Introduction - Muhammad Lying in the Quran


(This really belongs in Book K, but it is so essential for the reliability of Muhammad, of the Quran, and of Islam, that we include it as an extra chapter here in part II.)

List of the Surahs:

Muhammad lying in the Quran - samples

Surah 1

Surah 2

Surah 3

Surah 4

Surah 5

Surah 6

Surah 7

Surah 8

Surah 9

Surah 10

Surah 11

Surah 12

Surah 13

Surah 14

Surah 15

Surah 16

Surah 17

Surah 18

Surah 20

Surah 21

Surah 22

Surah 23

Surah 24

Surah 25

Surah 26

Surah 27

Surah 28

Surah 29

Surah 30

Surah 31

Surah 32

Surah 33

Surah 34

Surah 35

Surah 36

Surah 37

Surah 38

Surah 39

Surah 40

Surah 41

Surah 42

Surah 43

Surah 44

Surah 45

Surah 46

Surah 47

Surah 48

Surah 48

Surah 50

Surah 51

Surah 52

Surah 53

Surah 54

Surah 55

Surah 56

Surah 57

Surah 58

Surah 59

Surah 60

Surah 61

Surah 62

Surah 63

Surah 64

Surah 65

Surah 66

Surah 67

Surah 68

Surah 69

Surah 70

Surah 71

Surah 72

Surah 73

Surah 74

Surah 75

Surah 76

Surah 77

Surah 78

Surah 79

Surah 80

Surah 81

Surah 82

Surah 83

Surah 84

Surah 85

Surah 86

Surah 87

Surah 88

Surah 89

Surah 90

Surah 91

Surah 92

Surah 93

Surah 94

Surah 95

Surah 96

Surah 97

Surah 98

Surah 99

Surah 100

Surah 101

Surah 102

Surah 103

Surah 104

Surah 105

Surah 106

Surah 107

Surah 108

Surah 109

Surah 110

Surah 111

Surah 112

Surah 113

Surah 114



Some Mulims will murder anybody saying this (and we have got death warnings). To murder may frighten and change the balance of power, so that one win - but it does not change the truth.

But then Islam and Muslims are not interested in checking what is the truth. The thruth they are sure they already know - not because that anythingis proved, but because their fathers and Mullahs and imams, etc. tell and tell and tell that the Quran is the truth wheter its claims are right or wrong

That Muhammad lies even in the Quran is most revealing for the reliability for both him, the Quran, and Islam. And one more point: There are several points in the list below. ####Even one had been enough to prove that Muhammad's words in the Quran are not reliable. When he obviously lies about some things, how much more does he lie about?

This chapter you also find in our book about the Quran, as it is a most essential topic, and a topic most relevant also for the reliability of the Quran.


###001 2/224f: The problems with verse 2/224 - and a few similar verses + some similar Hadiths - of course are for one thing that it never is possible quite to trust a Muslim's (included Muhammad's) word in serious cases - he may see no sin in lying - and for another thing a Muslim has no reasonably reliable way of strengthening his words if he is not believed, no matter if what he says is the full truth. Also see 2/225a below. (That it also contradicts the Bible on this point, is highly unnecessary to say.

002 3/81f: "- - - then comes to you a Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -". A "foretelling" about Muhammad made by Muhammad. (A real foretelling had been a strong indication of something. But also a claimed "foretelling" has effect on his followers if the followers believe in it). A curiosum: The only place you find foretelling about Muhammad in the Bible, is in the Quran and in other Islamic literature - it does not exist in the Bible in spite of Muhammad's, the Quran's, Islam's, and Muslim's claims. Islam has a few quotes they have taken out of context. Read them in full context, and it is ever so clear that except for in cases of wishful thinking, those claims at best are mistakes, at worst - or perhaps most likely - are al-Taqiyyas (lawful lies) used because Islam HAS to find Muhammad there, if not the Quran is wrong and Allah a made up god - - - and Islam a made up religion.

003 3/94a: "If any, after this, invent a lie and attribute it to Allah, they are indeed unjust wrongdoers". Is this also the case if the Quran partly or all is made up, but attributed to Allah? If someone makes up a religion, he has a great advantage: He can lie and cheat and deceive as much as he wants, knowing there will be no punishment, as the religion is made up.

004 3/138a: "Here (in the Quran*) is a plain statement to men - - -". The interesting point concerning a statement like this, is not if it is plain, but if it is true. How can one without any proof relay on a statement built on nothing but loose words, and made by a very doubtful man - and made in a book full of mistakes, etc.?

But this statement also has relevance for all the claims Muslims make about all the points in the Quran they claim are not wrong - which the literal meaning is in those cases - but analogies. The Quran itself contradicts such claims by stating several laces that the text is plain and easy to understand.

Also see the chapter "Literal language in the Quran - according to the Quran" in "1000+ Comments on the Quran".


More down to the Earth: Muslims often explains away mistakes, etc. in the Quran with the claim that what is written there is not what is meant - it is a parable or an allegory or something. A book where you have to guess what is literally meant and what are parables - and what the parables in case mean - definitely is not easy.

######That the Quran tells - directly or indirectly, but clearly - that the texts in the Quran is clear, explained by Allah, and to be understood literally, you find f.x. these places: 3/7b, 3/138a, 6/114ca, 11/1b, 15/1d, 18/1d-e, 18/2a, 19/97b, 20/113b+c, 24/34, 24/54j, 26/2a, 27/1b-d, 28/2, 36/69e, 37/117c, 39/28b, 41/3da, 43/2a, 43/3c, 44/29b, 44/2b-c, 44/13d, 44/58b, 54/17a, 54/22b, 54/32a+b, 54/40a, 65/11f, and 75/19 Worth remembering each time a Muslim or Islam tries to "explain" away errors, etc. by claiming the text means something different from what it says. In such cases either the Muslim/Islam lies when he/she claims the text means something different from what it says (the claim often is that it is a parable or something), or the Quran lies when it says that the book uses clear texts where nothing else is indicated.

The listed points are all collected here under 3/7b and 44/58b.

Or perhaps Allah is so clumsy and helpless when he explains things, that he needs help from humans to explain what "he really means"? (Nonsense to say the least about such claims lying under such "explanations".)



####005 3/154e: “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 (anyhow*).” This is the "manifest" of predestination. And: This also is one of the points in the Quran where Muhammad knew he was lying. It is so obviously wrong, that an intelligent man like him knew this was not true. But he was a clever manipulator (“is it not more worth that I live among you, and spend the booty on the people not sure in their belief to make them stay in Islam?” f.x.) and he understood people. Lies like this worked because his followers were primitive and in addition wanted to believe. And for primitive, uneducated souls really believing mish-mash like this (it is easy to prove by statistics that it is untrue, if one are un-intelligent enough not to see at once that it is a lie) it was a mighty incitement – fighting in battles was not dangerous, because Allah had decided when you were to die, and at that time you would die whether you were in a battle or sleeping in your bed. It is worth noticing that even today this is the official point of view of Islam. To quote footnote 3/119 to this surah in “The Message of the Quran” (translated from the Swedish 2006 edition - not found in the English 2008 edition):

“(The) incorrect, heathen belief that humans by acting in special ways can avoid death (even for a time*)”.


Today it as said 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 as said is one of the points where Muhammad knew he was lying - he was too intelligent to believe in this. Actually Islam today back-pedals very much concerning predestination telling f.x. 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.x. many places connected to statements that when your time is out, you will die anyhow, and therefore you can as well go to war.

###006 4/40a: “Allah is never unjust in the last degree - - -.” Wrong. Examples: Suppression of others (non-Muslims) is “good and lawful and just” . The same is stealing and robbing if it is possible to find an excuse to call it jihad (to do things like this in the name of the god makes it extra disgusting) – and the same for rape of any not pregnant female captive or slave. But a 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 - nearly always impossible. Allah in the Quran at times is extremely unjust.

Another point is that this is one more of the places where Muhammad knew he was lying in the Quran. F.x. stealing/looting was normal practice in Arabia, but there is no way for the follower of a good and benevolent god to honestly believe that to steal or rob is just deeds. The same goes for hurting or killing others - f.x. in a war or fight not in real self defense. A third sample is taking slaves - impossible to justify morally (but easy economically if you see it only from your own side). F.x. even the old Greeks with their advanced and deep moral thinking, were unable to find a general moral justification for taking slaves. And rape - destroying other human's lives just for your own pleasure! But to Muhammad and the Quran and thus to Islam it is "lawful and good" and to be enjoyed (8/69). A cheap way for Muhammad to get warriors - and a nice life for many a Muslim man - but unjust to a high power - - - and no way for an intelligent man like Muhammad not to know this.

007 4/157j: "- - - those who differ therein (believe that Jesus was crucified*) are full of doubts, with no certain knowledge, but only conjecture to follow - - -". Good propaganda if the listeners were naive enough or eager enough to believe what they wanted to hear - but wrong information (no Christian believer doubt this point, something Muhammad ever so well knew).

008 5/46f: “- - - 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 many of all the additions made by the times by Jewish religious thinkers and leaders. This was more or less formalized during his last Easter, when the new covenant (f.x. Luke 22/20) was made. (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).

#########It is worth remembering that at least in 3/50a the Quran confirms that Jesus changed old Jewish laws. Especially it is worth remembering this all the many times Muslims claims that Jesus confirmed the old laws of Moses, without mentioning a whisper about that both the Bible and the Quran confirm he changed or terminated a number of them.

##############An extra juicy pint here is that surah 3 - where Muhammad says Jesus came to "make lawful to you (the Jews*) part of what was (before) forbidden to you" - is from ca. 625 AD. This means that already then he knew that Jesus changed laws. All the same he here - in 632 AD - he simply tells that Jesus was sent to confirm the Laws of Moses. ########A clear and documented case of Muhammad lying in the Quran - he knew better.

009 5/83a: "And when they (Christians*) listen to the revelations received by the Messenger (Muhammad*), thou (Muslims*) wilt see their eyes overflowing with tears - - -". Pure propaganda which was possible for Muhammad to use, as there were few Christians in the area, so that Muhammad's followers could not see it was not true. Today it is easy for all and every Muslim to see that Christians are not moved by the contents of the Quran, and especially not the ones who really has studied that book.

This surah is from 632 AD and by then Muhammad knew very well that Christians just did not storm to embrace his new religion - he knew he was lying in the Quran when he said this.

010 5/83g: "- - - their (Christians*) eyes overflowing with tears (from belief in the Quran*) - - -". Remembering the real points of view of the Jews in and around Medina (there were few Christians there) and that at this time (632 AD) most of them had had to flee, were made slaves or semi-slaves, or murdered by the many hundreds (some 700 one believe only from the Qurayza tribe) because they refused to become Muslims, one gets a bad taste in the mouth when reading dramatic claims like this. And one wonders what kind of naivety and religious blindness it takes to believe in fairy tales like this when one knows the truth - after all they had taken part in the atrocities and torture and enslaving and murdering themselves! But it makes it easy to understand why Muslims do not see what they really read in the Quran and the Hadiths: Indoctrination by the religion of the parents since baby age, parents and surrounding telling this is true, religious blindness, wishful thinking, a bent moral code, etc.

##011 6/28c: "But if they (sinners in Hell*) were returned (to a second chance on Earth*), they would certainly relapse to the things they were forbidden - - -". This is one more of the places in the Quran where Muhammad knew he was lying. There is not one chance that a man as intelligent and with so much knowledge about people as Muhammad, did not know that after really experiencing a place like Hell, each and everybody would do their outmost not to end there again - and after such a terrifying lesson, most of them would succeed. This even more so as such an experience would make more or less all of them believers, as they had got a solid proof for that the religion was true. It is nearly incredible that intelligent people - not to mention educated modern people of today - are able to believe a claim like this.

012 6/28d: "- - - they (non-Muslims*) are indeed liars". At least a clear message to Muhammad's followers - if it is true, is another question. Besides it is an ironic message from the only one of the big religions which accepts lies in the religion (f.x. Muhammad was too intelligent not to know he was lying when he claimed miracles would not make people believe - but he needed to explain away the lack of proofs for Allah), and as work tools - f.x. al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) and Kitman (the lawful half-truth) and worse, etc. - lies can be efficient.

#####013 6/35b: "(If you Muhammad could*) bring them (unbelievers*) a Sign (a proof*) - (what good?)". Again Muhammad's explaining away the questions for proofs for his claims. One more case where Muhammad knew he was lying when indicating that proofs would mean nothing. Jesus worked for three - 3 - years only and attracted huge crowds, partly because he proved his connection to something supernatural. Muhammad worked for 12 - 13 years in Mecca and attracted only a number of dozens of followers - not until he started as a highway-man and his followers could get good money and later power, did he start to get many followers. He knew ever so well that a few miracles had made - yes, miracles.

Muhammad was too intelligent and knew too much about people not to know that if there had been real proofs, many had become believers. One more place where Muhammad knew he was lying in the Quran.

###014 6/109i: “- - - what will make you (Muslims) realize that (even) if (special) Signs came, they (non-Muslims*) will not believe?” Wrong. If there were real proofs of a god - miracles - at least a good number of people would believe - that is a psychological fact (look f.x. at the Pharaoh’s magicians and at the results of Jesus' miracles). The sentence really is fast-talking to “explain” away why Allah/Muhammad was unable to produce unmistakable 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.

###015 6/111a: “Even if We (Allah*) did send unto them (non-Muslims*) angels, and the dead did speak unto them, and We gathered together all things before their very eyes, they are not the ones to believe, unless it is Allah’s plan”. This may be understood in two ways – both quite fast talk:

Another and strengthen variety of no. 7/120a and others - with Muhammad lying in the Quran.

Some of Muhammad’s audience questioned the obviously wrong logic and psychology in that clear proofs would not impress anybody, and needed a reason why not – and got the all-encompassing and ultimate answer to all difficult or unanswerable questions: It is Allah’s will - sometimes the fastest of all fast-talk.

This is one of the places in the Quran where Muhammad knew he was lying - produce some real miracles, and at least some will believe, and this even more so in old times with naive, uneducated, superstitious people, not as skeptical towards such things as people nowadays - it was easier to make people believe.

016 6/111b: “- - - they (non-Muslims*) are not the ones to believe, unless it is Allah’s Plan”. This is even worse than 6/107a above - Allah simply has made it impossible for non-Muslims to become Muslims, if it does not fit him. But still he condemns them to Hell!!! Predestination at its worst - perhaps except when luring people to their death or mutilation in battle.

No comment could possibly explain our point of view or distaste.

017 6/124b: "We (non-Muslims*) shall not believe until we receive one (proof*) (exactly) like those received by Allah's messengers". Wrong - the only thing they asked for, was a clear proof for Allah and his power, which Muhammad never was able to deliver. Here Muhammad has twisted the truth a little - lawful in Islam (this is a Kitman - a lawful half-truth) - to be able to explain it away and to be able to make his opponents look bad.

Not a proved lie from Muhammad in the Quran, as one or a few can have said so. But a very likely one, especially as the Quran says every leader said the same, which is highly unlikely.)

##018 7/29d:"- - - He (Allah*) created you - - -". There must be at least a hundred places in the Quran where Muhammad takes a natural phenomenon and claims it is Allah who is behind it. This for:

Glorification of his god.

Indication of his god's existence.

"Sign" - which in "Quran-speak" indicates proof - for his god's existence.

"Proof" for his god's existence.

"Proof" for his god's power.

A few times as proof for other gods' non-existence ("Allah makes the sun rise in the east, your god cannot make it rise in the west - your god does not exist".)</0l>

All this have one thing in common: They are utterly invalid words as long as it is not proved it really is Allah who makes those things happen - something the Quran never even tries to prove. Not once. It just is cheap, valueless words any priest and any believer in any religion freely can use free of charge on behalf of his/her god(s) as long as they can evade all requests for proving anything - like the Quran always does. Here it in addition is an extra curious point as the Quran "always" demands proofs from others, but never proves anything - anything - of any consequence itself. (The same to a large degree goes for Islam and for Muslims today - twisted logic, loose claims and cheap words, often lots of them, but no valid proofs for any of the central questions. Not one of the central points - in reality claims only - is proved in Islam. Everything only builds on the words of Muhammad - a man even the Quran and the Hadiths prove to be a man of very doubtful moral, as soon as you omit the glorifying cheap words, and look at the realities; what he demanded and did and permitted, what rules he introduced, etc.) Also see 21/56c below.

It is up to you if you are able to believe that Muhammad was not aware of that at least some of these were made up claims/untrue.

###019 7/120a: After Moses made his miracle “the sorcerers fell down prostate in adoration” and were 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; disbelievers - even sorcerers - became Muslims because of one small miracle in his own story about Moses(!), 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. The same story in 20/69-70. That Muhammad told this story, also shows that he knew miracles works, and thus that he knew he was lying in the Quran when he told Allah did not send miracles because it would make nobody believe anyhow.

#020 7/157e: “- - - the unlettered Prophet (Muhammad*), whom they (Jews and Christians*) find mentioned in their own (Scriptures)”. Muhammad's words - and Muhammad at least knew that scholars who knew the Bible denied he was mentioned there - if they had believed he was in the Bible, they had followed him. (There is a claimed story about a Jewish scholar believing in him. This may be true - but what is one or two against the great majority who saw they in case were wrong? - or it may be a made up tale.) You often meet Muslims claiming or stating that Mohammad is foretold in the Bible - as normal for Muslims without documentation. They have to claim this, as it is said here in the Quran, and if there are mistakes in the Quran, the book is not from a god - an omniscient god do not make mistakes - and then Islam is a religion built on a made up "holy" book. 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 one in OT (5. Mos. 18/15+18) and one in NT (John 14/26), but there are some other "weaker" places, too. The ones below are the ones we have found (more or less copied from "Moses in the Bible?" in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" - ).

There is one point here which Muslims never mention: If Muhammad really was mentioned in the Quran, this had been a strong argument for him to use when trying to win over the Jews (and for that case the Christians, but there were not many Christians in the Mecca/Medina area, compared to the number of Jews) to his religion. As far as we can find, he never used it when speaking to Jews. He also seldom used this claim under other circumstances, even though also for his Arab followers such an indication for that he really was a prophet, would have had great value. A very likely reason for that he did not use such a valuable claim, is that he knew or at least suspected that it was not true, and that the Jews with their books easily would see this.

There is another serious point to this Islamic claim: Many of the Islamic scholars know the Bible quite well - this is obvious from the fact that they frequently quote the Bible when there are points there which they like or where they wants to express that the Quran has a better point of view on just this-and-this than the Bible. They thus have to know f.x. how the word "brother" - the main word in this case in 5. Mos. 18/15+18 - in the figurative meaning is used in the Bible. It is used figuratively at least 325 times in that book, and no-one knowing the Bible would get the idea that in any - not one - of all these places Arabs are indicated. It is very clear that practically always in OT it means fellow Jews (there are something like 5 exceptions - one place a king is calling another, friendly king his brother, 3 times it is specified one meant descendants after Esau (the brother of Jacob) and one time Abraham says it to Lot. Well, actually there may be one more exception (1. Mos. 25/18): "And they (the 12 sons of Ishmael*) lived in hostility to all their brothers". If this means they were quarreling between themselves, the meaning is literal. If it means they quarreled with the sons of Isaac, the meaning may be figurative or it may be literal - meaning the closest relatives (this is nearly the last time Ishmael and his descendants are mentioned in the Bible - after all they lived far off - - - and far from Mecca where Muhammad claimed they lived.) All the other times it refers to other Jews. It is not possible to study the Bible/OT and not see this. Also in the Quran the word is used figuratively - more than 30 times. The only time it refers to Jews there, is one case where Muhammad links hypocrites to Jews and claims they are brothers. Also Arabia and Arabs are mentioned in the Bible - some 13 times - and always in neutral words or as enemies, never as friends, not to mention brothers. All the same Islam and its scholars straight-facedly tell their readers and their audiences that "brothers" in 5. Mos. 18/15+18 refer to Arabs and thus to Muhammad. There only are 2 possible explanations for such dishonesty: An al-Taqiyya (a lawful lie) to "explain" Muhammad's perhaps slip of the tongue, or wishful thinking stronger than their intellectual integrity.

Nearly as bad is the Muslim scholars' position concerning the main claim in NT, John 14/26. It f.x. is both physically and biologically impossible that Muhammad could be a helper of Jesus' disciples, as he was born something like 500 years after they were dead. All the same they tell their audiences that John 14/26 is about Muhammad and a proof for that he was foretold and a prophet. (John 14/26 refers to the Holy Spirit which according to the Bible came to and in a way became parts of the disciples some days later at Pentecost. More further down.) Also see 7/157d just above.

021 10/60b: "- - - those who invented lies against Allah - - -". Was Muhammad one of them? - the Quran is not made by a god - too many mistakes, contradictions, cases of invalid logic and of unclear language, etc. - and it has to be made by someone. Well, if Muhammad invented him, he was in the nice position that he knew an invented god could not punish him, no matter what he himself did. (But to be fair: If the reason for his belief was an illness like TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy), he may have believed at least partly in his stories himself.)

###022 15/14: "Even if We (Allah*) opened out to them a gate from heaven, and they (disbelievers*) were to continue (all day) ascending therein (they would not believe*) - - -". This is one of the places in the Quran where Muhammad explains away the difficult question why he could prove nothing. ######And it is one of the places where he knew the fast-talk was a lie: If there was opened a gate to Heaven, and people knew it led to Heaven, there would have been a run for it, and "seeing is believing", at least in cases like this - and Muhammad was too intelligent and knew too much about people not to know this. The same goes for any intelligent person today - they know this would be the result. Even intelligent, brainwashed Muslims know this deep down.

023 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 which 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 or could in other ways prove his claims. 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.x. the magicians of Pharaoh), and he also had a good example in Jesus who got many believers from making miracles – some refused to believe no matter, but quite a number of others did after miracles made by Jesus (made also according to the Quran).


#####024 17/59a: "And we (Allah*) refrain from sending Signs (Quran-speak for "proofs for Allah"), only because the men of former generations treated them as false - - -".

This is Muhammad's standard "explanation" for why Allah would not and Muhammad himself was unable to give any real proofs for the existence of Allah or for Muhammad's connection to a god - Allah or someone else. And it is not a good one, as for one thing it obviously is not true:

There were stories both in the Bible and in the Quran - f.x. the sorcerers of Pharaoh Ramses II and Moses - about people believing in the performed miracles/real proofs (if true stories).

Muhammad knew about at least some of the stories about the miracles he performed, and how huge flocks of believers he got from the miracles.

It is not contra, but incompatible with, human nature and psychology that not a good percentage of the ones who witnessed real miracles/proofs would not come to believe.

Muhammad was intelligent and he understood people and how to manipulate them. He knew this. But he obviously was unable to find a better excuse - there are not many excuses which would work.

What is really strange, is that Muslims have not seen through this "explanation" centuries ago, and still are unable to do so.

This is a monument over the effect of brainwashing, of wishful thinking, of ability to refuse to see the obvious, of lack of ability/training in critical thinking, uncritical acceptance of authorities, and more. A monument over the weak point of the human brain.

There are some such cases in the Quran, the most prominent and serious may be the impossible combination of full predestination like the Quran states many places, and free will of man, and the as impossible combination of full predestination, and claims about any effect of prayers. And the impossibility of lots of mistakes, etc. in the Quran, and the claim that it is from an omniscient god.


025 17/59g: “And We (Allah*) refrain from sending the Signs (real proofs*) only because the men of former generations treated them as false: We sent the She-camel to the Thamud to open their eyes - - -”. Thamud is the only example mentioned here – a tale “borrowed” from old Arab folk tales.

One thing is that we have never been able to understand how a camel could be a proof of Allah. (But actually the camel is part of an old Arab folk tale: It came out from a cliff and became a prophet for a god.) But just read the Bible – which the Quran “borrows” (and twists) many stories from – and you will see that real proof has effect (which is most natural). That it will have no effect just is fast-talk with somewhat bent logic and psychology – one of those any intelligent man knowing something about how people think and reacts was sure to know was untrue.

For one thing: To use something which was claimed to have happened, but more than 2ooo years before, is not valid without documentation.

For another: Muhammad himself used the miracles Moses according to the Quran made and told they made all the sorcerers of Pharaoh Ramses II become Muslims.

For another: There had been several prophets in between - with Jesus as the star in this connection - but also f.x. Paul, even though he was not a prophet - who made miracles people believed in and attracted followers.

This "explanation" is invalid also according to the Quran (contradicted). ######What is worse: It is one of the places it is clear Muhammad knew he was lying, as it is clear from the Quran that he at least knew about the miracles of both Moses and Jesus, and that these made people believe.

###026 17/107a: “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. Or a stronger word: Propaganda. And what is worse: #####The one who composed this verse knew it was a lie – which also Muhammad knew when he made or recited it. It is one of the places where Muhammad lied in the Quran. 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 AD 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 who rather became fugitives or were killed, than to accept Islam – f.x. the Qurayza - 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 of the Qurayza tribe - the last big Jewish tribe in Medina - could have saved their lives and possessions by becoming Muslims in time. To a man they chose not to. This verse contradicts solid historical science and knowledge. And one more fact: Remember that Muslims not only are permitted to lie to defend or forward Islam, but are urged to do it "if necessary" (al-Taqiyya and Kitman - the lawful lie and the lawful half-truth).

Muhammad did not intend this to be slander, but the claim is slanderous against people who choose death or to flee instead of accepting Islam.

027 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!” Made up propaganda. See 17/107a above.

028 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 above - but then dishonesty is a part of Islam (f.x. al-Taqiyya - the lawful lie, Kitman - the lawful half-truth, broken words/promises/oaths (if necessary against expiation), and betrayal/deceit all are accepted "if necessary" or "if it will give a better result").

This is one more of the places where Muhammad knew he was lying in the Quran. Perhaps one or a very few did this, even though it is highly unlikely and not documented (except that a few converted to Islam, but not necessarily through tears), but "they" (= all or at least the majority) simply no.

029 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 above - but then dishonesty is a part of Islam (f.x. al-Taqiyya - the lawful lie, Kitman - the lawful half-truth, broken words/promises/oaths (if necessary against expiation), and betrayal/deceit all are accepted "if necessary" or "if it will give a better result").

This is one more of the places where Muhammad knew he was lying in the Quran. Perhaps one or a very few did this, even though it is highly unlikely and not documented (except that a few converted to Islam, but not necessarily through tears), but "they" (= all or at least the majority) simply no.


#####030 20/69-70a: The magicians of the pharaoh all became Muslims when they saw Moses performing real miracles. All the same the Quran - and Muhammad - 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 of the scenes which make it clear that Muhammad knew he was lying each time he used those excuses and “explanations”. That no-one would believe if they witnessed miracles, contradicts all psychological knowledge – strengthened by the fact that Muhammad himself told it worked. He also knew at least some of the miracles Jesus performed, and all the followers they brought him. Contradiction both of Muhammad's intelligence - he was too intelligent not to know it was a lie - of reality, and of science.


031 24/11-16: This refers to the incident with Aishah - Muhammad’s child wife - and a young man. The slander afterwards was not an obvious lie like Muhammad later liked to claim. That it was not obvious - something also his own initial reaction clearly demonstrated - was and is so obvious that it is clear an intelligent man like Muhammad knew he was not telling the truth when he said it was obvious. (He used many days to decide to believe her.) Also they were not really proved innocent - there only were some convenient verses in the Quran some weeks later, and the Quran far from is reliable. (But there is a fair chance that the two told the truth). Also see 24/11b above.

Muhammad in this case definitely did not behave like a gentleman, and it is very unlikely that his behavior did not "put wood to the fire" and provoke more and/or stronger slander. Not the right man to blame others for bad conduct.

The story also tells not a little about the person Muhammad.

032 24/12d: "This (charge against Aishah) is an obvious lie". It might have been a lie, but it was not an obvious lie, something Muhammad's own reaction very clearly prove - so clearly that an intelligent person like Muhammad understood he was lying when he used the word "obvious" - and it is not the only time he lies in the Quran. He also was intelligent enough to know that as it far from was an obvious lie, he here was slandering those he talked to.

###033 25/57a: “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", but plenty from the looting - Muhammad f.x. had estates 3 different places (Medina, Khaybar and Fadang), something which is never mentioned by Muslims, when they talk about how poor he was personally). Hypocrisy.

###*To be exact the "poor-tax" - zakat - according to Hadiths after Al-Bukhari (comment 1 to Chapter 24) is for 8-9 different purposes:

1. Help the "Fuqara" - a category of poor people.

2. Help the "Al-Masakin" - another category of poor people. (These two points = the purpose of helping the poor. Lump them together, and you get 8 purposes.

3. Paying 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 for its leader(s).

9. To assist travelers (often pilgrims to Mecca).

It seems that a sizable percentage was used for points 4, 5, and 8. (You also will find claims that there are 5 purposes for the zakat. Then they lump 1 and 2 together and omit something - often 6 and 8. We some places in this book have used that list.)

###034 26/46-47: "Then did the sorcerers fall down, prostrate in adoration, Saying 'We believe in the Lord of the Worlds - - -". For one thing this is not from the Bible. But much more serious in this connection is that #######this is one of the proofs for that Muhammad knew he was lying each time he explained away his inability to produce any miracle as a proof for his god and for his own connection to a god, with that Allah did not want because it would make no-one believe in Allah anyhow. Here Muhammad is telling - early in his career and before many of those "explaining" away - about a minor miracle which made all those sorcerers suddenly become ardent believers in just Allah. Also see 26/51 below.

###035 26/51: "Only, our (the sorcerers*) desire is that our Lord (Allah) will forgive us our faults, that we may become foremost among the Believers". For one thing this is not from the Bible. For another thing it is a contradiction to reality - one know there was no religion like Islam in Egypt around 1235 BC when the Exodus happened according to science - if it happened. But more serious: #####That Muhammad told that such an after all small miracle could make all the sorcerers such strong believers, proves very strongly that he knew he was lying each time he told miracles would make no-one believe. Also see 26/46-47 above.

As for forgiving from Allah: See 2/187d above.

036 26/197a: “Is it not a Sign to them that the Learned of the Children of Israel knew it (as true)?”

This sentence is dishonest - one of the places where Muhammad lied in the Quran. It is not proved, but Islam claims that one or some learned Jew(s) accepted Muhammad as a prophet. But only a few of the thousands of learned Jews in case. If the story is true, an honest sentence had said: “- - - a few of - - -” or at most “- - - some of - - -”. There is quite a difference between "- - - the Learned of - - -" and "- - - a few of the Learned of - - -". Dishonesty in a presumed holy book does not give a favorable impression. And why is dishonesty necessary? - and how many other points in the book stems from dishonesty?

As the great majority of the Jews - learned as not learned - denied that Muhammad could be a prophet even as they were robbed of their possessions, slaughtered in wars, and murdered “en masse” as helpless prisoners, or made slaves, it is absolutely sure that what the Jews - learned or not - meant about him, was no sign for Muhammad or Allah. This even more so as to become Muslim was the only way to keep one’s riches and later one’s life, as Muhammad gained power in Medina, and still most Jews refused him. Some “renegade” swallows make no summer.

A true religion easily can live on - and tell - the truth or what one honestly believes is the truth after honest examination. If a religion or any other story needs to use lies or half-truths or even al-Taqiyyas (the lawful lie) or Kitman (the lawful half-truth), not to mention institutionalizes al-Taqiyya and Kitman and Hilah, deceit, and disuse of even oaths (2/225, 5/89, 16/91, 66/2) as means to defend and forward the religion, one must ask why are lies necessary? - and the natural following up question: How much more of what they tell about their religion in reality is lies?

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.x. the Qurayza tribe - the last big Jewish tribe in Medina), one or a few exceptions may be expected. The same is the truth today.

There also is another fact here: Islam from Mecca (610 - 622 AD) is quite different from Islam from Medina (622 - 632 AD) - a fact NEVER mentioned by Muslims. Therefore, even if some Jewish and/or Christian scholars should have been inclined towards Islam of Mecca - there only is Islam's words for this - it tells little or nothing about how such scholars viewed Islam of Medina in say 632 AD.

No, an al-Taqiyya or at best a Kitman was and is no valid sign. ####But it definitely is a sign telling a lot about Muhammad, about the Quran, and about Islam.

"The Religion of Dishonesty"?

037 26/222b: "They (the evil ones*) descend on every lying, wicked person - - -". We may here mention that Muhammad sometimes lied - even in the Quran - and even accepted the breaking of oaths if that gave better results. Also not a little of his moral code qualifies for the word "wicked".

038 28/52b: “(Jews and Christians*) – they do believe in this (Revelation) - - -“. Flatly wrong. And flatly dishonest. A few became Muslims according to Islam, 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.x. what happened in and around Medina and Khaybar in the years after this surah was told (in 621 AD or later). Contradicted by reality and history. And: ####One more place where an intelligent man like Muhammad knew he was lying, because this he knew.

#039 28/53c: “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 about what you find in 28/52a above - and like in 28/52a also here Muhammad had to know he was lying, because this he knew was untrue. It may have been true for a few, but only for a few in case. Also see 28/48a and 28/48b. A few Jews and Christians may or may not have become Muslims - there only are Muslim sources for the claims - but the majority clearly said no, even in the face of persecution and murder (f.x. the Qurayza tribe - the last big Jewish tribe in Medina - or in Khaybar).

040 28/53h: “- - - indeed we (the Jews and Christians*) have been Muslims (bowing to Allah’s will) from before this”. No comments necessary – except see f.x. 28/48a, 28/48b or 28/52 above.

##041 33/16c: “Running away will not profit you (Muslim warriors*), if ye 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”. Well, this proves two things: It is not possible to escape predestination - no matter what Islam tries to tell you today that "it is not real predestination" (with predestination man has no free will, and it is immoral by Allah to punish for sins) - and that in spite of the Quran, you at least can change your destination with “a brief respite“. A respite that at least has to be for some hours or days - if not there had been newly-dead frightened warriors laying around the nearest tens and more kilometers from some battlefields - dead for no obvious reasons after fleeing from battle.

This in addition to that modern statistical science long since has proved this verse nonsense. This even more so as even if they had got "no more than a brief (respite)", the laws of chaos then had changed the future - and Allah's precognition was gone.

But Muhammad got many and terrific, but naïve warriors - - - and was so intelligent that he had to know he was lying.

###042 33/62a: “(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 wrongly 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 from wishful thinking that he spoke the truth, but no matter he was too intelligent not to know he had no reliable source for the claim. 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.)

043 33/62c: "- - - no change wilt thou (Muslims/Muhammad*) find in the praxis (of suppressing, slaying, and killing*)(approved) of Allah". Wrong to say the least of it. Read the NT - it is so different from the war religion of the Quran, that it is not a question of finding changes, but if there exist basic similarities at all. The praxis approved of Yahweh is extremely different from the one approved by Allah - that is to say; Allah has approved nothing if he does not exist.

##########This is one of Muhammad's lies in the Quran. But he knew the Bible so little, that in this case he perhaps was not sure he was lying - but he was too intelligent not to know that this was a claim he made without a reliable source.

044 33/70c: "- - - (always) say a word directed to the Right". The Arab word here translated with "the Right", is a word meaning "exactly correct" - true, relevant for the point, and straight to the point. ####Remember that this is how the Quran demands things should be said - and several places in the book says is how things are said in the Quran - , when they try to explain away mistakes, etc, by claiming it is an analogy or something - a very normal "explaining away" for Muslims to use. #####Not to mention the times Muhammad lies in the Quran or advices the use of dishonesty as working tools.

###045 34/47b: “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, but up to 10%) as I need money for bribes, for strengthening my religion and platform of power, and for war and myself and my large family (NB: There is reason to believe that he did not take from the so-called "poor-tax" (the 2.5%) for personal use*), and some for the poor.

#####242 34/50b: “If I (Muhammad*) am astray, I only stray to the loss of my own soul - - -.” Wrong to at least the 9. power (as there are better than a billion Muslims – or the 10. power or more if you reckon the ones through the times). If Muhammad was astray – ALL believing Muslims are astray – and all the mistaken facts, contradictions, invalid logic, etc., tell an ominous tale. The Quran also is contradicted 100% by any religious knowledge and by logic. ONE MORE PLACE WHERE AN INTELLIGENT MAN LIKE MUHAMMAD HAD TO KNOW HE WAS LYING, BECAUSE THE LOGIC IS WRONG.

046 42/23g: "No reward do I (Muhammad*) ask of you for this except the love of those near of kin". Well, except 20% of all stolen goods and enslaved people - 100% if they gave in without a fight - 2.5% (average) of all your belongings each and every year in tax (though it is likely Muhammad used little or nothing of just this point personally), plenty of women and undisputed and total power over you, + lots of warriors to fight and may be die for me, among other things. One of the in reality most and strongest contradicted and abrogated by reality verse in all the Quran. Good propaganda towards followers unable to think for themselves.

Two words: Hypocrisy. Dishonesty.

One of the places where Muhammad knew he was lying in the Quran.

###047 45/5c: “- - - the fact that Allah sends down Sustenance from the sky - - -.” This is one of the lies in the Quran. Not the claim that Allah sends down rain - in this connection this may be said to be may be or may be not true, or a guess. But that it is a fact. Until it is proved it is done by Allah, it is no fact.

048 48/16k: When you see the verse 48/16 as a whole, there is only this conclusion possible to draw: A man who says the Quran teaches a human and peaceful and friendly religion towards non-Muslims and some fractions of Muslims, either has not read the Quran, or is deceiving himself, or is lying - and knows he is lying, and this was said in 628 AD, long time after Islam had been changed to a religion of dishonesty, apartheid, blood, and war.At this time Muhammad knew ever so well that he was lying each time he said things like that - and each time he had said it earlier, and not corrected it by now. (But then lying "if necessary" to defend or promote the religion is no sin according to the rules for al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) and Kitman (the lawful half-truth) in Islam - the only of the big religions with rules for ok. dishonesty). And any man believing him either has not read the Quran, or is deceiving himself or is naïve.

The same is the only conclusion possible after reading the whole Quran, and especially the surahs from Medina - which on top of all dominates over the more peaceful ones from Mecca according to Islam’s own rule abrogation, as the ones from Medina are younger.

###If a book about politics or any other subject than religion (actually for Muslims religion is politics), inciting so strongly to hate, (religious) apartheid, suppression (of women and of all outsiders), stealing/robbing, rape, murder and war, it had been prohibited in all civilized and most little civilized countries. (It was proposed to prohibit it in the Netherlands, but it will not be politically possible to do it because of Islam's power).

<<< Go to Introduction 1

>>> Go to Surah 1

This work was upload with assistance of M. A. Khan, editor of and the author of "Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism, and Slavery".