1000+ Claims in the Quran - Invalid Unless Proven, Surah 3

 

SURAH 3: Al 'Imran (The Family of Imran)

(Medina 625 AD)

 

001 "In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful". Please read the surahs from Medina, the immoral parts of the Muslim moral code, the unjust/immoral parts of sharia, and the Quran's rules for lying, thieving/looting, enslaving, raids and wars, plus the rules for treatment of girls and women - free, captives, and slaves - and see if you agree. Always when there is a distance between words and corresponding demands and deeds, introduced rules, ideals and laws, etc., we personally believe in the demands and deeds, etc. Glorious words are cheap, demands and deeds, etc. are more reliable. Glorifying words and claims anyone can use and disuse. When you read, read what was demanded, advised and done and the introduced moral code, etc, and distrust the glorious words - judge from realities, not from propaganda.

002 3/2a: "There is no god but He (Allah*)". Well, what is for sure is that Allah is not the same god as Yahweh (if any of them exists) - the teachings are fundamentally too different. (The only possibility is if the god is strongly schizophrenic.) Also see 2/225a above and 6/106b and 25/18a below. Another thing which is for sure, is that the existence of Allah was and is never proved. And a third: The only basis for the claims about Allah, is the word of a man who would be accepted by no court in any real democracy as a reliable witness, as he believed in the use of lies (al-Taqiyya - the lawful lie, Kitman - the lawful half-truth, Hilah - the lawful pretending/circumventing), deception, betrayal, and even the breaking of words and oaths, but pay expiation if necessary (2/225a above, 5/89a+b, 16/91e, 66/2a below).

Both the Bible and the Quran states that the old Jewish and Christian god existed, even though the Quran wrongly mixes him up with Allah (the question of other gods - f.x. the Hindu ones - we omit here). Thus there are at least two - - - if Allah exists.

003 3/2b: "- - - (Allah*), the Living - - -". There only are Muhammad's words for this - a man believing in using lies (al-Taqiyya - the lawful lie, Kitman - the lawful half-truth, Hilah - the lawful pretending/circumventing), deceit ("war is deceit" - and everything is jihad), and even broken words/promises/oaths (2/224e-f, 2/224-225, 5/89a+b, 16/91e, 66/2a). And a man lying even in the Quran (f.x. 6/7a, 6/28c, 7/146f, and 20/70a to mention some - Muhammad was too intelligent and knew too much about people to believe that such proof would not have effect. Also see the chapter about Muhammad lying in the Quran in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" - http://www.1000mistakes.com ). And also a man who liked power, respect and women. Such men often have proved unreliable. (Not to mention: A man modern medical science suspects was mentally ill - TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy).)

004 3/3a: “It is He (Allah*) Who sent down - - - the Book (the Quran*) - - -". There never was any proof for that the Quran really was from a god. Never. And with a reason - no god ever was involved in a book with so much wrong facts, contradictions, invalid logic, unclear meanings, etc.

005 3/3b: “It is He (Allah*) Who sent down to thee (Muhammad*) - - - the Book (the Quran*) - - -". There also (see 3/3a just above) is not one proof for that Muhammad was connected to a god - neither Muhammad nor Allah was ever able to prove anything essential at all. There only - only - are Muhammad's words for everything - a man of rather doubtful reliability and moral even according to Islam (if you look at the reality behind the glorifying words).

006 3/3d: “It is He (Allah*) Who sent down to thee (Muhammad*) - - - the Book (the Quran*), confirming what went before it - - -.” Here is indicated that it confirms the Bible. But the Arab original is cloudier: “- - - ma baynayadayhi - - -“ – literally “- - - that which is between its hands - - -“. Is it correct to guess that is means “- - - what went before - - -“? Or is it more correct to guess it means “- - - what is left now - - -.”? Muslim scholars dispute about it – most agree to the first alternative, but some to the other. And the literal meaning is yet another. Clear language?

007 3/3e: "- - - in truth - - -". The Quran frequently claims - but no proofs - it is speaking the truth. But the one who normally is most eager telling how truthful he is, is the cheat and deceiver. What at least is for sure, is that with so many mistakes, the Quran at best speaks partly the truth only - and is from no god.

##008 3/3j: “- - - the Book (the Quran*), 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 confirmation 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 claims and statements - and today it is proved by science and against their will and wish and intentions even more strongly by Islam (by being unable to find even one provable falsification among some 44ooo relevant scriptures and fragments) that those statements are wrong. If there had existed any proof for falsification, Islam had screamed about it at once - but the only thing they serve, are claims. Also see 2/130 and 3/3e above.

##009 3/3k: “- - - the Book (the Quran*), confirming what went before it (the Torah and the Bible*) - - -”. (A3/3) here comments that it is not confirming the Bible as we know it today, but like it was originally. We quote: "- - - the fact - - - that in the course of the millennia the Bible has been subject to considerable and often arbitrary alterations - - -". To say the least of it: This is distasteful. #########Top Muslim scholars know that science long since has proved this claim is not true - it is a well known fact. They also know that Islam has proved the same even more strongly by not finding one single falsification in all those tens of thousands of old papers - and by not even being able to explain how the identical falsifications in very many points in each of may be hundreds of thousands of relevant manuscripts (some 44ooo have survived till today) spread over thousands of kilometers and many lands and cultures, and sects - and 2 religions - could be done - and how to make f.x. Jews and Christians and different sects make identical falsifications. The ones of them who know something about human nature, also know that to make bishops falsify the Bible (like Muslims claim - as normal for Muslims without documentation - happened in Nicaea) is exactly as easy as making imams or ayatollahs falsify the Quran, and for just the same reason: Strong religious belief simply do not work that way (this in addition to that the agenda for that council is well known, and changes of Biblical texts were not even mentioned).

Also: If Jesus and his disciples were good Muslim, like the Quran claims, the Jewish scriptures could not have been falsified by then (and f.x. Ezra is out of the picture), because Jesus used those book, and had told if they were falsified. Well, he talked against laws added in new scriptures by the Pharisees and other scholars, but not one word neither in the Quran, nor in the Bible, about falsifications in the old scriptures. This is so obvious that Muslim scholars have to know it: OT cannot have been falsified until after the year 33 AD. If then it had been true that the Bible was falsified in Nicaea in 335 AD, this means that all those falsifications had to be done during a mere 300 years, or even in the course a few weeks in 335 AD - without any strong believer noticed and reacted, and without any historian became aware of it!

But all the same they write thing like this!

In spite of that the maximum time for the claimed falsifications is 300 years, and the likely time a few weeks according to Muslim claims, they speak about millennia to make the claim sound more believable. Honesty?

All the same he calls f.x. "arbitrary alterations" a fact.

In spite of that it is well known that no proved falsification is found, they claim that falsifications are "a fact". Actually the fact that no falsification is found in some 44ooo old manuscripts and fragments + the fact that the texts in the modern Bible are identical to the old texts, is a strong empirical – yes, an absolute – proof for that the Bible is not falsified. Islam is "The Religion of Honesty"?

Al-Taqiyya (lawful lie) of the most obvious kind.

But then they have no choice if they want to save the religion. And to save the religion is more essential than to check if it is a true or a made up one.

But if there is a next life, the consequences in believing in an invalid or made up religion is so severe, that the most essential and basic question should be just this: 'Is the religion a true one?' instead of using al-Taqiyyas (lawful lies) as argument for that "what our forefathers believed in must be true" and for saving the forefathers' old and never documented beliefs - "taqlid" only built on an apocryphal book dictated by a somewhat "special" man.

###010 3/3m: "- - - He (Allah*) sent down - - - the Gospel (of Jesus) - - -." This is one of the really bad ones, as it is historically clear that the Gospels (there were/are 4, not 1 like Muhammad seems to have believed) were not sent down, but written by humans here on Earth. Most Muslims try to get out of the syrup by claiming they are speaking of an older one - one so old that even Jesus could read it as a child. Which shows they do not even know what the Gospels are: They are the history of Jesus' life, death, resurrection, and ascension to Heaven, and consequently could not be written until after all this had happened - actually the oldest one was written some 25-30 years after his death (= around 60 AD). Now, science says there may have existed an older one, but for very obvious reasons it cannot have been much older, not to mention old enough for Jesus to have read, and even more so read it as a child - not unless Islam claims full predestination, and then the free will of man disappears. This mistake simply is caused by the fact that Muhammad did not know the Bible - only legends, etc., and obviously was not aware of what the Gospels really are. And an older Gospel as source for 3 of the present ones, in case makes them even more reliable - an older, written source for them. (The other possible explanation for why 3 of the gospels are very similar, is that the oldest was used as a model for the 2 younger ones - a possibility Muslims never mention.)

011 3/3p: "- - - (- - - right or wrong)". “The Message of the Quran” here (A3/4) tells that the sign here refers to the Gospel (or Evangelion – both words mean “glad tidings”) which Jesus got. “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 which 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” (which confirms that it is not a special word, just another word meaning the same). Our remark about this simply is that absolutely nowhere there is found a trace of an Evangelion/Gospel which 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 of Jesus’ life, death, resurrection and ascension to Heaven, and could not be written until after this had happened. The absolute only place you find this claim that Jesus read the Gospel(s) – and as normal for Islam only as a not documented claim – is in the Quran (and later Islamic relevant(?) literature built on or around the Quran). But the Quran is 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 after the things happened, using mainly religious legends, etc. as sources. Islam will have to produce solid evidences to make this claim believable – not necessarily true, but at least believable.

Be sure: Had Muslims found any proof for falsifications in the Bible, it had been written with BIG words every relevant and many irrelevant places. But this kind of dishonesty from highly educated Muslims is very disgusting - and revealing. They know ever so well that Evangelion = Gospel, as this is a well known fact in religious science and wider. 

And: Never any proof for that the Quran - or Muhammad - really was from a god. Never.

012 3/4e: "(Allah is*) - - - the Exalted in Might - - -". He in case never clearly proved it.

013 3/4f: "(Allah is*) - - - Lord of Retribution". A suitable lord for the "religion of peace" in case?

014 3/5a: "From Allah, verily nothing is hidden on earth or in the heavens (plural and wrong*)". Often claimed in the Quran, never proved anywhere. It definitely is no proved verity/truth.

And if it were true, why then does he have to test even his followers? - he can learn not a thing if he already knows everything. Plus: Why did he send down(?) a book of a quality like the Quran, if he knew lots of it was wrong?

#015 3/6a: “He (Allah*) is it Who shapes you in the womb as He pleases.” Conception is a most natural process - one that even Muslims like very much to indulge in, sometimes whether the woman is willing or not - and if the woman is your slave or prisoner, rape is a right, “lawful and god”, for you - just ask Muhammad, who according to Islam (among others Ibn Ishaq) practiced rape himself - f.x. Rayhana bint Amr and - at nearly 60 himself - the 17 year old Safijja bint Huayay, just after he had tortured her husband Kinanan to death (as for Safijja one of his men, Abu Ayub, waited outside the tent in case she should resist so much that it became dangerous for Muhammad and he needed help - but he managed the rape without help).

The Quran often "high-jack" natural phenomena and uses them for glorifying "signs" or "proofs" for Allah - always without any documentation for that Allah really is the one behind the phenomenon.

016 3/6b: "There is no god but He (Allah*)". Well, what is for sure is that Allah is not the same god as Yahweh (if any of them exists) - the teachings are fundamentally too different. (The only possibility is if the god is strongly schizophrenic.) Then there are at least two gods if the old books tell the truth - if Allah exists. Also see 2/225a above and 6/106b and 25/18a below.

017 3/6c: "(Allah is*) - - - the Exalted in Might - - -". He in case never clearly proved it.

018 3/6d: "(Allah is*) - - - the Wise". Not if he made the Quran.

Another fact: If Allah delivered the Quran and all its mistaken facts and other errors, all its internal and external contradictions, all its invalid logic, all its unclear point, etc. there is a good reason to laugh - and laugh loudly - from claims like this.

########################################################################

###019 3/7b: “He (Allah*) it is who has sent down to thee (Muhammad or Muslims*) the Book (the Quran*); in it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they (all the verses which are to be understood literally*) are the foundation of the Book: others are allegorical. But those in whose hearts are perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking disorder, searching for hidden meanings, but no one knows the hidden meaning, except Allah.” But maybe this one is allegorical, too, because Islam and many a Muslim are hunting for the hidden meanings behind what they claim is an allegory as soon as there are errors and mistakes they cannot otherwise “explain” away. Is this because of “perversity” in their heart? – or perhaps because they do not have the brain, the guts and the backbone needed to meet the question: What does it mean that there are lots of mistakes and other wrongs in the Quran? – or: If all the mistakes and other wrongs in the Quran means that Islam is a made up religion like so many others – what then whit all us Muslims if there all the same is a Day of Doom? - - - and especially if there somewhere is a benevolent god whom Muslims have been prohibited from looking for?!

It is very clear here that the plain and obvious meaning in the texts mainly is the correct understanding. When you remember that Muhammad’s congregation mainly was uneducated and often naïve people, it is even easier to understand that this had to be the case.

- -". No god ever made a book as full of wrong facts, other errors, contradictions, unclear language, etc. 

######T

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 is 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 are clear, explained by Allah, and to be understood literally, you find f.x. these places: 3/7b, 3/138a, 6/114da, 11/1b, 15/1b, 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, 44/2b-c, 44/58b, 54/17a, 54/22b, 54/32a+b, 54/40a, 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 collected here under 3/7b and 44/58b, but also see separate chapter in our coming book (2014-15?) about Muhammad in the Quran.

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 it, if Allah is omniscient, because:

WHO CAN EXPLAIN SOMETHING BETTER AND MORE CORRECTLY AND COMPLETELY THAN AN OMNISCIENT GOD?

01: Add to this that 3/7 tells that "those in whose heart is perversity follow the part thereof (of the Quran*) that is allegorical" and that "no one knows the hidden meaning (of the allegories*) except Allah". -

02: Add that 3/138a and many others tell that the Quran "is a plain statement to men - - -" or similar. = in a language clear and easy to understand - not in a language where you have to guess where and how to guess the "real" meaning.

03: #########Add that 6/114da says:"- - - He (Allah*) it is Who hath sent unto you (Muslims*) the Book (the Quran*) explained in detail - - -". If Allah has explained everything in detail, who can then explain it better? - or explain the claim that the clumsy Allah meant something different from what he said? But that is one of Islam's and Muslims' standard "explanations" for "explaining" away errors and difficult points in the Quran: As what the text says is impossible, horrible, or something, Allah cannot have meant what he said, but must have told a parable, allegory, metaphor, or something, without indicating so, "but we intelligent humans can explain it better and tell you what Allah 'really' must have meant!!".

04: Add that 11/1b tells that "- - - (the Quran is*) a Book with verses of basic or fundamental (of established (literal*) meaning), further explained in detail (by Allah*)" (= the texts in the Quran are clear words from Allah).

05: Add that 15/1b declares that it is "a Quran that makes things clear" - not one which hide basic and other facts or rules behind words of allegories, which are difficult if are allegories or plain speech, and on top of all a guesswork to extract the correct(?) meaning from. The texts are meant to be understood literally.

06: Add that 18/1d+e state that“(Allah*) hath allowed therein (in the Quran*) no Crookedness.” = The language is clear and literal, without any tricks of hidden meanings. 

07: Add that 18/2a states that Allah has made it - the Quran and its language - "Straight (and Clear)". No comment necessary.

08: Add that 19/97b tells that "- - - We (Allah*) made the (Quran) easy - - -". = clear language - clear Arab - is used.

09: Add that 20/113b+c tells that in the Quran is "explained therein in detail some of the warnings - - -". In detail = in a language clear and easy to understand - not in a language where you have to guess where and how to guess the "real" meaning. Islam in 20/113c explains that (YA2638): "The Quran is in clear Arabic, so that even an unlearned people like the Arabs might understand and profit by its warning".

10: Add that 24/34b says the Quran is "verses making things clear". Especially for people like Muhammad's followers - little or no education - to make things clear needs a clear and literal and easy to understand language = in a language clear and easy to understand - not in a language where you have to guess where and how to guess the "real" meaning. AND AGAIN: THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT THE QURAN ITSELF STATES THAT ITS TEXTS ARE CLEAR AND LITERAL AND NOT TO BE MISUNDERSTOOD - THE TEXTS ARE TO BE UNDERSTOOD WORD BY WORD AND AS SAID: LITERALLY. ONE OF THE MANY VERSES TO REMEMBER WHEN MUSLIMS TRY TO EXPLAIN AWAY ERRORS AND PROBLEMS BY CLAIMING THAT THE MEANING IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT FROM WHAT THE TEXTS REALLY SAY, BY CLAIMING THAT IT IS A METAPHOR, AN ALLEGORY, A PARABLE OR SOMETHING (ONE OF ISLAM'S AND MUSLIMS' STANDARD WAYS OF FLEEING FROM MISTAKES AND DIFFICULT POINTS IN THE QURAN).

11: Add that 24/54j says: "- - - preach the clear (message)". It is very clear that the Quran means its message is clear and easy = to be understood literally. Only when the message has an obvious and easy to understand meaning, it is clear. 

12: Add that 26/2a says the same as 24/34b above.

13: Add that 27/1b-d says the same as 24/34b above.

14: Add that 28/2 confirms that "These are the verses of the Book that makes (things) clear" - no hiding of meanings, etc. like in parables, allegories, metaphors, etc., except where this is clearly indicated and explained.

15: Add that 36/69b clearly says that the book is "a Quran making things clear" = in a language clear and easy to understand - not in a language where you have to guess where and how to guess the "real" meaning.

16: Add that 37/117c says that the Quran is "- - - the Book which helps to make things clear". Comment like 24/34 above.

17: Add that 39/28b says: “(It is) a Quran in Arabic, without any crookedness - - -”. This means that the texts should be understood just like they are written - no crookedness in the meaning. This is one of the points worth remembering each time Muslims or Islam tries to "explain" away errors, etc. by claiming the texts means something different from what it says. 

18: Add that 41/3da as clearly states that the Quran is "A Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail (by Allah*) - - -". Is it then possible for humans to explain it better - or differently - from a god's explanation?

19: Add that 43/2a declares that the Quran is "the Book that makes things clear - - -" = in a language clear and easy to understand - not in a language where you have to guess where and how to guess the "real" meaning. Which also must mean the language is not hiding other meanings and it is intended that everything shall be meant like it is said, and easy to understand, plus it explains things in ways clear to see.

20: Add that 44/58b states that "Verily, We (Allah*) have made this (Quran) easy (and also in Arab*) - - -". = in a language clear and easy to understand - not in a language where you have to guess where and how to guess the "real" meaning.

21: Add that 54/17a declares that "We (Allah*) have indeed made the Quran easy to understand - - -". To guess what is clear texts and what are not - and what the parables "really" means - definitely is not necessary (except a few places where the book tells that this is (an easily understood) parable, or explains the real meaning). 

22: Add that 54/22b says: “And We (Allah*) have indeed made the Quran easy to understand - - -.” Anyone wanting to try to “explain” away difficult points like mistakes or invalid logic or contradictions by calling them allegories, parables, etc. should read this sentence. It even is written 4 times just in chapter 54, and thus a solidly cemented and nailed truth: The Quran is to be understood literally, and search for hidden meanings is only for Allah, and such search by humans only is for the ones “in whose hearts is perversity - - -.”

23: Add that 54/32a+b tells: “And We (Allah*) have indeed made the Quran easy to understand - - -.” Anyone wanting to try to “explain” away difficult points like mistakes or invalid logic or contradictions by calling them allegories etc. should read this sentence (and there are at least 24 more points in the Quran saying similar = the Quran really means that its texts are to be understood literally where nothing else is indicated). It even is written 4 times only in this chapter, and thus a solidly cemented and nailed truth: The Quran is to be understood literally and search for hidden meanings is only for Allah, and such search only is for the ones “in whose hearts is perversity - - -.”

24: Add that 54/40 states: “And We (Allah*) have indeed made the Quran easy to understand - - -.” Comments like 54/17/a, 54/22b, and 54/32a+b above.

25: Add that 75/19 tells that "- - - it is for Us (Allah*) to explain it (Islam*) (and make it clear) - - -". ##########Is it possible for humans to explain or make things more cleat than a god is able to do in his claimed holy book, sent down directly from him?

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

All this means that Muslims claiming that some texts in the book are not easy and clear and correctly explained by Allah (f.x. 6/114da, 41/3da, 75/19 - not to mention), but are allegories, metaphors, parables, etc. (a standard Muslim way to "explain" away errors and difficult points) in the Quran, tell that the Quran is wrong or lying all these places, each time they claim that this and this is not clear speech, but hidden meanings/parables.

WHO CAN MAKE A TEKST MORE STRIGHT AND CLEAR, AND WHO IS BETTER TO EXPLAIN CORRECTLY AND IN DETAIL SO THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT HE MEANS, THAN AN OMNISCIENT GOD?

All the same one of the standard ways of "explaining away" errors and other bad points in the Quran, is to claim that Allah did not mean what he said, but something else - a parable, a metaphor, an allegory - and that the clever Muslims easily can help him and explain what he "really" meant. But this means that they indirectly, but clearly states that Muhammad lied in the Quran each time he said the texts there were easy and clear.

Should we thank them for confirming that Allah and Muhammad lies in the Quran?

##Also see the other comments to 3/7 below.

########################################################################

########################################################################

###020 3/7c: “- - - in it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they (all the verses that are to be understood literally*) are the foundation of the Book”: There is no doubt that the Quran is meant to be understood literally where nothing else is specified. Also see 3/7b just above and 11/1b below.

We also want to add a little more about 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:

There are some scattered verses said to be allegories or similar, and which are explained the meanings of. As the meanings are explained, these must be understood as included in “verses basic or fundamental”.

There are no clear allegories, where the meaning is not obvious or explained. There are a number of verses where the meaning is difficult or impossible to see. But unclear speech does not mean an allegory – an allegory is a (clear) story which means something else. Unclear speech only is indistinct or unclear speech.

###021 3/7d: ”- - - no one knows its hidden meaning except Allah”. In any text – even in Donald Duck – it is possible to find – or make up - hidden meanings. But this is strongly advised against in this verse (3/7): Only Allah is qualified to do that:”- - - no one knows its hidden meaning except Allah”. And who is better to know just that than Allah? – the maker of the book (?) - and the one revering the presumed "Mother Book" in Allah's home, a book which the Quran is claimed to be a copy of (without proofs as normal for Islam)?

But all the same a standard explanation used by Islam to “explain” any mistake or contradiction which is difficult to explain, is that it must not be understood literally, but allegorically. As soon as f.x. science shows that something in the Quran is wrong, that text switches from being “basic and fundamental – of established meaning”, to becoming an allegory. This in spite of Allah's and in spite of the Quran's clear words. It is one of the three most frequently used last ditch ways Islam and Muslims use to try to “explain” away things that cannot be explained. (The other ones are: “You cannot take the meaning from just one point or a few verse – you have to judge from the whole surah (or the whole Quran)", and: "You are just a Muslim hater or Israel lover and what facts you tell consequently are invalid and of no consequence and not interesting"). This in spite of that they themselves happily and with glee quotes and often even twists words far out of context to favor Islam (f.x. “There is (wrongly quoted) no compulsion in religion”) or to discredit any other religion). But 3/7 and many others prove that to make up hidden meanings behind the words – f.x. changing its meaning to be allegorical where an allegory is not indicated – is wrong and strongly against Allah’s wish and order: It is the work of “those in whose hearts is perversity”.

Similar in 6/114c-d, 11/1b, 16/103f, 18/1d-g, 18/1-2, 18/2a-b, 19/97b, 27/1b, 28/2, 41/3a-d, 43/2a-b, 44/2a-b, 44/58b-e, 54/17a, 54/32a-b, 54/40a below.

########################################################################

########################################################################

####022 3/7e: “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, and searching 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 hidden meanings.

The Quran and Islam for one thing claim that the clear and easy language is a proof for that the book is made by a god, and for another that the perfect language is a proof for the existence of Allah (no such proofs exist, so they try to find some). And not least that the book and its perfect language is to be understood literally if nothing else is indicated - that the language is "clear and easy" and that only those "in whose hearts are perversity" go looking for hidden meanings - hidden meanings "it only is for Allah to understand".

On this background: What does the mistakes, etc. and the unclear language prove?

And: Claims that errors, etc. in the Quran instead are allegories, etc. are wrong according to the Quran.

########################################################################

023 3/7f: "Those firmly grounded in knowledge - - -". See 26/83a below.

##024 3/7g: “- - - the whole of it (the Quran*) is from our Lord: - - - “. See the other comments. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs. No god ever was involved in a book of a quality like the Quran.

025 3/8b: "- - - Thou (Allah*) hast guided us (by means of the Quran*) - - -". No god has guided via the Quran - too much is wrong for any god to be involved in that book.

###026 3/8d: "- - - Thou art the Grantor of bounties without measure." The Quran has a strong tendency to claim and state small and great thing without any proof. Claims and words are very cheap if you are able to fast-talk yourself away from all questions of proofs. And in any case: He cannot be grantor for anything unless he really exists, which is not proved - there only is Muhammad's words for this, and Muhammad was a man with a very questionable moral and reliability even according to central Islamic literature (read what he demanded, incited, introduced, permitted and did, but skip the big glorious and cheap words, and you easily see the real person).

027 3/9a: "Thou (Allah*) art He that will gather mankind together against a Day about which there is no doubt - - -". Often claimed, never documented - only words and claims in a book where very much is wrong.

##028 3/9f: "- - - Allah never fails His promise." One more never proved claim which only rests on the word of a man with a rather doubtful moral, who accepted both lies, half-truths and even breaking of oats. But in this case it may be true: There is no proof for that Allah ever gave any promise - only the words of a morally suspect person. If he never gave a promise, he also never failed one. (We may add that there never has been any proved case where Allah was proved to have given or to have kept a promise - and Islam had not given you a chance to forget it if it had ever happened.)

029 3/10e: "- - - they (non-Muslims*) are themselves but fuel for the Fire." A terrible "whip" if it is true - but the only source for the claim is Muhammad - and the real, historical Muhammad was far from the reliable semi-saint Islam likes to claim. Also see 3/77b below.

030 3/11c: "- - - Allah is strict in punishment". See 3/77b below.

031 3/12d: "Soon will ye (non-Muslims*) be vanquished and gathered together and driven into Hell - - -". Similar often claimed in the Quran, but never proved or documented.

032 3/13d: "But Allah doth support with His aid whom He pleaseth - - -". There never was one single proved case in all history about Allah aiding anyone at all. If there had been, you bet Islam had told about it!

033 3/13e: "But Allah doth support with His aid whom He pleaseth - - -". A contrast: Allah aids whom he pleases, Yahweh whoever asks for it and deserves it. The same god?

034 3/14b: "- - - in nearness to Allah is the best of goals (to return to)". We are back to the old and fundamental problem: Only if Allah exists, if he is a god, if he is behind the Quran, and only if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth.

035 3/15d: "- - - Gardens in the nearness of their Lord - - -". According to Hadiths good Muslims end in the Quran's and Islam's paradise in the 7 material heavens above Earth (heavens which do not exist) - Muhammad's "night journey" in the Quran, in Hadiths, and in other Islamic literature indicates the same. The claim is that Allah lives above the 7. heaven, and thus Muslims end up below him in the next life. But as these 7 material heavens up there do not exist, something is wrong. As for life in the paradise, see 10/9f below.

036 3/15f: "- - - with rivers flowing beneath - - -". The paradise of the Quran is the desert dwellers' dream - plenty of water is a main reward (if not it had not been so frequently mentioned in the Quran). For short we call it an Arabism - one of many in the Quran. But Allah is the god of all people? - also the ones outside deserts and hot temperature? It does not sound so in the Quran. The paradise dream always is the one of the desert dweller.

037 3/15g: “(In Paradise Muslim men*) find their eternal home; with Companions pure (+ their wives if they qualify for Paradise*), and the good pleasure of Allah.” Does this sentence tell something about how women are valued and looked upon in Islam? - even in Paradise? Also see 3/14 just above.

038 3/15h: "- - - eternal home - - -". 11/108c may indicate that the Quran's paradise is not quite forever. Muslims try to explain this away with that this in case means the inhabitants will be moved to an even better place, but this is just a wishful hope - it is not said in the Quran.

#039 3/15i: "- - - Companions pure (and holy) - - -". The famous houris (an idea borrowed from Persia and its Zoroastrianism, where they were named paaris). There in not a word anywhere in the Quran about how they enjoy being "companions" to rough and uneducated self-centered warriors. Such questions were of no interest to Muhammad and to his Muslims. Empathy hardly exists in the Quran. The same goes for the moral behind f.x. rape and forcing women - and girl children at least down to 9 years old - to sex.

 

###040 3/15j: "- - - Companions pure (and holy) - - -". The houris. This is one of the really strong differences to the Bible - f.x. see Matt. 22/30: The Biblical Paradise is totally different. Yahweh and Allah the same god with so different Paradises? Guess 5 times!

The idea about the houris (sex slaves in Paradise) the maker of the Quran has "borrowed" from religions further east (where they were named paaris) - and the same for the handsome serving youths (nearly nothing in the Quran is original thinking or ideas, more or less everything is "borrowed" from others, mainly in what we today call the Middle East - most of the sources are known). Would a god need to pinch ideas from here and there on the primitive Earth - and only from a small part of it, the part known to the Arabs - to construct his religion and his Paradise?

###041 3/15k: "- - - Companions pure (and holy) - - -". This also contradicts NT in another way: It is nowhere in the Quran directly said the houris were for sex, but that is the clear underlying message (besides in the Quran woman mainly are for 3 things: Housework, childbearing and sex - and in Paradise there is no housework or childbearing, so only sex is left). In the NT polygamy and concubinate is not accepted. The same god and basically the same religion? The only possible answer is no - such a strong no, that it is one of the proofs for that this claim from Muhammad is not true. Actually as the permission of polygamy, concubinage and permission to rape captured or slave women and girl children is so strong in the Quran, this point alone is enough to singlehanded prove that Muhammad's claim is wrong. And then there are all the other proofs in addition.

042 3/15l: "- - - in Allah's sight are (all) His servants”. We are once more back to the old and fundamental problem: Only if Allah exists, if he is a god, if he is behind the Quran, and only of the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth.

043 3/15 + 17: “His (Allah’s*) servants (Muslims*) - - - who show patience, firmness, and self-control - - -”. They are claimed to be good people, at least according to Islam's somewhat special moral code, and Muhammad claims Allah will help them in the end. May be he will - if he exists and is a major god.

044 3/16b: "- - - forgive us (Muslims*) - - -". Allah cannot forgive unless he exists and is a god. There only are Muhammad's words for both, and how reliable are Muhammad's words?

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

045 3/16c: "- - - save us (Muslims*) - - -". Allah cannot save anyone from the results of sins unless he exists and is a god. There only are Muhammad's words for both, and how reliable are Muhammad's words? Remember here his acceptance of the use of dishonesty - al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), Hilah (the lawful pretending/circumventing), use of deception and betrayal, and not least the disuse of even words/promises/oaths (2/225, 5/89, 16/91, 66/2).

046 3/18a: "There is no god but He (Allah*) - - -". See 2/255a above and 6/106b and 25/18a below.

#047 3/18b: “- - - that is the witness of Allah - - -.” The problem is that there exists not one single witness from or for or of Allah – no miracle which could have been a witness, and nothing else. Only the words of a very doubtful man with a very "special" moral code, 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 further that it is proved that this god is Allah – words are very cheap, but only proofs are reliable. This claim is wrong until Islam proves that Allah really made it – and proves, not only claims like Muslims nearly always do.

048 3/18e: "- - - standing firm on justice". Not unless the Islamic moral code and parts of sharia and the rules for war are changed on several points. Also see 1/1a above.

049 3/18f: "There is no god but He (Allah*) - - -". See 2/255a (and 2/265b) above and 6/106b and 26/18a below.

050 3/18g: "(Allah is*) - - - the Exalted in Power - - -". He in case never clearly proved it.

051 3/18h: "(Allah is*) - - - the Wise". Not if he made the Quran.

Another fact: If Allah delivered the Quran and all its mistaken facts and other errors, all its internal and external contradictions, all its invalid logic, all its unclear points, etc. there is a good reason to laugh - and laugh loudly - from claims like this. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

052 3/19a: "- - - nor did the People of the Book (mainly Jews and Christians*) dissent therefrom (Islam*) - - -." To say this is not true, must be the understatement of the year - Islam has always met strong disbelief from both Jews and Christians, MUCH to the chagrin of Muhammad. This is one of the places in the Quran where it at least is clear he knew he was lying when he told this - he was too intelligent not to know what Jews and Christians generally meant about his new religion. By now (625 AD) he also knew plenty enough of the old Jewish scriptures/the Bible to know that they dissented much from his own tales and preaching. He knew he was bluffing/lying.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

053 3/19d: "- - - after knowledge had come to them (the people of the Book - see 3/19a+b above*) - - -". But that was exactly Muhammad's problem; they had so much knowledge about the Bible, etc., that they saw a lot was wrong, when Muhammad claimed his religion was the same as in the Bible - and the same god.

054 3/19g: “But if any deny the Signs of Allah, Allah is swift in calling to account.” He can call no one to account as long as not a single proved sign exists to deny. He also cannot call anyone to account unless he exists and is a major god, neither of which is proved. Also see 3/77b below.

055 3/20e: “If they (“infidels”*) do (become Muslims*), they are in right guidance, but if they turn back, thy duty is to convey the Message - - -.” This – that his duty only was to convey the message, was deeply contradicted – and abrogated by at least those of these verses that came after surah number 3 (in 625 AD), and we add the ones of them that came before, too, because Islam says an older verse in clear cases can abrogate a younger one (it is the one exception from the standard rule that the newest abrogates the older ones). Anyhow it is a clear-cut contradiction. This verse is contradicted and often “killed” by at least these verses: 2/191, 2/193, 3/28, 3/85, 3/148, 4/81, 4/90, 5/33, 5/72, 5/73, 8/12, 8/38-39 (the warning), 8/39, 8/60, 9/3, 9/5, 9/14, 9/23, 9/29, 9/33, 9/73, 9/123, 25/36, 25/52, 33/61, 33/73, 35/36, 47/4, 66/9. This includes many advising or permitting political, social, economical, etc. compulsion (with the sword in the background if you protest) – we mention a few here: 3/28, 3/85, 3/148, 4/81, 5/72, 5/73, 9/23, 14/7, 15/3, 33/73, 35/36. They are all quoted under 2/256 in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran". Muhammad became quite an enforcer.(At least 29 contradictions).

056 3/20g: "- - - right guidance - - -". Strongly contradicted by the much different teaching and moral rules, etc. in the Bible - especially in NT. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

Also contradicted by its many scientific and other errors.

057 3/20i: "- - - the Message (the Quran*) - - -". But is it really a message? - and in case from whom? All the wrong facts, other errors, contradictions, etc. make it clear it is not from any god, and the remaining possibilities are:

1): Dark forces - f.x. parts of the Quran's moral code, code of war, and sharia laws may indicate this.

2): A mental illness - f.x. TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) like modern medical science strongly suspects.

3): One or more cold brains, like f.x. Muhammad himself - all the mistaken facts which are in accordance with (wrong) science there at that time, and also all the "Arabisms" in the Quran may indicate this.

Two thought provoking facts here:

1. Many a self-proclaimed prophet or "prophet" has used religion as his platform of power. Self centered. Selfish?

2. If Iblis - the Devil - dressed up really like the angel Gabriel, Muhammad would have no chance of seeing the difference, and many points in the Quran fit a devil better than they fit a claimed good and benevolent god. 

058 3/20k: "- - - in Allah's sight are (all) His servants". This only can be true if Allah exists and in addition is a god.

059 3/21f: "- - - just dealing - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses expressions like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code and as immoral sharia laws (as opposed to "do against others like you want others do against you").

060 3/23b: "- those who have been given a portion of the Book - - -" This refers to the old and wrong (proved wrong by science and by Islam) Muslim claim that the Bible is falsified. The claim is that the Bible originally like the Quran was a copy of the claimed "mother book" revered by Allah and his angels in Heaven, and thus a parallel to the Quran - a claim proved wrong by science and by Islam, both being unable to find any proved falsification in the tens of thousands of relevant old documents, and thus unable to find that the Bible in the old times was similar to the Quran. Also both science and Islam has been unable to find scriptures similar to the Quran older than 610 AD and Muhammad, in spite of the claim that there have been more than 100ooo prophets for Islam through the times and all over the world (Hadiths mentions the number 124ooo, and even that may just be a symbolic number for something even bigger) - not one such copy or fragment has been found - - - but some 44ooo relevant manuscripts from the time before 610 AD quoting the Bible, a not falsified Bible. 0 to 44ooo are odds too strong to believe in - there are limits even to naivety (unless you are religiously blind).

We may add that if you use the religious time scale and say there were some 5ooo years between Adam and Muhammad, and reckon that each prophet on average was active for 25 years, this means that at any given time some 620 prophets for Islam were active - something like 3 in every country all the time and all those years. Even if one reckon science's age of homo sapiens - modern man - which is 160ooo-200oo years, this means that all through those years at least 15 Muslim prophets have been working around the globe. Except the Jewish ones - who really were preaching about Yahweh, not about Allah - and Muhammad, not one of them left any traces at all.

Believe it if you are able to.

061 3/23c: "- - - the Book of Allah (the Quran*)". Wrong, at least if Allah is omniscient - no god makes a book with that many mistakes, contradictions and other errors, not to mention have such a book in his own home/heaven as a revered "mother book" like the Quran claims. (13/39, 43/4, 85/21-22).

062 3/23d: "- - - a party of them (Jews and Christians*) turn back and decline (the arbitration)". The reason for this was very simple: They knew the Bible and saw the difference between what Muhammad claimed it told, and what it really told.

063 3/24d: “- - - their (Jews, Christians*) forgeries (of the Bible*) - - -“. The Quran, Muhammad, Islam and most Muslims claim that the Bible is falsified – they 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 - and against their wish and purpose, also Islam - long since has proved it is not falsified - one knows literally thousands of relevant old papers and scraps of paper (some 12ooo (included some copies of 300 the Gospels) older than 610 AD + some 32ooo other relevant references - quotes - to the Bible in other manuscripts), 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, and it thus also was physically impossible to co-ordinate the falsification of each and every copy all over the world, 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. And not to forget: The falsifications of the older manuscripts all had to be so cleverly done, that even modern science of today cannot find traces of scratching, chemical blotting out, wrong ink or wrong handwriting where new words are filled in, etc., etc. "Those facts does not matter - we need the Bible to be falsified, because if not something is seriously wrong with Islam. Period!!"

One more pertinent question: How do Muslims explain that it was possible to make f.x. Jews and Christians and sects agree on identical falsifications? There ought to be a limit to naivety, but we do not think there are - not in this case at least.

###Demand proofs next time a Muslim tells you the Bible is falsified. 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 disprove 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 someone – or -ones - using big letters. Actually the lack of documentation from Islam is the best of proof for that the claim is something made up - even better than the same proofs from science, as Islam have very strong motifs for finding such proofs, and has been unable to do so. 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 - the game is to win the debate, not to find out what really is true.

But to claim that the Bible was falsified, was the only way out for Muhammad to explain away his wrong quotes from the Bible – 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, this means to admit that Islam is a made up religion – which is too difficult to admit 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 who 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 the claims were true.

Islam’s claim here simply is proved wrong by science and with even stronger proofs from Islam – unless Islam produces proofs showing the opposite. But proofs, not only loose claims like they normally use.

Also see 2/75b, 2/130 above and 3/77a below.

064 3/24e: "- - - their (Jews and Christians claimed*) forgeries (of the Bible*) deceive them as to their own religion". In more plain words: The claimed forgeries of the Bible have made their religions false ones. But as both science and Islam thoroughly have proved that there are no forgeries in the Bible, what does this sentence then in reality tell? And what does it indirectly, but very clearly tell about Islam?

065 3/25a: "- - - We (Allah*) gather them (mankind) together against a Day about which there is no doubt - - -". Often claimed, never documented - only words and claims in a book where very much is wrong.

066 3/25g: "- - - each soul will be paid out (= get the reward*) just what it has earned - - -". There are different gardens in Paradise according to Islam - one better than the other. Exactly how many is not clear, but at least four or six and may be more or many more. In addition there are the higher heavens. The better a Muslim - and the better and more willing a warrior - the better heaven you go to. (This is contradicted by the claim that those of your family who are good Muslims, will be gathered together in Paradise - it is extremely unlikely that all in a family (remember we talk about extended families like normal in the old times and some places also today) qualifies for the same level of Paradise). In Hell there seems to be 7 parts, one worse than the other.

067 3/25i: "- - - (no*) injustice - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses expression like this it is meant in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code and law. Besides: Is there justice in the bestial and sadistic unending punishment in Hell compared to the after all not too bad sins most of the sinners have performed?

068 3/25j: "- - - (no*) injustice - - -". But what is fair and what is injustice if it in reality is Allah who has predestined everything you have said and done, like the Quran states many places? Is there at all any fair reward or punishment for words Allah has forced you to say and acts he has forced you to do, all according to his Plan?

069 3/26a: "O Allah! Lord of Power (and Rule)- - -". In case a never proved power.

070 3/26d: "- - - in Thy (Allah's*) hand is all Good". Only if he exists and in addition is a major god.

071 3/27b: "- - - Thou (Allah*) bringest Living out of the dead - - -". This interesting claim is repeated in different versions several places in the Quran - interesting because Allah never has proved he is stronger than death (actually he never has proved anything at all, included his own existence), except claims in a few repeated legends or fairy tales. But Yahweh has proved it several times if either the Quran or the Bible tells the truth on this point. (F.x. 1. Kings 17/22, 2.Kings 4/34-35, Matt. 9/25, Matt 27/52, Luke 6/14, Luke 8/53, John 11/43-44, Acts 9/40, Acts 20/10 - and Jesus himself according to the Bible).

072 3/27c: "- - - and Thou (Allah*) bringest the Dead out of the Living - - -". Here one could be flippant and point to that his - or at least Muhammad's - followers have been good at that through the centuries, and that terrorists and others keep that tradition alive.

073 3/27d: “Thou (Allah*) gives sustenance to whom Thou pleases - - -”. Perhaps - but many gods say the same, and like them neither Allah nor Muhammad ever proved one single millimeter, as a contrast to Jesus if the Bible tells the truth. One more thing: This - that Allah does what he finds wisest - also is one of Islam's standard explanations why Muslims are not always on top (have "most sustenance"). Also see 11/7a below.

##074 3/28a: “Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah - - -". What does this tell about Islam and also about the reasons for Islam's and Muslims' superiority complex and thus about why they are reluctant to mingle with others or be integrated in non-Muslim societies? - many want the good money they can make in the West and some other places, but that is it.

We may add that this verse is one of many in the Quran telling a sad story - and one of the many verses which prepared and prepares the ground for aggression against all "infidels" - aggression falsely called Jihad (holy war of defense).

##075 3/28b: “Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah - - -.” Social pressure, but may be meant defensive originally, as it is from 625 AD before Muhammad gained full control in 630 AD it is offensive today. This verse is contradicted (really made stricter) and often “killed” because it is too soft on non-Muslims, by at least these verses: 2/191, 2/193, 3/28, 3/85, 3/148, 4/81, 4/90, 5/33, 5/72, 5/73, 8/12, 8/38-39 (the warning), 8/39, 8/60, 9/3, 9/5, 9/14, 9/23, 9/29, 9/33, 9/73, 9/123, 25/36, 25/52, 33/61, 33/73, 35/36, 47/4, 66/9. This includes many advising or permitting political, social, economical, etc. compulsion (with the sword in the background if you protest) – we mention a few here: 3/28, 3/85, 3/148, 4/81, 5/72, 5/73, 9/23, 14/7, 15/3, 33/73, 35/36. They are all quoted under 2/256. (At least 29 contradictions).

076 3/28c: “Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah, except by way of precaution, that ye may guard yourself from them." ################Only if the non-Muslims are too strong for you and may hurt you, you may form good friendship with them!! Comments?

 

077 3/28d: “Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah, except by way of precaution, that ye may guard yourself from them." Deception, not honesty, also in friendship.

078 3/28e: "- - - his (the good Muslim's*) final goal is to Allah". If Allah exists and is behind what is told in the Quran. And if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth on this point.

079 3/29c: "And Allah has the power over all things". Well, at least the Quran claims so. There are so many loose and never proved or documented claims in the Quran, that you just can go looking and you will find plenty - they are easy to see. Claims like this any priest and any believer in any religion can as easily claim for his god(s) as long as one can evade all requests for proofs - words and loose claims are that cheap.

080 3/30d: "But Allah cautions (via the Quran*) you (to remember) Himself". As no god has sent down a book of a quality like the Quran, it is not Allah who cautions about this.

081 3/30e: "And Allah is full of kindness to those who serve Him". Is he? - with all his demands for war and blood, with his partly immoral moral code, with his partly unjust laws, etc.?

082 3/31c: "If ye do love Allah, follow me (Muhammad): for Allah will love you and forgive your sins - - -". Partly strengthening his - Muhammad's - platform of power, and partly pep-talk - including a promise which was very cheap for Muhammad, especially if Allah does not exist.

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

083 3/31d: "If ye do love Allah, follow me (Muhammad): for Allah will love you and forgive your sins - - -". Allah cannot forgive sins unless he exists and is a god.

Another point is that to forgive - or for that case to punish or reward or fulfill prayers - means for Allah to change his Plan considering the sinner/person, something which according to the Quran nobody and nothing can make him do. See 2/187d above.

084 3/32b: "Obey Allah and His Prophet (Muhammad*)". Muhammad's standard, but never proved mantra in a strengthened version - Muhammad is gluing himself to the god, plus demanding obedience (on Earth obeying Allah = obeying Muhammad). There are many, many like this in the Quran. Muhammad was self centered. - and selfish? Religion is a solid and trustworthy platform of power for its "prophet" normally - in any sect and religion.

085 3/33aa: "Allah did choose - - - Adam - - - above all people". According to science Adam never existed in a version even remotely similar to the story in the Quran.

Another difference between the Bible and the Quran: In the Bible Adam is something special, but not reckoned among the prophets. In Islam he is a prophet.

086 3/33a: "Allah did choose - - - the family of Abraham - - - above all people". Arabs claim - as normal without any proofs - to be the descendants of Ishmael, the illegitimate son of Abraham (in spite of that according to the Bible Ishmael's descendants settled on the border of Egypt (1. Mos. 25/18) - not in Arabia - and became a powerful people there "with twelve tribal rulers" (1.Mos. 25/16)), and they (the Arabs) claim they thus are descendants of Abraham. Is this the reason why Arabs through the first centuries of Islam claimed to be better than other Muslims, and thus caused lots of and lasting strife in Islam? Also see 2/125a and 2/127a above.

In addition: Even if Abraham had been a forefather of the Arabs, Arabia was settled thousands of years before Abraham, and he had in case been only one out of 10ooo+ Arab forefathers.

##087 3/35b: "Imran’s wife - - -". ###This is an example on "honest" Muslim technique of debate, taken - unbelievably - from Muhammad Yusuf Ali, the famous translator of the Quran, in his book: "The Meaning of the Quran": "By tradition Mary's mother was called Hannah (in Latin Anna, in English Anne), and her father was called Imran. Hannah is therefore both a descendant of the priestly house of Imran (the Arab name of Moses' father*) and the wife of Imran." One thing is that when using traditions and legends as basis, one cannot say that something "is", only that it "may be". But the real screamer is that the name of the father of Mary never in the traditions and legends was Imran. That name you only find in the Quran, and of course among the ones who take the name from the Quran - and this even more so as he mix in the Latin (and English) names. The name of Mary's father in the traditions was Jojakim or Jocim (except that Muslims have looked in the Quran and found the name Imran and made a new “tradition” from that). Further comments not necessary - just make your own conclusions about how reliable Muslims - even outstanding, learned ones like Mr. Ali - sometimes may be, and how reliable Muslim arguments and "facts" sometimes are. "Use al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie*), Kitman (the lawful half-truth*) and even deception and broken oaths to forward or defend the Religion of Truth". As you understand: When we base most of our writings on Islamic sources, we often run into the problem that everything has to be checked, because even claimed "facts" too often are incorrect.

###Another screamer: Mary's father was not from a priestly house/tribe. Mary - and thus her father - was from the Juda tribe, whereas all priests among the Jews were from the Levi tribe. Both these facts are so well known that there is no chance a learned man like Yusuf Ali did not know it. (He even mentions that fact in his comment 378 to the Quran.)

"Islam is the Religion of Honesty"??

Modern science agree on that this is a real mistake from Muhammad, likely caused by the fact that in Arab both Mary and Miriam (Moses’ sister) are written Maryam, and because of this Muhammad thought it was the same woman.

088 3/35-37: The birth of Mary. This story is taken from the fanciful book "The Protoevangelion's James the Lesser", and contradicts the Bible quite a lot as it is not like in the Bible.

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 miracle 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 for the same reason never been omitted there if it were true. Besides: Only men served in the Temple, a fact Muslim scholars know, but they never correct this point in the Quran).

It also tells something that when Muhammad differs from the Bible, his/the Quran’s stories mostly correspond to proved untrue religious fables and legends (often based on apocryphal scriptures – and often Gnostic). This tells it is not the Bible which is wrong, but that the Quran have used legends, fairy tales, etc. as sources. Would a god need fairy tales as sources?

089 3/37f: “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 (believed he) 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 which flourished at that time. These mistakes was a 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.)

090 3/37g: "- - - her (Mary's*) chamber - - -". The Quran indicates that this took place in the Temple (in Jerusalem). But according to Mosaic (Jewish) law a female child could not be devoted to service in the Temple - only men served there. And there is one more reason for why this claim is impossible: ONLY members of the Levi tribe served in the Temple, whereas Mary was a descendant of David, which means she was from the Judah tribe. Muslim scholars know this, but never tell their audiences that the Quran here is wrong. Even A. Yusuf Ali knew it - he mentions it in comment 378 in his book "The Meaning of the Holy Quran". But even this according to Islam perhaps very best translator of the Quran, and a learned man, makes no remark about it in his edition/translation of "the Holy Quran". "It is better to believe than to face a destroying truth". We may add that the story of Mary serving in the Temple is taken from apocryphal - made up - sources, AND even Islam knows this (see comment 378 in Yusuf Ali: "The Meaning of the Holy Quran", but they keep quiet about it. We quote from YA379: "Some apocryphal Christian writings say that she was brought up in the Temple to the age of twelve like a dove, and fed by the angels". (It is symptomatic for some Islamic literature that he uses the story even if it is an apocryphal one, and even he - a top Muslim scholar - does not mention that "apocryphal" normally means "a made up story", even though learned Muslims do know this, and thus dishonestly let the readers believe it is "bona fide" information - there were many such made up stories and legends, just like there were lots of made up Hadiths, and not a few of them are used by Muslims as it they were true stories. This fact tells not a little about Muslim disputants and about Islam, which does not discourage the use of untrue arguments. We at least have never seen any Islamic try to make an end to this kind of dishonesty. Also see 3/44a below.

091 3/37j: "From Allah - - -". It is highly unlikely that anybody talked about Allah - or al-Lah as his name was before Muhammad definitely changed it (though the name Allah was somewhat used also before Muhammad) - in the temple of Jerusalem around the time of (just before) Jesus.

092 3/38c: "- - - Thou (Allah*) art He that heareth prayer!" Even if we omit the fact that a Jewish priest - Zechariah was a priest in the Temple in Jerusalem - hardly would pray to Allah, but to Yahweh, there remains one fact: Allah only could hear prayers if he existed and if he in addition was a god. There only are Muhammad's claims for this - and Muhammad is not the most reliable of witnesses.

093 3/39d: "- - - the truth of a word from Allah - - -". The only words claimed to be from Allah is the Quran. But the Quran with all its mistakes, etc. is not from any god (it is slander and an insult and heresy to blame a god for a product of a quality like the Quran with all its mistakes, etc.) - and thus not from Allah even if he should happen to exist.

##094 3/39e: "- - - Yahya (John the Baptist*) - - - a Prophet". John the Baptist is in the Bible hardly really classified among the prophets - - he is something special. But he had a prophet's qualifications as he obviously had connections to Yahweh and also made prophesies: He foretold Jesus. Interesting here is that he told that the one he foretold, already was living among the Jews (John 1/26) and thus could not be Muhammad - this was before Jesus had started his mission - and that he never mentioned a successor of Jesus.

The fact that John told he was talking of a man who already lived among the Jews, makes Muslim claims claiming John was foretelling Muhammad impossible - Muhammad live 500+ years later.

095 3/43b: "O Mary! Worship thy Lord (here claimed to be Allah*) devoutly: prostrate thyself, and bow down (in prayer) with those who bow down". This is not from the Bible. As the Quran with all its errors is from no god, from where did Muhammad get this information?

Also: The Jews did not use prostration.

096 3/44a: "This (Mary serving in the Temple under Zachariya and later her receiving the message about a child*) is part of the tidings of things unseen, which We (Allah*) reveal unto thee (Muhammad*) by inspiration - - -". Wrong. It is neither from inspiration, nor from the Bible, but from old apocryphal - made up - scriptures. It is even more wrong, as according to Mosaic - Jewish - law, only men could serve in the temple. And even some more: Only members of the Levi tribe could serve in the Temple, whereas Mary was a descendant of David, and thus from the Judah tribe. Muslim scholars knew and know this (f.x. A. Yusuf Ali: "The Meaning of the Holy Quran", comment 378: "The female child (Mary*) could not be devoted to Temple service under the Mosaic (Jewish*) law - - -" (the rest of the quote we omit - it is speculative and unscientific to say the least of it, like sometimes in Islamic literature), and that only Levites could be priests, etc. is very clear from many places in the Bible + from history), but never mention to their congregations. Honesty. Also see 3/37a-b-c above.

097 3/44c: "- - - by inspiration - - -". A most convenient way for a prophet to get his messages - especially if he does not want others to be able to check if he really got messages. We have found nowhere in the Bible where it is mentioned that the prophets got messages this way - even though Muhammad claims several places that they did (to make them like himself, and thus make his claimed inspiration "bona fide").

098 3/45d: "- - - Allah - - -". This in this case so obviously contradicts the historical realities about religion among the Jews in Israel around the time of the birth of Jesus that we do not spend energy on commenting on it. It also contradicts the Bible of course.

099 3/45ea: "- - - (Jesus*), held in honor in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah". According to history there existed no god similar to Allah and no religion similar to Islam in what is now the Middle East and not anywhere else known in the Roman Empire or the rest of the world around or any time before or for centuries after the time of Jesus - not until after 610 AD when Muhammad started his mission do science find anything similar to Islam and the Quran. And according to the - proved by science and Islam not falsified - Bible the god of Jesus was Yahweh, not Allah. And also according to written history the god of the Jews at the time of Jesus, was Yahweh. Thus according to these three facts, he should be nearest to Yahweh.

100 3/45f: "- - - his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary - - -". This is the full name the Quran uses for him - to underline their claim that he was not the son of Yahweh. And it is entirely wrong - he never was called "the son of Mary". When a parent's name was mentioned as part of his name (normal in those countries), he was "son of Joseph" - "ben Joseph" - the name of his (adopted?) father on Earth. And to be even more accurate: As Jesus is the Greek version of the Hebrew name Joshua, Jesus' name there and then would be "Joshua ben Joseph". Any - any - god had known this - Muhammad obviously not. Then who made the Quran?

There is another curiosity connected to Muhammad's use of the name Jesus. He call Jesus Isa, but Isa is the Arab version of Esau - the name of the brother of the Jewish patriarch Jacob. Jesus is Greek (NT originally was written in Greek) for Joshua or in Hebrew Yoshuwa, which in Arab is Yeshuwa (the spelling may wary a little). Thus Muhammad all the time spoke about Esau, not about Jesus. Any god had known better.

##101 3/46b: "He (Jesus*) shall speak to the people in the childhood - - -". This refers to the Quran's claims that the baby Jesus from his crib spoke to the ones around him - something some Muslims try to explain away by calling it allegories, etc. (one of the standard last resorts for Muslims when things are difficult or impossible to explain). Islam is aware of that this is from apocryphal - made up - old scriptures (or tales?) cfr: Yusuf Ali: "The Meaning of the Holy Quran", comment 388: "Some apocryphal Gospels describe him as preaching from infancy". He is dishonest enough to mention the text - an argument - without mentioning the apocryphal normally means they are made up texts. It is just like if non-Muslims should use for arguments Hadiths the collectors did not use because they were well known to be made up ones, without telling that they were made up and without value. Persons used to honesty in argumentation, feel not a little distaste each time we meet things like this - and it happens a bit too often form Islam, even from well educated persons ( f.x. Yusuf Ali was far too well educated not to know that apocryphal stories normally are made up ones and totally without any relevance or value, but all the same he uses them - a completely clear half-truth, a Kitman (lawful half-truth)). But this kind of dishonesty - which actually is advised to use "if necessary" when forwarding or defending the religion - tells something negative about Islam (and about Islam and Muslim scholars). A religion which advices the use of lies - - - how much is then lies of what they tell and preach and argue?

##########102 3/47b: "How shall I (Mary*) have a son when no man hath touched me?" It may be worth noticing that the Quran here confirms the virgin birth of Jesus (the angel's answer in the next sentence had been different if this was not true). This because you meet Muslims throwing around ugly dirt about Mary and Roman soldiers, etc. and sex with an 8-9 year old girl from the Bible - Mary - refusing the virgin birth. Now, no-one knows the age of Mary, but it is likely that she was young. No-one guesses younger than 12 years, but looking to Muhammad's regular sex with Aishah from she was 9, Muslims sometimes claims Mary was 8-9 - the younger, the uglier - - - and an alibi for Muhammad's pedophilia. But the claimed virgin birth and thus no early sex, is confirmed at least 3 places in the Quran (19/20-21, 66/12 and here) - for what the reliability of the Quran is worth.

103 3/47d: "- - - a Plan - - -". Allah predestines everything the Quran tells many places, and his predestinations are according to his Plan - a predestined plan no-one and nothing can change. (Why then f.x. pray to him, as nothing can change his decisions anyhow?).

######104 3/47e: "He (Allah*) saith to it, "Be" and it is!" May be Yahweh just said "Be a son" and the fetus Jesus was. After all parthenogenesis - growing an offspring from just the female egg - happens frequently in nature in "lower" species, and are today possible to make even for somewhat higher beings by humans. To do the same in a human should not be too difficult for a god. The same for changing or exchanging the X-chromosome for a Y one to make a boy instead of a girl (normal parthenogenesis always gives female children) - it may be within what is possible for mere humans in some years or a few decades.

105 3/48: "And Allah will teach him (Jesus*) - - - the Gospel." For one thing: Muhammad does not seem to know there were 4 Gospels - he always uses singular (though also others sometimes use singular). For another: The Gospels did not exist at that time - the oldest one is from ca. 60 AD. For a third: Muhammad obviously did not know what the Gospels are about, as he tells Allah would teach Jesus the Gospels: The Gospels are the history of Jesus' life, death, resurrection, and ascension to Heaven, and could not be written until after all this had happened - not unless total predestination (and then out goes free will for man - such a combination is impossible even for a god, in spite of the Quran's and Islam's claims).

You meet the never documented claim that the Quran talks about an older Gospel - and in a way they may be right, as there may - may - have existed an older one. But for obvious reasons also this one cannot have been written until after things had happened - far too late for Jesus, not to mention the child Jesus, to read. Finally there of course are the naive ones who boldly claim that Allah knew everything before and could have it written down - but then as mentioned out of the window goes free will for man and the benevolent god - full predestination and free will for man is not possible to combine. Either the god knows everything before - and man is a puppet forced not to make that knowledge wrong. Or man has free will - and the god is not fully clairvoyant because man always can change his mind once more - the "time travel paradox" which this is a variant of, is long since proved even theoretically unsolvable. There are among the immaterial natural laws a few not even gods can cross (f.x. the mathematical 1 + another mathematical 1 always = the mathematical 2 no matter what trick a god tries).

Muslims also never mention the other possible explanation for why 3 of the Gospels are very similar: That the oldest one was used as a source by the two others. In that case there is no reason to believe an even older one existed.

106 3/49b: “I (Jesus*) have come to you (humans*), with a Sign form your Lord (the god - in the Quran claimed to be Allah*), in that I make for you out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, and it becomes a bird by Allah’s leave”. (This tale is “borrowed” from one of the apocryphal (= made up religious fairy tales*) so-called “Child Gospels”, in this case the so-called Egyptian one, but also mentioned in the so-called Arab one from Syria around 500 AD, and in the Gnostic apocryphal (made up) Thomas’ Child Gospel - it is not from the Bible*),

Islam is aware of that this is from an apocryphal story - (f.x. Yusuf Ali: "The meaning of the Holy Quran", comment 390: "The miracle of the clay birds is found in some of the apocryphal Gospels".) - but never mention the fact that as the stories are apocryphal they normally are fakes, to their congregations, and seldom if ever inform their readers that these are made up stories. A kind of dishonesty you meet too often in Islam. All are totally invalid as a proof for Allah, as long as:

It is not proved that Allah really did this - and stories from fairy tales need solid proofs. Or:

It is not proved that Allah and Yahweh really is the same god - which only Muslims claim to believe, and which they have never produced the slightest proof for - - - in addition to that the two gods (?) have so different teachings that it is impossible they can be the same one (Muslims explain this with that the Bible is falsified, but any professor in history would deem the Bible far more likely to be true - and for solid reasons - than the Quran (though even the Bible may have mistakes). Science also has proved that the Bible is not falsified - there as said may be mistakes, but no falsifications compared to the old texts. And Islam has proved it even more by not finding any proof for falsifications in 1400 years. If they had found one, they had SCREAMED about it - and there has been no such scream.

The Gnostic and other stories, tales, “gospels”, and apocryphal ones were made up by semi-Christian or sometimes semi-Jewish sects to fit their special points of view on how a god should be. The sects were quite widespread once upon a time. Muslims frequently use these and other made up tales to try to “prove” their statements. Not to mention how often one meets Muslim references to the so called Gospel of Barnabas - - - perhaps made up at the Caliphs Muslim court in Baghdad (in the 1400 century?), or one of the several Muslim falsifications from older (ca. 800 - 900 AD) Muslim dominated Spain.

A few of the apocryphal ones were close enough to the Bible to be read also by Christians (and from OT also by Jews) as morally good stories, even though not all "facts" were correct. The rest were more or less pure fairy tales and/or propaganda for semi-Christian (or semi-Jewish) sects. As for the Quran one may call it such an apocryphal story, but one in case has to remember that it in case is a very apocryphal one.

AND IT IS A STRANGE (?) AND PERHAPS TELLING FACT IN THIS CONNECTION THAT THE QURAN OFTEN AGREES WITH MADE UP STORIES FROM APOCRYPHAL BOOKS AND STORIES, LEGENDS, FAIRY TALES, AND OTHER TALES WELL KNOWN IN ARABIA AT THE TIME OF MUHAMMAD, INSTEAD OF THE MAY BE TRUE ONES IN THE BIBLE, AND NOT LESS PECULIAR THAT IT THEN "EXPLAINS", BUT NEVER PROVES, THAT THE REASON FOR THE DIVERGENCES, IS THAT THE BIBLE IS FALSIFIED. Muslims' use of apocryphal and often known to be made up stories as arguments, in reality proves they have few if any real arguments - if they had, there was no need for using made up ones.

(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”.)

One more point: A miracle like this never had been forgotten and left out from the NT if it had been real, especially as there are few stories from his childhood and this had filled in a blank space. Also see 3/46a above.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

####107 3/50a: (According to the Quran Jesus has come to Earth partly to confirm some Mosaic laws, but also:) "And to make lawful to you part of what was (before) forbidden to you - - -." This is a good verse to know, because as some of the Mosaic laws are closer to the Quran than to NT and its New Covenant (f.x. Luke 22/20), you meet Muslims throwing at you that Jesus (only) came to confirm the old laws, and consequently you have to mean this and this, etc. Or he/she throws at you some old Mosaic law, and you are bad not living up to it. Here is confirmed even in the Quran that Jesus lifted old laws - actually many of them, and even more of the ones the Jews had added later.

There also are verses in the Bible clearly telling that Jesus changed old Jewish laws - f.x. Acts 10/9-29.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

###108 3/50e: (Jesus said:) "So fear Allah and obey me". This is one of Muhammad's slogans, and then of course it was good policy to claim older prophets had said the same. But what Jesus said, was "follow me", which is something very different from "obey me" - deep down so different that it is one of the proofs for that Allah - especially as you meet him in the surahs from Medina, and thus in the little abrogated parts of the Quran - is not the same god as Yahweh. Definitely not.

##109 3/51a: (Jesus said*): “It is Allah who is my Lord and your Lord; then worship Him”. Contradicted by the Bible, to say the least of it - in the Bible Jesus' connection was to Yahweh (but then the Quran wrongly mixes Yahweh and Allah, even though the fundamentals of the teachings are too different for such a claim to be true). But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

110 3/51b: (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. For one thing it is a historical fact - from written history - that there existed no religion like Islam, no god like Allah and no book like the Quran in the entire Roman Empire, included in what is now Israel, at the time of Jesus - and never before and never later until it was taken by the Muslims. For another it is a fact from written history the god of the Jews at the time of Jesus was Yahweh, not Allah, and it also is a fact that Yahweh was a good too different from the teaching of the Quran to be the same god as Allah. And point three: 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“), though the easier to pronounce Allah sometimes was used. The Jews also that time were a traveling people, and they knew Arabia and the polytheistic religion there.

If Jesus had preached that people should pray to a known polytheistic god - and a moon 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 had got very few followers.

If Jesus had preached about al-Lah - a known polytheistic foreign god - the Jewish religious establishment had had him killed years before for heresy, impiety, disrespect for Yahweh and things like that.

This statement is made up by someone not knowing the religious and political situation in Israel around 30 AD (but the purpose for making it up is very obvious). It is very clear from history facts that the Jewish god at that time was Yahweh, and that around the year 30 AD it was a time when the religion had a strong position and strong power in Israel.

111 3/52b: “(Jesus*) said: ‘Who will be the helpers to (the work) of Allah?” See 3/51a above.

112 3/52d: “Said the Disciples (of Jesus*): ‘We are Allah’s helpers: we believe in Allah, and do thou (Jesus*) bear witness that we are Muslims". Definitely not to be found in the Bible. And as definitely conflicting everything known from facts from written history.

#113 3/52h: Said the disciples: “- - - and thou (Jesus*) bear witness that we are Muslims”. See 3/51a above. Besides the word hardly had a meaning 600 years before Muhammad.

114 3/53a: "Our Lord (Allah*), we (Muslims*) believe in what Thou hast revealed (the Quran*) - - -". No god of any kind has revealed a book with so much errors, etc. like the Quran.

115 3/53b: "- - - we (Muslims*) follow the Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -". One of Muhammad’s less used slogans or mantras for gluing himself to his god and his platform of power. All the same self centered. And selfish?

§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§

###116 3/54ab: ”- - - and Allah too plotted and planned, and the best of planners is Allah.” It in reality is Allah that decides everything – “the best of planners”.

MORE OMNIOUS: MUSLIMS UNDERSTOOD HERE THAT THE NON-MUSLIMS TRIED TO CHEAT AND DECEIVE ALLAH, BUT THAT WAS BETTER AT CHEATING AND DECEIVING. BUT AS ALLAH COULD CHEAT AND DECEIVE, ALSO MUSLIMS COULD/OUGHT TO DO IT IF THERE WERE REASONS. THIS THUS IS ONE OF THE VERSES IN THE QURAN BEHIND THE "LAWFUL DISHONESTY" IN ISLAM.

§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§

117 3/55a: "- - - Allah said: "O Jesus! - - - I will make those who follow thee superior to those who reject faith, to the Day of Resurrection: then shall ye all return to me - - -:" There also is hope for Christians - - - if not this is one of the many verses in the Quran which are abrogated - made invalid - by later and harsher verses. Much of the mild parts of the Quran are abrogated.

118 3/55b: "- - - Allah said: '- - - then (at the Day of Doom*) shall ye (people*) all return unto me - - -". Often claimed in the Quran, never proved anywhere - and a claim made on behalf of many gods in many religions. If the old books are reliable on this point, Yahweh with his resurrections may have proved something, but Allah and Muhammad nothing - only words.

119 3/55d: "- - - then shall ye (followers of Jesus*) all return unto me (Allah*) - - -". According to the Bible they will return unto Yahweh, not unto Allah - 2 very different gods in spite of the Quran's claims (especially like you meet Yahweh in NT.

120 3/55e: "- - - I (Allah*) will judge - - -". Only if he exists, and only if he in addition is a major god. And only if there is not another god who is the real ruler.

121 3/57c: "- - - Allah will pay them (in full) their reward (in the claimed next life*) - - -". If Allah exists. If he is a god. If he is behind what the Quran tells. And if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth only.

But remember as for punishments and rewards - and forgiving: They cannot be given unless there are made changes in the Plan of Allah, which several verses in the Quran states nobody and nothing can make. (A predestined reward is not a reward, but theater.)

122 3/58c: "- - - the Message (the Quran*) - - -". Is the Quran really a message? - and in case from whom or what, as with all those mistakes, etc. it is not from any god? And with those ethical and moral codes it also is not from any good or benevolent being.

123 3/58d: "- - - the Message (the Quran*) - - -". It is unlikely in the extreme that the Quran was rehearsed unto Jesus. Islam will have to bring very strong proofs to be believed.

#124 3/59b: “He (Allah*) created him (Adam (and Jesus)*) 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 according to science all of them are wrong, as man developed from earlier primates.

Some Muslims take pride in that archaeologists has found that the human race has passed through so-called bottlenecks where it nearly became extinct, and that all now may have one “mother” in common - the archaeological Eve (she just is named after the Eve in the Bible) - and one common “father” - the less known archaeological Adam. "Hurray! Here is the PROOF!", you may hear - "here is Eve and Adam!". 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 (195ooo?) years ago, whereas the corresponding “Adam” lived much later - may be as late as 60ooo - 70ooo (64ooo?) years ago, and Eve in Africa, Adam most likely in Asia (perhaps south of the Caspian Sea). Not a couple exactly! (And once more; 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 6/2b below.

#####125 3/59c: (Allah said:) "'Be' and he (Adam*) was". This is in strict contradiction to the verse claiming the god could not have a son, because he had no woman. But according to this and other points Allah could say "Be a son" and Jesus was. (In addition to that in the really old Hebrew religion there may have been a female god - Yahweh's Amat (source New Scientist and others)).

126 3/60a: “The Truth (comes) from Allah alone; - - -”. That the Quran is the truth, is just a claim, not a proved fact. 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 2/2b above and 13/1g and 40/75 below.

127 3/61a: “- - - now after (full) knowledge hath come to thee - - -”. Beware that here simply is meant knowledge about the Quran and Islam. When the Quran uses the word "knowledge" it normally only talks about this kind of knowledge.

128 3/61b: “- - - now after (full) knowledge hath come to thee - - -”. With so many mistakes in the Quran, it is at best partly knowledge - - - but which parts are knowledge and which superstition?

129 3/61d: "- - - invoke the curse of Allah - - -". This only has a meaning if Allah exists and in addition is a major god. We may point to that especially if Muhammad knew the Quran was made up, this was a nice small trap to use. But beware that one cannot say for sure that Muhammad did not believe in at least parts of what he told. Even if involvement of a god is out of the question with so much wrong in the Quran, an illness like TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) may have cheated him. The same may some dark forces have done - if they exist. Muhammad f.x. would have no chance to see through it if the Devil dressed up like Gabriel, and pretended to give Muhammad verses from Allah - parts of f.x. the code in the Quran may strengthen this theory.

130 3/62a: "This (the Quran*) is the true account - - -". With that many mistakes, etc., the Quran at best is partly the truth. Also see 2/2b above and 13/1g and 40/75 below. 

131 3/62c: "- - - there is no god except Allah - - -". See 2/255a above and 6/106b and 25/18a below - and for that case 2/165c above.

132 3/62d: "(Allah is*) - - - the Exalted in Power - - -". He in case never clearly proved it.

133 3/62f: "(Allah is*) - - - the Wise". Not if he made the Quran.

134 3/63a: "- - - Allah hath full knowledge of those who do mischief". See 2/233h above and 35/38b below.

135 3/63b: "- - - Allah hath full knowledge of those who do mischief". Does this mean Muslims in reality? - there is no doubt that many members of the war religion Islam with its "peculiar" moral code, according to all normal moral rules do a lot of mischief. (Compare the Quran's moral code, war code, etc. to "Do against others like you want others do against you", and feel sick.)

136 3/63d: "- - - mischief". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

137 3/64d: “- - - that we (Muslims and Jews/Christians*) worship none but Allah (= Yahweh and Allah are 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 to be believed by us. (It also is a fact from history that there was no falsification of the Bible after the birth of Jesus - if ever. Also a falsification on the scale Muhammad and Islam claimed/claims would be logistically, economically, psychologically (at least most owner of holy scriptures would refuse to have their scriptures falsified), and it would be impossible to make such a big operation without any historian ever heard about it.

Which raises the question: Are Muhammad and his Arabs really descendants from Abraham (and thus earlier of the same religion)? At least they in case only are maximum quarter breeds, as Ishmael’s mother, Hagar, was a slave from Egypt (1. Mos. 16/1), and also his wife (only one is mentioned) was from Egypt (also according to the Bible, written and unabridged since more than 1000 years before Muhammad – 1. Mos.21/20). Well, worse than that: Modern DNA analysis has showed that the pure Arab does not exist. Arabia is on a crossroad – caravans and merchants have passed through - - - and left babies behind now and then (remember that before Muhammad in Arabia sex and alcohol were “the two delightful things”). And Arab caravans and traders roamed wide – and now and then brought back brides from abroad. And finally the perhaps main reason for the diluted blood: The slaves. Literally millions of slaves – some 2/3 of them women – have through the times been brought to Arabia, both before and after Muhammad. And the women of the harems – do you think they were permitted to demand condoms? It is impossible to say there are not traces of DNA from Abraham in Arabs – perhaps via Jewish slave women? But any scientist will say that the chances for finding much more DNA from Abraham (if he ever existed) in Jews than in Arabs are big, because the Jews mostly have been intermarrying because of the excluding religion. Arabs? Blood diluted from literally millions of imported slaves and other sources, and hardly any traces of Abraham - none if the Bible tells the truth when it tells that Ishmael settled near the border of Egypt (1. Mos. 25/18 - and there was no reason for him who wrote 1. Mos. not to tell the truth).

And here we have not even mentioned that Arabia was settled thousands of years before Abraham. Even if he had been a forefather, he had been only one among thousands and tens of thousands of forefathers - a tiny drop of an Arab's blood; not even a milliliter, but only a few micro-liters of the 5 liters of blood in a man. A few micro-liters compared with a deciliter or two of f.x. Negro blood - plus other imported blood.

###############Also modern DNA tells that Arabs are a mixed race and with no common forefather.

#####We also may add that according to the Quran, the OT/Jewish scriptures cannot have been falsified until after the death/disappearance of Jesus. Jesus preached from the scriptures in the synagogues, and Jesus according to the Quran was a prophet and a good Muslim and never would have preached from falsified scriptures. "Ergo" there is no way they can have been falsified until after year 33 AD.

138 3/64e: "- - - we (here Muslims, Jews and Christians*) associate no partners with Him (Allah*) - - -". One thing is that Jews and Christians did and do not believe in Allah, but in Yahweh. But the main point just here is that Muhammad tries to tell his followers and others that other gods were gods the non-Muslims had in addition to Allah. This is a kind of Arabism, as this claim after a fashion could be used in Arabia, as Muhammad just had taken over the old Arab main god al-Lah and renamed him Allah (well, the name Allah had been somewhat used also before Muhammad). Thus the old Arabs had other gods in addition to al-Lah - but only after a fashion, as they prayed to the old pagan version of this god, whereas Muhammad talked about a refashioned one. All other religions had god/gods INSTEAD of Allah, not beside him. There is a huge difference between "instead of" and "beside" in this case, but Muhammad tries this trick again and again - if he could make his followers and others believe it was a general rule and not just something Arab that other gods just were in addition to Allah, it would make Allah big, and it would back up his never documented claim that Islam was an old religion.

139 3/65d: "Why dispute ye (Jews and Christians*) about Abraham, when the Law and the Gospel were not revealed till after him?" There is no reason why one cannot dispute about Abraham even if He lived - if he was a real person - some 1800 - 2ooo years before Christ, whereas "the Law" arrived around 1230 - 1235 BC, and the first known Gospel around 60 AD. One f.x. can dispute about the Quran's use (or disuse?) of him, the big differences between what is told about him in the Bible and in the Quran, and not least: As the Bible is the only known source about Abraham, and as the Quran with all its mistakes is not from a god, so that the new information about Abraham cannot have come from a god - where did Muhammad get his information(?) about Abraham from? There in reality are just three possible such sources: Dark forces - and then it may easily be wrong. Legends and fairy tales - and then it may even more easily be wrong. And fantasy - in which case it is nearly sure to be wrong.

140 3/66a: "Ye (Jews and Christians*) are those who fell to disputing (even) in matters of which ye had some knowledge!" Muhammad here refers to the fact that there were different ways of understanding some words and verses in the Bible, which caused debates among Jews and among Christians. When they were able to dispute even things Muhammad claimed should be clear to them, he claims that this means they are not qualified to debate things they know nothing about.

In clear language his claim is that as Abraham (previous verse) lived such a long time ago, the Jews (and Christians) in reality had no correct information about Abraham, and thus that what he himself told about Abraham, were the correct stories, as he - he claimed - got those stories from Allah.

But as it is clear to anything but strong wishful thinking backed by naivety, that no god ever was involved in the making of a book of a quality like the Quran, there emerge two questions: From where did Muhammad get his stories? And may be the Bible all the same is more reliable than those stories if they have no good, reliable source? (This even more so at it is clear that the source for many of Muhammad's stories are from known legends, apocryphal - made up - stories, and even fairy tales (f.x. Luqman - surah 31 - is a person from old Arab fairy tales)).

141 3/68c: "- - - those who follow him (Abraham*) - - -". Here the intended claim is that Muslims are followers of Abraham. This in spite of that not even Islam has found even one reliable trace of Islam older than 610 AD (when Muhammad started his religious work). Abraham, if he ever lived he lived some 2500 years before that. And in spite of that science tells it is highly unlikely - "practically sure" to quote science - Abraham ever visited Arabia, not to mention Mecca, in spite of that the Bible (written at a time when there was no reason for it to falsify this) that Ishmael's descendants settled to the east of where the Suez canal now runs, and in spite of that even if Ishmael had settled in Mecca, there lived so many people in Arabia, that the blood of an Arab today had contained less than 1% of 1% of 1% - less than one in a million parts as already Ishmael's grandchildren according to the Bible started with 75% Egyptian blood (both Ishmael's mother and wife were from Egypt), and as Abraham in case has been only one of tens of thousands of forefathers, and as the blood further was diluted by millions of imported slaves and by other sources - DNA/blood from Abraham

142 3/68f: "- - - Allah is the Protector of those who have faith". If Allah exists. If he is a god. If he is behind what is told in the Quran. And if the Quran in addition tells the full truth and only the truth about this.

143 3/69b: "- - - lead you (Muslims*) astray". But as the Quran is not from a god - too much is wrong in it - are you really led astray if you leave it? The worst which can happen is that you leave one dead end road for another. And with some luck you may find a real god (as the Quran is not real, most likely the god also is not real - this even more so as we know Allah originally was a pagan god - al-Lah - Muhammad just took over) - if such one exists.

144 3/69d: "- - - and they (the people believing in the Bible*) do not perceive!" But that was just what they did - saw that what Muhammad told about the Bible and about Yahweh was far from what the Bible really said.

145 3/70c: "- - - Signs of Allah - - -". There is not one sign in all the Quran - or outside the Quran - clearly from Allah. Without exception they all can as easily be claimed by other religions and other gods. Never proved claims and never proved words are that cheap.

146 3/70d: “Why do ye (the Jews*) reject the Signs of Allah, of which ye are (yourselves) witnesses?” They rejected the “Signs” – the teaching of Muhammad (the Quran as a book did not exist yet). The word “Sign” here may refer to two statements:

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. Islam also never mention the next few verses – f.x. number 18/21 about real and false prophets, and where Muhammad do not even qualify as a real prophet. See the chapter about “Muhammad in the Bible?” in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran". Wrong.

The other claim here is that when Jesus talked to his disciples about a helper that should come to them, Muslims claim that this meant Muhammad, even though they have to twist their “explanation” not a little (they need at least one “foretelling” about Muhammad from GT and one from NT, because it is said that he is foretold in both) - and even though Muhammad was born 500 years after the disciples were dead, he should be the helper of the disciples of Jesus according to Islam! (Jesus was talking about The Holy Spirit which came to the disciples some days later at Pentecost (Acts 2/2-4)).

The Quran refers to one or two learned Jews whom Islam claims accepted Mohammad as a prophet. (This may or may not be true - it is a not documented claim). But it is in no way correct to say that “ye” (all or most of the Jews) did so. On the contrary – may be a thousand Jews were killed and murdered and many more made slaves or had to flee the area, because they refused to accept Islam as their religion. Wrong claim - there is a huge difference between one/a few and most/all.

See 7/157d+e below.

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 ones. Similar claims in 2/42 – 2/101 – 2/146.

What was wrong with them, Muhammad told, was that they had distorted or thrown away parts of the OT (he claimed), so that it did not tell the same story as the Quran – which it, he claimed, surely had done when it was sent down from Allah. (As mentioned no part of the Bible is “sent down”, except the 10 Commandments. It is all written by humans – may be inspired by god, but written by humans. What comes closest to having been “sent down” except for the 10 Commandments are the laws of Moses, which the Bible tells Yahweh told to Moses, and Moses wrote them down later.) See 2/75b, 2/76b and 2/77a above, and especially 7/157d+e below.

Worse: Not even Islam has ever found a proof for that the Bible is falsified - not even a single point of falsification they have found in it (guess if they had referred to it if they had found anything!). Mistakes, yes, but no falsifications. The same goes for science: No falsification found by them, too.

147 3/71c: “Why do you (Christians/Jews*) clothe the truth with falsehood (= falsify the Bible, the Torah, and the other Jewish scriptures - this is strongly stated in the Quran and in Islam, as if it is not true then the Quran is a falsified book*), - - -?” 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 who knew little about the Bible, and the only way out he had. But does the Quran represent the truth? - with that many obvious mistakes, etc., it at most can be partly true. Also see 3/24d and 3/70d above.

148 3/71e: “- - - conceal the Truth (what the Quran tells*) - - -”. With so many mistakes, the Quran at best is only partly true. Also see “Muhammad in the Bible?”, 7/157e - and 3/71b above.

#149 3/71i: "- - - while ye (the Jews in and around Medina*) have knowledge?" Just here Muhammad most likely refers to his claims that the Jews had falsified the Bible and that they knew that it was falsified. (#####Quite a claim by the way: He claimed that they believed in something they knew was a falsification!! - a psychological impossibility.)

Alternatively Muhammad here claims the Jews (and the Christians) knew he was mentioned in the Bible - a claim Muhammad did not repeat too often, perhaps because he suspected or knew it was not true. (Be sure he had used it - and frequently - as an argument if he had known it to be true!)

150 3/72c: "- - - what (the Quran*) is revealed - - -". Was the Quran really revealed? And in case by whom?. As all the mistakes etc. prove that no god was involved, there remain 3 alternatives: Dark forces - Muhammad had no chance to detect the deception if f.x. the Devil dressed up like Gabriel and pretended giving him verses from Allah - the partly immoral moral code and partly unjust sharia laws may point to this explanation. Or a mental illness like TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) like modern medical science suspects - which also may have made Muhammad honestly believe in parts of what he told, at least in the beginning. Or by a cold human brain - perhaps Muhammad’s own - all the mistakes which were correct science or knowledge in Arabia at the time of Muhammad, may point to this explanation, and the same may the fact that all the "borrowed" stories in the Quran are from in or around Arabia.

151 3/73c: "True guidance (the Quran*) - - -". There is no true guidance in a book full of mistakes. Also see 2/2b above and 16/107 below.

152 3/73d: "True guidance is the Guidance (the Quran*) of Allah - - -". No god has had anything to do with the Quran - too much is wrong in it, so much that it is heresy, slander and an insult to blame it on a god, not to mention an omniscient god. Islam at least has to prove both Allah's existence, and that he in case is a god - neither f.x. a caricature of an existing god, nor simply something from the dark forces, nor as simply a fiction. Also see 2/2b above.

153 3/73e: "- - - revelation - - -". If there were revelations, they were from no god - too many errors, contradictions, etc. One may speculate if they were made up, were from dark forces, or from a mental illness - f.x. TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) like science tends to believe, or by a cold, scheming brain, f.x. Muhammad's - but it only will be speculations. The only thing which is sure, is that no god makes a book of that quality.

154 3/73g: "All bounties are in the hand of Allah. He granteth them to whom He pleaseth - - -". Allah in his unfathomable wisdom decides who is to have a good life and who not. Well, it is an "explanation" for what seems unfair in this world.

155 3/74a: "For His (Allah's*) Mercy (here = prophethood*) He specially choseth whom He pleaseth - - -". Muhammad claimed that he was not rejected by the Jews because his teaching was wrong, but because he was not a Jew. This verse is a defense against the bad Jews disliking that he was not Jewish - it was for Allah to decide whom to choose for a messenger. (Muhammad's claim was wrong - and it is likely Muhammad knew it, but needed the "explanation" - as the real reason was that there are miles between Islam and the Mosaic - Jewish - religion.)

156 3/74c: "- - - Allah is the Lord of bounties unbounded". Often claimed, never proved.

157 3/75c: “- - - they (Jews and Christians*) say, 'there is no call on us (to keep faith) with these ignorant (Pagans)'". Here it is needed proofs if Islam really claims the Jews (there were few Christians) were worse than average - f.x. Arabs do not have the best of reputations for reliability. Just ask any sailor.

158 3/75e: “But they (Jews and Christians*) tell a lie against Allah (= they have falsified the Bible*) - - -”. It is difficult to tell something is a lie, as long as nobody knows what the truth about Allah is - or if he even exists. There are so many mistakes, etc. in the Quran, that the book is totally unreliable as a proof, and the Quran is the only "real" source for the claims about Allah and about his possible existence. More to the point: Both science and Islam has proved very strongly that the Bible is not falsified. Neither of them has been able to document even one single falsification - mistakes yes, falsifications no.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

###159 3/75g: “But they (Jews and Christians*) tell a lie against Allah (= they have falsified the Bible*), and well they know it.” Wrong. ######It is a psychological impossibility to believe in a god or a "holy" book if you know it is a falsification. But the claim is good propaganda for leaders of people unable or unwilling to think things, words, facts, and slogans over.

Here - and especially in the words "- - - and well they (Jews and Christians*) know it." Muhammad knew he was telling a lie - he knew too much about people not to know this was a lie. See 3/78f below.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

160 3/76b: "- - - those who sell the faith they owe to Allah - - -". Muhammad many places in the Quran - like here - claims that non-Muslims do not believe in Islam because they have "sold" the religion for a better life in this world - a much more pleasing "explanation" for him and his followers than the pure truth: The non-Muslims simply believed or even saw that things were seriously wrong with the Quran and with Muhammad's new religion.

##161 3/76f: "- - - Allah loveth - - -". Impossible unless Allah exists.

##162 3/76g: "- - - Allah loveth those who act right". How can he in case love the ones who live according to the Quran? - a number of its moral rules are obviously wrong. The "constitution" for all moral rules is: "Do onto others like you want others do onto you". Compare this to the Islamic (im)moral code - and even a number of its laws, not to mention its rules for behavior in war - and weep. The only ones not able to see the horror in it, are Muslims who have been taught that this is "good and lawful" and "our glorious rights and duties" from they were babies. Read modern religious Islamic literature meant for Muslims, and you still find these medieval and pre-medieval ways of thinking and this upside down moral - or immoral - code. This at the same time as they declare that Islam is the "religion of peace". They should mention that Islam also is the culture and mentality of 630 AD and the "Religion of al-Taqiyya" (the lawful lie) - - - and in reality "the religion of war and suppression"..

163 3/76i: "- - - act aright - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

164 3/77a: "- - - those who sell the faith they owe Allah - - - for a small price - - -". Expressions like this mainly - and often - are used for Jews and Christians. What is meant is that those bad persons have falsified the Bible to have a richer life on Earth. Instead of admitting that they simply did not believe in Muhammad's new religion - and everything we know about history proves it literally was a new religion and that Muhammad's claims about older roots are fairy tales - from honest reasons. It was psychologically much wiser for him if he wanted to promote his religion - and his basis of power - to claim they did it from base motifs, and were morally degenerated and despicable persons. You will find him telling and impressing this claim on his followers several places in the Quran. Blind belief made people believe anything and without using their brains. It still does. Also see 2/75b, 2/130a, and 3/24 above.

####165 3/78a: “(Many Jews and Christians*) distort the Book (here the Bible) - - -“. This is an unproved claim without which Islam is dead - if the Bible is not falsified, that automatically means the Quran is wrong on many central points. But the fact is that in 1400 years Islam have been able to produce only claims and words – both of which are very cheap – whereas science has some 12ooo relevant old papers and fragments (of them some 300 from the 4 Gospels) from all over the then known world, plus some 32ooo other manuscripts with quotations from the Bible - all older than 610 AD when Muhammad started the new religion - 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 proof for falsification of the Bible exists. Also see “Muhammad in the Bible” (7/157e below), and “Falsified Bible?” in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran".

166 3/78b: "- - - (as they (mainly Jews*) read) you (Muslims*) would think it is part of the Book (here the Bible*), but it is not part of the Book (but claimed to be falsifications as it is different from the Quran*); And they say, 'That is from Allah', but it is not from Allah - - -". This is Muhammad's standard "explanation" for the many and big differences between what he claimed the Bible said and what it really said and says: The bad people had falsified the Bible, and what he said was the correct. Both science and Islam today have proved the claim wrong, but it was Muhammad's only way to save his religion when f.x. Jews read from the Bible and thus proved that what Muhammad told it said, was wrong.

167 3/78d: "- - - it is they (Jews and Christians*) who tell a lie against Allah - - -". = they tell something different from what Muhammad tells, and Muhammad's claim and "explanation" - as normal no proofs - is that the Bible is falsified by them ("who tell a lie against Allah"). See 2/75a+b+c, 2/130a, and 3/78a above.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

168 3/78f: "- - - and well they (Jews and Christians*) know it (that the Bible is falsified*)!" This is propaganda - and propaganda only fit for non-thinking and/or non-educated persons: It is psychologically impossible to believe in a god and a holy book you know are fakes. And very many of the Jews proved with the loss of their lives that they really believed in their scriptures.

This surah is from 625 AD. At this time Muhammad knew that at least the great majority - perhaps all the Jews and the few Christians in and around Yatrib/Medina believed in their old books and not in his tales. He may still to a large or small degree believe he had a contact with a god (if he had a mental decease - f.x. TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) this is fully possible), but he knew the Jews and the Christians did not believe him. He thus knew that they did not "know the Bible is falsified" - one does not believe in something one knows is falsified. Muhammad here thus used what he knew was a lie - propaganda often are lies.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

169 3/79b: "It is not (possible) that a man, to whom is given the Book, and Wisdom, and the Prophetic Office, should say to people: 'Be my worshippers rather than Allah's - - -". See 3/79a just above: More likely this verse is an argument for the claim that Jesus just was an ordinary prophet, and not divine. The dishonesty here is that Jesus never said anyone should "worship me rather than the god" - the argument is a lie. (One thing is that he never said so according to the Bible. As convincing is that the sentence would be totally at odds with everything else he said there.)

As for Jesus it may be thought provoking that 19/19 tells he was holy, whereas other points in the Quran makes it very clear that Muhammad was not - just an ordinary man. (#####When Islam and Muslims today name Muhammad holy, that means that either they or the Quran are lying.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

170 3/79e: "It is not (possible) that (a prophet*) should say to people: 'Be ye my worshipers rather than Allah's.'" A number of Muslim scholars think this clear claim, but with somewhat unclear reference, refers to Jesus - that it is impossible that Jesus did not come to tell about Allah. To Quote Yusuf Ali (YA414): "It is not in reason or in the nature of things (claims, not documentation*) that Allah's messenger (according to the Quran and Islam Jesus was a messenger for Allah, something which would have been impossible in the strong Yahweh culture in Israel at that time - he had got few/no followers and had been arrested/killed fast*) should preach against Allah (= a religion different from Islam*). Jesus came to preach and convey the true message of Allah (= the Quran/Islam*)", according to Muhammad. As it is strongly proved by both science and even more strongly by Islam that the Bible is not falsified, and as it is strongly proved by science that the god of the Jews at that time was Yahweh, and as strongly proved that no religion like Islam, no god like Allah, and no book like the Quran existed in the entire Roman Empire at that time (or at other times) this merits no comments, except on behalf of the ones who do not know the Bible well: There are so big and so fundamental differences between the teaching of Jesus in the Bible and the teaching of Muhammad in the Quran, and also between what the Bible really said and what Muhammad claimed it said, that you have to be religiously very blind - or with little knowledge - to be able to believe the two religions came from one and the same god. Even with some superficial similarities between Islam and Christianism it is difficult to find another of the big religions which fundamentally is more different from Jesus and NT than Islam. One is the religion of total honesty, truth and love, the other the religion of apartheid, suppression, and war, resting partly on the use of lies (al-Taqiyya, Kitman, "war is deceit" - and most things are jihad/"holy" war, break your promise/word/oath if that gives a better result (and pay expiation afterwards if necessary - 2/26h, 2/224e-f, 2/225a, 3/54b, 4/142a, 5/89a+b, 8/30, 10/21b, 13/42a, 27/50, 86/16)).

Just for the record: Al-Taqiyya, Kitman, and Hilah can be used at least in these cases (for deceit, etc. and broken oaths there are given no real limitations if the broken oath, etc. will give a better result. By implication this also goes for ordinary words and promises, as an oath is something stronger than a normal word or promise):

To save your or others' health or life.

To get out of a tight spot or a dangerous problem.

To make peace in a family.

When it will give a better result than honesty or honoring one’s oath.

To cheat women (should be remembered by girls with Muslim boyfriends wanting sex - or wanting a marriage to get work or residence permit in a rich country.)

To deceive opponents/enemies.

To betray enemies.

To secure one’s money (very clear from Hadiths).

To defend Islam. (Advised if necessary to succeed.)

To promote Islam. (Advised if necessary to succeed.)

But al-Taqiyya is a double-edged sword: In the short run you may cheat and deceive some ones – actually also in the long run if the opposite part does not know about this side of Muslims and of Islam, or if he/she is naïve - but that is it.

171 3/79f: "It is not (possible) that (a prophet*) should say to people: 'Be ye my worshipers rather than Allah's.'" Perhaps not, but it is quite possible for a man to say: "I am a prophet. I dictate a book. Obey me on behalf of my claimed god." Many have said so - some with and some without a special "holy" book. Their followers call them "messengers" or "prophets", the correct title mostly is "false prophet".

172 3/79g: "- - - Him (Allah*) Who is truly the Cherisher of all - - -". This only can be true if Allah exists and is a major god. In addition see 1/1a above.

173 3/80a: "Nor would he (a true prophet*) instruct you to take angels - - - for Lords and Patrons". No Christian would understand this sentence unless he/she also knew the Quran and some more of Islam: There is no place in the NT where one is instructed to take one or more angels "for Lord and Patron" - not even a place in the Bible where the text is possible to misunderstand like that.

But then there is the claim (not directly said in the Quran) that The Holy Spirit just is another name for the angel Gabriel. Gabriel brought messages to Muhammad, but the Quran a couple of times mention that the Holy Spirit also did so: Logical shortcut - and like some other places in the Quran a logically invalid one: The Holy Spirit = the angel Gabriel. But no-one who has ever read the Bible with an open mind, would ever get the idea that the Holy Spirit is an angel - whatever it is, it clearly is something very special and very different from - and more than - an angel. Also the Quran does not say that Gabriel = the Holy Spirit - the claim started somewhere outside the Quran.

As for prophets as "Lord and Patron", there remains the question of saints - though they normally never were prophets originally. Here the Quran may have a point, as saints is not something from the Bible.

And finally there remains the question of Jesus. Here it is no doubt that the NT clearly indicates that Jesus is divine (though only Yahweh is God) - and Islam has till date never proved this wrong - lots of claims, but only claims. Verse 19/19 even confirms that Jesus was holy. Also see 3/80b just below.

174 3/80b: "Nor would he (a true prophet*) instruct you to take - - - prophets for Lords and Patrons". This one is easier than the one just above: Jesus is just another prophet (has to be in order to make it possible for Muhammad to be the greatest one), and thus it is wrong to revere him - all this according to the Quran. According to the Bible - included Jesus' own words - he is the son of Yahweh, and thus at least of divine stock. (That Jesus is the son of Yahweh is said at least 89 times, and that Yahweh is the father of Jesus at least 204 times in NT - many of those by Jesus himself, and Jesus is reliable according to the Quran - plus the Bible is proved by both science and by Islam to be not falsified in spite of Muhammad's claims - remember here that Muhammad according even to the Quran believed in and used dishonesty as a working tool.) But it may refer to saints - but these you only find in parts of the Christianity - and just in this case the Quran may be right, as there nowhere in the Bible is any word about saints in the Catholic meaning of the word.

But it may be thought provoking that the Quran makes it very clear that Muhammad just is an ordinary man, whereas 19/19 tells that Jesus was holy. (When Islam and Muslims today claim that Muhammad was holy, they either are lying compared to the Quran, or they indirectly declare that the Quran is lying on this point.)

175 3/80c: "Would he (a prophet - here indicated Jesus*) bid you unbelief after ye have bowed your will (to Allah in Islam)?" To say the least of it: A strong contradiction to the Bible - Jesus asked everyone to believe in Yahweh, not in al-Lah/Allah (called only Allah by Muhammad).

176 3/80d: "Would he (a prophet - here likely indicated Jesus*) bid you unbelief after ye have bowed your will (to Allah in Islam)?" Even forgetting all the other "peculiarities": Who is bidding unbelief - the Quran with all its errors and clearly not from a god, or the ones skeptical to the Quran?

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤

##177 3/81a: "Behold, Allah took the Covenant of the Prophets, saying:" - - - then comes to you a Messenger (Muhammad*) confirming what is with you (= the scriptures the prophets had and their teachings*); you must believe in him and rendering him help". There is nothing like this in the entire Bible. Besides: How could the prophets help Muhammad? - they were all dead hundreds of years before Muhammad was even born - many of them a thousand years and more before. (Not even the Quran talks about prophets between Jesus and Muhammad.)

A curiosum is that there nowhere in the Quran is told where and when Allah made a covenant with Muhammad or with the Muslims. There only is the matter-of-fact tone claim that there is one.

Another curiosum: Jesus according to the proved not falsified Bible NEVER gave any help to Muhammad, NEVER said anything about Muhammad, NEVER said anything which could help Muhammad, NEVER mentioned a god of war like Allah, NEVER mentioned a religion of war and suppression and blood like Islam, NEVER even touched the hateful, suppressing, bloody, warlike, and not least dishonest moral code like the one in the Quran, NEVER expressed any wish for a "hajj" to Mecca even though all Muslims should go there at least once, NEVER even mentioned neither Mecca nor the Kabah - the most holy place on Earth according to Islam. Morally there are oceans between Yahweh and Allah, and between Jesus and Muhammad - oceans and light-years.

Similar go for all the old Jewish prophets.

###To give you a complicated, but very clear message: The only place in the Bible where Jesus perhaps mentions Muhammad, is in the "very reliable" Quran and in the even more reliable the Hadiths. (There are Muslims who drop the Hadiths because they are too unreliable.)

Similar go for all the old Jewish prophets - included Moses.

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤

178 3/81c: "- - - you (the Jewish prophets*) must believe in him (Muhammad*) - - -". How could they, when they were dead centuries and more before Muhammad was born, and even a little more before he started telling what he wanted people to believe? NB: There is nothing like this in the Bible.

##179 3/81e: "I (Allah*) give you (the prophets*) a Book - - -". As mentioned other places, the prophets all got a copy of the claimed "Mother of the Book" according to the Quran. The Quran claims that all societies to all times and all places have been sent prophets teaching Islam (but neither science nor Islam has found the tiniest traces of such prophets or teaching) - Hadiths mention 124ooo through the times, and even this may just be a symbolic number. And as you see here they as mentioned each got a book which was a copy of the claimed "mother book" in Heaven, similar to the copy Muhammad claimed he got - the Quran. The claimed "mother book" either is made by the god or have existed since eternity, according to Muslims - and is revered by Allah and his angels. You of course are permitted to believe this, but the normal reaction when you meet this claim after having read the Quran and all its mistakes, contradictions, invalid logic, helpless language (helpless in bringing clear messages not to be misunderstood), etc., is disbelief or a hearty laughter - no god would revere a quality like the Quran.

#####As all the claimed books, included the Bible and the Quran, were copies of the same book, all the books should be very similar. One of the very many never proved claims in the Quran - a claim which is proved wrong on at least two points: 1. Out of claimed at least 124ooo copies (according to Hadiths) + likely copies of these, not one single fragment or quote is ever found. This at least - at least - is a very strong circumstantial proof for that the claim is wrong, this even more so as there are found tens of thousands of quotes, copies, and fragments from the Bible from the same period of time. 2. The Bible provably was never falsified. This again proves that the Bible and the Quran never were even similar books.

We may also mention that in the entire two books - Bible and Quran - there only is a short part of a sentence - 6 words - which is identical (the words "the righteous will inherit the land" in Psalm 37/29 - words which easily may be identical by coincidence), + that the Bible has more than 4 times as much text. Quite a thorough "falsification".

180 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 have 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.

181 3/81h: "- - - then comes to you a Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -". There is nothing about a messenger or a prophet after Jesus in the entire Bible - this in stark contradiction to the Quran's and Islam's claims (if Muhammad is not foretold in both OT and NT, the Quran is wrong, and thus Islam and its Muslims cannot admit the plain fact that Muhammad nowhere is mentioned in any form in the Bible - they try to find him by twisting texts and facts, but only wishfully thinking Muslims are able to believe in those gymnastics. Muhammad simply is not and never was in the Bible.

182 3/81i: This is a funny one: The Messenger referred to, clearly is Muhammad. Letter for letter: It is impossible not to understand that he (Allah) visited - "saying (to each of them*)" - each and every prophet before Muhammad (Islam claims there have been 124ooo included the old Jewish ones) and confirmed what is with you (the Quran*)". No comments except: A busy job for Allah.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

#####183 3/81j: "- - - then comes to you a Messenger (Muhammad*), confirming what is with you (the Bible*) - - -". Wrong. There are so many fundamental and basic thoughts, ethics and moral rules which are so deeply different in the two books that the Quran is no confirmation of the Bible. And we remind you that science - and Islam - long since has proved that the Quran's never documented claim that the Bible is falsified, is wrong. Actually it is one of those claims Muhammad had to know he had taken out of thin air #####and thus knew he was lying (if he was not mentally ill - TLE f.x. (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy)), as he by now (in 625 AD) knew enough about the Jewish scriptures/the Bible to know that he was not confirming those - and remember: Both science and Islam have clearly proved that Muhammad's never proved claim that the Bible was falsified, is not true). But it was his only possible "explanation" if he was to save his religion and his own position as a claimed prophet and the leader for his religion - his platform of respect and power - - - and women.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

184 3/81k: "- - - then comes to you a Messenger (Muhammad*), confirming what is with you (the Bible*); you must believe in him - - -". Muhammad normally is more of a psychologist than in this plump message (plump because they all were dead centuries before Muhammad was even born, and thus in no way could help him), but it is a clear message and may be efficient towards blind believers wanting to believe.

185 3/81l: "Allah said: 'Do ye (all the old prophets*) agree, and take this Covenant (including believing in and helping Muhammad*) as binding on you?' They said: 'We agree'". There is nothing even remotely similar to this in the Bible.

186 3/81m: "Allah said: 'Do ye (all the old prophets*) agree, and take this Covenant (including believing in and helping Muhammad*) as binding on you?' They said: 'We agree'". He said: 'Then bear witness (about Muhammad*) - - -". They cannot have been very reliable, as exactly none of the known prophets ever mentioned him - included not Abraham, not Moses, and not Jesus to mention 3 of the main prophets according to the Quran (and yes, we know about the cherry-picked, wrong claims concerning 5. Mos. 18/15 and 18/18, and about the helper Jesus promised his disciples (the Holy Spirit) which Islam claims meant Muhammad 500+ years after the last disciple was dead, but those are claims made up after cherry-picking and twisting of texts. Claims made up from dire need simply - to find "confirmation" was and is more essential than to find out what is true or not in the Quran.)

187 3/82b: "- - - perverted transgressors - - -". One of the many nice Islamic names for non-Muslims who does not want to become Muslims - or in this case perhaps for Muslims leaving Islam. Such names have their psychological effect, and are even today one of the reasons why integration between Muslims and non-Muslims are difficult - who wants to make friends with perverted transgressors?

#188 3/83a: “- - - all creatures (= angels, jinns, man and animals*) in the heavens (plural and wrong*) and on the earth have, willing or unwilling 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 have accepted Islam and pray to Allah.

189 3/83c: "- - - willing or unwilling - - -". What about 2/256: “Let there be no compulsion in religion – - - “?

190 3/83d: "- - - to Him (Allah*) shall they all (all creatures*) be brought back (at the Day of Doom*)". This only can be true if Allah exists, if he is a god, if he is behind what is told in the Quran, and if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth about this.

191 3/84a: "- - - what (the Quran) has been revealed to us (Muslims*) - - -". Is the Quran really revealed? - in case not from a god; too many mistakes, etc. Then from whom or what?

192 3/84b: "- - - what (the Quran) has been revealed to us (Muslims*) and what was revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob and the (12 Jewish*) tribes- - -". One more of the never proved claims that it was the Quran which was given to each and every of the old prophets (see 3/81e above). One more claim showed wrong by science and by Islam by being unable to find the slightest trace of Islam or something similar older than 610 AD. And also by the fact that even really old Biblical scriptures are similar to the Bible of today. And also by the fact that even really old Biblical scriptures are similar to the Bible of today. (Islam's claim that the Mosaic - Jewish - religion and culture was a falsified version of Islam does not hold water. The same goes for the Christian religion. These are facts of history, at least from centuries before Christ onwards.)

#193 3/84i: “- - - in (the Books) given to Moses, Jesus, and the Prophets- - - -”. What is indicated here, is that all got the same book - the Quran or something very similar (actually the claim is a copy of the claimed "mother book" in Heaven). But the claim is proved wrong by science and even stronger by Islam by being unable to find and document any falsifications in the Bible. You bet Islam had told about it if they had found even one single provable falsification! Then also there is the fact that one has got some 44ooo papers from before 610 AD relevant to the Bible, but not one single similar to the Quran. If there had been 124ooo or more prophets teaching Islam, where are the traces? 44ooo : 0 means something in that claim is wrong.

###Islam also has been unable to find any proof at all for the existence of a book like the Quran before 610 AD when Muhammad started his mission. Compared to some 44ooo from the Bible, this is quite revealing - especially as the Hadiths tells that at least 124ooo of the Quran (one for each claimed prophet) were sent down (and these of course - like the Biblical scriptures - would be copied by claimed believers).

The "books" in the Bible started with 66 handwritten manuscripts, and now we know 44ooo copies, fragments and quotes older than 610 AD. The Quran started with 124ooo or more full copies, and now we do not know any trace of such one older than 610 AD. Believe this Islamic claim is you are able to.

194 3/85b: "- - - in the Hereafter he (the non-Muslim*) will be in the ranks of those who have lost (all spiritual good)". This only can be true if the Quran is reliable, and if Allah in addition exists and is a major god + if the god the non-Muslim believe in - f.x. Yahweh - does not exist.

195 3/86a: “How shall Allah guide those who reject faith after they accepted it and bore witness that the Messenger (Muhammad*) was true and that Clear Signs had come unto them?” Well, on basis of this sentence it is not possible for Allah to guide anyone, because Muhammad/the Quran is proved (by science and by Islam) full of mistakes, and not one single so called sign is proved true - with the possible exception of some “borrowed” from the Bible, and they in case prove Yahweh/God, not Allah.

196 3/86b: “How shall Allah guide those (Jews, Christians*) who reject faith after they accepted it and bore witness that the Messenger (Muhammad*) was true and that Clear Signs had come unto them?” This refers to Muhammad's claim that one or a few Jews and Christians had admitted (maybe true, maybe not) that he was a prophet, and here he claims it then was unjust and not understandable that not also all the others admitted the same. It is very clear even from Islamic literature that the reason why they did not believe in Muhammad, was that they simply did not believe in his new religion and stuck to the Bible.

197 3/86c: “How shall Allah guide those (Jews and Christians*) who reject faith after they accepted it and bore witness that the Messenger (Muhammad*) was true and that Clear Signs had come unto them?” Some Muslim scholars (f.x. A3/69) say that this is not about what the Jews (and few Christians) said and did, but about the Islamic claim that Muhammad is foretold in the Bible, something Muhammad here claimed they knew, but refused to admit. As you have to have very strange glasses to find Muhammad in the Bible - he is not there (see 7/157e below) - this sentence in case is invalid. (But it is a claim Islam cannot afford to drop, as it is said in the Quran that one finds Muhammad both in OT and in the Gospels. If they then do not find him, the Quran is wrong and cannot be from a god, and Islam is a made up religion - not from a god. And the belief of the fathers - "taqlid" - and the belief you have built your life on, is more essential than to find out if that belief can be true or not - for Muslims like for believers in many other religions), Also Islam has not one single proof for Allah, and a claimed indication in the Bible at least would be an indication - if it had been true. See the chapter about "Muhammad in the Bible?" in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" - https://www.1000mistakes.com, or 7/157e below.

198 3/86i: "- - - Allah guides not - - -". He cannot guide very many by means of a guidebook like the Quran.

199 3/86j: "- - - people unjust". Beware that when the Quran uses expressions like this, it is as compared to the Quran's own partly immoral moral code, and also to the partly unjust sharia laws.

200 3/87b: "- - - on them (see 3/86b-c above*) (rests) the curse of Allah, of His angels, and of all mankind". We cannot tell about the effect on Allah and his claimed angels - except that it is none if Allah is a made up, pagan god. But even though this verse primarily talks about people leaving Islam, it may sometimes have weighed heavily for Muslims starting horrors against other non-Muslims. (Muslims often complain about the crusaders, but holy Heaven how much worse and on how much greater scale they behaved themselves - f.x. in Armenia, Africa, Sind (now approximately Pakistan) and India.)

Muslims also like to claim that nobody leaves Islam (it many places carry strict punishment or death to do so - at least socially). This is one of the many proofs for that this neither is nor was true. Not to mention that the majority of mankind agree with the ones leaving a war, suppressing, hate, and blood religion based only on a book full of errors and worse, and dictated by a man who provably (from the Quran) believed in the use of dishonesty, deceit, broken words, etc., and with much to gain by making people believe in his new religion and platform of power, and a man who provably (from the Quran) liked respect, power, riches for bribes - and women. A most saintly and reliable (re?)teller of the book.

201 3/87c: "- - - the curse of Allah - - -". This only can exist if Allah exists and in addition is a god.

202 3/88a: "In that (Hell*) will they (the ones who leave Islam*) dwell - - -". In the curse of Allah - in reality in Hell. If Allah exists and is a god, and if no other god exists - f.x. Yahweh.

203 3/88-89: "- - - nor will their (the ones who leave Islam*) penalty be lightened, nor respite be their (lot) - Except for those who repent (even) after that (see 3/89a just below*) - - -". The Bible will say that the ones who repent and believe in Yahweh, not those who believe in Muhammad and Allah, will be forgiven.

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

204 3/90b: "- - - those who reject faith after they accepted it - - -". Muslims leaving Islam. Muslims like to claim it never happens, but it happens frequently - and happened frequently at the time of Muhammad, too. (###We also have seen that 3 out of 4 adults who today become Muslims, leave Islam within 3 years. What is it they learn inside the religion which make them leave again in spite of the problems and the danger leaving may mean?)

205 3/90d: "- - - never will their (those who have left Islam*) repentance be accepted - - -." To leave Islam is unforgiveable. "Let there be no compulsion in religion"? And compare this to NT!!

Another point is that to forgive - or for that case to punish or reward or fulfill prayers - means for Allah to change his Plan considering the sinner/person, something which according to the Quran is something nobody and nothing can make him do. See 2/187d above.

206 3/90e: "- - - for they (who leave Islam*) are those who have - - - gone astray". Only if Allah exists, if he is a major god, if he is behind what the Quran tells, and the book in addition tells the full truth and only the truth. If on the other hand the Quran is a made up book, and "the others" happen to follow a god which really exists, somebody else are astray. Not to mention that the Muslims in case are very astray - especially if the real god is one preaching a good and benevolent religion, as it will be difficult for him to accept souls from a war and hate and suppressing - and dishonest - religion.

207 3/92a: "By no means shall ye attain righteousness unless ye give (freely) of that which ye love - - -". - among other things gifts to finance warfare. Thieving and robbing pays - but takes some money each time a raid is to be outfitted, not to mention a war. We may add that most of Muhammad's raids were raids of aggression to steal/rob riches and to take captives for extortion or slaves. But all the same it was named "holy wars" (jihads) and "holy battles" (ghazwas). (Well, to be just: Also gifts to the needy and to the religion itself(?), etc. were good gifts).

208 3/92b: "By no means shall ye attain righteousness unless ye give (freely) of that which ye love - - -". Another of the fundamental differences between the Bible - and especially NT - and the Quran: In NT it is your mind and your belief in Yahweh which count most. Good deeds are plusses, but your honest belief and what is in your mind are the decisive points. In the Quran - like you see here - your deeds are what decide your possible 2. life. Yahweh and Allah the same god with two so fundamentally different teachings on such an essential point? Nope.

209 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 in a next life, as the religion is made up.

210 3/94d: "- - - unjust wrongdoers - - -". The word "Wrongdoers" in the Quran normally means "non-Muslims". It is one of the many unsympathetic names - here strengthened by "unjust" - Muhammad uses many places for creating distance between his followers and all the others (extreme sects and new religions often want such a distance, partly to make correcting information from the outside more difficult to get, partly to give the followers a feeling of exclusivity, and sometimes for other reasons like creating a superiority feeling like in Islam - a feeling making war and killing easier, because the victims are not reckoned to be fully human, or at least bad people - f.x. "unjust wrongdoers".

211 3/95b: "Allah speaketh the Truth - - -". Not if it is not Allah who speaks - and no god ever told the Quran with all its errors, contradiction, etc.

212 3/95g: "- - - (Abraham was*) sane in faith - - -". Faith in the Quran means Islam. So what is said here is that Abraham was a good Muslim (the same is said many other places in the Quran - but contradicted by the Bible, which tells Abraham's god was Yahweh, not Allah). Believe it whoever wants. But see 3/93a and 3/95d above.

IT ALSO IS WORTH MENTIONING THAT ABRAHMAM F.X. NEVER WENT TO WAR FOR A RELIGIOUS REASON, NEITHER ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE, NOR ACCORDING TO THE QURAN. HE CANNOT HAVE BEEN A GOOD MUSLIM.

Abraham also married his (half) sister, Sarah, something which is strictly forbidden in Islam. He cannot have been a good Muslim.

#213 3/96b: “The first House (of worship) appointed for man was that at Bakkah. 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.x. Egypt, Turkey, 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.x? - or even later?

Islam also has 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.x. is 5630 years old, not one single soul will believe them unconditionally, because of "al-Taqiyya" - the lawful lie - which Muslims not only are permitted to use, but are advised to use "if necessary", when it comes to promoting or defending Islam. But non-Muslims are not permitted to visit Kabah. 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 kilometers 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 then Adam's temple was destroyed at the time of Noah - but as often before Muslims only claim, seldom/never prove, so believe it who wants.

(We may add 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 tough 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 2/127a above.

One extra small detail: The foundations/temple the Quran claims Abraham built for his small family in Mecca - at the time of Abraham a desert and an empty valley - was so big that when the rich Mecca rebuilt it around 600 AD they could not afford to rebuild to the same size according to Hadiths. Any comments necessary?

By the way: The oldest known temple - building for revering one or more gods - is in Turkey, not in Arabia. Gobekli Tepe was built around 9ooo BC - some 7ooo years before Abraham and perhaps 5ooo years before Noah.

214 3/96d: "(The mosque Kabah is) full of blessing and guidance for all kinds of beings - - -". Only if it really is sanctified by a god and not just "represents" a made up one.

Besides, if this is true, Muslims are making a great sin by permitting only humans, and only Muslim humans, to visit it.

Kabah also is one of the really strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. For Allah it is the one and only super holy place on Earth. Yahweh does not even bother to mention that place, and exactly none of his prophets ever uttered a word about Kabah or Mecca or even a whisper about wanting to make a pilgrimage there. (And remember: Both science and Islam have strongly proved that in spite of Muhammad's many but never proved words, the Bible is not falsified.)

215 3/97c: “In it (Kabah in Mecca*) are Signs manifest; (for example), the Station of Abraham - - -“. For one thing Abraham never was in Mecca (see 2/127a above) - "practically sure" to quote science - and never built Kabah or its foundations. But there is a stone there, with a mark in it roughly like from two soft shoes. Islam calls it the Station of Abraham and tells 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? (Well, some say that by a miracle the stone became soft - an easy explanation and way out. According to Hadiths Muhammad was known for mostly choosing the easiest solutions and ways out).

This is the kind of sure proofs the Quran tells about - and which many of the Muslims even believe in.

216 3/97e: "- - - pilgrimage thereto (Kabah*) is a duty men (what about women?*) owe to Allah - - -". There nowhere is given a good reason for this - neither for the pilgrimage nor for why one owes it to Allah. Many words, but no logical and good explanation. Except that it was a pagan tradition Muhammad took over.

###########Besides: What is the merit of a pilgrimage as Allah according to several verses in the Quran has predestined everything already and according to his Plan, which nobody and nothing - included a pilgrimage - can change anyhow? Oh, we know that Muslims just flee from questions like this, or seek mysticism: "It must be true even if it impossible, because Allah says so in the Quran". But our question stands.

217 3/98e: "- - - Allah is Himself witness to all ye do". See 2/233h above and 35/38b below.

218 3/99h: "But Allah is not unmindful of all that ye (non-Muslims*) do". See 2/233h above and 35/38b below - and 3/77b above. If he exists. And if he in case is a god.

219 3/100d: "- - - they (some Jews and Christians*) would (indeed) render you (Muslims*) apostates after you have believed". Apostates from what as the Quran is not from a god? - too much wrong in the book for being from a god.

220 3/101c: "- - - among you lives the Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -". But as the Quran and thus the message are not from a god, the question is: The messenger for whom or what in case? Also see 63/5a below.

221 3/101f: "Whoever holds firmly to Allah will be shown a way that is straight". If Allah exists. If he in addition is a god. If he is behind what is told in the Quran. And if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth.

###But is there any symbolism in that Muhammad talked about the straight - the easy - way, whereas Jesus talked about the narrow - the difficult - road? Populism vs. realism?

222 3/103a: "- - - the Rope which Allah (stretches out for you (Muslims*)) - - -". The rope is Islam - ok for salvation if Allah exists and is a major god, invalid if the Quran is not from a god - which it clearly is not (no god delivers a book of that quality).

223 3/103b: "- - - be not divided among yourselves (Muslims*) - - -". According to our information there have been some 3ooo Muslim sects through the times. Some have "died" a natural death. Some have been suppressed. Some have been drowned in blood. And some still exists.

224 3/103c: "- - - Allah's favor on you (Muslims*) - - -". This only is correct if Allah exists and in addition has done the favors. If not, there are other explanations - remember that Muhammad had a strong tendency to credit his god with anything good - see f.x. 11/7a below.

225 3/103g: "- - - He (Allah*) saved you (Muslims*) from it (Hell*) - - -". This may - may - only be true if Allah exists and in addition is a major god.

226 3/103i: “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 2/39b and 2/99 above.

BUT THE MOST CENTRAL POINT HERE IS JUST THIS THAT THE QURAN CONFIRMS THAT THINGS ACCORDING TO THE QURAN ARE EXPLAINED CLEARLY = TO BE UNDERSTOOD LITERALLY. THIS DOCUMENTS THAT WHEN ISLAM AND MUSLIMS CLAIM THAT ERRORS, CONTRADICTIONS, ETC. AND OTHER BAD POINTS IN THE QURAN DO NOT MEAN WHAT THE TEXTS SAY, BUT ARE ALLEGORIES OR SOMETHING, SUCH CLAIMS AND EXPLAINING AWAY ARE WRONG. BESIDES: WHO CAN EXPLAIN BETTER THAN AN OMNISCIENT GOD?

#######227 3/104a: "Let there arise out of you (Muslims*) a band of people inviting to all that is good, enjoining what is right, and forbidding what is wrong - - -". #######The world is still waiting for this - the Muslims instead follow the Quran and its somewhat "special" laws and rules.

Well, perhaps some of the ones really living according f.x. the Bible qualify.

228 3/104e: "- - - they (good Muslims*) are the ones to attain felicity". If Allah exists. If he is behind what is told in the Quran. And if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth.

229 3/105a: "- - - those who - - - fall into disputations after receiving clear Signs - - -". Sects splitting off and/or persons leaving Islam. (Some Muslims of today claim that Islam is such a perfect religion that nobody leaves it. As you see here it happened even then.)

230 3/106b: "Did ye (non-Muslims, apostates*) reject Faith, after accepting it? Taste then the Penalty for rejecting Faith". One of the worst sins possible to commit according to Muhammad, was and is - to leave Islam. As the Quran claims it is the gravest of sins, Muslims in "taqlid" and without questioning anything accepts that it is the gravest of sins. ("Taqlid" = naively and without questions to accept what your father and surroundings claim must be the truth, because so their fathers again claimed, and then it must be true.)

231 3/106-108: Bad people will go to Hell, good Muslims will go to Paradise, this is what the book states here - without any documentation - and continues: “These are the Signs of Allah”. Well, it is a statement hanging in thin air, not to say vacuum - typically for the Quran; not proved and impossible to prove. Believe it if you are primitive and naïve enough - especially if you remember the fact that all and everything is based only on the words of a somewhat “special” warlord, rapist and dictator who liked power - and ask questions if you are not entirely naïve. Also see 3/77b above.

232 3/107b: "- - - therein (Paradise*) to dwell (for ever)". There are some verses in the Quran which may indicate that Hell is not quite forever (6/128c, 11/107b, 43/74b-c, 78/23, plus some Hadiths) and one (11/108c) which also may indicate similar for Paradise. Muslims claims that this in case only means that the inhabitants of Paradise will go to an even better place, but this is not said in the Quran.

233 3/108d: "- - - Allah means no injustice to any of His creatures". Read the unjust parts of the sharia laws, the immoral parts of Islam's moral code, Islam's rules for behavior during and after raids and wars, etc. and weep. Also see 1/1a above.

At least 200ooo (some numbers are much higher) MUSLIM girls and women raped by Pakistan soldiers during the war when Bangladesh freed itself from Pakistan in 1971 - not even a jihad/"holy war". As Allah predestines everything, also this must have been predestined by him. Justice or injustice?

234 3/109a: "To Allah belongs all that is in the heavens (plural and wrong*) and on earth - - -". There are many hundreds and more of loose claims like this one, built on no proof, no proved fact, and no documentation, in the Quran. Words are cheap.

235 3/109c: "- - - to Him (Allah*) do all questions go back (for decision)". = Allah decides and predestines all things - and everything he do predestine according to his unchangeable Plan. (Contradicting claim: Man has free will - impossible if Allah decides all things on beforehand. This makes up one of Islam's impossible questions: Predestination contra free will for man - impossible even theoretically to combine, even for a god. Islam is unable to explain this combination - only claims that it has to be true anyhow, as Allah/Muhammad says so in the Quran(!!)). Also see 3/154e, 6/149a and 14/22b below.

As for predestination contra free will for man, “The Message of the Quran” has this comment (6/141 to verse 6/149):

“In other words, the real relationship between Allah’s knowledge of the future (and, therefore, the ineluctably of what is to happen in the future) on one side, and man’s free will, on the other – two propositions which, on the face of it, seem to contradict one another – is beyond man’s comprehension; but since both are postulated by Allah (in the Quran*), both must be true."

Simply the ultimate pinnacle of clear speech. And the ultimate victory not for blind faith and "taqlid", but a blind faith based on naivety and intellectual unconsciousness.

IT ALSO IS THE ULTIMATE DEFEAT FOR THE CLAIM THAT IT IS POSSIBLE TO COMBINE THE CLAIM THAT MAN HAS FREE WILL WITH THE CLAIM THAT ALLAH DECIDES AND PREDESTINES EVERY DETAIL OF YOUR LIFE.

Predestination contra man’s free will actually is a version of “the Time Travel Paradox”, which is long since proved unsolvable. There is no way Allah can even be fully clairvoyant, not to mention decide everything on beforehand, and man at the same time have free will - not even partly free will, like some Muslims try to explain the problem away with. (More in the chapter about predestination in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran".)

The ultimately clear and easy to understand claim. And "taqlid" (blind and unquestioning belief in what the fathers told you - because their fathers again told so, and then it must be true!) is something Muslims blame non-Muslims of!!!

#####236 3/110a: “Ye (Muslims*) are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind - - -”. It is not possible to disbelieve that Muslims are the top of existing humans and human societies, as the Quran says so - and not one believing Muslim seems to be aware of how cheap words are. It also is strengthening the picture of non-Muslims as vermin or at least sub-human. In North Pakistan some time ago there was a debate: Has a non-Muslim half the value of a Muslim or less?

May be worse as this is from high up: Wall Street Journal, 9. April 2002. Compensation - also named "blood money" - for killing or in other ways causing a person's death in Saudi Arabia, was as follows:

100.ooo riyals if the victim is a Muslim man.

50.ooo riyals if the victim is a Muslim woman.

50.ooo riyals if the victim is a Christian man.

25.ooo riyals if the victim is a Christian woman.

6.666 riyals if the victim is a Hindu man.

3.333 riyals if the victim is a Hindu woman.

No comment necessary. A Muslim man is f.x. worth 33 Hindu women. Still no comment necessary – except that this is completely in line with the Quran and with the judicial and moral codes in Muslim culture.

Non-Muslims and especially "Pagans": Declare you are Muslim before you are killed. This will give your children more money to survive on.

###237 3/110b: “Ye (Muslims*) are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind - - -”. If the Muslims were evolved for the good of mankind, they have been rather lazy the last 900 years - the culture stagnated around 1100 AD, and after that nothing which could benefit mankind came from Muslims (and much/most of what came before, came not because of Islam, but in spite of Islam).

F.x. they later also stagnated in military power. The Great Siege of Malta (18. May to 8. September 1565 AD), and shortly after (7. October 1571 AD) the Battle of Lepanto - at sea - broke the Muslim hegemony in the Mediterranean. Well, they rebuilt their lost some 210(!) ships, and for a few years expanded some. But they had lost too many experienced sailors and too many experienced warriors in those two and some other battles, and the effort to rebuild and man the fleet overreached the Muslims power + Europe progressed scientifically and technically - from 1580 AD their power in the Mediterranean area quickly decreased.

238 3/110j: “Most of them (Jews and Christians*) are perverted transgressors.” Yes, one has to be perverted to believe in the god of the old - a god who according to their holy book has manifested his power many times - and in a book backed by thousands of witnesses at least from the times of Moses till after the times of Jesus (though in both these cases something or details may be wrong), compared to believe in a medium large businessman liking power and respect - and women - and who in addition is a highway man, extorter, womanizer, rapist, torturer, enslaver, slave dealer (selling or giving away for bribes his 20% or more of the slaves taken), assassin, murder, mass murderer, believer of al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) and Kitman (the lawful half-truth), Hilah (the lawful pretending/circumventing) (even thought these three kinds of dishonesty only were formalized later), deceiving ("war is deceit" - and "everything" is jihad), breaker of his words and oaths (f.x. murdering 29 men from Khaybar he had guaranteed safety during peace talks), even a few places clearly lying in the Quran, and an inciter to hate, discrimination and war - but in no way able to do more than to tell unproved tales backed by invalid and even wrong “signs” and “proofs” - tales which on top of all show a number of the hallmarks of a swindler, cheater, and deceiver. (Muslims: This is no slander - these facts are taken from Islam’s own books telling about and praising Muhammad - it only lacks the sugar coat of explaining away and heroism. There is no reason of being angry when meeting the very plain truth from your own books. When glorious words and reality disagree, we always believe in reality).

Yes, Jews, Christians and for that case Pagans have to be perverted not to believe on basis of such - unproved - words from such a man. And for not to kill and steal/rob and terrorize on his orders. Is it possible to add: - those perverted transgressors may deserve suppression and extermination - at least sometimes?

How would Muslims around the world react if some ones in big media claimed that most Muslims are perverted transgressors? - and how would different countries' judicial systems react to it? This in spite of that some of the moral and judicial rules in the Quran are perverse - f.x. the permission to rape female prisoners of war and slaves, included children, at least down to 9 years.

##239 3/110k: "- - - perverted transgressors". Normally in the Quran this is a name for non-Muslims. It carries a heavily negative picture of non-Muslims, and is part of the reason why many Muslims are negative to integration in non-Muslim societies - who wants to mingle or be associated with that bad people? (If this had been a novel and not a "holy" book, in most civilized countries the Quran had been prohibited because of discriminating contents and its incitements to discrimination, hate and blood. But then Islam is a religion who preaches discrimination - Muslims shall be the top and all others suppressed and "paying jizya (extra tax) with willing submission" - and Islam is too strong, so that prohibition of the book is impossible, in spite of points of view like this in it.) The claim: "Islam is the Religion of Peace" is an insult to the intelligence of anyone who has read the Quran with an open mind.

But you seldom see the claim: "Islam is the Religion of Honesty".

240 3/112a: "- - - the wrath of Allah - - -". If he exists and if he is something similar to what the Quran claims.

241 3/112b: Short words: Jews and Christians are to be detested.

242 3/112d: "- - - slew the Prophets - - -". Read the Bible - how many prophets of Yahweh did the Jews in reality slew? Except for Jesus not many. But they slew a number of false prophets.

243 3/112e: "- - - slew the Prophets in defiance of right - - -". Was there ever a time or a place where it was right to slay real prophets?

244 3/113g: "- - - they (Jews and Christians*) prostrate themselves in adoration". Wrong. None of "the People of the Book" adore Allah. They simply do not believe he exists, and definitely not as a god. (####Though many do not know the Quran better than they believe Muslims are speaking the truth when Islam claims Yahweh and Allah is the same god - but that Muhammad/the Quran has twisted the god's teaching. Same god, no. Twisting, yes.)

245 3/114d: "- - - they (Jews and Christians*) are in the ranks of the righteous". For once the Quran may well be right. But normally when words like "righteous" is used in the Quran, it is in accordance with the book's own partly immoral moral code.

246 3/116c: "Those who reject Faith (Islam*) - - - will be Companions of the Fire - - -". Contradicted to say the least of it by the Bible, at least regarding Jews and Christians. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words, like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

247 3/117b: "- - - they (Jews, Christians*) wrong themselves". Only if Allah exists and Yahweh not - and only if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth about this. And not least: Not if Allah predestines everything like the Quran claims many places.

248 3/118b: "Take not into your intimacy those outside your ranks - - -". = Do not make friends with non-Muslims. No comments necessary.

249 3/118c: “- - - they (non-Muslims*) will not fail to corrupt you (Muslims*)”. No good people. But the exact text says (translated from Swedish): “- - - they love all that can distress you - - -.” And that is not the same meaning by far. There is a significant difference between "to corrupt" (active) and "enjoy your distress" (passive + less serious). All the same: Detestable people.

But an honest translation?

250 3/118d: “They (non-Muslims*) only desire your (Muslims*) ruin - - -”. Even if it is not true: There is a good reason for despising such people according to the Quran. A good reason not to associate with them and keep a distance to them - and not believe what they say. Effect: Little information which could correct Muhammad's claims - and less resistance against making wars against these bad people.

251 3/118g: “We (Allah*) have made plain to you the Signs - - -”. Wrong. The only thing which is made plain about the so-called signs is that at least the ones not “borrowed” from the Bible without exception are just lose statements and cheap words any priest and any believing man or woman can use about any god in any religion - real or imagined.

What does it tell about the Quran and about Muhammad that loose statements and as loose claims are pretended to be facts and proofs? After all that kind of argumentation is one of the hallmarks for cheaters, deceivers and swindlers. The same goes for fast talk - you find lots of also that in the Quran. Not to mention a few clear lies (like the statements that miracles/real proofs for Allah or for Muhammad's connection to a god, would make no-one believe anyhow).

BUT THE MOST CENTRAL POINT HERE IS JUST THIS THAT THE QURAN CONFIRMS THAT THINGS ACCORDING TO THE QURAN ARE EXPLAINED PLAINLY = TO BE UNDERSTOOD LITERALLY. THIS DOCUMENTS THAT WHEN ISLAM AND MUSLIMS CLAIM THAT ERRORS, CONTRADICTIONS, ETC. AND OTHER BAD POINTS DO NOT MEAN WHAT THE TEXTS SAY, BUT ARE ALLEGORIES OR SOMETHING, SUCH CLAIMS AND EXPLAINING AWAY ARE WRONG. BESIDES: WHO CAN EXPLAIN BETTER THAN AN OMNISCIENT GOD?

252 3/118i: "- - - wisdom - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it normally only refers to "wisdom" and knowledge related to Islam.

253 3/118j: This verse as a whole is representative for parts of the Quran's propaganda against non-Muslims. It also is typical and representative for many other extreme sects wanting to insulate their members from the surroundings and thus from correcting information, and for militant sects wanting to create distance between "us" and "them" in order to prepare the followers for aggression - also within f.x. political extremes. F.x. the militant parts of communism and fascism/Nazism in some cases were nearly as extreme as the harsh parts of the Quran. (Islam has - with a reason - been compared to fascism and Nazism. F.x. by the renowned psychologist Young).

254 3/119a: "Ye (Muslims*) are those who love them (Non-Muslims*) - - -". Absolutely no comments necessary, except see 1/1a above and 9/5 below. Islam hardly is a religion of love.

255 3/119b: "- - - ye (Muslims*) believe in the whole of the Book (the Quran*)". Implication: Jews and Christians have falsified the copies their forefathers received of the Quran (sic!) and now have only parts of it left in which they believe - and the rest they believe in, Muhammad claims they had made up (an allegation and a never proved one - and a claim both science and Islam long since have proved wrong by being unable to find any falsification among literally tens of thousands of relevant old manuscripts).

256 3/119c: “- - - they bite off their very fingertips at you in rage (if you are lucky in some way or other*)”. Despicable people - true or not do not matter very much, as long as the followers believe it. And also pep-talk.

257 3/119d: "Allah knoweth well all the secret of the heart". See 2/233h above and 35/38b below.

258 3/120b: “- - - but if some misfortune overtakes you (Muslims*), they (non-Muslims*) rejoice at it”. There is a good reason to dislike them - or worse.

259 3/121c: "- - - to post the Faithful at their stations for battle - - -". Try to find something like this in NT! - it does not exist. Jesus a prophet like Muhammad (claimed to be)? - believe it if you are able to.

260 3/121-127: The religion of peace? - the god of peace? As mentioned other places, these claims is an insult to the intelligence of anyone who has ever read the complete Quran - or at least the surahs from Medina - with an open mind.

261 3/122e: "- - - Allah was their (see 3/122a above*) protector - - -". One of the very many never documented claims in the Quran. It is untrue unless Allah exists, is a god, and is correctly described in the Quran.

262 3/122f: "- - - in Allah should the Faithful (ever) put their trust". A doubtful advice if the Quran - and thus Allah - is made up (and at least it is from no god - far too many errors, etc.).

263 3/125c: "- - - if you (Muslims*) remain firm - - -". Time and again and again the Quran tells that if the Muslims just persevere, the "enemy" grows tired in the end and the Muslims win. ####Far too often this has proved correct, a fact all non-Muslims growing tired should remember. This especially the democracies, as they have problems when a fight lasts for a long time - there always are many voices wanting out of the struggle, as they see the short-time gain but not the long-time loss possible.

264 3/125f: "- - - five thousand angels (sent down*) - - -". Remember this sentence (and other sentences in the Quran) each time Muhammad - and others - claim Allah could not send down an angel or two to prove Muhammad's claims about representing a god, or even the claimed god's very existence, because that would mean the Day of Doom had arrived.

###265 3/126a: "Allah made it (the Quran/Islam*) but a message of hope - - -". Allah has not made it unless he exists. And even if he exists and is a god, he has not sent it - it is an insult, slander and heresy to accuse a god of being involved in a book with so many mistakes and other errors like the Quran.

266 3/126b: "- - - a message - - -". Is the Quran really a message? - and in case from whom or what, as no god was involved in a book of such quality? Dark forces? A sick brain? a Cold brain?

267 3/126c: "- - - there is no help except from Allah - - -". In the entire history there is not one single documented case of help from Allah to anyone. Not one. Claims and legends, but that is it.

###268 3/126e: "- - - Allah, the Exalted - - -". Read the Quran like it ought to be read if you want to find the reality behind the religion: First you arrange the surahs according to age, so that you see the development of the religion, and especially ######the big changes in the god and the religion around 622-624 AD from a rather peaceful religion to a full-fledged war religion, included dishonesty, apartheid, suppression and blood. Further you skip the glorifying cheap words, and read what is demanded, what rules are introduced or glorified, what is done, etc. - in other words the realities, not the propaganda. Is Allah - if he exists - really exalted? And for that case what about Muhammad and about Islam?

269 3/126f: "- - - Allah - - - the Wise". Not if he made the Quran - too many wrong facts and other errors, contradictions, cases of invalid logic and unclear language, etc.

270 3/128a: "Not for thee (Muhammad/Muslims*), (but for Allah), is the decision: Whether He turn in mercy to them (the ones opposing Allah*), or punish them - - -". This was in 625 AD. Later when the Muslims grew military stronger, Muhammad - and his successors - decided whom to "punish". And they really "punished" many.

271 3/129a: "To Allah belongeth all that is in the heavens (plural and wrong*) and on earth". One of the very many not documented claims in the Quran - claims any believer can make free of charge on behalf of his/her god(s) as long as proving it can be evaded. The truth in the claim also will be influenced by whether Allah exists or not, and if in case he exists, if the Quran has told the full and only truth about him. It also is contradicted by the Bible, where another god - Yahweh - is told is the only real god. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

###272 3/129c: "He (Allah*) forgiveth whom He pleaseth - - -". Here is one of the really deep differences between the Quran and NT: Allah forgives whom he pleases, whereas Yahweh according to the Bible forgives each and everyone who honestly regrets and tries to live accordingly. The same god? It is not even a silly question.

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

273 3/130b: "Devour not usury - - -". This is a positive side of the Quran. The problem is that Muhammad never explained what usury is - f.x. in connection to interest. A result of this is that Muslims cannot take interest on money they lend to someone, as to be on the safe side all interest is reckoned to be usury - very illogic; if you by something with the money (f.x. a house) and rent it to someone, you can take rent for it. Money you lend to someone, simply is something of a certain value you rent to someone. But not in Islam. Because of this there have been all kinds of "circumambulating" this rule - formally correct, in reality dishonesty towards the rule (f.x. buy a slave from the lender, and sell it back for a lower price) - - - a school and a training in dishonesty.

274 3/132a: "And obey Allah and the Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -". A strengthened version of Muhammad's standard, but never proved mantra for gluing himself to his platform of power, Allah.

275 3/133a: "- - - forgiveness from your Lord (Allah*) - - -". Allah can forgive nobody unless he exists and in addition is a god. There is no clear indication - not to mention proof - for any of those two necessities.

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

276 3/134c: "- - - Allah loves those who do good - - -". If he exists and if he is a god - - - and if a war god really likes really good deeds - "do onto others like you want others do onto you".

277 3/135a: "- - - (not*) wronged their own souls - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses expressions like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

278 3/135b: "- - - who can forgive sins - - -?". On Earth the ones sinned against can forgive. But here it obviously is meant a higher level, and then it only is a god or whom he has given the right to do so, which can be the answer. But there must be made an addition: Only gods who really exist can do so - and it is highly unlikely that Allah exists and is a god, as he only appears in a book full of mistakes and other errors and a book obviously not from any god, dictated by a man of highly dubious morality, but liking respect, power, riches for bribes for more power - - - and women. Gods from fairy tales do not count in this connection.

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

279 3/136a: "- - - forgiveness from their (Muslims'*) Lord (Allah*) - - -". Only 2 can forgive: The victim and a god. Thus Allah can forgive only if he exists and if he in addition is a god.

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

280 3/136c: "Gardens with rivers flowing underneath - - -". One of the characteristics with the Quran's paradise, is that it is made according to desert dwellers' dreams - plenty of water, shade, cool air, etc. This simply is the most frequently used Arabism ((see 4/13d below) in the Quran. But what god for all the Earth, forms his paradise according to only one minor group's dreams? - primitive dreams even. Actually this is the most frequently used Arabisms in the Quran. The big and fundamental differences between Yahweh’s and Allah's Paradises also is one of the many strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. If they had been, their Paradises had been one and the same one.

#281 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 - another Arabism (see 4/13d below). Muhammad told they were all remnants after peoples Allah had punished for their sins. There are more likely explanations. (Some time ago in Pakistan Muslim groups wanted to place placards in some ruins telling that these were from people punished by Allah, and that this was how Allah punished a people for sins. Western media referred the story without comments - something they sometimes do when the stupidity is so obvious, that even morons see it without explanations.

You of course may believe this claim if you are able to.

That the Quran is the truth, is just a claim, not a proved fact.

282 3/137c: "- - - the Truth (the Quran*)". With that many mistaken facts in the Quran, it at best tells partly the truth. Also see 13/1g and 40/75 below.

########################################################################

283 3/138a: "Here 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 rely 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, etc. The Quran itself contradicts such claims by stating several places 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".

######T

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 is 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, 43/29b, 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 under 3/7b and 44/58b. And there are more outside that list.

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 behind such "explanations".)

WHO CAN EXPLAIN SOMETHING BETTER AND MORE CORRECTLY AND COMPLETELY THAN AN OMNISCIENT GOD?

########################################################################

###284 3/139a: "- - - ye (Muslims*) must gain mastery if ye are true in Faith." No comments. Except: The declared goal for Islam is world dominance and suppression of all non-Muslims - - - and extra tax - jizya - "with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" (9/29).

285 3/140a: “If a wound hath touched you (Muslim warrior*), be sure a similar wound hath touched the others (the enemy*)”. Pep-talk. Keep the warriors bent on fighting on. A peaceful religion. Very different from especially NT.

286 3/140b: "Such days (of varying fortunes) We (Allah*) give to men and men by turns". A wise warlord prepares his warriors also for the lost skirmishes, and imprints that next time it is your turn to win.

287 3/140c: "- - - (so*) that Allah may know those that believe - - -". Why, why, and once more why: Why this "testing" and wars if Allah is omniscient? - and even more so if he predestines absolutely everything according to his Plan like the Quran claims many places? There is no meaning in this sentence - he can learn absolutely nothing. But it gets a meaning if it was Muhammad who wanted warriors and needed an explanation for why there were ups and downs.

288 3/140e: "- - - (- - - Truth)". Contradicted by the Bible - see 2/42c above. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

More trouble: Islam and Muslims in addition very often have to try to prove that also science is wrong. They are very good at claiming and sometimes "explaining" this, but unable to give valid proofs - "A proof is one or more proved facts which can give only one conclusion" - and "A claim without a proof may be dismissed without a proof".

"Strong claims need strong proofs.

"A claim without a proof may be dismissed without a proof".

"Claims are cheap, but only proofs are proofs".

"The use of invalid proofs normally proves that something is fishy".

"The cheat or deceiver naturally must rely on claims pretending to be facts or proofs".

"A made up "proof" makes the man very suspect".

"A strong belief is not a proof - not necessarily even a truth".

"Wrong claims and invalid "proofs" are working tools of the cheat".

"A student with correct facts gets a more correct answer than 20 professors with wrong facts". (Invalid, "signs", claims, "proofs", etc. of course are wrong facts.)

And we may add from Peer Gynt in his original language: "Naar utgangspunktet er som galest, blir resultatet tidt originalest" - freely translated: "When you conclude from wrong claims/wrong facts/invalid "proofs"/etc., you get wrong conclusions".

289 3/140f: "And Allah loveth not those that do wrong". Does this also include those who live according to the immoral parts of the Qurans moral code? (For comparison: The fundamental moral imperative is: "Do onto others like you want others do onto you".)

290 3/141a: “Allah’s object also is to purge those that are true in Faith and to deprive of blessing those that resist Faith.” An answer to the obvious question: Why do Muslims have to wage war and risk their lives, when Allah just could say “Be” and it was? But the answer above is not a good one - an omniscient god had known or fixed everything without mass slaughtering. But Muhammad had not gained power and riches without war. A possible explanation at least, for why war was “necessary”. But made invalid by the fact that Allah easily could purge his followers in not bloody and not fundamentally immoral ways - if he exists. (Job f.x. was tried and purged more than any normal human, without himself doing wrong to anybody.)

But if this was Muhammad needing an explanation why he wanted war and claims this, suddenly the words have a meaning.

291 3/142c: "- - - (in His (Allah's*) Cause - - -". As the Quran with all its errors is not from any god, it is a very open question if the raids and wars were and are in Allah's cause.

###########292 3/144a: "Muhammad is no more than a Messenger - - -". Sentences like this is the only reason why Muhammad is not a saint in Islam - divinity would be impossible, but sainthood they would be able to find an opening for, if it was not for sentences like this. It also is one of Muhammad's ways of explaining away questions for miracles as proofs for Allah or for his own connection to a god.

BUT BEWARE THAT THIS ALSO IS ONE OF THE STRONG PROOFS FOR THAT MUHAMMAD WAS UNABLE TO MAKE MIRACLES - HIS ONLY TASK, ONLY MISSION, AND ONLY POWER WAS TO BRING MESSAGES ACCORDING TO MUHAMMAD HIMSELF AND ACCORDING TO THE QURAN HERE AND OTHER PLACES. THE SAME GOES FOR PROPHESYING/FORETELLING (WHICH IN REALITY IS A SPECIAL KIND OF MIRACLES - TO BE ABLE TO SEE WHAT IS HIDDEN OR HAS NOT HAPPENED YET), SOMETHING ALSO HIS FAMOUS CHILD WIFE CONFIRMS IN THE HADITHS, AND BY MUHAMMAD HIMSELF OTHER PLACES IN THE QURAN (not able to make miracles, f.x. 7/188, 10/49, 17/93, 72/21, not able to make prophesies, f.x. 6/50, 7/188, 10/20, 27/65, 46/9, 72/27, 81/24).

And there is one more point: If the old books speak the truth on this point, both the Bible and the Quran tells that Jesus f.x. performed miracles, and thus was something more than just a messenger. Then the answer is automatic as to if Jesus or Muhammad was the "greatest" - the one with connection (or best connections) to something divine. ##An extra point here is that 19/19 confirms that Jesus was holy - Muhammad was not, as clearly said here.

293 3/144d: "- - - many were the Messengers that passed away before him (Muhammad*)". The Quran claims that all societies through all times have been sent prophets teaching Islam - Hadiths mention the number 124ooo. Neither science nor Islam has been able to find any trace of such prophets or such a religion (except in the Bible, but those prophets preached about another religion and another god - Yahweh - a god Islam wrongly and without proofs claims is the same god as Allah, but the fundamentals of the teachings are too different for this to be true).

We may add that if we compare this number with the time perspective in the Bible - on which also Islam here rests as the Quran builds on the same persons in the old times - this perspective is some 6ooo-7ooo years. Which in case means some Allah according to the Quran sent prophets/messengers for some 5ooo years up to the claimed last one Muhammad. Which again means some 24 new prophets a year - 2 a month. And not one of them except a few Jewish ones left a trace at all. Believe it if you are able to.

If we instead use the scientific perspective and say that Allah's sending of prophets/messengers started when Homo Sapiens started, we still end up with some 60 - 80 a century. (Homo Sapiens developed some 160ooo-200ooo years ago - one has a small preference for ca. 195ooo years ago. If we use this number, we end up with some 2 every 3 years - ca. 1 every 18 months. And not one leaving a trace except the few mentioned Jewish ones. (Why only the Jewish ones by the way, if Allah sent to all nations and cultures and people all over and to all times?

######An interesting mathematical fact: If we operate with a normal religious time frame, Adam lived something like 5ooo years before the claimed last prophet, Muhammad. If we say that Hadiths' number 124ooo had been correct, and that each of them worked for 25 years, there all the time from Adam till Muhammad should be on average 620 active prophets working for Allah around the world (more than 3 in every country during all those thousands of years). None of them (except the old Jewish ones - really working for Yahweh) left one single trace anywhere on the entire Earth. Even if you reckon the entire age of Homo Sapiens - 160ooo-200ooo years - there in case during all these eons have been 15-20 prophets working all the time. But no trace from them or a religion like Islam, a god like Allah - or a book like the Quran.

there also nowhere is given an explanation for why Allah for thousands of years meant man needed perhaps 620 prophets working round the year, but then from the year 632 AD on, they suddenly deserved not one any more.

294 3/145a: “Nor can a soul die except by Allah’s leave - - -". One of the many, many never documented claims in the Quran. Muhammad never was able to prove anything at all about his claimed god or his own claimed connection to him.

Another point is that according to the Bible souls cannot die - the body can, but not the soul.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

####295 3/145b: “Nor can a soul die except by Allah’s leave, the term being fixed as by writing”. Wage war - you die when your term comes and not before, no matter what you are doing. The for Muhammad most essential side of predestination? It is easy by means of statistics to show the claim is wrong, but right or wrong does not matter much in cases of blind belief. But one thing is clear: Any man as intelligent as Muhammad did know this was a lie.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

####296 3/145c: "- - - the term being fixed as by writing”. Everything is predestined by Allah and in accordance with his unchangeable Plan - also your death. By the way: As Allah's Plan is impossible to change, there is no use praying to him or do good or bad deeds, as what is predestined cannot be changed. This is one of the Quran's basic contradictions in the Quran and in Islam: Allah predestines everything long time beforehand - according to Hadiths f.x. your destination in the claimed next life (Hell or Heaven) is predestined 5 months before you are even born - and according to an unchangeable Plan. But all the same you should pray to Allah for a better life and for acceptance to paradise, etc. etc. Where is the logic? If everything is predestined, prayers can have absolutely no effect. And if prayers have effect and can change things, predestination and a divine Plan are not true. Predestination combined wit effect of prayers is as impossible as predestination combined with free will of man - even for a god. The same goes for f.x. any result of good or bad deeds, and for claimed effect of forgiving, etc. It is anybody's guess why Muslims do not see this.

297 3/145e: There is one more interesting short statement here: “- as by writing”:

In the old times when most people did not know how to read and write, written text was looked upon with respect - that something was written, for many naïve and uneducated poor souls this meant it was a proof for that it was true. Just think about a priest starting to read from the Bible in a church; in many countries he starts with something like “It is written” - which to his audience in the old times simply meant: It is sure to be the truth. This may be an explanation why Muhammad and the Quran so often stress that his teaching is from a book or that it is written (today we know it means nothing whether something is written or not - there are as many fairy tales and as many lies in written as in spoken words).

298 3/145g: "If any do desire a reward in this life, We (Allah*) shall give it to him; and if any do desire a reward in the Hereafter, We shall give it to him (note: the Quran seldom speaks about women*)". But remember the old fact: Allah can give nobody anything unless he exists and is a real god - after all Muhammad just took the old pagan Arab god al-Lah/Allah, used only one of his names, dressed him up, and claimed without ever being able to prove a comma about it, that this was the mighty and all-powerful single god, and Muhammad's own boss.

299 3/145h: "And swiftly shall We (Allah*) reward those who (serve Us with) gratitude". If he exists. If he is a god. If he is behind what is told in the Quran. And if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth on this point.

But remember as for punishments and rewards - and forgiving: They cannot be given unless there are made changes in the Plan of Allah, which several verses in the Quran states nobody and nothing can make. (A predestined reward is not a reward, but theater.)

#300 3/146a: “How many of the Prophets fought (in Allah’s way) - - -". Exactly no-one of the known prophets from the Bible. The very few of the known ones of them who took part in fighting, fought for earthly reasons. None took part in a religious war. The wars you find in OT (there is none in NT) were political ones or punishment of the Jews from Yahweh. There were no wars to spread the mosaic religion, as contrast to "holy wars" - jihads - fought by Muslims.

#301 3/146b: “How many of the Prophets fought (in Allah’s way), and with them fought large bands of godly men? But they never lost heart if they met with disaster in Allah’s way, nor did they weaken (in will) nor give in. And Allah loves those who are firm and steadfast.” A pep-talk to warriors of all times - never give in, never give up, retreat if you have to, but go on and you will win like the prophets, because Allah will help - - - and sooner or later the lover of religious warriors, Allah, will give you Paradise. Like in the old Norse religion and other war religions.

As for prophets, Islam maintains that they have existed to all times and all places - Hadiths mention the number 124ooo, but even that is just a symbol for uncountable many. (Using the religious time-scale = some 5ooo years up to Muhammad, gives 2 new prophets each and every month for those 5ooo years. Using the scientific time-scale = perhaps 195ooo years for Homo Sapiens, gives one new prophet every 18 months approximately. Believe it if you are able to.). This is not true, because it is not possible to find a single trace of monotheistic prophets (except the few in the Bible) anywhere or any time in any form - history, literature, art, architecture, archeology, or even in folk tales. It is not possible that so many prophets should leave not a single trace - especially the warring ones should leave traces, even if they had no success with spreading the religion.

And not many of the prophets we know about from other sources - mainly the Bible - did actually wage war. This picture becomes even more loop-sided when you remember the Bible mentions there were a number of prophets not named by name, and hardly any of these were leaders of wars - in that case they had been more central and named. (NB: The Bible does not reckon f.x. Saul and David - and not even Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob, not to mention Ishmael - primarily as prophets (Ishmael not as prophet at all). Leaders, but the title prophet hardly is used - for a central person like Abraham in all the Bible the title prophet is mentioned only a couple of times. Saul, David, Ishmael and a number of others are not named prophets at all in the Bible.) The fact that Biblical prophets normally did not wage war, compared to Muhammad's war religion, also is one of the clear indications for that Muhammad was not in the Biblical line of prophets.

302 3/147b: "Our (Muslims'*) Lord (Allah*)! Forgive us our sins - - -". Even if Allah should happen to be a god, he cannot forgive if that is contra to his claimed predestined Plan - the prayer then is a waste of time and effort. And if he has predestined forgiving and put it into his Plan long ago, prayer is not necessary as forgiving already is decided. If predestination is true like the Quran claims many times, prayer can never have an effect in Islam - a fact strongly contradicting the Quran's never documented claims.

303 3/148b: "- - - and the excellent reward of the Hereafter”. Well, we are back to the old fact: If Allah exists. If he is a god. If he is behind what is told in the Quran. And if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth on this point.

But remember as for punishments and rewards - and forgiving: They cannot be given unless there are made changes in the Plan of Allah, which several verses in the Quran states nobody and nothing can make. (A predestined reward is not a reward, but theater.)

304 3/148d: “For Allah loveth those who do good (in this case: To wage war for Allah and Muhammad*)”. To do battle for Allah - to steal and burn and kill and murder and destroy and rape for the good and benevolent deity - is a good thing which Allah loves. (Actually that it shall be made in the name of the god, makes it even more disgusting.) Did anyone say that modern terrorists have to twist the words of the Quran to find incitements to their deeds? And also: Muhammad got cheap warriors and gained wealth and power - in wars and robberies that really were illegal according to the Quran, as they in reality were wars of aggression, not really of defense. And they gave him the possibility to rape at least two women - Rayhana bint Amr and Safijja bint Huayay. Also Marieh hardly had a real choice.

305 3/149c: "- - - ye (Muslims*) will be turned back (from Faith) to your own loss". This claim only is correct if Islam is a not made up religion, if it has a real god behind it, and if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth about this god and how he wants his religion - the claimed religion of peace.

306 3/150a: "- - - Allah is your Protector- - -". Once more: If he exists. If he really is a god. If he is behind what is told in the Quran. And if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth on this point.

307 3/150b: "- - - and He (Allah*) is the best of helpers". There has not been one single case of documented help from Allah to anyone in all history - be sure Islam had told about it if such a proved case had existed.

308 3/151d: "- - - for which He (Allah*) had sent no authority - - -". Allah can send authority for exactly nothing if he does not exist, and for little more than nothing if he exists, but is no major god, neither of which is proved (he only is the main figure in a book full of mistakes, etc., and based only on the words of a doubtful and proved - in the Quran and other central Islamic literature ("break even your oath if that gives a better result", lies - f.x. "miracles will make no-one believe anyhow" - used in the Quran, etc.) - unreliable man, liking respect, power, riches for bribes - and women). Well, it is possible he has some authority if he exists, but represents the dark forces.

#309 3/151g: "- - - evil is the home for wrongdoers." "Wrongdoers" normally is one of Muhammad's names for non-Muslims. But: Much of the Quran's rules and moral and ethical code, not to mention rules for behavior in war, etc., most strongly sins against the "constitution" of all moral and ethical kinds of code: "Do unto others like you want others do onto you". Are Muslims thus wrongdoers heading for an "evil home" if there is a next life? This question is extra relevant as it is clear they live by a claimed holy book not produced by any god.

310 3/152b: “Allah did indeed fulfill His promise to you when ye with His permission were about to annihilate your enemy - - -". Very far from the moral code of NT - you find nothing similar in the entire NT. Yahweh and Allah the same god?. Hardly.

Besides: If Allah predestines everything like the Quran states several places, how can one then claim that Allah fulfilled his promise to the Muslims, when he turned the battle and they lost?

311 3/152h: "- - - to test you". In this case Muhammad is explaining away a human weakness with the claim that it was Allah's will. But why does an omniscient and predestining god need to test his followers? - actually the logic here is so hopeless, that it is an insult to the brain of the readers - only those can accept it who are very naive or mentally blind - or indoctrinated.

312 3/152i: "- - - He (Allah*) forgave you (Muslims*) - - -". As mentioned before, Allah can forgive nobody unless he exists and in addition is a god. And also not unless he changes his unchangeable Plan.

###313 3/154c: "- - - moved by wrong suspicions of Allah - suspicions due to ignorance". What then is right knowledge about Allah? The only source for claimed information about him, is a book full of mistakes, dictated by an unreliable man accepting the use of dishonesty as working tools, and liking power, riches for bribes, and women. If you go by known facts correcting all the mistakes, etc. in the Quran, it is highly unlikely Allah exists - and it is sure a book so full of mistakes, etc. is not from any god. For the same reasons: If Allah exists, it is highly unlikely he is correctly described in the Quran. It in case even be correct that he is from the dark forces, like parts of the Quran may indicate.

314 3/154d: "- - - suspicion due to ignorance - - -". In this case the honest explanation was greed, not ignorance - but what is quoted here fitted the religious claims better. And mainly the "suspicion" - read "disbelief" - at least the Jews and the few Christians in the area felt for Muhammad and his Allah, was based not on ignorance, but on the knowledge that the Bible told different - often very different - stories from what Muhammad claimed it told.

###By the way: This quote is a fitting one for Muslims. The Muslim areas and culture are full of conspiracy theories. The majority of them are based just on "suspicion due to ignorance" + the knowledge about al-Taqiyya, etc. etc. which makes it difficult or impossible for them to know when to believe what is said and when not.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

####315 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*)”.

Unbelievable!!

Today it as said is easy to prove by statistics that it is very wrong - but Muhammad did not know about statistics (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.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

316 3/154j: "For Allah knoweth well the secrets of your hearts". Well, this is just the point: If this is true, why does he then have to test them in bloody battles? Also see 2/233h above and 35/38b below.

317 3/155c: "- - - it was Satan who caused them (the ones don't wanting to fight*), because of some (evil) they had done". In plain language: They were punished for some sin by not wanting to take part in the battle. Some punishment! Some religion! Not to say quite a "Religion of Peace"!!

318 3/156d: “Be not like the unbelievers, who say of their brethren - - - engaged in fighting: ‘If they had stayed with us, they would not have died or been slain’”. A clear message: Be of better quality and go to war.

319 3/156e: “Be not like the unbelievers, who say of their brethren - - - engaged in fighting: - - - ". So definitely not from NY. Even in the harder OT war is not glorified like it is in the surahs from Medina. In OT it also is not fighting for the leader and the god and the religion, but just a means to reach a goal; a home country for the Jews. In NT there hardly is any armed war allowed at all. Yahweh and Allah the same god? - no answer is necessary.

320 3/156g: "This (so*) that Allah may make it (the non-Muslims not going to Paradise when killed in battle*) a cause of sighs and regrets in their hearts". One technique of debating, is to tell the audience what the opponents think or feel or "really" mean - without caring too much about whether it is true or not. This often is done in political debate, but also in f.x. religious "teaching". Textbooks call this "insincerity of the 3. degree". Why did Muhammad need to use this kind of technique?

321 3/156h: "It is Allah that gives Life or Death - - -". Again this claim which is interesting for the simple reason that this is repeated several times in the Quran, but Allah has never proved it - claimed it in some borrowed legends, but never anything but words - - - but both Jesus and Yahweh have proved so repeatedly if the old books tell the truth.(1. Kings 17/22, 2. Kings 4/34-35, Matt. 9/25, Luke 6/14-15, Luke 8/53-55, John 11/43-44, Acts 9/40, Acts 20/10 - and Jesus himself.) But Allah? - nothing but words, not even a peanut. When we have the choice between lofty words only and reality, we always believe in reality. And here the "reality" the Quran claims is nothing but lofty words.

322 3/156i: "- - - Allah sees well all that ye do". Do not try to cheat - you cannot cheat Allah. Also see 2/233h above and 35/38b below.

##323 3/157c: “And if ye are slain, or die, in the way of Allah, forgiveness and mercy from Allah are far better than all they could amass”. This only may - may - be true if Allah exist and is a god, and if the non-Muslims on top of this believe in a non-existing god - if their god (f.x. Yahweh) exists, he may be able to outdo Allah. (Especially if Allah in reality is a dressed-up and made up pagan god only - and he was a pagan Arab god before Muhammad took him over, shined him up, and renamed him slightly).

Another point is that to forgive - or for that case to punish or reward or fulfill prayers - means for Allah to change his Plan considering the sinner/person, something which according to the Quran nobody and nothing can make him do. See 2/187d above.

##324 3/158b: “And if ye die, or are slain, lo! It is unto Allah that ye are brought together”. This only can be true if Allah exists, if he in addition is a god, if he runs a religion like told in the Quran - and if the Quran has told the full and only truth about this.

325 3/159c: "- - - ask for (Allah's) forgiveness for them (some sinners*) - - -". But to what avail if everything is predestined by Allah long time ago, like the Quran states many places? - predestined in accordance with Allah's Plan, which nothing and no-one can change, if the Quran tells the truth. There are too many points in the Quran where the logic breaks down - even central and serious points like this. If everything is predestined by Allah long time ago, praying for help or something simply has no meaning, as Allah's Plan is unchangeable. And there are more places in the Quran where the logic is as hopeless. No omniscient god stumbles around like this.

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

326 3/159f: "- - - put thy (Muslim's*) trust in Allah". Be careful to do that until it is proved that Allah is not just the dressed up pagan and made up god al-Lah - nothing else was ever proved.

327 3/160b: "If Allah helps you (Muhammad/Muslims*), none can overcome you - - -". This is one of the claims where the correct answer entirely depends on if Allah exists and is a god - and that no stronger god in case exists.

328 3/160c: "- - - if he forsakes you, who is there, after that, that can help you?" See 3/160b just above. Also: If the old books tell the truth, at least Yahweh can help.

329 3/160d: "In Allah, then, let the Believers put their thrust". A bit risky, as it was never proved that he exists.

330 3/160e: "- - - Believers - - -". = Muslims.

331 3/161a: “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 - even containing such things. Islam says it proved Mohammad did not cheat. That may be correct if Allah made this part of the Quran, but not if Mohammad or someone else did so.

332 3/161b: “No prophet could (ever) be false to his trust.” There is another and much more serious fact here: Through the times most – not to say (nearly?) all – self-proclaimed prophets whom a god has not backed up, have been false prophets. Most of the false prophets have been (and are) men, and in religion they have found a way to money, esteem, and power – and women - 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” in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran"). 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, at least in the beginning, but it also is very clear from the Quran that he at least sometimes knew he was cheating/lying; some of the arguments he used in the book, any intelligent person knows are lies (f.x. 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 (he f.x. had a lot of them murdered) for the life and well-being of everybody who stood between him and power and riches (to use for bribing greedy warriors and chiefs to come to or stay on in 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.

And it is here worth noticing that the other possible explanation for this sentence in the Quran, is that it is a defense against accusations for making up the whole or parts of the book. Interesting here is that in (A3/123), Swedish 2006 edition both accusations are debated, and it is confirmed that Muhammad really was accused for not dealing fair when sharing the booty (this also is mentioned in other sources), whereas in the slightly more "correct" English 2008 edition this is omitted. One only tells that to accuse Muhammad for making up the Quran is "contrary to reason" - which is an invalid (not to use stronger words) argument when you for one thing know there have been literally thousands of false prophets throughout the history, for another thing know how many mistaken fact and other errors there are in the Quran, for a third know that many of the mistakes are from wrong science of different kinds one believed in in Arabia at the time of Muhammad, and for a fourth knows that all stories "borrowed" into the Quran are from or around Arabia, and not to forget Muhammad's point of view about honesty when dishonesty might give a better result - not even his own oaths did he respect in such cases. Also see 3/161a above.

To anyone knowing the reality of all too many self proclaimed "prophets" - and Muhammad had absolutely nothing to show for himself (except perhaps a brain illness) than his own words and proclamations - the quote above gives an excellent reason for a good laugh.

333 3/161d: “No prophet could (ever) be false to his trust. If any person is so false - - -”. Beware that the second sentence means that in reality it all the same may be possible that some prophets or "prophets" may be false to their trust anyhow.

A fact: There have been literally tens of thousands of false prophets in this world through the times. ALL OF THEM have been false to their trust.

Another fact is that as the Quran and all its errors, etc. is not from any god - a god had known better - Muhammad was no real messenger, not to mention prophet.

##334 3/162a: “Is the man who follows the good pleasure of Allah like the man who draws on himself the wrath of Allah - - -?” Of course not – the Muslims are better. It is a strange rule this that the ones inventing an ideology, always deem themselves to be the best, and all others of lower value. The Greeks were better than their "barbarian" neighbors. The old Egyptian found it distasting even to eat together with the Jews, according to the Bible (because they were lowly shepherds). Arab Muslims for centuries were better than other Muslims. Afghan Muslims even today mean they are better Muslims than other Muslims. Everybody is better than the Jews. The Indians were better than the Eskimos. The white race was the very best. Communists were and are best. Not to mention how best the Nazis were. And not to forget: Muslims are better than anyone else - twice as good or better according to some Muslims. It even is possible to believe things like this if you have little education, are naive, or are brainwashed.

335 3/162b: "- - - the wrath of Allah - - -". Once more we are back to the old fact that the only claim for Allah's very existence rests on a man believing in the use of dishonesty when this paid, and on the same man's book full of mistakes, etc. - even some lies. If Allah does not exist, there is no wrath of Allah. And just to mention it: There never has been even one proved case of his wrath - many claims, but not one proved case. Not one.

336 3/163b: "- - - and Allah sees well all that they do." See 2/233a above and 35/38b below.

337 3/164a: "Allah did confer a great favor (by sending Muhammad*) - - -". Here are some possibilities:

li>Allah exists and is an omniscient, major god. In that case he did not send a messenger making so many mistakes.

Allah exists, but is a minor god. Even in this case it is unlikely he would launch a religion built on so many mistakes, etc. - and thus unlikely he would use a "messenger" preaching so many errors.

What pretended to be Allah, in reality was an impostor - dark forces. But even though all the immoral parts of the Quran and Islam may indicate dark forces behind this religion, also dark forces/a devil would be reluctant to send a book so full of mistakes and it’s "messenger" as basis for its "religion", simply because they had to know they would be found out sooner or later, and lose credibility. There is one possibility, though: If the Devil was permitted to start a false religion to lure more humans into his Hell, but only on the condition that so much should be wrong that thinking persons would see the trap and evade it, then it is possible.

Allah does not exist. Well, dark forces may exist?

Perhaps no supernatural exists - or that there exists a god, but different from Allah. In this case no comments are necessary - in that case the Quran is manmade, f.x. by Muhammad.

In none of these cases Muhammad was a favor to people, except for the ones who became rich or powerful. This even more so if the Quran is man-made, which honestly is most likely - but in this case Muhammad was not sent.

338 3/164g: "- - - (Muhammad*) instructing them in Scripture and Wisdom (the Quran*)- - -". There is not much wisdom in a book full of mistakes, contradictions, etc., and as for what there after all is of such; it is not easy - often not possible - to pick out what is wisdom and what is of no value or of negative value, unless you on beforehand have enough wisdom - = intelligence + knowledge - to evaluate every detail which is told to see if it is wisdom or invalid or "unwisdom" or worse. And if there all the same are points you are unable to evaluate, you have to lay them aside till you are able to evaluate it. That is the only way a wise person can treat a book overflowing with mistakes. But when you already have gained so much wisdom, how much is there then to learn from such a book? (In reality the Quran neither is very "deep", nor containing much knowledge except for religious claims and statements - and undocumented claims and statements may be called hypotheses or theories, but are not knowledge no matter how sure you are that your hypotheses or beliefs are right - knowledge needs some kind of proofs, not necessarily the mathematical 100% ones, but at least the 99.998% ones from natural sciences - empirical proofs - and the slightly less demanding circumstantial proofs).

But one thing which is easy for any wise, not brainwashed, person to see, is that no god would base his religion on a book full of errors - if not for other reasons, then because he had to know that he would be found out sooner or later and lose credibility. A dark force - f.x. a devil - might do it to deceive victims, but if he is wise, he would use as few mistakes as possible to make it difficult for the victims to see the trap (there is an exception if the god permitted the Devil to make up a religion to lure more people to Hell, only on the condition that the trap should be easy to see for persons able to think). A human maker of the book is the only really credible possibility, and this even more so as all the real "knowledge" - right or wrong - in the book, is in exact correspondence to the "knowledge" one had in and around Arabia at the time of Muhammad (this in spite of the many claims Muslims make trying to "prove" that the Quran contains facts that was not known at that time - we have not seen one such till now which is not in reality wishful thinking.) And if there is no god behind the Quran, what then is Islam? - and what about all Muslims in a possible next life if Islam is a made up religion like many pagan others?

339 3/164j: "- - - (to be in*) error". Beware that when the Quran uses expressions like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code. Or sometimes - like here? - it simply means anything not in accordance with the Quran (in spite of all the errors in that book).

340 3/165b: "- - - Allah hath power over all things". Why then does he have to make humans fight wars for himself?

341 3/166cb: "- - - with the leave of Allah - - -". One "fact" which makes this clear, is that as Allah predestines everything and according to his unchangeable Plan, nothing can happen unless it is like in his Plan and thus "by the leave of Allah". NB: This is a main reason - not to say the main reason - why many Muslims believe that Hell and sending people there, is according to Allah's wish and Plan. But where then is the benevolent god? A god sending billions of humans to everlasting and sadistic torture is neither god nor benevolent, not to mention forgiving.

342 3/166cc: "- - - in order that He (Allah*) might test the Believers - - -" Also the defeat at Uhud was claimed to be according to Allah's Plan - to test the warriors. But why - WHY - does an omniscient, predestining god need to test anyone when he knows everything before??!! There is no logic in it! Whereas if you think a cunning warlord uses such a story as an explanation and a whip to strengthen and renew the will to fight in his depressed, but believing and naive warriors - well, then there suddenly is logic in the tale.

It takes a lot of naivety to be able to believe that an omniscient and predestining god needs to test his followers to know what they are worth.

343 3/167c: "- - - fight in the way of Allah - - -". That the raids and wars were and partly are made in the name of the god and named jihad ("holy war") and ghazwa ("holy battles") even though they mainly were raids for robbing, stealing, rape, slave taking, extortion, and little by little also for forcing Islam on people ("become Muslims, or fight us and die!"), make them even more detestable, especially as most of them were raids and wars of aggression - as said mainly for riches, slaves and power, and later also for spreading Islam by means of the sword directly and indirectly.

344 3/167d: "- - - fight in the way of Allah - - -". Verses like this - and there are many of them in the Quran - are more or less the antithesis to NT. Yahweh and Allah the same god? You only need two letters for the answer "no".

345 3/168b: “Say, ‘Avert death for yourselves (not good Muslims*) - - -.” This argument, which on the surface may be a heavy one, in reality is without meaning, as it demands a not provable deed. Statistically you may prove that your chances of surviving to old age becomes much larger by evading wars and battles, but to prove that one person's own acts has averted his death in such connections, is not possible, except in special cases. (He might have survived the battle anyhow). All the same statistics deliver solid proofs for that the claim that to work in your fields is as dangerous as taking part in a battle, is not even nonsense.

##346 3/169b: “Nay, they (dead Muslim warriors*) live - - - in the presence of their Lord (Allah*)”. One more of the very many cases in the Quran where one has to say: If Allah exists. If Allah really is a god. If Allah is behind what is told in the Quran. And if the Quran tells the full and only truth on this point.

347 3/170b: “They (the ones killed in war*) rejoice in the Bounty of Allah (an Earth-like luxury life + plenty of women – how that life is for the women, is of no consequence# - not worth even one question in the entire Quran and all the Hadiths or anywhere else in Islamic literature we have seen) - - - (and*) the (martyrs) glory in the fact that on them is no fear, nor have they (cause to) grieve.” Psychologically a very good way for a leader to tackle and to prepare his followers for the fact that some warriors were going to die in the wars. There were little cause for sorrow and little cause for blaming the leader. But to be able to believe in this, take lots of naivety, blind belief and wishful thinking - just naivety is not enough.

##348 3/170c: The family and others left behind by dead warriors, have no reason to grieve - their dear one - the warrior - is in Paradise. Yes - if it really was a war for Allah, and not for power or riches for some leader. And if the Quran speaks the truth on this point at least. And if Allah is an existing god. And if f.x. if children without fathers find the situation attractive.

349 3/170d: "- - - (martyrs) - - -". All Muslims killed in war, are martyrs, no matter if it is a war of aggression or not, or even simply a raid for money and rape and slaves – Muhammad made many such ones and called all of them jihads. It is like if the Christians should call everybody dead in a war with religious contents - f.x. the 30 Years War in Europe (1618-1648 AD) martyrs - or actually in all wars, as more or less all wars Muslims are involved in, are called jihads - "holy wars". Normally only innocent persons or persons killed in very special circumstances are martyrs. ###Wars of aggression, raids for stealing/robbing, etc. extremely seldom give martyrs in normal religions.

350 3/171b: "- - - (in their (the claimed martyrs'*) bliss) - - -". This only may be true if Islam is a true religion with a real god, and if the Quran in addition has told everything correctly.

351 3/171d "- - - the fact that Allah suffereth not the reward of the Faithful to be lost - - -". Once again: If Allah exists, if he in case is a major god - - - and if the Quran tells the full and only truth without mistakes about this. And no matter: This sentence is a claim, not a fact - words like "fact" are often disused by Muslims. (You f.x. meet claims like "the fact that the Bible is falsified", even though it is proved by strong circumstantial and empirical proofs that the claims are wrong.)

352 3/171e: "- - - the fact - - -". The strongest word which in reality can be used here, is "the claim" - the Quran contains so many mistakes and absolutely no proofs for central claims, that this cannot be called a "fact". But then it is quite normal for the Quran to use too strong words when claiming positive things for itself (and when claiming negative things for non-Muslims). Also see 2/2b above.

353 3/|72a: "- - - those who answered the call of Allah (for fighting*) and the Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -". Muslims. A strengthened version of Muhammad's standard, but never proved mantra to glue himself to his claimed god and platform of power.

354 3/172e: "- - - Allah and the Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -". A variation of Muhammad's standard, but never proved mantra for gluing himself to his platform of power; his god.

355 3/172g: "- - - those (Muslims*) who do right and refrain from wrong have a great reward (in Paradise*)". One more of the very many cases in the Quran where one has to say: If Allah exists. If he is a god. If Allah is behind what is told in the Quran. And if the Quran tells the full and only truth on this point. And also one of the very many places in the book where one has to say that when the Quran uses words like "right", "wrong", etc. it is in accordance with its own somewhat special moral code.

356 3/173a: “Men said to them: ’A great army is gathering against you’: - - - but it (only) increased their Faith - - -”. Pep talk. Real Muslims are not frightened - and Allah will help. Pep talk incites the warriors to keep fighting, and to wage war. This was of course necessary for Muhammad to gain personal security, power and riches. Like for many warlords. 

357 3/173c: "- - - it (the possibility of battle*) (only) increased their (good Muslims'*) Faith - - -". The religion of peace? The same god as in NT? No comment to any of the two questions. It would be a waste of time.

358 3/173e: "- - - He (Allah*) is the best disposer of affairs". Often claimed in Islam, never documented or in any other way proved. Also contradicting the Bible quite a lot - it tells it is Yahweh who is not only best, but the only one.

###359 3/174a: “And they returned (from war) with Grace and Bounty from Allah: no harm ever touched them - - -”. A fairy tale picture of war and easy riches. A good pep talk for recruiting new warriors if the men are uneducated and naïve. Glorifying war and spoils of war attracts new warriors. The larger the “army” the better chance of success and power for leaders.

But never a word about the catastrophes for the victims and for the destroyed lives and cultures, etc. Compassion and empathy nearly do not exist in the Quran - and definitely not concerning non-Muslims. And not one word about the morality in stealing, raping, extortion, slave taking, etc.

#####It is worth noticing that Muhammad and his followers behaved like Muslim gangs are doing today (2013 AD) in northeast Africa: Raiding - in this case especially people fleeing north from war and poverty - the weak ones. Muslims stealing what meager possessions they have, murdering, raping, gang raping, torture, extortion, slave taking, slave selling (yes, it goes on even today). This was the life of the semi-saint Muhammad the last 9-10 years of his life - Muslims were involved in some 82 armed incidences during that time, nearly all of them raids for stealing riches, for rape, extortion, and slave taking. Muhammad personally led some 26 of them and personally raped at least two women (Rayhana bint Amr and Safiyya bint Huayay). #####Some morally perfect idol!

#####It also is very telling that as far as we know, Islam is doing little or nothing to stop those gangsters of today - and how can they? Those gangsters are behaving just like Muhammad did, and everything Muhammad did was perfect, "lawful and good".

360 3/174b: "- - - Bounty from Allah - - -". That the raids and wars with its stealing, raping, suppression, extortion and blood shall be in the name of the god, makes the whole "business" - the Quran's rules for waging war - even more disgusting. And are robbed goods, rape and slave taking in accordance with the moral and ethical codes in NT? - the claimed same god? Read the NT and check for yourself.

But notify how often "bounty" is mentioned in connection to propaganda for war in the Quran - the permission to steal from and to enslave or extort the victims, was one of the central arguments for alluring Muslim men to go on raids and to war, and for attracting non-Muslims to enter Islam. (And is the "bounty" really from a god when you have to go out and steal and rob and risk your life and health for it - and destroy other people's lives. Words and propaganda are cheap, and incitements and temptation sometimes slick - and all such words may be dishonest and untrue.)

361 3/174d: "- - - they (Muslims at war*) followed the good pleasure of Allah - - -". The good pleasure of Allah here refers to going to war. You do not find anything even remotely similar to this in NT. And even in the more warlike OT, war was not for the pleasure of the god, but to make room for the Jews, and later for to defend their nation(s).

362 3/|74e: "- - - Allah is the Lord of bounties unbounded". This may refer to the claimed next life or to the material fact that in and around Arabia there were rich people and countries to conquer and steal from or enslave, or to do both.

363 3/175a: “It is only Satan that suggests to you the fear (of battles*)”. Who wants to be the subject of Satan - it is better to fear Allah and Muhammad and not shy away from fighting.

But what if the theory that the Quran is delivered by the dark forces is correct?

###364 3/176a: "Let not those grieve thee who rush head-along into unbelief - - -". The Bible: "Search for the lost sheep" (f.x. Matt. 18/12-14). Even this small verse alone proves 100% and more that the Quran and the NT are not from the same god - the basic ideas behind the religions are totally different. Well, unless the god is mentally ill.

365 3/176b: "Let not those grieve thee who rush head-along into unbelief - - - Allah's Plan is that He will give them no portion in the Hereafter - - -". Allah is predestining everything, also this, and predestining according to his Plan which nobody and nothing can change. Is he then a just god when he punishes these humans?

366 3/176c: "- - - unbelief - - -". What is in reality unbelief? Believing in the Quran which is the only "holy" book which proves completely that it - and the religion which is built on it - is not from a god (too many wrong facts, etc.). Or believing in one or more gods who perhaps exist(s)?

367 3/176d: "- - - Allah's plan is that He will give them (non-Muslims plenty in this life, but*) no portion in the Hereafter - - -". This is Muhammad's standard "explanation" for why Muslims often live a sorry life whereas some non-Muslims live in plenty. There is no proof for the claim - like for everything else of central claims in the Quran.

368 3/177d: "- - - not the least harm will they (the non-believers*) do to Allah - - -". It is not possible to harm him unless he exists.

369 3/178a: "Let not the unbelievers think Our (Allah's*) respite to them is good for themselves: We grant them respite that they may grow in their iniquity: but they will have a shameful punishment." Once more an explanation to non-Muslims and Muslims alike why non-Muslims often have a good life, but Muslims often a bad one. But do not be sad; they will be punished (and you rewarded) in the claimed next life.

But does punishment for what the god has predestined indicate a fair, good and benevolent god?

370 3/179d: "- - - what is evil - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses expressions like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code. F.x. one of the bad wrongs was not to go to war and rob and kill for Muhammad and/or Allah.

371 3/179f: "Nor will He (Allah*) disclose to you (Muhammad*) the secrets of the Unseen". #######One more confirmation for that Muhammad was no seer - no prophet; He was unable to "see the unseen" = unable to make prophesies. And a person unable to make prophesies is no prophet.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

372 3/179g: ""But He (Allah*) chooses of His Messengers (for the purpose) whom He pleases". Muhammad claimed the Jews did not believe in him because he was not a Jew (the real reason was that they knew their own old scriptures, and saw how much in Muhammad's teaching and what he claimed the old god said and wanted, were wrong compared to those scriptures. This is an argument against the Jews, but meant for his followers - the Jews knew he was not speaking the truth here. Worse: The last years - when Muhammad had got more knowledge about at least the OT, he had to see the difference himself and had to know something was wrong. But he blamed everything on falsification of the Bible even if he at this time (in all surahs younger than 624 AD, because by then he had got some knowledge to the real Jewish scriptures and Bible - this one is from 625 AD, and f.x. surah 5 from 632 AD) had to know he was lying - his only way out if he wanted to save his religion and his platform of power - - - and his "face".

----------------------------------------------------------------------

NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

----------------------------------------------------------------------

373 3/179h: "- - - believe in Allah and His Messengers (included Muhammad*) - - -." A variation of Muhammad's mantra to become - and stay - glued to his god and platform of power, here in a slightly strengthened version.

####Note how close Muhammad attaches himself to the power of his claimed god - in plain words: "Obey me - Muhammad". Self centered. Selfish? You find this many, many places in the Quran. Power was the main thing Muhammad sought - and riches to gain more power. The Quran clearly indicates that power - and respect - meant even more to him than women. And he was eager for (young) women - willing ones and not willing ones - and at least one child.

374 3/179k: "- - - ye (Muslims*) have a reward (in the claimed next life*) without measure." If Allah exists. If Allah is behind what is told in the Quran. And if the Quran tells the full and only truth on this point.

But remember as for punishments and rewards - and forgiving: They cannot be given unless there are made changes in the Plan of Allah, which several verses in the Quran states nobody and nothing can make. (A predestined reward is not a reward, but theater.)

375 3/180d: "To Allah belongs the heritage of the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth - - -". Often claimed, never proved - and one of those claims any believer in any religion can make free of charge on behalf of his/her god(s) as long as he/she can evade all requests for proofs.

376 3/180g: "- - - Allah is well acquainted with what ye do". See 2/233h above and 35/38b below.

377 3/181e: "- - - slaying the Prophets - - -". Read the Bible and see how many - or few - prophets the Jews in reality slew.

378 3/181f: "- - - slaying the prophets in defiance of right - - -". Is there any time or place where it is right to slay real prophets?

379 3/181h: In the next life the non-Muslims who have a good life on Earth, have their punishment. A soothing thought and a good "explaining away" of the fact that many non-Muslims were well off whereas many Muslims were poor. Also see 3/77b above.

380 3/182a: "This (being sent to Hell*) because of the (unrighteous deeds) which your hands sent before ye (non-Muslims*) - - -". = Because of sins you did in this life. But is this fair if Allah predestined everything you did, like the Quran claims many places? Also see 3/182b just below.

381 3/182b: "- - - (unrighteous deeds) - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses expressions like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code. F.x. one of the bad wrongs was not to go to war and rob and kill for Muhammad and/or Allah.

382 3/182e: "- - - Allah never harms those who serve Him". He can harm no-one unless he exists. On the other hand: If he does not exist and he just is the false pagan god al-Lah, the belief in him under the name Allah has done and continue to do his believers immeasurable harm - and especially so if there somewhere exists a god/gods Muslims are prohibited by in this case old superstition, from looking for. (If Allah does not exist, or even if he exists, but is falsely described in the Quran, Islam just is strong superstition - though Muhammad gained much respect and power, some riches, and a lot of sex).

383 3/183b: “They (non-Muslims/Jews*) (also) said: ’Allah took our promise not to believe in a Messenger unless he showed us a sacrifice consumed by fire (from heaven)’. Say: ’There came to you messengers before me, with Clear Signs and even with what ye ask for (fire from heaven as a proof*): why then did ye slay them, if ye speak the truth?”

The first double-quoted sentence is far from in accordance with the Bible or other Jewish scriptures - there is no reference to that the Jews (or Christians) said something like this. This verse is likely to be inspired by Elijah and his duel with the Baal priests (1. Kings 18/22-39), but that was not after such a request from the Jews.

Only a very few prophets used fire from heaven as a proof or at all to have brought such fire - the most well-known of these was Elijah, and he so definitely was not slain (he according to the Bible was taken up to Heaven alive (2. Kings 2/11)). None of the very few prophets who according to the Bible used fire from heaven as a proof, were killed. Besides the logic is wrong: That the Jews were accused of having slewed some, does not disprove that proof was a minimum requirement (and transferred to the Quran: Especially when a claimed message is full of mistakes, contradictions, etc. so that verification of what is true and what is not is strongly needed).

384 3/183c: “Allah took our promise not to believe in a Messenger unless he showed us a sacrifice consumed by Fire (from heaven)”. The underlying question: Then where are the proofs for your tales? There never was a valid answer to that question - never a valid proof.

385 3/184a: "Then if they reject thee (Muhammad*), so were rejected Messengers before thee - - -." This also is one of the remarks you meet here and there in the Quran: There is nothing strange in that Muhammad and his teachings were not accepted at once - that is normal for messengers. "Ergo" the situation is normal for a "messenger" when Muhammad is rejected. "Ergo" Muhammad is a (normal) messenger. (But the logic here does not hold - to be rejected is not a "sine qua non" (= it proves nothing)).

386 3/184c: "- - -the Book of Enlightenment." It is possible to guess here is meant the Bible, but most likely the reference is to the Quran - a book giving little enlightenment, as there are too many mistakes, etc. - making the "knowledge" unreliable or invalid, and also proving that it cannot be made of a god (an omniscient god makes no mistakes, contradictions, etc.), which further makes also the religious claims and statements unreliable or invalid.

387 3/185a: "- - - only on the Day of Judgment shall you (people*) be paid your full recompense". The recurring "explanation" for injustice in this world - and the comfort in knowing that "I" will end up on top later: Justice will happen in the next life. Cheap words for Muhammad - especially if they are not true. Shooting comfort for believing followers.

388 3/185d: "- - - life in this world is but goods and chattels of deception". Unintended (or intended?) irony if the Quran is a made up book - and it at least is not from a god (too much is wrong).

389 3/186a: “You shall certainly be tried and tested - - -”. Difficulties are just Allah’s way of testing you, and you do not pass the test unless you keep fighting. (But why does an omniscient and predestining god need to test you? - he knows everything already. There is no logic in this, not unless it is Muhammad who needs this argument as a carrot and a whip to strengthen his warriors' will to fight, or to "explain" why raids (for wealth mainly) and wars were "necessary".)

390 3/186ca: “But if ye persevere patiently - - - then that will be a determining factor in all affairs”. Keep fighting and you will win. ############Non-Muslims should never forget this expression.

391 3/187a: "And remember Allah (Yahweh*) took a Covenant from the People of the Book (= Jews and Christians*) - - -". According to the Bible it was Yahweh who did this - a different god with a very different teaching, especially after "the new covenant" (f.x. Luke 22/20) took place.

392 3/187c: "And remember Allah took a Covenant from the People of the Book (= Jews and Christians mainly*), - - - but they threw it away - - -".

Yahweh according to the Bible took a covenant with the Jews. It was sometimes respected, sometimes mistreated and broken and fell into disuse - - - and renewed time and again. What the Quran and Islam never mention, is that Yahweh never terminated it (well, Islam claims it was terminated "de facto" by the Jews' breaking and mistreating it, but not even the Quran says that the god told he terminated it). As not even the Quran claims the covenant was a fiction, at least formally it thus still was valued at the time of Muhammad, and even today.

Yahweh took a "new covenant" with the followers of Jesus, formalized via Jesus during "the Last Supper" (Luke 22/20 and a number of other places) and more or less the same can be said about this one, but with the addition that there always were many honest believers in this covenant never breaking it, so that there never was a reason for terminating it - omitting bad persons from it, yes, terminating it, no. The new covenant is never mentioned by Muslims. (Most Muslims have never even heard about it, even though their scholars know about it.)

393 3/187d: "And remember Allah (Yahweh*) took a Covenant from the People of the Book (= Jews and Christians*), - - - but they threw it away - - -".

Many Muslims claim this in reality is about the claimed mentioning of Muhammad in the Bible. But so what, when there is no such mentioning? It is very obvious that there is no clear mentioning of Muhammad there. Then Muslims make a number of claims about hidden references, but the cherry-picking of words and the twisting of meanings are too obvious and too wrong. See the chapter about the claims about Muhammad in the Bible in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" or in 7/157e below.

394 3/187f: "- - - they (Jews and Christians*) threw it (the claimed original Bible*) away behind their backs - - -". = They falsified the Bible - a claim both science and Islam solidly have proved is wrong. (Very serious for Islam, because if the Bible is correct, the Quran is wrong and Islam a pagan and made up religion.)

395 3/187h: "And vile was the bargain they (Jews, Christians*) made." In reality identical to 3/187g just above. In addition: This claim is wrong if the Quran is not reliable - and doubly wrong if the god they believed in instead (Yahweh*), really exists.

396 3/188a: The recurring theme: Why do many non-Muslims have a good life whereas many good Muslims fare badly - and the same soothing "explanation" and more soothing based on "Schadenfreude".

397 3/189a: "To Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth; and Allah hath power over all things". Another example of the never proved or documented claims and statements the Quran makes.

398 3/189e: "- - - Allah hath power over all things." Often claimed in the Quran, never proved anywhere.

399 3/190a: "Behold, in the creation of the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth, and the alternation of Night and Day, there are indeed Signs for men of understanding -". The Quran frequently disuses natural phenomenon as claimed "signs"/proofs for Allah, etc. But for one thing they all are instinctively invalid, as any priest in any religion can say just the same about his/her god(s) - without proofs it just is cheap, valueless words. And for another they also are totally invalid logically as long as Islam does not prove Allah really made the heaven and the Earth and the night and day (it really is a result of that the Earth is spinning in the sunshine). Even worse: Who needs to use bluffs and invalid arguments? - mainly the cheat and deceiver.

#400 3/190e: “- - - (and in*) the alternation of Night and Day, there are indeed Signs for men of understanding - - -”. Who - especially of uneducated people - does not like to hear they are persons of understanding? - or are reluctant to be classified as one of no understanding? But all the same: This simply is a natural phenomenon. No god has anything to do with night and day unless the opposite is proved - and statements of the opposite need documentation. Added some flattery – flattery is cheap and often works well, especially if the audience consists of a little naïve persons eager to believe. Well:

The first possible conclusion a man of understanding can make here is: Muhammad had no valid arguments – if he had had real and true arguments, he had not had to use invalid ones.

The other possible conclusion a man of understanding can make from this, is that something is seriously wrong. Wrong information, invalid logic, contradictions "en masse", and sometimes lies, after all are the hallmarks of a deceiver, a cheat, and a swindler.

Also see 2/39b above.

401 3/191b: "Not for naught hast Thou (Allah*) created (all) this (everything*)!" Allah or some other god or nature. This just is one more of the natural phenomena which Muhammad claimed for his god - like any believer in any religion can do for his/her god(s) as long as the claims for proofs can be evaded. Totally invalid as proof or indication for Allah, as long as it is not proved that it really was Allah who created it. And we remind you: "A proof is one or more proved facts which can give only one conclusion" Also see 11/7a below.

Some other quotes about proofs and invalid or made up proofs:

"Strong claims need strong proofs.

"A claim without a proof may be dismissed without a proof".

"Claims are cheap, but only proofs are proofs".

"The use of invalid proofs normally proves that something is fishy".

"The cheat or deceiver naturally must rely on claims pretending to be facts or proofs".

"A made up "proof" makes the man very suspect".

"A strong belief is not a proof - not necessarily even a truth".

"Wrong claims and invalid "proofs" are working tools of the cheat".

"A student with correct facts gets a more correct answer than 20 professors with wrong facts". (Invalid, "signs", claims, "proofs", etc. of course are wrong facts.)

And we may add from Peer Gynt in his original language: "Naar utgangspunktet er som galest, blir resultatet tidt originalest" - freely translated: "When you conclude from wrong claims/wrong facts/invalid "proofs"/etc., you get wrong conclusions".

402 3/191c: "Glory to Thee!" Ask first for proofs for that it really was Allah who created everything - and also read 1/1a - and see if he deserves any glory - - - if he exists.

403 3/192a: “Our Lord (Allah*). Any (non-Muslim*) - - - truly Thou coverest with shame, and never will wrongdoers find any helpers”. Of course not – they are of so bad quality, that they do not deserve any help. On the other hand: This is a never proved claim - is the claim true?

404 3/192d: "- - - wrongdoers - - -". In the Quran normally a name for non-Muslims - one of several with low-esteem value or worse frequently used by Muhammad. Names of such categories often are used by leaders of groups if the leader wants to create distance between "us" in the group and "them" outside.

405 3/193b: "Forgive us (Muslims*) our sins - - -". Allah only can forgive sins if he exists and is a god.

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

406 3/193c: "- - - blot out from us (Muslims*) our inequities - - -". Also this Allah cannot do unless he exists and in addition is a god.

407 3/194a: "Grant us (Muslims*) what Thou (Allah*) didst promise unto us (Muslims) through Thy prophets - - -." The Quran claims that all the old prophets - 124ooo Islam says (included the old Jewish ones) - are "their" prophets, and prophets in a long line leading up to Muhammad. But for this to be true, Muhammad's teachings, moral, ethics, etc. have to be in accordance with the corresponding ones of the old prophets - if one belongs to the same tradition from the same god, at least the main points have to be similar and nothing contradicting. In this case these facts do not add up. Muhammad cannot be in the same line unless the god suddenly changed his mind very much on several points (especially around 622 - 624 AD when Islam changed from relatively peaceful to a pure religion of war and suppression) - his teaching is very different from the known prophets. A fact few non-Muslims are aware of and no Muslims ever mention (also most lay Muslims are not aware of this fact, but their scholars know it). Besides:

######An interesting mathematical fact: If we operate with a normal religious time frame, Adam lived something like 5ooo years before the claimed last prophet, Muhammad. If we say that Hadiths' number 124ooo had been correct, and that each of them worked for 25 years, there all the time from Adam till Muhammad should be on average 620 active prophets working for Allah around the world (more than 3 in every country during all those thousands of years). None of them (except the old Jewish ones - really working for Yahweh) left one single trace anywhere on the entire Earth. Even if you reckon the entire age of Homo Sapiens - 160ooo-200ooo years - there in case during all these eons have been 15-20 prophets working all the time. But no trace from them or a religion like Islam, a god like Allah - or a book like the Quran.

Believe it if you are able to.

408 3/195b: "And their (Muslims'*) Lord (Allah*) accepted them, and answered them - - -". Often claimed, never proved.

409 3/195c: "Never will I (Allah*) suffer to be lost the work of any of you (Muslims*) - - -". If Allah exists. If he is a god. If he is behind the making and thus the texts of the Quran. And if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth.

##410 3/195f: “- - - those who have left their homes, or been driven out therefrom, or suffered harm in My (Allah’s*) cause, or fought or been slain - verily, I will blot out from them their iniquities, and admit them into (Paradise*)”. This has two messages: Persons who are persecuted for being Muslims and also warriors who go out to fight for Islam - they are the same, and 2): Both will end in Paradise. Many a terrorist has left his home, he may intend to fight - or at least call what he does a fight. With a bit of luck - or on purpose - he may die for the “cause”. Excellent - next stop is paradise, nearly no matter what sins you have done before. Did anyone say that the Quran had to be disused to incite to hate, killing, rape, war and terrorism?

But what if the Quran - and Allah - are made up? - at least the Quran with all its errors is not from any god.

411 3/195i: "- - - His (Allah's*) Presence is the best of rewards". If he exists. If he is behind the tales of the Quran. And if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth about this.

412 3/196a: "Let not the strutting about of the unbelievers through the land deceive thee (Muslims*)". Often it is easier to deceive oneself than to be deceived by others. Not to mention how much easier it is to be deceived by people one trusts, than by persons one distrusts.

413 3/198a: "- - - for those who fear their Lord (Allah*), are Gardens - - -". Muslims go to Paradise - - - if the Quran tells the truth. But a Paradise of mainly bodily satisfaction and luxury. Is this the best an omniscient and omnipotent god has to offer? Or was it just the maximum which could interest the primitive souls of primitive warriors?

414 3/198d: "- - - Gardens, with rivers flowing beneath - - -". The paradise of the Quran and of Islam is the dream of the primitive desert dweller - included plenty of water. This also is the most used Arabism (see 4/13d below) in the Quran.

415 3/198e: "- - - therein (in Paradise*) are they (Muslims*) to dwell (for ever) - - -". One verse (11/108c) may indicate that also Paradise is not for ever (Islam solves the uncertainty by claiming this in case will mean that the inmates of Paradise will be transferred to something even better, but this is not said in the Quran).

416 3/198f: "- - - the Presence of Allah is the best (bliss) - - -". If he exists and is a god, and if the future in addition is correctly described by the Quran.

417 3/199c: "- - - those (of "the People of the Book"*) who believe in Allah - - -". None of those believe in Allah, but in Yahweh (though some of them sometimes wrongly have used the name Allah for Yahweh). If they believe in Allah, they no longer are of "the People of the Book", but Muslims.

418 3/199d: "- - - revelations - - -". It was never proved they really were revelations, not to mention it was never proved all were revelations even in the case that some happened to be - from someone or something (though with so many errors, etc. not from a god). Like everything else also this rests on unproved claims only.

419 3/199e: "- - - sell the Signs of Allah for a miserable gain - - -". This and similar expressions mostly are used in the Quran in connection to persons not wanting to enter or wanting to leave Islam, and in connection with claims about falsifications of the Bible - some ones will sell their future in the claimed Paradise "for a miserable gain" in this life. This claim is valid only if Allah really exists, really is a central god, and if there somewhere exist valid signs for him (absolutely all claimed signs in the Quran are invalid as signs or proofs for Allah, as there nowhere is proved that it really is Allah who was/is behind what is claimed to be signs/proofs for him - any believer in any religion can make exactly the same claims for his/her god(s) free of charge as long as they can evade all requests for such proofs, like Muhammad did.

But for Muhammad this was a much better "explanation" than to admit that they saw that things were very wrong in his new religion (this was in 625 AD, and by then he f.x. had better knowledge about the old Jewish scriptures, and knew they often differed from what he claimed they said).

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤

#####420 3/199g: "For them (strongly believing Jews and Christians*) is a reward with their Lord". There may be a hope for Paradise also for Jews and Christians - - - if this verse is not abrogated (made invalid) by a stricter one later on.

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤

421 3/199h: "For them (strongly believing Jews and Christians*) is a reward with their Lord, and Allah is swift in account". Here the Quran once more wrongly indicates that Yahweh and Allah is the same god, a claim which obviously is wrong, as the teachings of those two too often and too fundamentally are too different.

But as for punishments and rewards - and forgiving - remember: They cannot be given unless there are made changes in the Plan of Allah, which several verses in the Quran states nobody and nothing can make. (A predestined reward is not a reward, but theater.)

422 3/199i: "- - - for Allah is swift in account". The old fact: Only if he exists and if he in addition is a god.

423 3/200b: “Persevere in patience and constancy; vie in such perseverance; strengthen each other; and fear Allah; that ye may prosper”. If George Bush had read this, he had listened to his generals and used more troops - for once USA used too few troops in an invasion when they invaded Iraq. Non-Muslims also should be aware that the Quran imprints and imprints and imprints that if you persevere, the opponent grows tired and gives in. Too often this is correct.

424 3/200c: "- - - fear Allah; that ye (Muslims*) may prosper". There is no use in fearing Allah unless he exists and in addition is a god, neither of which is anywhere proved - and this even more so as the Quran itself proves it is not from a god (no omniscient god makes mistakes, contradictions, need abrogations, etc.)

Well, there is a reason to fear Allah also if he should happen to be part of the dark forces.

505 + 424 = 929 remarks.

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Not formed like questions for proofs, but what needs to be proved normally easy to see all the same. And: References you do not find here, go to "1000+ Comments on the Quran".


>>> Go to Next Surah

<<< Go to Previous Surah

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