"1000+ Mistakes in the Quran". The best of the proofs for that the Quran is not from a god, but made up by someone else?

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 + 300 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
(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 1 THROUGH 5 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.
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.
230
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
231
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, not
232
Allah – 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.
233
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.)
234
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.
236
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 2/89
above 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.
237
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
238
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
239
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.
240
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 to
Negev 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
241
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
242
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.
243
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 of
making 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
244
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.))
245
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 many
mistakes 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.
246
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.
247
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.
248
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 only
lawful, 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.
249
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.
250
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 - also from the allegories), but no
one knows the hidden meanings except Allah (= the possibly hidden meanings are not for
humans*)".
****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 Allah
until 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.
251
***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
252
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
because 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.
253
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
254
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
255
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.
256
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.
257
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 one from 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).
258
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
259
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?
260
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?
261
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.
262
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.
263
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 man
had 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.
264
005 4/47: (The Quran is) "confirming what was (already) with you (= the Bible, the Torah,
etc.*) ". There are too many basic 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), there is so much discrepancy in
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.
265
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
266
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 only claims 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.
267
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.)
268
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 the
excuse 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
269
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 mass
communications, 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.
270
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.
271
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
272
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
273
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
274
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.
275
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:
276
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.
277
***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.
278
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.
279
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.
280
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
281
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?
282
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?
283
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.
284
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 is absolutely 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.
285
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 –
286
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 child. 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:
1. They attract selfish, greedy warriors to a
robber "prophet's" army – and to his
successors'.
2. They attract inhuman warriors to a robber
"prophet's" army – and to his successors'.
3. They attract primitive warriors to a robber
"prophet's" army – and to his successors'.
287
4. 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.
288
017 7/54c: "He draweth the night as a veil o'er the day - - -". The night is just the absence of
light. 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 with the filling up of the Mediterranean Sea and the
Black Sea – which is not even scientific rubbish:
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
289
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
290
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 in
case 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
291
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 some
30% 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.
292
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.
293
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.
294
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
295
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.
296
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
297
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.
298
*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.
299
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.
300
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
301
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.
302
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:
303
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.
304
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.
305
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
306
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.
307
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,
308
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
309
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.
310
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.
311
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 a
contradiction 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.
312
***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.
II, CHAPTER 1, Subchapter 4, Section 3 (= II-1-4-3)
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 11 THROUGH 20
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.
313

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.
314
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 not fare 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 was small. 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
315
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
316
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
317
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.
318
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
319
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 the word 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 in
the 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.
320
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
321
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.
322
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).
323
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
324
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 good
proofs 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".
325
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.
326
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 no documentation 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?)
327
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
328
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 did
not 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 copy of) ". Mere humans like us thinks it is unlikely in the extreme
that an omnipotent and omniscient god has a book awash with mistakes 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
329
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
330
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.
331
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:
332
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)
333
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.
334
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.
335
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
336
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.
337
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.
338
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
339
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
341
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. Malaysia
or 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 –
342
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 to
believe 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
343
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
344
(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.
345
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 600
years 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.)
346
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 both
sceptics 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
347
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 (near
the 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).
348
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.
349
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:
350
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)
351
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.
352
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.
353
***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 Muslim
way 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 or
Muhammad. 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.
354
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.
355
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 for
Muhammad'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.
356
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.
357
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.PART II, CHAPTER 1, Subchapter 4, Section 4 (= II-1-4-4)
358
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 21 THROUGH 30
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 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 Muhammad
made 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.
359
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 the
stuff 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
360
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
361
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 the Quran 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,
362
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.
363
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).
364
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.
365
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
366
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.
367
018 22/54b: "- - - (the Quran) is the Truth from thy Lord (Allah) - - -." Wrong. No
omniscient god ever made, or revered, or forwarded, 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.
368
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?
369
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).
370
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.
371
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.
372
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.
373
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 to
374
Mary, 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).
375
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.
376
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.
377
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.
378
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".
379
**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. The stories 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
380
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
381
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.
382
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 more
efficient 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 faculties 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
383
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
384
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:
386
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.
387
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.
388
***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
389
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
390
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,
391
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". 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.
392
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
393
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.
394
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?
395
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,
396
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.
PART II, CHAPTER 1, Subchapter 4, Section 5 (= II-1-4-5)
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 31 THROUGH 40
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.
397
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.
398
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.
399
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.
401
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
402
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 more
vitamins, 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 – 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).
403
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
404
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
405
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.
406
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
407
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.
408
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 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.
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
409
(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: Try
to 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.
Surah 34:
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 some outright 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
410
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.
411
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
412
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.
413
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
414
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.
415
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.
416
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
417
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.
418
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 the Earth, 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 from Swedish): "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
419
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.
420
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. 1. Have the gift of and close enough
connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. 2. Makes prophesies that always or at least
mostly come true.
3. 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.
421
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 of
the 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
Ial- 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 necessary to 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 - not a 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.
422
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 and Christians))". 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).
423
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.
424
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:
425
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.
426
**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,
427
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?
428
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 alLah.
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.
429
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/Islam speaks 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.
430
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
431
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 is
logically 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?
432
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
433
(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.
434
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.PART II, CHAPTER 1, Subchapter 4, Section 6 (= II-1-4-6)
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 41 THROUGH 60
435
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 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
436
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 in
two 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.
437
**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?
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 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.
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
438
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
439
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.
440
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.
441
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.
442
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
443
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.
444
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.
445
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 much as 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 41/12
029 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:
446
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.
447
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.
448
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.
449
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.
450
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
451
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
452
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.)
453
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
454
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
455
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
456
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 extremely clear 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:
457
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
458
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:
459
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?
460
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.
SURAH 54:
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 – 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.
461
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.
462
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.)
463
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.
464
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. See
2/99.
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
465
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 words
and 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:
466
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 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 w 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
467
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.PART II, CHAPTER 1, Subchapter 4, Section 7 (= II-1-4-7)
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 61 THROUGH 80
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 61:
001 61/1a: "- - - heavens - - -". Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.
002 61/1b: "- - - (Allah is) the Wise." See 40/75 + 41/12 + 59/1.
468
00a 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 was
prohibited 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 30ooo references to biblical verses in other known manuscripts. It is
only to be found in the Quran. (The Bible also never - mever - 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.
469
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
470
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
471
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
472
Muhammad, how could Muhammad
be their helper when they were all
dead 500 years before he was even
born??
4. 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)?
5. 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.
473
**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, (30
opponents 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
474
– 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.
And especially so if 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
475
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?)
476
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:
477
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 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.
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
478
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 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.
002 66/2: "- - - He (Allah) is full of Knowledge and Wisdom." See 40/75 and 41/12.
479
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.
480
****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.
481
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.
482
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?
483
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 also other 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, proves 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.
484
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.
SURAH 71:
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
485
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:
486
**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 because of 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.
488
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.
489
Sub-total till here: At least 1739 mistakes + 212 likely mistakes.
PART II, CHAPTER 1, Subchapter 4, Section 8 (= II-1-4-8)
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 81 THROUGH 114
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 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
490
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.
491
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
200+ 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.
493
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.
494
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 2009 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.

Town council

Click here and start typing. Sed ut perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus error sit voluptatem.

Education

Click here and start typing. Sed ut perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus error sit voluptatem.

Tax guide

Click here and start typing. Veritatis et quasi architecto beatae vitae dicta sunt explicabo nemo.

Garbage and recycling

Click here and start typing. Voluptatem accusantium doloremque laudantium totam rem.

Utility bills

Click here and start typing. Ipsam voluptatem quia voluptas sit aspernatur aut odit aut fugit.

Community

Click here and start typing. Adipisci velit sed quia non numquam eius modi tempora incidunt.

"1000+ Mistakes in the Quran". The best of the proofs for that the Quran is not from a god, but made up by someone else?

"1000+ Mistakes in the Quran". The best of the proofs for that the Quran is not from a god, but made up by someone else?

SURAH 2:

Town council

Education

Tax guide

Garbage and recycling

Utility bills

Community

Advanced settings