islam seems to represent such a backward culture, that its members was and to a
degree are unable to see - or care for - what catastrophes and destroied lives they inflict on others, as long as they themselves become rich and perhaps powerful. No price is to high for a good life - - - as long as others have to pay for it.
012 9/60: "- - - reconciled (to Truth) - - -". See 9/48, 13/1 and many others.
013 9/65: "- - - His (Allah's*) Signs - - -". There is not one "sign" in the Quran that clearly is from Allah. See 2/99.
014 9/70a: "- - - the Cities overthrown." In what we call the Middle East and further eastwards there were ruins from cities and towns and dwellings. Muhammad explained that each and every of them had been destroyed by Allah because they had sinned against him. Wrong – in an arid and warlike area there are so many reasons why even cities from the old can be empty, that Islam will have to prove that Allah's wreath was the reason for even one of them.
015 9/70b: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". There are no clear signs for Allah, etc. in the Quran. See 2/99.
016 9/73 "O Prophet (Muhammad*)!" But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition
of a prophet is a person that:
1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention pretended to or claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and says that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories). Also see 30/40a and 30/46a.Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.
**017 9/111: "Allah hath purchased of the Believers their persons and their goods; - - - they fight in his cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: - - -". This is a really strong one:
If there is something that is absolutely sure, it is that you do not find orders or incitement to slaying or to religious physical war in the Gospels - this is 110% wrong. (The sword is mentioned, but the mentality is totally different from the Quran. Totally.)
018 9/113: "- - - the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -." But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:
1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention pretended to or claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and says that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories). Also see 30/40a and 30/46a.Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.
019 9/116: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
020 9/117: "- - - the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -." See 9/113 above.
021 9/128: "- - - to the Believers (Muslims*) is he (Muhammad*) most kind and merciful." Wrong. It is not kind to incite them and force them to go to war and "kill and be killed" - - - or maimed. It is not kind to incite hate. It is not kind to demand full submission and obedience. And it far from is merciful to mistreat seriously both mentally, morally, and socially the ones who would not go to war for him or in other ways did not obey him in other things. Actually he was about as kind and merciful as Hitler or Mao or "Uncle Stalin" or the aggressive Zulu king Shaka."When a man – or a god – says something,but demands or does something else, we believe in his demands and his deeds, not in his words."
Surah 9: At least 21 mistakes + 3 likely.
SURAH 10:
001 10/1: "- - - the Book (the Quran*) of Wisdom." With that many mistaken facts, it is not a book of wisdom - and when there are many mistakes you see, it is difficult to trust the rest of the text, too.
002 10/2a: "- - - We (Allah*) have sent our inspiration (the Quran*) to a man (Muhammad*) from among themselves?" With this many mistakes, etc., the Quran is not from an omniscient god.
003 10/2b: "- - - the lofty rank of Truth". See 9/48 and 13/1.
004 10/3a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
005 10/3b: "- - - Allah, Who created the heavens (plural and wrong) and the earth in 6 days". Even though the Bible say the same number of days, it is extremely wrong - - - and any god had known that. As bad: The Quran contradicts itself by saying 8 days one place. This even though the claimed lack of contradictions in the Quran, Islam claims is a proof the that Allah madr the book. (Consequently the presence of mistakes then prove that Allah did not make the book).
006 10/4: "The promise of Allah is true and sure". The only known promises from Allah are found in the Quran. But in the Quran so much is wrong, that it is impossible to relay also on promises said to be from Allah. Therefore they are far from sure – or worse.
007 10/5: "- - - His (Allah's*) Signs - - -." There is not one sign in the Quran that is proved to come from Allah.
**008 10/6: "- - - heavens - - -". This and word is used in plural something like 190 times in the Quran. (The words "heavens", "seven heavens"," firmaments", "seven tracts", and "seven firmaments" are used altogether at least 199 times in plural - there is no doubt that the Quran believes in 7 heavens). The plural of the word refers to what was correct astronomy in the Middle East at the time of Muhammad: That the stars, the planets, the sun and the moon were fixed to 7 invisible, but strong heavens formed like hemispheres (actually the Greeks knew the Earth was a sphere, so then the heavens there had to be spheres) over the Earth. The Arabs and many others got this picture of from Greek and from Persian astronomy. Muslims today of course know it is wrong, and are "explaining" the 7 heavens in different ways - from vague thoughts about space, to telling that it means something else as - they say - in old Arabia the number 7 also could mean "many" (as if that is more correct in this case than 7), and to referring to 7 layers in the atmosphere (without explaining how the stars were fixed to the lowermost of the heavens, or explaining how resurrected material humans can walk around up there, which the Quran tells), etc. Strangely till now none of our group have met a single Muslim mentioning that 7 heavens were the correct astronomy at the time of Muhammad -may be they prefer not to mention that, because the logical next question then is: A god knew there were no 7 heavens, Muhammad believed there were. Then who made the Quran?
009 10/6: "- - - Signs - - -". Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
010 10/7: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
011 10/13: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". There is not one clear sign for Allah or for Muhammad in all the Quran. See 2/99.
012 10/15: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". Wrong. See 10/13 just above and 2/99.
013 10/17: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
014 10/18: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
*015 10/19: "Mankind was but one nation - - -". Mankind never was but one nation. Perhaps once one tribe, as some Muslims tries to explain, but never one nation - and that in case was some 200ooo years ago. You also sometimes meet Muslims telling in triumph that science has proved the Quran, because now they have found the prehistoric Eve and the prehistoric Adam - - - without mentioning that the prehistoric Eve lived some 160ooo - 200ooo years ago (the number varies some) in Africa, whereas the prehistoric Adam lived some 60ooo years ago only, and not unlikely in Asia. With Eve dead 100ooo years before Adam was born - and a long distance off - it is difficult to see how they can be the "parents" of man, and thus prove the Quran.
016 10/21: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
017 10/24: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
00a 10/27: "But those who earned evil will have a reward of like evil - - -". Muhammad, his men and his successors did enormously much evil – stealing/robbing, raping, enslaving, destroying places and lives and lands and cultures, extorting, terrorizing, torturing, murdering, inciting to hate and war and mass killings and suppression of other humans – only that it was sanctioned by a god, according to Muhammad, though a god that in case neither was omniscient, nor omnipotent (he f. ex. had to explain away all questions for miracles – some times with obviously logically invalid claims) - it will take quite a lot to give them "a reward of like evil."
018 10/31: "'- - - who is it that rules and regulates all affairs?' They (non-Muslims) will soon say, 'Allah'". Wrong. People of other religions would name their own god (or gods). (Though non-Muslim Arabs at that time might say al-Lah - the old polytheistic Arab top god, a name that sounds like Allah.)
019 10/32a: "- - - Truth (the Quran) - - -". See 13/1.
00b 10/32b: "- - - apart from Truth, what remains but error?" It is very clear that much of what is said in the Quran is not true – and then "what remains but error"?
020 10/33: "Thus is the Word of thy Lord (Allah*) proved true - - -". The trouble is that the sentence refers to nothing - there is nothing even remotely like a proof in the neighbourhood. It may refer to 10/31, but what is said there has nothing to do with a proof - and most nonMuslims would not even give the intended answer (and even if they did, it was no proof). This is not argumentation worthy a god - not even a minor, uneducated one hidden in a distant corner.
021 10/34: "- - - how are ye (people*) deluded away (from the truth (the teachings of the Quran*))". The Quran at best is only partly the truth. See 13/1.
022 10/35a: "- - - He (Allah*) who gives guidance towards Truth?" The old question - it appeared already shortly after Muhammad started preaching: Is there really a god behind the Quran? - a book with that many mistaken facts? Not possible.
023 10/35b: "- - - towards Truth?" With that many mistakes the teachings of the Quran at best is partly true.
024 10/35c: "It is Allah who gives guidance towards Truth- - - ". No guidance in that many mistakes and invalid and even wrong statements and proofs. See 10/35a and 13/1.
025 10/35d: "Is then He (Allah*) who gives guidance to Truth - - -". See 10/35 and 13/1.
026 10/36: "- - - Truth (the Quran*)". See 10/35 and 13/1.
**027 10/37a: "This Quran is not such as can be produced by other than Allah - - -". Very wrong. Many a good writer can write stories as good as and better than the collection of surahs in the Quran. In spite of what Islam says, the Quran is not good literature. The same stories are repeated again and again. They frequently are not well told. There are no new
stories or ideas – only stories and ideas borrowed from others. Honestly large parts of the book are rather dull reading. And the fabled high quality Muhammad's Arab language? - what Muslims seldom mention, is that it took some 250 years to perfect the language - it was not until around 900 AD that it had got something like today's language. It also existed in much more than one text. For one thing even Muhammad (according to Hadith) said it was sent down in 7 varieties that all were true ones - even if details were different. For another thing some of the old, original texts existed in the Muslim world for a long time after the "official" one was finished around 650 AD (at some time there were at least 14 canonized varieties –2 are used today: Hafs and Warsh, but most uneducated Muslims does not even know it). For still another thing the texts may have been slightly changed through the time - at least very old Qurans found in Yemen in 1972, had "small, but significant differences" from the modern edition. The dominating Quran today (Hafs), is the edition that was the official one in Egypt when first printed in 1924, according to what we have read. The version after Warsh is used in parts of Africa . Also see Preface (list of the then 14 canonized ones).
**028 10/37b: "- - - it is confirmation of (revelations) that went before it (the Bible*) - - -". There are too many and too deep differences between the thinking and the morality in the Quran and the Bible - especially NT. The Quran is no conformation of it, as mentioned before - the differences are too fundamental.
029 10/37c: "- - - the Book (the Quran*) - wherein there is no doubt - - -." Because of all the mistakes in a book said to be sent down from an omniscient good, there is a lot of doubt.
030 10/37d: "- - - the Worlds." One more reference to the 7 worlds of the Quran (65/12). Wrong.
**031 10/39: "- - - (the Quran*) whose knowledge they cannot compass, - - -". For the uneducated, often analphabetic members of Muhammad's early followers, that might be true, except for the question: Who has most knowledge – the one without knowledge, or the one with much wrong knowledge?. But it is in no case true today - and we see that a lot of the "facts" Muhammad used are wrong - something a god had known.
*032 10/47: "To every people (was sent) a Messenger". Hadith mention 124ooo messengers or prophets. There is not one single trace from prophets teaching monotheism in the old times (except in Israel), neither in archaeology, art, literature, folk tales, nor in religions. Some of them should have left small traces at least, when they were so many. This verse
is not true.
00c 10/52: "Ye (sinners*) get but the recompense of what ye earned!" Is there really real justice in the terrible and everlasting punishment in hell, compared to the after all not too big sins of many of the sinners?
033 10/55a: "- - - heavens - - -". See 2/22a.
034 10/55b: "Is it not (the case) that Allah's promise (the Quran*) is assuredly true?" The Quran in this case like in others proves it is not true – too many mistakes, etc.
035 10/57a: "(The Quran is*) a Guidance - - -." A book with that much wrong, is no guidance.
00d 10/57b: "(The Quran is*) a Mercy." Can a book with that much suppression, rape, stealing/robbery, blood and murder and war, be a mercy?
036 10/64a: "- - - Glad Tidings - - -." See 2/97c and 61/13.
***037 10/64b: "Hereafter; no change can there be in the words of Allah. This is indeed the supreme Felicity." The first sentence may partly explain why Muslims cannot admit the mistakes, no matter how wild "explanations" they have to use. The second one is plainly wrong - see f. ex. 10/39.Also: This surah was dictated by Muhammad ca. 621. There were many changes in Islam after that – Islam even changed its fundament completely from rather peaceful to a religion of robbing, hate and war. There also were many mistakes which science now see that the "facts" are changed by reality, and there were many "signs" and "proofs" that the laws of logic in reality changed the moment they were pronounced (Muslims only do not know).
038 10/66: "- - - heavens - - -". See 2/22a.
039 10/67: "- - - Signs - - -." See 2/39.
00e 10/68a: "Allah hat begotten a son!" An exclamation in disbelief. But Jesus many, many times called God/Yahweh his father (the word "father" (of Jesus) is used for God/Yahweh at least 163 times in NT and the word "son" (of God/Yahweh) is used for Jesus at lest 66 times.) Some of the times it is meant figuratively, but most times it is clear it is meant literally.
040 10/68b: "- - - heavens - - -". Wrong. See 2/22a.
041 10/71: "- - - the Signs of Allah - - -". There are no logically signs/proofs for Allah (or for Muhammad) in all the Quran. See 2/99.
***042 10/73: "O Prophet! (Muhammad*)" But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:
1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission. A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention pretended to or claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and says that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories). Also see 30/40a and 30/46a.Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.
043 10/74: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". Wrong. See 10/71 just above and 2/99.
044 10/75: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above
*045 10/82a: "And Allah by His Words (the Quran*) prove and establish His Truth, - - -". Wrong. The words of the Quran proves nothing about Allah, until it first is proved that it really was made by Allah, and that Allah really has made and done what the Quran says. It is at best partly the truth only - too many mistakes.
046 10/82b: "- - - and establish his (Allah's*) Truth, - - -". It is well established that a large number of the facts in the Quran are wrong. At best the book is partly the truth.
047 10/87a: "Provide dwellings for your (Moses'*) People in Egypt - - -". Wrong – and acontradiction with reality both according to the Bible and the Quran. According to the Quran the Jews had dwelled for a long time in Egypt, and according to the Bible this long time amounted to 430 years (1. Mos. 12/40). They had dwellings – no reason to tell Moses to provide such ones. Even more silly: Why provide (new) dwellings when all they wanted to do, was to leave Egypt?
048 10/87b: "- - - Glad Tidings - - -." At best partly true only. See 2/97c above and 61/13 below.
**049 10/90a: "At length, when overwhelmed with the flood, he (pharaoh Ramses II*) said: -- -". We know a lot about Ramses II - he was one of the really great pharaohs, and much material exists from his time. One of the tings we know is that he did not drown (was not "overwhelmed with the flood").
*050 10/90b: "I (Ramses II) believe that there is no god except Him Whom the Children of Israel believe in: I am of those who submit (to Allah in Islam) (= became a Muslim*)". One more thing we know about Ramses II (see 10/90), is that he was a polytheist and never a Muslim.
051 10/92: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Signs!" There is not one single sign in the Quran that surely is from Allah. Not one.
052 10/94a: "- - - the Truth (the Quran*) hath indeed come to thee - - - ". Once more: With so many mistakes, the Quran at best is partly true.
053 10/94b: "- - - the Truth hath indeed come to thee from thy Lord (Allah*): - - -". Also once more: Can a book with that many mistaken facts, be made by a god?
054 10/94c: "- - - be nowise of those in doubt (about Islam*)." With all the mistakes etc. in the Quran, it is sheer naivety not to be in doubt, and at least check the facts.
*055 10/95: "- - - the Signs of Allah - - -". There are no real signs/proofs for Allah in the Quran – only claims not proved statements. See 2/99.***056 10/96: "Those against whom the Word of thy Lord has been verified - - -." That is one
of the main problems for Islam – as it was for Muhammad: There exists no real verification of Islam – not one single proof, and not one single place. Only cheap words and claims that in NO case are verified. But glorification of and demands for blind belief you find aplenty.Whenever we meet people using bluffs and defending bluffs not to mention glorifying blind belief – like here – for us that strongly indicates not only that they have no real arguments, but also that they know it themselves, and just try to defend wishful thinking
or beliefs they are mentally unable to question – and to defend it by means of dishonesty.057 10/97: "- - - Sign - - -." See 2/39.
058 10/101: "- - - heavens - - -". Wrong. See 2/22a.
059 10/108: "Now truth hath reached you from your Lord (Allah*)". See 10/94 and 13/1.
Surah 10: At least 59 mistakes + 5 likely mistakes.Subtotal till here (Surahs 1 - 10): 517 mistakes + 73 likely mistakes.
Comments numbered by 3 numbers (included 00 or 0) a few places followed by one small letter = clear mistakes. Comments numbered by 00 or 0 followed by 1, 2 or 3 letters (big or small) = likely mistake.
SURAH 11:
*001 11/1: "- - - from one Who is Wise and Well-Acquainted (with all things)". The mistaken facts in the Quran shows he is not well enough acquainted with all things. Or that someone else made the Quran.
**002 11/2: "(Say) 'Verily, I am (sent) unto you (people*) from Him (Allah*) - - -". According to Ibn Warraq the word "(Say)"does not exist in the Arab original. That means that here it is Muhammad who speaks. There are a few places (8? + angels speaking) like that in the Quran. But how is it possible that Muhammad speaks in a book (pretended to (?) be
made by Allah or existed since eternity – and sent down by Allah? (Some Muslims say the word is just forgotten – but how many more words may then have been forgotten in the Quran?)
003 11/7a: "He (Allah*) it is Who created the heavens (plural and wrong) and the earth in six days" - and another place says 8 days (contradiction). Once more: It took a lot of more time. And any god knows that - but Muhammad did not. (Muslims sometimes say that the Arab word for day, also may mean aeon, but as we have found this translation of the word in no quality book and heard it from no really educated person, this seems to be an obvious try to
explain this blunder away). Also see the 4 Mega Mistakes.
004 11/7b: "- - - heavens - - -". Wrong. See 2/22a.
00a 11/14a: "- - - this revelation (the Quran*) is sent down - - -". That is just the question for Islam: No god sends down a book so full of mistakes, etc.
005 11/14b: "- - - this revelation (the Quran') is sent down (replete) with the knowledge of Allah, - - -". Well, all the mistakes show that either it is not made by an omniscient god or that something else is wrong.
*006 11/14c: "If then they (your false gods) answer not your (call), know ye that this Revelation (the Quran*) is sent down (replete) with the knowledge of Allah, - - -". This is logically 100% wrong, as whether false gods or other gods answer or not, proves nothing about Allah. The only thing that may prove Allah, are unmistakable answers or deeds from Allah. Would a god try to cheat his - mostly illiterate and uneducated - audience in cheap and primitive ways like this? In case; why did he need to cheat them? And: There never was a clear answer unmistakeably form Allah.
007 11/17a: "- - - Clear (Sign) - - -". See 2/99.Besides: In the book "The Message of the Quran", certified by Al-Azhar Al-Sharif Islamic Research Academy in Cairo (one of the 2-3 top universities in the Muslim world on such subjects) in a letter dated 27. Dec. 1998, it is admitted rather reluctantly that there are no proofs for Allah, and that it is not possible to prove him. An additonal point here is that if there are no ptoof for Allah and impossible to ptove him, automatically there also is no proof for, and impossible to prove Muhammad's claimed connection to Allah.
008 11/17b: "Be not in doubt thereof (the Truth – the Quran – from Allah*))". Wrong. The Quran is so full of mistakes, etc., that it is utterly naïve not to doubt.
009 11/17c: "- - - the Truth from thy Lord (Allah*) - - - ". Either it is a mistake that the Quran is from an omniscient god, or it is a mistake that Allah is omniscient. Too much is wrong in the book.
*010 11/22: "Without a doubt, these (the non-Muslims*) are the very ones who will lose most in the Hereafter". All the mistakes, wrong logic, etc. in the Quran make it very clear it is not from a god. Partly because of that – and this alone is a 100% proof for that something is wrong – there is every reason to doubt Islam is a genuine religion. And if it is a made up
religion – and Islam will have a tough job proving the opposite – there is every reason to doubt Muslims will fare any better than others. On the contrary: If there do exist a real religion and if this is run by a good god, the Muslims will notfare well with if they have lived according to the Quran's horrific ethics, even worse moral codex, inhuman treatment of fellow human, but non-Muslim, beings, etc.
011 11/28: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". In this case it is said to be Noah who was speaking, and according to the Quran Noah was a devoted Muslim - - - but there never was a clear sign/proof for anything concerning Allah – not anything at all is proved. (That is one of the main reasons why blind belief is demanded and glorified by Muhammad and by Islam).
012 11/40a: "- - - and the fountains of the earth gushed forth (and made the flood for Noah*) -- -." The Quran does not explicit say that the flood covered the entire world, and as there are no traces of such a flood found, many Muslims try to tell you that the flood only was regional. Not educated Muslims may honestly believe so, but the educated ones know that is one more untrue story – another al-Taqiyya or Kitman – because the Quran clearly tells that the Ark ended on a high mountain in Syria, something that demanded so high a level of water that it was physically impossible unless the flood was universal (the water had disappeared to nonflooded places if not). Perhaps 1000 m above our sea level?
But that makes a problem for this verse. Really big quantities of water - giving may be 1000 m of water all over the globe - could not gush forth from the Earth without leaving huge empty holes in there – either really empty, or at least with highly reduced pressure, (though most likely empty, as it is nearly impossible to compress water and then explain the gushing with expantion of the water (to compress water to double density, we have read that you need a pressure of 44000ooo kg/cm2 – or very roughly 30 times the pressure at the centre of Earth)). These holes would be too big (in order to contain enough water) to be stable, and would collapse. There is nowhere on Earth traces from such big collapses.(It is here among other places you will meet the explanation like the flood = the filling up of the Mediterranean Basin – a story so obviously an al-Taqiyya (lawful lie) that it is distasteful. That filling up happened 4 – 5 million years ago, and long before modern man existed. Besides it happened because Africa and Europe slowly drifted apart and the Strait of Gibraltar very slowly opened – centimetres a year – which means that the opening and thus the stream of water wassmall. The filling up took a hundred years and may be much more, with the water level rising slowly – one or a few meters a year – and nothing like the cataclysm of the flood of Noah. Something no educated Muslim has an excuse for not checking up before telling stories like this, especially since this is a well known fact among educated people, and
they most likely are aware of the real facts before spinning such a tale.
**013 11/40b: "We (Allah*) said (to Noah*):' embark therein (the ark*), of each kind (of animals*) two - male and female, and your family - - -". The Quran says nothing about the size of the ark. But the Bible according to the scientific magazine Lexicon says nearly 200 m long, some 30 m wide and some 12 m high with 3 floors. That makes some 18000 square
meters roughly speaking. (NIV tells 300 cubits long, 50 cubits wide and 30 cubits height = 140 m long, 23 m wide and 13, 5 m high. With 3 floors that means some 9600 sq. m. only.) But there are much more than 10ooo kinds of "normal" animals, nearly 2ooo kinds of birds, and at least 10 million kinds of insects and other insect-like animals, and easily a million other small animals – like slugs, worms, etc. There simply would not be enough space for so many, not to mention 2 of each. In addition it would be the question of food for all the animals. The Quran says nothing about how long time the voyage lasted, but according to the Bible it took more than one year. That would take one hec of a lot of food for that many animals - and how did they f. ex. store the meat for the carnivores, or live insects for some spiders, etc.? All that
food would take up a lot of space - much more than the animals themselves. Impossible in that "small" boat. And on top of that, there was the question of special food for special animals - eucalyptus leaves for the koalas f. ex. It further is likely that the Garden of Eden was in the south of Iraq (if it ever existed) according to science - - - and then there is the
question where they found f. ex. reindeer, polar bears, caribous, condors, lamas, pumas, kangaroos, orang-utans etc., etc., just to mention a few. And there is the question on who were feeding and giving water to all these animals, not to mention who kept it all clean - the family of Noah after all was rather small (8 according to the Bible). Also the laws of nature tell that one pair of each would not be enough to establish all the animal races - no DNA variety. Actually the DNA variety science has found, talks about very different lengths of time since most animal groups were just a few ones. The story simply is not true. There is a small chance that a man like Noah once lived and survived a flood big enough for him to seem to cover the entire world - f. ex. he survived with his family and his cattle, etc. Science knows about one or two really huge floods at roughly the right time (one in Mesopotamia and the flooding of the Black Sea - see below)). But everything is in an after all much smaller scale, and not like told in the Quran.Muslims try to reduce the problems by telling that Noah only should bring two of each of domesticated cattle - but that is not what the Quran says. They further tell that it just was a big, but regional flood - that is not said in the Quran, but it is also not said it was a worldwide one (but see rhe end of the "travel" below). But then some make a real blunder - or try cheating - because what follows below is not well known by most people, only to the more educated ones, and cheating of the "rank and file" therefore is easy: F. ex. "The Message of the Quran", certified by a top Muslim university (Al-Ahzar Al-Sharif Islamic Research Academy, Cairo) tells:
1. The flood must have been the filling up of the Mediterranean Sea - without mentioning that that happened (when the Gibraltar Strait opened) some 4 - 5 million years ago. (See above).
2. All this also without mentioning that the filling up took many years (see above) - may be as much as 100 or more - as the opening was small in the beginning and the stream slowed down long before it was full. Near what is now Israel and Egypt the water rose just some meters a year - no terribly rough flooding, like described in the Quran (f. ex. 11/42).
3. How could the slow filling up of that sea, give a flash flood in what is now Iraq, where this is supposed to have happened? - in or near Iraq somewhere.
4. May be they mix it up with the filling up of the Black Sea (also mentioned by Muslims)? But also that took time - and was far from Iraq. That happened after the last ice age that stopped 10ooo – may be as late as under a warm period (even less ice) 5700 years ago. The time may be ok, but then either Noah or the story in this case has travelled – and also this slow filling up cannot explain the weather and the waves.
5. There also is a very speculative theory about an asteroide or something falling into the Indian Ocean - an old tale mentioning a special astronomical constallation in case pinpoints the start of the flood to 10. May 2807 BC. But it is a very speculative theory only built on old legends and a hint of Chineese history.
6. Finally there is the extreme, but little known flood in Mesopotamia – now approximately Iraq – some 5200 years ago. It may easily explain the flood itself, and if this was an extraordinary "ordinary" flood, it also may explain the weather. But even if big, it was a local happening. (But then the Quran does not directly claim it was covering the entire world – but on the other hand see just below - the end of the journey).
7. And another conundrum that does not fit the Muslim "explanations" about a "local" flood: The Quran claims the ark stranded on a mountain in Syria (Mount al-Judi (11/44) -not Ararat in Turkey. Mt. al-Judi today is identifiead as the 2089 m high "jabal judi" or "judi dagh" near the modern town Cizre south of the Turkish border.) For the ark to have stranded on a high mountain, the flood had to be universal – if not the water had streamed away to empty, lower places – elementary
knowledge of physics.For a university to back a bluff like the flood = filling up the Mediterranean Sea, etc. is dishonest and tells something - the professors at a university have to know such facts, and know it is wrong, or at least they have no excuse for not checking if it was possible. It is a well known fact in educated circles. Similar claims in 23/27 – 26/119.
*014 11/42: "So the Ark floated with them on waves (towering) like mountains, and Noah called out to his son (who was at the shore*) - - -". When a boat is floating among waves like mountains, it is not possible to communicate with anyone ashore. Muhammad, living in a desert, may not have known. But no god had made a mistake like this - telling they could
communicate. That kind of waves are too noisy, and so is the wind that normally accompanies that kind of seas, plus you have to stay far from the shore not to be taken by the waves and smashed against the mentioned shore. Dramatic fairy tale with wrong facts.This also is a proof for that the dramatic scenarios in the Quran cannot be explained with the filling of the Mediterranean or the Black Sea: Even an enormous waterfall does not produce waves "like mountains" - a relatively stable stream of water does not do that except close to the waterfall, even when it is enormous, and as they are reduced proportional to the distance they run – double distance = half the energy per meter wave front, because they spread out in a (semi) circle (NB: This does not go for windblown waves with linear wave fronts, and definitely not if the wind is still blowing and transferring energy to the waves – only where the source of the waves is a "point" like a waterfall – or a stone thrown into the water). And a waterfall – no matter how big - never produce a terrible storm (mentioned other places).
015 11/43: "The son (of Noah*) replied - - -". In that kind of weather neither a call nor a reply was possible – the roaring of the wind and the crashing of the waves are far too noisy even if a short distance had been possible. In addition you have the effect of the wind "blowing away" the sound of your voice. Also see 11/42 just above.
016 11/44: "O, earth swallow up thy water - - -". Physically impossible with that amount of water. But if the flood was local,the water could go to the sea. (But the fact that the Quran tells the ark ended at Mt. al-Judi (earlier Mt. Qardu according to Muhammad Asad: "The Message of the Quran) in Syria, indicates that it was something really big – the water cannot reach high up on a mountain in Syria, unless the water level is roughly the same all over the world.
017 11/53: "- - - Clear (Sign) - - -". Wrong. See 2/99.
018 11/59: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
019 11/63: "- - - Clear (Sign) - - -". Wrong. See 2/99.
020 11/64: "This she-camel of Allah - - -". This refers to an old Arab legend Muhammad used in the Quran: A camel came out from a solid cliff and became a prophet. Believe it if you want.
*021 11/67: "A (mighty) Blast overtook the wrongdoers (the people of Thamud*), and they lay prostrate (dead*) in their homes before the morning - - -." Well, in 7/78 they were killed by an earthquake. One of them must be wrong – simply one more contradiction, even though the claimed absence of any contradictions is said in the Quran to prove it is sent down from Allah. The presence of contrasictions concequently then should prove it is not from Allah.
022 11/69: "- - - glad tidings - - -". At best only partly right. See 2/97c above and 61/3 below.
023 11/88: "- - - Clear (sign) - - -". Wrong. See 2/39.
*024 11/92: "He (Lot*) said, 'O my people!" Lot was an immigrant from far away (Ur in Chaldea in South Iraq – now he was living near the Dead Sea, most likely in what is now Jordan). This according to both the Bible and the Quran. The people of Sodom and Gomorrah were not Lot's people. And both the Quran and the Bible show there were distance between
Lot and the locals – they definitely had not become his people. But as the Quran states that prophets (which Lot was according to the Quran) except Muhammad only were sent to their own people, the book needs to make him a local in the area, belonging to the local people.
025 11/93: "And O my (Lot's*) people!" See 11/92 just above.
026 11/103: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
027 11/107: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
028 11/108: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
029 11/110: "We (Allah*) certainly gave the Book to Moses, - - -". According to science he certainly did not - those books are written 400-700 years later. (The Bible tells Moses got the 10 commandments written on tablets of stone + he got the law verbally and wrote it down later. The Law is sometimes used as a name for the Book of Moses, but in reality the laws
only is a minor part of it).
030 11/120: "- - - in them (the stories in the Quran*) there cometh to thee (Muhammad/the Muslims*) the Truth - - -". With all the mistaken facts, mistaken grammar, etc, and perhaps even more mistakes in the book, it can at best be partly true - and then the trouble is to find out what is true and what not, of the tales you do not positively know are wrong.
031 11/123: "- - - heavens - - -". Wrong. See 2/29.
Surah 11: At least 31 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
SURAH 12:
001 12/1: "- - - the Perspicuous Book (the Quran*)". A book with this many mistakes, invalid logical points, etc, is hardly perspicuous.
002 12/2a: "We (Allah*) has sent it (the Quran) down - - -". No omniscient god has sent down a book with this many mistakes, contradictions, cases of wrong logic, etc. Which means that either Allah is not omniscient, or that someone else has made the Quran.
003 12/2b: "- - - in order that ye may learn wisdom". No-one learns wisdom from a book with lots of mistakes and wrong logic.
004 12/7: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
005 12/19+20: Here is something wrong - or one more contradiction. Verse 19 tells that "travellers" found Joseph in the well where his brothers had thrown him down, and took him for a slave and concealed him. Verse 20 tells his brothers sold him for a few dirhams (small silver coins). Both cannot be true.
00a 12/31: There is little logic in 2 points here: Why giving them knives before showing them Joseph? (Some Muslims say it was to cut fruit, but when you cut fruit, you cut the fruit and lay down the knife mostly – few had had the knife in their hands at any given moment, and fewer holding the blade. And it is not a natural reaction to be so stupefied by a face, that all and every of them cut their fingers – one or at most two could have done so, though unlikely, but not more.
00b 12/32: What was the logic of putting Joseph in prison when it was proved he was not guilty? This after all was at a moment where the wife should have been careful. (Muslims have a kind of explanation, but only a kind of). But imprisonment is necessary for the story.
*006 12/40: "(Islam*) is the right religion - - -". Can a religion based on a book with so many mistakes, and with not a single valid proof for anything essential, really be a "right religion"? Simply no. Especially not when all the book rests only on the words of a man with very doubtful moral – thieving/robbing, womanizing, raping, enslaving, murdering, lying – even not respecting his own oaths - etc.
007 12/41: "- - - he will hang from a cross - - -". Egypt at the time of Joseph did not use execution by crucifixion.
008 12/49: "Then will come after that (period) a year in which the people will have aboundant water - - -". But the Arab word that is used her, and that is translated with "aboundant water" is "yughathu" or "yughath" which in reality is said to means "to be relieved by rain" (Joseph Al-Fadi (Christian)). As also "The Message of the Quran" has that translation (translated from Swedish): "- - - a year when the people will be blessed by rain - - -", and has a similar comment to theword and as we have met this translation before, we judge that Yusuf Ali has "stretched" his transcription a little. But in Egypt one has little and no rain – it is the flood inthe Nile that brings water. ("The Message of the Quran elegantly explains that it must mean rain further south in Africa, that made the Nile big, but that is not what the Arab text says).
009 12/51a: "What was your (the ladies'*) affair when you ye did try to seduce him (Joseph*) - - -". According to 12/23 it only was the wife of the Aziz that tried this. Mistake and contradiction.
*010 12/51b: The women in Potifar's (this name is from the Bible - the Aziz (title or job?) in the Quran) house said: "Allah protect us". The name and the god Allah did not exist in the old polytheistic pantheon in Egypt - and definitely not among the upper class (from slaves and traders they might have heard about Yahweh, but not Allah, and hardly even al-Lah that
early). Their gods were Osiris, Aton, Amon, and other ones. Actually there is found not one single trace of monotheism among the upper class in Egypt in the old times. (Except AknAton and his sun god)
011 12/52: The wife of Potifar (the Aziz): "- - - Allah will never guide - - -". See 12/51b.
00c 12/69: Joseph told Benjamin: "Behold! I am thy (own) brother - - -". It does not fit verses 70 – 77 that he told it at this time.
012 12/77: "If he (Benjamin*) steals, there was a brother of his (Joseph*) who did steal before (him)". Here something is wrong: The child/youth Joseph was not accused of stealing. (As for Joseph's age when he was brought to Egypt, Yusuf Ali in "The Meaning of the Quran" says he was 16 or 17 or may be even 18. We find no reason for believing anything – he may have been of that age or younger or even much younger).
013 12/84: "And his (Jacob's*) eyes became white with sorrow - - -". Eyes cannot become white (and more or less blind) from sorrow. That happens because of illness or physical malfunction in the eye – sometimes related to age. Any god had known – Muhammad perhaps not.
014 12/94: "When the Caravan left (Egypt), their father (Jacob*) said (to his sons*) - - -". But
12/87 says: "O my (Jacob's*) sons! Go ye (to Egypt*) and enquire about Joseph and his brother - - -". Jacob simply did not come along to Egypt at that trip – Jacob could not speak to his sons when they left Egypt. A mistake and a contradiction of the real situation. (This also is clear from 12/96: "When the bearer of the good news came (to Jacob's home*) - - -." Jacob could say nothing to his sons until they were back home with him.)
015 12/95: "They (Jacob's sons) said (= answered when the caravan left Egypt*): 'By Allah (?*)! Truly thou art in thine old wandering mind.'" See 12/94 just above.
00d 12/99: "- - - he (Joseph*) provided a home for his parents - - -". Not possible, as his mother (Rachel) died already when Benjamin was born – he could provide a home only for his father. (Islam explains or "explains" this with claiming that he reckoned the sister of his mother (Leah - also wife of Jacob) to be his mother, but there is nothing in the Quran saying so. But then it is quite normal for Islam to make claims without facts.) Also: How could Abraham be a good Muslim when he married 2 sisters at the same time? - strictly prohibitted by Allah in Sharia.
00e 12/100: "- - - parents - - -". See 12/99 just above.
015a 12/100 (A95 – in 2008 edition A98, A99): "- - - and they Jacob and his family*) fell down in prostration, (all) before him (Joseph*) - - -." Here is a big conundrum inside a riddle surrounded by a puzzle for Islam. A pious prophet like Jacob impossibly could prostrate himself before a human. And an as pious prophet like Joseph impossibly could have accepted it. Something has to be wrong in the text. This even though the Arab text "wa-kharru lahu sudjdjadah" literally means "- - - and they fell down before him in (alternatively "like in") prostration (or "praying to him" according to the Swedish copy)". Islam has no good explanations that we have found. According to 'Abd Allah ibn 'Abbas the "him" in "before him" must refer to Allah – which it most clearly does not do. Razi explains that Joseph's dream was not fully fulfilled, etc. Actually here the text is very clear – and the only thing Muslim scholars agree on, is that the literal meaning must be wrong, and this without having a good alternative meaning.
016 12/101: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
017 12/104: "And no reward dost thou (Muhammad*) ask of them (people/Muslims*) for this (the new religion*) - - -". No, nothing except 20% of all stolen/robbed values and slaves from raids and wars, 100% of all values taken from victims that surrendered without fighting, plenty of women and lots and lots of absolute and undisputed power/dictatorship, and lots and lots of free warriors – he only had to pay them with promises about paradise and promises about rich spoils of war stolen from humans, countries and rich cultures. And the "poor-tax" (mostly 2.5 to 10% - mostly around 2.5% - of what you owned each year if you were not too poor) – which he far from only spent for the poor – and the sometimes brutal zakat – the tax from non-Muslims (though neither the 20% nor the 100% nor the taxes were all for his personal use – much was spent for waging more wars and for "gifts" to make neighbouring Arabs good Muslims + some was given to the poor),And the price was cultures of surrounding peoples and humans and lives they destroyed – to gain more power for him. It is indisputably clear from the Quran that he at least liked women and power.
018 12/105a: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
019 12/105: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
020 12/108: "- - - evidence clear - - -". There is not one single clear evidence neither for Allah nor for Muhammad being a prophet in all the Quran. Not one. (There may be some exceptions for evidences for a god in points taken from the Bible, but those in case are proofs for Yahweh, not for Allah – those two gods cannot be the same one, unless that god is mentally ill – schizophrenic – as the teachings are fundamentally too different, especially like one meets Yahweh in "the new covenant" in NT – f. ex. Luke 22/20). Also see 2/99.
021 12/109: "Nor did We (Allah*) send thee (as Messengers) any but men, whom We did inspire – (men) living in human habitations." Wrong. According to the Quran also angels were sent, f. ex. to Abraham, to Lot, and to Mary, and at least to jinns were sent jinns as messengers.
00f 12/111a: "This is - - - instruction for men endued with understanding." It may be so –many Muslim thinkers and learned men were and are intelligent men. But to what avail? –when you give even the most intelligent persons wrong information from the start, their conclusions inevitably become just mistakes and errors, no matter how intelligent they are. To quote late Henrik Ibsen in "Peer Gynt": "Naar utgangspunktet er som galest, blir resultatet tidt originalest" – which means something like "when the facts you use are really wrong, the result frequently becomes very 'original'". Also: "Correct facts multiplied by one student give a better answer than false facts multiplied with a number of wice men".
00g 12/111b: "It is not a tale invented - - -". When there are so many mistakes in a book, what do you expect the reader to believe? - at least details have to be invented.
**022 12/111c: "- - - a confirmation of what went before (the Bible) - - -". When there are so many and so serious mistakes in a book, it is not to be expected that the reader can believe too much. Just the story about Josef is taken from the Bible (which "went before"). But the story is much changed (may be he in reality has retold a local legend about Josef, slightly based on the Bible) - it is no confirmation. On the background of all the documented mistakes in the Quran, which is easiest to believe, if any - the Quran or the Bible? At least some of the details in this story in the Quran are illogical. More to the point: There are too many and too fundamental differences - the Quran does not confirm the Bible.
023 12/111d: "- - - a detailed exposition of all things - - -". Wrong. There are many things necessary for normal life – not to mention modern life – that is not made clear, and even more so for details. F. ex. the Muslim laws on inheritance were far from clear in the Quran, and in many, many things Islam have no guiding lines from Allah – they have to extrapolate from
other or similare things said or done in the Quran or in Hadiths.
024 12/111e: "- - - a Guide - - -". See 12/111d just above.
Surah 12: At least 24 mistakes + 6 likely mistakes.
SURAH 13:
001 13/1a: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
00a 13/1b: "- - - the Book which hath been revealed - - -". That is one of the questions: Is it revealed – and in case by whom? See 13/1b just below.
**002 13/1c: "- - - the Book: that which hath been revealed unto thee from thy Lord (Allah*) - - - ". That is the question, to quote Hamlet: Did a god really produce a book with that many mistakes and invalid "proofs"? No.An alternative is that the f. ex. the Devil impersonated Gabriel and in other cases told Muhammad "by inspiration" (to quote "The Meaning of the Quran" by Yusuf Ali) what thus was "revealed" to him. The inhumanity of the religion would then be explained. Personally we doubt this, if for no other reason, then because even a devil would not make so many mistakes, contradictions, etc. - he simply would not want to be found out by his victims sooner ot later.Another alternative is that it all stems from a sick brain – TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) + lust for power may easily explain everything. Yet another alternative is that it was not revealed, but made up in cold blood. The fact that many of the mistakes are in accordance with the wrong science of the time and area of Muhammad, and also the fact that Muhammad was not stupid enough to believe everything that is said in the Quran, may indicate that it is made up.As for the last argument: F. ex. that miracles would not make some people believe, Muhammad was too intelligent and knew too much about people to believe himself – f. ex. Jesus was a good proof of the opposite: A lot did not believe in spite of everything, but quite a number came to believe because of what they saw and witnessed. The same was the conclusion of the story that Muhammad himself told about the magicians and Moses: They came (according to Muhammad's own words) to believe after a small miracle.
***003 13/1d: "(the Quran*) is the Truth".
1. There are many mistaken facts that history, geography, archaeology, literature, art, etc., proves are wrong. (At least unbelievable 1700+ !!! places with mistaken facts, and perhaps 3000+ errors all together).
2. There are "more than 100 divergences (mistakes*) from the rules and structure of normal Arab language", according to Ali Dashi "Twenty-three years".
3. There are verses where it clearly is Muhammad that is speaking, in stark contradiction to all statements that the book is made by Allah or has existed from eternity (though some of the places - f. ex. 6/114 in Yusuf Ali or 27/91 in Pikthall or Dawood -the mistakes are camouflaged by dishonest translators inserting the word "Say",
according to Ibn Warraq.)
4. The Quran states that the Quran is in pure Arab language. But according to al-Suyuti there are at least 107 foreign words used in the book, and Arthur Jeffery (specialist in Arab and in non-Arabic words in the Quran) says ca. 275 words from Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek, and also from Syria, Ethiopia, and Persia. Even the word Quran is said to be from Syria. (The Arabs later found an excuse for those mistakes: Al-Tha'alibi tells that the Arab started to use those words and made them Arabic. An easy but dishonest explanation.)
5. There was used an alphabet without vowels, and to make it even worse, when writing the Quran/surahs in the old time, they did not even use the small points newer Arab uses to specify different letters. Because of this it often is difficult or impossible to know which word is meant. To use an English example: If you only have the consonants "h" and "s" and put in vowels, the result may be "house" or "hose" or "his" or "has". Because of this there are thousands of possibilities for mistakes - or different meanings. Muslims tell the Quran was finished not later than 656 AD, but that is
not true - only the simplified version using the old unfinished alphabet was used then, and lots of versions were written as the language and the alphabet were completed. Not until 900 AD was the Quran finished, and by then there existed numbers of versions. Muslims under the very learned Ibn Mohair (died 935 AD) finally canonized 14 versions (see Preface). Over the centuries 11 fell out of use, and then one more - today there are mainly two - one dominant (Hafs) and one somewhat used in parts of Africa (Warsh). After all that, how can anybody pretend that the Quran of today is sent down from Allah letter-by-letter and comma-by-comma? – the comma did not even exist!
6. The language in the original Quran was so little exact, that there frequently is necessary to insert explanations.
7. And how then can anyone pretend that the language in the Quran of today is perfect and correct language word for word and meaning for meaning just as dictated by Allah, when one knows that they spent 250 years "decoding" the original texts and polishing the language?
8. And even more so: How can anyone pretend with a straight face that the Quran(s) of today is the one and perfect one from Allah, when the clergy/religious leaders and the educated elite at least, know that there were at least 14 "correct" versions earlier (to camouflage that they were different versions, Muslims call them "ways of reading" – you meet the word even today, because even today there are "different ways of reading") - versions that over the centuries by an arbitrary process was reduced to 3 and then to 1-2. (The one dominating today, most likely dominates because it happened to be used when Egypt printed Qurans in 1924, according to Ibn Warraq).
9. Of the 14 and more versions that existed, how can one be sure that the most correct versions were the ones that finally came to dominate? -or that those version (Hafs and Warsh) had all interpretations of the primitive writings correct (especially as they are not quite similar)?
10. There are lots of places in the Quran where the logic is wrong – mainly because Muhammad draws conclusions or make statements without first proving that it really is Allah that made this and this. F.ex. the sun and the moon and night and day may be goodproofs for Allah, but ONLY if it first is proved that it really is Allah that made them and runs them. Muhammad never really proves anything. Never. He just claims or states. The results are invalid claims with invalid logic, not real "signs" or "proofs". Valueless. Or even worse, as the use of such arguments proves to the entire world that he
has no real and true facts/arguments. Even worse: The use of bluffs is the hallmark of cheats and deceivers.
11. The facts in the point above are even more essential here in this point - in places where he indicates or even uses the word "proof". The problem is the same, and the only possible conclusion is the same: Valueless demagogy that proves that he had no real and true facts/arguments. Even worse: The use of bluffs is the hallmark of cheats and deceivers.
There is little reason to believe the Quran ever was perfect and withut mistakes, and even less reason to believe that the Quran of today is so (it simply is not). This even if you omit all the mistakes we know about. At very best the book only is partly true. Also see 13/39.
004 13/2a: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22.
**005 13/2b: "Allah is He Who raised the heavens (plural and wrong) without any pillars that ye can see: - - -". A Muslim information organisation was 1-2 years ago asked to explain this sentence. They replied not 100% politely, that anyone with an IQ of 60 or more had to understand that this meant that the pillars did not exist. The person that asked replied that he knew the difference between non-existent and invisible - the meaning in the sentence above is "invisible" - and asked them please to give him a real explanation. They never answered.There exist no pillars - visible or invisible. And actually the idea is ridicules, as there exists no material heaven that needs to be kept in position - the heaven we see is just an optical illusion. Any god - even small ones - would know this, but Muhammad naturally not. Besides no man
or animal or bird has ever banged into such an invisible pillar – and no plane collided with one.
006 13/2c: "- - - explaining the Signs in detail - - -". Wrong and/or logically invalid "explanations" in reality are not explanations at all – even if they were in detail, which they in many cases are not.
*007 13/3a: "And it is He (Allah*) Who spread out the earth, - - -". Similare things are said some places in the Quran - the earth is flat and spread out. It may be round or roundish, but like a pancake, not like a sphere. That was the geography of the Arabs at the time of Muhammad - though it hardly was the geography of any god. (There is one translator to English that says "egg-shaped" – but it is a wrong translation (the Quran there talks about an ostrich's nest on the flat ground, but the translator says it is about an ostrich's egg). All the same he often is quoted by Muslims – some may honestly want to believe him, others know they are using "al-Taqiyya" – the lawful lie - that is an integrated part of Islam (but of none
other of the big religions)).
008 13/3b: "He draweth the Night as a veil o'er the Day". Wrong. The night simply is lack of sunlight. Lack of something can never be a veil over anything. And even more so: Lack of light cannot hide sunshine.
009 13/4: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
*010 13/13: "- - - the thunder repeateth His praises - - -". Hardly – the thunder is just a natural and automatic reaction to the lightning (which again is natural and automatic reactions to electrical charges). Islam will have to prove that the thunder – vibrations in the air - has enough brain to be able to prise Allah in this way, in order to be believed.
00b 13/14: "For Him (Allah*) (alone) is prayer in Truth - - -". Yes, but only if Allah exists (and is the only god). There was a good reason why Muhammad demanded and glorified blind belief: There existed and exists no real proof and nodocumentation for the existence of Allah – or for that case for Muhammad's connection to a god. And this blind belief only is to be based on the words of a morally suspect man like Muhammad. (The real, historical Muhammad is only distantly related to the glorified saint Islam paints.)
011 13/15a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
*012 13/15b: "Whatever beings there are in the heavens and in the earth do prostrate themselves to Allah (acknowledging subjection)". As for in the Heaven, it is difficult to say yes or no. But for the Earth: No non-Muslim ever prostrate themselves for Allah. The same goes for all animals, fishes and insects, etc.: None of them has ever been observed prostrating themselves to any god, Allah included – and for Allah it should be extra easy to observe, as he
prefers 5 prayers with prostrations a day, some by day and some by night (even more easy to notice as few animals, etc. normally are awake and active both day and night). Islam has some heavy proofs to produce here to make this point in the Quran credible.
013 13/15c: "- - - so (prostrate themselves for Allah*) do their (the living beings'*) shadows in the mornings and evenings". Shadows are just lack of sunlight – and they for natural reasons are long and flat in the mornings and evenings. Islam will have to prove that this result of the Earth's spin in the sunshine, makes the lack of sunlight some places consciously
decide to prostrate "themselves" for a god. If no proofs are produced, this clearly is a fairy tale on an intellectual level fit for small children.
014 13/16: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
015 13/17a: "Thus doth Allah (by parables) show forth - - -". Can it really be an omniscient god that shows forth so many mistakes? Nyet – a good English word that means no with some lines under.
016 13/17b: "- - - show forth Truth and Vanity." As said before: The Quran can at very best only be partly true.
017 13/18: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
00c 13/19a: "- - - that which hath been revealed - - -". Well, has it been revealed? – and in case by whom? (A god had not sent down something with that many mistakes, etc., but the Devil in disguise could – but might have been too intelligent to do so, as there sooner or later would come questions about the mistakes and wrong logic, etc., and hence about his inhuman and bloody religion. He then would loose credence. May be the whole book was made up?)
018 13/19b: "- - - that which hath been revealed unto thee from thy Lord (Allah*) - - -". See 13/17.
019 13/19c: "- - - that which hath been revealed unto thee from thy Lord (Allah*) is the Truth, - - - ". Well, at best it is partly true - as said before. See f. ex. 13/17.
020 13/28: "- - - for without doubt in the remembrance of Allah do hearts find satisfaction". This only is true for some Muslims, and in difficult times also some more Muslims seeking comfort in religion – and also some because of social or other reasons only. Science tells that a minor fraction of the people (may be 10%) has an internal drive for a god, and some more that resort to such thinking when life is difficult – in 2006 or 2007 they even found which gene in our DNA that produces this drive. One theory is that religion is favoured by evolution because it makes the group closer knit and then the chances for survival bigger. These people find satisfaction in their religion - any religion - if they do believe in it. And if they happen to be Muslims, they then find satisfaction in Allah. But NB: The satisfaction does not derive from the god they believe in – he/she may well be a fiction, like Allah seems to be (strongly indicated by all the mistakes in the Quran) – but from their own belief, as it is strong enough to make them feel sure it is right, and then feel secure in that security (false or not does not matter, as long as they themselves believe their belief is right). There is a possibility that this feeling of security, and hence safety and reduced nervousness, is another Darwinian reason for this inherited trait – it may in some way give an edge in the fight for survival.The question these ideas of course produce is: Is there a god or are they all made up from our needs for something supernatural?We should try to find out, because if it all stems from inside us, we should at least try to find something better than inhuman and immoral war religions. And if there is a real religion one should search for that one.
00c 13/31: "If there ever was a Quran with which mountains were moved - - - (it would be this one)". Well, hitherto the Quran itself has not moved even one grain of sand. Ok, it has guided or misguided many humans, and they have done things, but the Quran itself has done nothing.
021 13/36: "Those to whom We (Allah*) have given the Book (the Quran*) - - -". The infernal question: Is a book with that many mistakes sent down by a god? No - simply out of the question.
022 13/37a: "Thus We (Allah*) revealed it (the Quran*) - - -". Did Allah reveal it? See 13/1b and 13/19a.
023 13/37b: "Thus We (Allah*) revealed it (the Quran*) to be a judgement of authority in Arabic." A book with that many mistakes and contradictions, that much invalid logic, that inhuman moral and without ethical or moral philosophy, is no basis for "judgement of authority". If Muslims disagree, they will have to bring strong proofs to be believed.
024 13/38a: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
025 13/38b: "For each period is a book revealed". Hardly. Homo Sapiens - modern man - is may be 200ooo years old (and there were humans or humanoids long before that). There is no trace of any book or of monotheism from all those years up to the next major step, that happened may be 60ooo+ years ago. At that time something happened – nobody knows what – that started Homo Sapiens on his course towards Modern Man (it is likely it happened somewhere in the western part of Asia, perhaps in the Caspian area and perhaps ca. 64ooo years ago). Then no book up to the next major step: Agricultural Man, 15ooo years ago, give or take a few thousand years – probably somewhere in the Middle East. No book and no trace of monotheism anywhere in the world. The next step: Towns. No books to regulate the life or
religion for Homo Urbanus (man in town) – not until long time after towns and even cities had started to pop up, and still no trace of monotheism of any kind, not to mention Allah. The first traces of real monotheism – and later a book about a monotheistic god – came with the Jews (the name is used in wide understanding chronologically), and perhaps the Zoroastrians in Mesopotamia. And even then it is highly unlikely that they (Israel) had books before the period in Egypt and may be much later (that Abraham had a book or books, is so unlikely that Islam will have to prove it if they will insist on that – it is extremely unlikely that a nomad of that time even knew how to read.) Also the Zoroastrians had a book, but that Muhammad didnot know – at least not until late in his life. After that – and before the Quran – science knows about only one or two books (depending on whether you reckon the "Bible" of the Jews + NT to be one or two – or many - books) as basis for monotheism – add one if you include the Zoroastrians. During most those periods and aeons there is found no traces of such other such a book or of monotheism in any kind of science: Archaeology (with a ?-mark for Akn-Aton and his sun), literature, folklore, history, art, architecture. Islam will have to produce very strong proofs for the opposite – till now they just have produced cheap statements and even cheaper words and claims - - - and not one real proof. Worse: When there finally came a book, it only built on the (wrong) knowledge in a tiny and underdeveloped part of the world – whereas the Quran states that every people in all times have had their prophets (and a book). Worse: If the Quran is a copy of the Mother Book, and all the 124ooo+ prophets through the times and all over the world got a somewhat similar copy (a revered Mother Book that may be existed since eternity cannot change?), that must have been a strange experience for many of them – "all" is about Arabia and Muhammad.Worst: Islam tells that the reason why "the Book" had to be rejuvenated at intervals, was that the world and the societies changed (in addition to the never proved or documented claim that the Bible is falsified). But how to change the "Mother Book" that these claimed holy books
are copies of? And the world and the cultures and the societies have changed more the last 300 years – yes, even the last 100 years – than in all the 200ooo or more years before. Why do we not need a new book after all these changes? – if Allah is omniscient, he 13.7 billion or more years ago (when the universe was created) knew that at least parts of the Quran would be hopelessly inadequate (f. ex. some laws) and too dangerous (f. ex. atomic, chemical and bacteriological weapons combined with a most ruthless and inhuman war religion), not later than around 1900 AD. Ours is a period that really needs a book teaching love and peace among humans and nations – not hate and suppression and inhumanity and war (like f. ex. the Quran and the religion of Gjingis Chan and a few other war religions).
**00d 13/39: "- - - with Him (Allah*) is the Mother of the Book (the original book of which the Quran is said to be a copyof*) ". Mere humans like us thinks it is unlikely in the extreme that an omnipotent and omniscient god has a book awash withmistakes as a revered Mother Book in his Heaven. There also are a lot of problems to explain, if it was made by the god a long time ago - not to mention if it is an unmade book that has existed forever, like many Muslims insists:
1. If the book is that old and existed before, why did the god have to send down imperfect books - Torah, OT, NT? Or was the "Mother Book" changed now and then to be able to send down different copies?
2. How to explain that in some surahs it is Muhammad that is speaking?
3. How to explain that the god some times has to change - abrogate - his message? - and did he really get everything right in the book this last time? Especially if he is copying the Mother Book he ought to? Or does the revered Mother Book change?
4. How could he change the messages, if it was all written a long time ago - or always existed - in a Mother Book he copied? Or does the revered Mother Book change?
5. How come that so many verses are answers or comments to things that happened in Mecca and Medina to Muhammad and during the life of Muhammad? - Muhammad f. ex. quarrelled with his wives, and Allah sent down surahs to explain that Muhammad as always was right - and like always a little bit to late to avert problem, but relevant to his
needs just then? - remember the free will of man. Nearly all of it is about Muhammad and Arabia and little about rhe other claimed 124ooo prophets and their needs and cultures and countries.
6. How to explain that it could have been written aeons ago, when Allah had given the humans (a certain amount of?) free will? -human acts will upset the texts in chaotic ways. (Predestination and human free will are 100% incompatible and 100% impossible to combine). The point is: The human with free will can always change his mind once more.
7. Islam says texts had to be changed a little over time, because times changes - therefore new holy books. But the 300 last years time has changed more than from Adam till 1700 AD. Well, even the last 100 years as mentioned. Why are no prophets and no holy book necessary? (Also see 13/38).
8. If the "mother book" is aeons old, why then is nearly the all talk to Muhammad, a little to a few others, and nothing to the other 124ooo (according to Hadiths)? The first prophets -when everything was new – after all needed most information and help.
9. How to explain that most of the stories in the Quran are based on religious fairy tales? - any god had known they were untrue.
10. How to explain all the mistakes? – any god had known better.
11. How to explain all the invalid statements? –any god had known better.
12. How to explain all the invalid "signs" (treated as proofs)?
13. How to explain the invalid "proofs"? – any god had known better.
14. How to explain the directly wrong statements, "signs" and "proofs"?
15. How to explain the contradictions? – no god contradicts neither himself nor reality.Also see 13/1.
Surah 13: At least 25 mistakes + 4 likely mistakes.
SURAH 14:001 14/1a: "A Book (the Quran*) which We (Allah*) have revealed - - -". The same old question: Can a book with so many very clear mistakes really be revealed by an omniscient god? And is it a coincident that many of the mistaken facts are in accordance with what one believed in Arabia at the time of Muhammad – even with fairy tales? A god's stories? -impossible.002 14/1b: "- - - revealed - - -". See 13/1a and 13/19a above.*003 14/1c: "- - - in order that thou (Muhammad – by means of the Quran*) mightest lead mankind out of the depths of darkness and into light - - -". No book with that many mistakes and that doubtful moral can lead anyone into light. The same goes for any religion so suppressing, inhuman and full of hate, discrimination, blood and war, and "all power to Muhammad/the leader".004 14/2: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.005 14/4: "We (Allah*) sent not a Messenger except (to teach) in the language of his (own) people - - -." Wrong. If you can call Moses a Messenger, he had to speak Egyptian in Egypt –not Hebrew. And Lot was from Ur in Chaldea (not too far from the Persian Gulf in Iraq), not from Sodom or Gomorrah – when the Quran says the people of Sodom and Gomorrah were his people, also that is wrong, this even more so as the Quran makes it very clear that not only was he a stranger, but also he was not integrated with the locals. And Jonah was not from Nineveh where he had to preach. Also Abraham was a foreigner with a language foreign to the place he settled down (Canaan and Sinai) – if one reckons him to be a messenger. The same goes for Joseph in Egypt in case. And not to forget Jonah in Niniveh.006 14/5a: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Signs - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.007 14/5b: "- - - in this there are Signs - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.008 14/9: "- - - Clear (Sign) - - -". There are no clear signs for Allah or for Muhammad in the Quran – not one. See 2/99.009 14/10: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.010 14/12a: "No reason have we (Muslims*) why we should not put our trust in Allah". Wrong. All the mistakes, etc. in the Quran proves 100% that it is not from a god, and all the mistaken facts that are in accordance with wrong science in the Middle East at the time of Muhammad, strongly indicate that it is made by one or more humans in Arabia at the time of Muhammad. In both cases the religion is a made up one, and Allah may not even exist.011 14/12b: "For those who put their trust should put their trust in Allah." Wrong. See 14/12a just above.00a 14/19a: "- - - Allah created the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth in Truth - - -". It is impossible to know if it is true, as long as the Quran only offers words and not a single proof. Words are very cheap - especially when it is clear that there are MANY mistakes etc. in the book.012 14/19b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.013 14/22: "It was Allah who gave you a promise of Truth (the Quran*) - - -." With that many mistakes the Quran at best is partly true.014 14/24: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.00b 14/27: "- - - with the Word (the Quran*) that stands firm - - -." Can words with that many mistakes and bent logic, etc. stand firm on other platforms than cheating, brain washing, pressure and wish for power?015 14/32: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.016 14/35: "Remember Abraham said: 'O my Lord! Make this city (Mecca*) one of peace and security; - - - ". Abraham never visited Mecca. Besides: There was no city at the time of Abraham – this both according to reality and to the Quran. Remember how Hagar run back and forth there without finding people and without finding water. Mecca as a city was only a few generations old as a town at the time of Muhammad - some 2500 years after Abraham. Also see 2/127.017 14/48: "- - - Heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See2/22.Surah 14: At least 17 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.
SURAH 15:00a 15/1a: "These are the ayat (verses*) of Revelation - - -". Well, is the Quran a revelation? – and in case by whom? There theoretically are 4 possibilities:1. A god – but the Quran proves that is not the case; too many mistakes, etc.2. Some dark forces, f. ex. the Devil – perhaps in disguise. The inhuman religion of war may point in this direction.3. Humans at the time of Muhammad. The fact that many of the mistakes in the book are in accordance with wrong science in the Middle East at that time, may point in this direction.4. Muhammad himself. Muhammad's lust for power - and women - may point this way. It also easily will explain rhe point above. Add his lack of ethics and moral and it also may explain point above that one, too.5. The clear conclusion is that it at least was not revealed by a god, like the Quran claims.001 15/1b: "- - - a Quran that makes things clear." With that many mistakes, it makes few things clear and some things very unclear - f. ex. the foundation that Islam rests on.00b 15/6: "O thou (Muhammad*) to whom the Messages is being revealed". See 15/1a above.002 15/9: "We have, without doubt, sent down the Message (the Quran*)". Wrong. There is a lot of well-founded doubt about that. Too many mistakes, among other things.003 15/14 + 15: "- - - They would only say (when experiencing a miracle*): 'Our eyes have been intoxicated - - -". Wrong. At least some had come to believe. These two verses are a piece of fast-talk. There is some fast-talking in the Quran - trying to explain away things and facts and ideas and not least questions that are difficult to explain or answer. See the chapter about fast talk in the Quran. And there are even more fast-talk among Muslims today, trying to explain away mistakes, abrogation, changes in Islam around 622, etc., not to mention trying to present Islam as a peaceful religion. Just in this case one tries to explain away questions for proofs for Allah and for Muhammad's connection to a god.**But the really bad thing about this point is that it is one of the points where Muhammad himself knew he was lying – at least some would believe in Islam if he produced miracles. He was too intelligent and knew too much about people not to know this – this even more so as he himself told about heathens becoming Muslims after they had experienced miracles (f. ex. the magicians of Pharaoh), and he also had a good example in Jesus – some refused to believe no matter, but quite a number of others did after miracles made by Jesus (made also according to the Quran).004 15/16: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.*005 15/17: "- - - We (Allah*) have guarded them (the Zodiacal Signs*) from every evil spirit accursed:" According to the Quran, the stars – included the Zodiacal signs – are fastened to the lowermost of 7 (material – they have to be so if the stars can be fastened to one of them) heavens. But jinns/bad spirits wanted to spy on the heavens, and had to be chased away by shooting stars = guarded. And then the Zodiacal signs were guarded at the same time. According to science this is utter nonsense to at least the fifth power. Any god had known –even baby ones – but Muhammad not. Then who made the Quran with all its mistaken facts, etc.?**006 15/18: "But any (jinn/bad spirit*) that gains a hearing (by spying on the heavens*) by stealth, is pursued by a flaming fire, bright (to see)." According to the Quran, the stars are fastened to the lowest of 7 material (see 15/17 just above) heavens. The stars are lights and decoration, but are also used for shooting stars for weapons to chase away jinns and bad spirits. Muhammad did not know that the mass of a star is somewhere in the range of 1 shooting star x 10 to the 20. or more power and utterly impossible to use as a shooting star in our atmosphere – for the reason of size, for the reason of heat, for the reason of irradiation, for the reason of gravity, for the reason of sheere size, etc. As said in 15/17 just above: Scientific nonsense and insanity to at least the 5. power. No god uttered this faity tale stuff – but Muhammad did not know any better. Then who made the Quran?007 15/19a: "And the earth We (Allah*) have spread out (like a carpet); - - -". In the Quran the Earth is flat - which is wrong. Just ask any god.*008 15/19b: "- - - set thereon (on the Earth*) mountains firm and immoveable - - -." But no mountain was ever set down – not to mention from somewhere above. They without exception did grow up, no matter whether they grew up because of volcanism or because of tectonic activity (the only two ways mountains are made). Any god had known – but Muhammad not.009 15/26: "We (Allah*) created man from sounding clay, - - -". Flatly wrong. See 6/2.010 15/26: "We (Allah*) created man from - - - mud - - -". Wrong. See 6/2.011 15/27: "And the Jinn race, We (Allah*) created before, from the fire of a scorching wind." Here is something wrong. It is said several places in the Quran that the Jinns were created from fire - and one place it is said from fire without smoke.012 15/28: "I (Allah*) am about to create man, from sounding clay, - - -." Wrong. See 6/2.013 15/28: "I (Allah*) am about to create man, from - - - mud - - -". Wrong. See 6/2.014 15/33: "- - - man, whom Thou didst create from sounding clay, - - -". Wrong. See 6/2.015 15/33: "- - -man, whom Thou didst create from - - - mud, - - -". Wrong. See 6/2.016 15/71: "There are my daughters (to marry)". Here modesty has got the better of the Quran (or the translator). The men of Sodom or Gomorrah were not going for marriage - neither could a few daughters marry a lot of men. It is talk about sexual abuse. Most likely a dishonest translation – but in that case: How many other places in the Quran are explained dishonestly?017 15/75: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.018 15/77: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.019 15/81: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.020 15/85: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.021 15/86: "For verily it is thy Lord (Allah*) who is the Master-Creator, knowing all things." The mistakes in the Quran means that someone else has made the book – or that Allah knows not all things.022 15/99: "- - - the Hour that is Certain (the Day of Doom*)". Because of all the mistakes in the Quran, certainly also the Day of Doom is uncertain – at least in the form described by the Quran – as this easily may be an error, too. This even more so as all the mistakes in the book prove that it is not made by a god, and Muhammad was a prophet unable of prophesying, and who then is left to tell us the true future? (By the way: What is a prophet unable to prophesy? – a title stolen because it sounds impressive? Muhammad never made real prophesies (there were a few sayings that are remembered because they happened to become true, but no real prophesying). Whereas a real prophet is a man/person making prophesies. The only possible conclusion: Muhammad was no real prophet; he only "borrowed" the title – like so many other things. May be a messenger for someone or something – perhaps for himself(?) - but not a genuine prophet.)Surah 15: At least 22 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.
SURAH 16:001 16/2a: "He (Allah*) sent down His angels with inspiration ("ruh"*) - - -." But the Arab word "ruh" does not mean "inspiration" but "Spirit".00a 16/2b: "He (Allah*) doth send down His angels with inspiration ("ruh") - - -." But the Arab word "ruh" does not really mean inspiration – it means the Spirit or the Holy Spirit. We may add that Muslims often claims that the Holy Spirit just is another name for the angel Gabriel. But here it is clear that the (Holy) Spirit – "ruh" – is not included among the angels (the angels "transported" ruh). (Actually Muhammad never quite understood what the Holy Spirit – one of it's at least 5 names – was). Also see 70/4, 78/38 and 97/4 where the same word – "ruh" – is used.002 16/3: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.003 16/4: "He (Allah*) has created man (the word "man" used like this, means the human race = in this case Adam*) from a sperm-drop - - -". Wrong. Even if it dhould really mean not Adam, but men generally, it is wrong. A sperm-drop is just half the explanation - also an egg cell is necessary. But Muhammad did not know that. (Human egg cells are too small to be seen with only eyes when it is lying in human tissue, blood and gore). Also see 6/2.00b 16/5: "And cattle He (Allah*) has created for you (men) - - -". Hardly. Cattle and their progenitors existed for may be millions of years. Man only after long aeons found ways of utilizing them - some 15ooo years ago only.00c 16/8: "And (He (Allah*) has created horses, mules, and donkeys for you to ride and use for show - - -". See 16/5 just above.004 16/11: "- - - verily this (different food plants*) is a Sign for those who are given thought." Verily it will be - - - but not until the day when Islam proves it really was Allah that created these food plants. Until that day it only is a clear sign that Islam and the Quran only have claims and cheap words and no proofs to show. Because if they had real arguments, they did not have to resort to logically invalid claims only. (This is an unavoidable conclusion from some persons giving things thoughts).005 16/12: "- - - verily this (sun, moon, stars, day, night*) are Signs for men that are wise." Wrong. See 16/11 just above.006 16/13: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.*007 16/15a: "And He (Allah*) has set upon the earth mountains standing firm, lest it should shake with you; - - -". Mountains do not hinder earthquakes (really other places in Islamic literature seems to indicate that what the book really means, is that the Earth can become unstable and capsize - impossible for a globe, but possible for a flat Earth). Some Muslims vaguely tries to find a way around the Quran and "explain" that mountains grow (are not "set upon earth"), but that in case is no explanation in this case - both growth from tectonic movements and from volcanic activity may result in earthquakes - - - the opposite effect of what the Quran says.008 16/15b: "(Allah has made*) roads - - -". Wrong – if Islam does not really prove it. The roads in the Middle East at the time of Muhammad in reality only were tracks most places –made not by Allah, but by the walking of men and animals through centuries and millennia.*009 16/36a: "For We (Allah*) assuredly sent amongst every people a Messenger, (with the command),'Serve Allah, and eschew Evil': - - -". The Quran insists that every people everywhere and every time through history has been sent prophets for Allah. The Hadiths mention that through the times there have been 124ooo prophets or more, and even that number is just an expression for innumerably many. But nowhere in the world - except in Israel (and in a way in Egypt under pharaoh Akn-Aton, who only accepted the sun as god -not Allah, and the Zoroastrians in Persia) - at any time or under any circumstances there are traces of prophets preaching monotheism before year one AD. Not in history, not in folklore, not in traditions, not in history, not in art, not in literature, not in archaeology, not any place - not even in fairy tales or legends. Especially when you compare this to the results of just two "prophets": Jesus and Muhammad, it is not possible that 124ooo or more prophets through the times have left not a single trace. This statement about all the prophets for Allah simply is not true.010 16/36b: "So travel through the earth, and see what was the end of those who denied (the Truth)". There were scattered ruins in Arabia. The Quran/Muhammad tells they all are results of Allah's punishment of infidels. Hardly true - at least not for all of them.011 16/36c: "- - - those who denied (the Truth)". With all the mistakes in the Quran, it is impossible to believe that the book or Islam represents the full truth and only the truth. (That is one of the main reasons why Islam can accept not a single mistake in the Quran no matter how obvious the mistake is - if there are mistakes, something is wrong with the book - - - -and consequently with the religion).00d 16/38: "- - - a promise (binding) on Him in Truth, - - -". What is true in a book full of mistakes?012 16/39: "- - - the rejecters of the Truth - - -". See 16/38 just above.013 16/48a: "- - - Allah's creations, (even) among (inanimate) things - how their (very) shadows turn round, - - -, prostrating themselves to Allah". Wrong – see 13/15c.014 16/48b: "- - - Allah's creations, (even) among (inanimate) things - how their very shadows turn round, from right to left - - -". Wrong: This is not a general law – it only is true on the northern hemisphere. On the southern it is from left to right – and Islam pretends to be a universal religion. Even a mentally retarded god had known this – but Muhammad of course not. Who made the Quran?015 16/49a: "And to Allah doth obeisance all that is in the heavens (plural and wrong*) and on earth, whether moving (living) creatures or the angels - - -". Wrong – if Islam does not prove the opposite. Animals, birds, insects, fish, worms, etc. – they never are observed making obeisance to Allah (or to any other god). No rituals, no 5 prayers a day/night (even more so: Few animals are naturally active both night and day – "prayers" should be easy to notice), no servility except sometimes towards their own leaders, etc. And surely non-Muslim humans do not do obeisance to Allah – though sometimes to other real or made up god or gods.016 16/49b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.017 16/50: "They all (all living beings*) revere their Lord (Allah*)". Wrong – if Islam does not produce good proofs. See 16/49a above.018 16/52: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.019 16/62: "- - - they (people*) attribute to Allah what they hate (daughters*)". Wrong – if Islam pretends to be a universal religion. Some places on Earth – like in Arabia – girl babies may have been hated. But most places they only were of lower value, and far from hated. Then some places they were valued more or less equally. There also were places where daughters were valuable – f. ex. because they meant money/valuables to their parents when they married. There even were a few places were the societies were matriarchates, and the girls the main sex. (This is one of the many points in the Quran that points to some human(s) in Arabia as the maker(s) of the Quran – there are too many points like this.)020 16/64a: "And We (Allah*) sent down the Book (the Quran*) - - -". The old and impertinent - but very pertinent - question is: Did an omniscient send down a third rate book? - third rate because it has so many mistakes and so much invalid/twisted logic that you cannot rely on anything you cannot control via other sources + not well written. The simple fact is: No god would make a book like this.021 16/64b: "(The Quran was sent down*) for the express purpose, that thou (Muhammad*) shouldst make clear to them things - - -". How is it possible to make things clear by means of a book full of mistakes, contradictions, and invalid/false "proofs"?022 16/64c: "- - - and that it (the Quran*) should be a guide - - - to those who believe". A book with so many mistakes etc. is no guide for anybody.00e 16/64d: "- - - and that it (the Quran*) should be a guide and a mercy to those who believe." Can a book with so much inhumanity, hate and blood be a mercy to anyone? –except perhaps to Muhammad himself and to his successors and helpers who gained/gains riches and power?023 16/65a: "And Allah sends down rain from the skies, and gives therewith life to the earth after its death: - - -". If rain is all it takes to make earth flourish, it was not dead before the shower - there was lots of live seeds and may be roots. And is it Allah or some other god - or nature - that sends it down?024 16/65b: "And Allah sends down rain from the skies, and gives therewith life to the earth after its death: verily in this is a Sign for those who listen." See 16/65a just above. It is some sign to use an invalid proof. The Quran often talks about Signs that shall document or prove Allah. The sorry thing is that each and every one of them, with the possible exception of some taken from the Bible, are without any value as proof for a god, and not one single proves anything about the existence of Allah. The two most frequent reasons are that they in reality are just claims taken from thin air, or they build on statements that are not proved. See separate chapter about this.025 16/65c: "- - - verily in this (rain, etc.*) is a Sign for those who listen." Possibly so for those who only listens and do not think. For those who also think, it actually is a sign of nothing, until Islam proves that it really is Allah that makes the rain, etc., and that all the unproven and undocumented claims in the Quran are not just so much thin air and cheap words. Well, actually it proves one thing: That the Quran, Muhammad, Islam, the Muslims, all have nothing more to show for the religion than unproven and undocumented claims – if they had had some reliable proof, they had used them instead of just words and twisted logic.026 16/66: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.027 16/67: "- - - in this (fruits, etc.*) also is a Sign for those who are wise". Wrong. See 16/65b and 16/65c just above.028 16/69: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.029 16/73: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.030 16/77: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.*031 16/79a: "Nothing holds them (the birds*) up but (the power of) Allah". Wrong. What hold them up are the laws of aerodynamics. Muhammad would not know this, but all gods would.032 16/79b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah – especially as the initial claim is wrong (see 16/79a just above). See 2/39 above.00f 16/81a: "He (Allah*) made you garments - - -". Proofs for that Allah did this?00g 16/81b: "He (Allah*) made you garments to protect you from the heath". This is another point where one may wonder: Did the maker of the Quran know only the Middle East? – most garments are made to protect humans from the cold.033 16/82: "- thy (Muhammad's*) duty is only to preach the Clear Message". It is not possible to preach a clear message from a book full of mistakes.034 16/89a: "- - - We (Allah*) have sent down to thee the Book (the Quran*) - - -". Yes, that is the big question for Islam. If Allah exists, and if he sent down the Quran, and if Muhammad retold everything correctly - f. ex. did not "doctor" the surahs in Medina to get warriors or peace in his family - Islam is a religion. If it is not true, what then? - and what happens in case to all Muslims if there is a next life run by a real god they have been prohibitted to search for? Can a book full of mistakes be sent down by a god - not to say an omniscient one? Flatly no.035 16/89b: "- - - the Book (the Quran*) explaining all things, - - -". Except that some of the explanations obviously are wrong. And except that many things are not explained.036 16/89c: "- - - (the Quran is*) a Guide - - - to Muslims". A book with that many mistakes and that much twisted logic and that much hate and inhumanity cannot be a real guide to anyone (and if someone all the same uses it as a guide, it tells volumes about them).00h 16/102a: "- - - the Holy Spirit has brought the revelation - - -". Muhammad Azad: "The Message of the Quran" tells that the Arab word "ruh al-qudus" (= the Holy Spirit) is used 3 times in the Quran (2/87, 5/110 – both connected to Jesus – and here), and that here it means the angel Gabriel. The Holy Spirit in Arab = Gabriel? That in case means that in 2/87 and 5/110 Jesus is strengthened with the angel Gabriel - a bit far from what the Bible tells. (It is likely Islam sets the Holy Spirit = Gabriel because the Quran tells that Gabriel brought large parts of the Quran (other parts came to him in dreams, etc.), so that when it says that the Holy Spirit brought him verses, that must mean that the book is talking about Gabriel - not 100% logical."037 16/102b: "- - - revelations from thy Lord (Allah*) - - -". Once more: Can the revelations be from an omniscient god, when so many of them are wrong or contain mistakes? Out of the question!038 16/102c: "- - - revelations from thy Lord (Allah*) in Truth - - -". With all the mistakes, the revelations told in the Quran, at best are partly true.039 16/102d: "- - - revelations from thy Lord (Allah*) in Truth, in order to strengthen those who believe - - -". It is a strange way for a religion to strengthen its believers at least partly with wrong and/or not reliable "information". There are far too many mistakes in the Quran for any sentient educated being with fresh eyes, to believe it is reliable.040 16/102e: "- - - revelations from thy Lord (Allah*) in Truth, in order to strengthen those who believe, and as a Guide - - - to Muslims". It tells volumes about Islam, if they use a book full of mistakes + discrimination, hate and war against non-Muslims as a guide for their believers - the Muslims. And even more if the religion/religious leaders try to "explain" away even obvious mistakes instead of finding out what is true and what not.041 16/102f: "- - - revelations from thy Lord (Allah*) in Truth, in order to strengthen those who believe, and as a Guide and Glad Tidings to Muslims". What kind of glad tidings can be built on at least to a large part mistaken and/or valueless statements and as wrong facts? It is bad if Islam really believes everything - that means they are too blind - or blinded - to see even the most obvious mistakes. But it is much worse if (some of) the leaders and learned men/teachers see the mistakes and bluff their audiences. And not least: If all the mistakes means that Islam is a made up religion - such religions do happen - and blocks the way for its (mis-) believers to a true religion (if such one exists), what then? Besides: Is it permission to steal and rob and rape and take slaves that are "glad tidings"? – fighting, women and looting are very central in the Quran.042 16/103: "- - - this (the Quran*) is in Arabic, pure and clear". Wrong in many ways: There are alien words, there are orthographical mistakes, there are grammatical errors and there are lots and lots of places where even today Islam does not know the exact meaning of words or verses (the last partly because the book originally was written by means of an unfinished alphabet).043 16/104: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.044 16/105: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.045 16/109: "Without doubt, in the Hereafter it is they (non-Muslims*) who will perish." Because of all the mistakes, etc. in the Quran, there is real reason for doubt about the hereafter – and even more so about if it really is like described in the Quran. Because of this – and because of all the other mistakes in the Quran – there is real reason for doubt about who will perish.046 16/115: "He (Allah*) has only forbidden you dead meat, and blood, and the flesh of swine, and any (food) over which the name of other than Allah has been invoked". Wrong. Hadiths – f. ex. Al-Bukhari and Muslim – are very clear on the fact that also meat from donkey is forbidden. (This is one of the cases where Hadiths abrogate the Quran. Perhaps Allah forgot that donkey meat was forbidden in the Mother Book, or Muhammad forgot to mention it?)047 16/123: "So We (Allah*) has thought thee (Muhammad/Muslims*) the inspired messages (the Quran*) - - -". No omniscient god has thought anyone so much mistakes, invalid logic, invalid signs, invalid proofs, like what you find in the Quran.048 16/125: "- - - the Way of thy Lord (Allah*) - - -". The Quran does not represent the way of an omniscient god – not a good one at least: Too many mistakes, etc.Surah 16: At least 48 mistakes + 8 likely mistakes.
SURAH 17:
340
001 17/1: "(Allah took Muhammad*) to the Farthest Mosque" = the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem according to Islam – but they still disagree on whether it was a real trip or a dream. But anyhow: The old Jewish temple was destroyed by Titus and his Roman Army in 64 AD, and nothing of any consequence was built on this small mountain until the Dome of the Rock was built in 690 AD, some 630 years later - - - and some 60-70 years after surah 17 - "The Night Journey" - was dictated around or after 621 AD. There simply was no mosque to visit around 621-630 AD. Is this a later addition to the Quran? - after all the book existed in many versions which were copied and copied by hand and thus could change a little now and then, and it was not really finished until around 900 AD. (Muslims explains this away with that the few walls of the old Jewish temple is what is meant, but that definitely is not what the Quran says.)
002 17/2: "We (Allah*) gave Moses the Book (the Quran), - - -". According to all information and to science this is wrong. God /Yahweh gave him (according to the Bible) the 10 commandments only + he told him the law (later a part of the Torah) that he himself wrote down. The Book of Moses in reality is several hundred years younger.
00a 17/4: "- - - (and twice they (the Jews*) should be punished)!" The Jews have been "punished" at least twice during history – does that mean they are in reality are safe now, except for minor episodes?
003 17/9a: "Verily the Quran doth guide to that which is most right (or stable) - - -". That is not possible on basis of a book with may be 3000+ mistakes, contradictions, invalid logic, and worse. It is worth adding that "The Message of the Quran" (remark 10 to this surah) specifies that "most right" includes "ethical principles and everything that promotes human life". A bit special for a religion that has no ethical or moral philosophy, only the dictates from the morally very special war lord and robber baron Muhammad – and reckons robbing, enslavement, rape of slaves, suppression, discrimination, murder, hate, war as "lawful and good" and very clearly permitted, and even encouraged by the god and the religion. (Well, Allah and Muhammad got many warriors – and for free). Similar claims, see 2/213 – 48/28.
004 17/9b: "- - - and (the Quran*) giveth the glad tidings to the Believers - - -". What kind of glad tidings can be built on a book containing hundreds of mistakes? - tidings of a fool's paradise? And can even such tidings be reliable, when built on some hundreds of mistakes + hundreds and hundreds of unproven statements hanging in the air, resting on unproven words? (See separate chapters). And what kind of glad tidings are built on moral and etics like what you find in the Quran - live a good life at the expences of catastrophes for many others?!
*005 17/12: "- - - all things have We (Allah*) explained in detail". Wrong. A lot of things are not explained in detail - f. ex. Muslim laws has had to be supplemented with many more paragraphs than the ones in the Quran and in Hadith - and still Muslim law are far from perfect concerning modern life and societies, and even concerning daily life. And just? - A man telling that a woman has behaved indecently is lying to Allah according to Allah and the Quran, if he cannot produce 4 witnesses, EVEN IF HE SPEAKS THE FULL TRUTH, AND THE OMNISCIENT ALLAH KNOWS THIS. And much worse: A raped woman is to be punished if she cannot produce 4 MEN who witnessed the very act - normally absolutely
impossible. (For one thing rape normally happens in hidden places, and for another: How many men will come forth to tell: "We saw that she was raped, but did not try to help her" -and then be strictly punished for that omission? Those two points in the Quran are the most horribly unjust and inhuman paragraphs we have ever seen or heard about in any even half civilized law. Is sharia half civilized? Is Allah good or/and just?
00b 17/15: "- - - nor would We (Allah*) visit with Our Wrath until We had sent a Messenger (to give warning)". This Islam will have to prove - see 17/16 just below.
00c 17/16: "When We (Allah*) decide to destroy a population, We (first) send a definite order to those among them who are given the good things of this life (= the rich and/or leaders*) and yet transgress - - -". This Islam will have to prove, because f. ex. many a natural catastrophe has happened absolutely without a warning - f. ex. the tsunami that in December 2004 hit Muslims far, far harder than any other religion. We never heard that f. ex. Malaysiaor Indonesia or Sumatra or Ashe had received warnings.
006 17/41: "- - - their flight (from the Truth)!" At best from partly true statements - the Quran at best is only partly true.
007 17/42: "If there had been (other) gods with Him (Allah*) - - - behold, they would certainly have sought out a way to the Lord of the Throne". Wrong – it is a possibility, but very far from a certainty. F. ex. are hierarchies possible, or splitting the "job".
*008 17/44a: "The seven heavens - - -". There are no seven heavens. See 10/6.
00d 17/44b: "- - - there is not a thing but celebrates (= all things celebrates*) His (Allah's*) praise - - -". This Islam will have to prove - it is an unlikely statement built on no obvious fact(s).
009 17/46: "- - - (the unbelievers*) turn on their backs, fleeing (from the Truth)". At most from what is partly the truth, as the Quran has lots and lots of mistakes.
010 17/55: "We (Allah*) gave David (the gift of) the Psalms". According to science the psalms are a lot younger than King David – at least most of them. A god had known.
011 17/59: "And We (Allah*) refrain from sending the Signs (miracles that would prove Allah and Muhammad's connection to him*), only because the men of former generations treated them as false - - -". This is a flat lie – and Muhammad was too intelligent not to know it. Not all, but a lot of people came to believe (f. ex. during the times of Jesus and Moses
according also to the Quran) because of clear miracles in the old times – and a lot would come to believe at the time of Muhammad and at the time of today if there were clear miracles connected to a religion.
012 17/61: "- - - one (Adam*) whom Thou (Allah*) didst create from clay - - -". Wrong simply and plainly. See 6/2.
013 17/73: "- - - that (the Quran*) which We (Allah*) had revealed to you (Muhammad*)". A book with so many mistakes, etc. like you find in the Quran, is not made by a god.
014 17/77: "(This was Our (Allah's*)) way with the messengers We sent before thee (Muhammad*), thou wilt find no change in Our ways." Wrong. There is so much difference between especially NT and the Quran, that it is not the same religion at all. F. ex. Jesus was for peace, Muhammad for war. And science has clearly shown that the Bible is not falsified –
Islam in case will have to prove it, and after 1400 years of thorough searching they have
found not one single proof, only loose claims. (Guess if they had told the world about it if they really had found a proof!!)
015 17/81: "Truth (the teachings of Muhammad*) has (now) arrived, - - -". As these teachings build on the Quran, and the Quran contains lots of mistakes, the teachings are at best partly the truth.
016 17/82: "We (Allah*) sent down - - - in the Quran - - -". Islam will have to prove that the Quran really is sent down, and sent down from an omniscient god. Without VERY good proofs, it is difficult to believe an omniscient god has sent down such a mess, and especially if he intended to save people for his Heaven. Yes, without such proofs, it simply is impossible tobelieve it.
*017 17/88: "If the whole mankind and Jinns (originally figures from Arab folklore and fairy tales – and not mentioned by any other prophet throughout times, even though they are pretty active and part of what Islam claims is the same basic religion as the Jewish and the Christian one*) were gathered together to produce the like of this Quran, they could not produce the like thereof". Wrong. A flock of naïve primitives or people indoctrinated from childhood might believe this. But a number of good writers today and through history would be able to do that - this everyone knows who have read some good books. The Quran is not especially good literature to be polite, in spite of what Islam declares - rather dull, repeating the same stories time and time again, and using the same points and the same finish over and over, and not least: There are few if any original thoughts or ideas - they are "borrowed" from other sources, included made up sctiptures, legends and faity tales. See also 10/37a and 10/37b.
018 17/92: "Or thou (Muhammad*) cause the sky to fall in pieces, as thou sayest (will happen) - - - ". No matter what Muhammad says will happen, and Allah accepts to repeat in his (?) book thousands and millions of years before Muhammad said it (!), it is wrong. The sky is an optical illusion, and cannot fall down in pieces.
019 17/95: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/2a.
020 17/98: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
021 17/99a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
022 17/99b: "- - - of which there is no doubt - - -". With this many mistakes - something like three or four pr. page in our book when you count just the surely mistaken facts - there is nothing in the Quran that can be no doubt about, unless it is really proved correct. And nearly nothing in the book is proved.
00e 17/101: "To Moses We (Allah*) did give nine Clear Signs - - -." According to the Bible he got his staff cum snake + 10 plagues = 11 "signs". Which book is most reliable – if any?
*023 17/102a: "- - - I (Moses*) consider thee indeed, O Pharaoh, to be one doomed to destruction!" Pharaoh Ramses II was not doomed to destruction, at least not this time. He did not drown, in spite of what the Quran says. – and he lived for several years after the possible exodus. (Which may be one of the reasons why some Muslims want the exodus from Egypt to have happened under pharaohs we do not know as well as Ramses II - preferably one we do not know if he may have drowned or not).
024 17/102b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
***025 17/103: "- - - We (Allah*) did drown him (pharaoh Ramses II) and all who were with him." The pitiful fact is that we know from history that Ramses II did not drown. He even did not die until some years after possible the exodus, according to history.
026 17/105a: "We (Allah*) sent down the (Quran) - - -". If Allah is omniscient, he did not make such a second or third-rate book - only all the mistaken facts makes it at least second rate, and then there are f. ex. all the invalid statements and proofs, not to mention the simply wrong ones and the contradictions.
027 17/105b: "We (Allah*) sent down the (Quran) in Truth, - - -". Perhaps - and perhaps not. The stumbling stone for these statements in the Quran is the large collection of mistaken facts and invalid signs, etc. in the book. It at best is partly true.
028 17/105c: "- - - and in Truth it has descended - - -". See 17/105 just above.
029 17/105: "- - - Glad Tidings - - -." At best only partly right. See 2/97c and 17/9b above and 91/13 below.
030 17/106a: "- - - a Quran which We (Allah*) have divided - - -". If any omniscient god has had anything at all to do with a sorry work like making or "sending down" the Quran, Islam will have to prove it.
031 17/106b: "We (Allah*) have revealed it (the Quran*) by stages." See 17/106a just above.
***032 17/107: "Say: 'Whether you believe it or not, it is true that those who were given knowledge beforehand (= Christians and Jews mainly*), when it (the Quran*) is recited to them, fall down on their faces in humble prostration". One word: Nonsense. And what is worse: The one that composed this verse knew it was a lie – which also Muhammad knew
when he made or recited it. A few Jews and Christians are said to have converted by 656 AD when the Quran is said to be written, though very few if any in 621 when this surah was made, but as a general rule: Utter nonsense. Just look at the history of conflicts between Islam, Jews and Christians, not to mention all the Jews in and near Medina that rather became fugitives or were killed, than to accept Islam – f. ex. Khaybar - and no more is necessary to say. You sometimes meet dishonesty like this in new, emerging religions and sects. It is a way of gaining "weight" for their statements, especially when they have few facts or proofs to show for themselves. Just one small fact that disproves this fairy tale: The 700 Jews in Khaybar could have saved their lives and possessions by becoming Muslims in time. To a man they chose not to.
033 17/108a: "And they (Jews and Christians when they hear the Quran*) say: 'Glory to our Lord! Truly has the promise of our Lord been fulfilled (and the Messiah has come*)!" Made up propaganda. See 17/107 just above.
034 17/108b: "And they (Jews and Christians) say: "Glory to our Lord! Truly has the promise of our Lord been fulfilled!" As for the likeliness that this is true, see 17/107 above. But Islam (in this case "The Message of the Quran") tells that it may refer to all the mentioning of Muhammad in the Bible (of which we have found none that is not just wishful statements that are obviously wrong – see "Muhammad in the Bible?"), but that it most likely means joy for finally getting the Quran, which Allah had promised and now finally had sent. There is no reference to a promise of something like the Quran in the Bible, and Jews and Christians at all times did reckon the Quran to be so wrong and so distant from the Bible, that it was not even heresy. Verse 107 and 108 simply are fairy tales made up to back up Muhammad - a not unusual technique to use by emerging new sects or religions. It may be based on a few converts at that time, or free fantasy - dishonesty happens when new religions and sects are made. And later.
035 17/109: "They (Jews and Christians*) fall down on their faces in tears (when they hear the Quran*)". As honest as 17/107 and 17/108 just above.
*00f 17/111a: "- - - Allah, Who begets no son - - -". Well, Jesus called Yahweh "father". Besides it is funny to read the Quran scolding Arabs to believe Allah had daughters - al-Lat, al-Uzza and (al-) Manat - because it is plain stupidity to believe a god who wanted family, would choose to have daughters. He was sure to choose sons. That imbecility was enough
proof in the man-centred old Arabia, to "prove" that the very idea had to be wrong. But when Yahweh may be wanted some company - a son - that is an utter impossibility in spite of this. Even more funny because the Quran, Muhammad, Islam and Muslims tell it is impossible for mere humans to understand a god - - - but everyone seems to be sure that a god wants to be alone, and neither do they ask if a god perhaps has a reason (that we may or may not understand for having a son, nor ask if he just wants company. Who knows a god's wishes?
*00g 17/111b: "- - - and has no partner in (His) dominion - - -". Well, Islam says that Allah is the same god as Yahweh. If we discuss from that hypothetical statement just here: In the very old Hebrew religion there was a female partner/wife of Yahweh - his Amat (source: New Scientist and at least two others). In the strictly masculine Semitic culture the Amat was
forgotten over the centuries. But may be she still existed all the same at the time of Muhammad - and may be even today?
Surah 17: At least 35 mistakes + 7 likely mistakes.
SURAH 18:
001 18/1a: "- - - Allah, Who hath sent down to his Servant the Book". Well, the sinister question is: Can a book that full of mistaken facts and other facts, really be sent down by an omniscient god? If yes, does that mean that Allah is not omniscient/omnipotent? If no, does it mean that someone else who is/was not omniscient, has made (up) the Quran? The last question is most sinister, especially if it means that Islam is a made up religion, and even more so if this (may be?) made up religion blocks the road for its "believers" to a real religion (if such one exists). The answers have got to be: No omniscient god would make such an unreliable book (among other reasons because man had to see the mistakes sooner or later), and it is likely it is made by one or more humans at the time of Mohammad (among other reasons because the mistakes and many of the stories are in accordance with what one believed in Arabia at that time).
002 18/1b: "(Allah*) hath allowed therein no Crookedness." In a book that full of mistaken facts and other mistakes, there is a lot of crookedness. Especially the use of invalid "signs" and "proofs" smell.
003 18/2a: "(He (Allah*) hath made it) Straight (and Clear) - - -". A book that full of mistaken facts and other mistakes, f. ex. linguistic ones, (and perhaps religious ones, too - why should they be exceptions?) is neither straight nor clear.
004 18/2b: "- - - Glad Tidings - - -." At best only partly right. See 2/97c and 17/9b above and 91/13 below.
00a 18/4: "(It is wrong*) that Allah hath begotten a son". Well, we are back to the old facts that Jesus according to the Bible - written on the background of thousands of witnesses/listeners - many times called God/Yahweh Father, that humble humans - f. ex. Muhammad - are unable to understand completely the ways and wishes of a god (may be Yahweh wanted a son for some reason), and that Islam has to deny that Jesus was the son of Yahweh, in order to make (or pretend?) Mohammad the greatest prophet. Besides: Where are Islam's proofs? - in spite of Islam's glorifying of blind belief - a psychologically wise slogan when all one have are doubtful and at least partly wrong texts from a doubtful, self
proclaimed "prophet" of at least as doubtful character - it is naïve in the extreme to believe blindly in so serious matter as eternity. If your chosen religion is a made up one - which every blind believer in every religion believes just their religion is not - where do you end if there is a next life? - and what if there is a real religion that you have not found, because of your blindness. Perhaps all religions are made up and just is a result of an inner longing in some people for something absolute (science have found that many weak - and some stronger -souls have such a longing in their genes or psyche), but in that case one at least does not have to make life as miserable for ones fellow men (and even more for the women) as Islam preaches - hate, rape, stealing, enslavement, and war.
*005 18/5a: "No knowledge have they (the Christians*) of such a thing (that Yahweh may have a son*)". Wrong. There is a lot of information in the Bible. Now of course Muhammad, the Quran, and Islam all declare that the Bible has been falsified - they have to, as that was the only way for Muhammad to explain the differences between his "quoting" the Bible and quoting of religious legends, fairy tales, etc., and the Bible proper (it also is common among religious sects or religions to say that other sects or religions have misunderstood or falsified information), and also between Islam and Christianity. But science clearly has shown that the Bible is not falsified. But the Quran is based only on what a single man said - only one man. A man that lived 600years later, who brings not one single proof or witness - only claims and statements taken from nowhere and from legends. Also a man for whom it was essential (just read the Quran and see) to be the greatest of prophets, which meant he had to reduce Jesus. And a man who craved very much for power - once more; just read the Quran and see how he glues himself to his platform of power; his religion and the god of that religion - which meant that his teachings had to gain priority over other teachings. And a man telling he got his teachings
directly from an omniscient god - which meant it was impossible to accept that there were mistakes in the teachings (a problem that today is a nightmare for Islamic scholars, because there very obviously are lots of mistakes, and it is difficult to find good enough ways of "explaining" the mistakes away, except for to people with no - or not enough - knowledge, or not able to think for themselves - - - or believing so strongly that they anyhow do not want to see facts that do not fit what they believe.) Whereas the Bible is written by many different persons, and as for NT many of whom knew Jesus or his closest co-workers, the Disciples, and nearly all wrote at times when there still were thousands of witnesses alive that had personally heard and seen what Jesus said and did.We do not say that the Bible is right. We even less say that all details in the Bible are right, as it is clear that some details are wrong also in the Bible, at least in Genesis (creating it all).
But there is no doubt that according to all rules for evaluating information, the Bible should be more reliable than the Quran. The OT is written some 1000 years earlier and consequently 1000 years closer to what happened, and also had at least a lot of verbal traditions to build on. And NT was written 450 – 600 before the Quran, and with lots and lots of witnesses to what had happened still alive when much of it was written. Muhammad on the other hand had few sources, and they were mixed up with fairy tales (like the Child Gospels, from which he f. ex. has got the story of the bird Jesus made from clay) or so-called apocryphal gospels or books -all of which are proved to be made up or propaganda for sects, or - well - fairy tales. Ok, he said he got his information from a god - but that is very easy and very cheap to say - many a founder of many a sect or religion have said the same thing. And there is not a single proof -not one single - for it being true in all the Quran, in spite of wishes and demands from bothsceptics and followers. Questions that at best were answered with some fast-talk about what Allah could do if he wanted (but he never "wanted") or that none of them would believe even if Allah sent real (supernatural) proofs (something any person that knows a little about people or about psychology knows is not true - supernatural proofs/wonders had made at least some believe. What is worse: Muhammad was a wise man who understood human nature - he had to know that he was lying each time he told just this). And do not forget: The glorified ideal Muhammad was in reality a highwayman and thief, an extorter, a rapist, a murderer and mass murderer, an enslaver, a warlord lusting for power, and a warlord telling that "war is betrayal".There also is the fact that science knows some 13ooo scriptures or fragments with relation to the Bible or biblical circumstances. Plus 30ooo+ other manuscripts with referances to the Bible. They all are in accordance with the modern Bible, and when they find that the translators of the Bible have misunderstood or not been quite exact enough, the translation of the Bible is corrected in later editions - one wants and strives for to have everything as correct as possible. In stark contrast: When Islam finds scriptures or fragments that is not quite the same as the 1-2 they use today, the findings are denied and hidden - a star example is the many copies of the Quran found in Yemen in 1972; when it became clear that details - some
of them of significance - were unlike what was written in the Quran(s) of today, scientists were denied access to them any more.Conclusion: Any student and any professor of history will say that according to normal rules for evaluation, the Bible is far more reliable than the Quran as a source for historical information. And any psychologist will confirm that Muhammad must have known he lied each and every time he said that (supernatural) proofs of Allah had made no-one believe in Allah anyhow. And more: No serioud scientist uses information from the Quran from before
610 AD in his science - it is not reconed to be reliable.
00b 18/5b: "What they (the "infidels"*) say (about Jesus being the son of Yahweh*) is nothing but falsehood". Tell that to all the witnesses that heard Jesus say so. There were so many listening to Jesus, that if a thing like this (Jesus calling Yahweh his father, and obviously in a traditional meaning - though perhaps a created, not a born son) was a lie, but was written in scripts meant for many to read, there had been serious protests and corrections. We do not say Jesus spoke the truth - even if he is accepted also by Islam to be an honest prophet. But we say it is highly unlikely that he did not say - many times - that Yahweh was his father. There simply were too many witnesses to what he said.
*00c 18/9a: "Or dost thou reflect that the Companions of the Cave - - -". This is an old tale - a religious legend - that is incorporated in the Quran. The story of the 7 sleepers is well known -and is just a fairy tale. The 7 were Christians from Ephesus in what is now Turkey, that fled to a cave during a pogrom under "Cesar" Decius the story goes.Decius had the cave walled up to kill them. Instead the 7 fell asleep, and did not wake up until in the 30.th year of the reign of the pious Theodosius - that is in 448 AD. Decius reined for just over two years around/just after 250 AD. That means that if the fairy tale had been true, they had slept some 195 years (the Quran says 300 or 309 years - even in the fairy tale it is wrong). Islam has troubles explaining this story, and the "explanations" we have seen, are very "lofty" and diffuse - f. ex. that it really is told about an older Jewish fairy tale - or that it derives from misunderstandings about the Esseers - the members of the Qumran society (nearthe Dead Sea) but without giving any sources or documentation - only speculations. Besides the age does not matter – it is as made up even if it should happen that the original is a bit
older. They also tell it is an allegory - which they mostly do when they have difficulties finding "explanations" that are possible to believe. But an allegory of what? And it obviously is not meant to be an allegory - among other things the meanings of an allegory in the Quran normally are very easy to see or are explained. The Quran further normally tells when it is telling an allegory or something similar, and not least; the Quran itself stresses that it shall be understood literally if nothing else is said. The sleepers also mentioned in 18/13 – 18/22 –
18/25. Also see 18/13 below.
006 18/9b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
007 18/13: "We (Allah*) relate to thee their (the 7 sleepers) story in truth: - - -". As this is a well-known fairy tale, and as the Quran has so many other mistakes, carefully said: At best it is only partly the truth. But note that it is stressed that the story is the truth - not an allegory, not made up, but the truth..
008 18/14: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
009 18/17: "- - - the signs of Allah - - -." There is not one single sign in the Quran that clearly is from Allah, and thus not one single "sign" that proves anything about Allah. Any priest in any religion can just as easy say they are signs of his god(s). Words are that cheap.
010 18/22: "(Some) say they (the 7 sleepers) were three, the dog being the fourth among them, (others) say they were five, the dog being the sixth - doubtfully guessing the unknown; (yet others) say they were seven, the dog being the eight". If Muhammad got this story from a real story via a god, not from a well known fairy tale, the god had known their number (well, a god also had known the number that was told in a legend), but Muhammad obviously not. Also see 18/13 just above.
011 18/25: "So they (the 7 sleepers) stayed in their Cave three hundred years, and (some) add nine more". See 18/13 and 18/22. (If one relies on some historical facts mentioned in the main variety of the legend, they slept some 195 years).
012 18/26: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
00d 18/27a: "- - - the Book (the Quran*) of thy Lord (Allah*): - - - ". Is it really the words of a god? - with that many mistakes?
013 18/27b: "- - - the Book (the Quran) of thy Lord (Allah*): none can change His Words (the Quran*) - - -". Wrong. Reality can change the words when the words are wrong. And many verses were abrogated ("We (Allah*) sends another as good or better") - a few even by Hadiths - not to mention that the whole religion was changed in and after 622 AD from
peaceful to war and hate and stealing and rape. Islam cannot admit this change, because it may expose mistakes in the religion, but people are able to read, and it is easy to find in the Quran.
014 18/29: "Say, 'The Truth is from your Lord (Allah*)". Allah's words as presumed "referred" in the Quran at best is partly the truth - mind all the mistakes.
015 18/31: "- - - bracelets of gold - - -". Which is right and which is wrong? – in 76/21 the bracelets are from silver. One of them has to be wrong. A mistake and one more contradiction – in spite of that "contradictions does not exist in the Quran – which is a proof for that it came from Allah".
016 18/37a: "- - - Him (Allah*) Who created you out of dust - - -". Wrong - man was not created out of dust. See 6/2.
*017 18/37b: "- - - Him (Allah*) Who created you out of dust, then out of a sperm-drop - - -", Wrong, or at best half true. Humans are not made out of a drop of sperm - though the Quran says so repeatedly. Humans - and animals - are made out of sperm + an egg cell. Arabs knew a lot about foetuses (from slaughtering of animals), but an egg cell is so small, that one does not notice it - hardly possible to see in all the blood and intestines and gore, etc. - so the Quran tells the semen is "planted" in a woman and grows to a being. Muhammad did not know better as that was an accepted theory at his time – Greek and/or Persian "knowledge" originally - but an omniscient god had known - - - so who made the Quran?
017b 18/50 (A53 – omitted in 2008): "Behold, We (Allah*) said to the angels,' Bow down to Adam': they bowed down except Iblis. He was one of the Jinns - - -." But here is a clear mistake – or more likely; A. Yusuf Ali's religion and al-Taqiyya may have suppressed his honesty: The original Arab text here do not say he was a jinn: It says something like
(translated from Swedish): "He (Iblis*) belonged to the multitude of invisible beings". The text here honestly and clearly indicates that he was an angel before he became the Devil. On the other hand the Quran other places tells he was made from fire, which in case means he according to this book in reality was a jinn. This is one more place where the Muslim scholars agree that the text in the Quran is wrong (though they never say this in clear words) as it here most clearly is indicated that Iblis was an angel.
018 18/51: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
019 18/55: "- - - now that guidance (the Quran) has come to them (the "unbelievers")". A book with so many mistakes is not really guidance.
020 18/56a: "- - - glad tidings - - -." At best partly true only. See 2/97c above and 61/13 below.
021 18/56b: "- - - in order therewith to weaken the truth (the teachings of Muhammad/the Quran*), - - -". To repeat the reality: With so many mistakes in the Quran, it can maximum be partly true.
022 18/56c: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
023 18/57: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
***024 18/86a: The next mistakes concern a certain Dhu'l Quarnayn - a name meaning "the Two Horned One", and it is an Arab "nickname" for the famous Macedonian king Alexander the Great (see f. ex. "the Oxford Dictionary of Islam"), who lived around 330 BC (died 323 BC) - some 950 years before Muhammad. Muslims never tell that Dhu'l Quarnayn is
Alexander the Great - perhaps because every educated European at once would know that a lot of the information about him in the Quran is wrong - we know a lot about him.You will even meet Muslims denying Alexander is Dhu'l Quarnayn - "proving" their statements with f. ex. that Alexander today is well known to have been a polytheist, whereas the Quran indirectly, but very clearly tells he was a good Muslim (another one of the Quran's mistakes). It may be of interest to mention that Ibn Ishaq seems to have believed that Dhu'l Quarnayn was an Egyptian of Greek origin (page 139 in the 2007 edition from Oxford University Press, edited by A. Guillaume). And that Ibn Hisham in his note no. 186 to that book knew what he was talking about. He says that Dhu'l Quarnayn was a Greek (Alexander also was king of Greece) and simply states: "His name was Alexander. He built Alexandria and it was named after him" (Alexander the Great founded Alexandria - a well known historical fact). But Ibn Hisham refrains from using the full name Alexander the Great. It never was a secret for the learned ones that it was Alexander the Great who founded Alexandria, not even at the time of
Ibn Hisham (dead ca. 840 AD), but to mention his full name might perhaps cause difficult questions from many quarters, as it was clear that at least some of what was told about Dhu'l Quarnayn obviously had to be recognized as fairy tales by anyone knowing the story of Alexander the Great. May be Ibn Hisham was brave by even identifying him as the founder of Alexandria?
18/86a"- - - he (Alexander) reached the setting of the sun, - - -". To reach the setting of the sun means to go west. In addition to all the other mistakes in this story we know that Alexander never went west (the furthest west he ever was, was his homeland Macedonia north of Hellas, and Egypt). See also 18/8b and 18/86c just below.
**025 18/86b: "- - - when he (Alexander) reached the setting of the sun - - -". Anyone who knows two millimetres about geography and astronomy knows this is wrong and ridiculous to the extreme: The sun does not set on Earth – and absolutely in a pond of dirty water. Also see
18/86a and 18/86c just above and just below.
***026 18/86c: "- - - he (Alexander the Great*) found it (the sun*) set in a spring of murky water". This statement - or fairy tale - deserves a series of exclamation marks - anyone today who has finished primary school, knows among other facts:
1. The sun is too big to settle anywhere on Earth.
2. Not to mention that it is far too big to settle in a pond - murky or not.
3. And that if the sun ever came within a million miles from the Earth, there would be no
spring or pond any more - far too hot.Muhammad did not know the size or temperature of the sun, but an omniscient god had known.Who made the Quran?Muslims try to "explain" it by f. ex. telling that what he saw was the reflexion of a sunset in a spring. Think of the great warrior king Alexander - riding west and west and west with his men, day after day and week after week to find the place where the sun set. Then one day he hits upon one more pond - even one with dirty water. When he stands so that that dirty spring is in the straight line between him and the sun, he sees the red and yellow mirror image of the sunset in the muddy surface - a sight he has seen time and again and again before on the
surfaces of ponds and springs and rivers and lakes and seas - and he hails his men: "Now we have reached our goal!! Here is where the sun sets!! Now let's go home and tell about our great discovery".Believe it whoever wants. But whoever believes it needs to see a professor of history - or a psychologist to mend his brain. Also see 18/86a and 18/86b just above.
027 18/90: "- - - he came to the rising of the sun - - -". It is not physically possible to come to the place where the sun rises from the Earth as the Quran indicates, because it does not rise from the Earth - and if it had, both Alexander and the Earth had been rather fried. Also see 18/86 x 3 just above.
*00e 18/94: "- - - Gog and Magog -. - -". These are from the Bible. In the Bible one is a country and the other a king – king Gog of the country Magog. In the Quran they are two bad people. Who is right? Remember that Muhammad did not know the Bible well. A god had known. Then who composed the Quran?
**028 18/95: "He (Alexander*) said: '(The power) in which my Lord (Allah!!!*) has established me is better - - -". The Quran clearly indicates that Alexander was a pious Muslim (some 950 years before Muhammad!). To make an understatement: That is wrong. Alexander was a polytheist. (Muslims sometimes try to use this mistake as a proof for that Dhu'l Qarnayn was not Alexander). Also see 18/86a, 18/96b and 18/96c below.
***029 18/95-97: A people that lived in a valley were terrorized by two other people - Gog and Magog. They (the locals*) asked Alexander for help. He said: "I will erect a strong barrier between you and them: 'Bring me blocks of iron'". And he let build a wall of iron blocks produced by the locals straight across the valley, strong enough to be impossible for the people of Gog and Magog to get through, and tall enough to be impossible to get over even with the longest ladders - be sure that Gog and Magog knew about ladders. But nowhere on the entire earth there existed that much iron blocks around 330 BC – blocks of iron the locals were asked to bring him. (Note here that 18/93 tells the wall had to cross "(a tract) between two mountains" under which mountains a people lived – the wall had to have some length to cross "a tract" big enough for a whole people to live – it took a lot of iron blocks.)(Besides it is all ridiculous: Very few valleys - and no big valley - have only one possible way in and out - Gog and Magog could in case get around the wall. And if not, it always was possible to dig under the wall - this was a valley in which people lived, and such a valley would have soil under the wall.) See also 18/86a -18/86b – 18/86c.
**030 18/96a: "At length, when he (Alexander - or really the workers making the wall*) had filled up the space between the two steep mountain-sides, he said, 'Blow (with your bellows)'. Then, when he had made it red as a fire - - -". It would not be possible to make the whole of such a big wall red like fire at around 330 BC. They neither had the means - that kind of fire -nor the technology. It would be more than difficult even today. Fairy tale.
**031 18/96b: "Then, when he (Alexander the Great) had made it (red) as fire, he said: 'Bring me, that I may pour over it, molten lead" (Dawood says bronze we think).
1. We do not think there any one place on Earth was enough lead - or bronze - for such a job.
2. Even if it did, metal was expensive - the locals had to be very rich to have so much lead/bronze. And this goes even more so for enough iron blocks to build a huge wall.
3. It would not be technically possible to heat such a big and long wall to "make it (red) as fire" ca. 340 BC - it is hardly possible today.
**032 18/98: "This is a mercy from my Lord (Allah*)". Wrong. Alexander the Great was no
Muslim, but a polytheist.
033 18/105: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
034 18/106: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
Surah 18: At least 34 mistakes + 5 likely mistakes.
SURAH 19:
001 19/7: "- - - his name shall be Yahya (John*): on none by that name We (Allah*) have conferred distinction before". But Johanan (John), son of Kareah, was a distinguished man in 2. Kings, 25/23. In addition our sources say that the word "distinction" is not in the Arab edition, but added by Yusuf Ali to circumvent an obvious mistake, as the name John was not unknown in Hebrew. (Yusuf Ali's comment 2461). Other translators – f. ex. Muhammad Azad in "The Message of the Quran" – say in their comments to the point that the exact translation is (translated from Swedish): "We (Allah*) have never before named anybody with his (John the Baptist's) name before". But the name John (Johanan in Hebrew) is mentioned 27 times in OT = before John the Baptist – it was a quite common name. From relevant history also were the priest-king John Hyrcanus and the general John the Essene. There both were many Johns and men of distinction named John before John the Baptist. Simply wrong.
002 19/10: "- - - Thy Sign - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
*003 19/18: "- - - I (Mary, mother of Jesus*) seek refuge from thee to (Allah) Most Gracious: (come not near) if thou dost fear Allah". It is highly unlikely that a Jew - and especially one working in Yahweh's temple - should seek refuge from a then highly polytheistic god from another country. As one see from what happened to Jesus, the monotheism and Yahweh were strong in Israel at that time. If the Quran tells the truth when it tells that Mary was working in the Temple, it is absolutely impossible - she had got into serious troubles if she addressed any other god than Yahweh (but then the Quran most likely is wrong also on this point - We have found nothing about Mary working in the Temple in the Bible or any other source, and if it had been true, most or all Christian sources had mentioned it, as it would mean one more
connection between Jesus and Yahweh. (Actually it is incorrect that she worked in the Temple. This legend is taken from the apocryphal - made up - "'proto gospel' after Jacob" - -- but Muslims all the same tell that the differences between the Quran and the Bible is because the bad non-Muslims have falsified the latter one – not because Muhammad ever so often used twisted fairy tales as basis for stories in the Quran.) Our Muslim sources also do not mention if there exists any other reliable source for this story in the Quran - which Islam frequently does not do when they have no sources, only statements built on nothing or like here on what legends and stories the story-tellers told in long evenings. Her work in the Temple simply is a fairy tale shined up and used like a true story in the Quran - by Allah or by Muhammad, and presumably sent down from Allah and copy from the Mother Book in Heaven, a book perhaps made by Allah, but most likely - according to Islam - never made, but existed from eternity (impossible as angels are speaking at least one place in the book - it must be made after the first angels were created. Not to mention that Muhammad speaks some
8 places in the book).You are free to believe it if you want.
***004 19/24+25: "But (a voice) (the new-born baby Jesus*) cried from beneath the (palmtree): 'Grieve not! For thy Lord hath provided a rivulet beneath thee; 'And shake towards thyself the trunk of the palm-tree (normally date palms are minimum 50 cm wide and strong –impossible for a human to shake*): it will let fall fresh ripe dates upon thee". This story is "borrowed" from chapter 20 in an apocryphal – made up - "proto gospel" said to be after some Mathew. "Borrowed" by Muhammad or Allah, but presumably sent down as a copy from the Mother Book in Heaven. Believe the last if you want. There are few if any original stories in the Quran - mostly they are "borrowed" from different sources, but often changed a little. In this special case one also finds the story in "The Childbirth of Mary and the Salvador's Childhood" if we remember the name correctly, and it has perhaps entered the Quran via "The Arab Childhood Gospel" (source; among others Ibn Warraq). As said before: Muhammad took stories from such fairy tales, and then accused the Bible of being falsified when it did not tell the same made up legends and tales. But no newborn baby is able to think rationally or to speak fluently - if it had really happened it had to be a miracle, and there is no chance that it had been forgotten in NT, as it had strengthened Jesus' connection to something supernatural quite a lot.
00a 19/27: "O Mary! Truly a strange thing (the baby Jesus*) hast thou brought!". Mary had had to be very fat and very lucky if none of "her people" had noticed she was pregnant - be it at home or in the Temple.
***005 19/28: "(Mary*) O sister of Aaron!" This is the most famous mistake in the Quran. The likely reason is that in Arab the names Mary and Miriam (the sister of Moses and Aaron) both are written Maryam. Muhammad was not well versed in the Bible, and thought it was the same woman, even though some 1200 years separated them. The Hadith tells that Muhammad was told by his followers that he was wrong, and tried to explain away the mistake, but without real success. Muslims today tend to "explain" the blunder by saying it was an age-old way of paying respect to a woman to connect her to a person of high standard, and similar "explanations" but the "explanations" generally are not accepted by science, even not by all Muslim scientists - this may be partly because Muhammad also has made the father of Moses,
Imran, the father of Mary another place in the Quran. (This last fact is by some Muslims "explained" with that they are two different Imrans. But also this is not accepted by the science, as it is clear that it in both cases it is the same man it is talked about - the founder of "Imran's house" or Imran's tribe). Some Muslims say it is an allegory, but it clearly is not told
like an allegory – to call stories that turns out to be wrong allegories also is a standard Muslimway of explaining away difficult points when other "explanations" fail. And remember: Both the Quran and Islam strains that the Quran is to be understood literally if nothing else is said. Allegories, etc., also have points very easy to see, or are explained (which is not the case here) if Muhammad had intended to make a point of something. A clear mistake according to science. This is even more clear as Hadith tells Mohammad himself was unaware he had made a mistake, and tried unsuccessfully to explain it away when he was corrected by his nearest co-workers
**006 19/30a: "I (baby Jesus*) am indeed a servant of Allah, - - -". See 3/51.
**007 19/30b: "(Allah has*) given me revelations and made me (the baby Jesus*) a prophet -- -". Even Islam (f. ex. the learned Ikrimah, quoted by Tabari) accepts the impossibility that a baby is a prophet, but the explaining it away is vague and hypothetical. A very clear mistake. This even more so as there is not one single chance that this wonder had been forgotten in or omitted from NT if it had been true. Actually this is one of the points where many Muslim scholars accept there is a mistake in the Quran.
**008 19/30-33: The baby Jesus is talking and discussing in his cradle. Also this is "borrowed" from apocryphal Child Gospels - in this case as far as we know via "The Arab Child Gospel" - also called "The first Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ" – an apocryphal scripture from 2. century. There is not a single chance that a wonder like this had been
omitted from the Bible, as it would have strengthened Jesus' position quite a lot. This even more so as there are not many tales about Jesus as a child, and this story would have made that part of his life less blank. Once more a fairy tale used like a true story by Allah orMuhammad. Even a book like "The Message of the Quran" is not able to defend this as a true story, but it only offers speculations and presumptions to explain away the impossibility. Also see 19/30b just above.
A very clearly not true story - a clear mistake. We have never met a Muslim explaining why the Quran often took its stories from well known, but made up legends and fairy tales, and then explained the differences from the Bible by insisting that the Bible is faked."The Message of the Quran" (A24 – in 2008 edition A23): As baby Jesus impossibly could be a prophet, there has to be other explanations, according to the Muslim scholars. As said: ONE MORE PLACE WHERE MUSLIM SCHOLARS AGREE THAT SOMETHING MUST BE WRONG IN THE QURAN.
*009 19/34: "Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary: (it is) a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute". We are back to what is the truth in the Quran - with all the mistakes it is a difficult question. What is sure is that Jesus did not say he was a servant of the known polytheistic, foreign god al-Lah/Allah (in that case he had had very few followers and had
been killed much earlier), and that he called God/Yahweh "father". In this case the text refers to verses 30 through 33 (see 19/30a, 19/30b, 19/30-33 just above), which already are shown to be clear mistakes. Another clear mistake.
00b 19/35: "It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son". We hope it really is the god that is talking here, because if it is Muhammad; how is a human to know what is befitting for a god? - and majesties often have children - many children. F. ex. Ramses II had 67 sons and an unknown number of daughters, and Djingis Khan had so many children that science still can trace his DNA in Asia (source: New Scientist). And if this statement is true, there is the enigma of Jesus' saying "father" and "my father" about Yahweh (the word "father" is used at least 163 times in the Bible, and the word "son" at least 66 times about the relationship between Yahweh and Jesus – frequently by Jesus himself) – both the Bible and the Quran says Jesus was honest - and science has shown that the Bible is not falsified in spite
of Islam's never documented claims. (Alao remember: Muhammad calls Yahweh Allah, as he insists it is the same god - something that is possible only if Yahweh/Allah is schizophrenic as there are too many and too grave differences between the two teachings.)
010 19/36: "Verily Allah is my (Muhammad's*) Lord and your (Muslims'*) Lord - - -". This is a serious one: Here clearly it is Muhammad himself – Muhammad the man - that is speaking. How is that possible in a book made by a god before the universe was created or may be one which has existed since eternity, and a copy of a revered Mother Book sent down
from Heaven by Allah? (There are a few mistakes (?) like this (8?) in the Quran – see 6/114a.)
011 19/58: "- - - Signs - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
012 19/65: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
013 19/67: "We (Allah*) created him (Adam) before out of nothing". Man was not made out of nothing. Actually man was not created at all, but developed from earlier primates. See also 6/2. (Another small contradiction: In 52/35 and others it is indicated that man was not made from nothing.)
014 19/68: "So, by thy Lord (Allah*), without doubt, We (Allah*) shall gather them together -- -". With all the mistakes in the Quran there are good reasons for doubts.
00ba 19/71: "Not one of you but will pass over it (the bridge Sirat - to be passed the Last Day*)". Very similar to Zoroastrian, where the bridge is named Chinavad.
016 19/73: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". There is not one single clear sign (=proof) for neither Allah nor for Muhammad's connection to a god in all the Quran – only claims and statements backed by not proved words or by nothing.
017 19/77: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
00c 19/88-89: "They say: '(Allah) Most Gracious has begotten a son!' Indeed ye have put forth a thing most monstrous!" See among others 19/35.
00d 19/92: "For it is not consonant with the majesty of (Allah) Most Gracious that He should beget a son". See among others 19/35.
018 19/93: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
019 19/98: "- - - Glad Tidings - - -." At best only partly right. See 2/97c and 17/9babove and 91/13 below.
Surah 19: At least 18 mistakes + 5 likely mistakes.
SURAH 20:
001 20/2: "We (Allah*) have not sent down the Quran to thee to be (an occasion) for thy distress - - -". The main fact is that Allah (if he exists) did not send it down at all – no omniscient god makes that many and that obvious mistakes, etc.
002 20/4a: (The Quran is*) "A revelation from Him (Allah*)". The unanswered question is: Would an omniscient god send down a book with so many mistakes? - not to mention if he would have it as a not perfect, but all the same deeply respected Mother Book in his perfect Paradise? There is an answer: Either it is wrong that Allah sent it down, or it is wrong that Allah is omniscient - if he exists.
003 20/4b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
004 20/6: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
005 20/47a: "Verily we (Moses and Aaron*) are messengers sent by thy (Ramses II's*) Lord (Allah*) - - -". Wrong – Ramses II was a polytheist. Besides: He might have heard about Yahweh (but would not respect the god of slaves very much), but never of Allah.
006 20/47b: "- - - we (Moses and Aaron*) come from thy (Ramses II's*) Lord (Allah*)!" See 20/47a just above.
007 20/53: "He Who has made for you the earth like a carpet spread out; - - -". In the Quran the Earth is flat. May be round like a pancake, but definitely flat - not like a sphere. That is what Muhammad believed, as that is what geography was like at his time - but a god had known it was wrong. (Actually there are 7 Earths according to the Quran (65/12) - one on top of the other according to Hadiths.) See also 2/22 (?), 15/19, 43/10, 71/19, 79/30, 88/20.
008 20/54: "- - - in these (plants and cattle*) are Signs for men endued with understanding." There are no real signs in the Quran – not for Allah, not for Muhammad's religion, nor forMuhammad's connection to a god. The only signs "men endued with understanding" gets from sentences like this in the Quran, is the question: Why did Muhammad have to use
invalid proofs and twisted logic, and the conclusion: Muhammad's use of invalid arguments proves that he had no real arguments/facts – if he had had, he had used them instead. And actually there is one more point: The use of made up claims and statements are the hallmarks of a cheat and a swindler.
009 20/55: "From the (earth) did We (Allah*) create you - - -". Wrong. Man was not created from earth. See also 6/2.
010 20/69-70: The magicians of the pharaoh all became Muslims when they saw Moses performing areal miracle. All the same the Quran repeats and repeats and repeats that the reason why Muhammad was unable to perform miracles, (included making real prophesies), was that nobody would believe anyhow. This is one if the scenes that make it clear that Muhammad knew he was lying each time he used those excuses and "explanations".
*011 20/71: "- - - I (Pharaoh Ramses II*) will have you crucified - - -". If not our sources are very wrong, Egypt at that time did not crucify people.
*012 20/78: "Then the Pharaoh pursued them with his forces, but the waters completely overwhelmed them and cover them up". May be the water covered up the troops, but not the Pharaoh - - - Ramses II did not drown, and he did not die until years later according to science. Another thing: They most likely did not cross the Red Sea proper. The original
Hebrew Bible in reality uses a name that also has the meaning "Sea of Reeds". The Sea of Reeds was a big, shallow lake south of the Bitter Seas in the area where you now find the Suez Canal. For Moses to walk past a big lake with his some 2 million Jews (600ooo men + women and children according to the Bible) and belongings and animals is one thing. To
march down the western side of the Red Sea and plan to cross that sea by boats they did not have, is quite another thing – remember that they did not know that Yahweh would split the sea (and most of them hardly had believed it if they had been told). The fact that the Hebrew name for the sea they crossed (?) – Yam Suph – also means "the Sea of Reeds" is mentioned in footnotes many times in NIV – and in other literature.
013 20/85: "- - - the Samari had led them astray". But the Jews still had not arrived in Samaria and there existed no Samarians (actually the name Samaria/Samarians as far as we can find, was not coined until 722 BC - more than 500 years after the exodus that happened (if it happened) ca. 1235 BC.). Muslims try to "explain" the mistake by saying may be it is meant "shmeer" = stranger, or "shomer" = watchman = samara in Arab - - - but if you cherry-pick from a whole language, it always is possible to find words that are look-alikes – and that the Arab word here is a look-alike, is totally irrelevant, as these Jews of the old hardly spoke Arab. But if the Quran means some other thing than it says here – or is possible to misunderstand - how many other places in the book are there similar or worse/religious mistakes?
014 20/87: "- - - the Samara - - -". See 20/85 just above.
015 20/95: "- - - O Samari - - -". See 20/85 above.
016 20/106+107: "He will leave them (mountains/mountain chains that will be removed*) as plains smooth and level. Nothing crooked or curved wilt thou see in their place". This would be correct on a flat Earth. But as the Earth is curved, there has got to be curved lines at least where the big mountain chains had been removed. Any god had known.
017 20/113: "Thus We (Allah*) sent this (the Quran*) down - - -". No book with that many mistakes is revered as a Mother Book by an omniscient god, and no omniscient god makes a copy of a book full of mistakes and sends it down as a holy book and the source for a religion dedicated to himself.
018 20/114: "High above all is Allah, the King, the Truth!" Allah as shown in the Quran at best represents partly truth and partly mistakes.
019 20/116: "Prostrate yourself to Adam". Wrong, as Adam did never exist - man developed from an earlier primate. We debated with some Muslims some time ago about this, and they triumphantly told us we were wrong, for now science had found that there had been an Eve and an Adam. Which is quite true. But what they did not mention, was that this "Eve" lived about 160ooo - 200ooo years ago in the Rift Valley in East Africa, and represented a so called "bottleneck" - a time when the human race nearly died out - and only Eve had girl children, or the DNA of the other girl children died out later (this result is from tests of mitochondria DNA - mDNA - and mDNA only tells about the female side of the story, as mitochondria only goes from parents to child via the egg cell = from the mother – carrying only the feminine DNA). Then around 60ooo+ (64ooo?) years ago, something happened to Homo Sapiens (may be in the area south of the Caspian Sea). He still was Homo sapiens, but something – science does not know what - happened that started him on the road to technical and other developments. And there was another bottleneck - something similar to what
happened to the "archaeological Eve" - happened once more. But this time it is readable in the Y chromosome, which only men – here named Adam - have, and consequently only shows the masculine side. This shows that all men living today, has a common "father" (by archaeologists not by coincidence named "the archaeological Adam" or just "Adam") - a single man that lived 140ooo (some say 100ooo) years later than Eve. That archaeologists named them Adam and Eve, in a way is quite logical. But they have nothing to do with the Adam and Eve in the Bible or with "Adam and his wife" in the Quran - how could they f. ex. be man and wife when they lived 100ooo - 140ooo years apart, and one in Africa, the other may be in Asia? Not to mention essential facts like this when they talk of the archaeological Adam and Eve and use this as a religious proof for creation, we find dishonest. And at least the scholars in Islam – the ones that teach their students and congregations and are interviewed and write and speak in the media – do know this. It is a well known scientific fact among learned people.
020 20/126: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
021 20/127: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
022 20/128: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
023 20/133: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". There is not one single clear sign (= proof) anywhere in the Quran neither for Allah nor for Muhammad's connection to a god. Without exception all the "signs", "clear signs", and "proofs" only are claims or statements resting only on air and/or twisted logic or on other not proved claims. (There may be one exception; arguments taken from the Bible – but they in case tell about Yahweh, not about Allah. Islam likes to claim that they are one and the same god, but the teachings – especially as you find them in NT (the new covenant Muslims never mention – cfr. the last Easter of Jesus, f. ex. Luke 22/20) – fundamentally are so different, that it is impossible that the two can be one and the same, not unless the god at least is schizophrenic.)
SURAH 20: At least 23 mistakes,
Subtotal here: 795 mistakes + 112 likely mistakes.
Comments numbered by 3 numbers (included 00 or 0) a few places followed by one small letter = clear mistakes. Comments numbered by 00 or 0 followed by 1, 2 or 3 letters (big or small) = likely mistake.
SURAH 21:
001 21/4: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22.
*00a 21/6: "- - - not one of the populations which We (Allah*) destroyed - - -". Muhammad claimed that the scattered ruins and ruin villages and towns were destroyed by Allah because its inhabitants have sinned. In an arid, hard and warlike area this hardly is the full truth – may be no truth at all.
002 21/10: "We (Allah*) have revealed for you (O men!) a book (the Quran*) - - -". Once more: Has an omniscient god revealed a book with so many mistakes? - or has Muhammadmade all the mistakes when telling what Allah told him? In plain words: No. (- or has Muhammad or some accomplice made up all of it from fantasy and knowledge that was often
wrong?).
003 21/16: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
004 21/18: "- - - nay, We (Allah) hurl the Truth against falsehood, and it knocks out its brain, and behold, falsehood doth perish!" Does the same happen if one hurls the Quran with all its mistakes? With all its mistakes, etc., the Quran at best is partly the truth.
005 21/19: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
*006 21/20: "They (all creatures in the heavens and the Earth*) celebrate His (Allah's*) praises night and day - - -". Islam will have to prove that all animals, birds, fishes, insects, worms, etc., etc. really does this – and all non-Muslim humans – before one can believe them and the Quran on this point.
007 21/22a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
008 21/22b: "If there were, in the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth, other gods besides Allah, there would have been confusion in both!" The logic is wrong. There exist both hierarchic and parallel (one boss for each department or aspect) systems for management. One can say there could be confusion, but not that there would be. The proof is invalid.
009 21/24: "But most of them know not the Truth - - -". Well, the "truth" as given in the Quran, at the very best is only partly true - too many mistakes.
00b 21/26: "And they say '(Allah) Most Glorious has begotten offspring'. Glory to Him! They are (but) servants raised to honour". We do not know what is the truth about al-Lat, alUzza and Manat - the daughters of al-Lah/Allah in the old Arab religion. But Jesus at least told many times that Yahweh was his father.
**010 21/30a: "Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens (plural and wrong) and the earth were joined together (as one unit of Creation), before We (Allah*) clove them asunder?" Heaven is an optical illusion - a fact that is well known today, but Muhammad did not know it - and an illusion cannot be "cloven asunder" from a material thing. We also have met Muslims saying that the theory of the Big Bang proves the Quran. But the Big Bang "clove something asunder" 13.7 billion years ago, whereas our sun (Helios or Sun*) is a 3. generation star, and it and the planets included Earth are just 4.57 billion years old. The differences in age, and far more the fact that our sun is 3. generation, (which means that thstuff the earth - and the sun – is made from, has been through two cycles of being fluid and mixed parts of former suns that became super novas (exploding stars) and were spread over large parts of cosmos where it mixed with remnants of other exploded super novas, and at last coalesce to make a new sun and planets) makes the Big Bang totally irrelevant in this connection – for all the previous 9 billion years the Earth and the sun and the planets just were scattered atoms, molecules and fragments in a celestial "mixer" – not an Earth, etc. that could be identified and could "be joined together" or "clowen asunder". At least the professors at Al-Ahzar University know this, and it is dishonesty to try to cheat people by using this "argument" in f. ex. "The Message of the Quran" - a book pretending to give, as seen from the Muslim point of view, correct information on and explanations of the Quran, certified by one of the highest authorities on the Quran in the Muslim world, the above-mentioned university. (Beware that the latest edition in English of that book is made more conservatively "correct" than former ones).
011 21/30b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
**012 21/30c: "We (Allah*) made from water every living thing." Wrong - the living things were not made from water. Some Muslims say modern science proves the Quran here, as science tells life started in water. But life only started in water, it was not made from water - there is a huge distinction there. The really bad thing here, is that this lie also is told by well educated Muslims – f. ex. it is thoroughly explained in comment 38 to 21/30 in "The Meaning of the Quran" – Muslims that have so much education and knowledge that they know the difference between to be "made in" water and be "made from" water very well. How reliable are then other things they claim? See also 6/2. We may add that this is the only place in the Quran where – possibly – also the "creation" of plants are included, this in spite of that plants are the basis for all life.
013 21/31a: "And We (Allah*) have set on the earth mountains - - -". The mountains are not "set on" the Earth - they have without exception "grown up", no matter whether they are a result of tectonic or volcanic activity. Any god knew this, but Muhammad not. Does this indicate who the real composer of the Quran is?
*014 21/31b: "And We (Allah*) have set on the earth mountains standing firm, lest it should shake with them - - -". Some experts on Islam and the Quran say this refers to that the disk that is the Earth (in the Quran the Earth is flat, but perhaps a round disk) might shake and become unstable, and because of this may slip away or tip around and drop everything -
included humanity - off the Earth.We refer to some Muslim scholars: Jalalan, (p. 437), Baydawi (p. 686), Tabari (p.589), and
Zamakhshari (part 4, p. 381): They all tell that "if it was not for these unshakeable (!!*) mountains, the earth would slip away."(!!!*) ****And Jalalan, Baydawi, and Zamakhshari all say that "- - - He (Allah*) placed unshakeable mountains (not more so then that they shake during earthquakes*) on Earth lest it tilts with people." This obviously is what the Quran really meant, and this even more obviously was the meaning Muhammad told his followers, as it is what the learned Muslim scholars were sure was the truth.But this "truth" is so ridiculous, that let us go on to the alternative explanation – the one that is in vogue in Islam now that they know the original "truth" was wrong: That the mountains hinder earth-quakes.That is not correct. Well, it is so far from the truth, that it is not even wrong - it is sometimes the opposite of the truth:
1. According to f. ex. heavyweights like "New Scientist" and "Nature" mountains sometimes can CAUSE earthquakes because of their considerable weight and pressure on the underground. Yes, even variations in the amount of water (= weight) in big mountain lakes or glaciers sometimes causes minor and medium earthquakes. The same goes for heavy snow-falls in the mountains sometimes – snow in the mountains and rain lower down is a normal phenomenon = imbalance in weight. (There f. ex. are more earthquakes in the north in winter than in summer).
2. *It is well known today that mountains are made because of tectonic activity (that always causes earthquakes - though sometimes too feeble for human so feel) or volcanic activity that often causes earthquakes. That means that mountains in reality are made by earthquakes (or actually by the same mechanisms that make most earthquakes), it does not hinder such quakes.Any god had known this, but Muhammad not - this is new knowledge to humans. Then who composed the Quran? *015 21/31c: "- - - and We (Allah) have made therein (in the mountains*) broad highways (between the mountains) - - -". We honestly did not know Allah - or any other god - built highways. And here we could make a cheap joke (tell your congress-men (or similar) to ask Allah build your roads, instead of spending all that tax money on it). But we refrain from it.Well, it would be possible for Muhammad to say - true or not true - that Allah showed the first travellers where to travel. But in no case Allah built the roads - or highways. Unless Islam really proves he did - but Islam never proves, they only tell or state or claim, even though they demand proofs from everyone else. Or they say it is said so in the Quran, and that
proves it. But a book with that many mistakes has little value as a proof - and besides it is logically impossible to use theQuran to prove the Quran, as circular proofs are without value.
016 21/32a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
017 21/32b: "And We (Allah*) have made the heavens (plural and wrong*) as a canopy - - -". Wrong. The heaven as we see it, is not made as a canopy - it is not even material. The heaven as we see it, is just an illusion made from bending of light by day, and from our inability to see the correct 3 dimensions at those distances by night.
**018 21/32c: "And We (Allah*) have made the heavens (plural and wrong*) as a canopy well guarded - - -". Muhammad was unable to see the difference between stars and shooting stars. In the Quran it is told that the shooting stars (mistaken for being ordinary stars) are "arrows" used to chase away bad spirits or jinns (beings "borrowed" from old Arab folklore and unknown to any other "prophet" than Muhammad) wanting to spy on Heaven. Any child today knows the difference between a real star and a shooting star, and also what would happen if a real star hit Earth.
019 21/32d: "- - - Signs - - -". Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 and 20/54 above.Actually: In the book "The Message of the Quran", certified by Al-Azhar Al-Sharif Islamic Research Academy in Cairo (one of the 2-3 top universities in the Muslim world on such subjects) in a letter dated 27. Dec. 1998, it is admitted rather reluctantly that there are no proofs for Allah, and that it is not possible to prove him. An additonal point here is that if there are no ptoof for Allah and impossible to ptove him, automatically there also is no proof for, and impossible to prove Muhammad's claimed connection to Allah.
**020 21/33: "- - - all (the celestial bodies) swim along, each in its rounded course." Wrong. There only is one celestial body that has a rounded course, and then only compared to Earth: The moon – Luna. And if you compare it to the sun, its course is not really rounded any more, but a kind of wavy, and even more so if you compare it to the galaxy. The sun also has no rounded course, even if you compare it to the galaxy – it follows a kind of a bent sinus curve above and below the equator of the galaxy. The same go for very many of the stars we see –no circle, but bent sinus. Earth's course of course follows, but is more complicated because of its circling the sun at the same time. And our galaxy – together with the rest of the Local Group of galaxies (a few dozen galaxies) and many others – are on our somewhat linear way
towards something called "the Great Attractor" which nobody knows what is - - - while it at the same time is walzing around in our Local Group, which is wandering in and part of a larger group of a thousand or more galaxies. You do not find round courses in space, unless you cherry-pick part movements – and all courses we can see without telescopes have a somewhat linear main direction because of this movement in the direction of "The Great Attractor", but irregular because of local circling or similar.
021 21/37: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
022 21/45: "I (Muhammad*) do but warn you (people*) according to revelations (the Quran*)." The Quran may be a revelation from Muhammad or from other humans or from some invisible powers, but not from an omniscient god – no omniscient god makes mistakes, and in the Quran there may be unbelievable 3000 or more places with some kind of mistake (included repetitions), if you count absolutely everything and all details. More than 5 for each and every page in our book!! Many of the mistakes just are details –but a god does not make even details wrong. And a number of the errors definitely are more than details.
023 21/50a: "And this (the Quran*) is a blessed message - - -". A message with that many mistakes, invalid points and wrong proofs, is not blessed.
024 21/50b: "And this (the Quran*) is a blessed message which We (Allah*) have sent down". How many ways is it possible to ask the question: Can it be true that an omniscient god has sent down a book with such a number of mistaken facts, contradictions and other wrongs - f. ex. linguistic and perhaps religious mistakes? Not to mention: How likely is it that a book of such a miserable quality, at least concerning wrong facts and invalid proofs, and as literature, can have a prominent place as the revered Mother Book in the home of an omniscient and omnipotent god? It simply is impossible.
*00c 21/50c: "- - - will ye (people*) then reject it (the Quran*)?" Of course we will reject it. When people with some intelligence and education are face to face with a book with lots and lots of mistakes, contradictions, twisted arguments and as twisted logic, with points where it is clear the narrator knew he was lying – and everything told from one single narrator with a most questionable ethic and morality, but with a strong liking for women and power, and religion his main platform for power, it is very naïve even to ask that question. No intelligent, educated, not brain washed person really has another choice than to reject it if no real proofs are produced. (And Islam has been unable to produce one single real proof for Allah or for Muhammad's claimed connection to a god – any god – and hence for Islam being true, in 1400 years - - - why do you think Muhammad and Islam glorify and demand blind belief?)
025 21/56a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
026 21/56b: "- - - He (Allah*) Who created them (man*) (from nothing)." Wrong. Man was not created from nothing. He was not even created. See 6/2.
*027 21/56c: "- - - He (Allah*) Who created them (man*) (from nothing): and I (Abraham) am a witness to this (truth)". This really is an unintended joke. It is told that Allah did something that is not true - and Abraham witnesses that it is the truth, and this even though he lived millions of years later! Yes, he even lived later than the claimed Adam, and still was a witness to Adam's creation!!Some proof for Allah!! Is it possible that Allah himself has sent down this? But it does tell some things about proofs in the Quran – and from Muslims. Also see 6/2.
028 21/76: "We (Allah*) - - - delivered him (Noah*) and his family from great distress (the big flood*)". Wrong: The Quran is very clear on that one of his sons (he just had 3 - Shem, Ham and Japheth – according to the Bible (1. Mos. 9/18)) drowned in the flood. Mistake and solid contradiction. Similar claim in 37/76.
029 21/77: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
030 21/80: "It was We (Allah*) Who thought him (King David*) the making of coats of mail". But coats of mail and similar are older than ca. 950 - 1000 BC – the time of David.
031 21/82: "And of the evil ones (jinns*) it was some who (worked for him = Solomon*) - - -". Islam will have to bring strong proofs for this. There were fairy tales like this that Muhammad could "borrow" stories from, but never any proved case of any jinn really working for anyone. It also in no case had been omitted from the Bible if it had been true - it had glorified Solomen far too much to be forgotten.
032 21/91: "- - - Sign - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah – or Muhammad. See 2/39 and 20/54 above.
00d 21/96a: "- - - Gog and Magog (people) - - -". The names are from the Bible. But in the Bible they are a king (Gog) and his country (Magog), whereas in the Quran they are two bad peoples. Which book is most reliable?
*033 21/96b: "Until the Gog and Magog (people) are let through (their barrier), and they swiftly swarm from every hill". Gog and Magog according to the Quran (surah 18) were two groups of people (tribes?) imprisoned in a valley behind a tall, strong barrier made from iron blocks erected by Dhu'l Quarnayn/Alexander the Great. But there is nowhere on Earth – let alone in the area Alexander travelled – a valley big enough to produce food for two large tribes of people ("swarm from every hill" = large tribes), that is impossible to get out from, even if the main valley and the main way out is blocked. Besides the whole storey is nonsense: Even if they could not get through or over such a barrier, given time it always
would be possible to dig under it. Even if it had been erected on solid rock, around 330 BC when the Quran pretends this happened (Alexander died 323 BC), people knew how to make short tunnels even through a rock if they really wanted to, f. ex. by means of fire + water. And there would always be paths across the mountains from a big valley. Besides: Where is the valley? Today every inch of the globe is mapped, and there is no walled in valley anywhere. Not in the east where Alexander travelled, and nowhere else. (And Gog and Magog are not to be released until shortly before the Day of Doom, according to the Quran, so they should still be in the valley).
034 21/104a: "The day We (Allah*) roll up the heavens (plural and wrong - like some 180+ other places in the Quran where the word is used separately, and at least 199 places all in all) like a scroll - - -". It is not possible to roll up an optical illusion. And at least the observable Universe is a sphere – diameter 27.4 billion light-years – and how to roll up a sphere? (Of course Islam can say the Universe is (part of) a "brane" (a thick "sheet" of stars some trillion light-years wide) – another contradiction to the Quran – but then they first will have to prove that "branes" exists, as they just are a scientific or science fiction speculations).
035 21/104b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
00e 21/108: "- - - therefore bow to His (Allah's*) Will (in Islam)." Is that an intelligent thing to do for intelligent, learned people who know how much is wrong in the Quran, and know its very doubtful background? It needs strong proofs to prove it is a real religion with a real god – and if it is not: What then if there exists a real religion somewhere, and you are
forbidden (f. ex. by Islam) to search for it? – it will be a rude awakening on The Last Day (if it exists).
036 21/109: "- - - in truth - - -". With that many mistakes and twisted claims, the Quran at best is partly true.
00f 21/112: "- - - against the blasphemies you utter!" Is it blasphemy to doubt what is told about Allah, when there are weighty reasons for doubt? (- all the mistakes etc. in the Quran).
Surah 21: At least 36 mistakes + 6 likely mistakes.
SURAH 22:
001 22/5a: "We (Allah*) created you out of dust - - -". Wrong. Man was not created out of dust. See 6/2.
002 22/5b: "- - - then (Allah created you) out of sperm". Wrong. Human beings are not created out of sperm, even though it is obvious that Muhammad believed so - the Quran indicates that sperm is planted in a woman and grows. Human beings in reality are made from 1 sperm cell + 1 egg cell, but it is likely Muhammad did not know this - such an egg cell is
too small to be seen in all the blood, intestines, and gore in an opened carcass without magnification. His belief also corresponds to an old Greek theory. See also 6/2.
003 22/6: "- - - Allah is the Reality - - -". Not unless Islam brings real proofs. It is too naïve to blindly believe in a religion only based on a book with lots of mistakes, contradictions, twisted facts and invalid logic – told by a man with a highly suspect moral, but a strong liking for women and power and with his religion as his platform of power.
004 22/7: "- - - there can be no doubt about it - - -". With all the mistakes in the Quran, there is every reason for doubt about quite a lot of things.
005 22/8: "- - - (the Quran is*) a book of Enlightenment - - -". With all its mistakes it is not. Worse: With all those mistakes you never know what is true and what not.
006 22/16: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". There are no clear signs (= proofs) neither for Allah, nor for Muhammad's connection to him in all the Quran. See 2/99.
007 22/18a: "Seest thou not that to Allah bow down in worship all things that are in the heavens (plural and wrong) an on earth - - -?" No, we do not see that. This just is another of the mistakes and cheap words/claims – and one more sample of animism - in the Quran, unless Islam really proves that it is reality.
008 22/18b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
009 22/23: "- - - bracelets of gold and pearls - - -." In f. ex.76/21 they are from silver.
010 22/26: "Behold, We (Allah) gave the site, to Abraham, of the (sacred) House (Kabah*) - - -". Abraham never visited Mecca. See 2/127. It is a made up story to give Muhammad's teaching more credence, and make it more interesting among Arabs.
**00a 22/29: "- - - the rites (during Hajj in Mecca*) prescribed for them (Muslims*) - - -". The rites in Mecca during Hajj are all taken over from the pagan/heathen times in Arabia –and in addition they are ever so childish and primitive; run 7 times back and forth between 2 small hills, walk 7 times around a building, throw some stones at a mark impersonating the devil, and kill one or more helpless animals for sacrifice, those are the main acts.
1. Who prescribed old pagan rites to be the only right ones for the presumed only, real god?
2. Who prescribed so shallow and childish rites for a presumed unfathomable, "deep" god?
3. Who prescribed that neither any rites from anywhere else in the world nor something new and soul-sustaining from Allah ought to be used in a presumed world religion – only the old, shallow pagan rites of the heathen old Arabia?
00b 22/33: "- - - their place of sacrifice is near the Ancient House (Kabah*)." Wrong. The place for sacrifice is in Mina, kilometres from the Kabah.
011 22/34: "To every people did We (Allah*) appoint rites (of sacrifice) - - -." Just one problem: The Christians have not been given/ordered any kind of sacrifices – or rites for such."
00c 22/37: "It is not their (the sacrificial animals') meat nor their blood, that reaches Allah: it is your piety that reaches Him - - -". Does an omniscient god have to see you killing helpless animals to see that you are a pious believer? – not if he really is omniscient. If Allah really is omniscient and if the only purpose with sacrificing animals is to prove your piety, then the sacrifice in reality is without meaning, as an omniscient god all the time knows very well whether you are a pious believer or not. Actually the Quran many places makes it absolutely clear that Allah knows also the innermost corners of even the deepest parts of your soul. To what avail and what meaning and what logic is a "test" or a "proof" of your piety, if Allah already knows the answer on beforehand? - and by the way: The same goes for testing your piety in war and battle and kill and be killed, something that even was meaningless if Allah were a good god - not to mention if he knows the answer already.
*012 22/40a: "Did not Allah check one set of people by means of another, there surely would have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques - - -." Wrong – this is far from the only way an omniscient and omnipotent god could manage the world.One alternative is f. ex. to change man a little and teach him how to live in peace. Only members of a culture and religion of war and looting and suppressing do not immediately see this. This point just is an artificial alibi for war and conquest – and suppression and looting.
*013 22/40b: "- - - monasteries, churches, synagogues, - - -, in which the name of Allah is commemorated - - -". The name of Allah is not commemorated there – on the contrary the name of Yahweh (or simply God) is what one commemorates there. Muslims will claim that it is the same god – as usual without proving anything - but the teachings are fundamentally so different, that that is impossible that they are the same unless the god is mentally seriously ill. Also they will claim that the reason for the differences in the teachings are that the Bible is wilfully falsified – something science long since has proved for one thing is not true (even the oldest scriptures are like today, except for minor mistakes normal when
manuscripts are copied by hand), and for another was physically impossible (not possible to make the same falsifications in all the thousands of manuscripts spread over thousands of kilometres and owned by thousands of different owners – that often even disagreed (even strongly sometimes) on many topics). How would you f. ex. make Jews and Christians agree on what and how to falsify in the OT? But it was the only way out and the only way Muhammad could save his religion and his platform of power when he finally understood how much was different between his teachings and the Bible.
00d 22/47: "Verily, a Day in the sight of thy (humans'*) Lord (Allah*), is like a thousand years of your reckoning". Well, in 70/4 it is like 50ooo years. Another contradiction that "does not exist in the Quran" and thus "proves" that the book is from Allah.
013 22/51: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Signs - - -". There is not one single sign clearly from Allah in all the Quran. With the possible exception of some taken from the Bible, there is not even one single sign that is proven made by a god – any god. (And the ones from the Bible in case proves Yahweh, not Allah – two very different gods (especially as we meet Yahweh in the NT and the new covenant there – which Muslims never mention) if not Islam really proves the opposite. But Islam never proves anything fundamental).
014 22/52a: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
015 22/52b: "- - - Allah is full of knowledge and wisdom - - -." Not if the Quran is representative for his knowledge and wisdom – Islam will have to produce real and reliable proofs if they insist that Allah has much knowledge and wisdom.
016 22/53: "- - - the wrongdoers are in schism far (from the Truth)". At very best they are far from "bits and pieces of truth", at least as the truth is pretended to be in the Quran, as that book at best contains bits and pieces of what is true.
017 22/54a: "- - - (the Quran) is the Truth - - -". With that many mistakes, twisted arguments, etc., it at best is partly the truth only.
018 22/54b: "- - - (the Quran) is the Truth from thy Lord (Allah*) - - -." Wrong. No omniscient god ever made, or revered, orforwarded, or built his religion on a book with that many mistakes, contradictions, and doubtful, unproven claims. A devil in disguise or a man craving for a platform of power might do so, but not an omniscient and omnipotent god.
019 22/54c: "- - - Allah (the Quran*) is the Guide of those who believe, to the Straight Way." Wrong – a book with that many mistakes, twisted facts/logic, etc. is not representing a straight way, at least not to Paradise.
020 22/55: "Those who reject Faith (Islam*) will not cease to be in doubt concerning (Revelation)". Perhaps correct - may be there will be a revelation made by some god (perhaps by Yahweh) some time. But we are in no doubt at all that there are good reasons for serious doubts about the Quran's claims, statements and descriptions - why should the claims and statements we cannot check be more reliable than the ones we can, and among which we find far too many to be wanting or wrong?
021 22/57: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Signs - - -." There is not one single sign in all the Quran clearly made by Allah. Only (unproved) claims.
**00e 22/62: "- - - Allah - He is reality - - -". Well, that is one of the big points that neither the Quran nor Hadith nor Islam's learned men have been able to give the slightest proof for. Even some Muslim intellectuals admit so. This in spite of all the "signs" and "proofs" that say so in the Quran - they have one thing in common: NOT ONE OF THEM GIVES ONE
SINGLE VALID PROOF OF ALLAH - they all are claims or statements built on air or on not proved "facts" or other claims or statements that are not proved. A fact that "smells". He may simply be something made up in the imagination of a Muhammad pretending Allah to be an avatar of - or identical to - Yahweh. The last is not possible, as the essences of the two teachings are too different, but Muhammad could pretend so. And: Cheating is the hallmark of cheaters.
022 22/64: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
00f 22/65: Has Muhammad Ali made an "al-Taqiyya" (lawful lie) here? He says that Allah "withholds the sky (rain) from falling on the earth". But according to "The Message of the Quran" the Arab text says that Allah withholds the heaven from falling down on Earth. Quite a scientific mistake in case. And also a dishonesty from Yusuf Ali in case.
023 22/67: "- - - thou (Muslims*) art assuredly on the Right Way". That only is true if the Quran is correct - - - and the Quran contains lots of mistakes, twisted arguments, twisted logic, some outright lies, etc. (all of which are hallmarks for cheats, deceivers and swindlers – persons normally looking for money, women and/or power in dishonest ways. Muhammad liked women and power – and money for "gifts" and bribes to possible followers).
024 22/72a: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Clear Signs - - -". Wrong. See 2/99.
025 22/72b: "- - - these Signs - - -". Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 and 20/54
*026 22/78: "It is He (Allah*) Who has named you Muslims, both before and in this (Revelation) - - -". Wrong. The name was never used before – there is no kind of trace of it anywhere. This is one of the cases where Islam will have to prove their claim.
Surah 22: At least 26 mistakes + 6 likely mistakes.
SURAH 23:001 23/12: "Man We (Allah*) did create from a quintessence (of clay)". We have never understood what a quintessence of clay is, but it is absolutely sure it is wrong: For one thing man was not created - according to science he developed from earlier primates. For another thing - even if one had accepted Islam's statement that man is created, Adam in no way could have been created in many ways - see 6/2. And for a third thing: Man is not created from only one or a few minerals like in clay.002 23/13: "Then We (Allah') placed him (the future baby*) as (a drop of) sperm in a place of rest - - -". Wrong. Muhammad believed sperm was a kind of seed that could grow to become a human being (and if the man climaxed first, it became a boy, whereas if the woman climaxed first it became a girl, according to him in Hadiths). The reality is that the sperm is not planted in a woman, but unifies with an egg cell and the resulting zygote then starts growing.*003 23/14a: "Then We (Allah*) made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood - - -". Wrong. And doubly wrong:1. The sperm is not made into a clot of congealed blood.2. Sperm (1 cell from it) combines with an egg cell and becomes a zygote.Muhammad did not know better, as this was what one believed in Arabia at his time - without a microscope it is impossible to see exactly what happens. But a god had known. There is a saying that "the taste is the proof of the cake". Muhammad and the Quran and Islam and Muslims had and have very busy times to find "explanations" - some of them rather unlikely - to "explain" why Allah/Muhammad did not produce one single real proof for that a supernatural being was involved, even tough many friends and as many foes asked sincerely for it. Yes, Allah did not even have to make the slightest miracle to prove his existence. All he had to do was to tell the truth in all these cases that now are proved to be wrong - like in this case. If Allah really did exist, and if he really was/is omniscient - why then did he make up so many wrong answers? - when all he had to do was to tell the truth -like the reality of how a foetus is made - and little by little there would be the strongest of proofs for his existence and for that Muhammad spoke the truth. He never did. Actually in all the Quran there is not one single scientifc "fact" that is not in accordance with what one believed to be the truth in Arabia at that time (and much of it actually Greek or Persian "knowledge".) Like it is now, all these facts are incredibly strong proofs for that there was no omniscient god involved in creating the Quran - and what then about Islam? - is it a made up, false religion? Not to mention: What will then in case happen in a possible next life to all humans - Muslims - who have had their chances to look for a real religion (if such one exists) blocked by Islam?*004 23/14b: "- - - then We (Allah*) made a (foetus) lump; We made of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh". Wrong - 100% wrong: Flesh is made first, and then bones develop inside the flesh of the foetus. It must be remarked that Muhammad's tale about how a baby is made, is in accordance with old Greek medical beliefs – f. ex. the famous doctor Galen and Aristotle – which was known in the Middle East at the time of Muhammad. Any god had known better. Then who made the Quran?005 23/17: "And We (Allah*) have made, above you, seven tracts (= seven heavens*) - - -". Wrong. There are no seven (material) heavens. See 2/29.00a 23/19: "Also a tree springing out of Mount Sinai, which produces oil, and relish for those who use it for food". Muslim scholars agree on that here it is meant olive trees. But there have been questions – the area around Mt. Sinai is quite dry, and absolutely not known for olive trees.*006 23/27: (Said by Allah to Noah*)"- - - take thou aboard pairs of every species, male and female - - -". Impossible. There simply are too many animals + necessary food for any ark or boat or ship to take two of each. Even a modern super tanker fixed up for such a job, had been far too small - and the ark was a wooden boat. See 11/40. And who did the feeding, watering and cleaning for all these animals? And who gathered them and gathered the food for all of them - and how was the food stored so as not to spoil?Muslims try to tell that most likely Allah meant only the domesticated animals. But that is not what the Quran says. And the Quran is to be understood by the word, if nothing else is said -see 3/7. Besides: Islam tells the Ark stranded on a 2089 m high mountain in Syria (Mt. AlJedi), and in that case there had to be so much water on Earth that all animals had drowned if they were not in the ark.007 23/30: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.*008 23/39: "(The prophet (Muhammad*)) said - - -." But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and says that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories). Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet as he did not have the gift of prophesying. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.009 23/45: "- - - Our Signs - - -". There are no signs in the Quran that clearly come from Allah – see 2/99.010 23/48: "- - - and they (Pharaoh and his chiefs*) became the ones who were destroyed (drowned*))". But at least the pharaoh (Ramses II) was not destroyed/drowned. Ramses II did not die by drowning. And we know he died only some years after the (possible) exodus.011 23/49: "And We (Allah*) gave Moses the Book - - -". Wrong. Moses never got something even remotely similare to the Quran or the Bible. What he got according to both the Bible and the Quran, was the 10 Commandments. That was all he physically got according to the Bible. But he was told the Laws – later part of the Book of Moses – and wrote them down later himself. Science tells that what is called The Book of Moses is several centuries younger.012 23/58: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.013 23/66: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.014 23/70a: "Nay, he (Muhammad*) has brought them the Truth (the Quran*) - - -". At very best bits and pieces of what Muhammad brought may be true - see all the mistakes.*015 23/70b: "- - - but most of them (the non-Muslims*) hate the truth". Wrong. It seems that the ones really seeking the truth, mostly are non-Muslims. Muslims, and not to mention many of their religious leaders, seem to be seeking - or inciting to and glorifying - blind belief in spite of real knowledge; they seem to be the ones hating the truth in all cases where the truth is not what their religion says. I myself started to study the Quran some years ago to find the truth concerning Islam. The main thing I have found till now, is that real truths show that there are so many mistakes in the Quran, not to mention contradictions, invalid "signs" and "proofs" - hallmarks of deceivers and cheats - etc., that it impossibly can come from an omniscient god. And so many mistakes that it is impossible to trust what is said in the book, unless one has solid extra proofs, or at least confirmation from other, reliable sources. And also that Muhammad in at least some cases has had to know he was not saying the truth - on a few points what he says, contradicts the fact that he was a wise man understanding people. He simply was lying. But then one of his slogans was: "War is deceit", and he also told that the result counted more than even keeping one's oath sworn by Allah. Sorry.016 23/71a: "If the Truth (as told in the Quran*) had been - - -". At most bits and pieces of the Quran are true. See all the mistakes.017 23/71b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.018 23/85: "They (non-Muslims*) will say, 'To Allah'". Wrong. If they name the name of a god, they will say the name of their own god (in old Arabia that might have been the polytheistic al-Lah).*019 23/86: "Who is the Lord of the seven heavens - - -?" Wrong. There are no 7 heavens (and remember: They had to be material ones, because according to the Quran, the stars are fastened to the lowest heaven, and you can fasten nothing to something non-material). See 2/29.020 23/87: "They will say,' (They belong) to Allah". Wrong. See 23/85 above.021 23/89: "They will say,' (It belongs) to Allah". Wrong. See 23/85 above.022 23/90: "We (Allah*) have sent them (non-Muslims*) the Truth (the Quran*) - - -". Either Allah is not omniscient or someone else has made the Quran – it at best is partly true only.023 23/90: "We (Allah*) have sent them the Truth - - -". At best bits and pieces of what is sent (= the Quran) are true. Too many mistakes.00b 23/91: "No son did Allah beget - - -". Perhaps not. But if Islam still says that Allah = Yahweh, it is sure that the Bible says that Jesus called Yahweh his father many times and to MANY listeners. And we have found far fewer mistakes in the Bible - and especially in NT -than we have found in the Quran, even though we red also the Bible with critical eyes. And: Also the Quran tells Jesus was honest. And finally: Science has clearly shown that the Bible is not falsified - in spite of Islam's never documented claim.024 23/105: "- - - My (Allah's*) Signs - - -". There is not one single sign in all the Quran clearly made by Allah – only claims that any priest in any religion can make.025 23/116: "Therefore exalted be Allah, the King, the Reality - - -". If there is one thing that is not proved in Islam, it is the reality of Allah. Everything in the religion rests only on blind belief in a tale told by a man with very dubious moral, but a strong wish for power – a man using his religion as his platform of power (like many others). And a self proclaimed prophet unable to make prophesies (= a stolen or "borrowed" title).Surah 23: At least 25 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.
SURAH 24:001 24/1a: "A surah which We (Allah*) have sent down - - -." Also this surah contains mistakes, and is consequently not sent down by an omniscient god.002 24/1b: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". There are no clear signs for Allah anywhere in the Quran –the "signs" either contain twisted facts or twisted logic or both or rest on nothing that is proved, and are thus without logical value. See 2/99.003 24/18: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.004 24/25: "- - - Allah (= the Quran*) is the (very) Truth - - -". With all the mistakes, etc. the Quran (Allah's words) at best is partly true.005 24/34: "- - - verses making things clear - - -". A book with this many mistakes does not make many things clear. At least not correctly.006 24/35: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.007 24/41a: "- - - it is Allah Whose praise all beings in the heavens (plural and wrong) and on earth do celebrate - - -". This has not been documented or clearly shown anywhere or any time.008 24/41b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.009 24/42: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.010 24/44: "It is Allah Who alternates the Night and the Day - - -". It is nature that alternates night and day – but words are cheap, and any religion can tell it is their god(s) that do it. Islam will have to produce proofs for that it really is Allah that makes the Earth spin around in the light from the sun – the reason for the alternation. But Islam rarely proves anything – only claims. And Islam also has Al-Taqiyya - the lawful lie - no other of the big religions have it.*011 24/45: "And Allah has created every animal from water". Simply and obviously wrong. See 6/2. Some Muslims try to say that science has proved this verse (+ two others - 21/30 and 24/54) as science has shown that life started in water. But there is an enormous difference between "from" water and "in" water. No place in the Quran there is even a whisper about that life was created in water, only from. We also mention that in the Quran nothing is said about how the plants were created, even though the plants are the basis for all life on Earth. Perhaps from water like the animals? Wrong simply.012 24/46: "We (Allah*) have indeed sent down signs that makes things manifest - - -". What is claimed sent down, is the Quran, and a book with so many mistakes, etc., makes nothing manifest – except perhaps scepticism to the religion and to Muhammad.00a 24/58: "- - - doff your clothes for the noonday heath - - -." The Quran is said to be a copy of the Mother Book in Heaven, and that such copies have been sent to the other prophets for Allah throughout the world and times – 124000 or more of them, according to Hadith, and to all people - also according to the Quran. Would a prophet among the Inuits or the Samoyeds in the cold north even understand this? And one among the old aborigines in Australia or Indians in South America before 1492 – what would he understand from his copy of the Mother Book, speaking about cows and sheep and camels and Arab customs and rules – and about Muhammad and his wives and family quarrels? If the Mother Book was meant for the entire world, like Islam claims, why does it only concentrate on Arabia and mainly one prophet far into the future for most of the really old prophets Islam tells about? Something is wrong here. (Mind you: We talk about the claimed Mother Book that the Quran is claimed to be a copy of – the Mother Book for all humans – all prophets – everywhere and through all times.)013 24/58: "- - - thus does Allah make clear the Sign to you - - -." See 24/61 below.014 24/59: "- - - thus does Allah make clear the Signs to you - - -." See 24/61 just below.015 24/61: "Thus does Allah make clear the Signs to you - - -". There is not one logically valid clear sign (= proof) of Allah or of Muhammad's connection to a god anywhere in the Quran. They without exception are just claims or based on nothing or on other not proven claims.016 24/64a: "Be quite sure that to Allah doth belong whatever is in the heavens (plural and wrong*) and on earth." It is impossible to be sure of that on basis of a book like the Quran with that many mistakes, contradictions, twisted facts, and that much invalid logic, etc.017 24/64b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.Surah 24: At least 17 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
SURAH 25:001 25/1: "Blessed is He (Allah*) Who sent down the Criterion (the Quran*) - - -". The Quran is not made by any omniscient god – too many mistakes, etc.002 25/2a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.00a 25/2b: "- - - no son has He (Allah*) begotten - - -". If Allah is another god than Yahweh, this may be correct. If Islam insists Allah is just another name for Yahweh (which it can not be, because fundamental aspects of the teachings are too different) it may be another question, as Jesus frequently called Yahweh his father in front of many witnesses. The word "Father" is used at least 163 times in the Bible for Yahweh's relationship to Jesus, and "son" at least 66 times for Jesus' relationship to Yahweh.*00b 25/2c: "- - - nor has He (Allah*) a partner in his dominion - - -". Well, if Allah should happen to be just another name for Yahweh: In the very old Hebrew religion there was a female deity - Yahweh's Amat (woman or wife). (Source: New Scientist among others). In the very masculine society there, she simply was forgotten. And then there is the question of Jesus and of the Holy Spirit, which even the Quran mentions a few (3 ?) times - a kind of partners? At leasr underlings.003 25/4: "But the Misbelievers say: 'Naught is this but a lie which he has forged, and others have helped him at it.' In truth it is they who have put forward an iniquity and a falsehood". With this many mistakes in the Quran, it is a very open question if it is the misbelievers who have put forward a falsehood. It might even be Muhammad. The Quran at least is not from an omniscient god - too many mistakes, etc.004 25/6a: "Say: 'The (Quran) was sent down by Him (Allah*) Who knows the Mystery (that is) in the heavens (plural and wrong) and the earth - - -". Same old question: Can a book with hundreds of mistakes have been sent down by an omniscient god? - and if not: Who composed it? Not an omniscient Allah.005 25/6b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.*006 25/20: "And the messengers whom We (Allah*) sent before thee (Muhammad*) were all (men) who ate food - - -." Wrong. There were sent angels as messengers at least to Abraham (who was frightened because they did not eat food) (11/69), Lot (11/77) and toMary, mother of Jesus (19/17). And also Jinns were sent as messengers that were not men according to the Quran (6/130).007 25/33a: "- - - We (Allah*) reveal to thee (Muhammad or the Muslims*) - - -". Did a god reveal a book with that many mistakes, contradictions, loose statements and invalid "signs" and "proofs"? No.008 25/33b: "- - - We (Allah*) reveal to thee (Muhammad or the Muslims*) the truth - - -". At most bits and pieces of the "revelation" (the Quran) are true - see all the mistaken facts and other mistakes - f. ex. linguistic ones, and not unlikely religious ones as they should make no exception.009 25/33c: "- - - We (Allah) reveal to thee (Muhammad or the Muslims) the truth and the best explanations (thereof)." The best explanations are never - never - built on a lot of mistaken facts. The Quran also many places states that belief in Islam is built on intelligence, intellectual capacity, and knowledge. Is it?Sometimes it seems like it is built on sheer blind belief and suppression of the true facts. ("The Message of the Quran" even tells that it is primitive not to be able to see that the Quran is made of a god, without any proofs. And another place that it is a no good believer that search for real proofs. The sorry truth is that it is primitive and naïve to believe only because something is said or written, or because your forefathers and -mothers believed so. Or because a man of very ubious moral said so.)010 25/35: "- - - We sent Moses the Book - - -". Wrong. The Torah (containing those books) was written many hundred years later according to science - may be as much as 800 years later. (Moses got the 10 commandments in writing + the law verbally and wrote it down himself later, according to the Bible. The law is a part of the Book of Moses.)011 25/36: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.012 25/37: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.013 25/45a: "- - - He (Allah*) doth prolong the Shadow!" It is the turning of the Earth that prolongs shadows. Any god had known, but Muhammad not - it is new knowledge. Then who made the Quran? Not an omniscient god. And Allah is said to be omniscient - or is he?*014 25/45b: "If he (Allah*) willed, he could make it (the shadows) stationary!" The only way to do that is to stop the Earth spinning. Islam will have to prove that Allah is able to do that - especially since all the mistakes in the Quran give serious and reasonable doubt about if he is omnipotent - and omniscient.We also will remark that sayings like "If Allah willed - - -" are frequent in the Quran. The phrases are typical for some ones that have to boast to gloss over that they are not able to prove themselves - you f. ex. often hear it from half bully children trying to impress others. If that is the case here, it is either Allah or Muhammad who frequently has to boast like that. (See separate chapter).015 25/49: "- - - with it (water*), We (Allah*) may give life to a dead land - - -". If all it takes to awaken the nature is water, the land is not dead, but alive with roots and seeds – it only looks dead.016 25/54: "It is He (Allah*) Who has created man from water". Flatly wrong. See 6/2 and 24/45.*017 25/56: "- - - glad tidings - - -". Wrong. At the very best one can say that the Quran brought some glad tidings to all the bad ones, wanting loot and slaves, and among some longing for a strong religion - - - if it was not because the Quran itself proves 100% that something is very wrong in the book. So wrong that it neither can be made nor revered by any god – not even by a small mini god. Too much is wrong in the book.***018 25/57: "No reward do I (Muhammad*) ask of you - - -". Nothing - - - except 20% of everything stolen or extorted in/after raids and wars, 100% of what was looted or extorted without fighting, plenty of women and total and unrestricted power. And 2.5% (up to 10%) of your possessions each year in "poor-tax" - - - partly for the poor, but also at least as partly to pay the lukewarm to become or stay Muslims, and not to forget to use for waging war. And a little to himself and all his women and few children (may be not of the "poor-tax"). Hypocrisy.****To be exact the "poor-tax" - zakat - according to Hadiths after Al-Bukhari (comment 1 to Chapter 24) is for 8 different purposes:1. 1 The "Fuqara" - a cathegory of poor people.2. The "Al-Masakin" - another cathegory of poor people.3. The persons administrating the zakat.(Originally Muhammad).4. Bribing people to become Muslims and in other ways to promote Islam.5. Bribing lukewarm Muslims to stay Muslims.6. To free Muslim captives.7. To help indebted persons.8. To wage war for the religion - and its leader(s).9. To assist travellers (often pilgrims to Mecca).It seems that a sizeable percentage was used for points 4 and 7. (You also will find claims that there are 5 purposes for the zakat. Then they lump 1 and 2 together and omit often 6 and 8. We some plases in this book have used that list.)*019 25/59a: "He (Allah*) Who created the heavens (plural and wrong) and the earth and all that is between, in six days - - -". Wrong. It took 4.6 billion years. (Actually the latest numbers are 4.57 billion). Even in the Quran you can find contradicting information saying it took 2 + 4 + 2 days = 8 days.020 25/59b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.**021 25/62: "And He (Allah) is it Who made the Night and the Day follow each other". Wrong. It is the turning of the Earth that causes this - any god had known.**We may add that the Quran many places talks about natural phenomena, and says Allah makes it or causes it. This needs solid proofs, as it is things that happens by itself from physical laws - and especially since words and statements are very cheap, and even more so AS ANY PRIEST IN ANY RELIGION CAN SAY JUST THE SAME ABOUT HIS GOD(S) FREE OF CHARGE - words are that cheap. Strong claims demand strong proofs, scientists say, and Muhammad did not prove one single of these statements or claims. Not one single.022 25/73: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39 above.Surah 25: At least 22 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.
SURAH 26:001 26/2: "- - - the Book that makes (things) clear - - -". With all the mistakes, it makes very little clear, as one cannot rely on what is said, without controlling it.002 26/4: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39 above.003 26/6: "- - - the truth of what they (unbelievers*) mocked at!" At best the Quran represents partly the truth - too many mistakes, etc.004 26/8: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.005 26/15: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Signs - - -". There are no valid signs for Allah in all the Quran. See 2/39 and 2/99.006 26/16: "- - - the worlds - - -". There are no 7 worlds, in spite of that the Quran says so. See 65/12 below.007 26/23: "- - - the Worlds - - -". See 26/16 just above. And 65/12 below.008 26/24: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.*009 26/29: "If thou (Moses*) dost put forward any god other than me (the pharaoh*), I will certainly put you in prison." Wrong – in Egypt one had many gods. Even more: According to one of Islam's tries to explain away the mistake of placing Xerxes' man Hamon at Ramses II's court - and hundreds of years wrong - the high priest (Ha-Amon) of one of the main gods – Amon – even was present and one of the pharaoh's main advisers at this meeting (a "fact" that makes this sentence impossibly illogical).00a 26/42: "- - - ye (the sorcerers*) shall in that case (if you win over Moses*) be (raised to posts) nearest to my person (Ramses II)." It is highly unlikely that the mighty pharaoh Ramses II said that to a flock of sorcerers – and especially for winning over an after all small opponent.010 26/47: "- - - the Worlds - - -". See 26/16 above and 65/12.011 26/49a: Pharaoh Ramses II said: "Surely he (Moses*) is your (the sorcerers') leader - - -." Wrong. Ramses II knew Moses and knew he had been away for 40 years (according to the Bible - an unspecified number of years, but years, according to the Quran) – he could not be the leader of the local sorcerers.012 26/49b: "- - - I (Pharaoh Ramses II) will cause you (Moses and others*) to die on the cross!" But the old Egypt did not use crucifixion for punishment.*013 26/63: "Then We (Allah*) told Moses by inspiration: 'Strike the sea with thy rod'. So it divided, and each separate part became like the huge, firm mass of a mountain".According to science the Jews started the exodus (if it ever happened - and if it did, it happened ca. 1235 BC during the rein of Ramses II - one of the greatest pharaohs ever - and some years before Ramses II's death (Muslims often wants to change this – preferably to around 1500-1600 BC - because we know Ramses II did not drown, but science is clear on this point)) from Goshen in the north east of Egypt – to be specific: In the Nile delta. They travelled south roughly parallel to what is now the Suez Canal, and to the west of it. Then they turned south east, before they again headed south - still roughly parallel to what is now the Suez Canal, but now to the east of where the canal now is. Then they continued south parallel to the Red Sea. Before the Suez Canal came, between the Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea, here was unbroken low and quite flat land with some scattered lakes, the biggest of which were the Bitter Seas.According to science the Jews may have been cornered against one of the seas during the above mention leg towards southeast, a sea named the Timsah Sea – or Yam Suph in Hebrew. In the old Hebrew scriptures the Jews were cornered against Yam Suph, which can mean the Red Sea (the most frequently used translation) or the Sea of Reeds – both names are possible. The Sea of Reeds was a shallow sea - as for the exact depth our sources are vague, but quite likely just a few meters at most. (The longest reed we have been able to find, is a special kind of rice growing in the Tonle Sap Lake in Cambodia. It can be up to 5 -7 m. The reeds growing in Egypt are shorter, and to get the name "Sea of Reeds", the lake had to be shallow enough for the reeds to get their "heads" above the water over at least a large part of the lake). To guess: From one or two and up to a few meters deep as indicated above.In such shallow seas there simply was not deep enough water to make "each separate part - - - like the huge, firm mass of a mountain". Wrong in case – and it is likely this is the case, even if the more dramatic Red Sea most often is used as a translation. This because for Moses it had been plain stupidity to march south along the western side of the Red Sea when he wanted to go east to Sinai, and then have to cross that sea to reach his destination, with all those people, equipment, animals, etc. in boats they did not have. (The Bible tells they were 600ooo men, which means some 2 mill. included women and children – a number that is mathematically possible (though not likely) after the 430 years the Bible says the Jews lived in Egypt).014 26/66: "But We (Allah*) drowned the others (the Egyptians)." Wrong, at least for Ramses II himself - he did not die from drowning, and he did not die until some years later.015 26/67: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39 above.016 26/77: "- - - the Worlds - - -". The Quran tells there are 7 (flat) worlds – Hadiths adds that they are placed one on top of the other, and names them. Wrong. See 65/12.017 26/98: "- - - Lord of the Worlds - - -". See 26/77 just above and 65/12.below.018 26/103: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.019 26/109: "- - - lord of the Worlds". Wrong. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.020 26/119: "- - - in the Ark filled (with all creatures)." Wrong. No boat could take that many tens of thousands of animal (included insects and similar) pairs + food for them. And even more so not a wooden boat - not possible to build big enough and strong enough for such size. See 11/40.021 26/121: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.022 26/127: "- - - Lord of the Worlds." Wrong. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.023 26/139: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39 above.024 26/145: "- - - Lord of the Worlds." Wrong. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.025 26/158: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.026 26/161: "- - - their (the people of Sodom and Gomorrah*) brother Lot - - -". Wrong. Lot was a stranger to the two towns, and it is very clear both from the Quran and the Bible that he did not mingle well with those locals. He came - together with Abraham - from Ur in Chaldea (in south Iraq). He was no "brother" of them – not even in the figurative meaning of the word. (The word here obviously is used to make Lot and the mentioned people fit the pattern the Quran claims is universal: That the prophets come from the people they are to teach. But here and in a few other cases that is incorrect). Also see 27/56 – it is very clear Lot was no brother of theirs - also not a naturalized "brother". ("Drive out the followers of Lut (Lot*) from our city - - -".)027 26/164: "- - - Lord of the Worlds." Wrong. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.028 26/174: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.029 26/180: "- - - Lord of the Worlds." Wrong. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.030 26/190: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39 above.031 26/192a: "Verily, this (the Quran*) is a revelation from the Lord of the Worlds (Allah*)". If is true that it is a revelation, Allah is not omniscient or Muhammad made a lot of mistakes when reciting it, or Muhammad made it up himself, or there have been a lot of mistakes when compiling the book around 650 AD and later copying it. Something definitely is wrong.032 26/192b: "- - - lord of the Worlds - - -." Wrong. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.*033 26/193: "With it (the Quran*) came the Spirit of Faith and Truth". If truth came down with the Quran, it must have been mutilated later. NB: This is one of the places where Quran mentions "the Holy Spirit".**034 26/196: "Without doubt it (the Quran*) is (announced) in the revealed Books (the Torah, the Bible*) of former peoples." There is very much doubt about that, as the basic elements of the teachings are too different – especially compared to NT and "the new covenant" that is the fundament for Christianity. And it also is absolutely sure that the Quran is not announsed in the Bible or in any Jewish scriptures. Also see the chapter about Muhammad in the Bible.**035 26/197: "Is it not a Sign to them that the Learned of the Children of Israel knew it (is true)?" In the Quran and also in Hadith, it is claimed there were one or a very few learned Jew(s) who accepted Muhammad as may be a prophet. Thestories might even be true. But we are back to the old truth: "One swallow makes no summer". It is absolutely sure that the Jews as a group - learned or not - did not accept his teachings for the truth even in the face of death (f.ex. in Khaybar), one or a few exceptions may be excepted. The same is the truth today. No, it was no valid sign.***036 26/209: "- - - and We (Allah) never are unjust".1. A man correctly telling that a woman has been indecent, is lying to Allah if he cannot produce 4 witnesses - even if an omniscient Allah has to know he is speaking the truth.2. A woman who has been raped, is forbidden to tell who it was, unless she can produce 4 MALE witnesses WHO HAS ACTUALLY SEEN THE ACT. If she cannot produce 4 such witnesses, and all the same tells who the rapist is she shall have 80 whiplashes for slander.3. **A woman who is raped and cannot produce 4 MALE witnesses (that on top of all will be punished for not helping her if they witness about what they saw) that saw the very act, is to be strictly punished – may be stoned – for indecency - if she is unable to hide she has been raped - . Probably the most unjust and amoral law we have ever seen in a "modern" society.4. It is 100% permitted for an owner to rape his female slaves or prisoners of war (may be this is why Muslims so often rape women during conflicts - f. ex. earlier in Bangladesh and earlier and now in Africa). The Quran even directly tells that it is no sin to rape also your married slaves or prisoners of war, as long as they are not pregnant.5. **It is glorious and the Muslims' right to steal, rob, plunder, enslave and to kill nonMuslims during jihad - and almost any conflict is declared jihad (holy war). It is "just and good".There are more if you look. Pleas never tell us that Allah as described in the Quran never is unjust. These 5 points - and more - are morally horrible. Some of it actually the most unjust we have ever seen in any law.*037 26/210-211: "No evil ones have brought down this (Revelation). It would neither suit them - - -". May be no evil spirits have brought down the Quran. But is definite that no omniscient god has done so – too many mistakes, etc. It also is definite that no good or benevolent god or spirit did it – far too inhuman, full of hate and suppression and blood – not to mention the wretched ethic and moral in the book. All the same it is possible it was not sent down by bad or evil forces (even bad supernatural forces would be too intelligent to make a book with so many mistakes, contradictions, invalid logic, etc., as they had to know they would be found out sooner or later and loose their cresability) – it simply is possible, and even likely, that it was made by one or more men (all the wrong science and "knowledge" in accordance with the local beliefs in and around Arabia at that time, and a lot more points in that direction). But what is absolutely sure, is that an Islam like the one one finds in the surahs from Medina suits evil spirits and forces very well: Inhumanity, stealing, blood, hate, war. Just ask Muslims what they think about the Mongols attacking them in the east. The religion in Mongolia under and after Djingis Khan basically was quite similar to Islam. When Islam used their war machine and inhumanity in f. ex. India and other places, they according to all Muslims were heroes. Then they met Mongols that did just the same to Muslims - - and the Mongols were terrible monsters. But then the southern Mongols became Muslims and continued in the same way like before, but now against non-Muslims - - - and now they were great heroes according to Islam. Ask them if the f. ex. remember the name Timur Lenk (Tamerlane).Islam as described in the surahs from Medina, definitely suits evil forces/spirits.*038 26/211: "- - - nor would they (non-Muslims*) be able (to produce it) (something similar to the Quran*)". Wrong. In spite of all the glorious words Muslims use about the Quran, the book is not good literature. There are lots and lots of mistake. There is lots of wrong logic. There are numbers of linguistic mistakes. There are lots and lots of contradictions. There hardly is anything original in the book - the stories are taken from the Bible and a few other old books, from made up religious tales, from folklore and from fairy tales and just changed a little, and the fundamental thoughts borrowed from neighbouring cultures – mainly Jewish and Christian, but also some from the east (Zoroastrians f. ex. and perhaps a little from Buddha – the Arabs had connections as far east as China, and at that time Buddhism was strong in parts of what is now Pakistan and India (but was later drowned in blood by Islam). Also in laws and morality there was little new - if any; there were a few changes compared to the old Arabia, but also here the ideas came from neighbouring cultures. And the same stories are told again and again - most boring. But good writers - not the original composer - polished the Arab language in the book for some 250 years (until ca. 900 AD). There would be no problem for a good or medium writer to write something with similar - or better - contents.Claims like that the Quran is good literature you can tell to the naïve, uneducated illiterate natives of the old (and for that case modern) times. Skip it when you are talking to an educated modern person who knows the Quran (far too few does – many had been disgusted) and knows a little about literature. The Quran may be intelligent religious tales for its time, but it is not a good piece of literature. Boring, repetitive, a melee of this and that – no logical system in the tales, the tales and thoughts all "borrowed" from others and well known, etc.Surah 26: At least 38 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
Surah 27:
001 27/1: "- - - a Book (the Quran*) that makes things clear - - -". The more mistakes, contradictions, etc. there are in a book, the less clear it can make things. It simply looses credibility. The Quran in many cases simply is incredible – literally speaking.
002 27/2a: "A Guide (the Quran*)". See 27/1 just above.
003 27/2b: "- - - glad tidings - - -". Wrong. At the very best one can say that the Quran brought some glad tidings among all the bad persons, wanting loot and slaves, and among some longing for a strong religion - - - if it was not because the Quran itself proves 100% that something is very wrong in the book. So wrong that it neither can be made nor revered by any god – not even by a small mini god. Too much is wrong in the book.
004 27/6a: "(Allah is*) All-Knowing". If that is right, he has not composed the Quran - far too many mistakes. Or to be blunter: The composer of the Quran is someone who is not all knowing.
*005 27/6b: "- - - the Quran is bestowed upon thee (Muhammad/Muslims*) from the presence of One who is Wise and All-Knowing (Allah*)." Islam claims that the Quran is the copy of the Mother Book that is revered in Heaven by Allah and his angles there. It further is claimed that the book either is made by the omniscient and omnipotent god Allah – the only god – or has existed since eternity, and is so fundamental that it is not made even by the god. This verse may be understood as a strengthening of the last claim: The Quran is not said to be made by or sent down by or from Allah, but sent down from "the presence of "Allah. The fact that spoils this lofty and undocumented claim (claims normally are undocumented in Islam –though they demand documentation and proofs from anybody else) is the huge number of
mistakes, twisted facts, contradictions, twisted and invalid logic, etc. in the book. No god –omniscient or not – has ever made such a sloppy work. And also: A large number of the mistakes, rites, ways of thinking, etc. are in accordance the culture and "knowledge" in what we now call the Middle East around the time of Muhammad – but no omniscient god would have to use mistaken science, customs and rules and ways of thinking from a special century and a special, small area and from a short time periode on the miniscule planet Earth, when he made the book – or it in other ways came into existence – before the universe was created (which happened 13.7 billion years ago according to science). Propaganda? At least it is wrong.There is one more fact that makes it impossible that the book is from eternity: There is at least one place in the Quran that angels (sccording also to Muslim scholars) are speaking (and at least 8 places where Muhammad is speaking). That means that the book cannot have been made - or at least not finished - until after the first angels had been created (they could not speak in the book before they were created). It is clear in the Quran that the angels are not from eternity - Allah created them from light. And It cannot have been made in a time that makes it impossible for Muhammad to have his say at least the mentioned 8 times.
006 27/8: "- - - the Worlds." The Quran falsely tells there are 7 Earths. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.
007 27/9: "- - - I am Allah - - - the Wise!" Not very wise if he made the Quran and all its mistakes, etc.
008 27/14: "- - - see what was the end (death by drowning*) of them (pharaoh Ramses II and his men*)". Wrong at least for Ramses II personally - he did not die until some years later, and not by drowning.
*00a 27/16 – 44: These stories – also repeated other places in the Quran - about King Solomon, the ants, the jinns slaving for him, the hoopoo, and not to mention the Queen of Sabah – are fantastic like were they from a fairy tale - - - which is what they are: They are "borrowed" from the made up - apocryphal - scripture "Second Targum of Ester". No god needs to steal old fairy tales and retell them with small – or big – twists to make them fit his religion/tales, and then call them facts. But Muhammad often did so. That is the reason why his contemporaries so often said that what he told just were old tales – they simply recognized the legends, fairy tales and stories.
009 27/16: "We (King Solomon*) have been thought the speech of the Birds." Wrong. One thing is that there is not one bird "speech" but one for each of at least 2000 different kinds of birds, and actually even more, as some birds have different "dialects" from one place to another – even if you were thought cockney English, you would not understand Italian or Arab or Swahili. More fundamental is the fact that the birds' brains are too small for developing coherent speech. The last years science has found that birds brain may be moreefficient that our, gram for gram, but that all the same it is far too small for this – the minimum size where it is theoretically possible for a brain to get facultie rudimentarily similar to the human brain, is guessed to be a brain the size of a cat's. Coherent, intelligent speech from birds simply is physically impossible.
*010 27/18: An ant spoke to other ants and in a way possible for King Solomon to hear. Wrong. Ants do not have the brainpower for composing complicated (for non-human terrestrial beings) sentences - see 27/16 just above - and they do not have organs for pronouncing words - not even "ant -language" words. Not to mention that they lack the power to speak loud enough for humans to hear. A fairy tale. (It is worth mentioning that Islam to a degree admits this. "The Message of the Quran calls it a legend – comment 17. But if this is a legend told like a truth, how many more are there like that in the Quran?)
**011 27/19: "So he (Solomon) smiled at her speech - - -". Wrong. See 27/16 and 27/18 just above. It would be impossible for Solomon to hear what the ant also could not pronounce –also because if it could speak and if it could speak loud enough for us the hear, the diminutive size of an ant would make the words far too high-pitched for our ear to register.
**012 27/22-26: A bird - the hoopoo - making long, coherent speech/sentences of its own composition. No bird on Earth can do that - they do not have the brain capacity (see 27/6b). A fairy tale.
013 27/24: "I (the hoopoo*) found her (the queen of Sabah*) worshipping the sun - - -". Sabah was at the southern end of the Arabian Peninsula – approximately Yemen today. In the old times this whole peninsula had a moon religion, not a sun religion – al-Lah (whom Muhammad later renamed to Allah) originally was a moon god. It is documented that also in
old Sabah the main god was the moon god (source; "The Lunar Passion and the Daughters of Allah"). We may add that Muslims say that even if the moon religion was the dominant, there also may have been sun worshippers. That is true, but not for the ruler of the country – the ruler has to be very strong or be a member of the official and main religion, if not there will be problems (look at Kashmir f. ex. – it all started with a Hindu ruler over a majority of Muslim underlings).
Besides she – the queen – did not worship Allah, because that name was not created yet. Perhaps the moon god al-Lah (later as mentioned renamed by Muhammad to Allah) or the old El.
014 27/25: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
015 27/28: "Go thou (the hoopoo*), with this letter of mine, and deliver it to them: then draw back from them, and (wait to) see what answer they return…." No bird is able to do this. Not even the pigeon brings letters – it only is able to return with a letter. (The pigeons have to be brought in cages from the one who is to receive the letters, to the ones that are to send the message. Then when the bird is let loose, it simply wants to return home - - - and carries the letter to its nest, where the receiver can collect it. This is the only possible way for using birds for carrying a letter. Except in fairy tales.)
00b 27/36: King Solomon is a good Muslim. Anyone is free to believe it if he wants to.
**00c 27/37: King Solomon is offered gifts from Sabah but answers with anger: "Go back to them (the rulers/queen of Sabah*), and be sure we shall come to them with such hosts (armies*) as they will never be able to meet (= attack them*) - - -." This answer has no logical reason or meaning, especially as the gifts were rich ("abundance of wealth"- 27/36). Also
Islam agrees to that something is wrong here, as "a prophet could not answer good gifts with a war of aggression", but they do not have any good explanations – only rather lame speculations about perhaps it in reality is Allah who is speaking and threatening them with what he will do if they do not become Muslims (1500 years before Muhammad! – King Solomon ruled 961 – 922 BC give or take maximum 10 years according to Wikipedia). "Let there be no compulsion in religion"? BUT THIS IS ONE OF THE PLACES WHERE MUSLIM SCHOLARS AGREE THAT SOMETHONG IS WRONG WITH THE TEXT IN THE QURAN.
*00d 27/39: "- - - (one) of the Jinns - - -". Jinns are beings with a diffuse role in the Quran. They are "borrowed" from old Arab fairy tales and legends. Allah made them from fire, the book tells (or may be from the fire of a scorching wind - one of the many contradictions in the Quran). There is said little about their shape - perhaps roughly like humans. They also have a diffuse role in the "pantheon" - they definitely do not belong in the heaven, but neither in hell. There simply is said nothing about where they belong. Neither is anything said about their role in the "life" of heaven and hell or their real connection to the "inhabitants" those two places - or to earthlings. As we said; much is diffuse concerning them and their life, except that they must be beings that can die - and end in hell mostly it seems. As said they are borrowed from old Arab folklore and fairy tales and mostly seem not really to belong in the religion, though they are mentioned quite frequently. Generally we feel they are a little suspect most of the time, but not always. Some were f. ex. servants (or slaves) for King Solomon (but only according to the Quran, not to the Bible), and in the older times - not 100 years ago - there shall have existed laws for marriage etc. between humans and Jinns, though no marriage ever took place!! Do they really exist in the hidden world? - or are they in reality just something from fairy tales used for the mysterious effect? Another curiosity: No other prophet ever mentioned jinns - creatures created from fire, able to marry humans, and creatures that go on to a next life, though most of them to Hell.
016 27/44a: "- - - she (the Queen of Sabah*) thought it (the floor*) was a lake of water (though it was slabs of glass) - - -".
1. They did not have the technology to make that quality of glass ca. 1000 BC. (Solomon ruled from ca. 961 BC till 922 BC (plus or minus max 10 years)).
2. They did not have the technology to make big slabs – and they had to be really big to make the cracks so few that they were not noticed - of glass ca. 1000 BC. Even today it is difficult, as it needs days and weeks and even months of very exact and slow cooling for that big slabs not to crack. (Cfr. the making of large astronomical telescopes).
017 27/44b: "- - - the Worlds." Once more: There are no 7 worlds in spite of the Quran (and the Hadiths). See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.
018 27/52: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
019 27/60: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
020 27/61: "(Allah*) made rivers in its (the Earth's) midst - - -". Wrong. The Quran believed the Earth was flat, and then there is a midst. But the Earth is a sphere, and the surface of a sphere has no midst. Besides: Is it Allah or rain that makes rivers?
021 27/63: "- - - glad tidings - - -". In this case it refers to rain. That is glad tidings in deserts like in Arabia, but hardly in f. ex. Amazonas or England or a lot of other places. Another of the many "Arabiaisms" in the Quran. In Muhammad's local area rain was glad tidings, in the area of a world religion that claims at best only is partly true – but why is Arabia the only cultural and otherwise centre of the Quran if it is for all the world – and from an omniscient god?
022 27/65: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
023 27/76: "- - - this Quran doth explain to the Children of Israel most of the matters in which they disagree". Very wrong. For one thing the Quran is so different from the Mosaic religion (and even more different from Christianity), that it clearly is not the same. For another: A book with that many mistakes, etc. can explain very little.
385
024 27/77a: "And it (the Quran*) certainly is a Guide - - -." A book with that many mistakes and worse, certainly is no Guide – at least not a good or reliable one.
*025 27/77b: "And it (the Quran*) certainly is - - - a Mercy to those who believe." With all its aversion against knowledge (except religious and related knowledge – f. ex. astronomy to follow the dates, special days, etc. exactly), its demand for hate and war, its dark and total dominance over all aspects of life, etc., - and the suppression of half its members (the women) - it is no mercy even to believers.
026 27/79: "- - - for thou art (on the path of) manifest Truth (the contents of the Quran*)". But the contents of the Quran is a mixed lot, and maximum some of it really is true - see all the mistakes.
027 27/81: "- - - Our (Allah*) Signs - - -." There are no logically reliable signs from/about Allah in all the Quran. See 2/99.
028 27/82: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Signs." Wrong. See 27/81 just above and 2/99.
029 27/83: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Signs - - -". Wrong. See 27/81 and 2/99 above.
030 27/84: "- - - My (Allah's*) Signs - - -". Wrong. See 27/81 and 2/99 above.
031 27/87: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
***032 27/91: "For me (Muhammad*), I have been commanded to serve the Lord (Allah*) of this City (Mecca - from 615-616 AD when Muhammad still lived there*) - - - ". This is a serious one: It is Muhammad who is speaking once more - - - in a book presumed to be copy of a "mother book" in Paradise, a book that may be existed from eternity or perhaps was made by Allah. Pikthall and Dawood both camouflage this very revealing mistake (there are a few more where either angles (37/164-166) or Muhammad speaks) by adding the word "say:", but that is not in the original, according to Ibn Warraq, "Why I am not a Muslim", p.175. Dishonest by Pikthall and by Dawood in case. But then it happens you meet dishonesty when Muslims tries to "explain" things - even in books you should believe were intellectually of high quality and moral. (Like Al-Azhar University, Cairo, certifying that the Big Flood could be explained by the filling up of the Mediterranean See. They know very well that both the time and the way it happened prohibit that explanation - some 4 – 5 million years ago and"slowly" over a period of perhaps 100 years, and not least; wrong place, as the Garden of Eden is believed to have been situated in what is now south Iraq (if it ever existed)).Anyhow a nice moment for Muhammad – he liked power. (Just look at how he glued himself to his platform of power; his god).
033 27/93: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39 above.
Surah 27: At least 33 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.
SURAH 28:
001 28/2: "These are verses of the Book (the Quran*) that makes (things) clear". With that many mistakes, contradictions, and suspect arguments in the book, at most some things can be made clear.
*00a 28/3a: "We (Allah*) rehears to thee some of the story of Moses and Pharaoh in Truth - - -". The story about Moses differs not a little from the one told in the Bible - which for this part is more than 1000 years nearer in time to what (may be) happened - and with stronger traditions concerning Moses. It is a question, which one is most reliable. In any case: Both have the death of Pharaoh Ramses II wrong (but when it comes to the Bible it is possible to explain this - not so with the Quran, which is told by Allah, and Allah is omniscient (the human narrator of the Bible can have mixed Ramses II with one of his 67 sons or one of his generals - for Allah such a mistake is impossible)).
002 28/3b: "- - - in Truth - - -". With all the mistakes etc. in the Quran, it at best is just partly true.
*00b 28/6: "- - - Haman - - -". In the Quran Haman is a high leader of some sort under the Pharaoh. But science says this is the Haman from the book of Esther in the Bible. Haman was according to the Bible a powerful minister under the Persian king Xerxes (Hebrew: Ahasuerus) (486 - 465 BC) and a central person in the mentioned book - Muhammad may
well have heard about him. In that case something is very wrong, because Ramses II naturally was king/pharaoh in Egypt, and on top of that lived some 800 years earlier. Haman could not be his top minister.Muslims want to explain this with that it was another Haman. But science is not in doubt, it is the same. Another question here is: Was the name Haman at all used in Egypt? – it is said to be a Persian name.**Here Islam has another explanation that just might have been true: One of the main gods in Egypt at that time was Amon. According to "The Message of the Quran" the title of the high priest of Amon, was Ha-Amen - which could be understood as Hamon. Not very likely, especially as that is the kind of "explanations" one frequently finds when Islam has problems finding better stories. But after all possible. Except that a god does not make such mistakes. And except for 28/38a: "Pharaoh said: 'O Chiefs! No god do I know for you but
myself - - -". Pharaoh cannot at the same time be the only god in Egypt (very wrong as said) and have the high priest (Ha-Amen) of another god as his second in command. Like so many times Muslim "explanations" covers only part of the picture and thus is proven wrong. Also see 38a below.The question also is how Muhammad could have heard about Ha-Amen nearly 1900 years later - after Amon and his high priest had ceased to be part of a large religion, in contrast to Haman, who was part of the Jews' religious traditions. This even more so as there were thousands of Jews in Arabia at that time, who could have told Muhammad, but few from Egypt. Of course Muslims will say that Allah knew. But if an omniscient Allah had told this, he - as said above - had not made any mistake with the name. And if the mistake came from Muhammad after Allah had told him: How many more mistakes did Muhammad make?
00c 28/8: "- - - Haman - - -". See 28/6 just above.
003 28/30: "- - - Worlds - - -". The Quran falsely tells there are 7 Earths. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.
004 28/35: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Signs - - -". See 27/81, 2/39 and 2/99 above.
005 28/36: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Clear Signs - - -". See 27/81 and 2/99 above.
*006 28/38a: "Pharaoh said: 'O Chiefs! No god do I know for you but myself - - -". This is one of the really good ones, because Egypt at the time of Ramses II had a good number of gods, included some central ones with a strong clerical organisation - not to mention: How then explain Islam's own story about Ha-Amen in 28/6 above? (It is typical for many
"explanations" of mistakes in the Quran that Muslims "explain" something, but are then unable not to "collide" with other information in the book - f. ex. explaining the heavens as the modern universe without telling how the stars then could be fastened to the lowest heaven). But at the time of Muhammad the old gods were reduced - Egypt was partly Christian (the forefathers of the present-day Copts). A real god had not made this blunder, but Muhammad could not know. Then who composed the Quran?Islam tries to explain this away with that it is not meant literally - only that Ramses II was the
top. But in this case it is very clear what the Quran says. And also remember that the Quran -and most Muslims - say that the Quran is to be meant literally where nothing else is said - - -and that to call something an allegory or say it is figuratively meant, we think is the for Islam the most used means of explaining away of things/mistakes in the Quran that has no explanation.
00d 28/38b: "- - - Haman - - -". See 28/6 above.
*007 28/40: "So We (Allah*) sized him (Ramses II*) and his hosts, and flung them into the sea - - -". Wrong at least for Ramses II himself - he did not drown and he died years later.
008 28/43: "We (Allah*) revealed to Moses the Book". Wrong. Moses got no book. The books of Moses were written centuries later - they just were named after him. (Moses got the 10 commandments only in writing according to the Bible. In addition he was told the law, which he himself wrote down later. The laws are parts of the later Books of Moses).
009 28/45: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Signs - - -". No omniscient god would use invalid signs. See 27/81, 2/39 and 2/99 above.
010 28/47: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
*011 28/48a: "- - - When the Truth (the Quran*) has come to them (the Quraysh - the leading tribe in Mecca*) - - -". If it was not because the word "truth" is so central and so disused in Islam, we had stopped commenting on it long time ago - it is so obvious that the Quran can be only partly the truth. See all the mistakes - some small, some big blunders, some repeated many times and really cemented - - - but even one mistake is impossible for an omniscient god. Is Allah omniscient? Or did someone else compose the Quran? If Allah is not omniscient, that means something is wrong with the religion. If Muhammad or another human composed it, it is a false religion.***And if it is a false religion and there somewhere exists a real, true one, to which Islam blocks the road to for its believers - - - what then for the Muslims?
012 28/48b: "- - - (the Signs) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
013 28/49: "Then bring ye (people*) a Book (the Quran*) from Allah, which is a better Guide - - -". A book that full of wrong facts, twisted arguments, contradictions, invalid statements and as invalid logic is no good guide for anyone.
*014 28/52: "(Jews and Christians*) – they do believe in this (Revelation) - - -". Flatly wrong. A few became Muslims, but the overwhelming majority had to flee, were made slaves, or were killed/murdered/executed because they refused to believe in Muhammad's tales. Cfr. f. ex. what happened in and around Medina in the years after this surah was told (in 621 AD or later). One more place where an intelligent man like Muhammad knew he was lying.
*015 28/53a: "They (Jews and Christians*) say: 'We believe therein, for it is the Truth from our Lord - - -". Well, this is what Muhammad claimed. The reality as clearly told in Islamic written sources you find in 28/52 just above - and like in 28/52 also here Muhammad had to know he was lying. Also see 28/48a and 28/48b.
016 28/53b: "- - - the Truth - - -". The Quran at best only is partly true – too many mistakes, etc.
017 28/53c: "- - - indeed we (the Jews and Christians*) have been Muslims (bowing to Allah's will) from before this". No comments necessary – except see f. ex. 28/52, 28/48a or 28/48b above.
018 28/53d: "- - - for it (the Quran*) is the Truth - - -". No. With that many mistakes, etc., the Quran hardly is the truth - at best partly the truth.
019 28/53e: "- - - for it (the Quran*) is the Truth from our Lord (Allah*) - - -." A book with that many mistakes, contradictions, and other errors is not from a god – omniscient or not.
*020 28/59a: "Nor was thy Lord (Allah*) one to destroy a population until he had sent to its Centre a messenger - - -". The Quran speaks about lots of prophets - in the Hadith it is mentioned 124ooo through the times and throughout the world. (And one impolite, but pertinent reminder: Muhammad was unable to make real prophesies – he in reality was no
prophet, only "borrowed" that big title). But with the exception of Israel and to a degree in Persia (and some rulers that did so on their own accord for political reasons + a small sect in Arabia, most likely inspired by Jews and Christians) there are no traces anywhere, any time after prophets for monotheistic religions - not in history, not in archaeology, not in
literature, not in art, not in architecture - not even in folklore or fairy tales.*Besides: MANY places were destroyed by war, famine or other catastrophes through the time without being visited by prophets for a monotheistic religion warning them first - in spite of the Quran's saying all such things only happen in accordance with the plans of Allah.The verse is wrong. And we are also not sure that such a vengeful and hard god is a good or benevolent god – when someone says or declares one thing, but demands or does something else, we always believe that the demands and the deeds are more reliable than cheap words. Similar claims in 17/15 - 17/16.
021 28//59b: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Signs - - -". No god would use invalid signs/proofs. See 2/99.
022 28/75: "- - - then they (the non-Muslims*) shall know that the Truth is in Allah (alone) - - -". That is to be hoped that if Allah is a god. But judging from the Quran, at most in him is partly the truth.
00e 28/82: "Those who reject Allah will assuredly never prosper". As for a possible next life discussion really is impossible - we know nothing, and can know nothing. Some will say they know, but they will be very wrong - what they do, is believing strongly. Knowledge is not possible without solid proved facts, and the only real fact in Islam is that one single man told stories he either refused to or was unable to document - either because a god did not want to (with illogical and/or sychologically wrong excuses) or was unable to, or because a god did not exist. There are lots of words - but words are cheap. There are lots of statements - but statements hanging in thin air without proofs are as cheap. There are lots and lots of "signs" -but a few are downright wrong, and the rest is completely valueless as proofs for Allah, as
they in reality are just unproved claims or statements hanging in the air and only proves that words are cheap - they are statements that any priest in any religion can say about his god or gods, as long as he does not have to produce real proofs - - - like Muhammad steadfastly or from sheer necessity did not produce. And there even are verses telling they
prove Allah. But not one single of them proves anything about him - they are as valueless as the "signs" and for the same reasons - a few even are plainly wrong. Especially we should mention all the natural phenomena that the Quran says are signs indicating or proving Allah, but without one single time proving that it really is Allah that makes the phenomena, and thus the only thing they prove, is that Islam never has been able to produce s single real proof, for any priest in any religion can say exactly the same cheap words about natural phenomena and his god(s). Which further proves that Islam has had to rely on cheap words to influence their congregations and others. One can speculate about why. *But when it comes to prosperity in this life, it is clear that the Quran is completely wrong. And it is likely to stay that way, as Muslim countries forces half their adult population not to work, and the culture is adverse to non-religious knowledge ("foreign knowledge") and real or critical thinking - which among other effects means that all the Muslim world has fewer new patents a year, than the single state of California - and the difference is even worse if one looks at patents of knife-edge technique or technology. This among other reasons will forever keep Muslim states in second-class economy, if they do not have natural recourses like oil to sell. Or if they do not become strong enough to exploit or tax others.
023 28/84: "- - - the doers of evil are only punished (to the extent) of their deeds". Flatly wrong. There is an abyss of injustice between what sins most sinners have committed, and the punishment they get in Hell.
024 28/87: "- - - the Signs of Allah - - -". There is no sign clearly showing Allah in all the Quran. Each and every claimed "sign" can as easy be claimed by any other god – and actually they do not signify any god at all, as it is not proved they are made by a god. (Possibly some taken from the Bible may be valid, but they in case signify Yahweh, not Allah – Muslims like to claim (as normal for Muslims without proofs) that Yahweh and Allah is the same god, but
the teachings are fundamentally too different).
Surah 28: At least 24 mistakes + 5 likely mistakes.
SURAH 29:
*00a 29/2: "Do men think - - - they will not be tested?" But why is it necessary to trst anyone if Allah is omniscient and knows everything before? – even decides everything before (in spite of the claim that man has (limited?) personal freedom to decide – though even Islam is unable to explain how it possible to combine the statement that Allah decides everything before, with the statement that man has free will (not strange, as it is a version of the time travel paradox, and that paradox is proved unsolvable)) – if all this, then why are tests necessary to find an answer Allah already knows?
001 29/15: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
002 29/23: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
003 29/28a: "- - - Lut (Lot*); behold, he said to his people (the people of Sodom and Gomorrah*) - - -." Wrong. Those people for one thing were not Lot's "natural" people, as he was a stranger from very far away (Ur in Chaldea in what now is South Iraq, but now living near the Dead Sea), and for another both the Bible and the Quran make it very clear that he
also was not a naturalized member of those communities – he was an outsider. (May be the Quran tells they were his people so as to be able to say he was a prophet to his own people, like they falsely claim every prophet was – in spite of Joseph (Egypt), Moses (Sinai 40 years), Abraham (Canaan), Lot (Dead See area), Jonah (Nineveh).
004 29/28b: "Do you (men of Sodom and Gomorrah*) commit lewdness (homosexuality*), such as no people in Creation (ever) committed before you." Wrong. Homosexuality was nothing new – it even exists among some "higher" animals, sometimes as a sign of dominance – and it is in the DNA of a minor part of humanity. If Islam stays on their claim that this was something "no people in humanity (ever) committed before", they will have to prove it.
005 29/35: "- - - an evident Sign - - -." There are no evident or clear signs for Allah – or for Muhammad's connection to a God - in all the Quran. See 2/99.
00b 29/39a: "- - - Haman - - -". See 28/6.
006 29/44a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
007 29/44b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
*008 29/45: "- - - remembrance of Allah is the greatest (thing in life) without doubt." There is much doubt about this if he has composed the Quran - the mistakes proves he in case is very far from omniscience, the valueless "signs" and "proofs" proves he is not very good at logical thinking, and his use of invalid excuses and his inability to send proofs of his existence, proves he is not omnipotent. And if someone else made the Quran, the doubt is even greater, as then both the Quran and Islam are without any value at all - or with negative value, as much of the religion is rather inhuman (f. ex. wars, terrorism, suppression of all non-Muslims, suppression of women and freedom to rape many of them, thoughts about slavery, and enmity towards non-Muslims).
***009 29/46: "- - - our (Muslims*) and your (Jews and Christians*) god is one - - -". This is not correct unless he is schizophrenic, as too many fundamental aspects are too different between the two teachings. To mention a few points:
Islam: The New Testament:
Do not kill without a good reason. Do not kill.
To wage war is a religious duty. Do not kill.
An eye for an eye. Turn the other cheek
You cannot carry another's burden. Carry your fellow man's burden.
Religion shall run the country. My land is not of this world.
Be killed for Allah and go to Paradise. Become like a child to go to Paradise.
Paradise = Earth-like luxury plus women Paradise = Heaven for your soul (for women = luxury and a share of the
husband). (for women = Heaven for your soul.)
Paradise = resurrected body. Paradise = the soul lives on.
Do not lie except for good reason. Do not lie.
Do not mourn the unbeliever. "The lost lamb".
Break an oath and pay damage for it. To break any oat is a severe sin.
Al-Taqiyya – Muslims' lawful lie. Do not lie.
To rob and steal may be "good and lawful" Do not steal.
To rape a female slave is "good and lawful". Bible: So immoral that it is not even mentioned.
Help others to gain merit in heaven. Help others because they need it – and gain merit in heaven.
(For those who do not know: Jesus said that if someone hit you on one cheek, turn the other towards him = do not do the same and answer bad with good. And: Jesus said that a shepherd would search for a lost lamb = to save a lost soul is very valuable, and there is reason to mourn the not saved ones.)We know both religions have been misused – though with one serious difference: Christ has been misused in contradiction to his teachings, Islam very often in accordance with its teachings, because of the Quran's often bloody religion and lack of real moral. The sentences above are some of the teachings – some of the fundaments.Only Islam says it is the same god - and they are wrong, unless the god is mentally ill.
010 29/47a: "- - - We (Allah*) have sent down the Book (the Quran*) - - -". No god ever sent down a book with that many mistakes, etc. – not to mention revered it in his own "home" as the Mother Book.
011 29/47b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
012 29/49a: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
013 29/49b: "- - - Our Signs - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
014 29/52: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22.
015 29/54: "- - - of a surety, Hell will encompass the Rejecters (non-Muslims*) of the Faith (Islam*)." No, that is no surety with all the mistakes in the Quran strongly reducing a reader's belief in the reality of the religion. Even more: If someone has made up the Quran, and there exists another, real religion, the rejecters of Muhammad and Islam have a chance
of finding that religion.
*016 29/61a: "If indeed thou ask them who has created the heavens (plural and wrong - like at least 198 other places in the Quran*) and the earth - - - they (non-Muslims*) will certainly reply, 'Allah'". Wrong. If they believed a god created it, they would certainly name their own god (which in the old Arabia might have been the polytheist al-Lah).
017 29/61b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
018 29/63: "And if indeed thou ask them (non-Muslims*) who it is that sends down rain from the sky - - - they will certainly reply, 'Allah'". Wrong. See 29/61 just above.
019 29/68: "- - - rejects the Truth (the Quran*) - - -". Wrong. With such a number of mistakes, it maximum is partly the truth.
020 29/69: "And those who strive in Our (Cause) – We (Allah*) will certainly guide them to Our Paths - - -". With so much wrong in the Quran, it is likely that this is wrong, too. At least it is far from a certainty.
Surah 29: At least 20 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.
SURAH 30:
*001 30/2-4: "The Roman Empire (Bysantz/Constantinople*) has been defeated (by Persia*) in a land close by (Damascus 613 AD, Jerusalem 614 AD, Egypt 615-616 AD – may be a battle in Syria in 615 AD – just pick your choice (the surah is from 615 or 616 AD)); but they, (even) after (this) defeat of theirs will soon be victorious – Within a few ("bid") years."
Bysantz defeated Persia in 628 AD after they first had had a number of defeats at the start of the war.
1. 1. The Arab word "bid" means "a few" and "means a number of no less than 3, no more than 9" according to comment 2 to this surah in "The Message of the Quran". It took at least 12 years.
2. This was a pep-talk to his followers. No-one –not even Muhammad himself – said that it was a prophesy - - - except that many Muslims say so afterwards.
3. It is very clear from the Quran that Muhammad did not have the gift of being able to make prophesies (a kind of miracles), and it is as clear that he never even pretended to or claimed to have that gift. This was just one of the (few) cases where a little of all that he said through his life happened to come partly true (actually: So much that he said and
spoke it is a miracle that not more happened to come true – and more true than in this case. And NB: This is the only heavy claim Islam has about him being able to make prophesies (though there are other claims). There are a number of theories and claims about his ability which he as said did not claim or or pretend to have himself, but this is the only
one Islam reckons to be a "heavy" claim". Once - nearly - in a lifetime = a prophet?
002 30/8: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
003 30/9: "- - - Clear (Signs) - - -". Clear signs about Allah and Islam does not exist in the Quran. One may wonder why Muhammad used invalid proofs – invalid proofs and arguments normally are the hallmarks of cheats and swindlers. It also indicates lack of real facts and proofs. See 2/39.
004 30/10: "- - - Signs of Allah - - -". No omniscient and omnipotent god had used strongly suspect "signs", etc. to prove himself , not to mention added his name for strengthening the claim. See also 2/39.
005 30/16: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
006 30/18: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
007 30/20: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
*008 30/20: "Among His (Allah's*) Signs is this, that He created you from dust - - -". Wrong. Man was not created from dust - really he was not created at all according to science. See 6/2. There is an extra irony in the fact that the Quran uses a piece of wrong information to "prove" Allah. Contradiction of reality.
009 30/21a: "- - -His Signs - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
010 30/21b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
011 30/22a: "And among His (Allah's) Signs is the creation of the heavens (plural and wrong) - - -". Very clearly a wrong proof – a wrong "sign" – as there are no 7 heavens. Irony? At least a contradiction of reality.
012 30/22b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
013 30/22c: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
014 30/23a: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
015 30/23b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
016 30/24a: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
017 30/24b: "- - - He (Allah*) sends down rain from the sky and with it gives life to the earth after it is dead: verily, in that are Signs (for Allah*) for those who are wise." Wrong. If just water made the earth come alive, it meant that it just looked dead, but was alive with seeds, etc. And those who are wise will see the irony in using doubtful "facts" as proofs for Allah.
018 30/24c: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
019 30/25: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
020 30/26: "- - - all (beings*) are devotedly obedient to Him (Allah*)." Wrong. No nonMuslim is devotedly obedient to Allah. And no Muslim sinner is devotedly obedient to any god. Islam also will have to prove that also all non-human beings, included worms and slugs and microbes - are devotedly obedient to him. Yes, they will even have to prove that all Muslims are devotedly obedient to him and not hypocrites.
021 30/27: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
022 30/28: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
*023 30/30a: "- - - no change (let there be) in the work (wrought) by Allah: that (Islam*) is the standard Religion - - -". No "standard" religion can be based on a book with so many obvious mistakes. And hopefully no "standard" religion can be base on hate, suppression and blood. (This paragraph is one of the reasons why Islam states - or pretends - that the Quran is perfect, and why Islam can admit not even the most obvious mistakes - all mistakes must be "explained" away, because there can be no change in Allah's work – the Quran).
*00a 30/30b: "- - - no change (let there be) in the work (wrought) by Allah: that (Islam*) is the standard Religion: But most among mankind understand not". The impolite, but most pertinent, question is: May be it is really the non-Muslims that have understood? - understood that something may be wrong.
00b 30/32: "Those who split up their Religion, and become (mere) Sects - - -". We have been told there have existed and exist some 3ooo Muslim sects. We have not been able to verify the number, but it is clear there are quite a number – from Wahhbism in Saudi Arabia and stricter, to Amaddiyyas and others. It also is clear that through the history there have been more –some have been eradicated in blood even, as there is no compulsion in religion, according to Islam. As the Quran is said to be very clear and easy to understand, one impertinent question is: Which of the sects understands it correctly? – and why do all the others understand it differently? – and last, but very far from least: What is really the correct understanding?
024 30/37: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
*025 30/42: "Travel through the earth and see what was the End of those before you (nonMuslims*) - - -." In the Middle East there were ruins here and there. Muhammad claimed they all were from people punished because they were non-Muslims and sinners. In an arid and harsh area populated by warring and feuding tribes, there were many other reasons for empty houses. Islam will have to provide strong proofs for the claim that they all were result of religious disbelief, if they want to be believed on this point.
*00c 30/43: "- - - the right Religion (Islam*) - - -". Is it possible that the right religion can be based on a book with that many mistakes, repeated or made by an Arab salesman, highwayman, murderer (he let at least 26 opponents and others murder - Ibn Ishaq names 10 of them), torturer and rapist (he - at an age of nearly 60 - at least raped the newlywed, 17 year old Safijja after he had let her husband Kinana be tortured to death, and Raihana bint Amr after he had murdered the male part of her family and made the rest slaves.) Source for this information: Muhammad Ibn Ishaq: "Life of the Prophet Muhammad" - the in Islam most respected of the old (dead 768 AD) writers about Muhammad. (It was written for the second Abbasside caliph in Baghdad, Mansur, around 750 AD). Neither Arab salesmen, nor highwaymen, nor torturers, nor murderers, nor rapists have the best of reputations for being honest (even if Islam insists he was, but Islam hardly is the most reliable source on just that point). This Arab salesman, highwayman, torturer, murderer and rapist and inhuman warlord, was even unable to produce one single small proof for his story. But he (?) produced lots of loose statements and invalid "signs" and "proofs".He is the only source Islam is built on.Can this be "the Right Religion"?
026 30/46a: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
027 30/46b: "- - - glad tidings - - -". Wrong. At the very best one can say that the Quran brought some glad tidings among all the bad warriors, wanting loot and slaves, and among some longing for a religion - - - if it was not because the Quran itself proves 100% that something is very wrong in the book. So wrong that it neither can be made nor revered by any god – not even by a small mini god. Too much is wrong in the book for that.
*028 30/47a: "We (Allah*) did indeed send, before thee (Muhammad*), messengers to the (respective) peoples - - -". The Quran tells there were sent prophets by Allah too all peoples throughout the times - the Hadith (the second main "pillar" of "knowledge" about Islam) mention 124ooo, and even that may even be only a symbolic number. But neither in
archaeology, nor in architecture (temples or stones reused for building f. ex.), nor in literature, nor history, nor folklore, nor even in fairy tales are there the slightest traces from those prophets. That so many prophets should leave not even a whisper of a trace - flatly no.
029 30/47b: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". See 2/99 above.
*030 30/48: "- - - then does He (Allah*) spread them (the clouds*) in the sky as he wills, and break them into fragments, until thou seest raindrops issue from the midst thereof - - -". It is not possible to get it more wrong than this. What happens is not that the clouds break apart, but straight opposite: That droplets come together to form drops. No further comments. But ANY god had known better.
031 30/53: "- - -Our (Allah*) Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 and 2/99 above.
032 30/58: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
033 30/60: "- - - the promise of Allah is true - - -". The promises of Allah are expressed via Muhammad and the Quran. Muhammad was a man of highly suspect morality according to his deeds told in Islamic religious and historical (the Quran, Hadiths, Ibn Ishaq to mention the most central ones) literature. The second is a book dictated by that man, and containing huge numbers of mistakes, twisted arguments, twisted logic, inhuman ethics and moral, etc., etc. Islam will have to bring real proofs to be believed – and Islam has till now been unable to prove anything fundamental - - - they instead glorify and insist on naïve blind belief.
Surah 30: At least 33 mistakes + 3 likely mistakes.
Subtotal till now: At least 1076 mistakes + 142 likely mistakes.
Comments numbered by 3 numbers (included 00 or 0) a few places followed by one small letter = clear mistakes. Comments numbered by 00 or 0 followed by 1, 2 or 3 letters (big or small) = likely mistake. MUSLI
SURAH 31:
001 31/2: "These are Verses of the Wise Book". A book with lots and lots of mistakes and with lots and lots of unfounded statements based on nothing except unproven, cheap words is no wise book and no book "full of wisdom". It may be symptomatic that the name of this surah, Luqman, is the name of a wise man in some Arab fairy tales.
002 31/3a: "A Guide - - -". See 31/2 just above. Such a book also is no good guide.
*003 31/3b: "And it (the Quran*) certainly is - - - a Mercy to those who believe." With all its aversion against knowledge (except religious and related knowledge – f. ex. astronomy to follow the religious dates, special days, etc. exactly), its demand for hate and war, its dark and total dominance over all aspects of life, etc., - and the suppression of half its members (the women) - it is no mercy even to believers.
*004 31/30: "- - - Allah is the (only) Reality - - -." The only facts that are realities about Allah, are that his existence is never proved, the belief in him rests only on blind belief, and all knowledge (or invented tales?) about him – absolutely all – come from a man with highly questionable ethics and morality, and a man willing to break even his oath if that gave better result, and one who used the tales as his platform of power. Actually: In the book "The Message of the Quran", certified by Al-Azhar Al-Sharif Islamic Research Academy in Cairo (one of the 2-3 top universities in the Muslim world on such subjects) in a letter dated 27. Dec. 1998, it is admitted rather reluctantly that there are no proofs for Allah, and that it is not possible to prove him. An additonal point here is that if there are no ptoof for Allah and impossible to ptove him, automatically there also is no proof for, and impossible to prove Muhammad's claimed connection to Allah.005 31/5: "These (Muslims*) are on (true) guidance - - -". A book with lots of mistakes, twisted arguments, as twisted logic, and dictated by a man of very suspect morality and defending and enlarging his platform of power – his self proclaimed religion – is no reliable guidance and of suspected truth. More proofs are needed to make this believable.
006 31/9: "The promise of Allah (the Quran*) is true". See 32/5 just above.
**007 31/10a: "He created the heavens (plural and wrong) without any pillars that you can see - - -". The Quran tells that the 7 heavens rest on invisible pillars (of course they need pillars - if not they would fall down!!!). Nowadays even Islam knows this is wrong, and the statements have to be explained away. We have f. ex been told from Islamic information
centres on Internet that: "- everyone with an IQ more than 60 of course understand that that means the pillars do not exist". But we know well the difference between "invisible" and "not existing". We also remember that the Quran - and Islam and Muslims - says the book is to be understood literally, (if nothing else is said).
008 31/10b: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
009 31/10a: "He set on earth mountains - - -". The mountains are not set (another place in the Quran it even says "set down") - they without exception have grown up.
010 31/10c: "He set on earth mountains standing firm, lest it should shake with you - - -". Some Muslim scholars say that this refers to the (wrong) danger that the pancake-like (?), flat disc that is Earth, could start shaking, then to tumble and turn and drop you off. But even if we accept Islam's modern "explanation" - that this has to do with earth quakes, it is
completely wrong. Mountains do not hinder earth quakes. On the contrary: Earthquakes very often are connected to the same processes that build the mountains, whether this is tectonic or volcanic activity (when we say "very often" in connection with tectonic activity, the reason is that earthquakes also are made from tectonic plates just sliding past each other without building mountains). The fact is that in some cases mountains - or because of varieries in big lakes or masses of snow in the mountains - varying weight can cause earthquakes (source: New Scientist). (There f. ex. are some more earthquakes in the northern part of the Earth during winter because of the weight of the snow, and there often is more snow in the mountains than in the low-land - source: New Scientist.)
*00a 31/11: "Such is the Creation of Allah: now show Me (Allah*) what is there that others beside Him have created - - -." Show us first if all the cheap words about everything Allah has created, are true – there only are lose and easy words anyone can use about his/her god(s), free of charge. With all the mistakes and twisted words and logic and even some obvious lies (f. ex. that miracles will make no-one believe) the Quran is built on, also this may be wrong.
011 31/16: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
012 31/20a: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
013 31/20b: "- - - without a Book (like the Quran*) to enlighten them". This implies that the Quran enlightens some ones – but a book with that many mistakes, etc., enlightens nobody. Also note how much value Muhammad puts on the written words - a book seems to be a proof for something in religion for him.
014 31/21 "- - - the (Revelations) that Allah has sent down - - -". Can an omniscient god have sent down texts with so many mistakes? Impossible.
015 31/22: "- - - the most trustworthy hand-hold (the Quran and Allah*) - - -". But a book with so many mistakes, etc. - and even some shining lies (like that miracles will not make a lot of people believe) – is not trustworthy.
016 31/25a: "If thou ask them who it is that created the heavens (plural and wrong once more) and the earth, they will certainly say, 'Allah'". Wrong. If they believe a god created this, they certainly will name their own god(s) - though in the old Arabia this might have been the polytheistic god al-Lah. ***(The likeness of the pronunciation of al-Lah and Allah hides the difference when spoken -just like when the Muslims use the word God instead of Allah speaking to non-Muslims - it on the surface camouflages some of the fundamental differences there are between Allah and God/Yahweh for people with little knowledge).
017 31/25b: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
018 31/27: "- - - Allah is - - - Full of wisdom." Not if the Quran is representative for his wisdom.
019 31/29a: "- - - Allah merges Night into Day and He merges Day into Night - - -." This is one of the natural phenomena Muhammad hijacked without any proof or documentation. It is totally void of any value as a proof for Allah unless it is proved that it really is Allah that spins the Earth in the light from the sun – the real reason for the alternation of day and night. Without such proofs, this just is another number of cheap, valueless words that anyone can use free of charge for his/her god(s).
020 31/29b: "- - - He (Allah*) has subjected the sun and the moon (to His Law) - - -". A nice proof for Allah - - - but only if it is proved that it really is he that moves them in their trajectories. Without such proofs, these just are cheap words in a valueless claim anyone can use totally free of charge – for Allah or for any other god, real or invented.
*021 31/29c: "Seest thou not - - - that He (Allah*) has subjected the sun and the moon (to His Law), each running its course - - -." Wrong. Relative to the Earth the sun is fixed and it is the Earth that is moving. ("Explanation" from some Muslims: We drop the fact that it here is talk about the relative movements between the Earth and the sun – obvious partly because it is talk about movement relative to the observer on Earth, and obvious from the fact that is talk about
the movements of both the sun and the moon – and we drop the fact that the verse started with "Seest thou not - - -", and find the "obvious" meaning: Muhammad talks about the sun's course around the galaxy, once every 225 million years. Well, it could have been obvious, if they had explained why they settled for that movement – because the galaxy is moving around in the Local Group (a small cluster of galaxies), which again is mowing around in our local Super Group (a cluster of a couple of thousands galaxies), which again is mowing towards some enormous centre of gravity called The Great Attractor - - - which again may be on its way somewhere. (Muhammad clearly had not the faintest idea about the real connections between Earth, moon and sun – any god had known everything exactly. Theb who made the Quran?) Even more: Even if one only looks at the movement of the sun around the galaxy, that is not a circle – it is a bent approximately sinuous curve as Helios – our sun –wobbles up and down over and under the galactic equator on its way around the galactic centre. But pick and choose the parts of the total movement till you find one you like.**If they are they just cherry picking the arguments they like and that seemingly are usable, no matter whether it really fits or not? Well, it would not be the first time.
**022 31/30: "That is because Allah is the (only) Realty - - -". Is Allah really a reality? All the tales about him derives from just one man - a man even canonized Islamic history tells for long time lived as a chief highwayman and from robbing and extortion (for kidnapped salesmen, etc.). A man initiating assassinations and murders on his opponents (f. ex. Asma bint Marwan (female poet), al-Nadr, Abu Uzza, and Ocba after the battle of Badr, Abu Afaq (said to be over 100 years old), Kab ibn al-Ashraf, Ibn Sunayana, Othman bin Moghira, Abi 'l Huqayq, and not to forget Kinana b. al-Rabi whom he tortured to death to find riches, and afterwards he personally raped Kinana's 17 year old, newlywed wife Safijja (Muhammad was nearly 60 then). A man that initiated mass murder - once some 700 helpless male prisoners, and made all their children and women slaves - one of them, Safijja bint Huayay (and another time Raihana bint Amr), for his own personal use), a rapist with permission from Allah for himself and all his men to rape ("have sexual connections with" to use more polite words) all female slaves and prisoners that were not pregnant (this tells something about Allah, too). A
400 man that initiated war and got 20% or more of all spoils of war, included slaves (though not all for his personal use). And a man lusting for power - easy to see both from the Quran and from Hadith. And a man - and a god - entirely unable to produce one iota of a real proof for the tales. (Sources: Among others: Ibn Hisham and Ibn Ishaq - both most respected by Islam for biographies about Muhammad. Ibn Ishaq's "The Life of Muhammad" is the most respected of the old ones of all Muhammad biographies in Islam - written for the caliph in Baghdad around 750 AD. Plus the Quran and Hadiths – Al-Bukhari and Muslim).Only this man told the tales in the Quran - tales that on top of all have hundreds and
hundreds of mistakes, at least hundreds of loose statements and hundreds of invalid "signs" and "profs" - also they loose statements, claims, and invalid "signs"/"proofs", all being the hallmarks of cheats and deceivers, and of persons without true arguments. A good and perfect man, according to Islam. If that is true, we hope never to meet a bad Muslim.
But a man normal people would say was dubious and with a dubious morality. Is a dubious man with dubious morality and who is unable to produce the slightest proof, but for a lot of airy and partly illogical excuses for this inability, and even "signs" and "proofs" without value, is this such a man that tells just and only the undeniable and full truth? And the only indication Islam has for the reality of Allah is the tales of that kind of a man.
023 31/31a: "- - - His Signs - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39 and 2/99 above.
024 31/31b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
025 31/32: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Signs - - -". No omniscient and omnipotent god uses unreliable and/or unproven signs to prove his existence and power.
026 31/34: "Verily, with Allah is full knowledge and he is acquainted (with all things)". All the mistakes in the Quran prove the opposite - - - or that someone else made the Quran.
Surah 31: At least 26 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
SURAH 32:
001 32/2a: "(This is) the revelation of the Book (the Quran) - - -." It is not a revelation from an omniscient god – too many mistakes. (But perhaps from bad forces or humans?)
002 32/2b: "- - - the Book in which there is no doubt - - -" Because of f. ex. all the mistaken facts and invalid arguments in the Quran, there is very good reason for doubt.
003 32/2c: "- - - the Book (the Quran*) from the Lord (Allah*) of the Worlds." Wrong. No omniscient god makes a book with that many mistakes, etc., not to mention revere it in his "home" as the Mother Book.
004 32/2d: "- - - the Worlds." Once more a reference to the 7 Earths in the Quran. Wrong.
005 32/3a: "Nay, it (the Quran*) is the Truth - - -". No. At best it is partly the truth - too many mistakes, contradictions, etc.
006 32/3b: "Nay, it (the Quran*) is the Truth from thy Lord (Allah*) - - -". Can a book with that many mistakes and "signs" and "proofs" without logical value really be composed by an omniscient god and be the revered "Mother Book" in Heaven? No.
007 32/4a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
008 32/4b: "It is Allah Who has created the heavens (plural and wrong) and the earth, and all between them, in six Days - - -". One simple and polite expression: Very wrong. And another: A contradiction to the verses in the Quran which tell 2 + 4 + 2 = 8 days.
009 32/5a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
010 32/5b: "Verily, a Day in the sight of thy Lord (Allah*) is like a thousand years of your (Mohammad's*) reckoning". Is something wrong here as 70/4 says: "- - - unto Him (Allah*) in a day the measure of which is (as) fifty thousand years"? Even if this should be figurative speech, a factor of 50 is much. Another contradiction in reality. Also see 22/47.
011 32/6: "- - - the Knower of all things (Allah*) - - -". Something is seriously wrong: Allah is not the knower of all things if the Quran is representative for his knowledge.
012 32/7a: "He (Allah*) Who made everything which He created most Good - - -". Wrong. We could had had better resistance concerning illnesses, our bodies could have been able to make more of the vitamins themselves, our brain could have been better – f.ex. ability to think about 2-3 things at a time, or learning more easily – just to mention a few points. Good, but far from most good.
013 32/7b: "He began the creation of man with (nothing more than) clay". Wrong. Man was not created from clay. See 6/2.
014 32/8: "And (Allah*) made his (man's) progeny from a quintessence of the nature of a fluid despised (semen*)". Only half the truth. Muhammad believed the semen was a kind of seed planted in the woman – he did not know about the egg cell. Any god had known. Then who made the Quran?
00a 32/10: "- - - a Creation renewed?" Muhammad believed we are to be recreated bodily at the Day of Doom. He also argues that if Allah is able to create you from semen (and egg –though unknown to Muhammad) he is able to recreate you bodily after you have become dust and juices. May be – but there is a difference between to create the natural way, and to recreate against strong entropy (a name in physics for caos or something like that) – the logic therefore is lacking.
015 32/15: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
016 32/22a: "And who does more wrong than one to whom are recited the Signs of his Lord (Allah*), and who then turns therefrom?" There is nothing wrong in being sceptical to a religion built only on a book with many mistakes and not one single valid proof, but with many "signs" and "proofs" without any value or even 100% wrong, but which may have the
effect of cheating uneducated or not intelligent persons - and on top of all told only by a man whose honesty normal,intelligent people would suspect because of the morality of his deeds and some of his words – when a man preaches good, but does and demands many things
bad, we any day believe in his deeds and demands more than in his words.
017 32/22b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
*018 32/23: "He (Allah*) Who has made everything which He has created most Good - - -". Wrong. Far from everything is made most good. To take humans: We could do with seeing a bit more of the electromagnetic spectre, we could do with a body able to produce morevitamins, we could do with better resistance against illnesses, we could do with a body stronger for wear and tear, we could do with stronger bones and other body parts, we could do a lot better with auto regeneration of lost body parts, and lots and lots of more that could have been better and closer to what is "most Good".
019 32/23: "We did aforetime give the Book to Moses - - -". Wrong. Those books were according to science written 5 to 8 centuries after Moses was dead. (He got the 10 Commandments and was told the law only, according to the Bible – and being 1000 years older and built on real traditions, the Bible is more reliable on this point. The law itself may be older, but the books no.)
020 32/24: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
021 32/26: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
Surah 32: At least 21 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
SURAH 33:
*001 33/1a: "O Prophet (Muhammad*)!". But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:
1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true - if not he is a false prophet.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.
A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – andmost of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he
said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and says that there
were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of
miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad
mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories). Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet as he did not have
the gift of prophesying. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.
002 33/1b: "- - - Allah is full of knowledge and wisdom." The mistakes, etc. in the Quran proves the opposite – or that something else is wrong.
003 33/2: "- - - that which comes to thee (the words of the Quran to Muhammad*) by inspiration from thy Lord (Allah*) - - - ". Can a book with that many mistakes and contradictions, that many "signs" and "proofs" without logical value, and absolutely without one single valid proof, told by a man of such a "good" quality (see 31/30) really and surely come from a benevolent, kind, good and omniscient god? Or is anything wrong with Allah? Actually also Islam most reluctantly accepts that there is no proof of Allah, or of Allah's sending down the Quran or of Islam. A book like "The Message of the Quran" dismisses this with that intellectually it is impossible not to see from the texts of the Quran that the book is made from Allah, and that it is a primitive way of thinking and reasoning, to have to ask for proofs to accept the full truth of the Quran (actually that is to turn reality upside down; one has to be very primitive - and naive - to accept something to be true, just because a rather suspect book repeats and repeats that it must be true - repeat a lie often enough, and people
will start to believe it, Goebbels said.) Nyet - a good English word meaning doubly no: Such a book is from no-one omniscient.
004 33/4a: "Allah has not made for any man two hearts in his (one) body - - -". Wrong. This really has happened – like almost anything else in the complicated creation that is man.
005 33/4b: "But Allah (the Quran*) tells (you) the truth - - -". May be Allah does, but the Quran does so only now and then - see all the mistakes and invalid signs and proofs.
006 33/4c: "- - - He (Allah*) shows the (right) Way." Not possible if the Quran is the words of Allah – too many mistakes, etc. A book that at best is partly true is a bad map.
007. 33/6: "The Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -." But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:
1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.
A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and say that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is one more solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories).*Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet as he did not have the gift of prophesying. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to
anyone to guess why.
008 33/8a: "- - - the (custodians (those the Quran recons to be prophets*)) of Truth (the teachings of Islam*) - - -". The teachings of Islam as represented by the Quran, at best is partly true - see all the mistakes, contradictions, etc. (and invalid "proofs" and "signs").
009 33/8b: "That (Allah) may question the (custodians (see 33/8a just above*)) of Truth concerning the Truth they (were charged with) - - -". The Quran says/pretends that the old scriptures of Israel were the same as in the Quran, but that bad Jews distorted them. If that had been true, they at best were charged with bits and pieces of truth - see all mistakes, lofty
"explanations" and invalid "signs" and "proofs" in the Quran. (Besides science has proved the Bible - here OT - is not falsified. There may be some mistakes, but no falsifications.)
010 33/13: "- - - the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -." But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:
1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.
A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and
most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and say that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is one more solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories).Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet as he did not have the gift of prophesying. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to
anyone to guess why. Also see 30/40 and 30/45.
*011 33/16: "Running away will not profit you, if you are running away from death or slaughter; and even if (ye do escape) , no more than a brief (respite) will ye be allowed to enjoy". Wrong. It is very easy to prove by means of statistics, that if you get away from a battle, your chances for being alive one year later, greatly improve. Any god had known – but
Muhammad did not know statistics. (Actually the claim also is contra-intuitive and against common sense – he had to know they were lies even if he knew no statistics). Besides: Even a short piece of time + another place are divergences from Allah's omniscient previous desition and knowledge.
***012 33/21: "Ye (Muslims*) have in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the final Day - - -". Wrong.Thieving/robbing, womanizing, raping, lying, betraying, extorting, suppressing,
murdering, hate mongering, war mongering, mass murder, raids to rob and kill and enslave, and wars of aggression – that is no "beautiful pattern" according to any human moral or ethical codex, except in some war religions, included Islam, and it tells volumes about Islam that this man is their greatest hero and shining idol.
013 33/28: "O Prophet (Muhammad*)!" But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:
1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.
A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and say that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is one more solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories).Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet as he did not have the gift of prophesying. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to
anyone to guess why. Also see 30/40 and 30/45.
014 33/30: "- - - the Prophet - - -." See 33/28 just above and 33/45 below.
015 33/32: "- - - the Prophet - - -". See 33/28 above and 33/45 below.
016 33/34: "And recite - - - Allah and His Wisdom (= the Quran*) - - -". There is limited wisdom in a book full of mistakes, and in addition: How to pick what is wisdom – if any –among all the mistakes, twisted words and logic, and even some outright lies?
017 33/38: "- - - the Prophet - - -." See 33/28 above, and 30/40a + 33/45a below.
018 33/40a: "(Muhammad was*) the Seal of the Prophets - - -." Muhammad was no real prophet - a messenger or an apostle for somthing or someone perhaps, but no real prophet. See 33/28 above and 33/45 below:
019 33/40b: "- - - th Seal of the Prophets - - -." See 33/40a just above: How could Muhammad be the seal of the prophets (the last and greatest prophet), when he in reality was not a real prophet? – he neither had, nor pretended to have, nor claimed to have the gift of prophesying!!!
020 33/40c: "- - - Allah has full knowledge of all things." The Quran proves this is not true –lots of mistakes, etc. Or may be it is not Allah that made the Quran?
***021 33/45a: "O Prophet! - - -". But was Muhammad really a prophet? A prophet is a person that has the gift of being able to make distinct prophesies – and does it. Then there is the difference between the real and the false prophet – because there were lots of false prophets, as it was (and still is) an easy way to make a good living if you are clever.
According to the Bible the distinction between a real prophet and a false one, is that the real prophet made prophesies and they came true, whereas what the false ones make of prophesies do not come true (except sometimes by coincidence). Muhammad did not even try to make prophesies or pretend he could make such. There are a few times where what he said happened to come true by coincidence – and were remembered by his followers just because it came true, whereas what he said that did not come true, were not remembered. It is like that with each and every human being; we say and we talk so much, that sometimes something has got to be correct now and then – In Scandinavia they even have a special expression for it: To "gaa troll i ord" – which means something like a troll makes your words come true – but it has no implication of you being clairvoyant or a prophet. Muhammad did not even try to make real prophesies – one of the tree absolute requirements for being a prophet. (And then he did not even test the second requirement: Did his prophesies mostly/always come true?) He simply was too smart to try to show off with things he knew he was unable to do. And then of course he also lacked the other requirements: Prophesies that came true, and prophesies as a part of his mission. Muhammad simply had none of the three requirements for being a prophet:
1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.
Muhammad simply was no prophet – he did not have that gift. He just stole or "borrowed" a distinguished title. As a prophet he only was an impostor – an eloquent leader, but unable to do what makes you a prophet: To make prophesies – and prophesies that regularly come true.***He may have been a messenger, if it is true he had a message. But no prophet. (Islam likes to tell that to be a messenger is something much more than being a prophet. But to be a prophet, you have to have special gifts, whereas to be a messenger simply means that you more or less passively bring messages from one place to another – an errand boy.) But another question in case is: A messenger boy for whom? – for himself? – for other humans? – for some dark forces? Two things are 100% sure:
1. *He was not a messenger boy for any omniscient god – too many mistakes, contradictions, twisted arguments and as
twisted logic, etc. in the Quran.
2. **He in any case was not a messenger boy for any good or benevolent god – too much stealing, hate, discrimination and inhumanity, not to mention rape, blood, extortion, suppression, enslavement, murder and war. (It is said that Muhammad just was another robber baron and warlord – no worse than other robber barons and warlords living from
stealing, extortion and slave trading in those hard times. That may be true. But he definitely was no better than the others, too –and he should have been much better than all the others if he represented a good and benevolent god). His behaviour and his real message from all the years in Medina prove far beyond any doubt that if he represented a god, it was so absolutely not a good god. Also cheating and lying and breaking even one's oats, are the hallmarks of a cheat and a deceiver and a swindler – and of a dark god or worse.All the mistaken facts in the Quran that are in accordance with wrong "science" in Arabia (mainly from old Greece and Persia) at the time of Muhammad, clearly indicates that the
Quran is made by one or more humans there and then. But if there was a god involved, the inhuman surahs from Medina most clearly show he definitely was not a good one. - - - But may be a devil in disguise?
022 33/45b: "Truly We (Allah*) have sent thee (Muhammad*) - - -". Muhammad was not sent by Allah if Allah was a good god – his (Muhammad's*) teachings were too bloody and too inhuman to represent a good god - and with too many mistekes, etc. (but they made a good platform of power for Muhammad). See also 33/45a just above.
023 33/45c: "- - - Glad Tidings - - -". Wrong. Islam is no glad tiding, except for the ones not suppressed and could rob and steal and rape and become rich – and really glad only for the ones near the top of the pyramid. It often is like that in war religions, especially when made to fit a strong and charismatic leader (and his successors), though many war religions have not been as hypocritical as Islam in trying to make its members and others believe it is good and just and benevolent. And well, it may have been glad tidings for the minor percent of people that needs a religion to lean on (the exact percentage is not known, but science indicates 5 – 10 %, though some more in difficult times.) In Islam these small percents have usurped all the power and force everybody not only to live, but also to think and blive like themselves.
00a 33/46: "(Muhammad be*) as a lamp spreading light." Did Muhammad spread most light or most darkness? A rhetoric question needing no answer.
024 33/47: "- - - Glad Tidings - - -". See 33/45a and 33/45c above.
025 33/50a: "O, Prophet! - - -." But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:
1. Have the gift of and close enough connection
to a god for making prophesies.2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.
A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and say that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammadmentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories).Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet as he did not have the gift of prophesying. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to
anyone to guess why. Also see 30/40 and 30/45.
026 33/50b: "- - - to the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -." See 33/40a, 33/45a, and 33/50a just above.
027 33/50c: "- - - if the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -." See 33/40a, 33/45a, and 33/50a above.
28 33/53a: "- - - the Prophet's (Muhammad's*) house - - -." See 33/40a, 33/45a, and 33/50 above.
029 33/53b: "- - - the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -." See 33/40a, 33/45a, and 33/50a above.
030 33/58: "O Prophet! (Muhammad*) - - -." See 33/40a, 33/45a, and 33/50 above.
00b 33/60: "- - - those (non-Muslims, hypocrites, etc.*) in whose heart is a disease - - -". A good slogan that you meet many places in the Quran: If you are not a good Muslim, that means you are sick. But like many slogans it may be a twisted truth – or simply a lie.
****031 33/61-62: "They (non-Muslims, hypocrites, etc.*) shall have a curse on them: whenever they are found, they shall be sized and slain (without mercy) ('no compulsion in
religion' 2/256*). (Such was) the praxis (approved) of Allah among those who lived aforetime (f. ex. Jews and Christians*). Muhammad claimed that Allah was just another name for Yahweh – but try to find an order telling that all non-Christians shall be murdered "without mercy" in NT and in the new covenant (f. ex. Luke 22/20 in NT) (a covenant Muslims never mention) and NT that Christianity is built on . Oh, we know very well that persons from Christian countries have done bad things, but that was in spite of their religion –and they were not really Christians deep down – and not in accordance with, or even because of the religion, like the case often is with the "religion of peace" (Muslim-speak for camouflaging the "religion of war") Islam.
***032 33/62: "(Such was) the practice (kill non-believers without mercy*) (approved) of Allah among those who lived aforetime: no change wilt thou find in the practice (approved) of Allah." Muhammad here refers to the Mosaic and the Christian religions (and he sets Allah = Yahweh) when he talks about "those who lived aforetime". But even though OT is hard against many non-Jews, the war and the killing was to get room for living for the Jews, not wanton murdering just because they were not Jews or for plunder and slaves. And in NT: Tryto find a single place saying that non-believers shall be murdered just because they have another religion – such an order simply does not exist. The Quran here actually is a 180 degree contradiction to the very core of the teachings of Jesus.Any god had been lying if he said this, but Muhammad did not know the Bible well, so may be – just may be – he thought he spoke the truth. In any case it was a good statement for a warlord trying to secure and enlarge his platform of power. (This surah is believed to be from 627 – 629 AD – before he had gained absolute control by conquering Mecca.)033 33/72a: "We (Allah*) even offered the Trust to the Heavens (plural and wrong*) and (the planet*) Earth and the Mountains, but they refused to undertake it - - -". Neither the planet (or disc like Muhammad believed) Earth, nor its mountains has the brain or consciousness to accept or refuse anything. A fairy tale.
034 33/72b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
Surah 33: At least 34 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.
001 34/1a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
002 34/1b: "- - - He (Allah*) is full of Wisdom - - -". Well, his words in the Quran proves that something is wrong, because that book is full of mistakes, contradictions, twisted arguments, claims based on thin air, invalid logic and even someoutright lies (like "miracles will make no-one believe anyhow".)
**00a 34/3a: "But most surely, (I – Muhammad) by my Lord (Allah*) - - -". The expression "by my Lord" here is an oath, but then Muhammad very clearly and several times (Hadiths) said that even tough it was not a good thing normally to break an oat if you had meant it when you said it (if not it was/is more or less ok.), it was no big sin to break it if you had a reason –yes, in some cases it even is the right thing to do. This – a part of what is often called alTaqiyya or the lawful lie- is a problem even today: When can you believe what a Muslim says and when not? Actually it also is a problem for Muslims; they have no reasonably sure way to strengthen their words when they need to do so, because even an oat is
not reliable – with clear precedence from Muhammad (he f.ex. promised an unarmed peace delegation from Khaibar safe return - - - and murdered all of them except one who managed to get away (29 out of 30). Add to this the slogan "War is betrayal" to quote Muhammad in Ibn Ishaq.)
003 34/3b: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
004 34/5: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Signs - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39 and 2/99above.
00b 34/6a: "- - - the (Revelation (the Quran*)) - - -". If it is a revelation, it at least is not from an omniscient god – too many mistakes, etc., and not from any good powers (god or spirit) –too much stealing, suppression, rape, hate, blood, murder, war, inhumanity, etc.
005 34/6b: "- - - the (Revelation (the Quran*)) sent down to thee (Muhammad*) by thy Lord (Allah*) - - -". The Quran is not from any omniscient god – too many mistakes, etc. Neither is it from a good god – war religions normally are not: Too much inhumanity, injustice and terror.
006 34/6c: "- - - that is the Truth - - -." Too many things "talks" against the claim that it is the truth that the Quran is from Heaven – Islam will have to prove it to make us believe it.
007 34/6d: "- - - it (the Quran*) guides to the Path (to Heaven*) - - -." A book with that doubtful contents impossibly can be a god guide – Islam will have to prove it to make us believe it.
00c 34/8: "- - - those who believe not - - - are - - - in the farthest Error." The question is: Who is likely to be in the farthest error; he/she that believes naively and blindly in a book where not a thing is proved or documented except that much of its contents are wrong and twisted and invalid and some of it even lies, and a book that is told by a man of very dubious character, but with lust for womwn and power? Or he/she that tries to find out if his tales can be true or not– and then leaves it if they find it is a made up religion (or start looking for a true religion, if such one exists). A made up religion has no value whether another real religion exists or not (but of course it is most serious if such a true religion exists, and one is denied the possibility to search for it. Then the possible next life may be troublesome).
008 34/9a: "- - - We (Allah*) could cause a piece of the sky to fall upon them." The sky as we see it is an optical illusion (Muhammad believed it was something material that the stars was fastened to). How can a piece of an optical illusion - a mirage so to say - fall down upon someone?Muslims tend to "explain" this with that the Quran talks about a shooting star or similar. But the book other places talks about such stars, and even though it believes it to be ordinary stars, it very clearly knows the difference between this and the sky. There is no doubt it is talking about a piece of the sky itself.
009 34/9b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
010 34/12a: "And to Solomon (We (Allah*) made) the Wind (obedient) - - -." Islam will have to prove that this is not just one more storey "borrowed" from a legend/fairy tale.
011 34/12b: "- - - and We (Allah*) made a Font of molten brass to flow for him (Solomon*) - - -".
1. To keep s fountain of molten brass running, was technical impossible at that time.
2. If it had been running all the same, there is no chance at all for that it had been forgotten or omitted from the Bible too mighty a wonder.
The claim simply is a fairy tale, perhaps inspired by the temple's brass "sea" the Bible tells about – a round metal vessel filled with water, 10 cubits (4.5 m) diameter and 5 cubits (2.25 m) high (1. Kings 7/23).
**012 34/14a: "Then, when We (Allah*) decreed (Solomon's) death, nothing showed them (the surroundings included jinns) his death, except a little worm of the earth, which kept (slowly) gnawing away his staff - - -". Wrong:
1. In the castle of Solomon there would be no earth and then no worm from the earth. (This could not happen outside, as his staff would not leave the mighty king sitting outside through many days and nights).
2. There exists no worm from the earth able to gnaw dry, hard wood like in a staff. Some Muslims wants this to have been a termite, but a termite is no worm, and a god knows that.
3. See also 34/14 just below.
**013 34/14b: "Then, when We (Allah*) decreed (Solomon's) death, nothing showed them
(see 34/14a just above) his death, except a little worm from the earth, which kept (slowly)
gnawing away his staff; so when he fell down - - -". Wrong: It would take days for a small
worm to weaken the staff enough for Solomon to fall - may be weeks.
1. A mighty king sitting not mowing for too long would after a time be addressed by his servants.
2. A mighty king not talking for a long enough while, would be addressed by his servants.
3. A mighty king not taking care of his duties and his visitors for a long enough while, would be addressed by his servants.
4. A mighty king not going to bed in the evening would be addressed by his servants.
5. Rigor mortis ("the stiffness of death" - the only possible, but highly unlikely reason for the situation) takes time to start – and it disappears. If not for other reasons, he would fall because rigor mortis disappeared long before a small worm had the time to weaken the staff.
6. In the climate of Jerusalem - even in winter (when there after all would be a fire) - his body would start decomposing. Everyone had to notice that.A fairy tale simply.
014 34/19: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
015 34/22: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
016 34/24: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
017 34/28a: "We (Allah*) have not sent thee (Muhammad) - - -". Was Muhammad really sent by an omniscient and omnipotent god? As you see if you read this chapter, there are serious reasons for doubt. (See f. ex. 41/12). So serious that Islam will have to prove it, not only rely on demanding blind belief built on hundreds of mistakes and twisted logic, etc. – told by a man of very dubious character and morality, but with a taste for power and with religion his platform of power.00d 34/28b: "We (Allah*) have not sent thee (Muhammad*) but as a universal (Messenger) -- -". If he was universal, why then is everything only from Arabia? – even when correct information existed other places (f. ex the form of the Earth) in the Quran you find wrong knowledge. And the made up and wrong legends and fairy tales that circulated in Arabia? No god had done such mistakes as using them instead of using correct information.
018 34/28c: "- - - glad tidings - - -". See 33/45c.
019 34/38: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
020 34/43a "- - - Our (Allah's) Clear Signs - - -". There exists not one single clear sign proving Allah in all the Quran. See 2/99.
021 34/43b: "And the Unbelievers say of the Truth (the Quran*) - - -". The Quran at best represents partly the truth - see all the mistakes, invalid statements, etc.
022 34/45: "And their (the unbelievers*) predecessors rejected (the Truth) - - -". See f. ex. 34/43 just above, and many others - like 49/75.
***023 34/47: "No reward do I (Muhammad*) ask of you - - -". - - - except absolute power and plenty of women. Yes, and 20% of all stolen/looted valuables and slaves – 100% if there is no fight – and poor-tax (on average ca. 2.5% of everything you own each and every year) as I need money for bribes, for strengthening my religion and platform of
power, and for war and myself and my large family, and some for the poor.
024 34/48: "Verily my Lord (Allah*) cast the (mantle of) the Truth (the Quran) - - -". See f. ex. 34/43 just above, and many others, like 40/75 or 41/12.
025 34/49: "The Truth (the Quran*) has arrived - - -". See f. ex. 34/43 above, and many others.
*****026 34/50: "If I (Muhammad*) am astray, I only stray to the loss of my own soul - - -".
This is outmost and extremely wrong – if Muhammad was astray (and too much point in that direction) it is to the loss of each and every Muslim's soul. Because then Islam is a false religion.This is one more place where Muhammad knew ha was lying – he was too intelligent not to see this was wrong.
027 34/52: "We (Muslims*) do believe (now) in the (truth) (the Quran*) - - -". The Quran at best is partly true – too many mistakes, invalid claims + invalid logic - - - and some outright lies.
Surah 34: At least 27 mistakes + 4 likely mistakes.
SURAH 35:
001 35/1a: "- - - Allah, who created (out of nothing) the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth - - -". In a way it is nearly correct that the heaven as we see it, is made of nearly nothing, as an optical illusion is made from photons (but Muhammad was very wrong all the same, as he/the Quran believed the heavens consisted of something material). But the Earth definitely is not made from nothing - not even if one refers to Big Bang.
002 35/1b: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
003 35/2: "(Allah is*) Full of Wisdom." Not if the Quran is representative for his knowledge and wisdom – too many mistakes, etc.
*004 35/3a: "- - - how then are ye deluded away from the Truth?" The big question: Who are deluded - the Muslims or the non-Muslims? The Quran has so many mistakes and other blemishes that to say it is made or revered by or sent down from a god, is an insult to that god. And if the Quran is wrong about Allah, the Muslims are even more deluded.
005 35/3b: "- - - how then are ye deluded away from the Truth (the Quran*)?" Is it the truth? At least not the only and the full truth. Too many things are wrong.
00a 35/5a: "Certainly the promise of Allah is true." If he exists and if he is omniscient and if he is omnipotent, it is to be hoped it is so. But it is not possible from the Quran to know what is true or if anything is true at all - too many mistakes, too many contradictions, too many invalid "signs" and "proofs", and too many tales and statements built on nothing or on other statements resting just on air.
*00b 35/5b: "- - - (not) let the Chief Deceiver deceive you about Allah." The Quran here talks about the Devil. But one question: Muhammad is the absolute and unquestioned chief of the Muslims. If Islam is a false religion – is Muhammad then the Chief Deceiver? The question is not ridiculous – it is sure it is neither made by an omniscient god (too much is
wrong in the Quran), nor by a good god (too much dishonesty, discrimination, inhumanity, hate, blood and war), and then the alternatives are: Made by man – rational or ill (f. ex. TLE -Temporal Lobe Epilepsy - will explain much) - or made by some dark forces – f. ex. the Devil dressed up like Gabriel.
006 35/9: "- - - and revive the earth therewith (with rain) after its death - - -". Land that can be revived by only adding rain is not dead. It is alive with seeds and perhaps roots.
007 35/11a: "And Allah did create you from dust - - -". Wrong - man was not created from dust. See 6/2. We may add that the Quran some places have a list of the step-by-step development of humans. The first step generally is the creation of man (like here). Next step is the semen - Mohammad does not seem to have known about the egg cell - like in 35/11b
just below. Next steps are the start and development of the foetus - but bones come before the meat, wrong. Then sometimes follows birth and development of the child and the man.
008 35/11b: "And Allah did create you from dust, then from a sperm-drop - - -." See 35/11a just above. In addition; no one is made from a sperm drop - one always is made from (a) sperm (cell) + an egg cell. A god had known this, but Muhammad not, as an egg cell for one thing is nearly impossible to see in the blood and gore of a carcass, and not least: Even if he saw it, he would not know it was something special.
009 35/12: "He (Allah*) merges Night into Day, and he merges Day into Night - - -". The alternation between day and night happens because the Earth spins around, swimming in the sunshine in space. Muhammad very often takes natural phenomena and calls them proofs/signs for/from Allah. It is untrue unless Islam first really proves both that this is done
by a god, and that this god is Allah. But normally Islam proves nothing – it only claims and states and demands blind and naïve belief without documentation - - - even in the face of solid proofs for that something is very wrong.
010 35/14: "And none (O man!) can tell you (the Truth) like the One (Allah) - - -". This may be true if Allah exists. But the truth as told in the Quran, at best is partly the truth - mistakes, contradictions, invalid "signs" and "proofs", etc.
*00c 35/24a: "Verily We (Allah*) have sent thee (Muhammad*) - - -". Verily Muhammad and the Quran repeats and repeats and repeats this (most often in the words "Allah and his Messenger") - worthy of a certain German "Minister of Propaganda" between 1933 and 1945 we think it was, a very honest and reliable (?) man named Joseph Goebbels, whose slogan was: "Repeat a lie often enough, and people will start to believe it". Here it has been repeated zillions of times through the time, and millions of Muslims believe in it - but then no Muslim society has ever trained their subjects in critical thinking, or for thinking realism. On the contrary: Muslim societies normally have trained them in the sick kind of thinking that is believing that most acts and most information are lies that gives reason for conspiracy theories + blind belief in Islam and the mullah and the imam.Perhaps the words in the quotation are true. But most likely they are not. One thing is all the mistakes in the Quran that tells it is not reliable and most likely is invented. More serious is that in spite of being asked again and again and again Muhammad was unable to prove anything at all - one hallmark of a lie – or more lies - is that proofs are impossible. One have to use fast-talk and evasions, both of which there are plenty of in the Quran. And when there is a question of proving anything? – there still is plenty of fast-talk in Islam. *But worst of all are all the invalid claims and statements, and the "signs", "proofs" and fasttalk - those are the hallmarks of any smart cheater or false prophet that for natural reasons are unable to produce proofs.
011 35/24b: "Verily We (Allah*) have sent thee (Muhammad*) in truth - - -". We are back to the literally age old question (the serious questions that started around 610 AD - but Muhammad in the end was military the strongest) about the Quran: What - if anything - is true, and what is not true in the Quran? (Nowadays it is easy to see that at least many of
the tales and many of the statements are untrue).
012 35/24c: "- - - Glad Tidings - - -." Wrong. Islam is no glad tiding, except for the ones not suppressed – and really glad only for the ones looking for booty and slaves and stolen riches, and not least for the ones near the top of the pyramid that got – and get – a lot of power in addition. It often is like that in war religions, especially when made to fit a strong and charismatic leader (and his successors), though many war religions have not been as hypocritical as Islam in trying to make its members and others believe it is good and just and humane and benevolent. And well, it may have been glad tidings for the percentage of people that need a religion to lean on – at least for the possible ones where the old pagan religion was not strong enough.
**013 35/24d: "- - - and there never was a people, without a warner (a prophet for Allah*) having lived among them (in the past) - - -". As said before: Neither in archaeology, nor in architecture, nor in art, nor in history, nor in literature, nor in folklore, nor in folk tales - not even in fairy tales, do we find a single trace of any teaching of monotheism, with two well
known (Yahweh and Allah) and two or three less known exceptions (Pharaoh Akn-Aton, praying to the sun, an Arab sect around 600 BC - likely inspired by the two monotheistic religions in the area – plus the Zoroastrians after a fashion). Some places one or a few gods dominated, but no monotheism.
1. In the Americas - absolutely nothing.
2. In Australia - absolutely nothing.
3. In the Pacific - absolutely nothing.
4. In Europe - absolutely nothing.
5. In Africa - absolutely nothing with the exception of one single man: Pharaoh AknAton - but he so definitely was not speaking about Allah. He wanted the sun for the only god.
6. In Asia - absolutely nothing, except in what we now call the Middle East: The Christians, the well known Jews and as already mentioned the Zoroastrians mainly in Persia (after a fashion) and a less well known Arab monotheistic and at that time not very old sect - most likely inspired by the Jews. Of course there was Buddha, but he was/is no god, and
besides he accepted that gods existed, but told they were on wrong ways not leading to nirvana - no monotheism.
124ooo (or more - the number is said to be symbolic, as there may have been more) prophets had to have left some traces somewhere, if the tale was true.This statement simply is not true. If Islam still insists, they will have to produce strong proofs. "Strong statements demands strong evidence", to quote science. And not just loose claims, invalid "signs" and "proofs", and more loose statements like Islam normally produces.
014 35/25a: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". See 2/99.
*015 35/25b: "- - - the Book of Enlightenment (the Quran*) - - -". A book with so many mistakes and so many invalid "signs" and "proofs" is too unreliable to be any kind of enlightenment. Actually one single mistake or one single false "proof" would prove the Quran was not from an omniscient god - and here are hundreds (actually unbelievable may be 3ooo if you count all kinds of wrongs).
*016 35/28: "Those truly fear Allah - - - who have knowledge - - -". The fact is that it is more common to be religious if you have little knowledge and/or intelligence (but of course this is a good way of flattering and attracting the naïve and the uneducated). And the Quran also proves that somewhere there was/is a huge lack of correct knowledge – and
consequently that something is seriously wrong with the book and hence with the religion.
017 35/31a: "That which We (Allah*) have revealed to thee (Muhammad/people*) of the Book (the Quran*) - - -". Can an omniscient god reveal a book with that many mistakes, contradictions, and invalid "signs" and "proofs"? No.
018 35/31b: "That which We (Allah*) have revealed to thee of the Book (the Quran*) is the Truth - - -". See 35/31a just above. And also: With that many mistakes, etc. it at best is parts and bits of the truth.
019 35/31c: "- - - (the Quran is*) confirming what was (revealed) before it (= the Bible, the Torah, etc.*)". Wrong. See 29/46, and others.
020 35/33: "- - - bracelets of gold - - -". Well, another place (76/21) it was said they were from silver. A minor contradiction – but a contradiction.
021 35/38: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
022 35/40a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
023 35/40b: "- - - clear (evidence) - - -". There is no clear or valid evidence for anything concerning Allah in all the Quran. See 2/99.
024 35/41: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
025 35/42: "- - - their flight (from righteousness (= the teachings of Muhammad*)) - - -". Any teaching based on a book containing large numbers of mistakes and invalid "proofs" and "signs", and on top off all is only told by one single man of dubious morality and character (womanising, rape, robbery, extortion, murder and mass murder - and lust for power - is well documented by Islam itself, though glossed over) - such a teaching does not represent righteousness unless this is really proved. This even more so that it strongly incites to hate, suppression, killing and war - not very righteous or good.
026 35/44a: "Do they (people*) not travel through the earth, and see what was the End of those before them - - -?" In and around Arabia there were ruins here and there. Muhammad claimed – as normal without any documentation as only non-Muslims need to prove anything – that each and every one of them was results of Allah's anger because of disbelief etc. in Islam. Wrong. In a dry and harsh land inhabited by warring tribes there were plenty of other reasons for empty houses and ruins.
027 35/44b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22.
Surah 35: At least 27 mistakes + 3 likely mistakes.
SURAH 36:
001 36/2: "By the Quran, full of Wisdom - - -". What goes for righteousness in this case also goes for wisdom - see 35/42 and 49/75.
00a 36/3: "Thou (Muhammad*) art indeed one of the messengers - - -." Only 2 things are sure:
1. This is never proved or in any other way documented – and with all the other mistakes in the Quran, this proof is strictly necessary.
2. If Muhammad was a messenger, then for whom? The only two things that the Quran makes very clear about this, are that it was not for an omniscient god (too many mistakes, etc.) and not for a good or bemevolent god (too much immorality, stealing/robbing, dishonesty, suppressing, rape, inhumanity, terror, blood and war, etc.).
*00b 36/5a: "It (the Quran*) is a Revelation - - -". Well, in case from whom? – not from an omniscient and/or good god (see 36/3 just above and 36/5b just below). Perhaps from himself or some other humans? (cfr. how well the religion fitted as a platform of power for him and for helping him also in his private troubles - in what pretends to be the Mother Book, revered by Allah) – or by some dark forces? (cfr. the inhumanity, dishonesty, hate, blood, war, etc. –it fits f. ex. a devil very well – and it makes it nearly impossible for Muslims to search for a true religion if such one exists, if Islam is wrong - - - also this is nice for a devil and his wish to populate a possible hell).
002 36/5b: "It (the Quran*) is a revelation sent down by him (Allah*)". Once more: Can it really be sent down by an omniscient god, with all those mistakes and invalid "signs" and "proofs"? Never.
003 36/6: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39 above.
004 36/12a: "- - - of all things we have taken account (in the Quran*) - - -". Not all things by far are taken account of in the Quran. Look f. ex. at all the extra paragraphs which are necessary in Muslim laws.
005 36/12b: " - - - in a clear Book (the Quran*) (of evidence) - - -". A book with that many mistakes and invalid "signs" and "proofs" gives little clear evidence.
006 36/17: "- - - the clear Message (the Quran*)." A book that full of mistakes, contradictions (f. ex. man has free will v/ Allah decides everything – even Islam is unable to explain that, "but it has to be true, because it is said by Allah (in the Quran*)"!!!) according to "The Message of the Quran" - invalid arguments and ditto logic give no clear message.
00c 36/24: "(If I took another god*) I would indeed - - - be in manifest Error." Not if that god exists – and especially not if Allah is a made up god (he after all was taken over from the pagan Arab gods by Muhammad who just renamed him from al-Lah to Allah, and even took over most of the pagan Arab religious rituals, too.)
007 36/33a: "A Sign - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39 above.
008 36/33b: "A sign for them is the earth that is dead: We (Allah*) do give it life - - - ". From other parts of the Quran, we know it here means "by adding rain". But a land that comes to life just by adding rain is not dead - it is alive with seeds and perhaps roots.
*009 36/36: "- - - Allah, Who created in pairs all things - - -". Wrong. Only multi-cellular plants and animals are in pairs - and far from all of those, too. No uni-cellular life exists in pairs - and they are far more abundant both in numbers and species. Besides there is quite a number of multi-cellular beings that propagates asexually and thus do not exist in pairs – up to and included sponges, etc., some fish and some reptiles.
010 36/37: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
011 36/38a: "And the sun runs his course for a period determined to him - - -". The sun runs no course as related to theEarth, though that was the accepted astronomy of that time. It is the Earth that revolves – around itself and around the sun. See 36/38 b just below.
*00d 36/38b: The normal translation of 36/38a – see 36/38a just above - (Arab: "limustaqarrin laha") is (translated fromSwedish): "And the sun runs to its place of rest" which is way out wrong. But as the old Arab written language far from was exact, Muhammad Ali's transcription is a possible, if less likely one – as is "(to) the end point for the course which it follows" or - inserting other vowels among the written consonants (in old Arab only the consonants were written) and getting the expression "la mustaqrra laha" – "it runs its course without resting" (Abd Allah ibn Mas'ud/Zamakhshari). Or "The sun runs its course to a certain extent, then it stops" (Baydawi: "The Lights of Revelation" p.585).Next time you meet a Muslim seriously telling you how exact the Quran always is, do not laugh – it is impolite.
012 36/39: "- - - till she (the Moon*) returns like the old (and withered) lower part of a datestalk (that takes a crescent form*)". Wrong. The moon does not become a crescent - it only looks like that, and even Mohammad could have seen that, if he had been observant: Within the circle indicated by the crescent, and that in reality is covered by the moon, you never see a star. Any god had known this. Muhammad obviously not. Who made the Quran?
013 36/40a: "It is not permitted for the Sun to catch up the Moon - - -". It is not physical possible for the sun to catch up the moon - not in some 5 billion years (then it perhaps will happen - - - if the Earth is gobbled up by the sun). A god had known.
**014 36/40b: "- - - nor can the Night outstrip (be longer than*) the Day - - -". Wrong. At high latitudes the night always are longer than the days in winter. A little past the Arctic Circles (a little past (towards equator) because of refraction – bending of light in the atmosphere) the night even lasts 24 hours a day for a shorter or longer time each year – for
how long depends on the latitude. The Quran has a strong tendency to pick natural phenomena and tell they prove or are signs for Allah, without first proving that Allah really is the reason for them. For one thing such "proofs" are entirely invalid. For another: It each time comes to our minds that (trying) to use invalid statements and "proofs" is a hallmark for
cheats and swindlers. And for an ironic third: Sometimes the "proofs" even turns out to be really laughingly wrong. And not least: If you need to use made up arguments, that means you have no real arguments.
015 36/40c: "- - - each (night and day*) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law)." Wrong. Night and day are constants - they just seem to move because Earth revolves in the sunshine. Any physicist will laugh from this – night has a fixed position determined by the sun, and only seems to move because of the spin of the Earth. It has not the faintest similarity to an orbit.It is a nice extra touch that they swim along in orbits "according to Law".
016 36/41a: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
*017 36/41b: "And a Sign for them (humans*) is that We (Allah*) bore their race (through the Flood) in the loaded Ark - - -". No wooden boat could possibly carry the load the Quran says: Noah + his people + 2 of every animal + food and fodder for a long time (the Quran says nothing about how long, the Bible indicates more than a year). Even Muslims today see that this is very wrong, and try to explain it away by saying that only domesticated animals was meant, but that is not what the Quran tells. Also: Islam tells that the ark stranded on a mountain in Syria - the 2089 m high Mt. Al-Jedi - (not Ararat in Turkey), but if water was that high, where did the animals not represented in the ark survive? - and for that long (the Quran as mentioned does not specify, but the Bible says some 16 months)?
018 *36/42: "And We (Allah*) have created for them (people*) similar (vessels) (similar to the ark*) - - -". We have never heard that Allah built boats.
019 36/46a: "- - - Sign - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
020 36/46b: "- - - Signs - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
021 36/64: "- - - for that ye (the "unbelievers"*) (persistently) rejected (truth)." The "truth" in the Quran at best is just partly the truth. Too many mistakes, etc.
022 36/69a: "We (Allah*) have not instructed (the Prophet) - - -." But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:
1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.
A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and say that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories). Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet as he did not have the gift of prophesying. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to
anyone to guess why. Also see 30/40 and 30/45.
*023 36/69b: "We (Allah*) have not instructed (the Prophet) in Poetry - - -." As for
Muhammad not being versed in making poetry, this is a claim used by Islam as a "proof" for
that the Quran is not made by Muhammad. But the claim is invalid – you do not have to be
versed on poetry to spin tales like in the Quran. Actually the often naivistic style and helpless
repetitions, etc, indicates that it is not made by a good poet or essayist. And besides the Quran
is not poetry, but prose.
024 36/69c: "- - - this is no less than a Message and a Quran - - -." At least it is far less than a true message and a true Quran which the Quran itself proves – far too many mistakes, twisted arguments and too much invalid logic + some clear lies. Etc.
025 36/69d: "- - - a Quran making things clear". A book with that many mistakes, contradictions, misleading "signs" and "proofs", etc. makes things confused rather than clear.
026 36/70: "- - - reject (truth (the Quran*)) - - -". The Quran at most is partly true – too many mistakes, etc.
027 36/77: "Doth not man see that it is We (Allah*) Who created him from sperm?" Once more a natural phenomenon that the Quran says proves Allah, without first proving that it really is Allah that makes it. Besides: Humans were not created by sperm. Humans/a man were created from one sperm cell + an egg cell. But Muhammad did not know this - a god had
known.
028 36/81: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
Surah 36: At least 28 mistakes + 4 likely mistakes.
SURAH 37:001 37/5: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.***002 37/6: "We (Allah*) have indeed decked the lower heaven (in) stars - - -". The Quran tells this in some varieties some places in the book: The stars are fastened to the lowest ofthe 7 heavens (which also means that the heavens have to be made from something material - if not it was not possible to fasten the stars there). The stars also are lower than the moon, - other places in the Quran also tell that the moon are in between the heavens - in addition to that it here is said the stars are fastened to the lowest heaven. It actually is borrowed from Greek and/or Persian astronomy at the time of Muhammad and before (a fact any baby god had known better. Muslims generally tries to evade questions about this - or gives you a lot of diffuse words (and never tells it is from local, wrong astronomy). We have hardly ever seen a reasonable – not correct, but at least logically reasonable - explanation of this, except the standard one when something is so wrong that even "explanations" are not possible: It is "figurative", "allegorical" - or something similar - explanations or stories.***003 37/6+7: "We (Allah*) have decked the lower heaven with beauty (in) the stars - (For beauty) and for guard against all obstinate rebellious evil spirits." See first 37/6 just above. Then: The Quran does not know the difference between a star and a shooting star, and tells that the stars are used for shooting stars for chasing away evil spirits that wants to spy or listen to what is said in Heaven. The shooting stars are used as weapons in such cases. It should not be necessaryto say that this is wrong at least to the 25th – 30th order = the difference between the mass of a star and of a shooting star. Also see verse 8.***004 37/10: "Except such (evil spirits*) as snatch away something by stealth, and they are pursued by a flaming fire, of piercing brightness". See 36/6 and 36/6+7 just above. Here it is told how spirits are chased away by a shooting star - nota red flame, but a piercing brightness. No reason to tell this is horribly wrong.005 37/11: "Them (here it is not clear what beings, but as Jinns are made from fire, it must be humans*) have We (Allah*) created out of sticky clay". Wrong. For one thing science tells that man is not created - he evolved. For another thing: Not in any case is he made out of clay. See 6/2.**00a 37/16: "When we die, and become dust and bones, shall we (then) be raised up again -- -". The Quran and Islam teaches that at the day of Doom every human being is resurrected bodily – Allah gathers all the bones and dust and fluids you were made of, and puts it back together to make your earthly, old body, except rejuvenated if you died old (nothing is said about the age and maturity of resurrected babies and children) – to Hell if you lived a bad life and to a Earth-like, but luxurious, life in a 1 to 4 star Heaven if you have been good – and depending on how good and how much of a warrior you have been – during your life on Earth. Believe it who wants – and remember that in reality Allah decided everything you did on Earth (a fact even Islam is unable to explain how fits the claims of the free will of man, and thus the justice of sending him to Hell if Allah has decided his acts on Earth.)006 37/21: "- - - truth ye (once) denied - - -". The "truth" as told in the Quran, at best can be partly true - too many mistakes, invalid "signs" and "proofs", etc.007 37/37a: "He (Muhammad*) has come with the (very) Truth (the Quran*)". The Quran is at best bits and pieces of the truth - too many mistakes and invalid "signs" and "proofs".*008 37/37b: "- - - and he (Muhammad*) confirms (the Messages of) the Messengers (before him (= from Jews andChristians*))". Wrong. There are too many and too fundamental differences between especially NT and the Quran. The Quran is not confirming the Bible –the fundamental differences between the teachings simply are too big – especially compared to NT and the "new covenant" Jesus brought. See 29/46 and others.009 37/52: "- - - the Truth (of the Message (= the Quran*))". See 376 37/37 and many others. 010 37/76: "- - - and We (Allah*) delivered him (Noah*) and his people from the Great Calamity (the flood*)." Wrong – according to the Quran one of his (according to the Bible) only 3 sons drowned (not so in the Bible). Similar claim in 21/76.011 37/87: "- - - the Worlds." The Quran tells there are 7 (flat) Earths, and Hadiths adds that they are placed one above the other, and also mention their names. Wrong.*00b 37/97: "They (people*) said, 'Build him (Abraham) a furnace, and throw him into the blazing fire!" You are free to believe this happened to Abraham – but beware that the story is "borrowed" from a tale named "Midrash Rabbah" (Muhammad may also have been inspired by the story about Daniel and his friends in the OT).00c 37/114: "Again (of old) We Allah*) bestowed Our favour on Moses and Aaron - - -". "The Message of the Quran" is quick to add that it was not because they were progeny of Abraham, but because of their own quality. What the Quran never mentions, what Islam never mentions, what Muslims never mention, is that Israel's (belief in a) special contact with Yahweh, is not – repeat not - because of they had an ancestor named Abraham some thousands years ago. The reason was and is the covenant that was made between Israel and Yahweh according to OT – and renewed several times through the ages. It is good propaganda to bully them for believing Abraham who lived some 4ooo years ago (if he ever lived) is a part-out card to Heaven. But it is pretty dishonest to make this lie, and to never mention the real reason for the Jew's belief: The covenant – broken and maltreated, but never lifted or ended. (In the same way as it is pretty dishonest never to mention the "new covenant" made via Jesus in NT – but then Muslims are obliged to use al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) or "Kitman" (the lawful half-truth) if necessary, when it comes to defending or promoting Islam – no matter whether Islam is a false religion or not).012 37/117: "And We (Allah*) gave them (Moses and Aaron) the Book - - -" Wrong. According to the Bible Moses received the 10 Commandments and in addition was told the Law (in reality part of the Book of Moses) – which he himself wrote down later. Nothing else. More essential here is that science tells that what is called the "Book of Moses" was written centuries after the time of Moses.*013 37/142: "Then the big fish swallowed him (Jonah*)". Wrong.1. There exists no fish big enough to swallow a man whole. There is one or two exceptions, but those do not eat large prey (the whaleshark and the one called Megamouth). Besides there may be one or two of the whales, but even the orca does not swallow a seal (reasonably similar size) in one piece.2. Even if he had been swallowed, he had not survived - he had died in minutes from lack of oxygen.3. And had he had a supply of oxygen - which he obviously did not - the acid juices in the stomach of the "fish" had killed him in a short time.A fairy tale, even if this story is "borrowed" from the Bible. (There are some mistakes also in the Bible).014 37/144: "He (Jonah*) would certainly have remained inside the fish till the day of Resurrection". The fish would not live that long, but that aside: See 37/142 just above.015 37/145: "But We (Allah*) cast him (Jonah*) forth on the naked shore in a state of sickness." Something is wrong, because another place in the Quran the book tells he was cast ashore on an ok place (because of Allah's mercy).00d 37/152: "'Allah hath begotten children'? But they are liars!" May be Allah has no children. But if Allah = Yahweh like Muslims like to claim, there is the curious fact that Jesus many times called Yahweh his father - and clearly not like an allegory or figuratively.**00e 37/164: Here according to most Islamic scholars angles that are talking. That at least means the Quran cannot have existed since eternity, like many Muslims like to believe: It must have been made, and made after at least some angels had been made – if not the angels could not have spoken in the book.00f 37/180: "((He is free) from what (children*) they (non-Muslims*) ascribe (to Him))". See 37/152 just above.016 37/182: "- - - the Worlds." The Quran falsely tells there are 7 Earths. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.Surah 37: At least 16 mistakes + 6 likely mistakes.
SURAH 38:001 38/1: "- - - by the Quran, full of Admonition: (this is the Truth)." A book that full of mistakes, invalid "signs" and "proofs" and not least a myriad of not documented claims and statements just "hanging in the air" at best is partly true.002 38/10: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.00a 38/19: "- - - and the birds gathered (in assemblies): all with him (King David*) did turn (to Allah)." Believe it who wants – we do not believe in assemblies of birds turning towards any god, not unless we get some proofs for it and not just words that cost zero to produce.003 38/29a: "- - - a Book (the Quran*) which We (Allah*) have sent down - - -". Lots of mistakes, lots of contradictions, lots of invalid "signs" and "proofs", and lots and lots of not documented/not proved claims and statements, all of which had to be seen through sooner or later - are those the hallmarks of an omniscient god? Normally they are hallmarks of cheats, deceivers and swindlers. No god sent it.004 38/29b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39a above.005 38/36: "Then We (Allah*) subjected the wind to his (Solomon's*) power - - -". This needs strong evidence - we hardly believe Solomon was able to regulate temperature and air pressure in the atmosphere in such a way as to be the director of the winds.006 38/37: "- - - And also the Satans (including) every kind of builder and diver (had to work for King Solomon*) - - -". To make us believe this, Islam has to produce very real proofs –this even more so as it had been such a boost to Solomon's reputation, that it surely had not been forgotten in the Bible - - - and there it is not mentioned. (Actually it is "borrowed" from a made up scripture).007 38/66: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.008 38/67: "That (the Quran*) is a Message Supreme - - -". See 38/29 just above. Such a book definitely is no supreme message.009 38/71: "I (Allah*) am about to create man from clay:" Man according to science was not created, but developed from earlier primates - and at least not created from clay. See 6/2.010 38/75: "- - - one (man*) whom I (Allah*) have created with my hands - - -." See 38/71 just above and 6/2.011 38/76a: "Thou (Allah*) createdst me (Iblis – the Devil*) from fire - - -." Here something is wrong, as another place in the Quran it is said he was created from the fire of a scorching wind – there is a difference between a fire and a warm wind.012 38/76b: "- - - him (man) thou (Allah*) createdest from clay." See 38/71 and 6/2.013 38/86: "No reward do I (Muhammad*) ask for this (Quran) - - -" - - - except absolute power over you all + plenty of women + plenty of valuables for bribes + free or nearly free warriors for raids and wars to gain more power and more riches for more raids and wars and bribes and power.014 38/87: "- - - a Message to all the Worlds." Likely the Quran and Islam should reach all the 7 Earths that the Quran mentions – but there are no 7 Earths (flat, and one above the other according to Hadiths.) See 65/12.015 38/88: "And ye (non-Muslims*) shall certainly know the truth of it (the Quran*) (all) after a while". See 38/29 or 40/75 - it is at best partly true as the Quran at best is partly true.Surah 38: At least 15 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
SURAH 39:001 39/1a: "The revelation of this Book (the Quran*) is from Allah". No. See 38/29 above.002 39/1b: "(Allah is*) Full of Wisdom". See 38/29. If the Quran is from Allah, he is not full of wisdom – too many mistakes, etc.003 39/2a: "Verily it is We (Allah*) Who have revealed the Book (the Quran*) - - -". Is that really so? Verily, it is impossible to believe so - too many mistakes, etc. See 38/29.004 39/2b: "(Allah has*) revealed the Book (the Quran*) to thee (Muhammad or the Muslims*) in Truth". Can it really be the truth that Allah has sent down a book like this, with so many errors? - see 38/29. In that case Allah cannot be omniscient. Something is wrong.005 39/5a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong (at least 199 times in the Quran, included other words for heaven as we see it from Earth – like "firmaments" or "tracts"). See 2/22a.006 39/5b: "He (Allah*) created the heavens (plural and wrong) and the earth in true (proportions)". True to Muhammad's picture of the heaven(s) and the Earth - the Earth f. ex. is flat like a disk in the Quran. And 7 heavens. Wrong.007 39/5c: "- - - each one (the sun and the moon) follows a course - - -". As related to the Earth (and that relation was all Muhammad knew about), the sun does not follow a course. It is the Earth that runs a course around it.*008 39/5d: "He makes the Night overlap the Day, and the Day overlap the Night - - -". Wrong. That is done by the sun, as the night really is just a shadow. If Islam pretends something else, they will have to produce real proofs - not just cheap words. "Strong statements demand strong proofs". Any god had known this - not Muhammad. Yes, any god could have proved himself for the future just by telling things like that - no miracle necessary. Then who composed the Quran?009 39/6a: "He created you all from a single Person (Adam*) - - -". According to science Adam never existed – man developed from earlier primates.010 39/6b: "He (Allah*) sent down for you eight head of cattle - - -". According to science, cattle are not sent down, but have developed.*011 39/6c: "He (Allah*) sent down for you eight head of cattle in pairs - - -". From other places in the Quran we know the cattle were: 2 cows, 2 sheep, 2 goats, 2 camels = 4 pairs = 8 heads. That is wrong, as the Quran is for the entire world: There also are water buffalo (Asia), reindeer (in the north), lama (S. America), the alpaca (S. America), the guamaco (S. America), the vicuna (S. America - the 4 from S. America are distantly related to the camel), the yak (Asia), and (Indian) elephant - and perhaps others (+ horse, donkey, etc. (and pig)).Any god knew this – Muhammad not. Who made the Quran? Contradicted by zoological facts.012: 39/6d: "He (Allah*) makes you, in the womb of your mothers, in stages, one after the other - - -." According to old Greek medicine (Galen, Aristotle), the foetus developed in 4 stages. Modern medicine disagrees.**00a 39/7: "No bearer of burdens can bear the burdens of another". Can this really be true? In that case this is yet another proof for that Allah cannot be the same god as Yahweh, because one of the things Yahweh stresses in the NT via Jesus, is that a good Christian shall help others with their burdens.*013 39/12: "And I (Muhammad*) am commanded to be the first of those who bow to Allah in Islam." How is that possible if the Quran is correct and lots of people had been Muslims before him, and bowed to Allah? (Though in reality it is highly likely he was right: That he was the first one ever). Muslims explain that it means the first in a community, but that is not what the Quran says. Besides both Abraham and Ishmael according to what the Qutan claims, lived in Mecca - at least for some time.014 39/22a: "In one whose heart has opened to Islam, so that he has received enlightenment (the contents of the Quran*) from Allah - - -". With all the mistakes, invalid "signs", etc. in the Quran, it at best partly gives enlightenment. Whereas the mistakes, etc., give the opposite of enlightenment.015 39/22b: "They (non-Muslims*) are manifestly wandering (in error)!" Islam claims that only Muslims do not "wander in error". But it only is (as normal for Islam) an undocumented claim – it definitely is not manifested. (Another fact is that with all the mistakes and worse in the Quran, it is a very open question who is wandering in the worst error). We also should mention that claims like this is normal for fringe sects like Islam once was.016 39/23a: "Allah has revealed (the Quran*) - - -". Really? Absolutely no. See 38/29 and others.***017 39/23b: "Allah has revealed - - - the most beautiful Message - - -". Incitement to hate, rape, suppression, extortion, taking slaves, murder, mass murder and war + full permission for raping any slave or prisoner and + 100% dictatorship by the warlord (Muhammad and his successors). Yes, that is a beautiful message. (or in reality: Horrible).*018 39/23c: "(The Quran*) is consistent with itself". Wrong – there are plenty of contradictions - hundreds. Islam even needs a special abrogation rule for deciding which paragraph is the correct one when two or more "collides" (the youngest one is normally the correct - that is one of the reasons why the age of the different verses counts in Islam). Some Muslims tell this is not true - Allah just made the rules stricter. It may look like an ok explanation in some cases, f. ex. concerning alcohol. But what kind of omniscient god did not know from the very beginning what kind of rules was needed? – besides: more strict rules also is an abrogation.*019 39/28: "(It is) a Quran in Arabic, without any crookedness - - -". We have never been able to understand why it is a good thing that the Quran is in Arab if Allah wanted to be the god for all earth – well, even the Arabs tell it is a difficult language (though language experts say the claim is blown up by Islam – perhaps as an extra defence to avoid having to explain what they cannot explain, perhaps as an artificial back up for the demand that Muslims must read the Quran in Arabic - and say it is just a medium difficult language).*They further insist it is impossible to translate it (just like the Japanese used to do before they learnt other languages well). That is rubbish. What one human brain is able to think, another human brain at the same level of knowledge and intelligence is able to understand. Of course there is the fact that languages have special words, etc. that you do not find in other languages - that is the case for all languages, and nothing special for Arab, like some uneducated Muslims like to claim (and some of them even believe it, we think). Take f. ex. the Norwegian very simple word "tran". That word exists in few other languages. F. ex. English has to say "cod liver oil" – and French similar. In Arab one would have to say something like "oil from the liver of the North Atlantic fish that in English is called cod" –but the main thing is that even if they need an explanation that the Norwegians in this case do not need, it tells 100% exactly and correctly the same and correct meaning. Or take the Inuit –they are said to have 42 different words for different kinds of snow and snow conditions –Arab hardly has more than a couple. But it would not be too difficult to explain to an Arab that this Inuit word means that the snow is wet, this that it is laying full of water, this that the snow is dry, this that it is or has been wind driven, this that it is frozen hard, this that it is sticky (so you can make snow balls f. ex.), this that it is powdery, etc.And it is just the same with Arab: Arab f. ex. has a word for "2-years-old she-camel". "Solch ein Wort gibt es nicht in Deutch" ("such a word does not exist in German") – but it is no problem to explain to a German that one is talking about a female camel that is 2 years old. As said: What one human brain can think, another human brain at the same level can understand with a little explanation.**Besides: To demand that an Afghan farmer shall read the Quran in Arab just means that you demand he shall be explained all those different words and different meanings on beforehand – because that is the only way he can understand them when he reads them later. Just the same words and the same explanations – but a lot more words, because he may not know on beforehand exactly which words that may give him extra insight.In addition the Arab alphabet at that time was unfit for writing down exactly what was said – the alphabet at that time was very incomplete. (That was one of the reasons why there were so many varieties of the Quran in earlier times. Now there mainly are 2 of the earlier 14 "canonized" ones that are used – one (Warsh) in parts of Africa, and one (Hafs) in the rest of the world – though they call it "ways of reading" to hide that the reality is "varieties". Those two expressions in this case are exactly identical). If Allah wanted to reach many, the natural language in that area had been Greek or perhaps Latin or Persian. Or why not Bahasa Indonesian? - one of the easiest languages in the world to learn and with as many potential Muslims as in Arabia, and with good connections to surrounding countries. In case of a western language or Persian they also could have written down the book correctly, as those languages already had perfected alphabets. Then they had not had the problem of not knowing what was really said and written. Now Muslims only can make unfounded – or wrong – statements claiming that the Quran of today is correct to the last letter and last comma, even though not all letters – and the comma – did even exist around 650 AD in Arab.Many Muslims even believe what they say. With a complete alphabet it could really have been correct. But the fact of the incomplete alphabet of that time, makes the claim a joke. But why do the mullahs, imams, etc. lie to their congregations on these poins - or hide the points? But without crookedness? With all the mistakes?!! With all those contradictions?! With all the invalid "signs" and "proofs"? With all the loose claims and statements? Such "facts" normally are the very hallmarks of crookedness.020 39/32: "- - - rejects the Truth (the Quran) - - -". See 38/29. The book at best is partly true.021 39/33: "And he (most likely Muhammad, as it is written with "he", not "He"*) who brings the Truth - - -" The Quran at best is partly true – also see f. ex. 40/75 and 41/12.*022 39/38a: "If you ask them who it is that created the heavens (plural and wrong) and the earth, they would be sure to say 'Allah' - - -". Wrong. If they believed a god created it, they had named their own god(s) - though there and then it might have been the polytheistic al-Lah.023 39/38b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.024 39/41a: "Verily We (Allah*) have revealed the Book (the Quran*) - - -." Can Allah have made book of this quality? No god makes a second rate - or third rate - book. See 38/39.025 39/41b: "Verily We (Allah*) have revealed the Book (the Quran*) in Truth - - -". At best partly the truth - see all the mistakes, etc.00b 39/41c: "Verily We (Allah*) revealed the Book (the Quran*) - - -, for (instructing) mankind." If Allah is a good god, like Islam pretends, why then all the immoral instructions and inhumanity one finds in the some 22-24 surahs from Medina? And a book with this many errors is not fit for instruction – not as a basis for the religion of a benevolent god.***00c 39/41d. "He, then, that receive guidance (see 39/41c just above*) benefits his own soul - - -". How can it benefit your soul to steal/loot, hate, rape, murder, mass murder (many, many cases in Muslim history), enslave, etc.? It benefits your pocket – and gives Muhammad and his successors many and cheap warriors – but your soul? Wrong. This kind of life only brutalizes a man – and his culture and religion.026 39/42: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.027 39/46: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.028 39/52: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.029 39/55: "And follow the Best of (the courses) revealed to you (the teachings of the Quran*) from your Lord - - -". A book overflowing with mistakes, twisted arguments and logic, contradictions, and even obvious lies (like that miracles would make no-ones believers), is not the best pilot.030 39/59: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.031 39/63a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/2a.032 39/63b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.033 39/67a: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.034 39/67b: "- - - the heavens (plural and wrong) will be rolled up in His (Allah's) right hand - - -". The heaven as the Quran thinks it is, are 7 invisible hemispheres made from some material. How do you roll up hemispheres? But more to the point: The heaven as Muhammad and we saw/see it, is an optical illusion in near vacuum. How do you roll up an optical illusion, and how do you roll up vacuum? Not to mention: How do you roll up a universe?035 39/68: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.036 39/71a: "- - - Did not messengers come to you from among yourselves - - -?" No they did not. The Hadith/Islamspeaks about 124ooo prophets. If so many had been working somewhere, some time, at least a few of them had left traces. There are none. See 35/24.037 39/71: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.038 39/74: "- - - the Worlds - - -". One more reference to the 7 flat Earths that exists according to the Quran – and according to Hadiths are placed one above the other. No comments necessary. See 65/12.Surah 39: At least 38 mistakes + 3 likely mistakes.
SURAH 40:001 40/2: "- - - this Book (the Quran*) is from Allah -". Se 38/29 and 39/41.002 40/2: "- - - (Allah is*) full of Knowledge - - -". Not if he sent down the Quran. See 38/29.003 40/4a: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.*004 40/4b: "None can dispute about the Signs of Allah but the Unbelievers". Wrong. There is no reason why it is not possible for Muslims to discuss them, too, except religious ideas and prohibitions. And they should do so, as none of them are valid proofs (they rest on thin air or unproven claims or statements) of Allah. A few taken from the Bible may prove Yahweh, but absolutely none proves or even indicates Allah. They f. ex. can be used by any priest in any religion about his god(s).005 40/8: "- - - (Allah is*) Full of Wisdom." Not if he sent down the Quran. See 38/29.006 40/13: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.007 40/21: "Do they (people*) not travel through the earth and see what was the End of those before them?" In the Middle East there are ruins here and there. Muhammad claimed that they were remnants from people punished by Allah for their sins. Wrong. In an arid and harsh land and with warring tribes, there are many other reasons why old houses and settlements may be empty or reduced to ruins.008 40/22. "- - - Clear (Signs) (= proofs for Allah*) - - -". There are no clear signs for Allah in all the Quran. See 2/99. In this case there may have been clear signs, but in case for Yahweh, not for Allah.00a 40/24: "- - - Haman - - -". See 28/6.009 40/28: "- - - Clear (Signs) - - -". See 40/22 and 2/99 above.*010 40/31: "- - - Allah never wished injustice to His Servants." Wrong. One star example: The Islamic law that tells that a woman who is raped is to be severely punished/stoned for indecency if she cannot produce 4 male witnesses that actually saw the rape, probably is the most unjust law that ever existed in an even half civilized society. Extreme injustice.011 40/35: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.00b 40/36: "- - - Haman - - -". See 28/6.012 40/37a: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.013 40/37b: "- - - the plot of Pharaoh led to nothing but perdition (for him)." Wrong. We know from other places in the Quran, that the perdition is said to be drowning. But Ramses II did not die by drowning, and on top of that he did not die until several years after the possible exodus in ca. 1235 BC - both according to science.*014 40/50: "- - - Clear Signs (= proofs of Allah*) - - -". There exists no proof of Allah –not in the Quran, not anywhere else (even many Muslim scholars admit this). If a proof had existed, you can be 1000 – thousand - % sure all the world had been informed and with big letters.015 40/51: "We (Allah*) will, without doubt, help Our messengers and those who believe - - -." Wrong – with all the mistakes, etc. in the Quran, there are heavy reasons for doubts.**016 40/53: "We (Allah*) did aforetime give Moses the (Book of) Guidance - - -". Wrong. According to science those books were written centuries after Moses was dead. (According to the Bible, Moses only got the 10 Commandments in writing. In addition he was told the law (really parts of what now is the Book of Moses), which he then wrote down himself later). Now, Islam has a tendency to tell that the Bible is falsified - and strangely: - always in ways that happens to omit points that would under build Islam if it had not been falsified. Also they frequently tell that scriptures have disappeared - always the scriptures that are said to be like the Quran and not the others, and not only that: All such texts have by a strange coincidence happened to get lost. Further: Science has over the years accumulated some 13ooo texts or fragments relevant to the Bible plus some 30ooo with references to the Bible. All have been in accordance with the Bible or have been easy to understand with relevance to the Bible – and none have been "unsanctified" with texts Islam claims should be there, but that simply does not exist among all the ones found - some have even given deeper insight so it has been possible to correct details in translations. Finally: There are also found a number of old scriptures relying to, or copies of, the Quran. But anything that is not like the texts of today is obscured by the Muslims. The star example of which is the "Quran grave" - resting place for worn out Quran scrolls - found in Yemen in 1972. Scientists and scientific methods from the West made it possible to read them, but when it turned out that there were "small, but significant" divergences from the texts of today,further access to the scrolls were denied, except for some selected not "dangerous" parts. This even if anyone who knows the history of the Quran knows that the statement: "The Quran of today is to the last letter and the last comma identical with what Gabriel told Muhammad" is not true.Honesty?017 40/56: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.018 40/57: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.019 40/59: "The Hour (of doom) will certainly come: therein is no doubt - - -". It is quite possible that an hour of doom may come - many religions say so. But as the Quran has given not one single valid proof for it - just cheap, though often strong, words - there are strong reasons for doubting a doom and a hell like in the Quran. This even more so as the Quran has so many other mistakes, and uses so many contradictions and invalid "signs" and "proofs", not to mention all the statements resting on nothing or on other invalid statements, "signs" or "proofs".*020 40/61: "It is Allah Who made the Night for you - - - and the Day - - -". Wrong. It is the sun and the revolving of the Earth that makes night and day. This is just another place where Muhammad takes a natural phenomenon, states without proof that this is done or made by Allah, and then tells or indicates that this is a proof for Allah or Islam. As a proof, it islogically completely invalid - and as said before: Use of invalid proofs, etc., etc., is the hallmark of someone deliberately not speaking the truth and trying to delude or deceive or cheat somebody.021 40/62: "- - - how ye are deluded away from the Truth! (the Quran*)". See 38/29. A book like that at best represents partly the truth.022 40/63: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.023 40/64: "(Allah has*) made the sky as a canopy - - -". Wrong. The sky - or heaven - is not a canopy, especially not when you know that it according to the Quran is made from something material (the stars are fastened to the lowermost heaven). The sky as we see it, is an optical illusion in near vacuum.024 40/66a: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". Wrong. See 2/99.025 40/66b: "- - - the Worlds." The Quran falsely tells there are 7 Earths. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.026 40/67a: "It is He (Allah*) Who has created you from dust - - -". Wrong. Man was not made from dust. See 6/2.027 40/67b: "(Allah then made you*) from a sperm drop - - -". Wrong. You were not made from a sperm drop. You were made from the fusing of a sperm cell and an egg cell - the egg cell even is by far the biggest. From other places in the Quran it is clear that Muhammad believed the sperm was "seeds to plant" in a woman, and there started to grow to become a foetus and then a baby. Any one inch tall god had known that this was wrong. Then who made the Quran?028 40/69: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.029 40/70: "Those who reject the Book (the Quran or the "not falsified" Bible, like Islam claims – as always without any documentation*) which We (Allah*) sent - - -". No omniscient god sent down the Quran – too many mistakes, etc. (and science has shown that the content of the modern Bibles is the same as in the first ones – Islam's claims are just that; claims.)It is a most open question who is furthest away from the truth – Muslims or (some?) nonMuslims. It is clear from all the mistaken facts, contradictions, and other wrongs, that the Quran is not made by an omniscient god – and the inhumanities in the Quran also proves it is not made by any good or benevolent power (when someone claims and states good things, but demands and does bad ones, the demands and deeds are more reliable for judging his character, than the very cheap words). And if Islam is a made up religion, based on a made up book – what then with all the Muslims who have been denied the possibility to look for a real religion (if such one exists)? – their only hope in case is that also Hell is a fiction.***030 40/75: "- - - the Truth (the Quran*) - - -". To repeat things:1. The Quran contains more than 1750 places with wrong facts.Add the ones we have overlooked + all the other kinds of mistakes and other types of wrongs and you may have some 3000 or more places with mistakes, contradictions, etc. in one single book.2. The Quran in addition contains at least 200+ "most likely" wrong facts.3. The Quran is likely to contain more mistaken facts we have not seen.4. The Quran contains lots of invalid "signs" indicating or "proving" Allah/Islam. The use of invalid arguments is the hallmark of cheats.5. The Quran contains a number of invalid "proofs," pretending to indicate or "prove" Allah/Islam. The use of invalid "signs" and "proofs" are strong hallmarks for cheats, swindlers, and deluders.6. The Quran contains a huge number of claims and statements hanging in thin air or resting on other invalid claims, statements, "signs", or "proofs". The use of such invalid arguments and cheap words is the hallmark of cheats and decievers.7. There is not one single statement, "sign" or "proof" in the Quran that really proves Allah - they without exception are logically invalid. There are a few taken from the Bible that may indicate a god - not Allah, but a god. But the Bible talks about Yahweh, not about Allah (and the teachings are fundamentally so different - see 29/46 - that in spite of what the Quran and Hadith say, Allah is not the same god as the one Jesus told about - not unless he is schizophrenic.)8. The Arab Quran contains more than 100 linguistic mistakes according to linguists.9. The Quran is said to be pure Arabic. It contains a lot of non-Arabic words. We have seen different numbers, but perhaps 275 different words according to Arthur Jeffries (the word Quran is said to be one of them). For the story these are not serious, but they are mistakes compared to what the Quran says, and the Quran pretends to be perfect and without mistakes - sent down from an omniscient god. Islam has an explanation, though: Arabs has used the foreign words and made them Arab. A Negroe does not become an Arab even if he moves to Arabia. A very practical way of making something look true only.10. The Quran contains at least ca. 400 contradictions.11. The Quran contains at very least 400+ places where the original Arab text is so unclear that it is impossible to be sure what is really meant.The Quran at best is partly true. There are very good reasons for doubt and scepticism.It is also told that the Quran is the copy of a revered "Mother Book" in the Heaven of Allah. This has to be wrong. An omnipotent god impossibly can have revered - not kept as a funny curiosum, but revered!! - a book with that many mistakes and contradictions, that number of loose and without value claims and statements, not to mention all the invalid "signs" and "proofs"- hallmarks of an imbecile or a cheat or deceiver. Besides: The other 124ooo+ earlier prophets (or at least many of them) according to Islam received a similar copy of the Mother Book. Pretend you were the prophets Hud or Salih living at least 2000 years before Muhammad (because Moses spoke about them according to the Quran, and he lived (?) some 2000 years before Muhammad - Hud and Salih concequently must have lived before that), or that you were one of the Indian prophets in the Americas before 1492 AD – or in the Arctic or in Australia 100 years before Botany Bay – the Quran and Islam claims that all people have had prophets. Then read the Quran and see how much you would understand and how much not – even words like cows, sheep, goats, camels, ships, coats of mail, and a number of other words – what did they mean in South America or Australia? And how much is irrelevant? – f. ex. Muhammad's family problems, all the facts and happenings relevant mostly for Arabia, etc.Read the Quran with that in your mind – and weep. Would a god make or revere or use copies of such a book for his prophets through all times and all over the world? – Remember we here talk about the perfect and timeless Mother Book that the Quran and all other not falsified books sent down to the prophets all over the world from Adam to Muhammad are exact copies of. This in spite of that Islam explains that the reason for new prophets and new scriptures were that time changed, so the scriptures had to be changed a little - how to change perfect copies of the one and perfect Mother Book?031 40/77: "- - - the Promise of Allah is true - - -". So much is wrong in the Quran, that also this has to be proved, as there are serious reasons for doubts about whether the religion itself is true. If it is a made up one, of course "Allah's promises" also are not true.032 40/78: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.033 40/81a: "- - - His Signs - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.034 40/81b: "- - - the Signs - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.*035 40/82: "Do they not travel through the earth and see what was the End of those before them?" In and around Arabia there were - and are - scattered ruins. Muhammad told they were all remains of people punished by Allah for sins (and for good measure they were stronger than Muhammad's contemporary Arabs). Believe it who wants - but contact a professor of history or a psychologist if you do. Similar claims at least in 3/137 – 6/11 – 7/4 – 9/70 -16/36 - 21/6 - 40/21.036 40/83: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". See 2/99.Surah 40: At least 36 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.¨Sub-total here: At least 1338 mistakes + 169 likely mistakes.
Comments numbered by 3 numbers (included 00 or 0) a few places followed by one small letter = clear mistakes. Comments numbered by 00 or 0 followed by 1, 2 or 3 letters (big or small) = likely mistake.
SURAH 41:
001 41/2: "A revelation (the Quran*) from (Allah) - - -". See 38/29 and 40/75.
*002 41/3: "A Book (the Quran*) whereof the verses are explained in detail - - -". Many verses are not explained in detail - see f. ex. all the extra explanations that has been necessary concerning Islamic laws.
003 41/9a: "(Allah first*) created the earth in two Days - - -". Wrong. Earth was far from created first. The universe was created some 13.7 billion years ago – our sun and the Earth some 4.6 billion years ago (or actually 4.57 billion) - - - and trillions of stars and most likely plants were created in the more than 9 billion years in between. Any god had known, but
Muhammad not. Then who created the Quran?
004 41/9b: "(Allah*) created the earth in two Days - - -". Wrong. It took the better part of 4.6 billion years to get it like today - and hundreds of million years just to make it fit for life.
005 41/9c: "- - - the Worlds - - -". The famous 7 flat Earths of the Quran – one above the other and named, according to f. ex. Al-Bukhari. See 65/12.
***006 41/9-12: "(Allah*) created the earth in two Days - - -. He set on the (earth) mountains standing firm high above it, and bestowed blessings on the earth, and measured therein all things to give them (living entities*) nourishment in due proportions, in four Days - - - (and*) So he completed them (the sky*) as seven firmaments, in two Days - - -". This makes 8 days -very inconsistent and very wrong compared to what the Quran normally says: 6 days. (Not to mention the 4.6 billion years science has found out). One more contradiction. We have been told we have to be very stupid who does not understand that the two first days are included in the next four. We admit that is the only way Islam can try to "explain" this away - but that very clearly is not what the text says. ("The Message of the Quran" has "doctored" the Quran
a little (at least in the Swedish translation) to make the "explanation" not quite so dumb - but only "not quite so", as Yusuf Ali's translation is very clear).
007 41/10a: "He set on the (earth) mountains standing firm, high above it - - -". Wrong. The mountains were not set (down) on Earth – they grew up.
008 41/10b: "He set on the (earth) mountains standing firm - - - - - and measured therein all things to give them (animals or humans?*) nourishment in due proportions, in 4 days - - -". Wrong. That took millions of years - only the cooling down of the Earth to make any kind of life possible, took at least 300 million years. And the development from the first life to the first real animal took some 2.5 - 3 billion years. That happened in late Pre-Cambrium, in the periode that a few years ago was named Ediacarian, which makes up the end of the long PreCambrium periode some 500 – 550 million years ago. (And then animal life "exploded" during the period named Cambrium.)
***009 41/11a: "- - - it (the sky) had been (as) smoke - - -)". The sky according to Muhammad was something material (the stars were fastened to the lowermost heaven, f. ex.) and had to be made from something. But it is wrong. The sky as we see it, is just an optical illusion.Some Muslims discover the Big Bang and the cloudlike state after that, and in triumph present you for this "proof" of Islam being scientific and correct. But the Big Bang happened 13.7 billion years ago according to science. The cloudlike state lasted for 300ooo – 380ooo years and was not clouds (micro particles floating in gas) but only ionized gas, mainly hydrogen + a little helium. - - And our sun and earth did not coalesce until 9 billion years later – 4.6 billion years ago - and are on top of all 3. generation creations. The connection between the "clouds"
after the Big Bang and Earth is highly feeble and has nothing to do with our sky.More logical but less frequently quoted, are the tales saying the sky was made from the cloud of dust and gas slowly coalescing into the sun, the planets, etc. But that material ended up as the sun, the planets, etc. - an optical illusion like our sky is not made from gas or dust or clouds. It is made from the bending of light in near vacuum only. (And the illusion that makes the night sky seem like a hemisphere is made by our inability to see the 3. dimension at those distances). See 41/11c below.
010 41/11b: "Come ye (Earth and sky*) together - - -". Earth and sky never were separated intwo parts that then could come together. (Islam tries to explain that what is meant is gas, mainly H2 – hydrogen. But hydrogen – or other gases - has nothing to do with smoke – any god had known. (Smoke = micro particles "diluted" in gas – without the particles no smoke).
***011 41/11c: "He (Allah*) said to it (the sky) and the earth: 'Come ye together - - -'". The sky as we see it by day is just an optical illusion that is a result of the refraction - bending - of light in the rarefied upper atmosphere - it is blue because blue light bends the least. It simply is physical laws at work - there is no question of "coming together".The night sky is another optical illusion - the day sky and the night sky are not even "made" in the same way. Here we see a sky because we are unable to see 3 dimensions at those distances. At night it is if possible even more wrong to talk about things coming together.Any god knew this. Muhammad believed in the local wrong astronomy. Who composed the Quran?
012 41/12a: "- - - seven firmaments - - -". Wrong - there are no 7 heavens. (Firmament is another name for the heaven or sky – mainly used for the night sky).
*013 41/12b: "So He (Allah*) completed them as seven firmaments in two Days - - -". If the Quran hear means the sky as seen by day, it took as many years as it took the atmosphere to form - some million years. If he means the starry night sky - which most often is meant when one uses the word "firmament" - it all started 13.7 billion years ago according to science, and may be the first stars became visible not much later - - - and the creation is still not completed.
**014 41/12c: "He (Allah*) assigned to each heaven its duty and command". How could he do that when there were no 7 heavens?
***015 41/12d: "And We (Allah*) adorned the lower heaven with lights (= stars*) - - -". This is one of the points Muslims are very reluctant to try to explain, as it is obviously and impossibly wrong - and impossible to "explain" away in any believable manner. We know from old astronomy that the moon and the planets were fastened to different heavens,
and that means that the stars have to be between us and the moon - at less than some 384ooo km distance - as the stars were fastened to the lowest heaven. (The Quran also says that the sun (?) and the moon are between the heavens). In addition to all the other impossibilities, humans would not be even crisps in a millisecond. Once more: Any existing god knew this, Muhammad not. Is Allah non-existing? Or who composed the Quran?
***016 41/12e: "- - - and (provided it) (the lowest heaven*) with guard". We know from other places in the Quran, that this "guard" is stars mistaken for shooting stars used against bad spirits wanting to spy on the heavens. The only place such "information" fits today, is in fairy tales. Who composed the Quran? (Likely Mohammad.)
*017 41/12f: "(Allah is*) full of Knowledge." Something is wrong. Either Allah is not omniscient - then he may have sent down the Quran. Or he is full of knowledge - omniscient. Then he did not send down a book like the Quran with that many mistakes - see 41/75. If not Allah, then who composed the Quran?
018 41/15: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.Besides: In the book "The Message of the Quran", certified by Al-Azhar Al-Sharif IslamicResearch Academy in Cairo (one of the 2-3 top universities in the Muslim world on such subjects) in a letter dated 27. Dec. 1998, it is admitted rather reluctantly that there are no proofs for Allah, and that it is not possible to prove him. An additonal point here is that if there are no ptoof for Allah and impossible to ptove him, automatically there also is no proof for, and impossible to prove Muhammad's claimed connection to Allah.
019 41/28: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
020 41/30: "- - - Glad Tidings - - -." Wrong. Islam is no glad tiding, except for the ones not suppressed – and really glad only for the ones looking for booty and slaves and stolen riches, and not least for the ones near the top of the pyramid that got – and get – a lot of power in addition. It often is like that in war religions, especially when made to fit a strong and charismatic leader (and his successors), though many war religions have not been as hypocritical as Islam in trying to make its members and others believe it is good and just and humane and benevolent. And well, it may have been glad tidings for the small percentage of people who need a religion to lean on – at least for the possible ones where the old pagan religion was not strong enough.
*021 41/37a: "Among His (Allah's*) Signs are the Night and the Day - - -". The night and the day are made by the sun and the revolving of the Earth - physical facts at work. If Islam states the sun and the Earth and the physical laws are made by Allah, they will have to prove it - it is nowhere proved neither in the Quran nor in the Hadiths - cheap words and invalid signs anyone can use, f. ex. any priest in any religion: Baal made the sun and makes it rise in the east. Allah can neither unmake it nor make it rise in the west - then Baal is a real god and Allah a false one. It only is cheap words that prove not a thing, except that resorting to such faked arguments are among the hallmarks of cheats, swindlers, and deceivers, which may prove or indicate something or other about the one(s) using such arguments.
022 41/37b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
023 41/39c: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
024 41/39: "He (Allah*) Who gives life to the (dead) earth (by sending rain*)". Earth which comes alive just by adding water, is not dead - only looks like that. It is alive with seeds and perhaps roots.
025 41/40a: "- - - the Truth - - -". With all these mistakes, etc., the Quran at best is partly true.
**026 41/40b: "Those who pervert the Truth in Our (Allah's) Signs - - -." It is not possible to pervert the truth in invalid signs, they are already invalid - not one (with the possible exceptions of a few pointing to another god, Yahweh, taken from the Bible) has any value as signs or proofs, as they without exception are logically invalid, because they all are
hanging in the air – just unproven claims - or resting on other invalid - not proved -"statements", "signs" or "proofs". Any priest in any religion can say the same about his god(s). A real god would not use invalid "signs" and "proofs", proofs he had to know would be seen through sooner or later. (Actually it has been seen through long time ago, but the weight of the number of believers and Islam's rules for social or real murder of the ones thinking "heresy" even if it is the full truth, make it roll on - away from the real god if such one exists, and if Islam is wrong.)
027 41/40c: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
028 41/42a: "No falsehood can approach it (the Quran*) - - -". No comments, except see
40/75 and many others.
029 41/42b: "- - - One (Allah*) Full of Wisdom - - -". The way Allah is manifested in the Quran, he is very far from full of wisdom.
00a 41/42c: "- - - Worthy of all Prise." Is a claimed, but never proved deity that makes so many mistakes worthy of all praise? Hardly.
030 41/43: "Nothing is said to thee (Muhammad*) that was not said to the messengers before thee (f. ex. Jesus and the old Jewish prophets*) - - -." Wrong. As science thoroughly has proved that the Bible is not falsified – and especially not NT – it is very clear that what Muhammad claimed to have been told, often is far from what the real (?) prophets and
patriarchs had been told. And this is strengthened by the fact that it very often is very clear that Muhammad took his "biblical" stories not from the Bible, but from religious legends (often even based on apocryphal scriptures and stories, not the Bible) that circulated in the area, and that Muhammad believed was from the Bible - - - and then later he had only one way out how to explain the errors compared to the real Bible: He was right and the Bible falsified!!!. As for the quotation above, it is not true that nothing was said to Muhammad that was not said to earlier (real) prophets – a fact that Islam even confirms sometimes – f. ex. in the statement from Muhammad that he was the first "messenger/prophet" that had got permission from the god to steal and rob and rape, which the god according to the Quran even confirms is "god and lawful".
031 41/44: "It (the Quran*) is a Guide - - -". A book containing that many mistakes - see 40/75 - is no real guide. Or it is a guide to something inhuman.
032 41/45: "We (Allah*) certainly gave Moses the Book aforetime - - -". Wrong. Those books were written much later according to science. (Moses according to the Bible only got the 10 commandments in writing. In addition he got the law verbally – parts of what now is "the Book of Moses" (actually the first 5 books in the Bible) – which he himself wrote down later. Nothing else. And as said: Science confirms that the Torah - the Book of Moses - is centuries younger than Moses).
033 41/53a: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
034 41/53b: "- - - this (the Quran*) is the Truth." See 40/75.
Surah 41: At least 34 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
SURAH 42:
001 42/3a: "Thus doth (He (Allah*)) send inspiration (a lot of the verses were "sent by inspiration" - easy - - - and easy to falsify*) to thee (Muhammad*) - - -." Verses and surahs so full of errors were not sent by an omniscient god.
002 42/3b: "- - - (Allah is*) full of Wisdom." See 40/75 and 41/12.
003 42/4: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
004 42/5: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
005 42/7a: "Thus have We (Allah*) sent by inspiration to the - - -." See 42/3a above.
006 42/7b: "- - - the Day of Assembly (the Day of Doom*), of which there is no doubt - - -". In a book with as many mistakes (see 40/75) there is reason for doubting anything:
1. Is Allah omnipotent and made the Quran? – or not?
2. Is Allah omnipotent, and did not make the Quran? Also the fact that many of the mistakes etc. in the book are in accordance with what was good knowledge and science in Arabia at the time of Muhammad, makes one wonder:
3. Did some human in Arabia make the Quran? -that would explain a lot.
4. Is there a Hell? – and in case is the description in the Quran correct? – there are so many other mistakes in the book.
5. Is there a Day of Doom? – and in case is it run by Allah? – or by Yahweh? – or by some other god(s)?
6. Is there a Paradise? – and is it in case a paradise for the body like in the Quran? – or for the soul like in the Bible? – or something else.
This is a problem with the Quran: There are so many mistakes that there are reasons for doubting anything, and impossible to know if something is true, and in that case what? What is true? What is al-Taqiyya? – what is plainly and simply wrong?A last day will come for man sometimes in the future – but as there are so much wrong in the Quran, there is every reason to doubt that the description (or even existence) of Allah, and then consequently to believe that the description of Allah's arrangement of the last day also is wrong.And what about each and every Muslim if the Quran is partly or completely wrong, and they because of threats, social pressure or simply by the glorified plain and blind belief have not had the chance to find out in time? If there is nothing after this life, they will have lost nothing – except they have made this life difficult or a hell or worse for many. But if there is something afterwards, it may be a rude awakening, because there only is one thing that is sure about the Quran: No god – omniscient or not – made (not to mention revered in his own Heaven) a book with that many mistakes, contradictions, etc., and with that much invalid logic and as invalid "signs" and "proofs".
007 42/11: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
008 42/12: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
009 42/13a: "The same religion has He (Allah*) established - - - (as that of Noah*)". With all the mistakes (see f. ex. 40/75) there are good reasons for asking if it really is an omnipotent god that made this religion.
**010 42/13b: "The same religion (Islam*) has He (Allah*) established for - - - Abraham, Moses, and Jesus". Neither the Quran, nor Hadith, nor Islam has brought the slightest valid proof for this - only words. And at least when it comes to Jesus, it is wrong. The teachings of Jesus and the ones of Muhammad are fundamentally too different. Of course Muslims say that the Bible is falsified and that scriptures have disappeared – that is the only way out they have. But they have yet to prove the first and to prove that scriptures documenting all the points Islam says are wrong in other religions have disappeared and none reliable and impossible to misunderstand ones have reappeared among the 13ooo with relevance that exists. "Strong claims need strong proofs." This even more so as science by means of all the old scriptures has proved that the Bible is not falsified – a fact that is extra clear for NT.
*011 42/13c: "The same religion (Islam*) - - - that We (Allah*) have sent by inspiration to thee (Muhammad*) - - -". Is it really an omniscient god who has initiated a religion based on a book with at may be 3ooo cases of mistakes, invalid logic, invalid arguments, invalid "signs" and "proofs", plus lots of contradictions, etc.? Definitely no. See 40/75 and 41/12 above and many others.
012 42/15: "I (Muhammad*) believe in the Book (the Quran*) that Allah has sent down - - -." No omniscient god has sent down a book with that many mistakes, etc., not to mention revered it in his own home as "the Mother Book".
013 42/17a: "It is Allah Who has sent down the Book (the Quran*) - - -." See 40/75 and 42/15 above.
014 42/17b: "It is Allah Who has sent down the Book (the Quran*) in Truth - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12 above - and others.
015 42/18: "- - - and know it (the Quran*) is the Truth." See 04/75 and 41/12 - and others.
016 42/23: "No reward do I (Muhammad*) ask of you (Muslims/people*) - - -". - - - except total dictatorship over you, total obedience from you, plenty of women, cheap warriors, plenty of riches for bribes, etc., etc."
017 42/24a: "- - - the Truth (the teachings in the Quran*) - - -." With that many mistakes and worse, the teachings in the Quran at best is partly true.
***018 42/24b: "And Allah - - - proves the Truth by His Words." Muhammad was asked many times to prove his - or presumably Allah's - words, but he never did, and seemed never to be able to, this even more so, as f. ex. some of his "explanations" for why he never could prove anything, an intelligent man like him knew were lies (f. ed. that real miracles would make no-one believe anyhow). And the words of the Quran prove not a thing, among other
reasons because:
1. Far too many mistakes pretending to be facts. (Swindle?)
2. Far too many loose statements pretending to be facts. (Swindle?)
3. Far too many invalid "signs" pretending to be documentation. (Swindle?)
4. Far too many invalid or even wrong "proofs" pretending to be documentation. (Swindle?)
5. Some obvious lies – f. ex. that miracles would make no-one believe. (Swindle.)
6. Muhammad was unable to present anything but fast-talk when asked for proofs. (Swindle?)
7. Lots of invalid use of logic. (Swindle?)
8. Lots of contradictions (– proves of lies?)
These all are hallmarks of a crook and a cheat and a deceiver.
019 42/29a: "- - - His (Allah's*) Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 and 2/99 above.
020 42/29b: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
*021 42/30a: "Whatever misfortune happens to you, is because of things your hands have wrought - - -". Wrong. Sometimes it is because of bad luck and coincidence and sometimes f. ex. by what others do. F. ex. if some terrorists - normally Muslims - kills or mutilates you for things you absolutely are not guilty of. And not least it may be because of natural catastrophes – like the 2004 tsunami that killed more than 300ooo, mostly Muslims (ca. 80%).
*022 42/30b: "Whatever misfortune happens to you, is because of things your hands have wrought - - -". Wrong. According to the Quran, Allah desides everything (though Islam is unable to explain how this corresponds to the claimed free will of man - and lamely claims that all the same it must be true, "because Allah says so in the Quran"(!!!)).
023 42/32a: "- - - His (Allah's*) Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 and 2/99 above.
*00a 42/32b: "And among his Signs are the ships, smooth-running through the ocean - - -". Neither Allah nor Muhammad ever built a ship - and if Islam says that Allah thought man to build ships, they will have to prove it. The same if what the point here is that the wind moves the ships. The Quran never has proved that Allah makes the wind - a Hindu or Pagan priest may utter the same invalid words, that his god(s) make(s) it. Words are that cheap.
024 42/33: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
025 42/35: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 and 2/99 above.
026 42/49: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
027 42/50: "- - - He (Allah*) is full of knowledge - - - ". Hardly. See 40/75 and 41/12.
028 42/52a: "- - - We (Allah*) have made the (Quran) a Light - - -". A book with may be 3ooo mistakes, contradictions, invalid statements, "signs", "proofs", invalid logic, etc. is not much of a light. See also 40/75 + 41/12.
029 42/52b: "- - - and verily thou (Muhammad*) dost guide (men) to the Straight Way - - -". It is not possible to guide anyone straight from a book this crooked.
030 42/53: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22.
Surah 42: At least 30 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
SURAH 43:001 43/2: "- - - the Book that makes things clear - - -". A book with 2000+ mistakes makes few things clear. See also 40/75 + 41/12.002 43/3: "- - - (and learn Wisdom) - - -." Nobody learns wisdom from a book full of errors.***003 43/4a: "- - - it (the Quran*) is in the Mother of Books, in Our (Allah's*) presence, high (in dignity) - - -". This is one of the places in the Quean where Muhammad claims the Quran is taken from (is a copy of) the Mother Book in Allah's own home/Heaven. But no book containing hundreds of mistakes, hundreds of contradictions, hundreds of loose claims and statements, lots of invalid logic, lots of invalid "signs" and lots of invalid"proofs" easy for anybody with good and wide education too see through, etc., is copied from a revered Mother Book, high in dignity and esteem, in the perfect Heaven, the home of a perfect, omnipotent and omniscient god. See also 13/39.004 43/4a: "- - - (a Quran*) full of Wisdom - - -." See 40/75 and 41/12.**005 43/6: "But how many were the prophets We (Allah*) sent amongst the people of the old?" Well, Hadith says 124ooo - and it is not true, because so many had had to leave some traces. Besides: With so many different people so many different places in the world - why were there no other prophet any place in the world at the time of Muhammad - yes, none at all for a very long time before Muhammad? According to the time scale of Genesis and the Torah and the Bible that the Quran does not correct, and 124ooo prophets, it should mean hundreds or a few thousands for each generation.And: Islam's explanation for why Allah wanted new holy books on Earth now and then, is that the world changes, and then some details in the holy book needs adjusting. Why then is Muhammad said to be the last one? – and the Quran to be the last book, a book that is too inhuman, too primitive on justice, and too outdated on warfare (too destructive) for modern societies, just to mention 3 subjects. The world has changed MUCH more between Muhammad and now, than between Adam and Muhammad, and man needs new instruction for a less inhuman world - and an omniscient god had known that on beforehand.*006 43/9a: "- - - 'Who created the heavens (plural and wrong*)?' they (non-Muslims*) would be sure to reply, 'They were created by (Allah*)". Wrong - if they believed a god had created it, they would be sure to mention their own god, though in the old Arabia that may have been the polytheistic god al-Lah, which could cause (intended?) confusion because the names were so similar (the same reason why Islam now tends to use the word "God" instead of "Allah" in the west, we have been told – it hides some of the real differences.)007 43/9b: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.008 43/9c: "(Allah is*) full of Knowledge - - -". See 41/12 and 40/75.*009 43/10a: "(Allah*) has made for you the earth (like a carpet), spread out - - -". The Quran many places says the Earth is flat (it always is compared to something flat) - perhaps round like a disk, but flat - - - like a carpet. Wrong.*010 43/10b: "- - - and (Allah*) has made for you roads - - -". We have never heard about a road made by a god, except perhaps in fairy tales. The paths/roads in Arabia were so old that no one remembered the start of them, and then Muhammad could tell things like this.011 43/11a: "- - - We (Allah*) rise to life therewith (with rain*) a land that is dead - - -". A land that is coming alive only because of rain is not dead - it is alive with seeds and perhaps roots.012 43/11b: "- - - We (Allah*) rise to life therewith (with rain*) a land that is dead - - -." Wrong. If water is all it takes, the land only looks dead – it is alive with seeds and roots. Any god knows.*013 43/11c: "- - - We (Allah*) rise to life therewith (with rain*) a land that is dead; even so will ye be raised (from the dead) - - -". The comparison is wrong - and a god had known it. In the first case the DNA is alive and well and ready to sprout. In a dead body everything is finished - also the DNA and all its possibility to go against entropy (a term from physics that can be said to be a measure for chaos and lower states of energy). There is critical difference in that.*014 43/12: "- - - (Allah*) created pairs in all things - - -". Very wrong. This only goes for multi-cellular beings, and for far from all of them. And it goes not at all for uni-cellular beings - and they exist in a by far larger number, both in quantity and species. Any god knew this -Muhammad not.015 43/14: "And to our Lord (Allah*), surely, must we turn back." With 2ooo+ mistakes etc. in the Quran, this may be wrong, too - see 41/10 and 41/12. For sure it is not sure that we meet Allah - if any god at all - after this life.016 43/29a: "- - - the Truth (the Quran*) - - -". See 40/75 and 42/12.017 43/29b: "- - - a Messenger (Muhammad*) making things clear." No messenger preaching what is in the Quran, makes things clear – too many mistakes and too much unclear logic, etc.018 43/30: "- - - the Truth (the Quran*) - - -". See 40/75 and 42/12.00a 43/43a: "- - - the Revelation - - -." Is it a revelation? And in case from whom? – not from an omniscient god (too many mistakes) and neither from a good god (too inhuman, too dishonest, too bloody). But perhaps from a dark power in disguise? – or from humans? – or even from himself?019 43/43b: "- - - the Revelation sent down to thee (Muhammad*) - - -." The claimed revelation at least is not sent down by any omniscient god like the Quran wants one to believe – if at all sent down.020 43/44: "The (Quran) is indeed the message, for thee and for the people - - -." Definitely not – too much is wrong. Or if it after all is a message – from whom?00b 43/45: "And question thou Our (Allah's*) messengers whom We sent before thee (Muhammad*); did We appoint any deity other than (Allah) Most Gracious, to be worshipped?" Allah or Yahweh for the Biblical ones? (In spite of what the Quran says, it is not the same god unless the god is schizophrenic – the teachings are fundamentally too different. Islam tries to explain away – without documentation like normal for Islam – the differences with claims that the Bible is falsified, but science has long since shown that it is not true. There may be a limited number of mistakes in that book, too – though much less than in the Quran - but no falsifications.021 43/46: "- - - the Worlds - - -". Once more the 7 non-existing Earths that the Quran tells about. See 65/12.022 43/55: "- - - We (Allah*) drowned them all (= Pharaoh Ramses II and his people*)." At least Ramses himself did not drown. He did not die from drowning, and he did not die until several years later.**023 43/56: "And We (Allah*) made them a people of the past - - -". Wrong. Neither Ramses II nor the people of Egypt became a people of the past in the year 1235 BC (the approximate year of the possible exodus, according to science). That did not happen until much later – and the final doom came in 659 AD when the Arabs under Mu'awiya conquered the country and took over - for ever (?). Muslims like to "explain" that "a people" means the soldiers of Pharaoh. But the expression "a people" has a wider meaning than that.**00c 43/59: "He (Jesus*) was no more than a servant - - -". Possible. But there is still the funny fact that thousands heard him call Yahweh "father". Whereas only one man - and a man of very questionable character and ethics, claims the opposite - and this even a man who had much to gain from Jesus being not the son of God. And he claimed it as muchas 600 years later without any kind of documentation.**024 43/63a: "(Jesus said*): therefore fear Allah - - -". If Jesus had been a missionary for a known polytheistic god from a not too far of country, he for one thing had got very few followers in the at that time strictly monotheistic Israel, and for another thing he had been killed by the clergy long before - especially if he all the same got a big following like he really did. This is a tale told by someone who knew the religious and political situation in Israel around year 30 AD badly.025 43/63b: "(Jesus said*): fear Allah and obey me - - -." This is really is Muhammad's slogan – he wanted power, and religion/Allah was his Platform of Power. And many places in the Quran it becomes clear that Muhammad wants everyone to believe he was a "normal" (but top) prophet (actually he was no real prophet, as he did not have the gift of making prophesies – see chapter about Muhammad), and then it was nice if Jesus used the same words like Muhammad and showed this was normal for prophets to say. But one of the really – and one of many - fundamental differences between Jesus and Muhammad (and for that case between f. ex. Buddha and Muhammad), was that Jesus was absolutely not interested in power on this Earth. Consequently this slogan that Muhammad very frequently used in different varieties to secure his power, was meaningless for Jesus. (The Quran does not oppose what can be taken as a fact: That Jesus preached, but did not seek power on Earth.)026 43/64: "(Jesus said): For Allah, He is my Lord and your Lord - - -". See 43/63 just above. We may add that starters of new religions or sects often try to "high-jack" well known persons or situations to use it in their teachings. This may look like such a case.027 43/69: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.028 43/78a: "Verily, We (Allah*) have brought - - - (the Quran*) - - -". Is it really an omniscient god that has produced it? See 40/75 and 41/12029 43/78b: "Verily, We (Allah*) have brought the Truth (the Quran*) - - -". At most the Quran is partly the truth. See 40/75 and 41/12.030 43/78c: "- - - but most of you (non-Muslims*) have a hatred to the Truth." The truth - see 40/75 and 41/12. And in addition:1. *Few hate – but many are frightened.2. Quite a number feel distasted because of the inhuman and unjust laws and traditions in Islam.3. **There is a difference between frightened strength and frightened weakness – a fact that sometimes is forgotten.*00d 43/81: "If (Allah) Most Gracious had a son, I (Muhammad*) would be the first to worship". Some proof!! But for that: There still is Jesus calling Yahweh father. And any neutral professor of history would say that according to all normal rules, the Bible should be more reliable than the Quran as a source of correct history: Very much closer in time to Jesus, thousands of witnesses, many narrators, versus one single narrator without good sources and 600 years later - and even a man of dubious character and with strong motif to reduce Jesus to become the greatest prophet himself - and a man clearly lusting for power (just read the Quran and the Hadits - it is easy to see f. ex. his gluing himself to the god.). A man that definitely had not been accepted as a reliable witness in any country with a reliable judicial system. (The real and historic Muhammad was something quite different from the glossy semi-saint Islam and Muslims claims – a claim made necessary because all Islam only is built on this man's words - if he lies, the religion is a false one). Also: Science has shown that the never dicumenter Islamic claim about falsification of the Bible is wrong.031 43/82: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.032 43/84: "- - - He (Allah*) is full of Wisdom and Knowledge". See 40/75 and 41/12.033 43/85: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.034 43/86: "- - - only he (the not capital "h" must be a misprinting - it refers to Allah*) who bears witness to the Truth - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.035 43/87a: "If thou (Muhammad or Muslims*) ask them, Who created them, they will certainly say, Allah - - -". Wrong. See f. ex. 43/9 - and many others.036 43/87b: "- - - the Truth (the Quran*) - - -." The Quran at best is only partly true – too much is wrong.Surah 43: At least 36 mistakes + 4 likely mistakes.
SURAH 44:*001 44/2: "- - - the Book (the Quran*) that makes things clear - - -". A book with this many mistakes and dubious arguments - see 40/75 and 41/12 - dictated by a man with a dubious character - see f. ex. 31/30 - does not make things clear.002 44/4: "In that (night) (when the first surah is said to be sent down*) is made distinct every affair of wisdom". As for wisdom in the Quran - see 40/75 and 41/12.003 44/6: "He (Allah*) hears and knows (all things) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.004 44/7: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.005 44/25-28: "Thus (was their (pharaoh Ramses II and his men*) end - - -". We know from other parts of the Quran that the end was drowning. Wrong, at least for Ramses II himself - he did not die by drowning (if he had done, you bet three religions had screamed about it!), and he only died years later than the possible exodus in ca. 1235 BC according to science.006 44/33: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.007 44/38: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.Surah 44: At least 7 mistakes.
SURAH 45:00a 45/2a: "The revelation of the Book (the Quran*) - - -." There never were any proofs for anything. So many things are wrong with the Quran, that it has to be proved it really was revealed.001 45/2b: "The revelation of the Book (the Quran*) is from Allah - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.002 45/2c: "(Allah is) Full of Wisdom." See 40/75.003 45/3a: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.004 45/3b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.005 45/4: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.**006 45/5a: "And the alternation of the Night and Day - - - are Signs for those who are wise". Not unless Islam proves it is Allah who alternates night and day. They may say that Allah made the physical laws - but then they will have to prove it - - - "strong claims demands strong proofs". And of course they will have to compete with all other religions trying to say and do the same, with the same cheap words. Words are cheap as long as you do not have to prove them - and very little in the Quran is proved.***In Islam the educated ones know nothing is proved. The defence is that "any intelligent person can see from the texts in the Quran that they have to be sent down by an omniscient god" (!!). All the mistakes and all the invalid "proofs" etc. disapprove this. The second line of defence is that it is "primitive" thinking to have to rely on proofs!!! (F. ex. in "The Message of the Quran" that on top of all is "certified" by a top university - Al-Azhar in Cairo). The reality is the 180-degree opposite: It is primitive - and naïve - thinking to accept loose claims and often obviously wrong and unlikely statements without some sorts of proofs.007 45/5b: "- - - the fact that Allah sends down Sustenance from the sky - - -." As "always" the Quran makes a claim only, and proves nothing. As long as it is not proved, it is not a fact – words are too cheap. Actually this is one of the very many cases where the Quran takes a natural a phenomenon – here rain – and unceremoniously say it is Allah that makes it - - - just like any priest in any religion can say about his god or gods, just as cheaply.008 45/5c: "(Allah*) revives thereafter the earth after its death (by sending rain*) - - -". One thing is that the Quran in no way proves that it is Allah who sends the rain - the book has a strong tendency to give Allah credit without any documentation for natural occurrences. But: If earth comes alive just because of water, it was not dead - it only looked like that.009 45/5d: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.**010 45/6a: "Such are the Signs of Allah, which we (Allah*) rehearse to thee (Muhammad*) in truth - - -". A strange saying, as all "Signs" in the Quran are logically invalid, as they either are claims or statements based on nothing or based on other invalid (not proved) claims, statements, "proofs", etc. There may be a few exceptions for some taken from the Bible, but they in case indicate Yahweh.011 45/6b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.012 45/8: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.013 45/9: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.014 45/11a: "This (the Quran*) is (true) Guidance - - -". A book with perhaps 3ooo mistakes, invalid statements, contradictions, etc., etc., is no true guidance. See 40/75 and 41/12.015 45/11b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.016 45/13a: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.017 45/13b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.018 45/17: "- - - Clear Signs - - -." See 2/99.00b 45/18: "Then We (Allah*) put thee on the (right) way of Religion - - -". All the mistakes, contradictions, invalid statements, "signs" and "proofs" gives reason for serious doubts about that.**019 45/19+20: "- - - Allah is the Protector of the Righteous. These are clear evidence to men - - -". Yes, but only if it is documented that Allah really is a protector. There are no proofs for that in the Quran - only claims or statements based on invalid (not proved) claims or loose statements, etc. There in reality is not even a single valid proof for Allah himself. (But then it is not possible for humans to prove a god - only a god can do that. That is one of the reasons why all the "proofs" in the Quran turn out invalid – Allah refused to or was unable to prove anything).020 45/20: "These are clear evidence to men and a Guidance - - - to (the believers*)." See 45/19+20 just above - how can an invalid "proof" be guidance? After all a proof is one or more proven fact(s) that can give only one conclusion whereas Islam/Muhammad/the Quran far too often use unproven claims or statement only as basis for new claims, instead of proven facts – and then any conclusion is invalid.021 45/22: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22.022 45/25: "- - - Clear Signs - - -." There are no clear signs of Allah – or of Muhammad's connection to a god – in all the Quran. See 2/22.023 45/26: "- - - the Day of Judgement, about which there is no doubt - - -". Because of all the mistakes, etc., in the Quran, there is every reason for doubt, and especially about a Muslim style Day of Judgement.024 45/27: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.025 45/32: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.026 45/32: "- - - there was no doubt about its (the Judgement Day*) (coming) - - -". See 45/26 above.027 45/35: "- - - Signs of Allah - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 and 2/99 above.028 45/36a: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.029 45/36b: "- - - the Worlds - - -". The trouble for the Quran is that the 7 Earths this refers to, do not exist. See 65/12.030 45/37a: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.031 45/37b: "(Allah is*) Full of Wisdom". See 40/75 and 41/12.Surah 45: At least 31 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.
SURAH 46:00a 46/2a: "The Revelation of the Book (the Quran*) - - -." Back to square one – is the Quran revealed? – and in case from whom? See 41/12.001 46/2b: "(Allah is*) Full of Wisdom." Not if the Quran is representative for it – too many mistakes, etc. See 40/5 and 41/12.002 46/3: "- - - heaven - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.003 46/4a: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.004 46/4b: "Bring me (Muhammad*) a Book (revealed) before this (as a proof*) - - -". Wrong. A book in itself proves nothing – it is as easy to falsify a book as it is to falsify speech. F. ex. the Quran can well be a falsification – made by Muhammad or someone.005 46/7a: "- - - Our (Allah's) Clear Signs - - ." There are no clear signs from Allah in all the Quran – see 2/99.006 46/7b: "- - - the Unbelievers say of the Truth (the Quran*) - - -." See 2/99 and 40/75 above.**007 46/9: "I (Muhammad) am no bringer of a newfangled doctrine - - -". Muhammad pretended Islam was the continuation of - or the uncorrupted - religion of the Jews and the Christians. That is not true - especially in the NT it is clear that the teachings fundamentally are so different (and sciens has prowed that Islam's undocumented claims about falsification of the Bible are wrong), that it can not be the same god - at least if he is not mentally ill. See 29/46 and 12/111.***008 46/10: "If (this teaching) be from Allah, and ye (non-Muslims) reject it, and a witness from among the Children of Israel testifies to its similarity (with earlier scriptures (what is Muhammad's definition of "similarity" here?*)), and has believed (or pretended to believe -sometimes that was necessary*) while ye are arrogant, (how unjust ye are) - - -". This sentence is a bit complicated, but what Muhammad said, was that a Jew agreed – true or not true - to that the Quran was similar to old Jewish scriptures, and that non-Muslims then are unjust not accepting that Muhammad is a real prophet.1. Tales like this are quite common among self proclaimed prophets trying to prove their new religion or sect. They may be true or not true.2. We only have Muhammad's word for this - a man who had initiated or himself done a lot of dubious deeds included lying/betrayal, and on top of that had a lot to gain from making people believe him, a man who lusted for power - and one who was teaching a dubious tale. There are no other sources. The tale may be true or not true.3. We do not know how many Jews lived in the neighbourhood of Mecca/Medina. But in only one tribe he destroyed, there were 700 men (all murdered – in Khaybar. Plus the 29 from the peace delegation he invited and murdered earlier). As families tended to be large, that should mean some 2ooo-3ooo women and children in addition (all made slaves). And there were three big tribes (and some small ones) and thus thousands of Jews - and the women at least here cannot be omitted, as they tend to be more religious than men. It would be most surprising if not one or a few of them wanted to humour the power-that-be or really changed the religion - from belief or greed or fright or other reasons.4. But all the other – thousands and thousands -of Jews said Muhammad was wrong. This even when he marched against them with his army, and they knew to humour him meant "no war". Even when they had to give him all their farms and become day workers for him -still knowing that humouring him meant they would keep their possessions if they in time had humoured him. Even those who had to flee, loosing everything they could not carry - knowing that if they humoured him, they could stay. Not to mention the 700 men of Khaybar - knowing they were murdered by the half-dozens through the day and far into the night, and that humouring him perhaps could save their lives. All said no; Muhammad was too wrong to be possible to accept even then.5. Even if it was correct that one or a few Jew said yes - which well may be true: "One swallow makes no summer". (It also may be a made up story - that often happens in new sects to "prove" they are right.)All in all: This "proof" has no value. According to the Jews Muhammad was very wrong. And even more: We still have the same books of Moses - the Torah is unabrigded for at least 1000 years before Muhammad according to science – and the rest of the Jewish Bible (the OT) that the Jews in Arabia had. Anyone can read and see they were right.009 46/12a: "- - - this Book (the Quran) confirms (it (the Torah*)) - - -". See 46/10 just above, and especially the last lines. No one knew or know the Torah better than the Jews. Wrong.010 46/12b: "- - - Glad Tidings - - -." Wrong. Islam is no glad tiding, except for for the ones not suppressed – and really glad only for the ones looking for booty and slaves and stolen riches, and not least for the ones near the top of the pyramid that got – and get – a lot of power in addition. It often is like that in war religions, especially when made to fit a strong and charismatic leader (and his successors), though many war religions have not been as hypocritical as Islam in trying to make its members and others believe it is good and just and humane and benevolent. And well, it may have been glad tidings for the minor percentage of people that need a religion to lean on – at least for the possible ones where the old pagan religion was not strong enough.011 46/16: "- - - a promise of truth (the words of the Quran concerning Paradise*) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12 - the promise of Paradise is part of it.00b 46/17: "For the promise of Allah is true." That may be - if he exists (there is not one single proof, and the number of tries with invalid proofs, etc., make no good impression, as that normally is the hallmarks of cheats and deceivers). But there are good reasons for doubt, as the only source for information is the Quran, and very much there is not correct - or doubtful.012 46/27: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.013 46/30a: "We (some Jinns*) have heard a Book (the Quran*) revealed after Moses, confirming what came before it - - -". Jinns were beings "borrowed" from Arab fairy tales, legends and from the old Arab pagan religion – Muhammad mostly based his world on the (contorted) biblical legends - - - and on Arab traditions (the rest of the world made little or no traces in Allah's religion – nothing from the Americas or Australia f. ex. But may be the uneducated, warlike Arabs had done things almost correct in most of the religious aspects in their pagan religion? – only the Arabs of the ones without a Book?).014 46/30b: "- - - confirming what (Torah,Bible*) came before it (the Quran*) - - -". As for confirming the Torah and also the Bible: See 40/75 and 46/10.015 46/30c: "- - - it (the Quran*) guides (men) - - -". A book with that many mistakes and invalid "proofs" etc. is no reliable guide.016 46/30c: "- - - it (the Quran*) guides men to the Truth - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.017 46/33: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.011 46/34a: "Is this not the Truth? (= what was told in the Quran*)". With all its mistakes etc. the Quran at best is partly true.019 46/34b: "- - - ye were wont to deny (truth (the Quran*))!" See 46/34a just above.Surah 46: At least 19 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.
SURAH 47:00a 47/2a: "- - - believe in the (Revelation) sent down to Muhammad - - -". Was it really sent down? See 42/12.001 47/2b: "- - - for it (the Quran*) is the Truth - - -". See 40/75.002 47/2c: "- - - for it (the Quran*) is the Truth from their (Muslims'*) Lord (Allah*) - - -." Is it? No. See 40/75 and 41/12.003 47/3a: "- - - those who believe follow the Truth (the Quran*) - - -". Do they? See 40/75.004 47/3b: "- - - the Truth (the Quran*) from their Lord (Allah*) - - -". Is it? Not if Allah is omniscient - too much is wrong in the book. See 41/12 + 40/75.****005 47/4: This is a really serious one: "Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; at length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them) - - -." BUT OUR SOURCES TELL THAT THE WORDS "(in fight)" IS NOT WRITTEN IN THE ARAB TEXT – IT IS ADDED BY THE TRANSLATOR. Muslims primarily shall read the Quran in Arab, and there in case the text is: "Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers, smite at their necks - - -". It in case simply is a permanent order to be aggressive. The real "Religion of peace"!!!(?)006 47/9: "- - - the Revelation (the Quran*) of Allah - - -." It is highly questionable if the Quran is a real revelation. What is not questionable is that it in no case came from an omniscient god (too much is wrong), and from no good god (too inhuman, too unfair, too harsh, too hateful, too bloody.)007 47/10: "Do they (non-Muslims*) not travel through the earth, and see what was the End of those before them (who did evil)?" In the Middle East there are scattered ruins – houses, villages, towns. Muhammad claimed – as normal without any proof – that they all were results of Allah's punishment for disbelief and sins. But in an arid and harsh country which on top of all was settled by warlike inhabitants, there were many other reasons for empty houses. The statement that all were empty because of punishment for disbelief and other sins against Allah need strong proofs from Islam to be believed.008 47/14: "- - - on a clear (Path) from his (a person*) Lord (Allah*) (= living according to the Quran) - - -". The trouble is that so crooked, and of so doubtful clarity, as the Quran is, it does not represent a clear path.*009 47/16: "- - - those (Muslims*) who have received Knowledge (the Quran*) - - -". The Quran at best represents bits and pieces of knowledge, and it is difficult for uneducated people to know what is true and what not. See 40/75 and 41/12 and others.00b 47/27: "But how (will it be) when the angles take their souls at death - - -." Is something wrong here? In 32/11 there is a special angel – the Angel of Death – doing this, and in 39/42 it is Allah.*010 47/32: "- - - after Guidance (the Quran*) has been clearly shown to them (nonMuslims*) - - -". There is not much guidance in a book with that much mistakes and cheating (trying to use invalid statements, "signs" and "proofs"). See 40/75. If there is some, it in no way is "clear".Surah 47: At least 10 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.
SURAH 48:
001 48/4: "- - - Allah is Full of Wisdom - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
002 48/7: "- - - (Allah is*) Full of Wisdom - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
003 48/8a: "We (Allah*) have truly sent thee (Muhammad*) as a witness - - -". Is this reliable? - in a book with this much mistakes, invalid statements, "signs" and "proofs"? There is only one possible answer to that: A "witness" bringing so much wrong information and wrong fact, is not sent from an omniscient god. And one may add: A "witness" bringing so much injustice, hate and misery to the world, is not sent by a good and benevolent god. If Muhammad at all was sent, on may speculate about by whom. Personally we hardly believe he was sent by even a devil, though the religion as preached in the Quran fits any devil well. But not even a devil would make a "holy" book with so many mistakes and errors – he would be found out sooner or later.***But may be a devil knew that mistakes so not matter very much – may be he knew that religiously blind persons are unable to see even the most obvious mistaken facts, because they do not want to see them?
004 48/8b: "- - - Glad Tidings - - -." Wrong. Islam is no glad tiding, except for the ones not suppressed – and really glad only for the ones looking for booty and slaves and stolen riches, and not least for the ones near the top of the pyramid that got – and get – a lot of power in addition. It often is like that in war religions, especially when made to fit a strong and charismatic leader (and his successors), though many war religions have not been as hypocritical as Islam in trying to make its members and others believe it is good and just and humane and benevolent. And well, it may have been glad tidings for the minor percentage of people that need a religion to lean on – at least for the possible ones where the old pagan religion was not strong enough.
005 48/19: "- - - Allah is - - - Full of Wisdom." See 40/75 and 41/12 and others.
006 48/20: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
007 48/26: "And Allah has full knowledge of all things". The Quran proves the opposite (see
40/75) - - - if not the Quran is a falsification.
008 48/28: "It is He (Allah*) Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad*) with Guidance - - -". There is not much guidance in a teaching based on a book with that many mistakes and littered with hallmarks of a cheat and deceiver (loose statements and invalid "signs" and "proofs").
009 48/28: "- - - Guidance and the Religion of Truth, to proclaim it over all religion - - -". At most partly the truth. See 40/75. The second part of the sentence tells volumes about Islam.
00a 48/29: "Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah." There are so many mistakes and so many places tried cheating and deceiving in the Quran - is this any more reliable? - especially as it is said by the man himself, a man who was unreliable and who clearly liked power?
Surah 48: At least 9 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
SURAH 49:
001 49/1: "- - - Allah - - - knows all things." Not if he composed the Quran. See 40/75.
002 49/8: "- - - Allah is full of Knowledge and Wisdom". See 40/75.
003 49/13a: "- - - We (Allah*) created you (man*) from a single (pair) of male and female - --". Adam and Eve never were, according to science. Besides if everything had started with just one pair, the DNA-variety had been too small to make the group viable in the long run = man had died out after some generations. (Actually science says that to have enough DNA variety + have a reasonable safety margin against dangerous illnesses, a group of animals (ot humans) should consist of minimum some 2000 members – and spread around some to reduce the impact of contagious illnesses – to be sure to be viable in the long run.)
004 49/13b: "And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things)." Not if he has and respects the "Mother Book" (see f. ex. 43/4) like the Quran revered in his heaven, and not if he sent down a copy of a book with that much wrong contents as a basis for his religion. See 40/75 and 41/12. Also see 4/176 – 27/6 – 27/44 – 48/26 – 49/1 – 49/16 – 49/18 – 57/3 – 64/4 – 65/12 – 67/13.**Besides: Have you ever noticed that the one who needs to boast – loudly and frequently –about how truthful he is, is the cheater, and the one boasting about his knowledge is the mediocre to rather, but not top, intelligent ones? – the really honest and the really intelligent persons never need to boast about those things. Real honesty and real intelligence makes itself felt after some time of close connection – if there is a need for boasting, something is wrong.
005 49/16a: "But Allah knows all that is in heavens (plural and wrong) and on earth - - -". Not if he reveres a "mother book" (43/4) like the Quran in his heaven. See 40/75 and 41/12.
006 49/16b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
007 49/18: "Verily Allah knows the secrets of the heavens (plural and wrong - some proofs or statements the Quran chooses) and the earth - - -". Not if he reveres a "Mother Book" (43/4) he has copied the Quran from, in his heaven". See 40/75, 41/12 and 49/16a above.
Surah 49: At least 7 mistakes.
SURAH 50:
001 50/1a: "- - - by the Glorious Quran - - -". A book with that many mistakes, contradictions, etc., and with so many hallmarks of cheating and deceiving (loose statements, invalid "signs" and "proofs", etc.) is not glorious. By the way the expression is an oath - swearing by the Quran. Hope the rest is true, if not it is a false swearing. Though in Islam in some cases false oaths are permitted - or can be forgiven if paid for).
00a 50/1b: "- - - by the Glorious Quran (thou (Muhammad*)) art Allah's Messenger". See 49/29.
00b 50/3: "What! When we die and become dust (shall we live again?)". Muhammad thought that at the Day of Doom all humans would be revived in flesh and bodily and not least mentally to be just the same humans that they were here on Earth except rejuvenated – Allah would assemble all the bones, dust, fluids and gas molecules you ones consisted of, and recreate your (former) body and soul from it (though in the shape of a young and goodlooking individual – but as the Quran talks little about your children in Paradise, it is unclear if babies and children that died were/are recreated as adults or not. It also is unclear if they will be self-sufficient in Paradise, or only members of your family) Believe it who wants to.
002 50/5: "But they (non-Muslims*) deny the Truth (the Quran*) - - -". See f. ex. 40/75 and 41/12.
**003 50/6: "- - - and there are no flaws in it (the sky*) - - -". The sky is two different optical illusions - by day one made by bending of sunlight, and by night by our inability to see the 3 dimensions at long distances:
1. As the sunlight by day hits the entire atmosphere and bends light all over, flaws are difficult to see by the naked eye. (There really are no flaws, but shimmering because of temperature differences is easy to see when you use a telescope – and by night sometimes the flickering of stars). Once more a natural occurrence the Quran says is because of Allah, without any proof. Another loose statement.
2. At night we see deep into the vacuum of space. There are no visible flaws in vacuum. Once more: A loose statement without real value - except for cheaters and deceivers.Any priest in any religion can say just the same about his god(s). Words are that cheap.Besides: How can there be flaws in optical illusions? And physically speaking: How can there
be visible flaws in vacuum?
004 50/7: "And the earth - we (Allah*) have spread it out - - -". The Quran tells the earth is flat - may be like a disk, but flat. Wrong.
005 50/11: "- - - and We (Allah*) give (new) life therewith (with water*) to land that is dead -- -". Land that comes alive just with water is not dead - it is alive with seeds and perhaps roots.
006 50/13: "- - - the bretheren of Lut (Lot*) - - -." This refers to the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, but it is extremelyclear that they were not his "bretheren". For one thing he was a stranger from very far away, and for another it is very clear from both the Bible and from the Quran that he was at odds with them – the connection was nowhere like a naturalized
"brother". Simply wrong.The only reason we can see for the use of this word, is that Muhammad wanted the situation
to fit into his statement that prophets were sent to their own people – "their own brethren". Wrong – and forgetting also about f. ex Jonah.
007 50/19: "- - - Truth (like in the Quran*) - - -". See 49/75.
008 50/37a: "Verily in this is a Message (the Quran*) - - - ." There simply is no message in it – not from Allah - until Islam really proves that Allah really said and did all that this refers to.
009 50/37b: "Verily in this is a Message (the Quran*) - - - (that is*) (the truth) - - -." See
40/75. There simply is no message in it, until Islam really proves that Allah really did all that.
*010 50/38a: "We (Allah*) created the heavens (plural and wrong) and the earth and all between them in Six Days". Flatly wrong – it took some billions of years.
011 50/38b: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
00c 50/38c: "- - - nor did any sense of weariness (from creating everything in 6 days*) touch Us (Allah*)." Why then has the week 7 days (the Bible tells the god rested the 7. day)?
Surah 50: At least 11 mistakes + 3 likely mistakes.
SURAH 51:
001 51/5: "(The Quran swears in 51/1 to 51/4 that) Verily what ye (Muslims*) are promised (in the Quran*) is true - - -". With so many mistakes, etc. – and even obvious lies – in that book, also this hardly is true. It at least will need solid proofs.
002 51/8: "Truly you (people/non-Muslims*) are in a doctrine discordant". Some may be yes, some may no. Among the ones in "may be yes" are the Muslims, as all the mistakes and worse in the Quran prove absolutely that something is wrong with that book and that religion.
003 51/9: "Through which (non-Muslims*) are deluded (away from the Truth)". As for truth, see 40/75.
004 51/20: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
***005 51/23: "- - - by the Lord (Allah*) of heaven and earth (the Quran/Allah is swearing by Allah!!*), this (the promise of Paradise*) is the very truth - - -". We have to hope so, as a false oat is not good in Islam either - but one can pay compensation, and if it was said thoughtlessly it may even be forgiven without (and if it is to defend or forward Islam, it is an obligation to do so if necessary). But for truths in the Quran see 40/75, 41/12 and others. (Sentences in the Quran that starts with "by" normally are oaths.)
006 51/30: "- - - He (Allah*) is full of Wisdom and Knowledge." See 40/75.
007 51/37: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
008 51/38: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
009 51/40: "So We (Allah*) took him (Pharaoh Ramses II*) and his forces, and threw them into the sea (where they drowned*)". For one thing they were not thrown into the sea, they went themselves (according to the Bible and not opposed by other places in the Quran) out on the dry sea bed, and then the water returned), but for another: At least Ramses II himself did not die by drowning and he also did not die until some years later, according to science.
010 51/41: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
011 51/43: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
**00a 51/47: "- - - it is We (Allah*) Who created the vastness of space." Here is a point that should be controlled: According to one of our sources, the word that is used in Arab is "samaa" which is said to mean "sky", whereas the Arab word for "universe" or "space" is said to be "al-kawn". We have till now been unable to check this for sure, but mention it because such dishonesty tells so very much if it is true – and we find half truths or cases of al-Taqiyya too often in Islamic media/books (though we had originally not expected it from a man like Yusuf Ali).
012 51/48: "And We (Allah*) have spread out the (spacious) earth - - -". From other places in the Quran we know the spreading out is like a carpet - and the earth is flat. Wrong.
*013 51/49: "And of every thing We (Allah*) have created pairs - - -". Very wrong. This only goes for multi-cellular beings, and not even for all of them – among primitive animals and even up to reptiles and fish you find some kinds that propagate asexually, and thus do not make pairs. Uni-cellular beings are not in pairs, and there are by far many more of them both in species and in total numbers. Any god had known – Muhammad not. Who made the Quran?
**014 51/50: "I (Muhammad*) am from Him (Allah*) a warner to you - - -." Here is one more of those really bad ones: Suddenly the book changes from Allah speaking to Muhammad speaking. But how is it possible for Muhammad to speak in a book that pretends to be billions of years old (from eternity – before the universe was created 13.7 billion years ago) or made by Allah in his heaven?
Surah 51: At least 14 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
SURAH 52:
001 52/5: "By (Allah is swearing*) the Canopy (heaven*) Raised High - - -". There is no canopy/material heaven, only optical illusions. What does it mean that Allah swears by something he should know did not exist??
002 52/11: "- - - those who treat (Truth (the Quran*)) as Falsehood - - -". At least it is not the full truth - see 40/75 and 41/12 and others.
003 52/36: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
004 52/44: "Were they (non-Muslims*) to see a piece of the sky falling (on them), they would only say:' Clouds gathered in heaps!" The sky is an optical illation (or actually two). A piece of an optical illation cannot fall. (It is clear from the text that it is not meant clouds, and it is clear from other places in the Quran that meteorites (shooting stars) are known - it really is a piece of the sky that is meant).
Surah 52: At least 4 mistakes.
SURAH 53:
*001 53/2: "Your Champion (Muhammad*) is neither astray nor being misled." All the mistakes, etc. proves that he at least was somewhat astray. Though all the hallmarks of a cheat, deceiver and swindler may indicate that may be he was not misled - those last 3 words may be true, as may be he was misleading.
*002 53/3: "Nor does he (Muhammad*) say (aught) of (his own) desire". It will take strong proofs to prove that surahs like no. 66 or no. 111 are worthy of and belongs in a revered Mother Book in Paradise - that may be has existed since eternity. And also to prove they are worthy a book revered by an omniscient and omnipotent god.
00a 53/5: "- - - one Mighty in Power (Allah*) - - -." But is Allah mighty in power? – there is not one single proof for that. Lots and lots of words – even big words – but not one single proof.
003 53/6: "(Allah is*) Endued with Wisdom - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
004 53/11a: "The (Prophet's (Muhammad's*)) - - -." But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:
1. Has the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.
A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention pretended to or claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and says that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories). Also see 30/40a and 30/46a. Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.
00b 53/11b: "The (Prophet's (Muhammad's*)) (mind and) heart in no way falsified that which he saw." If the Quran is fundamentally different from the Bible, and the Bible is not falsified according to science – in spite of Islam's not documented claims - what explanations are then left?
00c 53/18a: "For truly did he (Muhammad*) see - - -". How truly is it really? – in a book with this many mistakes and from a man with so suspect morality that not even his oaths are holy?
005 53/18b: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
006 53/26: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
007 53/28: "- - - conjecture avails nothing against Truth (the Quran*)". Actually that is the question concerning the Quran: How much is true and how much is conjecture - and how much is not even that? See 40/75 + 41/12.
008 53/31: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
*009 53/45+46: "- - - He (Allah*) did create (man*) in pairs - male and female - From a seed (the semen*) when lodged (in its place (a female womb*))." Muhammad believed the semen was some sort of a seed that could start to grow when planted in a woman. Wrong - or at best half the story. But Muhammad obviously did not know the other half - the egg cell - as the same story is told several times in the Quran. Actually this was the going zoology at the time of Muhammad - one did not know how conception happened, and did not know the egg cell. A god had known better. Who made the Quran?
*010 53/49: "- - - He (Allah) is the Lord of Sirius (the Mighty Star) - - -". Sirius it not very mighty, even if it may look like that from Earth. It is a dwarf compared to stars like Betelgeuse, Aldebaran and millions more. And just a firecracker compared to f. ex. the enormously potent Eta Carinae (borderline enormous for exploding, and expected to go supernova in the astronomically near future). Not to mention compared to the real giants.
**011 53/56: "This is a Warner (Muhammad*), of the (series of) Warners of the old". Muhammad impressed and impressed and impressed on his followers that he was one of a long series – though the greatest of all – of prophets (even though he per definition was no prophet, as he did not have the gift of making prophesies – he just "borrowed" that prestigious
title), as that gave him "weight" and prestige. And to belong to the one timeless "right" religion, also gave his teachings weight among the ones that believed it (Science have never found any traces of a religion like Islam anywhere or any time before 610 AD – if they had, you bet Islam had told about it.) But he in case definitely did not belong to the same series as the Jewish prophets, included Jesus – the teachings were too different. AND they made prophesies - real prophesies – which he was unable to.
Surah 53: At least 11 mistakes + 3 likely mistakes.
001 54/2: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
002 54/5: "(The Quran is*) Mature wisdom - - -". Hardly. See 40/75, 41/12 and others.
003 54/6: "Therefore (O Prophet (Muhammad*)!)" But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:
1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.
A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – andmost of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention pretended to or claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and says that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories). Also see 30/40a and 30/46a.Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.
004 54/11: "So We (Allah*) opened the gates of Heaven (here = the religiously defined Heaven as it f. ex. is written with capital "H", not a substitute word for the sky or clouds*) with water pouring forth". But the material heavens that Muhammad believed in, did not exist - and thus could not contain water.
005 54/15: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
***006 54/17: "And We (Allah*) have indeed made the Quran easy to understand - - -." See 54/32 below.
007 54/18: "The Ad (people) rejected (truth (the teachings of the Quran*)) - - -." Those teachings at best only are partly true – too many mistakes, etc.
008 54/19: "For We (Allah*) sent against them (the people of Ad*) a furious wind, on a Day of violent Disaster". Well something is wrong – and contradicting – as here it is said one day, in 41/16 it is said (several) days and in 69/7 is said 6 nights and 7 days.
***009 54/22: "But We (Allah*) have indeed made the Quran easy to understand - - -." See 45/32 below.
010 54/32: "But We (Allah*) have indeed made the Quran easy to understand - - -". This in a way is very correct – the language is plain and simple mostly, and the Quran itself makes it clear that one is to understand it literally. Also the statement that it is easy to understand, means that it is to be understood like it is written - if not it was not "easy to understand", (though many Muslims claim that verses that are wrong, are allegories – it is an easy way to use to flee from difficult questions)But it is all the same at least partly wrong – partly because there are so many places where it is difficult to guess which word is really meant. Separate books are needed to explain the Quran - there are many such ones. And if you read any of the good ones, you will find that even today there are many points in the book Islam has not been able to understand, and even many more points they still do not know the exact meaning of - or which one of two or more meanings is the correct one (though Islam tells that all possible meanings are correct ones -they call it "different ways of reading" to hide the facts that the book for one thing is unclear, and for another that there exist many possible varieties). But it is easy too see that Muhammad meant it was easy and not complicated to understand - and an omniscient god had been able to compose a book that was possible to understand and impossible to misunderstand or not understand, just like Muhammad claimed and surely believed and intended. Who composed the Quran?
011 54/40: "And We (Allah*) have indeed made the Quran easy to understand - - -". See 54/32 just above.
012 54/42: "- - - Our Signs - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
013 54/55: "An Assembly of Truth - - -". With so much wrong in the book and hence in the religion, this needs solid proof to be believed by us.
Surah 54: At least 13 mistakes.
SURAH 55:
001 55/2: "It is He (Allah*) Who has thought the Quran." See 40/75, 41/12 and others.
002 55/3: "He (Allah*) has created man". At least not like told in the Quran - see 6/2. Besides man was not created according to science - he developed from an earlier primate. If Islam says he was created, they will have to prove it.
003 55/10: "It is He (Allah*) who has spread out the earth - - -". We know from other places in the Quran that the spreading out, was like a carpet - Muhammad believed the Quran was flat. Wrong.
*004 55/14: "He (Allah*) created man from ringing clay like unto pottery". Wrong - but somewhat funny. See 6/2.
**00a 55/15: "And He (Allah*) created Jinns from fire free of smoke." Jinns are beings from old Arab folklore, fairy tales and legends relating to the old Arab pagan religion. Is just by coincidence that these beings in Allah's world – that according to the Quran are real beings –before only were known to the Pagan Arabs and not to any others, not even the real (?) prophets in the Bible? – and not to any of the other prophets the Quran claims were spread all over the world and to all times? Because no-one but the old Arabs and their neighbours knew about jinns. In a religion for all the world and made by a god for the entire world, they never manifested themselves any other place in the entire world than just in that area. What a lucky coincident that Allah finally choose just an Arab – Muhammad – for a messenger, so that he could tell the rest of the world what part the jinns play in the real religion. But it also is strange that except for things borrowed from the Bible and a little from neighbouring religions, there is nothing about or from the rest of the world in the Quran – and the Quran practically has no stuff from those pasts of the world, even though there have been prophets all over and to all times, according to that book. (Jinn often is translated with spirits (god or bad) - but it is wrong, because the Arab word for spirits is "ruh". Also other words for supernatural beings from other cultures are used for translation, but it is symptomatic that top translators do not translate the word, but use the Arab one - Jinns are a group of beings special
to Arab folklore and legends, and even the top translators do not find equivalent beings or names in western languages.)
*000 55/17: "He (Allah*) is the Lord of the two Easts and the two Wests." This cryptic sentence means the northmost and the southmost points of the sun during a year (the equinoxes) – in east and west. (We mention this because some Muslims try to find ways to use this sentence to prove that the Quran says the Earth is globular.)
00b 55/24: "And His (Allah's) are the Ships sailing - - -". We never heard about a god owning ships. It cannot be literally meant. But the Quran says it is to be read literally.
005 55/29: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
*00c 55/31: "- - - both ye worlds!" According to "The message of the Quran", the Arab word that is used here – "thaqalan" (not plural, but dualis of "thaqal") does not really mean "worlds", but is normally translated with "humans and invisible beings", but may also mean "men and women" in other connections.
006 55/33: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
**00d 55/56: The Muslim Paradise is quit like the Zoroastrian one (Zoroastrians mainly lived in Persia, one of the big trading partners for Arabia. The Arabs knew that religion – hardly as well as the Mosaic or the Christian religions, but at least superficially.) - except that the houries there were named paaris. (Also the Jewish and Christian hell may have got inspiration from the Zoroastrian one.)
Surah 55: At least 6 mistakes + 4 likely mistakes.
SURAH 56:
001 56/51: "- - - and treat (truth (the Quran*)) as Falsehood! - -". See 40/75, 41/12, and others.
002 56/57: "- - - the Truth (the contents of the Quran*) - - -". But the contents of the Quran at best only is partly true – too much is wrong.
003 56/70: "- - - We (Allah*) could make it (all rain*) salt - - -". Not without changing both natural and the physical laws. If Islam insists it is true, they will have to prove it - words are cheap.
004 56/80a: "A Revelation (the Quran*) from the Lord of the Worlds (Allah*) - - -". Can it really be so? See 41/12 - and 40/75. Impossible – no omniscient god would make/deliver a book with so many mistakes – not to mention keep it in his own Heaven as a revered Mother Book (13/39 - 43/4). Can this be a revelation from a god? Or the other way around: Can something producing so many mistakes, contradictions, so much invalid logic be lord of even one world? Also see 2/131 – 26/109 – 26/127 – 26/192.
005 56/80b: "- - - the Worlds." The Quran says there are 7 (flat) Earths – and the Hadiths place them one above the other and has named them. Wrong. See 65/12.
006 56/81: "Is it (the Quran*) such a Message that ye would hold it in light esteem?" This rhetoric question demands the answer "no". Wrong. With so much wrong in the book, it is correct to hold it in very light esteem – if in esteem at all, as everything in it needs to be documented to find out what is right and what is wrong in the book.
007 56/92: "- - - those (non-Muslims*) who treat (Truth (the Quran*)) as Falsehood - - -". There really is a question: What is true and what is false in the Quran - see 40/75 and 41/12 and others.
008 56/95: "Verily, this (the description of hell in the Quran*) is the Very Truth and Certainty". Why should what the Quran says about Hell be more true and certain than the rest of the book? See 40/75 and other places.
Surah 56: At least 8 mistakes.
SURAH 57:
001 57/1a: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
002 57/1b: "- - - He (Allah*) is - - - the Wise." Not according to all the mistakes, etc. in the Quran.
003 57/2: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
004 57/3: "- - - He (Allah*) has full knowledge of all things". Not if he had anything to do with the Quran - see 40/75 and other places.
*005 57/4: "He (Allah*) it is who created the heavens (plural and wrong) and the earth in six days - - -". It is not possible to doubt that Muhammad/the Quran means that it all took 6 days, except one time it took 8 days (contradiction). Wrong. It in reality took billions of years.
006 57/4b: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
007 57/5: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
*008 57/6: "He (Allah*) merges Night into Day, and Day into Night - - -". Wrong. It is the sun and the revolving of the Earth that does this - any god knew it, but Muhammad not. Then who made the Quran? If Islam still say Allah does it - or made the natural laws behind it -they will have to bring proof - - - and not just words or statements any priest can use for any
god, as statements and words are very cheap.
009 57/9: "- - - manifest Signs - - -". There are no manifest – sure – signs in the Quran. See2/99.
010 57/10: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
011 57/16: "- - - the Truth (the Quran*) that has been revealed - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
012 57/17: "- - - Sign(s) - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
013 57/19a: "- - - they (Muslims) are sincere (Lovers of Truth (the Quran*)) - - -". See 40/75 + 41/12.
014 57/19: "- - - Our (Allah's Signs - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
015 57/25: "- - - clear Signs - - -." See 2/99.
***016 57/27: "- - - (Allah*) bestowed on him (Jesus*) the Gospel - - -". For one thing is seems that Muhammad did not know there were 4 Gospels - he always used singular. Worse is that the Gospels were all written after his (Jesus') death. Muslims try to "save the day" by insisting that Allah used another Gospel which is now disappeared - a standard way for
Muslims to "explain" difficult points, and as normal without documentation. But in this case they may even be right - there may have existed an older one (the possible original for 3 of the known Gospels). The bad news is that we know that if it ever existed, also that one was written after Jesus was dead, because a Gospel is the story of Jesus' life and death and
resurrection, and it could not be written until after this had happened (and that possible Gospel in case means that there is even shorter time between Jesus and the first written Gospels).Muslims also never mention the other possible explanation for why the 3 are so similar: That the oldest have been model for the two others. (In this case there was no older Gospel they partly copied - and no claimed way out on this point for Muslims.)
Surah 57: At least 16 mistakes.
SURAH 58:
001 58/5: "- - - Clear Signs - - -." See 2/99.
002 58/7a: "- - - Allah doth know (all) that is in the heavens (plural and wrong) and on earth -- -". Not if the Quran is a copy of a "mother book" (54/32) he reveres in his Heaven. See 40/75 and 41/12.
003 58/7b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
Surah 58: At least 3 mistakes.
SURAH 59:
001 59/1a: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/2a.
00a 59/1a: "- - - He (Allah*) is exalted in Might - - -." Is he? There nowhere – absolutely nowhere - is any proof for his might or power. There are lots and lots and lots of big wordsand boasting, but not one single valid proof – not one. And PS: Who in the normal world are the ones that have to rely on big words and boasting? – the ones that lack true facts.
002 59/b: "- - - (Allah is*) the Wise." See 58/7 just above and 40/75 + 41/12.
003 59/16: "- - - the Worlds!" Muhammad believed there were 7 (flat) Earths. Wrong. See 65/12.
00b 59/21: "Had We (Allah*) sent down this Quran on a mountain - - -". Was it really an omniscient god that sent it down? See 41/12 and 40/75.
004 59/22: "Allah - - - knows (all things) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12 - and others.
005 59/24a: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22.
006 59/24b: "(Allah* is) the Wise - -". See 59/1 + 40/75 + 41/12.
Surah 59: At least 6 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.
SURAH 60:
001 60/1a: "- - - they (non-Muslims) have rejected the Truth (the Quran*) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
002 60/1b: "- - - the (Prophet (Muhammad*)) - - -." But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:
1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true - if not he is a false prophet.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.
A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – andmost of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention pretended to or claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and says that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories). Also see 30/40a and 30/46a.Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.
003 60/2: "- - - they (non-Muslims*) desire that ye (Muslims*) should reject the Truth." As for truth: See 40/75 and 41/12. As for the rest, may be the Quran is right – but for entirely different reasons from what that book claims. Islam in its pure Quranic form is a very destructive, inhuman and immoral religion, and when on top of that it is shiningly clear that the Quran is not a divine work, we do not want our descendants to end up in something like that.
004 60/5: "(Allah*) - - - the Wise." See 58/7 + 40/75 + 41/12.
005 60/10: "And Allah is Full of Knowledge and Wisdom." See 40/75 and 41/12.
006 60/12: "O Prophet (Muhammad*)!" But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:
1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.
A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention pretended to or claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and says that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories). Also see 30/40a
and 30/46a.Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.
Surah 60: At least 6 mistakes.
Sub-total till here: 1634 mistakes + 197 likely mistakes.
Comments numbered by 3 numbers (included 00 or 0) a few places followed by one small
letter = clear mistakes. Comments numbered by 00 or 0 followed by 1, 2 or 3 letters (big or
small) = likely mistake.
SURAH 61:001 61/1a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.002 61/1b: "- - - (Allah is*) the Wise." See 40/75 + 41/12 + 59/100a 61/5: "- - - I (Moses*) am the Messenger of Allah (sent) to you (Jews*) - - -." Allah or Yahweh? The Quran uses the name Allah for the god of the old Jews many places. Mostly we have not "arrested" it, but it is extremely unlikely to be correct as the teachings are too different.Another point: In the book "The Message of the Quran", certified by Al-Azhar Al-Sharif Islamic Research Academy in Cairo (one of the 2-3 top universities in the Muslim world on such subjects) in a letter dated 27. Dec. 1998, it is admitted rather reluctantly that there are no proofs for Allah, and that it is not possible to prove him. An additonal point here is that if there are no ptoof for Allah and impossible to ptove him, automatically there also is no proof for, and impossible to prove Muhammad's claimed connection to Allah.***003 61/6a: "- - - (Jesus said*) I am the Messenger of Allah - - -". If Jesus had said something like this about the known polytheistic god from a not too distant foreign country, for one thing he had not got many followers, and for another: The clergy had at once had an excuse to have him killed. This verse is composed by someone not knowing the religious and political realities in Israel around 30 AD.004 61/6/b: "- - - (Jesus said that he came for*) confirming the Law (of Moses*) - - -." What he according to the Bible said, was that he had not come to finish that law, but to fulfil the law and to save souls – which was not the same as he should confirm the old laws or wasprohibited from changing them or finish them. What he actually did according to the Bible, was making a new covenant between man and Yahweh that "de facto" changed or finished many of those old laws – a covenant Muslims never mention. To find the essence of it, read about "the Last Supper" in the Bible. (There were at least 12 witnesses to that supper, and they told about it to many afterwards.) F. ex. Luke 22/20.***005 61/6c: "- - - (Jesus said: I am*) giving the Glad Tiding of a Messenger to come after Me, whose name shall be Ahmad (another form of the name Muhammad*) - - -". This is quite a funny verse, as you meet Muslims that insists it is from the Bible. But there is not anything remotely like this in the Bible, and neither in the some 13ooo relevant scriptures or fragments found throughout the times, older than 610 AD – included some 300 from the Gospels - nor in the some 32ooo references to biblical verses in other known manuscripts. It is only to be found in the Quran. (The Bible also never - never - gives names when it foretells into the far future – also never about the name of the Messiah that was to come. Here you get a clear name – quite a break of the rule - - - and unbelievably convenient for Muhammad, the very man that told this. Believe it is a coincidence if you want.)**And it is worth remembering that it is quite common for makers of new sects or religions to connect themselves to a mother religion and bend that - or even highjack (parts of) it. The founder of the Amaddijja-Muslims is really one of the latest examples, and Mormons tell Jesus visited America during his last days on earth. Such things give roots, credence and weight to a movement.*Jesus told The Holy Spirit (also named the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of God, the Spirit of truth,or only the Spirit – like Allah and like Muhammad it has more than one name) should come shortly - which it did. And he told he himself should return once upon a time "to judge the living and the dead". But not a single word about any other - and not to mention not one with a foreign name the Jews would question.**We know of one place where Muhammad is mentioned: In the Barnabas Gospel - a most apocryphal book - according to one of our sources it may even be written at the caliph's court in Baghdad (not very strange if it then mentions Muhammad). At least it seems clear that the copy that present day copies are made from, is a late try to "connect" the religions. You need to make up proofs only if you have no real ones. Muslims sometimes tell you this "gospel" is a real one.But the standard explanation Muslims follow - without proofs: The Bible is falsified and the name Muhammad and the expectation of him taken out by bad conspiracies - people in that area hve a strong tendency to look for and believe in conspiracy theories (We have a private theory that the reason is that they never in their history have been used to relatively reliable information). But in that case:1. The life of the first Christians had been entirely different - and their time scale had been entirely different if any of them had heard about another prophet to be expected before the return of Jesus "to judge the living and the dead". (They would know the return of Jesus would take much longer time than they now believed, to give the new "prophet" time to work).2. The contents of the NT had been different -not least the letters had been different. It simply is a fairy tale made up to strengthen Muhammad's claim to be a prophet - like some other self-proclaimed prophets. (Rather ironic; as he did not have the gift of being able to make prophesies – he did not even claim or pretend he had it – he was not even a real prophet. Messenger for someone or something perhaps, but not a real prophet).3. ***The Muslims only backs their claim on one Greek word used in the Bible: "parakletos" which means "helper" – Jesus before he left Earth, promised to send his disciples a helper – the Holy Spirit (which arrived some days later – at Whitsun -according to the Bible (a story that is not negated in the Quran)).1. Islam claims "parakletos" is a misspelling for another Greek word "periklytos", which means "the highly praised one". In Aramaic "the highly praised" means "Mawhamana" of which the second part of that word as a verb is "hamida" (= to praise) and as a noun "hamd" (law or praise). If you then continue to Arab the names Muhammad and Ahmad (another variant of the name Muhammad) both derives from "hamida" or "hamd" according to Islam. Which to Islam and all Muslims is a strong proof for that "parakletos" in reality is misspelled and means "Muhammad" in the Gospel after John (f. ex. John 14/16) - Islam and Muslims have difficulties of seing the difference between a possible (and often unlikely) explanation and a proof when they wish a claim to be a proof. Here the claim is a not very convincing proof to say the least of it – and in addition:2. The word "periklytos" that Islam claims is misspelled – the only possibility they have to get the answer they want and desperately need (they need it desperately, because the Quran clearly tells that Muhammad is foretold also in the NT - - - and he is not there) – does not exist at all in the Bible, not to mention in the NT. It is not used one single time.3. The word "periklytos" also is not found one single time in all the some 13ooo relevant manuscripts and fragments science knows from before 610 AD. Neither in one single place or time, nor in one single of the many manuscripts. And as bad: Not in one single of the thousands of other old manusctipts that make references to the Bible. Not one single time.4. Worse: Neither is it found in any of the some 300 copies or fragments of Gospels older than 610 AD or in other manuscripts referring to the Gospels.5. *The word "periklytos" simply never was used in the old scriptures that became the Bible. The word that is used everywhere is "parakletos" –"helper" (and a helper was what the disciples needed). This goes for each and every known copy.6. **Beside: How could it be possible to falsify – as Islam claims – the same word the same way in hundreds and thousands of manuscripts – and how to find each and every "periklytos" in each and every of the many different manuscripts – spread over all those countries? – and on top of all: In a time with little travel and hardly any media!? Islam has a tough job proving their claim – and remember: It is the ones making claims that have to prove them, not others to disprove it. This often is forgotten when Muslims throw loose claims and statements around.7. *Muslims tries to explain that it could not be a question of the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit already was present. And the Holy Spirit was present or visited Jesus. But it was not part of the disciples – and that was what happened at Whitsun according to the Bible: They each got personal contact with the Spirit, and that was quite a change of a situation.8. *Muslims also say that as two different names for the Spirit is used (the Spirit of Truth and the Holy Spirit (you actually also have the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of God (1. Mos. 1/2) and only the Spirit)) it proves that John does not mean the Holy Spirit, when he uses the name "the Spirit of truth" – "the Spirit of truth" must mean the Muhammad that lies to his followers in the Quran ("miracles will make no-one believe", f. ex.) and advised his people to use al-Taqiyya or even break their oaths if that gave a better result. In addition to all the other wrong logic here, this claim is just as logical as to claim that the 99 names of Allah means there are 99 different gods, or the 5-6 or more names of Muhammad means there were 5-6 or more of him. The spirit simply is named by (at least 5) different names – and in addition it is absolutely clear that in the whole Bible there only is one spirit with a special connection to Yahweh.9. Jesus promised his disciples a helper –a parakletos. If he had meant Muhammad, how could Muhammad be their helper when they were all dead 500 years before he was even born??10. In the thousands of manuscripts older than 610 AD - the first point of time when Christians could get a reason for such a falsification - how was it possible to erase the word paracletos with the primitive means of that time, and fill inn the word perikletos cletos instead, in such a way that modern science are unable to find physical traces from the erasing, unable to find chamical differences in the ink that was used, and unable to see any difference of the letters (all people writed differently)?11. There only is one conclusion – the conclusion science has made long ago – possible to make is this: This Islamic claim – like many others – either is a lie (an al-Taqiyya?) or wishful thinking.Wishful thinking? – or a bluff? – or a lie/al-Taqiyya? At least science long ago has proved from the old manuscripts that it is not true – the Bible never was falsified on this point either. (But Islam HAS to find him somewhere there, if not the Quran is wrong on this for Islam very essential point). Also see 7/157.(As mentioned also the apocryphal (made up) "Gospel of Barnabas" sometimes is used as an argument, because there Muhammad is clearly mentioned (no surprise if the theory that it is made at the court in Bagdad is correct). The sorry fact, though, is that a made up gospel is a made up gospel (there are a number of them) – and it tells something about Islam's lack of arguments that they continue to insist that may be it is not made up, and therefore is a proof for Muhammad, when science is unanimous: It is one of the false ones. The only thing the "Gospel of Barnabas" in reality proves, is that Islam has no real documentation for their claim that Muhammad is mentioned in the NT, as they have to resort to that kind of argumentation).***But the most solid proof for that the Bible is not falsified, comes from Islam itself. If they had found one single solid proof for falsification of the Bible among all the many thousands of old manuscripts that exists THEY HAD SCREAMED TO HOLY HEAVEN ABOUT IT – and no-one has till now heard such a scream – not even after 1400 years!!!.**00b 61/9a: "It is He (Allah*) Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -". With all those mistakes in the claimed message, it is obvious that also this claim needs proofs –especially since an illness like temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) easily can explain both his fits, his sights (?) and his other experiences (?) – TLE often gives religious illusions like this (source among others BBC). Add some personal "inspiration" or cunning to solve personal and domestic problems, and add the contemporary wrong knowledge and science, and you have the Quran exactly – with all its mistakes and other weaknesses.**006 61/9b: "It is He (Allah*) Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad*) with Guidance - - -". A teaching based on a book containing unbelievable perhaps 3ooo+ mistakes, loose statements, contradictions, invalid "signs" and "proofs" + at least some clear lies and statements telling that Muhammad did not respect even his oaths too much, is not much of a guidance.***007 61/9c: "- - - the Religion of Truth, that may proclaim over all religion - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12. It is also worth to remember that normal people of today - and earlier times –would be reluctant with trusting or believing in a man with a CV like Islam tells Muhammad had: Robbery, extortion, lies, broken oaths, incitement to hate, incitement to suppression of all opponents, assassination of opponents, murder of opponents, mass murder, rape, betrayal, (30opponents from Khaibar invited to debate under promise of safe return - but 29 murdered on the slightest excuse, the last one managed to flee), incitement to war - and lust for women and for power. We have met Muslims excusing him with that he was a hard man living in a hard time, and that he was no worse than other warlords. May be so, but he definitely was no better either, and he pretended (?) to represent a good and benevolent god. Personally if we meet a man - or a god - telling he is benevolent, but has harsh damands or deeds, we any day and any hour believe his demands and deeds more than his words.The last part of the quotation also tells volumes about Islam.008 61/13: "- - - Glad Tidings - - -". Permission to steal/rob, suppress, rape, enslave, keep harems, murder, etc. which are central parts of the Quran – are those "Glad Tidings"? Direct orders to go to war and kill and suppress and enslave and loot and destruct - - - and perhaps become an invalid or dead, leaving your wife/wives widow(s) and your childten fatherless –are those "Glad Tidings"? Direct orders to concentrate only on religious knowledge (indirectly very clear in the Quran and directly and unmistakably very clear in Islam from very early – and totally dominant from 1095 AD and al-Ghazali, "the Greatest Muslim after Muhammad") – are those "Glad Tidings"? Total destruction of all advanced countries and cultures they met in Africa, Europe and Asia at least as far east as what was then India –destruction it took the locals at least 200 years to overcome (if ever) – are those "Glad Tidings"? The inhumanity in the war religion – are those "Glad Tidings"? The reduction of women to third class citizens – if really citizens – (Islam's claim that women were/are better off under Islam than before only is true for some parts of what is now the Muslim area, mainly in minor parts of Arabia – and even there it had not necessarily been true today if it was not for the suppressing factor of Islam) – are those "Glad Tidings"? The enslavement and suppression and mass murders/slaughtering of non-Muslims – were and are (see Muslims at waging war and terror even today) those "Glad Tidings"? What a war religion did and does to the societies and the personal soul – are those "Glad Tidings"? The suppression of thinking – all non-religious philosophy, and all religious non-conform (to Islam) thinking – are those "Glad Tidings"? Well, yes, for some Muslims – the ones of the warriors that survived in good health and became rich from looting, and the ones of the leaders that became rich in wealth and women from looting/slave taking and taxation plus became powerful, then and today. And for some ones longing for a strict religion for psychological reasons.**For everyone else it was everything from "Bad Tidings" to terror – and still is (just look at the backward societies it resulted in once the riches from looting came to an end except where they have natural resources to sell, like oil – and even worse when the sometimes hard taxation or pogroms of non-Muslim underlings, reduced the number and/or economy of those underlings = less tax possible. Look f. ex. at the development in India, China, Brazil of today – especially India and China were far behind the Islamic countries 60 years ago, but what has been happening during these years? Take away the oil, the money from outside the area and the ideas from outside, more or less forced on the clergy and the leaders from media and others – what has really happened in the Islamic area since f. ex.1950 compared to many other places?Yes: For everyone else it was and still is everything from "Bad Tidings" to terror. For Muslims the part about heaven is "glad tidings" – if it is true. Also killing, rape, enslaving, suppression and stealing are glad news for the right – or wrong – kind of Muslims. The rest of the tidings is from bad to terror also for them – hate, war, suppression of women, stagnant society, immoral moral, only religious knowledge really counts, servility under authorities, fight and be killed, etc. Even for Muslims the claim that Islam is glad tidings at best only is partly true - even if the religion should happen to be true. VERY far from "Do towards orhers like you want others do towards you".And especially so as Islam is a made up religion. And even more so if there somewhere is a true religion that Islam blocks its members from even looking for. The very best one can say about the Quran and "Glad Tidings", is that for some – some only -parts of it partly were glad tidings, and that for some others parts of it bring peace to the soul – like strong believers gain from ANY of the main religions. ***For all others – included the majority of Muslims – it was and is "Bad Tidings". As mentioned especially so if Islam is a made up religion. Which it seems to be from the proofs of the Quran and the claims and the life of Muhammad. There are many more like this claim –partly true for Muslims in a way, but terror for all others – in the Quran – f. ex. 2/119 – 17/9 – 33/45 – 33/47.009 61/14a: "- - - said Jesus - - - to the Disciples,' Who will be my helpers to (the work of) Allah?'" See 61/6 + 61/6 (2 pieces).010 61/14b: "Said the Disciples, 'We are Allah's helpers". See 61/6 + 61/6 (2 pieces).Surah 61: At least 10 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.SURAH 62:001 62/1a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.002 62/1b: "(Allah*) - - - the Wise - - -*)". Wrong if the Quran is representative for his wisdom.00a 62/2a: "It is He (Allah*) Who has sent (Muhammad*)". It is difficult to believe that an omniscient god sent a messenger with a message containing so much wrong, and a messenger taking so good care of himself.**00b 62/2b: "It is He (Allah*) Who has sent amongst the Unlettered a Messenger from among themselves - - - ". All Muslim literature say Muhammad was analphabetic, and use that for a proof for his inability to make up the Quran - not mentioning that many a good teller of tales in the old times were analphabetic. But there also are two other possible meanings of this verse: That his audience were unlettered persons ("- - - amongst the Unlettered - - -"), or that they were persons without a holy book.*As for Muhammads unability to trad: The statement is questioned: A man of good and not too poor family not knowing how to read and write? A rich widow marrying an analphabetic, knowing he was to run her business? An intelligent businessman with admission to learned men, with a drive for power, not learning how to read and write? It is not likely - but there are no neutral sources about Muhammad from that time. It will never be possible to find out for sure, one way or the other.003 62/2c: "- - - His (Allah's*) Signs - - -." There are no signs clearly from Allah neither in the Quran, nor any other place. See 2/99.**004 62/2d: "(Muhammad was to*) instruct them (the Unlettered Arabs*) in Scripture and Wisdom - - -" To instruct them in scripture, he hardly could be an analphabetic himself, but that aside: See 40/75 and 41/12.005 62/3: "- - - (Allah is*) Wise - - -". See 61/1 + 40/75 + 41/12.006 62/5: "- - - the Signs of Allah - - -." See 62/2 and 2/99 above.007 62/6: "- - - then express your desire for Death, if ye are truthful!" An impossible demand for pious Jews and Christians: For one thing life has its values for everybody. More essential for them: Life is a gift from Yahweh/God – to wish to end it is to diminish a gift from Him. Most serious: To (wish to) end your own life, is a sin so grave that it automatically sends you to Hell.Any god had known this – Muhammad obviously not. Then who made the Quran? (In a way worse: Muslim scholars today know this fact. But they never mention it, in spite of using this argument. Dishonesty.)008 62/8: "- - - ye will be sent back to the Knower of things (Allah*) - - -". As for "the Knower": See 61/1 + 40/75 + 41/12.Surah 62: At least 8 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.
SURAH 63:00a 63/1: "- - - thou (Muhammad*) art indeed His (Allah's*) Messenger - - -." Well, the Quran says so – but very much of what is said in the Quran obviously is wrong. And can a man claiming to bringing ok messages for 12 years and then highly immoral and inhuman messages for 10 years (Islam changed much in and after 622 AD and the flight to Medina) to man – and using the messages as his platform of power – really be the messenger of a timeless and benevolent god?001 63/4: "How are they (non-Muslims*) deluded (away from the Truth)!" At very best away from partly truths - see 40/75 and 41/12. (But there is an impolite thought far behind in our brain: Who are really deluded when it comes to Islam? – the ones just listening to the imams without using their knowledge and their brain and asking no questions, or the other ones?)002 63/7: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.Surah 63: At least 2 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
SURAH 64:001 64/1: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.002: 64/2 "- - - it is He (Allah*) Who has created you - - -". According to science man was not created, but evolved from an earlier primate. At least man cannot have been created in more than one of the 13 different ways in which the Quran tells the single person Adam was created - see 6/2.003 64/3: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.004 64/4a: "He (Allah*) knows what is in the heavens (plural and wrong) and on earth - - -". According to the Quran, he knows only parts of it - see 40/75 and 41/12.005 64/4b: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.006 64/6: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". See 2/99.**007 64/7: "The Unbelievers think that they will not be raised up (after this life*)". Wrong. Islam wants to be a religion for the entire world, and most religions it met and meets have a second life. But what was difficult for the old Arabs to accept, was that Muhammad told that not only your soul - or something similar - was to be resurrected, but your complete and exact body and mental self, except that you are to be resurrected as a young and good-looking person - there is said nothing about people born with mental or physical handicaps, or babies/children in this connection. (There is one inconsistence, though: 2-3 places the Quran tells that your women in Paradise will be of "suitable age" - f. ex. 78/33. Why? - if everyone will be young and then of roughly the same age?) If bodily resurrection is believable or not, anyone will have to decide for himself or herself.008 64/8a: "Believe, therefore, in Allah and His Messenger, and in the Light (the Quran*) - - -". As for the Light, see 40/75 and 41/12. As For believing: See all the mistakes, contradictions, invalid claims/logic, etc. – not to mention highly immoral laws that are not made by any benevolent god.009 64/8b: "- - - the Light (the Quran*) which We (Allah*) Have sent down." See 41/12 + 40/75.010 64/10: "- - - Our (Allah's) Signs - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.011 64/18: "- - - (Allah is*) Full of Wisdom." See 40/75 and 41/12.Surah 64: At least 11 mistakes.
SURAH 65:001 65/1: "O Prophet (Muhammad*)!" But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that: 1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making eal prophesies.2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true. (If not he is a false prophet.)3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention pretended to or claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and says that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof forthat all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories). Also see 30/40a and 30/46a.Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.00a 65/7: "Allah puts no burden on any person beyond what He has given him." Well, there are people in Muslim countries, too, that cannot bear the burdens and flee – to other places or even from this life.**002 65/11: "- - - the Signs of Allah (are*) containing clear explanations - - -". Wrong. There is not one single of the "Signs" referred in the Quran, that has any value, neither as proof nor as explanation for a god or for a messenger (with the possible exception of some taken from the Bible, but they talk about another god, Yahweh). The reasons are that they without exception just are loose statements or are building on other invalid claims or statements, "signs" or "proofs" - totally invalid. A proof after all is "one or more proven facts that can give only one conclution". If a person consciously uses such invalid arguments, they are using hallmarks of a cheat and a deceiver. No god would use them.**003 65/12a: "Allah is He Who created seven Firmaments - - -". Firmament is another name for the heaven as we see it - mostly used about the night sky. The Quran so many places states there are 7 heavens or firmaments or tracts or just heavens in plural (at least 199 places in the Quran) referring to the 7 heavens, that there is no doubt what it means. It is totally wrong, though. (Even if Muslims try to explain it away with 7 layers in the atmosphere or diffuse arguments about the space as we know it today or statements about it being an allegory - the standard last resort for Muslims for explaining or "explaining" things that are impossible to explain - even though it very clearly is no allegory - clear at least to anyone not full of wishful thinking or religious inhibitions.*** 004 65/12b: "Allah is He Who created seven Firmaments (wrong*) and of the earth a similar number". According to Hadith the last part means 7 seperate Earths - one above the other. According to Muhammad ibn 'Abd Allah al-Kisa'I the last part means 7 layers down in the Earth according to one "explanation". But what the Quran really says, is 7 Earths – 7 flat Earths. No matter if you believe the Quran/Hadith or one of the "explanations" for this somewhat special geology/astronomy, the names of the "Earths" from top and down are:1. Ramaka,2. Khalada,3. Arqa,4. Haraba,5. Maltham,6. Sijjin,7. Ajiba.According to f. ex Al-Bukhari they are placed one above the other – easy as the Quran tells the Earth(s) is/are flat. The lower down, the more devilish life on the respective layer –and if you are a big enough sinner, you can fall down through them. It is not necessary to say it is all rubbish.005 65/12c: "- - - Allah comprehends all things in (His) Knowledge." See 40/75 and 41/12.Surah 65: At least 5 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
SURAH 66:001 66/1: "O Prophet (Muhammad*)!" But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.(If not he is a false prophet).3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not tomention pretended to or claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most ofwhat he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and says that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the Quran" – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories). Also see 30/40a and 30/46a.Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only "borrowed" that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.002 66/2: "- - - He (Allah*) is full of Knowledge and Wisdom." See 40/75 and 41/12.003 66/3: "- - - the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -." Wrong. See 66/1 above.004 66/6: "- - - a fire whose fuel is Men and Stones - - -". A fire is a chemical reaction –normally an oxidation – that releases heat, and so much heat that the reaction continues by itself and still releases enough surplus heath to make a visible flame. This does not happen with stones – and definitely not with the stones Muhammad and his congregation knew about. (There are Muslims telling Muhammad meant coal, but coal as a means of heating, was unknown in Arabia at the time of Muhammad and his congregation – which means it is very clear that his followers were meant to understand normal stones). Wrong.005 66/8: "- - - the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -." Wrong. See 66/1 above.006 66/9: "O Prophet (Muhammad*)!" Wrong. See 66/1 above.00a 66/11: The wife of the Pharaoh (Ramses II) is indicated to be a strongly believing Muslim. Now a pharaoh normally had a number of wives – and a mighty one like Ramses II not least (it is known he had 67 sons, but we have not seen the number of wives). They may have had different religions – especially the possible ones not born in Egypt. But it is utterly unknown to science that one of them can have been a Muslim 2000 years before Muhammad. Actually – and in spite of the Quran's and of Islam's repeated claims of being an age-old religion, science has found not one single trace of a religion like Islam anywhere or any time before 610 AD when Muhammad started his mission – and of really monotheistic religions only the Mosaic (Jewish), the Christian, and to a degree the Zoroastrians in Persia (+ the episode with the sun god of Akn Aton and the small monotheistic sect in Arabia, most likely inspired by the Jews and the Christians). Islam has to bring proofs.**007 66/12: "And Mary the daughter of 'Imran - - -". Once more this famous mistake.Imran was the father of Moses and Aaron - - - but they lived (if they are not fiction) some 1200 years before Mary, mother of Jesus. The pharaoh of Moses f. ex. was Ramses II according to science, and we know when he lived. Muslims try to explain this with that it was another Imran, but science agrees on that it is the same one, and that Muhammad here made a genuine mistake. This even more so as Hadith shows that Muhammad later was told about his mistake, and tried to "explain" it away, but without success.Surah 66: At least 7 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
SURAH 67:****001 67/3a: "He (Allah*) Who created the seven heavens one above another - - -". It is hardly possible to state the Quran's picture of our sky more accurately and clearly than this. Neither is possible to be much more wrong, especially when we add that according to the Quran the heavens are held up by invisible pillars, that the heavens are made from something material (if not you could build them and not fasten the stars, etc. to them), that the stars are fixed to the lowest heaven with the sun (?) and the moon between the heavens, and that the stars also double as shooting stars to chase away spying bad spirits. See 67/5a and 67/b below. Who composed the Quran - a god or someone not omniscient?002 67/3b: "- - - seest thou any flaws (in Allah's creation of heaven*)?" See 50/6.****003 67/5a: "And We (Allah*) have (from of old), adorned the lowest heaven with Lamps (Stars*)- - -". The Quran's picture of cosmos is taken from Greek and/or Persian astronomy, and as any secondary school child not blinded by religious indoctrination can see; it is much wrong. For one thing the heavens have to be made from something material to make possible fixing the stars to one of them. Besides: From Greek etc. astronomy we know that the planets, stars, sun and moon were fixed to 7 different heavens. As the stars according to the Quran is fixed to the lowest, they have to be lover than the than the moon. But what happens if you try to place say Betelgeuse or even Helios - our sun - below Luna - our moon?Further: Our rockets cannot go too high - they will collide with the material heavens. Muhammad said the Quran is perfect and without mistakes or flaws. The Quran says the Quran is perfect and without mistakes or flaws. Islam says the Quran is perfect and without mistakes or flaws. Muslims say the Quran is perfect and without mistakes or flaws. All of them say the Quran is perfect and without mistakes or flaws because Allah sent down a book he had made or which had existed forever - a book which is the revered "Mother Book" (f. ex. 43/4) in the heaven of Allah - and an omniscient god can neither make mistakes nor revere texts containing lots of mistakes, contradictions, flaws and hallmarks of cheats and deceivers. Also see 67/3 above and 67/5 just below. BUT WHAT DO ALL THOSE WORDS HELP WHEN THE MISTAKES, CONTRADICTIONS, AND THE FLAWS ARE THERE ANYHOW? AND WHEN ISLAM TELLS THAT THE TOTAL LACK OF ANY MISTAKE IN THE QURAN PROVES IT IS FROM ALLAH, WHAT THEN DOES MEGA BLUNDERS LIKE THIS PROVE?***004 67/5b: "- - -and We (Allah*) have made such (lamps (stars*) as) missiles to drive away the Evil Ones - - -". Well, well. Any secondary school child IS able to see that this entry from the same verse above, was wrong, he would laugh from this: Stars fastened to the lowest heaven and then doubling as shooting stars to drive away bad spirits or jinns!! Also see 67/3.No further comments. And none necessary,*** 005 67/10: "Had we (non-Muslims*) but listened or used our intelligence - - -". Islam often tries to tell that it is intelligence that makes Muslims believe, or intelligence that is necessary to see from the Quran that it is a work from a god. What at least is sure, is that anyone who uses his intelligence and has a reasonable minimum of knowledge of f. ex. history, geography, astronomy, archaeology, etc. will find a lot of mistakes in the Quran - if he not for some reason is blind or do not want to see. Also: If he knows a very small minimum of logic and the rules for using logic and for evaluating information, he has to see the lose statements, the invalid "signs" and the as invalid "proofs" - and may be he will be struck by the thought: Who uses this kind of arguments, except one who has no real arguments, and therefore has to cheat and deceive - f. ex. to gain followers and power?006 67/13: "He (Allah*) certainly has (full) knowledge - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.**007 67/19: "None can hold them (the birds*) up except (Allah) - - -". Wrong. What keep the birds up, are the laws of aerodynamics. (Of course Muslims can use one of their favourite last resorts: Declare that Allah made those laws. But then they will have to prove that - not just use cheap words that any priest in any religion can use about any god.) Also see 16/79.008 67/21: "- - - flight (from the Truth)." See 40/75 and 41/12.Surah 67: At least 8 mistakes.
SURAH 68:***001 68/4: "And thou (Muhammad or Muslims*) (standest) on an exalted standard of character - - -". Well:Seen in the Quran and the Hadiths:1. Lots of mistaken facts, and other mistakes. Not typical for an omniscient god.2. Lots of invalid arguments - hallmarks for cheaters and deceivers.3. Lots of "signs" - all invalid as proofs for Allah or for Muhammad's connection to a god.4. A numger of "proofs" - all invalid as proofs for Allah or for Muhammad's connection to a god. A few of the "proofs" even are scientifically wrong. Hallmarks for cheats, swindlers, and desceivers.5. A man gluing himself to his god and his religion – his platform of power.6. A prophet that in reality was no prophet – he had not the gift of prophesying. Muhammad did not even pretend or claim to have that gift, he just "borrowed" the distinguished title. (A few things he said, came true – but they were not given as prophesies.) A messenger ok – for someone or something or for himself – an apostle for the same, ok. But a person that does not have the gift of prophesying, is not a real prophet -Muhammad just "borrowed" an imposing title. Islam also claims that messenger is a more distinguished title prophet – but the title just means "one who is not implicated, but just brings messages from one or more to one or more others". He does not even have to understand whet things really are about. Besides: Why did Muhammad borrow the title "prophet" if the title "messenger" had been more distinguished? – simply because a prophet is something more: Messages like a messenger + prophesies - - - if it is a real prophet.7. A messenger being the chief of highwaymen from Yathrib/Medina - even in holy months.8. A messenger also living from extortion -(money for men kidnapped from f. ex. caravans).9. A messenger whose due was 100% of the robbed things if the victim gave in without a fight (albeit not all for personal use).10. A messenger permitting to take "spoils of war" - and 20% for him (albeit not all for himself).11. A messenger permitting to take slaves - and 20%for him (albeit not all for personal use).12. A messenger who received ca. 2.5% (from 0% to 10 %) of what you owned each and every year (if you were not too poor) – for the poor, but also for war and for "gifts" to attract followers, etc.13. A messenger using betrayal (f. ex. promise of safe return of a 30 strong delegation from Khaybar broken and 29 of them murdered).14. A messenger with special agreement with the god for having many women.15. A messenger teaching hate against nonfollowers.16. A messenger teaching and inciting war against non-followers.17. A messenger personally raping female prisoners/slaves.18. A messenger and his men - all with permission from their god to rape any female prisoner or slave that was not pregnant. It was "god and lawful".19. A messenger that initiated assassinations of opponents.20. A messenger that initiated murders on opponents.21. A messenger that initiated mass murder.22. A messenger teaching suppression of women and non-followers.23. A messenger with lust for power (easy to see from f. ex. Hadith, but even more so from f. ex. the way he glues himself to his platform of power, his god, also in the Quran).And not least: All this is from Muslim sources - what Islam itself tells about him, though in more glossy words. There is no excuse for becoming angry, because it is 100% true according to Islam itself. Yes, many will call that "an exalted standard of character". But not many of those would be non-Muslims. And how many of the Muslims can say it and fell honest?002 68/7: "- - - those (Muslims*) who receive (true) Guidance (the contents of the Quran*) - --". Can the Quran with all its mistakes deliver true guidance? See 40/75 and 41/12.003 68/8: "So hearken not to those who deny (the Truth)." See 40/75 and 41/12.004 68/15: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Signs - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.005 68/52: "- - - all the Worlds." Once more a reference to the 7 (flat) worlds of Muhammad. Wrong. See 65/12b above.Surah 68: At least 5 mistakes.
SURAH 69:001 69/9+10: "And Pharaoh, and those before him - - - (Allah*) punished them with an abundant Penalty." The Quran tells that this penalty for the pharaoh was drowning, but Ramses II did not drown. Neither did he die until several years after the possible exodus, according to science.002 69/16: "And the sky will be rent asunder - - -". How do you rip asunder vacuum and open space?003 69/43a: "(This (the Quran*) is) a Message sent down from the Lord (Allah*)"of the Worlds (Allah*)." Must be wrong. See 41/12 and 40/75. No omniscient god makes or revere or forward in his own name a book with so much wrong.004 69/43b: "- - - the Worlds - - -." But the 7 worlds of Muhammad do not exist. See 65/12b.00a 69/44 – 46: "And if the Messenger (Muhammad*) were to invent any sayings in our name, We (Allah*) should certainly size him by his right hand, and We should certainly then cut off the artery of his heart". Not if you – Allah – does not exist. Nor if you are far from omnipotent if you exist.**005 69/50: "But truly (Revelation (of the Quran*) is a cause of sorrow for the Unbelievers". True, but for wrong reasons: Because of all the war and blood and terror Islam has represented through the ages - and the answer is NOT that alsoother religions have caused wars, etc. as that does not make a hate, rape, suppression, robbery and blood religion like Islam one single iota better – and in most other religions it is done in spite of the real religion, not because of. And because many felt pity for souls going lost in a religion built on a book where something is seriously wrong. (May be their own religion(s) also were wrong, but all the mistaken facts, etc., in a book pretending to be from an omniscient god, prove that in Islam there really is something that is wrong - and it makes one doubt very strongly that it really is a divine revelation.Actually Islam is the only one of the big religions that directly proves itself – by means of their holy book – that it is something seriously wrong with the holy book and thus with the religion.006 69/51: "But, verily; it is Truth of assured certainty". Hardly - but words are cheap. See 40/75 and 41/12 - - - and others.Surah 69: At least 6 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
SURAH 70:00a 70/4a: "The angels and the Spirit ("ruh" in the Arab text) - - -." The word "ruh" is used a few times in the Arab text – at least in 16/2, 78/38, 97/4 and here. It really means "the Spirit" or "the Holy Spirit", but is f. ex. in 16/2 given another translation ("inspiration"). A number of Muslims wants it to be another name for the angel Gabriel (simply because it was he who was said to bring down the surahs to Muhammad, and it is said a couple of places that the "ruh" – the Spirit or Holy Spirit – brought down such ones, "ergo" the Holy Spirit = the angel Gabriel). But the logic is not correct – by means of the rules of logical deductions it is possible only to say they may be the same. And here is another piece of information that makes that deduction unlikely or impossible: The "ruh" – the Holy Spirit" - is not included among the angels. Neither is it the other places – which makes it highly unlikely logically that the Holy Spirit = the angel Gabriel. (In the Bible it is clear they are not the same).001 70/4b: "- - - in a Day the measure whereof is (as) fifty thousand years - - -." A solid contradiction to 32/5 and 22/47 which both say 1000 years.002 70/39: "For We (Allah*) have created them (humans*) out of (base matter) they know! " Man was not created; he evolved from an earlier primate. Any god had known. Also see 6/2 -Adam could not be created in a dozen different ways.Surah 70: At least 2 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
0a *71/6: "- - - (the non-Muslim's*) flight (from the Right (Islam*))." Can a religion building on the Quran with all its mistakes, contradictions, etc., be the right one? See 40/75 and 41/12? There is good reason for doubt. And if Islam is a made up religion like so many others -what then with all Muslims if there exists another one which is right and there is a next
world? - - - and they are blocked from looking for it.***001 71/15a: "- - - Allah has created the seven heavens one above another - - -". See 67/3a, 67/3b, 67/5a and 67/5b above.
002 71/16: "And made the moon a lamp in their (the heavens') midst - - -." The moon is not in the midst of the 7 heavens (see 71/15a just above) of Muhammad. Any god - even baby god - had known, Muhammad not. Who made the Quran?
**003 71/19: "And Allah has made the earth for you as a carpet (spread) out." The Quran describes the Earth flat - may be round like a disc, but flat. Wrong. (Similar description in 15/19, 20/53, 43/10, 79/30, 88/70).
Surah 71: At least 3 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
SURAH 72:
**00a 72/3: "- - - He (Allah*) has taken neither a wife nor a son." If Allah is not the same god as Yahweh, this may be true. But if the two are the same: Well, Jesus called him "father" many times and in front of thousands of witnesses. And as for a wife: In the really old Hebrew religion the god had a female companion - his Amat (source: New Scientist and others). But in the very male culture she was forgotten.
*001 72/8: "We (jinns – a being "borrowed" from pagan Arab religion, legends and fairy tales*) pried into the secrets of heaven, but we found it filled with stern guides and flaming fires." The Quran tells that Allah use the stars like shooting stars – flaming fire – to chase away bad spirits amd jinns wanting to spy on heaven. No comments should be necessary.
002 72/9: "- - - flaming fire - - -." See 72/8 just above.
003 72/13: "- - - listened to the Guidance (of the Quran*) - - -". As for guidance from the Quran: See 41/12 and 40/75.
Surah 72: At least 3 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
SURAH 73:
001 73/11: "- - - deny the Truth (of the Quran*) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
00a 73/15: "We have sent to you (O men!) a Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -". Would an omniscient god send a messenger teaching a religion containing lots of mistakes and lots of hallmarks of a cheat and a deceiver? Islam will have to prove it - not only the usual undocumented claims.
002 73/16: "- - - We (Allah*) sized him (Ramses II*) with a heavy Punishment - - -". For one thing: It is likely Ramses II got no personal punishment - he died years later. For another: We know from the Quran that the punishment was drowning - but Ramses II did not drown. Wrong.
003 73/18: "- - - the sky will be cleft asunder - - -." How can vacuum be cleft asunder?
Surah 73: At least 3 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
SURAH 74:
001 74/16: "- - - Our (Allah's) Signs - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
002 74/56: "He (Allah*) is the Lord of Righteousness - - -." A Lord making laws that f. ex. say that killing and raping and stealing are "right and good", and who says that a woman shall be strictly punished for indecency if she is raped and cannot bring 4 male witnesses to the very act, is not righteous – on the contrary: He belongs to the most inhuman, worst and most unjust beings in all the universe. The last mentioned law – about the raped woman – is among the very most unjust laws that have ever existed (may be together with the law that says that stealing/robbing, extortion and killing in jihad – everything is jihad – is "good and lawful"), especially as Allah (if he exists and is omniscient) knows she is not guilty. On many points the opposite of benevolent.
Surah 74: At least 2 mistakes.
SURAH 75:
**001 75/8+9: "(The day when*) the moon is buried in darkness, And the sun and the moon are joined together - - -". This is physically impossible the first some 5 billion years. And the day it may become possible, the Paradise as described in the Quran is not longer possible. Because - and not least: That day the moon will not be buried in darkness, but in intense light - and a day of doom and Paradise like described in the Quran will be impossible. That day both the Earth and the moon are buried inside the sun - if that happens (science is not quite sure the sun will balloon enough). But in any case the hugely swollen sun will make any place inside Jupiter too hot for a paradise on Earth or in the heaven over/around Earth - the Quran places Paradise there under a benign and everlasting sun. Also everlasting will be impossible and wrong, because science tells that in some 5 billion years the Earth either is inside the giant swollen, red (not yellow any more) sun, and sporting ca. 2000 - 3000 centigrades, or just above the then giant star and with a temperature of some 2ooo - 3000 degrees centigrade -hotter than in the flames of the Muslim Hell.
002 75/32: "- - - he rejected Truth (the Quran*) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
003 75/37: "Was he not a drop of sperm - - -?" No. He simply "was" not until a sperm cell and an egg cell had fused together. Any god knew this - Muhammad not. Sperm is no seed to plant in a woman to start growing like a pip of an orange.
Surah 75: At least 3 mistakes.
SURAH 76:
001 76/2: "Verily, We (Allah*) created man from a drop of mingled sperm - - -." Wrong. Neither man (see 6/2 and 75/37 just above), nor a man (see 75/37) was made only from sperm.
*002 76/13: "- - - (the moon's) excessive cold." The moon often is up at night. Clear nights -when you can see the moon - often are very cold in deserts like in Arabia. But the cold is not because of the moon - that is just a coincidence becauseof a clear sky. It is cold because Earth radiates its heath to space - something Muhammad could not know, but any god had known it. Who composed the Quran?
003 76/16: "- - - Crystal clear, made of silver - - -." This must be a mistake somehow – even Muhammad knew that something made from silver cannot be clear – transparent – like crystal. But if f. ex. Caliph Uthman made a mistake here when creating the official Quran, then how many more mistakes did he or others make?
004 76/21: "- - - and they will (in Paradise*) be adorned with bracelets of silver - - -." Well, in 18/31 – 35/33 the bracelets are from gold. A small detail – but an omniscient god does not get even the details wrong. A mistake and a small contradiction.
005 76/23: "It's We (Allah*) Who have sent down the Quran - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
006 76/30: "- - - Allah is full of knowledge and Wisdom." See 40/75 and 41/12.
Surah 76: At least 6 mistakes.
SURAH 77:
487
001 77/9: "- - - When the heaven is cleft asunder - - -." How can vacuum be cleft asunder?
002 77/15: "- - - Rejecters of Truth (the Quran*) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
003 77/19: "- - - Rejecters of Truth (the Quran*) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
004 77/20: "Have We (Allah*) not created you from a fluid (sperm) - - -?" No. See 75/37.
005 77/24: "- - - Rejecters of Truth (the Quran*) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
006 77/28: "- - - Rejecters of Truth (the Quran*) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
007 77/34: "- - - Rejecters of Truth (the Quran*) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
008 77/37: "- - - Rejecters of Truth (the Quran*) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
009 77/40: "- - - Rejecters of Truth (the Quran*) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
010 77/45: "- - - Rejecters of Truth (the Quran*) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
011 77/47: "- - - Rejecters of Truth (the Quran*) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
012 77/49: "- - - Rejecters of Truth (the Quran*) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
Surah 77: At least 12 mistakes.
SURAH 78:
001 78/6: "Have We (Allah*) not made the earth a wide expanse - - -?" We know from other places in the Quran that this expanse is flat, and may be round like a disk. But Earth is a sphere.
00a 78/7: "(Allah made*) the mountains as pegs - - -". Some Muslims say: Hip, hurray – here is a proof for Muhammad and the Quran: The science talks about the "roots" of the mountains – the mountains are like pegs! How could Muhammad know?! But mountain "roots" are not like pegs, but like bulges or distorted sheets (as mountains often are long and narrow – look at the chain Rocky Mountains + Andes f. ex.) or as distorted hemisphere. There exist deep pegs – or really sheets – pointing far down into the mantel (melted stone), but not in connection to mountains or mountain ranges really, though they may co-exist: They exist some places where large pieces of the Earth's crust – tectonic plates – are forced downwards because of movements of the crust (tectonic movement). But that has nothing to do with mountains (even though mountains may be secondary results of the movement) – it is something entirely different.
*002 78/12a: "And (have We (Allah*) not) built over you - - - firmaments - - -?" For something to be built, materials have to be used – the heavens also from other pieces of information must be made from something material. Wrong: The sky as we see it, just is an optical illusion – or actually 2.
*003 78/12b: "And (have We (Allah*) not) built over you the seven firmaments - - -?" Wrong: See 67/3 a, 67/3b, 67/5a and 67/5b. Simply and doubly wrong.
00b 78/12-13: "And have We (Allah*) not built over you the seven firmaments, and placed (therein) a light of Splendour (= the sun*)?" The sun is not placed among ("therein") the 7 firmaments.
004 78/19a: "And the heavens (plural and wrong*) shall be opened as if there were doors - - -". There is nothing to open in open space.
005 78/19b: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
006 78/28: "- - - Signs - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.
007 78/37: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
Surah: At least 7 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.
SURAH 79:
001 79/24: "(Pharaoh Ramses II*) Saying: 'I am your Lord (in this connection: Your god*), most High'". The pharaoh was not the "most high" god in the old Egypt.
002 79/25: "But Allah did punish him (Pharaoh Ramses II*) - - -". Wrong. We know from other places in the Quran that the punishment is said to be drowning. But for one thing Ramses II did not die by drowning, and for another thing: He only died years later.
003 79/28: "On high hath He (Allah*) raised its (heaven's*) canopy - - -". Heaven is no canopy. See 67/3a. 67/3b, 67/5a and 67/5b.
*004 79/30: "And the earth, moreover, hath He (Allah*) extended to a wide expense - - -". See 78/6. As this is one of the last places in the Quran where the Earth's form is indicated (flat), we may add that you will meet Muslims that insists that it is egg-shaped. This is taken from one of the translators that even Islam reckons not to be an outstanding one, Rashad Khalifa. He translates that the Earth is egg shaped. But the Arab original speaks about the ground that the ostrich flattens before it lays its egg = a flat area. Instead the clever Mr. Rashad Khalifa talks about the egg – and egg shaped!! And as this fits reality in a way (Earth in reality is a slightly flattened sphere - 21 km shorter diameter between the poles than at
equator (an egg is the opposite) and with an ever so slight pear-shape) – though not the Quran – this mistaken translation often is quoted. (You never find that translation from a good translator).
Surah 79: At least 4 mistakes.
SURAH 80:
695 80/19: "From a sperm-drop He (Allah*) hath created him (man*) - - -". Wrong. Neither man (see 6/2) nor a man (see 75/37) was created just from sperm.
Surah 80: At least 1 mistake.
Sub-total till here: At least 1739 mistakes + 212 likely mistakes.
Comments numbered by 3 numbers (included 00 or 0) a few places followed by one small
letter = clear mistakes. Comments numbered by 00 or 0 followed by 1, 2 or 3 letters (big or
small) = likely mistake.
SURAH 81:001 81/1: "When the sun (with its spacious light) is folded up - - -." A solid sphere cannot be folded up – it can become dark (in many billion years), which may be the underlying meaning, but it cannot be folded up. It seems that Muhammad believed the sun was a flat disc. Any god had known better.002 81/1+ 4 + 5: "When the sun (with its spacious light) is folded up (becomes dark*) - - - the she-camels, 10 months with young, are left untended (and*) When the wild beasts are herded together (in human habitations) - - -". In some 5 billion years the sun will become a red giant, according to science. The Earth will either be swallowed by it or circle just above its surface. If Earth survives, it will then have a surface temperature of some 2ooo+ C as the surface of a red giant is 2000-3000 centigrades - and all camels, wild beasts and humans will be gone billions of years before. The Earth itself will only be dry cinder. From then it will take many billions of years before the sun becomes dark (it will not go nova as it is too small by a factor of ca. 12 - it will become dark). Very wrong time factor. Any god had known.003 81/2: "When (at the Last Day*) the stars (here it is talk about the real stars, not shooting stars*) fall (on Earth*), loosing their lustre - - -". The stars cannot fall on earth - never according to science and according to reality. Theoretically Earth can fall into the sun – and may do so in 5 billion years time – but not "vica versa" (it will be the Earth that really moves, not the sun).004 81/19: "Verily, this is the word of a most honourable Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -." If a man that is a thief/robber, extorter, womanizer, child molester (Aishah through many years from she was 9 years old), rapist, betrayer, torturer, murderer, mass murderer, war monger and more is a "most honourable Messenger" - - - well, in that case we will not like to meet a normal messenger, not to mention an unhonourable one. It may seem that Islam have a somewhat special standard for ethics and moral.005 81/27: "- - - the Worlds - - -." Well, the 7 (flat) worlds of Muhammad simply never are found by science. See 65/12b.006 81/29: "- - - the Worlds - - -." See 81/27 just above and 56/12b.
SURAH 82:001 82/1: "When the Sky is cleft asunder - - -." How can vacuum be cleft asunder?
SURAH 83:001 83/6: "- - - the Worlds - - -." See 81/27 above.002 83/13: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Signs - - -." There exists no sign clearly from Allah, neither in the Quran, nor anywhere else. And see 2/99.
SURAH 84:001 84/1: "When the Sky is rent asunder - - -." Vacuum cannot be rent asunder. Any god had known.***002 84/15+16: "For his Lord (Allah*) was ever watchful of him (non-Muslim*)! So I (Muhammad*) do call to witness the ruddy glow of Sunset - - -". A serious one - here it once more is Muhammad who is speaking - in what is said to be the copy of the Mother Book (43/4) in Heaven, made of Allah and existed from eternity. How is that possible?003 84/23: "But Allah is full of Knowledge - - -." Not if the Quran is representative for that knowledge.
SURAH 85:001 85/9: "- - - heavens - - -." Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.002 85/19: "- - - rejecting (the Truth) (the Quran*)!" See 40/75 and 41/12.*003 85/21: "- - - a Glorious Quran - - -". A book with that many mistakes, contradictions, and other hallmarks of cheating and deceiving is not very glorious. Also see 40/75 and 41/12.Surah 81 – 85: At least 15 mistakes.
SURAH 86:001 86/6: "He (man*) is created from a drop (of sperm*) emitted - - -". See 80/19 + 6/2.**002 86/6+7: "He (man*) is created from a drop (of sperm*) emitted - Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs." Glorious: Muhammad did not even know that sperm comes from the testes - the "stones" - and placed the source inside the body and half a meter too high up!!!! And a place where it is too hot for production of semen. (The testes are in scrotum outside the main body because it needs slightly under body temperature to be able to produce semen). It is in accordance with Greek medicine – Hippocrates f. ex. thought the sperm passed through the kidneys. Even a baby god knows better. Who composed the Quran? And what is Islam – and it's Muslims - if the Quran is faked?
SURAH 87:001 87/3: "- - - and granted guidance (the Quran*) - - -". There is little reliable guidance in a book full of mistakes and hallmarks of cheating and deceiving. See 40/75 and 41/12.*002 87/19: "The Books of Abraham - - - ". Abraham had no books according to science –and definitely not in plural. Besides a nomad of 4000 years ago, hardly knew how to read. (There exists, though, "The Testament of Abraham" – a very much made up (apocryphal) scripture.)
SURAH 88:001 88/20: "And at the earth, how it is spread out?" – the flat Earth is indicated again. See 79/30 and others above.
SURAH 89 – 90:001 90/19: "- - - Signs - - -." Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.Surah 86 – 90: At least 6 mistakes.
SURAH 91:001 91/2: "By the Moon as she (the moon*) follows him (the sun*)". The moon does not follow the sun - it only looks like that as seen from the Earth. Does Allah live on Earth? At least it seems like the maker of the Quran did so.*002 91/4: "By the Night as it conceals it (the sun*)". The night does not conceal the sun -there is night because the Earth makes a shade. It is 180 degrees different from what Muhammad told: There is night because the night conceals the sun. Any god knew that. Besides: The night simply is lack of sunlight – it is physically impossible for the night to conceal the sun. Any god had known that, too. Then who made the Quran?003 91/6 "By the Earth and its (wide) expanse - - -". The Earth is no wide expanse (it is known from other places in the Quran that Earth is a wide, flat expanse), but a sphere.
SURAH 92:492**001 92/1: "By (start of an oath*) the Night as it conceals (the light) - - -". Wrong - it is Earth that conceals the light and causes the night. Any deity knows this - Muhammad not. (See 91/4).*002 92/3: "By (the mystery of) the creation of male and female - - -". No mystery for us, no mystery for a god - a large mystery for Muhammad. (According to Hadith he thought that if the woman climaxed first, it became a girl, but if the man climaxed first, it became a boy –and boys of course were best.) Who made the Quran?003 92/16: "- - - Truth (the Quran) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
SURAH 93 – 94 – 95:**001 95/4: "We (Allah*) have indeed created man in the best of moulds". Wrong - and it tells something that the Quran strengthens (with the word "indeed") a statement - a loose one as so often - that is wrong. Man is far from made in the best of moulds. Many "construction details" could have been better - our ability to stand wear and tear f. ex., and our ability to see in the dark, and more. Also our ability to tackle illnesses is far from perfect - and if our brain could think of more than one thing at a time, we would be more efficient. Etc., etc., etc.Surah 91 – 95: At least 7 mistakes.
SURAH 96:**001 96/2: "(Allah*) Created man, out of a (mere) clot of congealed blood - - -". Neither man (see 6/2) nor a man (see 75/37) was made out of blood - congealed or not – even though some of the old Greeks believed so, and from whom Muhammad may have stolen this idea. But the start of a human or an animal - the sperm cell and the egg cell and then the zygote -are so small that it is not to be seen with your eyes only, in the blood and gore in a carcass or in a slaughtered animal. Muhammad believed that the semen was a seed which planted in a woman grew into a clot of blood that grew into a foetus. It may be worth mentioning that the statement in this verse, is like Aristotle's theory. But any god had known better. Who composed the Quran? And why do Muslims never mention that so many of the "facts" in the Quran are in accordance with Greek and Persian (wrong) science at that time?**002 96/11: "- - - if he (a man*) is on (the road of) Guidance?" Is there guidance in a book with more than 1700 points with mistaken facts, at least 200 likely mistaken facts, more than 100 linguistic mistakes in the Arab edition according to linguists, lots of loose statements and lots of invalid "signs" and "proofs" - the hallmark of cheaters and deceivers? Not to mention 300+ contradictions, 100+ abrogations and 400+ cases of unclear language in the Quran – the claimed lack of which is Islam's only strongly claimed (but never proved) proof for divine origin of the book!! - No; no real guidance. No evidence and no good guidance.003 96/13: "- - - if he (a man*) denies (Truth (the Quran*)) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.
SURAH 97 – 98 – 99 - 100:001 98/1a: "Those (non-Muslims*) who reject (Truth (the Quran*)) - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12.002 98/1b: "- - - Clear Evidence - - -". This means the Quran: See 96/11, 40/75 and 41/12.003 98/4: "- - - Clear Evidence - - -". This means the Quran: See 96/11, 40/75 and 41/12.004 98/6: " Those who reject (Truth (the Quran*)) - - -." With all that is wrong in the Quran, the book at best is partly the truth.Surah 96 – 100: At least 7 mistakes.
SURAH 101 – 102 – 103:
001 103/3: "- - - teaching of the Truth - - -". See 40/75 and 41/12 - - - and others.
SURAH 104 – 105:
001 105/3+4: "- - - Han (Allah*) sent against them Flights of Birds, Striking them with stones of baked clay." This refers to an attack from Abyssinia in 570 AD. The vice king Abrhah or Abrah, lost much of his army because of a virulent illness - perhaps smallpox - and had to return home without attacking Mecca. The troops were NOT killed by stones from birds.
Muslim scholars often agree this is unlikely, but sometimes try to "explain" the clear text and the as clear mistake away by some linguistic gymnastics that includes that the Arab word for stone and the one for writings are not dissimilar, and if they think that these words have been mixed up (in a holy book sent down by Allah, and without mistakes), and then say the meaning is metaphorical (in a book the Allah says shall be understood as it is written), it may not mean stones, but hard physical strikes. Muslims frequently have to use far out "explanations" like this to try to camouflage mistakes. But if there is a linguistic mistake here, according to Muslims – how many more linguistic mistakes are there in the Quran?
SURAH 106 through 114:
00a 112/3: "He (Allah*) begetteth not - - -." Well, if Allah should happen to be the same god as Yahweh all the same, Jesus many times called him "father" and many times said he was the son of Yahweh – and lots/most of those times it is clear it was meant in the real meaning. In the NT it is said at least 163 times that Yahweh was father of Jesus, and at least 66 times that Jesus was the son of Yahweh. It is said nothing about how the relationship started. If true, there are 3 possibilities:
1. The age-old and mostly forgotten female counterpart of Yahweh in the very distant past of the Hebrew pre-history, may be true. Then the "Amat" of Yahweh may be the mother of Jesus.
2. Yahweh may have created him. As it is said in both the Bible and even more in the Quran, the god only could say "be" and it was. May be the god said "be" and Jesus was.
3. Also Jesus may have existed since eternity.
Surah 101 – 114: At least 2 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.
Total for all the Quran: At least 1776 mistakes + 213 likely mistakes.
In reality there are more. It is our educated guess that a real in depth analyses will end at 2ooo+ points with mistaken facts, as there are points we have skipped because the proofs were more complicated, there are the likely mistakes – a lot of them will turn out to be real mistakes – there are the borderline cases we have skipped because we were not sure, and not least: We hardly have seen all the mistakes.In addition there are the other mistakes, errors and wrongs. In this edition (2009) we have most of the mistaken facts. There are three categories that are missing:
1. Mistaken facts we have overlooked – there are sure to be some.
2. Mistakes that needs much explaining – we have omitted them if they were minor ones.
3. All the border-line suspect points we have omitted – at least some of them in reality are mistakes. This means there in reality are more that can be listed – especially likely mistakes. F. ex. all the times the Quran uses the name Allah for the god of the old Israel and all the times it claims Muhammad was the representative of a god – can an omniscient god have sent a representative that presented so many errors to his followers ?This edition is planned to be the final one as for mistaken facts – it is far more than enough to prove 100% and more that something is seriously wrong with Muhammad, with the Quran, and with Islam. We may add some more mistakes from grammar, orthography, etc., and some more contradictions, abrogations, etc., but for mistaken facts we think this is enough. Though if we are made aware of mistakes we have overlooked, they will be added.
If we have made mistakes - but real mistakes and not f. ex. just divergences with the Bible - we have
not found, please inform us by Internet and our answering box. We will add them later.
Fact errors At least 1776 (+ overlooked)
Likely fact errors At least 213 (+ overlooked)
From other sources:
Linguistic errors in Arab texts Some 100
Contradictions Some 300
Sum Some 2400
Abrogations (correcting errors) Some 100
Unclear Arab language Some 400
Total Some 2900.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then there are:
Points positive to/demanding discrimination/religious racism At least 1280 (separate list)
Points of anti-integration (never mentioned in debates) At least 145 (seperate list)
Points positive or srtonger to violence/war/murder of non-Muslims At least 600 ("Verses of War in the Quran".)