1000+ Claims in the Quran - Invalid Unless Proven, Surah 5

 

SURAH 5:  Al-Ma'idah (The Table Spread)

(632 AD, one of the very last ones. Some verses of earlier time)

 

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, introduced rules, and deeds, we personally believe in the demands, rules, and deeds. Glorious words are cheap, demands and deeds, etc. are more reliable. Glorifying words and claims anyone can use and disuse, rules, demands, deeds, etc. are reality. When you read, read what was demanded, advised and done, and distrust the glorious words - judge from realities, not from propaganda.

002 5/1b: "Fulfill (all) obligations." On the face of it this is a good order. But remember here that one of the strongest obligations was - AND NB: IS - the duty to go to war for the religion and its leaders. (If you read modern Islamic literature meant for Muslims, you see this duty stressed again and again and again also for today and for the future - whereas similar literature meant for non-Muslims talks more about "the Religion of Peace", etc.)

003 5/1c: "Lawful unto you (Muslims*) (for food) - - -". The practical exceptions one normally runs into, are the prohibition against meat from pig and blood (but also see 5/3a below). About the prohibition against meat from pig it is only explained that it is an abomination, but no-one knows why. There have been proposed these - and a few more - explanations:

The danger for trichinosis. A danger which is easy to guard against.

Pigs like to wallow in mud to cool down. This looks dirty. It may be a reaction against a "dirty" animal.

Pigs often eat food which could be eaten directly by humans. It thus is "expensive" meat. May be old leaders have found it too expensive and placed a taboo on it.

Meat and fat from pig are tasty and highly nourishing. It may in the really old times have been used for religious ceremonies and purposes, and may slowly have become sacred for normal use and then taboo. This in case partly is a parallel to what happened to horse meat in the north when the old Viking religion was ousted by Christianity - horse meat was the prized meat for the old religious ceremonies, and overnight became prohibited to eat when the Christian religion took over - a prohibition which lasted nearly until modern times. 

As for the taboo against food from blood, it may be connected to an old belief one meets some places, that life is in the blood, and one should not eat life.

There also are a number of other taboos, but meat from pig and blood are the two one most often meet in daily life when Muslims live in non-Muslim areas.

We may also mention a bad kind of "fun" a few non-Muslims sometimes indulge in: To cheat Muslims (and Jews - and perhaps also Hindus) into eating forbidden food - f.x. by solemnly, but wrongly telling that there is no such-and-such meat in those sausages. For one thing it is done in vain - f.x. a Muslim who eats meat from pig, does not sin if he honestly believes he is eating something which is not forbidden (or if he is forced to do it or have to eat it from sheer hunger and has nothing else to eat). This kind of "fun" thus tells nothing about the victim, but a lot about the "fun"-maker. Besides there is the fact that most Muslims are as human as anybody else, and to try to insult his/her feelings in this way, just is a case of childish intellectual capacity and of bad taste.

004 5/1d: "Fulfill (all) obligations." This is the general rule in the sharia laws. But see the points about f.x. al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), Hilah (the lawful circumventing/pretending), deceiving/betrayal, and breaking of promises/word/oaths (2/225, 5/89, 16/91, 66/2).

005 5/1g: "- - - but animals of the chase are forbidden while ye are in the Sacred Precincts or in pilgrim grab: for Allah command according to his Will and Plan". There is nothing similar in the Bible. In itself it only is an indication for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, but as Allah(?) strengthens the prohibition by stressing that it is according to his will and Plan, whereas Yahweh does not care enough to even mention it, it becomes one of the many proofs for that the two are not the same god.

006 5/2c: "- - - Sacred Month - - -". A tradition - one of many - taken over from the old Pagan times in Arabia. No other of the large religions have such holy months - funny how many things the pagan old Arabs but nobody else had correct, according to Allah. There were 4 such months (number 1, 7, 11, 12), when f.x. fighting and war was not permitted - but the Muslims broke it at least once. Muhammad afterwards - as normal - got a "revelation" which sanctified the breaking. By the way: Hajj - pilgrimage - is in month number 12, but beware that the Muslim year is a little - ca. 11 days - shorter than the natural year, and thus it wanders along the normal year over a period of ca. 33 years. 100 normal years = ca. 103 Muslim years. (As the expression here is in singular, the book just here may indicate the month of pilgrimage only.)

007 5/2f: "- - - Sacred Month - - -". One more proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - the months are sacred for Allah, but to Yahweh not interesting enough to even mention such ones.

008 5/2h: "- - - Sacred House - - -". The Bible never mentions a sacred place in Arabia, not even in connection to Moses who may be - may be - visited the Arabian Peninsula according to the Quran (Midian/Madyan (if the Bible's Midian was not in Sudan - well, highly likely Midian was in Sinai, as Mt Sinai and also Mt. Horeb (likely another name for Mt. Sinai (today Jabal Musa (34 degrees east, 28.5 degrees east. Roughly 70 km north northwest from Sharm-el-Sheik (Sharm el Shaykh) far south in central Sinai. Also Islam confirms that it was here Moses met his god and got the mission to lead the Jews out from Egypt. This is far from Madyan in Arabia) is mentioned)). (That Abraham visited Arabia - and Mecca - just is wishful thinking or psychological strategy on behalf of Muhammad. The Bible gives the routes Abraham travelled, and he never was even close to that peninsula. We also may mention that the Bible tells about what Abraham built, and he never built anything but a few altars made from not chiseled natural stone - not even a small chapel anywhere. Even the grave of his wife Sarah was a cave, not something built. You find all this in 1. Mos. f.x. 12/7, 12/8, 12/18. These are facts Muslims never mention, even though at least their scholars know it - it is not possible to go hunting in the Bible for tit-bits they can cherry-pick, without also seeing the information which tells that the Quran is wrong on many points.)

As for science, they in their careful language tell from: "There is no reason to believe that Abraham ever visited Mecca", to: "It is highly unlikely Abraham ever was in Mecca)

009 5/2i: "- - - Sacred House - - -". May be the very strongest of all Arabisms. There is not one chance that a god - Yahweh - would not mention his most sacred place if it really was sacred for him, and all the same this originally old pagan temple in Arabia became a most holy place. "Ergo" Yahweh was not involved in the Kabah - or in Mecca.

#010 5/2j: "- - - Sacred House - - -". The mosque Kabah in Mecca is one of the really strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah is not the same god. There is not one chance that a god had not mentioned his most sacred place and the duties and benefits connected to it, to his strongly believing followers relatively near by - f.x. Abraham and Moses or a powerful king like David, who could have tried to conquer the area to get it into his country.

011 5/3c: "This day have those who reject faith given up all hope of your (Muhammad's/Muslims'*) religion - - -". Notice how this and the next sentence are inserted in a verse about food. You MANY places in the Quran find such sudden changes of subjects, and some places even stuff not relevant for that place in the text is inserted into totally different contexts - like here. The Quran has very little to do with good literature in spite of Muslims' claims about the opposite - like so often in Islam the claims about this are not true.

012 5/3h: "This day have I (Allah*) perfected your (Muslims'*) religion for you - - -". This sentence always fascinates us - was the religion not perfect earlier? And how could the religion be perfected - made better - without changing the claimed "Mother Book" which is claimed to be the unchangeable and timeless basis for Islam? How could f.x. Abraham be a perfect Muslim - or a Muslim at all - if the religion was not perfected until this day in 632 AD? Etc., etc.

013 5/3l: "But if anyone is forced by hunger, with no intention to transgression, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful". #####One small point to be repeated here: Some ones think it is fun or that they make a point by cheating Muslims - or Jews - to eat forbidden food, f.x. meat from pig. This just is to be impolite and unfriendly - and for no reason, as if they are cheated or forced to eat it, it is no sin neither for Muslims, nor for Jews.

######014 5/5c: "The food of the People of the Book (Jews and Christians*) is lawful unto you (Muslims*) - - -". One small point here: You will meet Muslims claiming that the restrictive food laws of Moses really are binding also for Christians as they are not explicit cancelled in the Gospels. We quote MA: "The Massage of the Quran", comment 14 to surah 5: "- - - there is no statement whatsoever in the Gospels to the effect that these prohibitions were cancelled by Jesus". No, but for one thing the Gospels only make up a little better than 40% of the NT, and it is clear in the other parts of the NT that the strict Jewish food laws only are for Jews, not for Christians, and for another it is clear that Jesus did not accept everything in those laws - see f.x. his reaction when some ones scolded his disciples for harvesting grains and eating them during the Sabbath. And not least: Even the Quran tells that Jesus changed some of the Jewish laws (3/50a above).

Addition and correction 1/1-2014: The Gospel do tell that the old laws of Moses for food were lifted - we overlooked it because we thought of it like Peter's vision (Acts 10/13-23). Both Matt. 15/11-20 and Mark 7/14-19 tell that the old food laws were lifted - Mark 7/19 directly says: "In saying this, Jesus declared all food "clean".

Muhammad Ali here is directly wrong. This is said at least 2 places in the Gospels. And we remind you: Both science and - inadvertently - Islam have strongly proved that the Bible is not falsified, in spite of Muhammad's words.

015 5/5h: “(Lawful unto you in marriage) are (not only) chaste women who are believers, but chaste women among the (Jews and Christians*) - - -.” This is told to men – women are too insignificant for such debates. But it concerns women. Muslim men can marry women who are Jews, Christians (though the Quran other places seems to be against it unless they become Muslims) or Muslims, but not Pagan ones (though there is no prohibition for having them as concubines or similar, or rape them). Muslim women can marry only Muslim men – the prohibition is so strict that if a woman marries a non-Muslim, or her Muslim husband converts to another religion, her marriage is invalid and nullified. "No compulsion in religion".

016 5/5l: "- - - dower - - -". There is no demand for dower in the NT - one more contradiction to the Bible. And as dower is a must to Allah, but of no interest to Yahweh, thus is another difference so essential that it is clear Yahweh and Allah are not the same god.

017 5/6b: “When ye prepare for prayer, wash (face, hands, lower arms, feet till ankles, and rub your head*) - - - if you are in a state of impurity, bathe (in reality wash – Hadiths tell Muhammad used 3-4 liters of water for a “bath”, and that only means wash) your whole body. If - - - you have been in contact with women, and ye find no water, then take for yourselves clean sand and earth, and rub therewith your faces and hands.” The rules for cleanliness did make the Muslims a somewhat cleaner people than many others, but that was a side effect, not the intention. The main thing was the formal, ceremonial cleanliness, not the physical cleanliness. And one normal source of becoming formally unclean, was – and is – women.

018 5/6f: "Allah doth not want to place you in difficulty - - -". Perhaps not on after all minor points like cleanliness, but he demanded that you fought, suffered hardship, was crippled (never mentioned in the Quran) and died. You may call that difficulties, too, f.x. for your afterwards fatherless children and widow(s).

019 5/7b: "- - - His Covenant, which He (Allah') ratified with you (Muslims*), when ye said: 'We hear and we obey'- - -". Once upon a time Boers of South Africa made what they called a covenant with Yahweh/God. They promised that if Yahweh/God would help them, they would do so-and-so. What they over-looked was that a covenant must be agreed on by at least two parts; and as Yahweh/God was not an involved participant in an agreement about the case, they in reality only made promises, not a covenant. Is this something of the same? Another point: According to the Bible the god did not make any covenant with Ishmael and his descendants, only with Isaac and his line (1.Mos. 17/21). This even more so as in spite of Arabs' claims of being descendants of Ishmael, it is highly unlikely they are.

020 5/7c: "We hear and we obey". As the only one they could hear was Muhammad, the one they in reality could "hear and obey", was Muhammad. Well and good if the Quran were 100% true and if everything Muhammad said in addition to the Quran were also 100% true. If not, the position of the leader, robber baron and later warlord Muhammad all the same was extremely comfortable.

021 5/7d: "- - - fear Allah, for Allah knoweth well all the secrets of your (Muslims') hearts." The often used warning: Do not try to cheat, because Allah knows everything. (But also see 2/233h above and 35/38b below).

#####022 5/8e: "Be just, that (justice*) is next to Piety - - -". Compare this to NT, which says something like "Faith, Hope and Love - but strongest is Love". The same god? Believe so if you are able to. (And remember that these words from the Bible written in Greek, which has two words for "love" - "eros" = the erotic or bodily love, and "agape" = the higher kind of love - the love between souls. This was written "agape". (For a contrast: Do we have to remind you about how central "eros" is in the Quran?))

023 5/8g: "- - - fear Allah. For Allah is well acquainted with all that ye do". See 2/233h above and 35/38b below.

024 5/9c: "- - - hath Allah promised - - -". The thought provoking fact here is that there is not documented one single case in the entire history where Allah has kept a promise - not even that he has given one. Many claims, no proved case - just listen to the silence on this point from Islam. Islam had not been silent here if they had had even one single proved case.

025 5/9d: "- - - hath Allah promised forgiveness - - -". Allah cannot forgive unless he exists and in addition is a god.

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

026 5/9f: "- - - a great reward". True only if Allah exists, 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. And not least: Only if this paradise really exists. Nothing is ever proved - like always for central claims in the Quran.

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.)

##027 5/12e: "I (Allah*) am with you (the Jews*): if ye (but) establish regular Prayers - - -". There is no demand, request or even mentioning of a fixed number of prayers or fixed times for prayers in the Bible. As this is so essential to Allah, that it is one of the 5 pillars of Islam, but of no interest at all for Yahweh - pray when there is a reason or when you feel for it - the 5 fixed prayers of the Quran is one of the absolute proofs for that Yahweh and Allah is not the same god.

028 5/12f: "- - - Messengers - - -". The word "messenger" is not used as a title in the Bible - a small, but significant difference between the Bible and the Quran - - - and especially so as many Muslims try to tell that "messenger" is something bigger than "prophet" (in spite of that "messenger" just means a messenger-boy, whereas "prophet" is a weighty title).

029 5/12g: “- - - and loan to Allah a beautiful loan - - -.” This normally is “Quran-speak” for “risk or lose your life in battle for Muhammad and Allah”. In just this case it is claimed to be said to the Jews of old times, which gave it double value: A good pep-talk and “documenting” that messengers wanting war, was nothing new. But these words are never used in the Bible.

030 5/12h: “- - - and loan to Allah a beautiful loan - - -.” This normally is “Quran-speak” for “risk or lose your life in battle for Muhammad and Allah”. You never find anything similar in the Bible.

031 5/12j: "- - - Gardens - - -". Paradise - and the Quran's Paradise is rather similar to a primitive, uneducated person's ideas about royal luxury life here on Earth, included lots of women. See 10/9f below.

032 5/14b: "- - - the Message - - -". The Bible. Here indicated originally to have been similar to the Quran.

033 5/14c: "We (the god*) did take a Covenant (with the Christians, too*) - - -". It is crystal clear that if the old scriptures and 11 witnesses tell the truth, a new covenant was confirmed by Jesus' words the last supper (Luke 22/20), and that the context makes it clear that the new covenant was life according to his teachings. This is so well known and so central in the Christian religion, that not one single Muslim really educated in religion does not know this. All the same this new covenant almost always is omitted when Muslim scholars write or talk - and the lay Muslim mostly have never heard about it. And then you even in presumably good quality Islamic literature meet claims like this - claims which have to be written against the writers knowledge, as it is so well known - f.x. (YA: The Meaning of the Quran", comment 715): "The Christian Covenant may be taken to be the charge which Jesus gave to his disciples, and which the disciples accepted, to welcome Ahmad (= another name for Muhammad (61/6, 7/157 (no name) - but ONLY claimed in the Quran)*)":

1: The Christian covenant's formal words (Luke 22/19-20): "This is my (Jesus*) body given for you (Mark 14/24 says "for many"); do this in remembrance of me (my teaching*)", and: "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you". Matt. (26/28) adds: "- - - which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins". We add Mark 13/10: "And the gospel must first be preached to all nations". HOW MUCH DO YOU FIND ABOUT AHMAD OR MUHAMMAD HERE - OR ABOUT THAT JESUS' TEACHING ONLY WAS/IS FOR THE JEWS? 

2: It is totally clear from the context that the new covenant was for humans to live according to Jesus' teaching.

3: There exists a verse in the Quran where it is claimed Jesus said there should come a messenger named Ahmad (= Muhammad) - but only in the Quran, a book dictated by Muhammad (61/6, 7/157 (no name) - but ONLY claimed in the Quran). Not very strange if Muhammad foretold himself. BUT NOT EVEN THERE IT IS SAID THAT JESUS' DISCIPLES ACCEPTED THE MESSAGE. (It is claimed in the Quran that the disciples said they were Muslims, but not even there that they accepted this claimed message about Muhammad). Honesty in argumentation?

4: There is no-where in the Bible said anything even remotely similar to this. And it is worth remembering that science - and Islam - long since has proved the claims in the Quran about falsifications in the Bible wrong - not to say fakes.

5: Jesus' order to his disciples before he left them (according to the Bible and not opposed by the Quran) was to find proselytes and make them Christians by baptizing them - something very different from what here is said.

6: Jesus also told them he should send them a helper - and they received their "parts" of the Holy Spirit some days later, something which helped them quite a lot according to the NT. But Islam strongly claims this helper Jesus promised, was Muhammad - who was born nearly 500 years after the last of the disciples was dead! (But this is the only place they can twist the NT so much that an al-Taqiyya may look distantly believable for the ones not knowing the Bible, and as it is told in the Quran that Muhammad was foretold in both OT and NT, they HAVE to find such a foretelling both places, come Hell or high water. If not the Quran is very wrong. See 7/157e below.

7: Another fact worth mentioning here is that in absolutely no foretelling in the Bible about anybody not in the foreteller's near future, is names given - sometimes titles, but never real names. In the verse in the Quran claimed to be parallel to one in the Bible, there is a clear name, a name which just is another version of the name Muhammad - typical for a deceiver overdoing his "job".

Two strong fact stands out: If Jesus in the Bible is the truth, Muhammad in the Quran is not. And if the Bible is the truth, the Quran is not - - - and the Quran is proved wrong on unbelievably many points.

034 5/14e: “For those, too, who call themselves Christians, We (Allah*) did take a Covenant, but they forgot a good part of the Message that was sent them - - -“.

Comment (A5/27): “I. e. their going astray from the genuine teachings of Jesus - - -.”

Comment (A5/28): “- - - it is obvious that what is alluded to in this context is the concealing of something from oneself; in other words, it is a reference to the gradual obscuring (read; falsification*), by the followers of the Bible, of its original verities which they are now unwilling to admit even to themselves.”

This claim that the Bible is falsified you find many places in the Quran and in Islam. But we have commented on this never proved claim so many places, that here we only remind you of that this is the only possible “explanation” Islam has and Muhammad had to “explain” away all the many differences between the Bible and what the Quran claimed the Bible said - - - and that science and also Islam (against their intention) long since and quite clearly have proved this undocumented claim wrong – the Bible may have mistakes here and there, but not one sample of falsification has been found. On the contrary: All the many old manuscripts show that the Bible today is the same as in the old times. The best proof for this is Islam: If one single real proof for falsification had ever been found, the world had been informed about it each and every time there is a debate between Christians or Jews and Muslims. Not a single consonant or vowel has ever been aired about a real proof – only undocumented statements and claims.

How do Islam and Muslims explain all effects and means of making a sudden enormous change (there only is one small identical part of a sentence - the 6 words "- - - the righteous will inherit the land - - -" (Psalms 37/29 - words which easily may be identical by coincidence) in the entire Bible compared to in the Quran)? Alternatively how do they explain it if the means was a "gradual obscuring" of such a central and widespread book? Islam and Muslims produce(?) many claims, but never proved or even logically believable explanations.

It also is typical for Islam that Muhammad Asad pretends that the claim is a fact, in spite of that it never was anything but never proved claims, and now long since proved wrong by strong circumstantial and empirical proofs.

035 5/15c: "- - - our (Allah's*) Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -". A man preaching a teaching with so many mistakes, contradictions, etc, is not the messenger of an omniscient god. Also see 63/5a below.

036 5/15e: “- - - revealing to you (Jews and Christians*) much of that ye used to hide in the Book (the Bible*) - - -“. To believe in the theory that the Bible is falsified, one has to know very little about how to make identical falsifications of tens of thousands of copies of many different manuscripts, where on top of all that, all the different falsifications have to be synchronized in all the different manuscripts, so that the different manuscripts do not tell widely different facts. And not least: All references to and from the different papers must have been synchronized – try to do that even today with 100ooo papers spread over large areas and without using mass communications, or even a post office.

With 12ooo relevant papers or scraps of papers still existing today, there must have been at least 100ooo and many more in the old times, spread all over – papers are destroyed or rot or disappear over the centuries - all identically falsified or falsified so that each corresponded to all the others, because at that time nobody knew which papers would survive until today!!! And then we have not even included the some 32ooo other manuscripts with quotes from the Bible which also have survived till today. All together at least half a million papers had to be falsified - on 3 continents - from 2 religions + sects - in a time nearly without communications. And all had to be falsified in exactly the same ways and no point where falsification was necessary could be forgotten - and EVERY relevant paper had to be found and falsified (if not they could be found in the future). And not least: The falsifications all had to be so cleverly done that it is impossible for modern technology of today to find any traces of it. And without any historian then or afterwards ever heard a whiff about and mentioned it.

It is up to you if you will weep or laugh - the two only normal reactions to a claim like this, if it was not because it was so serious.

Judge for yourself after you also have read all under 2/75, 3/24, 5/13 and 5/14.

But a plot like this could not be used in a novel - nobody would believe in it.

037 5/15f: "- - - and passing over much (that is now unnecessary) - - -". How is it possible to pass over much, if the Quran is an exact copy of the unchangeable "Mother Book" (13/39b, 43/4b+c, 85/21-22) in Heaven, like the Quran claims?

##########038 5/15g: "- - - and passing over much (that is now unnecessary) - - -". There is quite a lot of stuff in the Bible you do not find in the Quran - some of it rather essential for the religion (and not a little very different from the Quran, included a lot of the essential stuff - and we remind you here that in spite of Muslims' never documented claims, it is circumstantially and empirically proved that the Bible is not falsified - and the sum of all the proofs make a 100% proof of mathematical strength for that the Bible is not falsified).

Islam and Muslims will have to prove their words, not only produce - in double meaning - claims

#039 5/15h: “- - - there hath come to you (Jews, Christians*) from Allah a (new) light (Muhammad*) - - -“. Well, that is one of the questions: Did a man so morally degenerated and preaching a religion based on a book with so many mistakes, etc. and so much wrong logic, really represent a god? And did a war religion with a partly immoral moral code represent a benevolent god? Simply "no" to each of these questions.

040 5/15j: “- - - (Allah has sent down*) a perspicuous Book (the Quran*)”. No god has sent down – not to mention revered it as the "Mother Book" in his own Heaven – a book with that many mistakes, unclear language, contradictions, and that much wrong and invalid logic.

041 5/15l: "- - - a perspicuous Book - - -". Perspicuous?

042 5/16b: "(A book - the Quran which*) leadeth them (Muslims*) out of darkness - - -". Is there any of the big and medium religions which to a greater extent than Islam represents the dark sides if the darkest Middle Age? - into which the Quran not only leads, but condemns its followers.

043 5/16e: "- - - guideth (by means of the Quran*) them (non-Muslims*) to a Path that is Straight". Does Islam represent a straight way? - and in case where? - when it builds on a book no god would ever have made or sent, not to mention revered? It is blasphemy and insults and slander to a god to accuse him of having made a book that full of errors, contradictions, unclear language, etc. like the Quran.

044 5/17a: "In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ - - -." No Christian - not one single one - says that Allah (or Yahweh) = Jesus. Yahweh and Jesus are separate, but closely connected only. To use an Irish picture: Together with the Spirit they make up the 3 parts of a clover leaf. As for the Trinity, though, Islam may be right, as this is not clearly a part of the Bible (though Jesus said: "My Father (Yahweh/God) and I are one" - may be figuratively meant). But no Christian says Yahweh/God = Jesus.

A picture may be: Yahweh = the god. Jesus = a co-worker and/or friend and/or crown prince. The Holy Spirit = the messenger - an errand boy and helper. Or Yahweh = king, Jesus = prince (royal, but not king), the Holy Spirit = the chief ambassador.

#045 5/17b: “In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ (= put another god by Allah’s side – the ultimate and unforgivable sin according to 4/48 and 4/116) - - -". No Christian says that Jesus is Allah or the other way around. Neither do they say that Jesus is Yahweh. Also Muhammad never understood the trinity dogma of the Christians. (He believed the trinity consists of Yahweh, Jesus and Mary!!!). But if one looks only at that dogma, Islam may be right that it is not correct - may be. It is only a dogma decided on by humans after much discussion; it is not part of the Bible - but see 5/17a just above. (This dogma is from the 4. century, and it got its present form from the so-called Cappadocian Fathers (Gregory of Nyassa (332-395), Basil the Great (320-79 AD), Gregory of Nazeanzus (329-389). The nearest you come in the Bible, is that Jesus said that he and his father, Yahweh, were one - easy to understand figuratively.) Also see 5/17a and 5/73b. But no-one in his right mind and with some knowledge about the Bible, would ever believe Mary was part of the trinity. Any even baby god had known. Then who made the Quran?

047 5/17h: "- - - to Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens (plural and wrong*) and earth - - -". Often claimed, never proved - one of the many claims any believer in any religion can make free of charge on behalf of his/her god(s) as long as all requests for proofs can be evaded. Words are that cheap.

048 5/17k: "He (Allah*) creatheth what he pleaseth". A most interesting claim, as Allah/Muhammad never proved any power to create things. Yahweh proved it several times if the old books tell the truth, but Allah? - nothing. Also see 2/22d above and 6/1e, 6/2b, 11/7a, 21/56c below.

049 5/17l: "For Allah hath power over all things". A power he in case never provably has demonstrated.

##050 5/18d: “Why then doth He (the god*) punish you for your sins (if he loves you*)”. Wrong psychology, and a naïve question, as anyone knows you sometimes have to punish even children you love to teach them how to behave.

051 5/18f: "He (Allah*) forgiveth whom He pleaseth, and He punisheth whom He pleaseth". Whereas the Christian god according to the Bible forgives anyone who regret honestly and tries to make amends, and punishes only those who deserve it. The same god? Guess twice.

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

052 5/18i: "- - - unto Him (Allah*) is the final goal (of all)". If he exists, if he in case is a major god - and if the Quran has told the truth.

053 5/19c: “O People of the Book! Now hath come unto you, making (things) clear unto you - - -". A preacher using and a preaching containing so many errors like the one of Muhammad, does not make things clear. (Sometimes it even messes up things.)

###054 5/19f: "- - - after a break in (the series of Our (Allah's*) Messengers - - -". Muhammad and the Quran pretended/pretend Muhammad belong(ed) in the Jewish line - or series - of prophets. This is not correct, as both the god, the teaching and the fundamental ideas, ethics and moral codes, etc. are too different - Muhammad and his god and teaching often are even the antithesis of the prophets in the Bible and especially of the NT. Muhammad definitely is not in that line.

055 5/19j: "- - - a warner (Muhammad*) - - -". At this time (632 AD) this at least was a Kitman (a lawful half-truth). In 632 AD Muhammad also was an enforcer - most of Arabia and much of the rest of the now Muslim area became Muslim by some kind of force - weapons, money, social pressure, work, etc. (Arabia mainly by greed - the Arabs wanted parts of the loot from raids and wars - or force: "Become Muslims or fight and die - and see your women and children become slaves".)

###056 5/19m: "- - - but now hath come to you (Jews, Christians, Sabeans*) a bringer (Muhammad*) of glad tidings and a warner (from evil)." Read the Quran - skip the glorious words, and read the realities; the demands, the introduced rules, the deeds, the (im)moral code, the lack of ethics, the sharia law, the code of war, treatment of women, slavery, etc. Glorious words are cheap to use for propaganda, the underlying realities are the realities. Read these realities and see what "glad tidings" and warning from real evil you find. Muhammad probably is the single man throughout the existence of man who has brought most terror and misery into this world - and if his Quran with all its errors, etc. is made up or from dark forces, also into the possible next world for his followers, if there is a real god somewhere.

057 5/20a: Moses talked about Allah. Especially as it is clear Yahweh and Allah cannot be the same god, and as all the really old manuscripts mention Yahweh, it is highly unlikely Moses mentioned Allah - not to say it stronger. Also a contradiction to the Bible, which tells he talked about Yahweh.

##058 5/20b: “Remember Moses said to his people: - - - Allah - - - made you kings”. This is the correct literal meaning of the Arab text, but it is historically wrong. The first Jewish kings were Saul (Talut in the Quran) and then David some 200 - 300 years after Moses (around 1000 BC whereas Moses - if he was a real person - lived around 1300 BC (perhaps ca. 1315 to ca. 1195 BC). Any - even minor - god had known this. We have heard Muslims explain that this is not what the Quran means, but that Allah made all Jews like kings. But anyone who knows a little about Jewish history and about Jews before and now, knows very well that most Jews never were or are or behave(d) like kings. It is an obvious “explanation”. To circumvent and hide the mistake you find this translation in “The Message of the Quran: “- - - and (Allah*) made you your own masters - - -.” Honesty in religion? – al-Taqiyya? - - - a language “clear and easy to understand”?

Islam "the Religion of Honesty"?

Any omniscient god knows the full history of the Jews, Muhammad did not - this is clear many places in the Quran - and believed the Jews had had kings even before Moses. Then who made the Quran?

059 5/27a: "- - - the truth of the stories of the two sons of Adam (Cain and Abel*)". Well is it the truth? The murder is from the Bible, but the dialogue between the two just before the murder is borrowed from the made up scripture the Targum of Jerusalem (better known as pseudo-Jonathan).

Did an omniscient and omnipotent god really have to borrow from made up texts and then call it "the truth"?

060 5/27c: "- - - the two sons of Adam - - -". Like so very often the Quran is vague on relevant details, like here the names - Muhammad simply did not know them. Not good literature. (You find them in the Bible: Cain and Abel - 1. Mos. 4/4-16). 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.

061 5/27-31 Cain and Abel (the names not mentioned in the Quran): A lot of this is neither in the Bible nor in any other somewhat reliable source (actually the Bible is the only existing perhaps source about them). See 5/27a above.

062 5/28a: “If thou (“infidels”, Cain*) dost stretch thy hand against me (Muslims, Abel*), it is not for me to stretch my hand against thee to slay thee - - -.” When you read this, remember that Muslims have no overall moral philosophy. What they have is a code telling them to look for “What did Muhammad say about such things?” If he has said something, they take that as a moral code – good moral or not. If not, they have to look in the book: “Is there a parallel situation somewhere?” If they find – sometimes by stretching imagination – a "right" way to act, or the alibi for how one wishes to act, that is the moral code. Mind also that this verse is one of the very few in all the Quran which is in accordance with the teachings of Jesus – one of the very few. And it is totally “murdered” by abrogations. This verse is contradicted and abrogated and “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". (At least 29 contradictions). Besides: This sentence or similar is not mentioned in connection to Cain or Abel the Bible or any other somewhat reliable source.

063 5/28d: "- - - Allah, the Cherisher of the worlds". Only if he exists and is correctly described in the Quran.

064 5/28f: "- - - the worlds". Wrong. This refers to the 7 worlds claimed in 65/12b below (one on top of the other according to Hadiths). But there exist only one Earth.

065 5/29a: (YA732): “- - - my sin as well as thine - - -.” Unclear. The meaning likely is that a murderer according to the Quran also carries the sins of the victim – as the victim was robbed his possibility to regret his sin and be forgiven (this is one of the dogmas in Islam). But there also is another possible meaning: “my sin” may mean the sin against me who is murdered, and “thy sin” may then be the committing of the murder or “thy sin against yourself by committing such a grave deed and rob yourself for Paradise.”

There is no similar text in the Bible, etc. Actually just this part of the story of Cain and Abel as said is from "the Targum of Jerusalem" also known as "pseudo-Jonathan", not from the Bible.

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

066 5/31: The raven and Cain. This tale is not from the Bible, but is to be found in "The Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziah" and also in "The Targum of Jerusalem" also called "pseudo-Jonathan". You also find it in Mishna Sanhedrin. All these 3 are made up Jewish tales. Muhammad "borrowed" from many places. Would a god need to borrow from made up tales?

067 5/32b: "- - - if anyone slew a person - - - it would be as if he slew the whole people (often quoted/translated "- - - as if he killed the whole mankind/world - - -") - - -". (Also see 5/31-32 above.) This is a sentence much quoted by Muslims to prove how peaceful Islam is. But this was not said to the Muslims; for some reason or other, they without exception drop the first part of the quote: "We (Allah*) ordained for the Children of Israel that if anyone slew a person - - - it would be as if he slew the whole people - - -". They never "remember" to mention that this was said to the Jews, not to the Muslims or Arabs. Forgotten?

It is also worth to note that the Quran often is quoted/translated: "- - - as if he killed the whole mankind - - -" or "- - - as if he killed the whole world - - -". There is a difference between killing the people and killing the whole world - all living beings. Also see 5/31-32 just above. 

Is the Quran really the work of an omniscient god?

068 5/33a: “The punishment for those who wage war against Allah and his Messenger (Muhammad*) - - - is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from the opposite sides, or exile from the land.” Remember that this surah is from 632 AD, and that practically all raids and wars were wars of aggression from Islam/the Muslims, mostly raids for riches – even the battles of Badr, Uhud and Medina/the Trench were battle in a war of aggression started and kept alive by Muhammad – so mostly the victims who “fought war against Allah and his Messenger” were fighting in desperate and sheer self defense to defend themselves against the on-slaughter of Islam - - - and to defend themselves obviously was a great sin. Muslims attacked for gaining loot, land, slaves, power - - - and force Islam on their neighbors. Arabia mainly was made Islamic by the sword. In spite of Islam’s peaceful words some places, the local Arabs normally only got two choices: Become Muslims or fight/die. A clear contradiction – and abrogation of - 2/256: "Let there be no compulsion in religion". And what about "Islam is the Religion of Peace"? Or: "Islam is the Religion of Honesty"?

069 5/33f: "- - - (making*) mischief through the land - - -". Most of the mischief was made by the Muslims in their aggressive attacks for riches, slaves/extortion and for forcing Islam on its neighbors - most of Arabia was made Muslim by the sword and by Arabs' lust for looting, which made many become Muslims so as to have the permission to loot and rape, enslave and extort.

There exists an old folk tale: A bear was drinking from a river. Further down a lamb also was drinking. "You dirty the water for me", the bear said to the lamb. "No, that is impossible, sir", the lamb answered. "You are further upriver from me, and the water is streaming from you to me, and not from me to you". "I say that you dirty the water for me", the bear repeated, and killed the lamb. 

Often Muslim claims and "explanations" make us think about this small tale. 

##070 5/33h: This verse is the antithesis of the underlying of the moral philosophy about this in the NT, and a strong proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - one of those many who singlehandedly prove it. And then there are all the other proofs, indicia and indications in addition.

071 5/34a: "Except for those (opponents of Islam*) who repent before they fall into your (Muhammad's*) power." If you are negative to Islam and fall into Muslim hands it is too late to change your mind - punishment is just and right and to be expected. With Muhammad the great idol, there is no wonder terrorists murder victims, guilty or not guilty of anything.

Compare this f.x. to "the 11. hour" - f.x. Matt. 20/8-13 - or "love your enemies" - f.x. Matt. 5/44. Yahweh and Allah the same god? The claim is not even nonsense.

072 5/34b "- - - Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful". See 1/1a above.

073 5/35c: “Do your duty to Allah, seek the means of approach unto Him, and strive with might and mind (= make war*) in His Cause: that ye may prosper”. You prosper if you do like this. Islam after fighting non-religious knowledge for a few centuries (winning from ca 1100 AD - or actually 1095 AD in the eastern and central Muslim area and ca. 1198 in the western) found that there was no prosperity in thinking and researching and studying - except just studying and repeating the religion and related subjects - to fight and steal/rob/suppress/enslave on the other hand was good. The result was stagnation after some time, and not prosperity.

074 5/35d: “- - - strive with might and main (normally in the Quran this means “fight in war”*) in His (Allah’s*) cause.” A clear order. Islam "the religion of peace" like Muslims often claim?

###075 5/35e: “- - - strive with might and main (normally in the Quran this means “fight in war”*) in His (Allah’s*) cause.” It is not possible to be more the antithesis of NT about such things than this. This sentence alone is a 110% proof for that Yahweh and Allah is not the same god. And there in addition are many more proofs, indicia and indications.

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

####076 5/35g: “- - - strive with might and main (see 5/35a-b just above*) in His (Allah’s*) cause - - -”. For us this is one of the most detestable points in all the Quran and Islam: Fight and steal and rob and mutilate and rape and enslave and hate and murder and suppress in the name of your god - a claimed good and benevolent god.

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

077 5/36d: "- - - if they (non-Muslims*) had everything on earth - - - to give as ransom for the penalty of the Day of Judgment, it would never be accepted from them". This only can be true if the Quran is true and from a god.

078 5/38c: (YA742): “- - - cut off his or her (the thief’s*) hands, a punishment by way of example, from Allah - - -”. Whatever one can say about Allah, he is merciless - big, nice words are used, but reality, demands and deeds tell the real truth here like in many other cases in the Quran.

079 5/38d: "- - - Allah is Exalted in Power." Often claimed, never clearly shown.

080 5/39a: "- - - Allah turneth to him (a repenting sinner*) in forgiveness - - -". Allah cannot forgive unless he exists and in addition is a real god.

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

081 5/40b: "- - - to Allah (alone*) belongeth the dominion of the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth - - -". Often claimed, never proved. One of the many cheap claims any believer in any religion can make on behalf of his/her god(s), as long as the requests for proofs can be evaded.

082 5/40g: "He (Allah*) forgiveth - - -". See 5/39a above.

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.

083 5/40h: "Allah hath power over all things". Often claimed. never proved.

084 5/41c: “Let not those grieve thee, who race each other into unbelief”. (In last edition: "To unbelief"). No comment necessary, except compare to f.x. "the lost coin" (Luke 15/8-10), "the lost sheep" (Matt. 18/12-14), "the lost son" (Luke 1/11-31), "the 11. hour" (Matt. 20/8-13) - the same god? You bet no.

085 5/41j: "If anyone's trial is intended by Allah - - -". Why would an omniscient and predestining god need to try anybody - anybody at all? There is no logic in this.

086 5/41k: "(For non-Muslims or hypocrites*) it is not Allah's will to purify their hearts". Compare with f.x. "the lost sheep" (Matt. 18/12-14). One more strong indication, not to say proof, for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god.

087 5/42a: "- - - listening to falsehood - - -". Psychologically a much better explanation for Muhammad to use about the ones not believing in his new religion, than to admit that the reason might be that they understood something was very wrong in his teaching.

088 5/42d: "If thou (Muhammad*) judge, judge in equity between them (non-Muslims*)". The words are good - and varieties of these words are repeated some times in the Quran, also concerning Muslims. But is it possible always to judge fair and just, if you have to go by the sharia laws and its partly immoral and unjust rules?

089 5/42e: "For Allah loveth those who judge in equity". Pleas study the Quran's moral code and the sharia laws, and then read this sentence once more.

090 5/44e: "- - - to them (the learned Jews*) was entrusted the protection of Allah's Book - - -". The often repeated claim: The Jews got a book similar to the Quran from Allah, but falsified it so that it became OT. See 5/44c above.

091 5/44f: "- - - barter away My (Allah's*) Signs for a miserable price". See 3/77a above.

092 5/44h: "- - - (the light of) what Allah hath revealed (the Quran*) - - -". There is little religious light in a claimed holy book full of mistakes and not from a god.

093 5/44j: "- - - they are (no better than) Unbelievers". Sentences like this are quite revealing about what Muhammad wanted - and wants - Muslims to mean about non-Muslims.

094 5/45a: "We ordered for them: 'Life for life, eye for eye, nose for nose, tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal'" This is approximately what the OT says - and the Quran is even more specific as it recons different values for different lives: "Free man for free man, woman for woman (half value*), slave for slave (no human value, only economic one*)". The "turn the other cheek" from NT and its New Covenant (f.x. Luke 22/20 and other places in NT) you never find in the Quran or mentioned by Muslims (you may forgive, but that is based on quite another moral idea). Why - if the gods had been the same one like the Quran claims - should that god have gone from the on this point rather harsh law of Moses (which was much milder than the customs for revenge before that time, though), to mildness in the NT and its New Covenant, and then back to something more harsh and inhuman than the laws of Moses?

095 5/45b: "- - - judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed - - -". Judge by the rules in the Quran and by its (partly immoral) moral and judicial codes.

096 5/45c: "- - - (the light of) what Allah hath revealed (the Quran*) - - -". There is little religious light in a claimed holy book full of mistakes and thus not from a god.

097 5/45d: "- - - what (the Quran*) Allah hath revealed - - -". No god ever revealed a book with so many errors, etc.

098 5/46c: “- - - we (Allah*) sent Jesus the son of Mary - - -". See 5/110a below.

#099 5/46d: “We (Allah*) sent - - - the Gospel”. Any person with some knowledge about this, knows the Gospels were not sent down by anyone. They were written by men.

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

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

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

#100 5/46e: “We (Allah*) sent him (Jesus‘) the Gospel (a Gospel = the story about Jesus' life, death, resurrection and ascension to heaven) - - -”. Any god had known that the Gospels did not exist at the time of Jesus - the oldest of the 4 was written about 1 generation after his death - may be in 64 AD, may be a little earlier. (Islam tries to get out of this fix by claiming the Quran talks about an older Gospel. And actually there may have existed an older one. But as a Gospel as mentioned is the story of Jesus' life, death and resurrection, also this one in case could not be written until after all had happened - not unless there is full predestination, and thus no free will for man. And only the Quran claims predestination - one more serious difference between the two books and the two religions proving once more that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. See 3/3g-k and 3/48 above.

When it comes to claimed foretelling about Muhammad in the Bible, which is claimed in the Quran, it seems that just this was and is more essential to Islam and Muslims, than to Muhammad himself, because he did not return to that topic often (or maybe he was careful because he suspected or knew it was not true?). For Islam and Muslims it is an essential question, however, because Islam has not one single valid proof neither for Allah nor for Muhammad’s connection to a god – a real foretelling had been if not a proof, then at least a good indication. There exists no such one in the Bible, in spite of Islam's claims - they cherry-pick and then twist some words and quote them out of context, and try to make it look like foretelling about Muhammad, but they can cheat only people not knowing the Bible.

Besides the Quran tells that Muhammad is to be fond both in OT and NT, and then Islam has to find him “come Hell or high water” – if not the Quran is wrong and then something is wrong with the religion. An indication of how essential this claim is to the Muslim clergy, is that in Hadiths – f.x. Al-Bukhari – you find “quotations” about Muhammad presumably taken from the Bible and presumably quoted from the Bible at about the time of Muhammad (and thus it is impossible even for Islam to claim that the Bible is falsified afterwards), which are not from the Bible, but the commentators do not whisper one word about that the quotes are wrong, but just let readers who do not know the Bible (= f.x. 99.9% of the Muslims) believe it is a “bona fide” and correct quote). An Al-Taqiyya.

But Islam HAS to find Muhammad both in NT and OT - if not the Quran as said is wrong, and Islam a made up religion. This is why they so strongly claim he is there - true or not true. It is more essential to live in "taqlid", than to check to find what is true and what not, even in spite of the price they will have to pay if the Quran is a made up book and there all the same is a next life and a god.

101 5/46f: “- - - we (Allah*) sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law (of Moses*)”. According to the Bible Jesus was not sent to change the old laws – that was not his main purpose. All the same he did so – changed some and even nullified some of them, especially many of all the additions made by the times by Jewish religious thinkers and leaders. This was more or less formalized during his last Easter, when the new covenant (f.x. Luke 22/20) was made. (This covenant is never mentioned by Islam, and most Muslims without religious education have not even heard about it. This even though it is one of the main and most central facts in the Christian religion).

#########It is worth remembering that at least in 3/50a the Quran confirms that Jesus changed old Jewish laws (and the same according to f.x. Matt. 15/11-20, Mark 7/14-19, Acts 10/10-16). Especially it is worth remembering this all the many times Muslims claims that Jesus confirmed the old laws of Moses, without mentioning a whisper about that both the Bible and the Quran confirm he changed or terminated a number of them.

##############An extra juicy pint here is that surah 3 - where Muhammad says Jesus came to "make lawful to you (the Jews*) part of what was (before) forbidden to you" (3/50) - is from ca. 625 AD. This means that already then he knew that Jesus changed laws. All the same he here - in 632 AD - he simply tells that Jesus was sent to confirm the Laws of Moses)". ######A clear and documented case of Muhammad lying in the Quran - he knew better.

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

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

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

102 5/47c: "- - - what Allah hath revealed therein (in the Gospels*)". Allah has revealed pretty little in the Gospel - according to the Bible that in case is done by Yahweh. (This mistake is because Muhammad wrongly claimed Yahweh and Allah were the same god, and also claimed that the Gospels were sent down to man).

#####Remember that the Gospels were written in the times of written history. There is no chance that they originally were similar to the Quran and then changed - history had known about such things.

103 5/47d: "If any fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed (the Quran*), they are (no better than) those who rebel". As the moral and judicial rules are different - often very different - in especially NT compared to the Quran, Christians (and also Jews after all) rebelled and rebel. Bad people - living only according to "do to others like you want others do to you" (or at least that is the basis for their moral code).

104 5/48b: “- - - We (Allah*) sent the Scripture in truth - - -”. With all the mistaken facts - and perhaps other mistakes - in the Quran, it is at most partly the truth, and not from any god.

105 5/48d: “- - - (the Quran is*) confirming the scripture (the Bible*) that came before it, - - -”. There are so many and so fundamental differences between the Quran and the Bible - especially NT - that the Quran is no confirmation of the Bible, and especially not of the NT. See 2/89b, 3/3g-k and 3/48 above.

106 5/48f "- - - what Allah hath revealed (the Quran*) - - -". No book with that many mistakes is from any omniscient god.

107 5/48j: "To each of you (Jews, Christians, Muslims*) have We (Allah*) prescribed a Law - - -". If the same god has prescribed the laws and rules in the Bible and the ones in the Quran, that god is at least schizophrenic. And: If a god has prescribed the laws and rules in the Quran, that god at least is neither good nor benevolent nor has an at far from all points good moral.

108 5/48k: “If Allah had so willed - - -". One of many places telling that if only Allah would, he could do this and this - - - but Allah never would. Just like hearing children or immature persons trying to impress others. Such talk often is called boasting.

109 5/48m; "- - - (His (Allah's*) plan is) - - -". Allah decides everything, and according to his Plan which no-one and nothing can change. Predestination once more.

110 5/48n; "- - - (His (Allah's*) plan is) to test you - - -". But why does an omniscient god who on top of all predestines everything, need to test his followers?!?!

111 5/48p: “- - - so strive as in a race in all virtues.” In a race of all virtues you strive peacefully. But in the Quran the virtue is war.

112 5/48q: "The goal of you all is to Allah - - -". 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 truth and only the truth.

113 5/48s: "- - - it is He (Allah*) that will show you the truth - - -". If he exists and 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.

114 5/49c: "- - - their (non-Muslims' - in this case Christians'*) vain desire - - -". The Christians "vain desire" was to follow the Bible, which they very correctly saw was very different from Muhammad's new religion.

115 5/49d: "- - - that (teaching)(the Quran*) which Allah hath sent down to thee (Muhammad*)". No god ever sent down a book of such sorry quality like the Quran, not to mention revere it in his "home" in Heaven as a "mother book" (13/39b, 43/4b+c, 85/21-22).

##116 5/50a: "- - - (the Days of) Ignorance - - -". Believe it or not, but "the Days of Ignorance" or "the Time of Ignorance" is the official and accepted name for the times before Islam in Muslim area even today. Extra ironic when you know parts of that area - f.x. Egypt, Greece, Turkey, and not to forget Persia - were far less ignorant before being conquered by culturally primitive Muslim warriors, not to mention that Islam after some time stopped all scientific thinking except what was connected to religion - from 1095 AD (100 years later in the far west) after having fought it for centuries, and nearly till today there did not come one new idea or thought which could benefit humanity from all the Muslim area. So when was the real Time of Ignorance?

But in a way this stagnation was a good thing for the rest of the world - and perhaps also for the Islamic world's future - because it gave Europe and later USA the time necessary to catch up and then bypass the Muslim power.

117 5/51b: “Take not the Jews and the Christians (pagans are not even valid to be mentioned*) for your friends and protectors.” If people a leader looks upon as (possible) enemies or as possible subjects for attacking and suppression, are made up to look for you like something bad and degenerated and kept at a distance personally, it is much easier for that leader to make his followers believe that “that vermin” deserves to be attacked and killed and raped and suppressed and to have their possessions stolen - especially if the warriors among his followers are permitted to rob and rape and enslave and steal for themselves valuables and women “justly and right“.

And with no intermingling from the outside the leader also greatly reduces the risk of that his subjects meets unwanted ideas or facts. Thus: No friendship, thank you. The method is known from a number of fanatic sects.

118 5/51d: "And he (the Muslim*) who turns to them (non-Muslims*) (for friendship) is of them." If you take non-Muslims for friends, you are as bad as they. Have you heard words like "discrimination" or "superiority complex" or similar before? It is not strange that Muslims f.x. in the west are reluctant to mingle with non-Muslims. If Christians - who after all has moral codes much closer to the gold standard; "do against others like you want others do against you", said something similar against Muslims in widespread media (like the Quran after all is), what would happen? Not to mention: How would Muslims react?

119 5/51g: "- - - Allah guideth not - - -". See 16/107 below".

120 5/52a: “Those in whose hearts is a disease - - -”. If you are not a Muslim, your heart has a disease. One of Muhammad's many negative and antipathy creating names for non-Muslim. Comments?

But as the Quran and all its errors, contradictions, unclear points, etc. are not from a god - no god make mistakes wholesale - then who is really who in this point?

121 5/52c: "- - - a decision according to His (Allah's*) Will". According to the Quran Allah decides absolutely everything, and he decides it according to his will and to his predestined Plan which nobody and nothing can change (so why pray to him about changes in your or others life? - prayers cannot help as Allah's Plan is unchangeable. The same for god and bad deeds, pilgrimage, wish for forgiving, etc., etc.

122 5/53b: "All that they (non-Muslims*) do will be in vain, and they will fall into (nothing but) ruin". What non-Muslims do is without value and in the end will come to naught. But though similar often claimed never proved.

123 5/54e: “- - - fighting in the way of Allah - - -”. Unlike when you fight for Jesus and Yahweh - and many other gods - with your brain and words and good deeds, for your fights for Muhammad and Allah you fight with weapons and wage war and terror, and is paid by loot and rape and slaves and respect and perhaps power - the laudable thing to do according to the Quran. Or - ?

124 5/54f: “- - - fighting in the way of Allah - - -”. You find nothing like this in the Bible. In the OT the Jews were fighting not for the god, but to establish and later defend their country. In NT physical war hardly is accepted at all. One of the many solid proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. And then there are all the other proofs, indicia and indications in addition.

125 5/54h: "- - - the Grace of Allah, which He will bestow on whom He pleaseth". This in one of the differences between Yahweh and Allah - Yahweh spend his grace on anybody who wants and qualify, Allah on those he pleases".

126 5/54i: "- - - Allah encompasseth all - - -". Similar often claimed, never proved.

127 5/54j: "- - - He (Allah*) knoweth all things". See 2/233h above and 35/38b below.

128 5/55a: "Your (Muslims'*) (real) friends are (no less than) Allah, His Messenger (Muhammad*), and the (fellowship of) Believers (Muslims*) - - -." Clear message: Non-Muslims are not your real friends - one step on the road to making an "enemy picture".

 

129 5/55b: "- - - Allah, (and*) His Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -". A variant of Muhammad's standard, but never proved mantra to glue himself to his platform of power - his god.

130 5/56b: "- - - Allah, (and*) His Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -". A variant of Muhammad's standard, but never proved mantra to glue himself to his platform of power - his god. Muhammad is self- centered - - - and selfish?

131 5/58a: "- - - that is because they (non-Muslims*) are a people without understanding - - -". Just this sample of pep-talk is older than Adam in many religions, and will never become too old in many religions - there always will be lots of naive people falling for it - "we intelligent ones know, those stupid do not know" - - - and it is just the least intelligent and least learned ones who most easily are duped, in many religions, by this worn out claim. Besides: Who is the one without understanding? - the one who believes anything told to him, or the one who is able to think things over? - in this case the one blindly believing the Quran, or the one able to see at least some of all the errors, etc. in that book, and able to understand what they mean?

132 5/59da: "Do ye ("People of the Book"*) disapprove of us (Muslims*) for no other reason than that we believe in Allah, and (in*) the revelation (the Quran*) that hath come to us and (in*) that (the Bible and the Jewish scriptures*) which came before us - - -?" Indirectly here is said that the Bible and the Jewish scriptures are the same as the Quran (but that they are falsified to become very different from the Quran). Both claims you meet several places in the Quran - and in Hadiths - but both are strongly proved wrong by both science and Islam (who has searched intensively for 1400 years) by the fact that even the oldest scriptures and fragments and quotes science and Islam have found, are identical to modern time texts, except for scattered minor mistakes normal when texts are copied by hand, and by the fact that neither science nor Islam has found one single proved case of such falsification.

But unproved claims are easy and cheap. Some time ago we f.x. run across a claim on Internet that one could prove that - if we remember correctly - at least 37 points in the Bible was falsified at the Council of Nicaea (325 AD) - Nicaea is a pet claim for Islam when it comes to falsification of especially NT (and Ezra for OT) - but typically the claim was strong, but not one proof given. These claims also are:

Historical nonsense as the agenda for that council is well known, and changes of texts in the Bible/falsifications were not a topic.

Religious nonsense as neither sects nor the Jews were present and could agree to falsifying their copies.

Psychological nonsense - how do you make strongly believing bishops change their holy scriptures? - it is exactly as easy as making ayatollahs change the Quran, and for exactly the same reasons.

More psychological nonsense: How to make tens of thousands of owners of scrolls and scriptures agree to having their cherished and expensive - handwritten books are very expensive - holy books, the basis for their beliefs and religion - falsified?

Even more psychological nonsense: How to do all this without starting tongues wagging? - in/after 325 AD we are 1000 years into the times of written history, and there does not exist even a rumor about such an enormous and fundamental operation anywhere in history.

Practical nonsense - how to afterwards falsify all the tens of thousands and more copies and references/quotes spread over 3 continents in exactly identical ways, how to be sure ALL existing copies/quotes were falsified, how to falsify the old manuscript so perfectly that no traces - scratching, different handwriting, different ink - can be found even by modern science? Etc.

More practical nonsense: The Bible has 4 - 5 as much text as the Quran. How to falsify 4 - 5 times as much text into the old scrolls? (Remember that today it is easy to find the age of the material texts are written on - and mostly also the age of the ink - they had to reuse the old scrolls to have the necessary age of them.)

Even more practical nonsense: In all the two books there just is one short sentence - 6 words - (from a verse in the psalms - 37/29 ("- - - the righteous will inherit the land - - -" a kind of words which easily may be identical by coincidence)) which is the same. ALL THE OTHER TEXT IS DIFFERENT. Our copy of the Quran is 560 pages. How could the Council of Nicaea agree on and produce 4 times that much text as in the Quran and agree on every word in some weeks, on top of a program tightly packed with other topics to discuss? - committees are notorious for working slowly.

And may be the top psychological question: How afterwards make the believers strongly believe in the totally different new texts, which they knew were falsifications?

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Some Muslims as said claim Ezra falsified OT, but in addition to other facts:

THERE IS ONE STRONG FACT CONNECTED TO JESUS AND THE OTHER OLD JEWISH PROPHETS: ACCORDING TO THE QURAN THEY ALL WERE GOD MUSLIMS - AN IMPOSSIBILITY IF THEIR CLAIMED HOLY BOOKS FROM ALLAH WERE FALSIFIED. THUS THE CLAIMED FALSIFICATION OF ALSO OT CANNOT HAVE HAPPENED UNTIL AFTER JESUS (F.X. EZRA COULD NOT HAVE FALSIFIED OT, LIKE SOME MUSLIMS CLAIM - IF HE HAD, JESUS HAD USED WRONG INFORMATION WHEN HE READ FROM THE SCRIPTURES IN THE SYNNAGOGUES, AND HAD BEEN NO GOOD MUSLIM). THIS IN ADDITION TO THAT THE BOOKS WERE SENT DOWN (DIRECTLY) FROM ALLAH TO THE PROPHETS, ACCORDING TO THE QURAN, AND ERRORS IN THEM THEREFORE SHOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE. ALL THE OLD GOOD MUSLIM PROPHETS INCLUDED JESUS THUS MUST HAVE HAD CORRECT HOLY BOOKS - THE OLD JEWISH SCRIPTURES/OT. IF NOT F.X. JESUS HAD BEEN TEACHING WRONG THINGS, WHICH HE DID NOT DO ACCORDING TO THE QURAN. THE ONLY POSSIBLE CONCLUTION HERE IS THAT ALSO NO PART OF THE OLD SCRIPTURES - OT - CAN HAVE BEEN FALSIFIED UNTIL AFTER JESUS TIME.

B U T T H E R E E X I S T P L E N T Y O F M A N U S C R I P T S A N D F R A G M E N T S O L D E N O U G H T O P R O V E T H A T O T W A S N O T S I M I L A R T O T H E Q U R A N A T T H A T T I M E !!! I T W A S S I M I L A R T O T H E S C R I P T U R E S O F T O D A Y !!!

In addition there is the problem: How in case make Jews and Christians and sects agree on what new texts to use when they falsified (parts of) the Quran into OT??? And how to make ALL Jews spread over large parts of the world accept the new and falsified holy scriptures without protests - and destroy all the old copies so thoroughly that not one piece of any of them has been found later? This in addition to the claimed falsification of NT and all the impossibilities and improbabilities which have to be "explained" away concerning the claimed falsification of NT.

T H I S I S O N E O F T H E C L A I M S M U H A M M A D M A D E U P.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Islam and its Muslims are very efficient - though often not clever - at making up claims. They - and Muhammad the same - are very strong at demanding proofs from opponents, proving that they reckon proofs to be valuable and of essence. But they are hopeless at producing real and valid proofs themselves - as was Muhammad.

"A CLAIM WITHOUT A PROOF MAY BE DISMISSED WITHOUT A PROOF". THE NEVER PROVED CLAIM THAT THE BIBLE IS FALSIFIED, IS ONE OF THE MANY WHICH CAN BE DISMISSED UNLESS ISLAM PRESENTS SOME REAL PROOF. AND ON TOP OF THIS FACT THERE AS YOU SEE ARE MANY AND STRONG CIRCUMSTANTIAL PROOFS FOR THAT THE CLAIM THAT THE BIBLE IS FALSIFIED IS WRONG - ONE OF THE POINTS MUHAMMAD KNEW HE LIED ABOUT IN THE QURAN, BECAUSE THIS LATE (632 AD) HE HAD KNOWLEDGE AT LEAST TO THE JEWISH SCRIPTURES - THEY EXISTED F.X. IN MEDINA.

133 5/59e: “- - - the revelation (the Quran*) that hath come to us (Muhammad*) (from Allah) - - -“. Well, one of the central questions about Islam is if there really were revelations (with that many mistaken facts, etc.) – and if there were: From whom. There are these alternatives:

Revelations from a god – which the Quran proves is not the case, as no god, omniscient or not, had used so many mistaken facts and other mistakes, contradictions, and so much wrong logic, unclear language, etc.

Or revelations from an impostor – f.x. the Devil – pretending to be Gabriel. The inhuman and on some points highly immoral war religion Muhammad founded and f.x. it’s partly very immoral moral code, may indicate that this really is a possibility.

Or something working on Muhammad’s brain (an illness like TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) which easily would explain everything – see BBC “God on the Brain”, 20. March 2003) – and the inhuman and on some points highly immoral religion the highway-man and later warlord Muhammad founded, may indicate that also this really is a possibility. A sick brain. All the mistakes which were in accordance with what one believed was correct science in Arabia is compatible to this alternative.

Or it is all a “scenario” made by a cold and scheming brain – and Muhammad’s inhuman ruthlessness and easily recognized lust for power (see f.x. how he glues himself to Allah) and women may indicate this. His obvious lust for power may explain the making up of a religion - many a self proclaimed "prophet" with lust for power or money or women has done so through the times (Muhammad at least liked power and women - and riches to attract and keep followers by means of "gifts" or bribes). Even more so all the mistakes which are in accordance with what one believed was correct science in and around Arabia at that time, may indicate this - humans would believe they used facts, supernatural beings of some class had known it was wrong.

A combination of some of the 4 possible points also is possible.

Also see 2/136a+c and 4/47c above and 13/1f below.

134 5/59f: "(the revelation*) which came before (us (Muslims*)) - - -" = the Bible. Again this claim that the Quran confirms the Bible like it was before it was falsified - claims strongly proved wrong by both science and Islam.

135 5/59g: "- - - (perhaps) most of you ("People of the Book") are rebellious and disobedient?" Or perhaps the explanation simply is that Muslims believe in a "holy" book so full of errors, etc., that it is not from a god, a fact which the People of the Book see?

136 5/60a: “Those who incurred the curse of Allah and his wrath, those of some he transformed into apes and swine - - -”. Hardly likely. This needs strong proofs.

137 5/60b: “Those who incurred the curse of Allah and his wrath, those of some he transformed into apes and swine - - -”. Not from the Bible. (This story in reality is from an old legend.)

138 5/64b:"- - - (blasphemy) - - -". To talk against Allah is not blasphemy unless he exists and really is a dominant god. There nowhere is any clear indication for that this is the case - only Muhammad's words, a man of doubtful moral even according to Islam's central books (read his demands, deeds, introduced rules, etc., not the cheap and glorious words, and you find the reality behind the glossy blind belief), and a man who had much to gain from deceiving his followers. 

139 5/64c: "- - - both His (Allah's*) hands are widely outstretched (for giving*) - - -". This only is possible if he exists. (Most of the riches the Muslims got, simply were stolen or extorted from the surrounding people).

140 5/64d: “- - - the revelation (the Quran*) - - -“. A book with that many mistakes, etc. is not from an omniscient god. Is it revelations at all? And in case from whom? Also see 2/136a+c, 4/47c and 5/59e above and 13/1f and 15/1b below.

141 5/64g: “- - - the revelation (the Quran*) that cometh to thee (Muhammad*) from Allah increaseth in most of them (non-Muslims - here mainly the Jews*) their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy". Naturally they reacted negatively when told their and Muhammad's god and religion were the same, as they saw how much was deeply different. "Rebellion and blasphemy"? - it was good psychology, though, for Muhammad to use strong negative words.

142 5/64i: "Every time they (here mainly the Jews*) kindle the fire of war - - -". Irony to say the least of it - and a lot of gall - as practically all raids, wars, and armed skirmishes during Muhammad's stay in Medina (82 in all?) were initiated by and aggression from Muhammad and his followers. Even Badr, Uhud, and the Trench just were defense battles in a continuous war of aggression started and kept alive by Muhammad's robberies.

143 5/64j: "And Allah loveth not those who do mischief". Whom Allah dislikes naturally is for "us" to detest. On the other hand: Muslims did and do a lot of mischief according to all normal moral rules - what then about their relationship to a possible god? - this question is even more urgent if Allah is a made up god and if there exists another, benevolent god somewhere, not liking lies (al-Taqiyya, etc.), stealing, rape, mistreatment of innocents, torture or murder?

144 5/64k: "- - - they (non-Muslims*) (ever) strive to do mischief on earth". Quite a hypocrisy from the man who was involved in may be 82 armed conflicts during his few (10) years in Medina (ca. one every 6 weeks through 10 years) - nearly all of them initiated by himself to gain riches to use for gaining more power and little by little for forcing his new religion on his surroundings.

145 5/65a: "If only the People of the Book had believed - - -". They did believe, and so much that they rather choose to flee or be murdered, than to leave their religion. But they believed in the Bible, and saw that so much was different in the Quran, that when Muhammad claimed it was the same religion and Yahweh and Allah the same god, something was seriously wrong - it simply was not true. This even more so as also they did not believe in his unfounded claims that the Bible was falsified.

##146 5/66a: "If only they (Jews and Christians*) had stood by the Law, the Gospel (Muhammad seems to have believed there was only one - he always used singular*) and all the revelations that was sent to them from their Lord - - -". That was exactly what they did. But the powerful Muhammad said they lied, and power often wins against the truth - at least in the short run (and even 1400 years is "short run" compared to eternity).

A most relevant point here: Even the Quran admits that Jesus changed some of the old "Laws of Moses" (f.x. 3/50a), and NT tells the same. The Jews even today stand by their Law of Moses, AND THE CHRISTIANS STILL STAND BY THE LAWS CORRECTED BY JESUS (at least if they try to be real Christians).

But truth has an uncanny tendency to win in the end - at least if it gets known. And the truth about the Quran is getting known. (A problem Islam is meeting today, is the easy and open access also to correct information.)

147 5/66d: "- - - the right course - - -". Here is meant the teaching of the Quran. But as the Quran is not from any god, this is likely to be wrong.

148 5/66e: "- - - a course that is evil". Here is told about "the People of the Book". But as they believed in the Bible and in Yahweh - a god even Muhammad admitted existed, even though he mixed him up with Allah - there is a chance that their course was not the evil one.

149 5/67c: “- - - the (message) which hath been sent to thee (Muhammad*) - - -". Was it sent - and in case from whom? - or was it made up? Most self proclaimed prophets through the times have made up their preaching themselves, and often their religions and gods, too.

150 5/67d: “- - - the (message) which hath been sent to thee (Muhammad*) from thy Lord.” There is no chance that a message (the Quran) that full of mistakes, contradictions, wrong logic, unclear language, etc., and even at least a few clear lies, is from an omniscient god - well, according to the Quran Allah could lie and cheat. See 5/59e above.

151 5/67e: "- - - His (Allah's*) Mission". A mission built on a book full of mistakes, etc., is not the mission of an omniscient god. A mission in addition building on a partly immoral moral code and on partly immoral and/or unjust laws also is not the mission of a god and benevolent god. (When you meet propaganda, always throw away the glossy words meant for blinding and cheating, and look for the reality, if you want to find the truth. The reality often is hidden in the demands, in the introduced rules, and in the deeds. In the Quran there is a long distance between the glossy words and the demands, introduced rules, and deeds, etc. - not strange in the only big religion believing in the use of al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), etc., and even in the use of deceit and of broken oaths (2/225, 5/89, 16/91, 66/2) for working tools.

152 5/67g: “For Allah guideth not - - -”. No, Allah cannot guide many if he tries to use a guidebook so full of mistakes, etc. like the Quran.

153 5/68c: "Ye (Jews and Christians*) have no ground to stand upon, unless ye stand fast by the Law, the Gospel (Muhammad seems to have believed there was only one - he always uses singular*) and all the revelations that has come to you from your Lord - - -". See 5/66a above. As for Jesus changing that Law, see 3/50a above. Besides they believed in what according to the Bible were revelations from the Lord Yahweh, and saw that Muhammad's claimed revelations were not from the same Lord.

154 5/68e: "It is the Revelation that commeth to thee (Muhammad*) - - -". Were they really revelations? And in case from whom? As they were from no god - no god makes that many and often stupid errors - there only are these alternatives:

Dark forces - f.x. the Devil.

A sick brain - f.x. TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy - like modern medical science suspects).

One or more cold and scheming man/men - f.x. Muhammad.

A combination of two or three of these.

155 5/68f: "- - - their ("the People of the Book") obstinate rebellion and blasphemy". Very bad people. Stay away from them - or fight them. Characteristics like this leads up to dislike and worse - - - and the possibility for raids against them and suppression or even enslavement or killing, like we see in Islamic history.

156 5/68g: "- - - blasphemy - - -". Doubting in the Quran is not blasphemy unless Allah really exists and is a god, and in addition is reasonably correctly described in the Quran.

157 5/68h: “But sorrow thou not over (these) people without a Faith”. 180 degrees opposite of what is the point of view of Yahweh/Jesus. (Luke 15/8-10, Matt. 18/12-14, Luke 15/11-31, Matt. 20/8-13). Yahweh and Allah the same god? Impossible. One of the 100% proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same religion.

##158 5/69b: “Those who (believe in the Quran), and those who follows the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabeans – any who believe in Allah (here "included" Yahweh/God*) and the Last day, and work righteousness – on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.” This may indicate that also Jews and Christians (and Sabeans - most likely people from the then mainly Christian Sabah/Sheba, but also a couple of other explanations may be possible - see 2/62f above) may go to Paradise. But see 5/69c just below.

Muslims and Islam have a strong tendency to forget this verse and this point. This even though this surah is from 632 AD and one of the very last ones, and thus according Islam's rules for abrogation should be a strong one.

159 5/71c: "But Allah sees well all that they do". See 2/233h above and 35/38b below.

160 5/72c: “They (Christians*) do blaspheme - - -". Only if the Quran tells the full truth and only the truth. And only if Allah exists and in addition is a god.

##161 5/72d: “They do blaspheme who say: ‘God is Christ the son of Mary’”. No Christians say that Yahweh is the son of Mary, Jesus. (Though catholic people use the expression “Mother of God” meaning “Mother of (the holy) Jesus”, but also they clearly know the difference between God/Yahweh and Jesus).

##162 5/72e: "- - - Christ (Jesus*) the son of Mary." See 5/110a below.

##163 5/72g: “But said Christ; ‘O Children of Israel! Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord‘”. If Jesus had tried to teach about the in Israel known polytheistic god al-Lah from a heathen neighboring country, he had got very few followers and had been quickly killed by the clergy in the religious climate in Israel at that time. This is told by someone not knowing the religious and political situation in Israel at the time of Jesus.

164 5/72m: "For the wrongdoers there will be no one to help". For those of what Muhammad called "wrongdoers" who were Jews or Christians there perhaps is Yahweh.

165 5/73a: “They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity”. Our sources tell that the 3 last words does not exist in the Arab edition, but is added by Yusuf Ali. Then the correct text in case ends: “Allah (Yahweh*) is one of three (gods*).” Which obviously is wrong, as Christians only believe in one god. Besides it is a most dubious way of working to make additions to a text without making the readers aware of that it is an addition – f.x. by at least putting the addition in ( ). Do you see why we have to be careful when working with Muslim texts?

But the claim in any case is wrong: Christians do not say Allah is one of a Trinity, but Yahweh is one of a Trinity. (But there is a chance for that the Quran here is correct when it denies that the god is part of a trinity, as this is not said in the Bible - this is a Christian dogma from the 4. century, and it got its present form from the so-called Cappadocian Fathers (Gregory of Nyassa (332-395), Basil the Great (320-79 AD), Gregory of Nazeanzus (329-389). The nearest you come in the Bible is that Jesus said that he and his father, Yahweh, were one.) Also see 5/73b just below.

166 5/73b: “They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity - - -.” Muhammad never understood the trinity - he even believed it consisted of Yahweh, Jesus, and Mary, a mistake no god - agreeing or not agreeing to the Trinity - would have made. But for once there is a possibility that the Quran has a point; the Trinity is formally not a part of the Bible. On the other hand those are the three special ones: Yahweh, Jesus and the Holy Spirit - we may think of them as God, his co-worker and representative, and his errand boy/messenger boy and helper. Trinity or not - those three have a special status according to both the Bible and the Quran (even though the Quran does not agree to which status - it even say the Holy Spirit = the angel Gabriel, which makes anyone really knowing the Bible laugh.) There also is the fact that according to the Bible, Jesus said that he and his father was one - but figuratively meant. Also see 5<773a just above.

167 5/73d: "- - - blaspheme - - -". Only if Allah exists, is a god, and is correctly described, and only if in addition Yahweh and Allah is the same god (he must in case be seriously ill mentally), because Christians talk to and about Yahweh, not Allah.

168 5/73e: "- - - there is no god except One God (Allah*)". See 2/255a above and 6/106b and 25/18a below.

169 5/74a: "Why turn they (Christians*) not to Allah - - -?" For the very simple reasons:<(p>

They believed - and believe - in another religion and saw/see that Islam was/is so far away from that religion, that it could not be the same one.

2. They saw that the teachings were so very different, that it impossibly could be the same god, and preferred their own Yahweh, and believed Allah was something made up.

3. They saw that Muhammad was teaching a very different religion - he impossible could be a prophet from Yahweh.

4. They saw that f.x. according to 5.Mos. 18/21 he could be no prophet at all - he did not even make wrong prophesies, he made no real prophesies at all. He consequently - and also because his teachings were wrong - was a false prophet.

5. Muslims like to claim the reason why Jews and Christians did not accept Muhammad, was that Muhammad was no Jew, but that only is a smokescreen to hide and explain away the real reason: Allah could and cannot be the same god as Yahweh - too much and too fundamental parts of the teachings are too deeply different; Muhammad did not represent Yahweh.

170 5/74b: "- - - and seek Allah's forgiveness - - -". Only the victim or a deity - or one with permission from such ones - can forgive. As Jews and Christians did not believe Allah was a real god, they simply did not - and do not - believe he could/can forgive.

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

171 5/75a: “Christ, the son of Mary, was no more than a messenger; - - -”. The Bible says something else – that Jesus called Yahweh his father (this relationship according to our latest leafing through the Bible, is mentioned at least 204 times as “father” + at least 89 times as “son” in the NT - frequently by Jesus himself), and far from always only his spiritual father - and as the Bible is written relatively short time after Jesus’ death, and on this point on the basis of thousands of witnesses who could tell what Jesus said, and protest if the narrators quoted Jesus falsely, it is likely that the Bible is more reliable here, than the Quran. The Quran is written 600 years later, and offers only undocumented statements and claims without any proof or even indicia backing up the claims. This even more so as the only Islamic source for the claims was a man who demanded to be the greatest prophet of all times, something he definitely could not be if Jesus was a relative of Yahweh – and this even more so as Muhammad in reality was not a prophet: He did not have the gift of being able to make prophesies (he did not even claim to or pretend to have it) – perhaps a messenger for someone or something, or an apostle, but not a prophet. And not least: Muhammad clearly had a deplorable moral - easy to see even in the Quran if you omit all the glossy, big words and look for the facts which are told about him.

Also as mentioned Jesus himself frequently called Yahweh his father - and Jesus is reliable also according to the Quran. A sticky fact Islam cannot accept (as said the Quran/Mohammad cannot accept that Jesus may be the son of Yahweh, because then Muhammad is not the greatest of “prophets” – and the defense of Muhammad also is essential, as he in reality was a dubious and immoral character, and all the same all Islam is built only - only - on this man's words).

Also relevant here is that 19/19 confirms that Jesus was holy, whereas the Quran very clearly states that Muhammad just was an ordinary man. #############(When Islam and Muslims name Muhammad "the Holy Prophet" they either are lying compared to the Quran, or they state that the Quran is lying on this very central point.

172 5/75d: "They (Mary and Jesus*) had both to eat their (daily) food according to the Quran (according to the Bible they did (1. Mos. 18/8))." This is intended to be a proof for that they just were ordinary humans - even lowly angels f.x. visiting Abraham did not eat food. (Funny; Muslims in Paradise have to eat - one of their few pass-times and one of their few things to look forward to in the claimed next life - f.x. absolutely no intellectual activity). But on Earth Jesus was born as a physical normal human who needed food. The "proof" thus is of no value. As for Mary: Here Muhammad tries to prove she was not part of the Trinity, as she was a human. Not even the most imbecile Christian ever said she was part of that. We simply are back to the fact that Muhammad did not understand these central parts of Christianity: No-one ever indicated that Mary was part of the Trinity or divine - some say she was holy, but in the meaning "better than ordinary people", not in the meaning "divine", and the rest do not even say that. As for Jesus; no matter whether one believes he was divine or not, no-one ever indicated that his life here on Earth was in something other than a normal human body. Muhammad is breaking in open doors. And any god had known this - and that Mary was no part of the Trinity (the Trinity = Yahweh, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit). Who made the Quran?

173 5/75g: “- - - they (the non-Muslims*) are deluded away from the truth.” With all the mistaken facts - and perhaps other mistakes - in the Quran, it at best tells only partly the truth. Also see 5/75f just above.

174 5/75h: "- - - the truth!" See 2/2b above and 13/1g and 40/75 below.

175 5/76a. "Will ye (Christians*) worship, besides Allah (Jesus*) - - -". No Christian (or Jew or other non-Muslim) worships something besides Allah. Jews and Christians do not believe in Allah at all, and worship another god, Yahweh, INSTEAD OF Allah. There is a huge difference between these two concepts. (Oh, we know the Quran claims - and as normal for the Quran without proofs - that Yahweh and Allah is the same god, but their teachings are far too different for that to be true.)

176 5/76b. "Will ye (Christians*) worship, besides Allah, something which hath no power either to harm or benefit you?" The word "something" here must refer to Mary and Jesus in the previous verse. When it comes to Mary and the Catholics, Muhammad here may have a point - saints are not an idea you find in the Bible. (On the other hand they do not pray to a divine Mary, only to what they believe may be a helper to reach the divine.) As for Jesus we are back to the fact that he several places told he could help according to the old books - - - and to the old fact that science and Islam both clearly has shown that the Bible is not falsified, even though Islam is dependent on this never documented claim for their religion to survive. (If the Bible is not falsified it is ever so clear that then the Quran is a made up - false - book, as so much of what it claims the Bible tells or should tell, is not from the Bible, and mostly conflicts the Bible. Both those books cannot be true.)

177 5/76c: "- - - besides Allah - - -". See 25/18a below.

178 5/76d: "- - - something which hath no power either to harm or benefit you - - -". The ironic fact here is that in all history there is not one - one - proved case of Allah helping or benefitting - or harming - even one single being, human or not. There only are words and claims, both of which are very cheap as long as they do not have to be proved.

179 5/76e: "- - - He (Allah*) is it that heareth and knoweth all things". See 2/233h above and 35/38b below.

180 5/77c: "- - - trespassing beyond the truth - - -". Once more the claim - but as always only a claim - that the Bible must be falsified, as it differs seriously from the Quran. But science has proved thoroughly that the Bible is not falsified, and the same has Islam done (against their wish and intention - by being unable to find even one proved falsification among the literally tens of thousands of relevant old manuscripts and fragments). It is not the Bible which differs from the Quran, but the Quran which differs from the Bible, to be a bit cryptic.

181 5/77f: "- - - the even way - - -". The road to the Quran's paradise - see 10/9f below. The Quran uses pictures like "the straight way" and "the even way" = the easy way, for this. NT uses "the narrow road" = the difficult road. There is a symbolism here, and not least an indication for that it is from two different god's religions. Populism vs. realism?

182 5/78a: "Curses were pronounced on those of the Children of Israel who rejected Faith (Islam - only Islam is Faith in the Quran*), by the tongue of David and of Jesus - - -". This is wrong, if for no other reason than because there are found no traces of Islam or claims about Muhammad's Allah older than 610 AD when Muhammad started his religion. There f.x. is not a word about curses because of Allah or al-Lah (the names of the pagan Arab god Muhammad took over and only called Allah) in the Bible - actually there are no traces neither of Allah nor of Muhammad in the Bible (in spite of Islam's claims about the opposite)).

183 5/78c: "- - - David - - -". The mightiest of the Jewish kings. When it comes to the old names in the Bible - Noah, Abraham, Moses, etc. science is unsure if they really have lived. Also for David there is no sure proof for his existence as far as we know, but we are now so near the first written sources, that we understand most scientists believe he is a historical person. He in case lived around and after 1000 BC. In just this case, however, he is a time anomaly - see 4/13d above.

184 5/78d: "- - - Jesus - - -". The name needs no presentation, but we may mention that when they started to use his year of birth as year 1, they made a small mistake - he really was born ca. 4 - 6 years BC. His mentioning in the Quran in just this case, however, is a time anomaly.

Jesus definitely is a historical person - he according to our sources is mentioned by 4 of the old writers, among them Josephus Flavius, a historian reckoned to be very reliable, plus by Tacitus, Suetonius, and Plinius the younger - just mentioned, but mentioned. They did not write much about him, but he is mentioned.

We also add that Jesus is the Greek version of the Jewish name Joshua or Yehoshu'a (which means "Yahweh is salvation") - NT originally was written in Greek, and because of that the Greek version was used.

You meet Muslims claiming NT originally was written in Aramaic (to be able to "explain how the word Parakletos (helper, counselor) in the Gospel after John, can be claimed misspelled for “Periklytos” ("the glorious one" or "the praised one") - Aramaic had an incomplete alphabet like in Arabia, Greek had a complete one where such a misspelling was impossible. But that claim is wrong - NT was originally written in Greek.

Concerning the Quran and Jesus there is a curios fact here: The Arab version of the Hebrew name Joshua is Yehoshu'a or Yushuwa (the spelling may vary a little). Muhammad does not use this name, but the name Isa for Jesus - but Isa is the Arab version of the name Esau (which means "hairy" - very different from Joshua), the brother of the Jewish patriarch Jacob. Thus all through the Quran and the Hadiths, Muhammad in reality is talking about Esau, not about Jesus. No god would make such a silly mistake.

185 5/78e: "- - - Faith - - -". As normal the Quran here means Islam - only Islam is faith according to the Quran. Here it thus again insinuates that the "pure" teaching (Islam) was falsified by Jews and Christians to become what is told in the Bible. See f.x. 2/130a above.

186 5/79a: "Nor did they (Jews and Christians*) (usually) forbid one another the inequities which they committed - - -." Our sources tell that the word "usually" is not in the original Arab text. In that case this sentence is wrong. Even with the word "usually" the sentence is not correct, as they often corrected each other.

187 5/80a: “Thou seest many of them (Jews and Christians*) turning in friendship to the unbelievers. - - - (with the result) that Allah’s wrath is on them - - -”. They seek bad company because they do not listen to Muhammad - Jews and Christians are bad. Apartheid propaganda?

188 5/81a: “If only they had believed in Allah, in (Muhammad*) - - - never would they (Jews and Christians*) have taken them (non-Muslims or Pagans*) for friends - - -”. It is just tragic - most religions are today able to live together in peace and reasonable harmony. But Islam is so bent on distaste and superiority complex and apartheid against all non-Muslims, and on conquering all other religions and suppressing its peoples, that integration is difficult. The only position Islam really can accept, is superiority according to the Quran.

189 5/81b: "If they (Jews, Christians*) had believed in Allah - - -". It is difficult to believe in a religion and a god when you see that so much is wrong that you honestly believe both the religion and the god are made up ones, not to mention when the religion itself proves that the teaching is seriously wrong. That things are seriously wrong with the religion is not even belief, but a proved fact backed by many proofs.

190 5/81c: "- - - believed in Allah, in the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -". A variant of Muhammad's main mantra to glue himself to his god and his platform of power; Self-centered. Selfish? - he sometimes could be mistaken for that. F.x. when raping captives.

191 5/81g: "- - - revealed unto him (Muhammad*) - - -". Revealed unto him? - and in case by whom as all the mistakes, contradictions, etc. prove it is from no god? Or made (up) by him?

192 5/81h: "- - - (if they were good Muslims*), never would they have taken them (non-Muslims*) for friends and protectors - - -". A clear and unmistakable message.

193 5/81i: "- - - most of them (non-Muslims*) are rebellious wrongdoers". "Wrongdoers" is one of several not very sympathetic names Muhammad used for "non-Muslims" - here in a strengthened form. It is not strange that Muslims are reluctant to accept non-Muslims or to be integrated in non-Muslim societies. Pretty distaste - and stronger - inducing.

But remember that when the Quran uses words like this, it compares to its own on many points "peculiar" moral code, not at f.x. "do to others like you want others do to you". (But all the same: Remember that most Muslims personally are as human and good as you and me.)

194 5/82c: "- - - nearest among them (non-Muslims*) in love to the believers (Muslims*) are (the Christians*) because amongst these are men devoted to learning - - -". The first part may be right, but the reason is wrong: For one thing many (far from all) Christians are very open-minded towards other religions, but the main thing is that few Christians really have studied the Quran and seen what kind of war and hate religion it really is, and what is its official and ultimate goal on Earth - to suppress all others.

195 5/83a: "And when they (Christians*) listen to the revelations received by the Messenger (Muhammad*), thou (Muslims*) wilt see their eyes overflowing with tears - - -". Pure propaganda which was possible for Muhammad to use, as there were few Christians in the area, so that Muhammad's followers could not see it was not true. Today it is easy for all and every Muslim to see that Christians are not moved by the contents of the Quran, and especially not the ones who really has studied that book.

196 5/83c: "- - - revelations received by the Messenger (Muhammad) - - -". The messages Muhammad claimed he got, in case were from no god - no god would ever be involved in a book of a quality like the Quran.

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

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

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

197 5/83f: “- - - they (Christians*) recognized the truth (their religion is claimed by the Quran to be corresponding to the Quran*)” and "- - - their (Christians*) eyes overflowing with tears - - -".. As said before: With that many mistakes in the Quran, the teachings of Muhammad at best are partly the truth. Besides: Claiming that others believe and accept that the teaching is true, is good psychology - - - as long as it is not too easy to find out that the claim is not true. (What most Christians quickly in reality understood, was that something was really wrong with the new religion.)

This surah is from 632 AD. At that time Muhammad knew ever so well that bluffs like this were lies.

Another point: The religion does not mean too much for most Christians of today. All the same you never see their eyes "overflowing with tears" for wanting to accept and believe in the very different religion Islam instead - to equate "the Religion of Love" with the apartheid, war, suppression and acceptance for dishonesty religion Islam, tells something about the Quran. In the old times the religion meant a lot more to the individuals. What do you think is the possibility for that those strong believers in the religion of f.x. honesty, love, and monogamy, of Yahweh and Christ would "recognize the truth" and "overflow with tears" from acceptance and want of this other very different religion of distaste, hate, suppression, accepted dishonesty, blood, and sex (rape, polygamy, harems)? - and a very different god? Or for that they "recognized" in Christianity the practically antipodal religion Islam?

You are free to think over this yourself.

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

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

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

198 5/83i: "- - - write us (learned Christians*) down among the witnesses". This may be 100% propaganda, or there may have been a few (most likely the last alternative, if for no other reasons, then to save their lives and family and property). As for all the rest this is pure fantasy - - - but good propaganda. (Also today you see the few Christians converting to Islam used for propaganda by Muslims - and denial of the ones converting from Islam to other religions, mainly to the Christian one. #####Another fact is that of the ones - Christians and others - who convert to Islam, some 75% leave the religion within 3 years, indicating that they see it is not a true religion when they learn more about it. This fact is NEVER mentioned by Muslims.)

###199 5/84a: “What cause can we (Muhammad and the people*) have not to believe in Allah - - -?” Well, there are strong answers to that – all the mistakes etc. in the Quran, the inhumanity of Muhammad and Islam, the at some points sick morality of Muhammad, the Quran and Islam, etc., etc., etc. But the main point is that the question is wrong. ####The correct and relevant question had been: "What cause can we have to believe in Allah?”

200 5/84d: "- - - the truth (the Quran*) which has come to us (Muhammad*) - - -". With so many mistakes, etc. the Quran at best only is partly the truth. The intended indication in addition is that it is sent down by a god, which is not the case with that many mistakes, contradictions, cases of invalid logic, etc.

201 5/85c: "- - - Gardens, with rivers flowing underneath - their (Muslims'*) eternal home". But 11/108c may indicate it is not quite eternal. Islam tries to explain it away with that this in case means that the dwellers there will be moved to an even better Paradise - not too difficult as the Quran's Paradise is little but a poor desert-dweller's picture of an earthly king's life + Allah at a distance - but this is not said in the Quran.

202 5/86a: "But those who reject Faith and belie our Signs - they shall be companions of Hell-fire.

As for Jews and Christians, the Bible tells another story.

If so happen that Yahweh is a true god and Allah not, few if any Muslims will end in Yahweh's Paradise, partly because parts of the Quran's moral code, etc. are so perverted (compare to the "constitution" of true moral: "Do unto others like you want others do unto you"), that persons living according to those rules, are not acceptable to Yahweh, and partly because they do not seek him, but another, and quite likely made up, god.

Another point is that the claim is wrong: As there are no signs provably from Allah, to doubt the existence of such ones is not to belie them.

203 5/86e: "- - - they (non-Muslims*) shall be Companions of Hell-fire". See 3/77b.

204 5/89d: "Thus doth Allah make clear to you His Signs - - -". This has little meaning, as it does not show to anything making things/"signs" clear. Or maybe it is just what it does, as the word "thus" points to the sentences about permitted lies/broken oaths and to how to be forgiven for such? Deplorable literature.

As for forgiving from Allah: See 2/187d 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 DO NOT MEAN WHAT THE TEXTS SAY, BUT ARE ALLEGORIES OR SOMETHING, SUCH CLAIMS AND EXPLAININGS AWAY ARE WRONG. BESIDES: WHO CAN EXPLAIN BETTER THAN AN OMNISCIENT GOD?

####205 5/91b: "- - - prayer - - -". What is really the mission of prayers in Islam? As Allah already has predestined everything according to his Plan which nobody and nothing can change, there is no meaning in praying and no possible effect of it.

206 5/92a: "Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -". The mantra of Muhammad, here in a strong form - and a form very practical for a warlord (surah 5 is from 632 AD and he is not just a robber baron any more, but a warlord.) Obey Muhammad! Self centered. Selfish?

For a comparison: Jesus said: "Follow me", which is a long way from "Obey me".

207 5/92e: "- - - it is Our (Allah's*) Messenger's (Muhammad's*) - - -". With a message (the Quran) that full of mistakes, contradictions, etc., that message - and hence the messenger - is not from any omniscient god.

208 5/92f: "- - - it is Our (Allah's*) Messenger's (Muhammad's*) duty to proclaim (the Message) in the clearest manner". No doubt - at this time (632 AD) Muhammad had long since started to "proclaim" it by the means of weapons and murder. The clearest of all manners.

209 5/93b: "- - - deeds of righteousness - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code. (F.x. one of the best deeds is to go to war and steal and rob and rape and suppress and kill in the name of the good and benevolent god Allah.)

#210 5/93d: "For Allah loveth those who do good". Whenever we see sentences like this and similar, we remember the golden rule for moral: "Do unto others what you want others do unto you". And then we wonder if Allah is able to like Muslims living according to the harsh parts of the Quran's moral rules, and what that in case tells about Allah.

Besides Allah can love nobody unless he exists.

211 5/94b: "Allah doth but make a trial of you - - -". But WHY does an omniscient, predestining god need to make a trial of you??!! There is no logic in this - not unless the Quran is a made up book, and Muhammad needs an explanation for hardship his followers meet.

212 5/95d: "Allah forgives what is past - - -." See 5/93c above. Deeds which were no sins according to your old religion, but are sins according to Islam, are automatically forgiven if you ask Allah for this, if you do not repeat them after you became a Muslim and learnt they were sins.

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

213 5/95e: "If any of you doth so (kills game intentionally*), the compensation is an offering - - -". As neither the demand for pilgrimage, nor prohibition against hunting during pilgrimage is to be found in the Bible, also this is not to be found there.

214 5/95f: "- - - Allah is Exalted - - -". If he exists, if he is a god, and if the Quran in case has described him correctly.

215 5/96d: "- - - Allah, to Whom ye (people/Muslims*) shall be gathered back (at the Day of Doom*)". 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.

216 5/97b: "- - - the Sacred House - - -". Kabah in Mecca is the most holy place on Earth for Allah, and very central to his religion. Yahweh does not mention it at all in the Bible, which he had done if it meant much to him. One more proof for that Yahweh is another god than Allah. And Jesus and Muhammad not in the same religion.

217 5/97d: "- - - the Sacred Months - - -". This you do not find in the Bible, and it is was of such value to the old culture, that it had been mentioned there if Yahweh had introduced something like this. One more strong indication for that Yahweh is another god than Allah. And one more old tradition the Quran simply took over from the old Arab pagan religion.

218 5/97e: "- - - Allah hath knowledge of what is in the heavens (plural and wrong*) and on earth - - -". If he made the Quran, he will get low marks for knowledge.

219 5/97f: "- - - Allah hath knowledge of what is in the heavens (plural and wrong*) and on earth - - -". See 2/233h above and 35/38b below.

220 5/97h: "- - - Allah is well acquainted with all things." This is another of Muhammad's mantras, and which served him well: Behave yourself - and obey Muhammad - or Allah sees you and will punish you. Ok if true. Good psychology from a leader liking power if the Quran is made up. Also see 3/77b above.

221 5/98b: "- - - Allah is Oft-Forgiving - - -". Allah can forgive nobody unless he exists and in addition is a god.

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

222 5/98c: "- - - Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful". See 1/1a above.

223 5/99d: "But Allah knoweth all that ye (humans*) reveal or ye conceal". See 2/233h above and 35/38b below.

224 5/100a: "- - - things that are bad - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses expressions like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

225 5/100b: "- - - things that are good - - -". See 5/100a just above.

####226 5/101b: "Ask not questions about things which, if made plain to you, may cause you trouble". ####Guess if this is a revealing sentence! Do not ask questions - debate - if the result may be something that put question marks to the Quran!! - the criterion is not to find the truth, but not to find anything which may give you reason to question Islam - true or not is not part of the statement. This tells something serious about Muhammad, about the Quran, and about Islam. And most likely a main reason why Islam ended in its intellectually and culturally blind alley, and petrified and stagnant dark ages from around 1100 AD - dark ages they were forced backwards and protesting (f.x. printing was prohibited in Egypt for 300 years, because "it could be used to hurt Islam") out from by ideas, impulses and technology from the west, and by military realities mainly during the 2 last centuries. Also see 5/102a below.

227 5/101d: "- - - the Quran is being revealed - - -". See 2/136a+c, 4/47c and 5/59e above and 13/1f and 15/1b below.

228 5/101f: "- - - Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Forbearing." See 1/1a above.

229 5/102a: "Some people before you did ask such questions, and on that account lost their faith". May be there were good reasons for losing the faith in Islam when they got knowledge? Also see 5/101b above. Some Muslims claim that Islam is such a good religion that none leaves it. This is a proof from the Quran that some do leave it. (And today 75% of all adults who become Muslims, leave Islam again within 3 years - something Muslims never mention. What is it they learn inside, which makes them leave in spite of the problems and the danger this may mean?

230 5/103b: "- - - blasphemers - - -". No-one can be blasphemers against Allah unless he exists and in addition is a god.

231 5/104a: "- - - what Allah hath revealed (the Quran*) - - -". No god - omniscient or not - has revealed a book with so many mistakes, contradictions, etc., not to mention kept it in his own "home" a revered "mother book" like the Quran claims.

232 5/104c: "- - - the Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -". See 63/5a below.

###233 5/104f: "Enough for us (non-Muslims*) are the ways we found our fathers following". = We non-Muslims prefer to follow the religion of our fathers. A way of thinking which Muhammad found much wanting - - - but which is just what most Muslims of all times have been and are doing; our parents and our surroundings told this religion was the true one and worthy of blind and unthinking belief, and then we follow their beliefs - as they and others say so, it must be the truth. The Arab word for this is "taqlid". There is much taqlid among Muslims.

234 5/105b: "- - - if ye (Muslims*) follow the (right) guidance, no hurt can come to you - - -". This may perhaps be correct, but only if you get the right guidance. A book like the Quran with that many mistakes, contradictions, etc. at the very best can be only partly right - and a lot wrong.

235 5/105c: "(If you follow the Quran), no hurt can come to you from those who stray". No comments - and none necessary.

236 5/105d: "(If you follow the Quran), no hurt can come to you from those who stray". But what about from the Quran if there somewhere is a real god - a god Muslims have been prohibited from looking for?

237 5/105e: "- - - those who stray (leave or not enter Islam*)". They only stray if the Quran really is from a god, and if it in addition tells the full truth and only the truth. (+ that the god they believe in instead of Allah - f.x. Yahweh - may be a true one. In that case they definitely do not stray.)

238 5/105g: "The goal for you all (at the Day of Doom*) is to Allah - - -". Only if Allah exists, if he is a major god, if he is behind what the Quran tells, and if the Quran in addition tells the full truth and only the truth.

239 5/105i: "- - - it is He (Allah*) that will show you the truth of all that ye do". He will show you what you have done of good and bad and judge you from that. Often claimed, never proved.

240 5/106b: "When death approaches any of you (Muslims*),(take) witnesses among yourselves when making bequests - - -." Make a will not later than when you feel death is coming to you. Muhammad himself broke this rule, which made considerable troubles. For one thing: Who was to inherit his considerable wealth? (Muslims like to tell that Muhammad died very poor. It simply is not true - and many of them know it, as it is clearly told in Hadiths. He had estates in Medina, Khaybar and Fadak. But he had said - not willed, but at least said - that this was to be given to the religion, and therefore the caliph, Abu Bakr, confiscated it, much to the anger of Muhammad's only living child, Fatimah, who wanted the inheritance from her father. But he neither had made rules for his own inheritors, nor for transfer of power or for succession of leaders of Islam, which resulted in that Fatime did not get her inheritance - and that of the 11 first caliphs only one (Abu Bakr) died a natural death - the line of transfer of power was unclear and many wanted that power. The religion of truth and peace!

241 5/108a: "- - - other oaths would be taken after their oaths". Oaths can be broken in Islam according to Muhammad, though if you really meant the oath when you swore it, you may have to pay expiation to Allah to be forgiven. All the same: The main rule is that you shall try to keep your oaths. (But that rule is far from absolute).

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

242 5/108b: "- - - listen (to His (Allah's*) counsel (the Quran*)) - - -". One thing is listening to a book where so much is wrong. Quite another thing is to follow its advice without using ones brain and ones other knowledge, not to mention blindly to do so - in taqlid. Besides: As no book of a quality like the Quran is from any god, the counsels given in the Quran are not from a god, included not from Allah - no matter if he exists and is a god or not.

243 5/109b: "- - - it is Thou (Allah*) Who knowest in full all that is hidden". See 2/233h above and 35/38b below.

244 5/110a "O Jesus the son of Mary!". This is a claimed name you some places find for Jesus in the Quran. The point is to fortify Muhammad's claim that Jesus was not the son of Yahweh (in that case he may be was divine, and in any case clearly was a greater and more central prophet than Muhammad, which Muhammad would not accept).

But officially Jesus was the son of Joseph (his official and formal father - the least you can say about the connection between those two, is that Joseph "de facto" had accepted Jesus as his adopted son). If anyone used a "full name" for him in the very man-dominated Israel, it would be "Jesus son of Joseph" - "Jesus ben Joseph" - and not "Jesus ben Mary" ("ben" means "son of" in Hebrew - the same as "bin" in Arab). Or to be more complete: Jesus is the Greek version of his name. The Hebrew version is Joshua. So to be exact his name was "Joshua ben Joseph".

And to make the picture of Muhammad's problems with Jesus' name complete: Muhammad uses the name Isa for Jesus in the Quran. This is wrong. Isa is the Arab version of Esau (the brother of the Jewish patriarch Jacob). The Arab form for the name Jesus - or Joshua in Hebrew - is Yushuwa (the spelling may vary a little). Any god had known this - Muhammad obviously not. Who then made the Quran?

Finally: As for Muhammad's never documented claim that Jesus was not the son of Yahweh, we may mention that the name "father" is used is used for Yahweh in this connection at least 204 times in the Bible, and the name "son" for Jesus in the same connection at least 89 times - many of those times by Jesus, a prophet whom also the Quran admits is very reliable.

But an extra point here is that if the Quran and Muhammad claim that Jesus was not the son of Yahweh, like they strongly do to try do to make Muhammad the greatest of prophets, the only alternative is that he was the son of Joseph. Then in a strongly male society like the Hebrew - or the Arab - no son of a married couple would accept to be named after his mother. F.x. Muhammad never was called Muhammad bin Amina (his mother's name was Amina). In this case the only name possible for Jesus - and the only name one honestly could use in the old Israel - was Joshua(Jesus) ben Joseph. Any god had known - but Muhammad needed a twist to be able to claim he himself was the greatest.

245 5/110d: "- - - the holy spirit - - -". The Spirit is mentioned a few times in the Quran, even though Muhammad did not understand it properly. Muslims today often claim that this is just another name for the angel Gabriel, even though this is not said in the Quran - perhaps because Muhammad used to claim it was Gabriel who brought him many of his claimed revelation (though other times he dreamt them), and once it is mentioned that the Holy Spirit brought him some revelations; viola! - the Holy Spirit = Gabriel. The logic is invalid (the most you can say logically, is: "perhaps the Holy Spirit is Gabriel" - there is a long distance from "perhaps" to "is", but you will often see Muslims doing this kind of logically invalid "jumps" to get answers they wish or want. Just keep an eye open and you will see such logically invalid "conclusions" here and there.) No-one who knows the Bible would get that idea, as the Holy Spirit clearly is something special (and also the old Jews knew the difference between an angel and a spirit) - but Islam as normal just claims without any documentation.

##246 5/110f: “I (Allah*) taught thee (Jesus*) - - - the Gospel”. Wrong. But do not laugh - it is impolite: The Gospels did not exist until some 25 - 30+ years after Jesus died (the oldest Gospel). They simply could not exist until after Jesus' death as a Gospel is the story of Jesus' birth, life, teaching, death, resurrection, and assent ion to Heaven, and thus could not be told until after all this had happened. But do not laugh - it is impolite. See 3/3g-k and 3/48 above. (There is a possibility that an older Gospel has existed, but also that one must have been written after Jesus' death, resurrection, and ascension to Heaven - if not it could not have told about this, which is pretty sure it did, if it existed, because it in case likely was a source for 3 of the 4 gospels in the Bible, and they all tell about that.)

247 5/110h: “And behold, thou (the child Jesus*) makest out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, by My (Allah's*) leave, and you brethest into it and it becometh a bird by My leave, - - - “. This is not from the Bible. It is a made up story from the made up legends in the made up (apocryphal) Thomas Child Gospel and also mentioned in a couple of the others of the so-called child gospels (also they made up legends) - see 3/49b above. Besides: A wonder like this had not been forgotten in the Bible - and especially not by “wrongdoers” wanting to falsify the Bible to make Jesus more holy, like the Quran frequently says/indicates.

##248 5/110i: "And behold, thou (Jesus*) bringest forth the dead by My leave". For Muhammad it was essential to stress that it was not Jesus himself who resurrected the dead ones, but the god. (If it was Jesus himself, he clearly was a superior prophet to Muhammad - and Muhammad wanted to be the greatest). But the main thing here really is that if the Quran tells the truth here, it confirms that Jesus was connected to something supernatural and powerful - a god. For Muhammad and Allah this never and nowhere is proved - not one single time (of course Islam still will claim Allah = Yahweh, but the teachings fundamentally are so different that this only is possible if the god is strongly schizophrenic).

249 5/111a: "I (Allah*) inspired the Disciples to have faith in Me - - -". According to the Bible this was done by Yahweh.

250 5/111b: "- - - inspired - - -". This word hardly is used in such a connection in the entire Bible. But as Muhammad claimed he got many of his verses/surahs "by inspiration", it was imperative for him to "document" that this was a "normal" way for the god to communicate.

251 5/111f: “(the Disciples*) said: “We have faith, and do thou bear witness that we bow to Allah as Muslims”. A made up story - see 3/51a+b for explanation.

252 5/112b: "O Jesus the son of Mary!" For one thing your nearest co-workers do not use a long and formal name for you. For another see 5/110a above.

253 5/113b: "- - - and that we ourselves (the disciples*) may be witness to the miracle". Invalid explanation - they had seen plenty of miracles in other connections according to the old books. Also this is not from the Bible.

One more confirmation in the Quran for that Jesus could cause miracles - the story is made up unless the opposite is proved, but the confirmation and admission are real ones. Neither Allah nor Muhammad proved they were able to this (Muhammad - and Islam - clearly admitted/s that he himself was unable to (see 5/110i)).

254 5/114a: "- - - Jesus the son of Mary - - -". See 5/110a above. 

255 5/114c: "(Jesus said*) O Allah our Lord - - -". Allah or Yahweh? No comment should necessary. (Remember that we here are in times of written history. We know ever so well that for one thing the god of the Jews was Yahweh, not Allah. For another that neither science nor Islam has ever found any traces from a god like Allah, a religion like Islam, or a book like the Quran anywhere in the world, included in what is now Israel. And for a third that if Jesus had preached about the pagan god al-Lah from a neighboring country - and especially if he had mixed him with Yahweh - the Jewish clergy had had him killed long time before, as religious fanatism was strong in Israel at that time.

256 5/114d: “Send us (Jesus and the Disciples*) from heaven a Table set (with viands), - - -”. A made up story - there is no chance that such a miracle which clearly shows Jesus’ connection to Yahweh, would be omitted from the Bible. Not one single chance. Even if Muhammad had been right and Christians had falsified the NT, this is the kind of stories they had added, not omitted. Some Muslims say this may refer a little to “The Prayer of God” - "give us our daily bread" - in the Bible. Much more likely it is a contorted version of the last Easter supper.

The Quran tells nearly nothing about Jesus as a preacher or about his teachings. The main points for Muhammad were that Jesus was a good Muslim and that even though Jesus was a great prophet – and a real prophet according to both the Bible and to the Quran – he in reality was no match to the greatest: Muhammad. Muhammad claimed to be the greatest prophet - - - but never even proved that he was a prophet.

257 5/116a: "O Jesus the son of Mary!". See 5/110a above.

358 5/116c: “Didst thou (Jesus*) say unto men, ‘worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of Allah’?” Jesus was not involved with Allah - see 3/51a for explanation. As for a divine Jesus, that is not explicitly said in the Bible, but many places it is clearly understood that he was (f.x. if Yahweh really was his father in some way, and also all his miracles – some even confirmed by the Quran (see 5/110 above and the complete verse in the Quran) – indicates something). But when it comes to Mary, Islam is right - saints are not a part of the teaching of the Bible (on the other hand also some Muslims have saints, notably the Shiites). But the Quran also is very wrong: No Christian - not one single - prays to Mary as a god, only as a go-between. The position of Jesus is vaguer - he is divine, but no Christian believes there is more than one god.

#259 5/117a: (Jesus said*): “Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord”. A story made up to strengthen Islam. If Jesus had said things like this about the known foreign and pagan god al-Lah, he had had very few followers - - - and had been killed within months by the Jewish clergy. See 3/51a above for further explanation.

260 5/118a: "It Thou (Allah*) dost forgive them (sinners*) - - -". Allah only can forgive if he exists and in addition is a god.

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

261 5/118b: "- - - Thou (Allah*) art the Exalted in Power - - -". Often claimed, never clearly documented.

262 5/118c: "- - - Thou (Allah*) is# - - - the Wise." Not if the Quran is representative for his wisdom.

263 5/119d: "- - - Gardens, with rivers flowing beneath - - -". The Quran's and Islam's paradise - see 10/9f below - and also the most frequently used Arabism in the Quran.

264 5/119e: "- - - their (Muslims'*) eternal home - - -". But 11/108c may indicate it is not eternal.

265 5/119f: "- - - (the fulfillment of all desires) - - -". The Quran's paradise like described in that book, only satisfy bodily and material desires + not too long distance to the god (for normally good Muslims there are 6 heavens in between).

266 5/120a: This verse in reality is a repetition of one of Muhammad's mantras: Be good and obedient - also to Muhammad - and Allah will reward you. Be bad and disobedient - also to Muhammad - and Allah will punish you.

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.)

267 5/120b: "To Allah belong the dominions of the heavens (plural and wrong) and the earth - - -". Often claimed, never proved.

268 5/120d: "- - - it is He (Allah*) who hath power over all things". Often claimed, never clearly proved.

1263 + 268 = 1531 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".