1000+ Claims in the Quran - Invalid Unless Proven, Surah 7


SURAH 7: Al-A'raf (The Heights)

(Mecca 621 AD)


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

002 7/2c: "- - - with it (the Quran*) thou (Muhammad*) mightest warn (the erring (non-Muslims*)) - - -". This was in 621 AD - Muhammad did not have power to do anything but "warn". This changed quite a lot as he started to gain power from 622 - 624 AD on - he little by little also became an enforcer. The same for his successors - most of Arabia and much of the rest of the now Islamic area became Muslim by different kinds of compulsion or force backed by the sword: "Become Muslims or fight us and die!"

003 7/2d: "- - - (the erring (= non-Muslims)) - - -". As the Quran is not from any god with all its mistakes, etc., it may be a relevant question: Who belong to the group "the erring"?

004 7/2f: "- - - and teach the Believers". Can you teach anyone what is right from a book where much is wrong? - and can you teach s right religion from a book there is no god behind (no god had made so many errors, etc.)?

005 7/3a: “Follow (O People!) the revelations (the Quran*) given onto you from your Lord, - - -”. No omniscient god has made such book. Either Allah is not omniscient, or someone else has made it.

#006 7/4a: “How many towns have We (Allah) destroyed (for their sins)?” There were scattered ruins and there were tales about former tribes in Arabia. Muhammad said they all were destroyed as punishment for their sins. This hardly is true - and science simply does not believe him. Proofs for his claims are needed.

007 7/4b: “How many towns have We (Allah) destroyed (for their sins)?” Some ones complain about Yahweh being harsh in OT. Some ones claim that Allah is a good and benevolent good. But if you read the Bible and the Quran, you will find that Allah has destroyed and killed many more than Yahweh - and if Allah = Yahweh like the Quran and Islam claim, Allah has made all the destruction and killing in the Bible, too, (under the name of Yahweh), plus all the destruction and killing in the Quran, plus all the destruction and killing his followers have done till now through history in accordance with the Quran, plus all the destruction and killings the Muslims do today and will do in the future in accordance with the Quran's incitements and orders. A good and benevolent god and religion? The religion of peace? The claims are insults to the intelligence of anyone who have studied the facts with an open mind. (One may counter that also Christians have caused destruction and deaths. But for one thing: Read the NT and you will see it has been done in spite of the texts there - the Bible sometimes has been disused for purposes of power or wealth - not because of the "holy" texts, like in the Quran. Even in OT the fighting was for a nation, not for a religion. And for another: Bad deeds by non-Muslims do not make bad deeds made by Muslims one molecule or atom better. And especially not so when it is done by religious demands and orders from their god - orders which are stated to last forever until everybody else are "thoroughly suppressed" under the Muslims.

008 7/6a: "Then shall We (Allah*) question those - - -". Why does an omniscient god need to ask questions, when he according to the Quran knows every detail already - and even has predestined everything?

009 7/6b: "- - - Our (Allah's) Message (the Quran*) - - -". No god ever sent a message that full of errors, etc.

010 7/6d: "- - - those by whom We sent it (the claimed messages*)". = The claimed prophets/messengers. Islam claims there have been 124ooo or more (according to Hadiths) prophets through the times preaching Islam. There is not a single trace of any of them except Muhammad. Believe the claim if you want - for us to believe it, we need some proofs. A few prophets have changed the world history thoroughly - whereas 124ooo have left not even a whisper of a trace. Proofs really are needed.

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

Believe it if you are able to.

011 7/7b: "- - - We (Allah*) were never absent (and saw everything*) - - -". A threat and a reminder: Be a good and obedient Muslims, or Allah will punish you in the claimed next life. But also see 2/233h above and 35/38b below.

012 7/8b: "- - - those whose scale (of good) will be heavy - - -". This includes all kinds good deeds like of thieving, lying, discrimination mongering, suppressing, enslaving, torture, rape, murder, etc. if it is done in the name of "Allah and His Prophet" during a Jihad - and practically every conflict and raid was and is claimed to be Jihad.

PS: The idea of using a scale for weighing bad against good deeds, the Quran "borrowed from old Persian pagan religion.

013 7/8c: "- - - scale - - -". It is claimed that good and bad deeds are weighed on a scale at the Day of Doom. (This scale the Quran "borrowed" from Zoroastrianism (Persia).

014 7/10a: "It is We (Allah*) Who has placed you (people/mankind*) with authority on earth - - -". One of Muhammad's many, many cases where he without even trying to prove anything claims natural phenomena as indication, proof, and glorification for his god - claims as invalid as when any pagan priest makes the same claims as easy and cheap for his god(s), as long as it is not proved that it really was Allah who made or caused the phenomenon.

015 7/11b: “- - - We (Allah*) bade the angels bow down to Adam, and they bowed down; not so Iblis (the future Devil*) - - -.” But was Iblis an angel, like it is indicated here? It is said several places in the Quran that he was created from fire (f.x. 7/12), which means he was a jinn (angles are created from light, according to the Quran). An unclear point in Islam, but most scholars mean he was a jinn. (Jinns are beings "borrowed" from old Arab pagan religion, legends and fairy tales.)

#016 7/11 - 18: The story about Iblis/the Devil and Adam is not from the Bible. There also is nothing similar, except that the Devil cheated them, and they had to leave Garden of Eden (according to science likely in the water rich lands in what now is south Iraq - if it ever existed). From where did he get it? - not from a god, as too much is wrong in the Quran to be from a god, and not from a devil, as a devil would not give negative information about himself. The only remaining alternative is from man.

017 7/12a: "Thou (Allah*) didst create me (Iblis - the Devil*) from fire - - -". There is some debate in Islam - is Iblis originally an angel? F.x. the previous verse, 7/11b, may indicate that. But this verse clearly indicates he originally was a jinn (a being from old Arab fairy tales, legends, and pagan religion), because according to the Quran Allah created jinns from fire, whereas angels were created from light.

018 7/13-16b: This was the reason for Hell - though many Muslim scholars believe that also Hell is part of Allah's Plan, as Allah is too strong to permit Hell if he did not want it, and if it was not part of his Plan. But what kind of a sadistic god is then Allah? - because Hell as described in the Quran is pure and - well, devilish - sadism.

019 7/18 - 25: The story about Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden is roughly similar to the one in the Bible - though the Bible is better as literature also here - but details differ, and also many details lack in the Quran compared to in the Bible. There are two marked differences, though: For one thing (not mentioned here) the sin in Eden did not result in the "inherited sin" in Islam like in the Bible. And the other is the quote from 6/24 just below.

##020 7/24: "Get ye (Adam and Eve*) down, with enmity between yourself". May be Islam has comments on this, but we have never seen one. The message is clear: There will be enmity between man and woman. And when you see the status and the treatment of women in Islam, that may well be the case in Islam - with the man as the winner and the woman as the suppressed vanquished loser.

On this point the Bible has another story. In the Bible it was the snake who made Eve pick the forbidden fruit, and because of that Yahweh said there should be enmity between man and snake - and that is quite something different from enmity between man and woman.

A possible explanation for the story in the Quran is that Muhammad did not know the Bible well - this is a well known fact - and misunderstood the story (especially before he came to Medina where there lived many Jews, in 622 AD, he had very superficial knowledge of the Bible, and this surah is from 621 AD).

In the Bible the enmity is between man and snake - the Devil used a snake for disguise.

021 7/27b: "- - - We (Allah*) made the Satan friends (only) to those without Faith". Parts of the Quran's moral code and also parts of sharia, not to mention its rules for raids and war, may indicate another truth and make one wonder who are really the friends of Satan.

022 7/28a: "When they do aught that is shameful, they say: 'We found our fathers doing so;' and 'Allah commanded us thus". Read f.x. the immoral parts of the Quran's moral code, its unjust and/or immoral parts of the sharia laws + its rules for raids, wars and behavior during and after such, and see if this verse is about the Muslims or not. Also see 7/27b just below.

###023 7/28b: “Allah never commands what is shameful - - -.” This is contradicted by several points in the Quran, f.x.:

2/230: “If a husband divorces his wife (irrevocably), he cannot, after that, remarry her until after she has married another husband and he has divorced her.” This situation is not common, but it does happen in a culture where divorce is as easy as in Islam. In Islam the woman then has to prostitute herself in legal forms, to be permitted to do so (the intermediate marriage has to be a “fulfilled" one).

Enslaving is “lawful and good”.

Killing and murdering and war are not only good and lawful, but the best service to Allah.

A raped woman who cannot produce 4 male witnesses to the very act, is to be punishes severely for unlawful sex.

Allah commands/permits sex with children. For an adult to enjoy sex with a child is utterly shameful. For an adult to introduce a child to sex is inhuman and even more shameful. Muhammad even demonstrated that it was ok at least from the girl is 9 – and worse: She – Aishah - became his favorite wife the rest of her childhood.

Allah commands that one can take slaves in a jihad - and any skirmish or war where Muslims are involved, is declared jihad. For centuries (till ca. 1930 – 1940) all the four law schools of Islam said that if the opposite parts were pagans, this was good enough reason to declare jihad – which means that at least theoretically any slave hunter in Africa or Asia could claim to be waging jihad. To force fellow humans to become slaves, to toil for free for you, to be free for you to sell or mistreat or use for a sex toy, is utterly inhuman, utterly selfish, utterly immoral – and utterly shameful. Not to mention that it is a grotesque act to commit in the name of a presumed god and benevolent good.

To rape a child captive/slave/victim is grotesquely selfish, immoral, inhuman and grotesquely shameful - - - but Allah has commanded that it is ok if the child is mot pregnant - and over 9 years according to Islam (the age of Aishah when Muhammad started to have sex with her - anything Muhammad did is just and right).

To rape any woman prisoner/slave/victim – a fellow human being – is nearly as selfish and shameful and bad as raping a child. But in the Quran it is “lawful and good” (8/69) if the woman is not pregnant. That it is "lawful and good" may be a reason why rape is so common by Muslim warriors/soldiers. F.x. during the short war between Pakistan and Bangladesh in 1971, Pakistani an soldiers raped at least 200ooo Muslim - Muslim - children and women. And that even was one of the few not holy wars Muslims have been involved in. (Another possible reason is that empathy is not an integrated part of Islam - and the same for moral philosophy).

To murder opponents – also personal opponents – in the name of a presumably good god is something much more than shameful.

To incite to discrimination, hate and war, in the name of a presumably good god is even worse than this again – and a proof for a god or a “prophet” full of hypocrisy.

To steal/rob/plunder and extort in the name of such a god – and with his permission as “good and lawful” - is nearly a bad and as much hypocrisy as raping and killing and apartheid/suppression. And to do so in the name of a god, makes the god, the religion and the acts even more perverted and distasteful. But all these points have this in common:

They attract selfish warriors to a robber “prophet’s” army – and to his successors’.

They attract greedy warriors to a robber “prophet’s” army – and to his successors’.

They attract inhuman warriors to a robber “prophet’s” army – and to his successors’.

They attract primitive warriors to a robber “prophet’s” army – and to his successors’.

It is a cheap way for a robber “prophet” – and for his successors – to get an army – a cheap army and an inhuman army.

Finally: Severe or capital punishment for a woman who has been raped, but is unable to produce 4 male eye witnesses to the very act, most likely is the most inhuman, most immoral, most unjust, and most shameful law we have ever come across in any at least half civilized religion or culture, and Allah/Muhammad has introduced this law.

024 7/29a: “My Lord (Allah*) has commanded justice - - -“. This at most is partly true. See 7/28b above.

025 7/29b: "- - - set ye (Muslims/people*) your whole selves (to Him (Allah*)) - - -". This may be a bit risky if he does not exist.

##026 7/29c: "- - - prayer - - -". What is the idea of praying for anything in Islam? According to the Quran - and Hadiths - Allah has predestined every detail in your and everyone else's life according to his unchangeable Plan - a Plan "nobody and nothing" can change. Thus prayers can have no effect and can change nothing, and just is a waste of time and effort - a fact (if the stated predestination is correct - and if it is not, the Quran is wrong) no Muslim ever mentions or tries to explain.

##027 7/29d:"- - - He (Allah*) created you - - -". There must be at least a hundred places in the Quran where Muhammad takes a natural phenomenon and claims it is Allah who is behind it. This for:

Glorification of his god.

Claimed indication of his god's existence.

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

"Proof" for his god's existence.

"Proof" for his god's power.

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

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

Muhammad's and Muslims' demands for proofs prove that proofs are essential, but all the same they have been and are unable to prove any of the central claims in Islam. Not one.

It also is up to you if you are able to believe that Muhammad was not aware of that at least some of the "signs", etc. were made up claims/untrue.

028 7/30b: "- - - others (non-Muslims*) have (by their choice) deserved the loss of their way - - -". How is this possible if Allah predestines everything, included a person's way, like the Quran claims strongly and often?

029 7/30c: "- - - they (non-Muslims*) took Satan, in preference of Allah, for their friends and patrons". The Quran claims that everyone who does not believe in Allah, are the friends of Satan. This for one thing presumes that Allah exists and is a god, neither of which is ever proved. And for another thing that no other real god - f.x. Yahweh exists.

Quite an ironic sentence if Allah is from the dark forces.

030 7/30d: "- - - and (wrongly*) think that they (non-Muslims*) receive guidance". This is what the Muslims do if the Quran is a made up book - and with all its errors, etc. it at least is from no god.

##031 7/31b: "- - - prayer - - -". What is the idea of praying for anything in Islam? According to the Quran - and Hadiths - Allah has predestined every detail in your and everyone else's life according to his unchangeable Plan - a Plan "nobody and nothing" can change. Thus prayers can have no effect and can change nothing, and just is a waste of time and effort - a fact (if the stated predestination is correct - and if it is not, the Quran is wrong) no Muslim ever mentions or tries to explain.

071 7/32a: "- - - which He (Allah*) hath produced for His servants (people*) - - - for sustenance - - -". Allah has produced everything according to the Quran. Also see 7/29d above.

032 7/32b: "They (the good things*) are - - - purely for them (Muslims*) on the Day of Judgment". If Allah exists, if he is a central god - and if the Quran tells the full truth and only the truth.

033 7/32d: "Thus do We (Allah*) explain the Signs in detail - - -". But there is no explanation of Allah's claimed signs in this verse. A book so clear and easy that it only can be made by a god?


034 7/33a: “The things my (Muhammad’s or Muslims’*) Lord (Allah*) hath indeed forbidden are: shameful deeds - - -“. This only is partly true – see 7/28b above.

035 7/33b: “The things my (Muhammad’s or Muslims’*) Lord (Allah*) hath indeed forbidden are: - - - sins - - -“. There are quite a number of things permitted or demanded in the Quran which are sins according to all normal ethical and moral philosophies and rules, not to mention against NT. A religion of war and suppression needs un-normal ethical and moral rules on a number of points.

036 7/33e: “The things my (Muhammad’s or Muslims’*) Lord (Allah*) hath indeed forbidden are: - - - trespass against - - - reason - - -". All the places Muhammad uses invalid logic are trespasses against reason. The same goes for not a few of all the mistakes in the Quran.

Compare the moral code, etc. in the Quran to "do to others like you want others do to you", and judge for yourself.

037 7/33f: “The things my (Muhammad’s or Muslims’*) Lord (Allah*) hath indeed forbidden are: - - - trespasses against - - - reason - - -". There are many things in the Quran trespassing reason - f.x. all the (wrong) ways Adam is created, the astronomy and geography, not to mention some of the laws and parts of the moral code.

038 7/34c: "- - - not an hour can they (humans*) cause delay, nor (an hour) can they advance (it in anticipation)." Predestination is absolute - man can do exactly nothing. Which means that man's claimed free will is an illusion. But it also means that war and battles are not dangerous - you do not die until your time is out, but then you die whether you are in the midst of a hard battle, working in your fields, or sleeping in your bed. A very nice religion for a robber baron and for a warlord - wrong of course, which is easy to prove nowadays by means of statistics, but naive people even today may believe in it. It also is so strongly contra to all logic and reason, that this is one of the places in the Quran Muhammad knew he was lying. But also see 7/34a above: Have prayers any meaning at all in Islam, when prayers can change nothing?

039 7/35d: "- - - on them (good Muslims*) shall be no fear nor shall they grieve". If the Quran tells the full truth and only the truth about everything.

040 7/35e Verse 7/35 is a little complicated written. In plain words: When prophets for Allah come to your community, good Muslims will benefit. (Whether this is true or not is another question.)

041 7/36f: "- - - to dwell therein (Hell*) (for ever)". There are some verses in the Quran which may indicate that Hell is not quite forever - at least not for Muslims: 6/128c, 11/107b, 43/74b-c, 78/23, (plus some Hadiths). One of the verses also may indicate that Paradise also is not quite forever: 11/108c.

042 7/37a: "Who is more unjust than one who invents lies against Allah or rejects His Signs?" A pretty ironic sentence if the Quran is a made up book, not to mention if it is from the dark forces - and with all those mistakes, contradictions, etc, it at least is not from a god - no god makes such mistakes. But nice for Muhammad if it was he who made it up - he knew that no matter what he said or did, there was no Allah to punish him, if the religion was fiction,

043 7/37c: "- - - the Book (of Decrees) - - -". This simply is a reference to Allah's predestination: What he has decreed - what he has predestined. As there is no dogma about a "book of decrees" in Islam , we guess here is used figurative speech (if it is not the Quran which is meant).

044 7/37d: "- - - the things (other gods*) that ye (non-Muslims*) used to invoke besides Allah - - -". See 2/165c above and 25/18a below.

045 7/37e: "- - - witness - - -". Why did an omniscient god even bother with witnesses - or throw away time listening to things he already knew?

046 7/38b: "- - - Jinns - - -". A being from Arab folklore, fairy tales and pagan religion which Muhammad has taken into Islam. An Arabism - see 4/13d above - as they only existed (?) in Arabia and neighboring areas.

###047 7/40c: (A7/32): “- - - nor will they (non-Muslims/sinners*) enter the Garden (Paradise*), until the camel can pass through the eye of the needle - - -“. But here is a wrong translation according to “The Message of the Quran” – wrong even if it is widely used. And this claim is so strongly stressed and under built (Zamakhshari, Rezi, and others), that it is likely to be true – this even more so as the book is certified by Al-Azhar Al-Sharif Islamic Research Academy, General Department for Research, Writing and Translation prior to the 2008 edition (this academy is part of the Al-Azhar University in Cairo, one of the 2-3 foremost Islamic universities in the world). The Arab word “jamal” (jumal, juml, jumul – variants of the written consonants jml (the old Arab alphabet did not have the vowels - those the readers had to guess) in this case clearly means “a thick rope” or “a twisted cable” or “a thick, twisted rope” (Jawhari).This is even more clear as Muhammad’s co-workers clearly used this meaning, and Ibn Abbas also according to Zamakhshari very clearly stated that this was what was meant here. Ergo the real meaning is: “- - - nor will they enter the Garden until a twisted rope can pass through a needle’s eye”. Clearly unclear language – or use or (mis)understanding of the language.

But there is a small "but" in addition:

Abdullah Yusuf Ali was a learned man. He may have known little known facts. He also was a man who clearly placed his religion before his own intellectual integrity, before the absolute value of facts, and before the value of the full truth – f.x. his book “The Meaning of the Quran” shows this not infrequently, and one finds traces of the same in this his translation of the Quran. (Just sue us for the statement – it is easy to find enough examples to satisfy any free court. And the same goes for Muhammad Asad and his “The Message of the Quran”). May be he and other learned scholars used the wrong translation on purpose. (Also see 7/40c just below.)

One of the little known facts he may have known, is that the expression “needle’s eye” also have another meaning. The old walled cities had strong, heavy gates. In or beside the gate there often was a small door to make it possible for people to pass in and out even if the main gate was closed for the evening. Some places this small door was called the “needle’s eye” or "eye of the needle".

No adult camel could pass this needle’s eye, too - but a baby camel could. And any thick rope could.

048 7/40e: "- - - such (Hell*) is Our (Allah's) reward for those who sin". If Allah exists and is a god - and if he is correctly described in the Quran - Muhammad f.x. may have mixed inspirations from Gabriel/Allah with his own inspiration (all humans have inspirations (ideas) sometimes).

049 7/42c: “- - - no burden do We (Allah*) place on any soul, but that which it can bear - - -“. Can this be true? – also among Muslims self murder (or seeking death for Allah, when the real reason is a too difficult life), depression because of problems, deserting one’s family or child, resorting to crime to be able to live on, etc. happens.

050 7/43b: "- - - Allah, who has guided (via the Quran') us (Muslims*) - - -". No god based his religion on a book full of mistakes, etc. And if the Quran is not from Allah, it does not represent his guidance.

051 7/43f: "- - - indeed it was the truth, that (the Quran*) the Prophets of our Lord (Allah*) brought unto us (Muslims*)". The Quran tells there have been many, many prophets through the time - Hadiths mention 124ooo - who all preached the religion Islam based on the teachings of the Quran - or really a teaching which was a copy of the "mother book" in Heaven like the Quran. But a book with that many mistakes at best can be partly the truth.

052 7/43h: "- - - the Prophets of our (Muslims'*) Lord (Allah*) - - -". This of course pretends to include the claimed greatest of them all; Muhammad. But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet was a person who could see at least parts of the unseen, and thus a person who:

Has the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.

Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.

Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.

A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for any person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said which did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens if it is nothing spectacular). But he did not guess the future correctly often - actually he statistically and according to the laws of probability should have "hit the mark" far more often by sheer chance than he did - there just are a few cases where Muslims will claim he foretold something correctly, and few if any of them are "perfect hits". But then the Quran makes it pretty clear that even though he was intelligent, he had little fantasy and that he also was nearly unable to make innovative thinking (nearly all his tales and his ideas in reality were "borrowed" ones - though often twisted to fit his new religion).

The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, that he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying - ability to "see the unseen" - and that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2 above), and finally that both he and Islam clearly said and says that Muhammad was unable to "see the unseen" (extra revealing here is that the old Biblical title for a prophet, was "a seer" - one who saw the unseen (f.x. 1. Sam. 9/9)) and also that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad “except the Quran” (prophesying is a kind of miracle - seeing what has not yet happened). (The fact that Islam admits there were no miracles connected to Muhammad "except the revelation of the Quran" also is a solid proof for that all the miracles/foretelling connected to Muhammad mentioned in the Hadiths or in Muslim folklore, are made up stories). Also see 30/40a and 30/46a. We also should add that his favorite wife (and infamous child wife) Aishah according to Hadiths (f.x. Al-Bukhari) states that anyone saying Muhammad could foresee things, were wrong.

Verse 7/188b also is very relevant here: "If I (Muhammad*) had knowledge of the Unseen (= what is hidden or what has not happened yet*), I should have - - -". IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT MUHAMMAD DID NOT HAVE THE PROPHETS' ABILITY TO SEE "THE UNSEEN" - he was no real prophet. Similar in 6/50a, 7/188b, 10/20c+d, 10/49a, and 72/26.

Also relevant here is that the original title of the Jewish prophets as mentioned was not "prophet" but "seer" - one who saw at least parts of the unseen. (F.x. 1. Sam. 9/9#, 1. Sam. 9/11, 1. Sam. 9/18, 1. Sam. 9/19, 2. Kings. 17/13, 1. Chr. 9/22, 1. Chr. 26/28, 1. Chr. 29/29, 2. Chr. 9/29, 2. Chr. 16/7, 2. Chr.16/10, 2. Chr. 19/2, 2. Chr. 29/25, Amos 7/12, Mic. 3/7 - some places the two titles even are used side by side). Muhammad thus so definitely was no seer - prophet - even according to his own words; he had no "knowledge of the unseen".

####Many liked - and like - the title prophet , and there have been made other definitions for this title - the most common of these are "one who brings messages from a god", or "one who represents a god", or "one who acts/talks on behalf of a god". But the fact remains: Without being able to prophesy, he or she is no real prophet. A messenger for someone or something - ok. An apostle - ok. But not a real prophet.

###This is a fact no Muslim will admit: Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet or seer. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only “borrowed” that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.

It also is remarkable that Muhammad relatively seldom used the title "prophet" about himself in the Quran. He mostly used the title "Messenger", even though messenger in reality means an errand-boy (Muslims try to make this title something big and imposing, but this is the meaning of it). "Prophet" on the other hand is a heavy and impressive title telling a lot about the person. May the reason for why he did not use it so often, be that he knew he did not have what it took to merit that title, and was a little careful using it, so as not to provoke questions or comments? (And is this also the reason why Muslims try to pretend that "messenger" is something more impressive and heavy than "prophet"?)

053 7/43i: "- - - the Prophets of our (Muslims'*) Lord (Allah*) - - -". This of course intends to include also Muhammad, but: No god uses a messenger telling his audiences a lot of things which are wrong. And no good and benevolent god uses a robber baron and warlord living from stealing, extortion, rape and paying his men by permitting them to steal, to rape even children, slave taking/dealing, extortion, apartheid, and blood and murder.

054 7/43j: "- - - deeds (of righteousness) - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses expressions like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

055 7/45a: "Those (non-Muslims*) who would hinder (people) from the path of Allah (= the road to Paradise*) and would seek in it something crooked they were those who denied the hereafter". An ironic verse if the Quran is crooked - and it at least is not from a god with all those mistakes, contradictions, etc.

056 7/45 - 51: This is not from the Bible. (Actually little even of "Biblical" stuff in the Quran really is from the Bible - most are from legends, apocryphal stories, and even fairy tales more or less incorrectly connected to the Bible, and often twisted some to fit into Muhammad's religion.)

057 7/46a: “Between them (those going to Paradise and those going to Hell) shall be a veil - -” - and the first ones telling the last ones that Islam was right. Good pep-talk whether true or not.

058 7/50c: "- - - Companions of the Garden - - -". = The ones who ended in Paradise. Also remember that the big and fundamental differences between the Bible's Paradise and the one of the Quran, are one of the strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god.

059 7/52a: “We (Allah*) had certainly sent unto them a Book (the Quran*), - - -”. The recurring question: Is a book with that many mistakes – wrong facts, contradictions, invalid proofs, unclear language, orthographic and perhaps even religious mistakes - really sent down by a god? Impossible - not to say heresy and an insult against any omnipotent or omniscient god - yes, against any god.

It also is a provable fact that neither science nor Islam has found one single trace or quote from such a book older than 610 AD (when Muhammad started his mission). From the Bible science knows about 44ooo copies, fragments, quotes, and references. This in spite of that according to Hadiths there must have been more copies of the Quran before Muhammad - at least 124ooo from Allah (+ written copies from them) spread all over the world.

060 7/52c: “- - - a Book (the Quran*), based on knowledge, - - -”. With that many mistakes, the book at best is based just partly on knowledge - or for the better part of the mistakes; on outdated and wrong knowledge. An omniscient god would not have used knowledge which was wrong or would become outdated. Also see 26/83a below.

061 7/52g: "(the Quran*) - - - a mercy to all who believe". May be a mercy to some of the believers - the ones who grew rich or powerful from loot etc., and the ones who needed a religion of some sort to lean to. But not to all Muslims, not to all the war cripples (NEVER mentioned in the Quran and hardly by Islam), and definitely not to non-Muslims. And if the religion is made up: Also not a mercy to any Muslim in a possible next life. Also see 1/1a above.

062 7/53c: "The Prophets of our (Muslims'*) Lord (Allah*) did indeed bring true (tidings)." But there is a curious and documented fact: Science has found not one prophet for a god like Allah or a religion like Islam or a book like the Quran older than 610 AD. As bad: Islam also has found not one single prophet or book provably for Allah or for Islam, older than 610 AD - a lot of claims and many prophets "borrowed" from Biblical legends, etc., but not one proved case for Allah or Islam. Also see 7/43g above.

063 7/53g: "- - - the things they (non-Muslims*) have invented will leave them in the lurch". Will this also be the case for Muslims if the Quran is a made up book and Allah an invented god? - remember no god made a book of a quality like the Quran.

064 7/54a: "You (people’s*) Guardian-Lord is Allah - - -". One more of the many not proved claims you find in the Quran - claims any believer in any religion can make on behalf of his or her god(s), free of charge as long as no proofs are required, and claims which are totally without value as proofs as long as it is not first proved it is the god who really is behind what happens. In this case the claim only may be - may be, not is - true if Allah really exists, if he really is a dominant god, and if the Quran in addition tells the full truth and only the truth about this. But not even the existence of Allah is proved, and it is thoroughly proved that the Quran is full of mistakes, etc., both of which proves that Islam has to produce proofs for the claim, if they want to be believed - and proofs, not just loose words or more unproved claims.


065 7/54f: Muhammad Asad has this translation: "(Allah*) created the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth in six eons" (the same in 11/7c - actually this point is from 11/7c) - telling that the Arab word used here for "day" (yawm) also may mean f.x. eon, even though it is very clear that Muhammad's listeners and later Muslims understood "day" - - - until science proved that days could not be right. Mr. Asad(?) also is forced to change from "day" to "eon" in order to use the word "evolution" instead of "creation" in his comment 11/10 to this verse.

Honesty seems not to count too much in Islam, compared to the essential: To make the Quran look right. But where goes the reliability of the religion when you discovers small and big "twists" and lies? - and how much more of the religion, the teaching and its arguments are in reality untrue?

One more point: In the Swedish somewhat older edition, is used "days". It thus may look like it is the editors of the new English edition who have falsified Mr. Azad to get a text nearer to what is scientific correct instead of giving a correct translation of the Quran. Once more: Honesty does not seem to count too much in Islam.

Do you understand why we have to be careful and check a lot, when working with Islamic literature? Unclear meanings + dishonesty.

Perhaps there is a reason why Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that "Islam is the Religion of Honesty"?


066 7/54l: "Is it not His (Allah's*) to create and to govern". A rhetoric question expecting a certain answer. But it is impossible to know as long as one does not have reliable information, and as long as it is not documented even that Allah exists or has power, and if he in case is a major god. There only are Muhammad's never proved claims - a man of very doubtful reliability, who even according to central Islamic literature is a doubtful and unreliable person (read the realities and omit the glorifying cheap words, and see what picture emerges of him).

067 7/54m: "- - - Allah, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the Worlds (plural and wrong*)". Often claimed, never proved - and a claim easy to make for any believer in any religion on behalf of his/her god(s).

##068 7/54+58b: “- - - Allah, Who created the heavens ((plural and wrong) - in part of 6 days as also Earth was created in those 6 days*) - - - thus do We explain the Signs - - -”. A wonderful symbol “borrowed” from the nature and even so with no less than 2 serious mistakes (many heavens and 6 days) - really a glorious proof for Allah. A nice “sign” and "explanation".

##069 7/54+58d: “He (Allah*) draweth the night as a veil o’er the day - - - thus do We explain - - -”. A new wonderful wrong proof of Allah from nature: The night can in no scientific way be described as a veil, as the night is simply nothing - it only is absence of light. If you really want to be specific, in addition Muhammad has gotten it all totally wrong - it is the daylight that rules over the night, not the other way round. Another nice “sign” - not to mention the “explanation“. This any god had known - who made the Quran?

070 7/54+58h: “- - - (all cosmos is*) governed by laws under his Command - - - thus do we explain the Signs - - -.” All gods like to say similar words, and it is very easy to say. Well, words and statements cost nothing more than a big mouth - but where are proofs for that Allah really initiated this “sign” for Allah?


##071 7/55a: "Call on (pray to*) your (Muslims'*) Lord (Allah*) with humility and in private - - -". What is the idea of praying for anything in Islam? According to the Quran - and Hadiths - Allah has predestined every detail in your and everyone else's life according to his unchangeable Plan - a Plan "nobody and nothing" can change. Thus prayers can have no effect and can change nothing, and just is a waste of time and effort - a fact (if the stated predestination is correct - and if it is not, the Quran is wrong) no Muslim ever mentions or tries to explain.

072 7/56a: “Do no mischief on earth, after it has been set in order - - -“. According to our book, murder, rape, stealing/robbing, hate, suppression, enslaving, murder, war, etc. are mischief. But maybe it only is against Muslims this is immoral and forbidden, and not against non-Muslims?

073 7/56b: “- - - after it (Earth*) has been set in order - - -". And the officially declared order is: Islam and Muslims on top, all others suppressed and discriminated taxpayers without many rights - or exterminated. (Before you protest to this sentence, read the surahs from Medina.)

074 7/56d: "- - - call on (pray to*) Him (Allah*) - - - for the Mercy of Allah is (always) near to those who do good.

How can the claimed mercy of Allah come to light or have any effect, when everything already is predestined according to Allah's Plan - a Plan nobody and nothing can change according to the Quran? 

075 7/56f: "- - - the Mercy of Allah is (always) near to those who do good". Does this include the Muslims living also in accordance with the immoral parts of the Quran's moral code?

076 7/57a: “It is He who sendeth the winds - - -”. The winds are made by differences in temperatures and air pressure. Islam will have to prove that Allah is doing it. Also see 7/29b above.

077 7/57b: “It is He who sendeth the winds like heralds of glad tidings - - -". An Arabism; in desert areas of the world wind may be glad tidings - it may be a forerunner of rain, or at least it may quench the heath. But we may tell you this is not the message of winds in some other parts of the world. Was Allah just a god for desert part of Tellus (the Earth) as he forgets this fact?

078 7/57e: "- - - thus shall We (Allah*) rise up the dead - - -". Interesting claim, because neither Allah nor Muhammad has ever showed they have this power - Muhammad could not even help his own dying children (he lost all his children except Fatima, and she died shortly after him - was some god punishing him for something?) - there only are lofty words. Whereas if either the Bible or the Quran (f.x. 5/110a) tells the truth on this point, Jesus and Yahweh - and for that case even Elisha (1. Kings 17/22) and Paul (Acts 20/9-12) - proved so thoroughly, and thus showed they were closer to a god and thus greater prophets than Muhammad (if he at all was a prophet - no person unable to make prophesies is a prophet).

079 7/58a: “From the land that is clean and good, by the will of its Cherisher (Allah*), springs up produce - - -”. It is easy to take credit for all and everything, when you evade all questions about proofs. Also see 11/7a below.

080 7/63a: (Noah said:) "Do ye (his people*) wonder that there hath come to you a messenger from your Lord (Allah*), through a man of your own people - - -?" Muhammad is making a parallel to himself (he often does in the Quran) - the claim (and in this case mostly correct - as most of the confirmed(?) ones were Jews working among Jews (but not all)) is that prophets come from among their own people, so then it is very normal that Muhammad is an Arab amongst Arabs, Muhammad claimed.

081 7/63c: "- - - from your (Noah's people*) Lord (Allah*) - - -". The Quran claims that there always and in all places has been preaching about the one god, Allah (but that falsification of the messages has led to belief in all the other false gods - included the one from the teaching of the Bible, a book claimed falsified from earlier copies parallel to the Quran)). Neither science nor Islam has found anything confirming any of these claims.

###082 7/64c: (A7/46): Muslims – even scholars and Al-Azhar University - do not need difficult language to get troubles with the claimed true meanings and the claimed Truth and reality. 7/64 “do not support the theory of a world deluge” – gallantly omitting the fact that Islam and the Quran claim the ark stranded on a 2089 m high mountain (Mt. Al-Jedi) in Syria (not Mt. Ararat in Turkey), which is impossible if the deluge was not universal, as the water then had streamed away to lower, not flooded places. And “The Message of the Quran” – also in the 2008 edition!! – as gallantly explains it with the filling up of the Mediterranean Basin “during the Ice Age” (ended some 10ooo - 15ooo years ago), this in spite of that this filling up happened 4-5 million years ago, and also for several other reasons – f.x. wrong place and by far wrong way of filling up – cannot explain the Big Flood or the ending up of the Ark on a high mountain. These are well known facts which the honorable professors have to know, or at least had to and easily could check before they "broadcast" their "explanation". A typical al-Taqiyya (lawful lie - here to explain away a clear mistake and thus defend Islam) as the time for and way of the filling up of the Mediterranean Sea as said are well known scientific facts.(NB: MORE IN 7/64c+d in "1000+ Comments on the Quran").

##083 7/64d: “- - - We (Allah*) overwhelmed in the Flood those who rejected Our Signs”. And everybody except those in the Ark were drowned. Well, Islam claims quite correctly that the Quran does not directly say that the Big Flood covered all the Earth (but it says so indirectly, as it tells the ark ended on a 2089 m tall mountain (Mt. Al-Jedi) - impossible if the flood did not cover the entire world - the water in case had disappeared to not flooded areas). But when they try to explain the Flood as described in the Quran, they not only stumble, but fall head-over-heel down a full hill. This especially as some of the facts they twist, are so well known among learned people, that the honorable learned Muslims obviously have to know they are making up things and conclusions to cheat naïve and/or not learned people - - - some small al-Taqiyyas and/or Kitmans? (lawful lies and half-truths). This is lawful in Islam (yes, al-Taqiyya, etc. even is advised in some cases) if necessary in promoting and/or defending the religion, which is much more essential than to find out what is the truth. But a religion which has to lie, also has things to hide - f.x. that neither Muhammad nor Allah ever was able to prove anything about Islam. Also see 11/40 – 11/42 and 11/43 below. And: How reliable is a religion which has to lie? - and how much of it’s preaching, arguments and holy(?) books are lies and how much truth? (NB: MORE IN 7/64c+d in "1000+ Comments on the Quran").

084 7/65d: "To the 'Ad people, (we (Allah*) sent) Hud - - -". As for the claimed prophet Hud we have been unable to find out if also he is a person from old Arab legends, or if he "surfaced" with Muhammad's tales. But notice one thing: Muhammad is some places in the Quran said to be the first prophet to the Arabians. The claim that there was a prophet Hud in Arabia (and also a few others) contradicts that claim - one of many contradictions in the Quran. To quote comment (A7/47) (translated from Swedish): "Hud is told to have been the first Arab prophet". Also see 7/73a below.

085 7/66a: Muhammad like so often makes the story a parallel to himself (he too often does) - it tells his audience that meeting disbelief and little success was normal for prophets - and consequently Muhammad's situation (in 621 AD) was normal, and thus that Muhammad was a normal prophet.

086 7/67a: Muhammad makes the story a parallel to himself (he often does) - it tells his audience that meeting disbelief and little success was normal for prophets - and consequently Muhammad's situation (in 621 AD) was normal, and thus that Muhammad was a normal prophet.

087 7/68a: "I (Hud*) am to you ('Ad*) a sincere and trustworthy adviser". Muhammad is once more making a parallel to his own situation - this is exactly his own message to the Arabs. And to his followers: That prophets are distrusted is normal, and thus his own situation in Mecca was normal for a prophet - reassuring for his then few followers in 621 AD to "know".

088 7/69a: "Do ye (people*) wonder that there hath come to you a message from the Lord (Allah*) through a man of your own people - - -?" Muhammad is making - in the broad lines - an exact copy of his own situation, to show that his own situation is normal for prophets. There are several such cases in the Quran, making the "explanation" too obvious.

089 7/69c: "- - - a message from your ('Ad's) Lord (Allah*) - - -". No god ever sent down something like the Quran - too much is wrong. And neither science nor Islam has ever found traces from such a message/religion anywhere in the world, older than 610 AD.

090 7/69d: "- - - He (Allah*) made you (the 'Ad tribe) inheritors after the people of Noah - - -". Noah is supposed to have lived in what is now south Iraq, the 'Ad tribe in Arabia. The Quran several places mention that the Arabs had inherited land, houses, etc. from people Allah had exterminated. But 'Ad at least inherited little of such things from the people of Noah - at least 700-800 miles/1100-1300 km wrong geography.

###091 7/70c: "- - - the cult of our (the 'Ad people's*) fathers - - -". This is meant as hidden irony. But the real irony is that Islam only is "the cult of the fathers" - and "taqlid" - as absolutely nothing is proved, and even lots of it is proved wrong + that all the wrong points prove 100% and more that no god was involved in the Quran and thus in the religion. Superstition often, very often, is mistaken for a religion. Most or all pagan religions simply are superstition.

This also goes for Islam if the Quran is a made up book.

092 7/70d: "Bring us (the 'Ad people*) what thou (Hud*) threatenest us with - - -". They simply were asking for proofs - a total parallel to requests Muhammad got, and he uses the parallel to show that Allah also that time proved nothing - Muhammad thus was in good company when he was unable to prove anything.

093 7/73a: The Thamud people and Salih like the 'Ad people and Hud are from old Arab folklore and not from the Bible. They may or may not have existed, but nothing of what is told about them in the Quran is from any known written source.

094 7/73d: "To the Thamud people (we (Allah*) sent) Salih - - -." Salih is another claimed and self-proclaimed Arab prophet - may be and may be not from Arab folklore (if not, the original source is Muhammad or someone). According to Islam he came some time later than Hud. Also he - like Hud - is a contradiction to the claim in the Quran that the Arabs had had no (self proclaimed) prophet before Muhammad. But at the same time Hud is a parallel to Muhammad, and thus an "indication" for that Muhammad's experiences were normal for prophets, and thus Muhammad a "normal" prophet. More or less all the some 25 older prophets (= before Muhammad) mentioned in the Quran, are parallels to Muhammad up to the time in Muhammad's life when the verse/surah was told (with the partly exception of Jesus - he was too well known to twist the stories too much). Muhammad needed "documentation" for that he was an ordinary prophet.

095 7/73-77: The whole of the camel "proof". Taken from an old Arab legend well known in Arabia at the time of Muhammad: A camel came out from a cliff and became a prophet. (Muslims normally denies that this is the original, but relevant science is in no doubt.) To tell the obvious: This is not from the Bible. See 7/73g above.

096 7/74c: "- - - the benefits (ye (Muslims*) have received) from Allah - - -". There is not documented one single case of benefit clearly given by Allah in the entire history of Islam - a number of claims, but only claims based on air or belief, and nothing provably from him. The best proof: If there had existed clear cases, Islam had told about the proofs often and in big words. There are no such words.

097 7/74e: "- - - refrain from - - - mischief - - -". Much of what Muslims and Islam did through history, was - and is - mischief according to any normal code of moral or ethics. (But not always according to the Quran's somewhat peculiar codes of such things).

098 7/75a: "The leaders of the arrogant party among his (Salih's*) people said to those who were reckoned to be powerless - - -". An exact parallel to Muhammad's situation in Mecca when this surah was made, where the leaders opposed the mostly poor followers of Muhammad. It is typical for the Quran that a far larger part of the stories than coincidence would predict, are parallels to Muhammad's situation at the time of the emergence of the different surahs, and thus telling his followers and others that his situation was normal for prophets, true or not, and thus that he was a normal prophet.

099 7/75c: “’Know ye (believers*) indeed that Salih (a claimed prophet for the tribe or people Thamud. He according to the Quran lived sometime between Noah and Moses, but after the claimed prophet Hud – Moses is said to speak about him, though not in the Bible*) is a prophet from his Lord?’ They said:’ We do indeed believe in the revelation which has been sent through him.'”

Comment to 7/75 (A7/58 - 7/60 in the 2008 English edition): “The contents of this message (lit., ”that with which he has been sent”) appeared to them justification enough to accept it on its merits, without the need of any esoteric “proof” of Salih’s mission. In this subtle way this statement of faith has a meaning which goes far beyond the story of the Thamud. It is an invitation to the skeptic who is unable to believe in the divine origin of a religious message, to judge it on its intrinsic merits and not make his acceptance dependant on extraneous, and objectively impossible, proofs of its origin: for only through the contents can its truth and validity be established”.

Well, proofs – or at least documentation – is not more “objectively impossible” than that the Christians have got documentation in NT, and partly confirmed in the Quran, for that something supernatural was involved with Jesus and with Yahweh (another question is whether one wants to believe in that documentation or not). It ALWAYS is possible for a god to prove his existence (but not for a human to prove a god). What to be aware of here is that Islam has not one single proof for anything concerning the religion – not one single bit; only the word of a man with a very special mentality and morality – or amorality. Therefore they have to argue for blind belief - "taqlid" - and for that proofs are unnecessary, yes, that demands for proofs are intellectual stupidity and lack of intelligence. Which they do. And which is wrong - in all aspects of life the most sure way to be cheated now and then, is to believe blindly. Besides: If intelligence is given by a god, surely his meaning was that we should use it.

One problem here is that it is logically and intellectually impossible to know something that is not proved. One maximally can believe strongly – sometimes so strongly that one believes one knows. But not proved beliefs never are more than beliefs – strong or not. But even strong beliefs ever so often have been – and are – wrong. People “knew” the Earth was flat – and it was wrong. Then people “knew” Earth was the centre of the geocentric Universe – and it was wrong. Then people “knew” Sol or Helios (2 names for our sun) was the centre of heliocentric Universe – wrong. And then they “knew” our galaxy (“The Milky Way”) was the entire Universe – wrong once more. And in all religions – f.x. Islam - there are people who “know” they are right and that all others are wrong - - - and most of them have to be wrong (and Muslims with their somewhat special founder and everything built only on claims and with lots and lots and lots of mistakes, etc. in their holy book, in reality are in a most weak position for being among the ones – if any – who are right).

But because their total lack of proofs and even of real indicia, Islam claims and claims and strongly claims that the texts in a book with lots of mistakes and errors and wrongs, prove that a god has made it, that lack of ability to see this is your stupidity, not that the book is not perfect - and that blind belief (taqlid) is the ideal. Which is a main – if not the main – reason why Muslims and Islam cannot accept or see any mistake in the Quran, no matter how obvious: If there are mistakes in the Quran, it is not from a god - and then Islam is a false religion. That is a possibility too hard to face.

one of Islam's problems is that no matter how strongly they demy or explain away the errors, contradictions, etc., they are there and are easy to see anyhow.

100 7/75-76: Another parallel (see f.x. 7/68a above) to Muhammad's situation in Mecca in 621 AD - nice and reassuring for his followers to know this situation just was normal for a prophet.

101 7/77b: "Bring us about thy threats, if thou art a prophet (of Allah)". A new parallel to Muhammad's situation at that time, indicating that his situation was normal for prophets - and adding a pep-talk in the next verse.

102 7/78b: “So the earthquake took them (the people of Thamud*) unawares, and they lay prostrate (= dead*) in their homes in the morning”. Except that this is contradicted by:

11/67: “The (mighty) Blast overtook the wrongdoers (the people of Thamud*), and they lay prostrate in their homes in the morning - - -.” A blast sounds like something from f.x. an explosion.

69/5: “But the Thamud – they were destroyed by a terrible Storm of thunder and lightning”. You meet Muslims referring to the storms that “naturally follow earthquakes”. That is wrong – there is no – no – connection between earthquakes and storms, as they are caused by entirely different mechanisms. (To continue the song about “correcting” the Quran: Mr. Muhammad Asad in “The Message of) the Quran” has quietly and without comments changed 69/5 from “storm and lightning” to “earthquake”. An “al-Taqiyya” lawful lie)? Al-Taqiyya is not only permitted, but ordered if necessary to defend or promote the religion.

2 contradictions. And do you understand why we have to be careful and check everything when we use Islamic sources?

Comment YA2004 to 15/83 where they were killed by a mighty blast: "The mighty rumbling noise and wind accompanying an earthquake". There is no wind (and no blast, thunder or lightning) accompanying earthquakes - the mechanism producing wind is totally different, a fact even educated Muslim scholars know, but all the same they produces arguments like this. Intellectual dishonesty - there is a bit much of this in Islam. And in a religion using dishonesty/lies, how much is true of their arguments? - and of their religion?

#####The reason for this dishonesty, is that it is believed that "the people of the rocky tract" just is another name of the Thamud tribe. And in 7/78 the Thamuds were killed by an earthquake. 11/67, 15/83, and 54/31 they were killed by a mighty blast. And in 69/5 they were killed by "terrible Storm of thunder and lightning!". Voila!: Make wind/blast accompany earthquakes or let the noise represent a blast to hide this mistake in the Quran - but forget the thunder and lightning! But neither wind nor blasts nor thunder nor lightning is a part of an earthquake.

#####Honesty too often is not essential for Muslims and Islam. The main thing is to make the Quran and thus Islam look like they are true. But when even persons like Muhammad Yusuf Ali uses dishonesty - here an al-Taqiyya (a lawful lie), how many more lies are there then in Islamic literature and argumentation? - and in the Quran and in Islam?

103 7/80f: Here is an interesting comment in (YA1049). Yusuf Ali comments on what is told in the Bible (1. Mos. 19/30-38) about Lot committing incest with his two daughters, something which is not mentioned in the Quran: "His (Lot's*) story is biblical, but freed from some shameful features which are a blot on the biblical narrative". The question is not if the story about the incest is true or not, but that it is a blot on the story of a claimed prophet (the Quran claims Lot was a prophet, which the Bible does not do). "A story we like is sometimes better than looking for what is the truth", someone once said. Truth at best plays second fiddle in Islam - IN SPITE OF THAT IN SUCH A SERIOUS QUESTION AS THE WHOLE POSSIBLE FUTURE LIFE O N L Y O N E T H I N G S H O U L D C O U N T: T H E T R U T H. THE PRICE FOR BEIN WRONG IF THERE IS A NEXT LIFE, IS TOO HIGH.

104 7/81: "For ye (Sodom and Gomorrah*) practice your lust on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bonds". See 7/80d+e+f above.

105 7/82a: “And his (Lot’s*) people (the people of Sodom and Gomorrah*) gave no answer but this: they said, ‘Drive them out of your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure.’” This surah came ca. 621 AD. But may be the same year and not later than 624 AD the omniscient Allah had forgotten what he told, and now remembered it like this:

29/29: “But his (Lot’s) people gave no answer but this: they said: ‘Bring us the wrath of Allah if thou tellest the truth”. They in both tales only gave one answer - - - but quite different ones in the two narrations.

106 7/84: "- - - a shower (of brimstones - see 11/82c) - - -". Contradiction to the Bible which tells Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by a rain of burning sulfur (1. Mos. 19/24). And contradiction to reality, as there is no way brimstone can rain - shower - down.

We also never saw a report on fallen down brimstones in the Dead Sea area.

107 7/85a: "To the Madyan people - - -". Islam claims Madyan is the same area which in the Bible is called Midian. As the Bible does not tell what direction Moses went, his Midian also may have been in Sudan. But as the Bible mentions Mt. Horeb (likely = Mt. Sinai) and Mt. Sinai, it is highly likely Moses' Midian was in Sinai.

108 7/85d: "To the Madyan people we (Allah*) sent Shu'ayb - - -". Shu'ayb is the third of the claimed three Arab prophets of the old according to the Quran - a claimed but never documented prophet with whom Muhammad makes yet another parallel to his own position in Mecca: What Muhammad experienced there, was indicated to be what prophets normally experienced - no reason for his few followers to be depressed even if the majority of the people did not accept his teachings. Also Shu'ayb may or may not be from folklore. Islam likes to claim he was identical with the father-in-law of Moses, Jethro (in 2. Mos. 2/18, and 4. Mos. 10/29 also called Hobab). There is no rational reason for believing this. Also YA in his comment to this, YA1054, says: "His identification with Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, has no warrant, and I reject it." The Quran f.x. tells Shu'ayb was 4. generation (= ca. 100 - 120 years) after Abraham, but there were some 500 years between Abraham and Moses (if they ever lived), which in case also makes the claim that Shu’ayb was identical to Jethro impossible.

109 7/85h: "- - - (Muslims*) do not make mischief on earth - - -". Read the Muslim political, military, raiding and slave hunting history, and weep - especially if Islam is a made up religion, and remember here what the fact that there is no god behind the Quran indicates (no god was ever involved in a book of that quality).

110 7/86a: "- - - and seeking (non-Muslims*) in it (the Path of Allah*) something crooked - - -". If the Quran represents the path of Allah, it is pretty crooked compared to normal codes of conduct and of moral: "Do to others like you want others do to you".

111 7/86: "- - - the end of those who did mischief". This may be a reference to Muhammad's claim that the people who had once populated the scattered ruins in and around Arabia, and the disappeared tribes from Arab folklore, had been exterminated because they had sinned against Allah. There are a number of other possible reasons for why houses and hamlets and even towns can become empty in a land and a culture like the old Arab one, according to science.

112 7/87a: "- - - the Message with which I (Muhammad*) have been sent - - -". But in case from whom? - a book where that much is wrong, is not from any god.

113 7/87b: “- - - hold yourselves (“infidels”*) in patience until Allah doth decide between us: for He is the best to decide.” This was in 621 AD – not a good year for Muhammad, and he was – or pretended to be – peaceful. But: This verse is contradicted and often “killed” - abrogated - by at least these later 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).

114 7/87c: “- - - hold yourselves (“infidels”*) in patience until Allah doth decide between us: for He is the best to decide.” This may be true only if Allah exists and is a god + that there is no greater and more just god anywhere (in spite of the Quran's claims, Allah as he is described in the Quran, is not very just to say the least of it - just read the harsh parts of the sharia laws and the immoral parts of the Quran's moral rules and see for yourself.

115 7/88b: This verse is another close parallel to Muhammad's position in Mecca in 621 AD - nice for his followers to "know" that Shu'ayb was right and that in the following verses his opponents were punished. And that Shu'ayb came out the winner. Psychologically a good story for the at that time few Muslims.

116 7/89aa: "- - - a lie against Allah - - -". Not unless he exists, is a god, and is correctly described among all the unbelievably some 3ooo - three thousand - errors in the Quran.

Well, may be to make up an Allah, or to transcribe one from being a pagan, polytheistic god, to a claimed real and monotheistic god unable to give the smallest valid proof for himself, is "a lie against Allah"?

##########117 7/89c: “- - - nor could we (humans*) by any manner or means return thereto (the right way*), unless it be as in the will and plan of Allah - - -:” It - according to the Quran - is Allah who decides everything in this (and in the claimed next) world, as he predestines everything according to his Plan, and you can do nothing which is not in this Plan ###############(which should mean that this book about the Quran is decided by Allah, and part of his Plan - thus there is no reason for Muslims to be angry with us, as it is Allah's decision that we should write it).

The "fact" (according to the Quran) that Allah predestines everything, influences the Quran's and Islam's moral code.

118 7/89f: "In Allah is our (Muslims'*) trust". But the only foundation for that trust is the Quran - or the copy of it Shu'ayb had received.

119 7/89g: "In Allah is our (Muslims*) trust". Rather risky as most likely he is a not existing, made up god - at least there is no god behind the only claims for his existence, the Quran (too much is wrong in that book for any god to have been involved in it).

120 7/90a: "The leaders, the Unbelievers among his (Shu'ayb*) people - - -". Once more an exact copy of Muhammad's position at the time of the publishing of the surah. There are scores of such "coincidences" in the Quran, telling that Muhammad's position was the normal for prophets (and thus that Muhammad was a normal prophet - nice for his followers to "know").

121 7/91: “But an earthquake took them (Shu’ayb’s people, the Madyans*), and they lay prostrate (dead*) in their homes before the morning.” Wrong. An earthquake never kills 100% - normally less than 10%. Except in low quality high-rise buildings, it takes an extreme earthquake to kill more than 30%.

122 7/93b: "- - - the Message for which I was sent by my Lord (Allah*) - - -."If the message was like the one in the Quran, like the Quran indicates, it hardly was from any god - too many mistakes, etc.

123 7/93c: "- - - how should I (the claimed prophet Shu'ayb*) lament over a people who refused to believe?" Can this be the teaching of same god who was behind the stories of the lost coin, the lost sheep/lamb, etc? Simply no. But then as mentioned this story is not from the Bible - and from no other known written source. (And as mentioned Shu'ayb, if he ever lived, he lived too early to be the father-in-law of Moses (like some Muslims claim). Which means he lived well before 1400 BC, which again means 2000+ years before Muhammad. The Stone Age now is roughly 2000 years behind us. What is the chance for that something which happened in the Stone Age in Scotland or France or Persia/Iran or Arabia and which only has been told by the words of mouth through the centuries - never written - is correctly told today? - and how many such after all minor catastrophes from that time are alive by the words of mouth today?

124 7/94a: "Whenever We (Allah*) sent a prophet to a town - - -". Muhammad claimed all people, all over the world and all through history and pre-history had had prophets preaching about Allah. In Hadiths the number 124ooo prophets through the times, is mentioned. Except for the Jewish prophets, neither science nor Islam has been able to find traces of even one or of their monotheistic teaching - no traces of an Islam before 610 AD has ever been found.

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

Believe it if you are able to.

125 7/94c: Comment from (YA1065): "Man was originally created pure". We do not think there is one rational psychologist in this entire world who agrees to this claim.

126 7/96a: "- - - We (Allah*) should indeed have opened out to them (all kinds of) blessings from heaven and earth - - -". We are back to the old fact: If Allah exists, if he is a central god, and if the Quran tells the full truth and only the truth about this.

127 7/96c: “- - - they (non-Muslims*) rejected (the truth) (= the teachings of Muhammad*)”. With that many mistaken facts (and who knows how many mistaken religious points?) it at best is partly the truth. Also see 2/2b above and 13/1g and 40/75 below.

###128 7/99a: "- - - the Plan of Allah - - -". This refers to Allah's predestined running of the world(s) and the heaven(s - like Islam insists) and perhaps also Hell. It is a rigid plan with no room for changes: Allah has decided everything long ago, and that is it - nothing and nobody can change anything in it - total predestination (which in case means absolutely no room for any free will - partly like some Muslims try to explain it away with or total. And in a way worse and never - never - mentioned by Muslims: Also there is no room for prayers in spite of what the Quran insists - if absolutely nothing can change the predestined Plan of Allah, also prayers can change nothing, and is just a waste of time and effort, and similar go for punishment and reward - good deeds and f.x. pilgrimages can have no effect, as nothing can change Allah's Plan). You meet this Plan many places in the Quran.

129 7/100a: "- - - is it not a guiding (lesson) that, if We (Allah*) so willed (see 7/100c below*), We could punish - - -". The only lesson possible to learn from boasting, is that the one boasting wants to make an impression of being more than he is.

130 7/100c: "- - - if We (Allah*) so willed - - -". This is a kind of expression you find MANY places in the Quran: Allah or Muhammad boasting that "if Allah just willed" or similar words. This is the kind of boasting you meet from children, youths, and immature adults needing to feel or give the impression of being bigger or stronger or more influential than they are. The strange coincidence is that they never "will". And strangely also Allah never "willed" or "will". Bashful boasting - very cheap words. But strong believers and naive souls may believe in it even if it never becomes anything but big words - both of which only are claims put forth by a very unreliable man in a book full of mistakes, contradictions, etc. Just engage your knowledge and your brain + omit the cheap glorifications, and see the reality about him and his tales yourself the next time you read the Quran.

131 7/101a: "- - - (the stories*) We (Allah*) (thus) related unto thee (Muhammad/Muslims*) - - -". As the Quran is not from a god with all its mistakes, etc., these stories either mush have been related from someone else, or been the result of illusions - from mental illness like TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) - or made up - the only three possible explanations left.


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


##132 7/101d: “- - - they (non-Muslims*) would not believe what they had rejected before.” (Literally: “- - - to which they had given the lie aforetime”.

Comment A7/80 (7/82 in the 2008 English edition): “- - - an allusion to the instinctive unwillingness of most people to give up the notions – positive or negative – to which they are accustomed.”

#######But the book skips also here the fact that this also goes for Muslims: If they are strongly indoctrinated like Muslims are, they may react strongly to arguments and facts they do not like – and without thinking over – or being mentally unable to think over – even true facts. To live in "taqlid" - uncritical acceptance of what your father and surroundings believe is the truth - is easier and less demanding.


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


133 7/102a: “Most of them (people*) We (Allah*) found not men (true) to their covenant - - -“. “The Message of the Quran” (A7/81 - A7/83 in 2008 English edition) tells (in the Swedish edition) that the exact word-for-word translation is: “We found by them nothing that tied them to what is truth and right”. Not a word about a covenant.

And that book continues by telling that this may include man’s capability to instinctively to see the difference between right and wrong.

It is a fact that science never has found even traces from such a capability - a longing for a god in a minor part of humanity (5-10%?), but no capability to see or sense instinctively or in other ways - and these facts are easy to find in scientific material. Science also never found an instinctive capability to see the difference between good and bad - it simply does not exist. "Good" and "bad" ALWAYS is defined by moral codes you first have to learn, and such moral codes may vary a lot from one culture to another.

It would be easy for Muhammad Asad to check on his claim if he did not already know it was wrong. Either plain dishonesty or dishonest methods of work. There are a little - or much - too much of things like this in Islamic religious literature.

Now the fact that some of the most fundamental moral questions get the same answer in many societies indicates that something deep inside man tells some common moral truths: You shall not steal, you shall not be a nuisance – or worse – to others, you shall not rape, you shall not kill, etc. But Islam and the Quran is the best proof for that these inner messages are easy to override for a charismatic leader and for a society, and make immoral behavior praiseworthy and a moral code: To steal/rob, rape, enslave, murder, and more – it all is “lawful and good” (8/69) if you just observe the right formalities in Islam. To what claimed covenant are they true?

Besides: Was there really a clear covenant between Allah and the Muslims, or have Muhammad and his followers just made promises and believe it is a covenant? - and if there is a covenant: What is it worth if Allah is a made up god?"

134 7/103d: “- - - see what was the end (drowning*) of those who made mischief. (Pharaoh and his men*)”. According to science the exodus happened (if it happened) around 1235 BC, during the reign of Ramses II. Ramses II did not drown, which is the punishment the Quran claims. (Also the Bible - from where it is likely Muhammad got this story, at least indirectly - tells that the pharaoh drowned. But the Bible was made by humans. Humans might have mixed Ramses II with one of his generals or one of his 67(?) sons. A god had known the truth.)

135 7/105d: One small "en passent" here as Muslims do not like the timing of the Exodus, and as M. Yusuf Ali makes a comment (in A1073 to this verse) "(The Jews stayed in Egypt*) perhaps two to four centuries. (Renan allows only one century).": The Bible is very clear on how long time the Jews spent in Egypt: 430 Years, and there was no reason for the Jews to falsify this number, in addition to that in spite of Islam's claims no falsification is known in the Bible - mistakes yes, falsifications no (again: Guess if Islam had screamed about it if even one documented case of proved falsification had been found!). But as Ramses II did not drown, Islam needs to use an earlier pharaoh where one does not know how he died - f.x. Thothmes I (ca. 1540 BC) is mentioned. But Jacob - the patriarch who took the Jews to Egypt lived around 1800 BC (if he is not fiction), or to be exact: Abraham lived - if he is not fiction - around 2ooo - 1800 BC. Jacob was his grandson, and as Abraham was old when he got Isaac (the father of Jacob) it is realistic to say Jacob lived around 1800 or perhaps a bit later. Then it is not possible to use earlier pharaohs than Ramses II if the Jews stayed 430 years. A little twist is necessary in case - and voila!: Islam says (the mentioned YA comment 1073): "- - - Israel stayed there perhaps two to four centuries." Problem solved - without any source for the estimate given. May be the 430 years in the Bible is a falsification? (but in case why?) - the standard and easy "explanation" Muhammad always used.

And there is another point here you never hear Muslims mention: According to the Bible (1. Mos. 46/27) the Jews were 80 - 90 (70 + the wives of Jacob's sons) when they settled in Egypt. The same book mentions 2 - 3 places that when they left Egypt, they were 600ooo men = something like 2.ooo.ooo included women and children. It at least theoretically is quite possible for say 80-90 to become 2.ooo.ooo in 430 years. But it is in no way possible - scientific nonsense - in 200 or 300 years (and 100 years is a joke) , and even 400 years may be unlikely - for a geometrical curve like this one is, one extra generation makes a big difference. Also this makes an exodus and a pharaoh around 1500 - 1600 BC like Islam likes to claim to get rid of Ramses II, impossible.

There are some scientists, though, who thinks Exodus happened a little later, under the son of Ramses II, Merneptah. But that in case as said means later and not before - and under another pharaoh we know did not drown.


136 7/105c: "- - - your (the Pharaoh's*) Lord (Allah*) - - -". Science says that if the exodus ever happened, it took place around 1335 BC. That means under the mighty and well known Pharaoh Ramses II (Islam wants it to have happened earlier under pharaohs whose reason for death is not known - Ramses II did not drown (guess if 3 religions had vocalized about it if this had been the case!)). What is very sure, is that Allah was no known god to Ramses II, except perhaps as one of many gods in a distant country. And what is as sure, is that Ramses II was a polytheist.

We may add that originally Hubal was the moon god in Arabia, and some sources say the Kabah originally was his temple and dedicated to him. But when Muhammad was born, al-Lah - sometimes named Allah - may have taken over as Arabia's main god. It is a bit ironic that a building dedicated to an old moon god (be it Hubal or al-Lah/Allah - because also Allah had been a moon god and the crescent moon still is his symbol) was and is the most holy place on Earth for a claimed only and claimed omnipotent god - and as ironic is the fact that if Muhammad had been born earlier, Islam's god might have been named Hubal (see second part of 1/1d), not Allah (Muhammad simply took over the claimed mightiest of the pagan Arab gods, and earlier Hubal (see second part of 1/1d) was reckoned to be the most powerful one - and the moon god like al-Lah had been and perhaps still was).

########We have not mentioned much about al-Lah/Allah's position in the Kabah before Muhammad. The reason is that it is quite unclear. There are the two gods mentioned as the main god for the Quraysh tribe = the main god in the Kabah: Hubal, the moon god (see second part of 1/1d), and al-Lah/Allah - also a moon god, at least in southern parts of Arabia. There are clear indications, but no proofs, for that these two really and simply were two names for the same god - perhaps with Hubal as his "personal" name and al-Lah/Allah his title (al-Lah/Allah means "the god", or in this case "the main god").

There also are indications for that there were connections between Hubal and the Ba'al (a name used for some gods) known from f.x. the Bible - same god and similar name, but in another variety of religion. If this is true, the Quran and Islam are way beyond the Milky Way when they forward claims like Zachariya prayed to Allah/Hubal/Ba'al, or that Jesus preached about Allah/Hubal/Ba'al, as in those times such connections would be known, even if they are forgotten today, and Ba'al represented the Devil to the Jews of those times.


137 7/110b: “His (Moses’) plan is to oust you (Pharaoh*) from your land - - -". Taken into account how powerful Ramses II was - perhaps the mightiest pharaoh ever in the old Egypt - and Moses only the spokesman (hardly the leader yet) of a group of slaves, no adviser could say such a thing to the Pharaoh and expect to be believed.

138 7/117a: "We (the god) put into Moses' mind by inspiration - - -". This method of transferring information is never mentioned in the Bible - on the contrary Yahweh specifies that he used direct talk, visions or dreams (4. Mos. 12/6-7).

###139 7/120a: After Moses made his miracle “the sorcerers fell down prostate in adoration” and were convinced that the god of Moses was a strong and real one. This is one of the proofs for that Muhammad knew he was lying when he time and again told his audiences that it would have no effect to perform miracles, because disbelievers would not believe anyhow; disbelievers - even sorcerers - became Muslims because of one small miracle in his own story about Moses(!), and thus explained away the fact that he (and his presumed god) was unable to make miracles. Here he tells just the opposite - a psychologically much more correct tale on just this one point. The same story in 20/69-70. That Muhammad told this story, also shows that he knew miracles works, and thus that he knew he was lying in the Quran when he told Allah did not send miracles because it would make nobody believe anyhow.

140 7/125c: This verse definitely is not from the Bible.

141 7/130a: “We (indicated Allah*) punished the people of the Pharaoh with years (of draught) - - -.” There is nowhere said directly how long time it took Moses to get his people free and out of Egypt neither in the Quran nor in the Bible. But the few sources indicate a limited time. The Bible has one piece of information that gives a clear indication – and we had better once more mention that science - and Islam - has proved beyond any legal and any reasonable and any unreasonable doubt, that the Bible never was falsified, in spite of never documented loose claims and loose statement from the Quran and from Islam. Moses was 80 years old when he came to the Pharaoh to get the freedom for the Jews. Afterwards he and his people spent 40 years in Sinai, and he died 120 years old – which means it must have taken less than one year, perhaps weeks or a few months, because if not the numbers do not add up. Also the texts in the Bible indicate weeks or months, even though it is not directly said. Further there is no mentioning of draught or shortness of food or anything else in the Bible connected to this incident. Also in the science of history, there is no indication of draught or hunger in Egypt at this time. This verse may be a mix up with Joseph and the 7 bad years 430-440 years earlier.

142 7/134f: (YA1092): "The demand of Moses was 2-fold: (1) Come to Allah and cease from oppression, and (2) let me take Israel out of Egypt". Demand number (1) is nowhere mentioned in the Bible - only: "Let my people go".

#143 7/137b: “- - - We (indicated Allah*) leveled to the ground the great works and fine Buildings which Pharaoh and his people had erected - - -”. There is no trace neither in archaeology, nor in history, literature or art, not even in folklore or fairy tales of such a catastrophe around the year 1235 BC (some years before the end of the reign of Ramses II) when this should have happened – at the time of the exodus from Egypt. On the contrary; Ramses II was one of the strongest and most successful of the pharaohs, and also a great builder leaving MANY great buildings behind after many years of - among other things - building. Has Muhammad put more drama to his story, believing it would be impossible to control if it were true? Islam will have to find proofs - and they do not exist. (You will meet Muslims claiming the Quran here refers to the natural wear and tear which today means there are many ruins in Egypt, but that has nothing to do with a punishment of the pharaoh and his people to do - just another "explaining away", and a very primitive one.)

144 7/138-139: This episode is unknown to the Bible.

145 7/146a: "- - - those who behave arrogantly on the earth in defiance of right - - -". = Those who do not accept Islam = non-Muslims. Simply one of Muhammad's many distaste inducing names for non-Muslims.

But have you ever read about the arrogance of earlier - and to a degree present - Muslims, and about their codes of conduct, codes of moral, and behavior compared to "do to others like you want others do to you"?

146 7/146d: "- - - them (the ones refusing to believe Muhammad*) will I (Allah*) turn away from My Signs (here = deny them the possibility to find Islam after all*) - - -". Compare this to "the lost coin" (Luke 15/8-10), "the lost sheep" (Matt. 18/12-14), "the lost son" (Luke 15/11-31), "the 11. hour" (Matt.20/8-13). Yahweh and Allah the same god? There only is one possible answer: No - the teachings are fundamentally too different.

147 7/146g: "- - - the way of right conduct - - -". Believing in and obeying Muhammad - the claimed way to the Quran's and Islam's Paradise - see 10/9f below.

148 7/146l: "- - - rejected Our (Allah's*) Signs, and failed to take warning from them". You do not take warning from "signs" you know are invalid - on the contrary you are on your guard because the use of invalid claims and invalid "proofs" is the hallmark of cheats, deceivers and swindlers.

149 7/147c: This verse is typical pep-talk for Muhammad's followers.

150 7/152c: "- - - thus do We (Allah*) recompense those who invent (falsehood (= claims not in accordance with Muhammad's teachings*))". What is the value and consequence of this sentence if the Quran is a made up book?

151 7/155e: "This is no more than thy (claimed to be Allah's*) trial - - -". Once more the question the Quran and Islam never answer: Why does an omniscient and totally predestining god have to try or test his followers? - there is no logic in this often repeated claim, which Muhammad used as an explanation for difficulties his followers met and for why Allah wanted wars and bloodshed resulting in riches and power for Muhammad.

152 7/155f: "- - - Thou (claimed to be Allah*) causeth whom Thou wilt to stray - - -". Once more this 100% proof for that Yahweh and Allah is not the same god, and especially not compared to NY and the new covenant (Luke 21/20). Yahweh causes no-one to stray (Luke 15/8-1o and 15/11-31 plus Matt. 18/12-14 and 20/8-13).

153 7/155g: "- - - and Thou (claimed to be Allah*) leadest whom Thou wilt into the right path (to Paradise*)". Another 100% - or 110% proof for the difference mentioned in 7/155f just above. Allah leads whom he will, Yahweh leads anyone who really wants and lives accordingly.


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


#######154 7/157e: “- - - the unlettered Prophet (Muhammad*), whom they (Jews and Christians*) find mentioned in their own (Scriptures)”. See 7/157a-r in our books "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran", "1000+ Comments on the Quran" or/and "Book O: Muhammad and Jesus in the Quran" (expected late in 2014 or in 2015). Quite much stuff there about this for Islam very central theme. ########(The claim is wrong, but as the Quran says that Muhammad is mentioned in both OT and NT, it is impossible for Islam to check or drop it. It is more essential to "prove" the Quran right no matter if it is wrong, than to find out what is the truth - this in spite of the price EVERY believing Muslim will have to pay if the Quran is a made up book - and with all its errors, contradictions, etc. it at least is from no god - and Islam thus a made up religion, if there all the same is a next life run by a god - be it Yahweh or anyone else. "Taqlid" is very strong in Islam, and in addition it is hard to face that perhaps what you "know" is the one and full truth, is wrong.)


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


155 7/157f: “- - - for he (Muhammad*) commands them (Muslims*) what is just, and forbids them what is evil”. The last statement is solidly contradicted both by reality and by the Quran. The book – not to mention Muhammad and his successors not only permitted but demanded murders and war, stealing/robbing and extortion, rape and enslavement, etc. It is possible to make such things “lawful” by sick laws. But there exists no way to make such inhumanities “good”, of “just” or “pure” – and this includes calling what in reality are raids for loot and slaves, or wars of aggression, for “self defense” or jihad (like Muslims have done legion times throughout history – often with a real but minor detail or made up arguments as pretext).

156 7/157l: "- - - he (Muhammad*) releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them". Perhaps partly true. What is not mentioned, are the new burdens and the new yokes put upon his followers. Like going to war - for many it meant death or destroyed health or body. Like putting an end to thinking. Like obeying to his absolute dictatorship. And not to mention the burdens on women - in most areas women made a lousy deal. Etc.

157 7/157n: "- - - the Light (the Quran*) which is sent down with him (Muhammad*)- - -". There is not much light in a claimed holy book so full of mistakes, etc. that it proves it is not from any god, and so full of immoral moral rules, that it absolutely is not from any good and benevolent god.

158 7/157o: "- - - it is they (Muslims*) who will prosper - - -". In this life some did prosper from loot/stealing/extortion and some so absolutely did not prosper. If here is meant the claimed next life, the answer depends entirely on if Allah exists, if he is a central god, if he in case is correctly described, and if the Quran tells the full truth and only the truth here. And on whether there exists other/real gods - f.x. Yahweh.

159 7/158c: "I (Muhammad*) am sent unto you all (humans*), as the Messenger of Allah - - -." No man preaching a teaching with so many mistakes, contradiction, etc., is sent by any god.

160 7/158e: "- - -(to Allah*) belongeth the dominion of the heavens (plural and wrong) and the earth - - -". Often claimed, never proved.

161 7/158i: “- - - it is He (Allah*) that giveth - - - life - - -”. A very nice thing to claim credit for - and claims come easy if you never have to prove it. This claim is repeated frequently in the Quran, and it is an interesting one, because neither Allah nor Muhammad ever - not one single time - proved any power over death. Lots of killing and murder, but not one documented resurrection or creation of life. Whereas both the Quran (f.x. 5/110d) and the Bible tell that Yahweh and Jesus - and even Elisha, Paul, and Peter (but not Muhammad) - had the power to resurrect. (F.x. 1. Kings.17/22, 2. Kings.4/34-35, Matt. 9/25, Matt. 27/52, Luke 7/15, John 11/44, Acts 9/40, Acts 20/10 - plus Jesus' resurrection).

162 7/158j: “- - - it is He (Allah*) that giveth - - - death - - -”. Another natural event to claim credit for - true or not. Though as for giving death both Muhammad and his successors were pretty efficient.

163 7/158k: "So believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -." Muhammad's main mantra - here in a strengthened version. It glued him to his god. A platform of power many have used - though none with a success like Muhammad's.

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

As for believing in him that is a bit risky, as all the errors, etc. in the Quran prove there never was a god involved in that book.

164 7/158n: “- - - the unlettered Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -”. See 7/157a-b above.

165 7/158q: "- - - Allah and His Words (the Quran*) - - -". The Quran is no god's words - far too many facts etc. are wrong.

166 7/158r: "- - - follow him (Muhammad*) that (so) ye (Muslims/people*) may be guided." Thieving/robbing, extorting, raping, enslaving, slave dealing, womanizing, discrimination mongering, hate mongering, torture, murder, mass murder, suppression, war mongering, war, al-Taqiyya and Kitman (lies), breaking your oaths, and more. Yes, follow him and be guided!

167 7/160b: "- - - by inspiration - - -". This word is not used in such a connections in the Bible. Yahweh told he used direct speech, visions, or dreams to communicate with his prophets (4. Mos. 12/5-6). But as Muhammad claimed he got many of his verses and surahs this way, it had value for him to impress on his followers and others that this was a normal way for prophets to get information, true or not true - and thus that Muhammad was a normal prophet.

168 7/161a: "And remember it was said to them (Moses' Jews*): 'Dwell in this town - - -". Contradiction: "And remember We (Allah*) said: 'Enter this town - - -' (2/58)". There is a distinction between to enter a town and to live in a town. (Arab scholars agree on that it is the same incident to which it is referred - f.x. YA1136. They use one of their standard "explanations": It is a parable. But for one thing there is no indication in the Quran for that this is meant as a parable any of the two places, and for another thing the mistake does not have more logical meaning as a parable. Clear texts in the Quran?

Another point: There is nothing like this in the Bible. As no god ever was involved in a book of a quality like the Quran, from where did Muhammad get this information? - or "information"?

169 7/161b: "- - - We (Allah*) shall forgive you (Muslims*) your faults - - -". There only are two who can forgive something: The victim and a god. Is Allah a god - - - if he exists? At least his claimed words, the Quran, is from no god - too much is wrong.

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

#170 7/162a: “But the transgressors (Jews*) among them changed the word (of the Bible*) from that which had been given them - - -“. Well, well. The only way for Muhammad to save his religion and his power, was to claim that the Bible was a falsified version of an earlier copy of "the Mother of the Book" in Heaven, i.e. a falsified version of the Quran – and this he claimed and claimed without ever producing one single real proof. That is exactly the situation for Islam today: To save itself and the religion (which is more essential that to find out if it really is a true religion with a real god) – and the positions of the leaders – it has to claim and claim - this and other things, without being able to prove one single of the central claims. But today the position is more difficult, because science has so many old documents and fragments, that they know Islam is not speaking the truth. See f.x. 7/157a-d. The Bible never was falsified according to science. (And Islam even more strongly proves the same, as even they have been unable to find proved falsifications.)

171 7/163d: In this verse Muhammad tells that fish learnt that during the Sabbaths - every 7. day - things were safe. No fish is able to learn this, at least not without much and long and systematic instruction - among other reason because few if any of them are able to count to 7 or to remember abstracts for long time. Fish freely swimming also are unable to hold their heads over the water - marine mammals are able to do that, but not fish. Fish counting to 7 days and holding their heads over the water? - this is from a fairy tale.

172 7/163e: "- - - a trial for them". Why does an omniscient god who on top of all predestines everything according to the Quran, need to test people?

173 7/165a: "- - - those who forbade evil - - -". Muslims. Remembering Islam's history of dishonesty included stealing/looting, aggression, inhumanities, etc., no comment should be necessary to this claim.

174 7/166: "Be ye apes - - -". Allah said to some “bad” Jewish people (according to the Quran): “Be ye apes - - -”. Hardly likely that humans were transferred into apes. (The story is taken from a legend. And just to mention it: There is nothing similar in the Bible.)

175 7/168b: "We (Allah*) have tried them (people*) - - -". Why does an omniscient god who on top of all predestines everything according to the Quran, need to test people?

176 7/169a: "Was not the Covenant of the Book (here indicated with Allah*) taken from them (the Jews*), that they would not ascribe to Allah anything but the truth?" To use an understatement: The Jews hardly had promised Allah this - Yahweh, yes, but not Allah. Another thing is that Islam and the Muslims included Muhammad would dearly like the Covenant between Yahweh and Israel to be terminated - and here they use claimed sins in unnamed place(s) in an unspecified time - difficult to check - as background for the question (and you also may meet it as a - as normal from Islam not proved - statement and claimed "fact"). But no: There nowhere - not even in the Quran - anywhere is said that that Covenant is terminated - disused and broken, but never terminated. (The same goes for the New Covenant - never mentioned by Muslims - which Jesus formalized the Last Supper between Yahweh and the followers of Jesus, later called Christians - never terminated according to any known scripture.) Also see 7/170a+c below.

177 7/169e: "Will ye (non-Muslims*) not understand?" Perhaps that is just the problem, at least for some non-Muslims: They understand that a "holy" book choke full of mistakes, contradictions, unclear language, etc. is not from a god, and a book with a partly highly immoral moral code in any case is not from a good or benevolent god - and hence that something is seriously wrong with the book, with the "prophet", and with the religion.

###178 7/170b: "- - - regular Prayers - - -". The demand for regular prayers - a fixed number of prayers at roughly fixed times of the day - does not exist in the Bible. As this is one of the most central demands (one of the 5 "pillars) of Islam, and thus one of the central points for Allah, but totally without interest for Yahweh, this is one of the very strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god.

179 7/170c: "- - - never shall We (the god*) suffer the reward of the righteous (here; among Jews and Christians?*) to perish". In clear language: Also the righteous among Jews and Christians will go to Heaven - - - if not the god changed his mind and abrogated (made invalid) this verse later (this was in 621 AD - before Islam was changed to a harsh war religion). But see 7/169a and 7/170a above.

180 7/171: “When We (Allah*) shook the Mount (Mt. Sinai*) over them (Moses' Jews*) as if it had been a canopy, and they (the Jews*) thought it was going to fall on them - - -”. This needs strong proof from Islam, especially as it in reality is from a fable taken from the old Jewish book “Abodah Sarah”. The picture is clear: The god lifted the mountain, held it over the Jews like a canopy and shook it. All the same you meet Muslims who "forget" about the canopy and the danger that it could fall on the Jews, and claim this was an earthquake(!). "It is the one not wanting to see, who is most blind" or "The blind man you can explain things, but the man not wanting to see also denies facts" - choose what quote you like.

181 7/172d: "- - - made them (people*) testify concerning themselves". Another interesting claim: (A7/138 - in English 2008 edition A7/139) tells that "According to the Quran, the ability to perceive the existence of the Supreme Power (= god*) is inborn in human nature (fitrah); and it is this instinctive cognition - which may or may not be subsequently blurred by self-indulgence or adverse environmental influence - that makes every sane human being "bear witness about himself" before Allah". Science has never found any trace of such inborn, instinctive knowledge. (They have found that a minor percent of humans have an inborn longing for something strong to lead them - a god - but nothing like an inborn, instinctive knowledge. Actually man has very few real instincts, and very little inborn knowledge - almost everything has to be learnt.)

But when one meets claims like this from Islam and Muslims, one should remember that they frequently use claimed instinctive knowledge or understanding and similar expressions as arguments for why Islam is the correct religion and for why one should believe in Muhammad and his religion. As they have exactly no proof or documentation for the religion, they have to do two things: 1). Glorify Muhammad so that he sounds as trustworthy as possible, and resort to unclear and not documented claims like "instinctive knowledge" about Allah or at least about divinity. But do remember that Muhammad himself proved what kind of man he was - forget the glorifying, cheap words. and look for his deeds, demands, lies, rules, moral, etc. And 2). Use mysticism and made up claims instead of knowledge or facts. The fact that they need to use such "arguments" and claims, tells miles about lack of real facts and arguments - and also about their reliability, as these are the kind of "arguments" and claims you normally meet from mystics and from charlatans.

If you have little knowledge about humans and human psychology, just read and reflect on this. If you have good knowledge about it, you get a hearty laugh from the quoted claim.

In reality this only is mysticism - actually bordering dishonesty, as science more or less has proved such an instinctive "ability to perceive the Supreme Power" does not exist. But neither Muhammad nor Islam had/has anything better to offer for a "proof".

182 7/173: "Our fathers before us may have taken false gods, but we are (their) descendants after them: wilt Thou (Allah*) then destroy us because of the deeds of men who were futile?" As the Quran with all its mistakes, contradictions, etc. is not from a god, this may be relevant for the Muslims - f.x. on the possible Day of Doom.

183 7/174a: "Thus do We (Allah*) explain the Signs in detail - - -". There are no explanations, not to mention detailed explanations, of the claimed "signs" in the entire Quran - or anywhere else. There are claims, but no explanations - an especially not for the main point: Can they at all be called signs for Allah, and in case why? (As there nowhere is proved that Allah is behind the claimed "signs", they are logically totally invalid as signs or proofs for anything.


184 7/177e: "- - - (non-Muslims*) wrong their own souls". Only if the Quran tells the full truth and only the truth about everything. And not if the non-Muslim happens to believe in another god who really exists (if such a god is to be found).

185 7/178d: "- - - whom He rejects from His (Allah's) guidance - - -". Here is one of the fundamental differences between the Quran and NT: Allah rejects many from his guidance, yes, he decides before they are even born whether they are to end in Hell or Paradise according to Hadiths. NT never gives in the hope to find again "the lost sheep" - not even "in the eleventh hour". Yahweh and Allah the same god?

#186 7/179a: “Many are the Jinn and men We (Allah*) have made for Hell - - -". A serious difference between the Quran and NT: Allah makes many for sending them to Hell. Yahweh according to NT makes no-one with that intention. (See Luke 15/8-10, 15/11-31 and Matt.18/12-14, 20/8-13). Yahweh and Allah the same god?

187 7/179b: “Many are the Jinn and men We (Allah*) have made for Hell - - -.” Here Allah tells that many of the men and Jinns he had made, were made for Hell. But this is contradicted with that all men and Jinns are made to serve Allah:

51/56: “I (Allah*) have only created jinns and men, that they may serve Me.”

- - - or does the bloody and immoral parts of services Muhammad/Allah demand, condemn you to Hell afterwards?

188 7/179c: "- - - Jinn - - -". A kind of beings “borrowed” from Arab pagan religion, legends and fairy tales. They are material beings - f.x. there exist laws in Islam for marriage between humans and jinns, and marriage would be impossible unless they are material. And they are sent to Hell and fire for punishment - for immaterial beings fire would be no punishment. Allah made them from fire, according to the Quran. They are an Arabism as except for in the Quran they only exist in Arab and neighboring folklore, (+ fairy tales and old Arab pagan religion). They also are one more proof for that the Bible and the Quran are not from the same god, because even though Jinns do exist in the periphery of Jewish folklore, they never are mentioned in the Bible. This even though they except for angels and perhaps spirits make up the largest population of supernatural beings in the Quran. They are a rather central part of the world of Allah, but does not exist in the world of Yahweh.

189 7/179e: "- - - nay, they (non-Muslims*) are more misguided: for they are heedless (of the warning)". Who is the most religiously misguided - the one who uses his knowledge and his brain when something obviously is wrong, or the one who blindly and in "taqlid" goes by a guide-book full of mistakes and not from any god?

190 7/180b: "- - - they (bad persons*) will soon be requited". Once more: If Allah exists and is a god, and if the Quran tells the truth and only the truth - and if he can "requite" without changing his predestined and unchangeable Plan.

191 7/181a: “Of those We (Allah*) have created are people who direct (others) with truth, - - -”. If this refers to the truth in the Quran, it can at best be partly the truth.

192 7/181aa: “Of those We (Allah*) have created are people who direct (others) with truth, - - -”. Here is meant the claimed prophets and messengers for Allah. Only some of the Jewish prophets, included Jesus (mentioned by at least 4 of the old historians, Josephus Flavius, Tacitus, Suetonius, and Plinius the younger - just mentioned, but mentioned) are reliably documented. Of all the claimed Muslim 124ooo ones (according to Hadiths), not even Muhammad is really proved to have lived - though it is highly likely (but it also is highly likely that he is the only one of the claimed Muslim prophets/messengers) and if the Quran is his claimed connection to a god, that book and all its errors, etc. itself proves that it has not any connection to a god - the quality of the Quran indicates that it is a human product, but perhaps to the dark forces, but not to a god, and definitely not to an omniscient and/or good and benevolent one. And what kind of connection did this indicate for Muhammad?

193 7/181c: “- - - those We (Allah*) have created - - -". That Allah is a creator is often claimed, but never proved. It is an interesting claim because of the irony in the fact that if the old books speaks the truth, Yahweh several places in the Bible and at least one place in the Quran (5/110i) proved he at least had the power of resurrection, whereas Allah an Muhammad never prove anything like that - several claims, but never a proved case.

194 7/181d: "- - - justice - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code and with the partly both immoral and unjust sharia laws.

195 7/182-183a: "Those who reject Our (Allah's*) Signs - - - Respite will I grant unto them - - -". But be sure; Muhammad did not always grant them respite after he became strong enough. This verse (and f.x. 2/256) is abrogated – made invalid - and contradicted by at least these verses: 2/191, 2/193, 3/38, 3/85, 3/148, 4/90, 5/33, 5/72, 8/12, 8/38, 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 bloody threats, but also verses advising or permitting political, social, economical, etc. compulsion (with the sword in the background if you protest) – we mention a few here: 3/28, 3/85, 3/148, 4/81, 5/72, 5/73, 9/23, 14/7, 15/3, 33/73, 35/36. They are all quoted under 2/256. (At least 28 abrogations).

196 7/184a: "Do they (non-Muslims*) not reflect?" May be that is just what they did - reflected over the fact that much obviously was wrong in the new religion of Muhammad. Already then it was possible to see that the claims about Allah being the same god as Yahweh, Islam the same religion as the Mosaic or Christian ones, and the Quran the real, not falsified Torah or Bible, plus Jesus in the same religion as Muhammad, could not be correct, and also that most of the tales in the Quran were from known earthly sources, not from Heaven. And later little by little all the other mistakes, etc. showed up in addition.

197 7/184c: "Their Companion (Muhammad*) - - - is but a perspicuous warner." In 621 AD Muhammad did not have the power to be anything but a warner. From 622 AD on - when he started to get military power - he changed to also being an enforcer. The same for his successors; it became dangerous to try to leave Islam, and large parts of the Arabs - and others - got the choice: "Become Muslim or fight us and die." (2/256 was thoroughly abrogated - made invalid - and forgotten).

198 7/185b: "- - - all that Allah hath created - - -". A strong claim, an often repeated claim - a never proved claim. See 7/29d above.

###199 7/185c: "- - - their (humans' - in this case non-Muslims*) term - - -". The word "term" in the Quran mostly is used as a word for when something is coming to an end according to the predestined Plan of Allah - here the end of their lives. Predestination is a heavy fact in Islam, and you have to be a blindly believing or not thinking Muslim to be able not to see the impossibility in combining predestination - the total predestination of the Quran - with the claim that man has free will and also that prayers to Allah or good (or bad) deeds have any merit if everything already is predestined.

200 7/185d: "In what Message after this (Muhammad's*) will they (non-Muslims*) then believe?" Difficult to say, as some choose one belief, others another one. But for thinking persons with some knowledge it is difficult to choose a belief which itself proves strongly that something is very wrong. For children brainwashed and pressured from baby age and never taught critical thinking, it may be explainable. But for adults to choose such a religion it takes a lot of lack of knowledge, a lot of lack of brain, or a lot of naivety. Or perhaps some al-Taqiyya (lawful lie) or Kitman (lawful half-truth) - both of which "if necessary" or if "it gives a better result" ought to be used to promote Islam, f.x. by making proselytes believe in Islam and become Muslims. ######(3 out of 4 who become Muslims in adult age today, leave the religion within 3 years. What do they learn inside Islam which makes them loose their belief, and leave in spite of the trouble and danger leaving Islam may mean?) Islam is the only of the big religions who promotes the using of lies for among other things to defend or promote the religion.

Besides why do they have to believe in messages later than Muhammad? There are older ones which may be believed instead - newer ones thus are not necessary. But as times have changed very much, a new message might be handy now.

201 7/186b: "To such (persons*) Allah rejects from His guidance - - -". For comparison: Yahweh/Jesus rejects no-one who is honestly searching - not even heavy sinners in the 11. hour (f.x. Luke. 15/8-10 and 15/11-31, Matt 12-14 and 20/8-13). They have to reject themselves.

202 7/186c: "To such (persons*) Allah rejects from His guidance - - -". Allah can reject nobody unless he exists and has power, and neither unless he can do so without changing his predestined, unchangeable Plan.

203 7/186e: "- - - His (Allah's*) guidance (the Quran*)- - -". There is not much reliable religious guidance in a book full of mistaken facts and other mistakes, errors, invalid logic, etc. and with parts of its moral code very immoral - and the book on top of all not from a god (proved 100% by all the mistakes, etc. - no omniscient god makes mistakes).

204 7/186g: "He (Allah*) will leave them (the lost ones*) in their trespasses, wandering in distraction". Compare this to Yahweh's search for "the lost sheep" (f.x. Luke 15/3-7). Yahweh and Allah the same god? You bet!

###205 7/188b: "If I (Muhammad*) had knowledge of the Unseen - - -". "- - - the Unseen" = the future or what is hidden. This is one of the places where Muhammad clearly tells he is unable to see the future = unable to make foretelling (prophesies). Aishah says the same in Hadiths. Muhammad simply was no real prophet (this becomes even clearer when you know that the original title for a prophet was "a seer" - person able to see the unseen (f.x. 1. Sam. 9/9) - a person unable to make prophesies, must use a "tailored" definition to call himself a prophet. (But then Muhammad had "tailored" definitions for this and that.) Similar in f.x. 6/50a, 10/20c+d, 10/49a, and 72/26.


As prophesies are a kind of miracle - to be able to see what is hidden or what has not happened yet - this also proves that Muhammad was unable to make at least this kind of miracles (this really also go for the other verses telling he was unable to make foretelling/prophesies).

######206 7/188da: “I (Muhammad*) am but a warner, and a bringer of glad tidings - - -". = I, Muhammad, have no supernatural powers. (This in exact accordance with Islam's repeated statements that "the only miracle connected to Muhammad, is the delivery of the Quran" - - - if a book that full of wrong facts, etc. etc. is a miracle.)

207 7/190a: "But when He (Allah*) giveth them (a couple*) a goodly child - - -". Allah? - or a (proved?) god (if such one exists)? - or nature? Muhammad very often took natural occurrences and claimed they were signs or even proofs for Allah (like any believer in any religion may do on behalf of his god(s), as long as one can flee from questions for proofs).

208 7/190b: "- - - Allah is exalted high above (anything*) - - -". Often claimed, never proved. There only are the words of Muhammad for this claim - and judge for yourself how reliable a man Muhammad was with his al-Taqiyyas (lawful lies), Kitmans (lawful half-truths), broken promises/words/oaths according to the Quran (2/225, 5/89, 16/91, 66/2), and his "War is deceit", etc.

209 7/190c: "- - - the partners (other gods*) they describe to Him (Allah*)". An Arabism - only in Arabia they had partners to al-Lah/Allah - the pagan god Muhammad took over and named only Allah. All other places they did not have gods in addition to Allah, but instead of Allah.

210 7/191b: "Do they ascribe to Him (Allah*) things that can create nothing - - -". The irony here is that also Allah has created exactly nothing which is proved - there only are loose words and as loose claims for it.

211 7/192a: "No aid can they (other gods*) give them (non-Muslims*) - - -". There is not much reliable religious guidance in a book full of mistaken facts and other mistakes, errors, invalid logic, unclear language, etc. and with parts of its moral code very immoral - and the book on top of all not from a god (proved 100% by all the mistakes, etc. - no omniscient god makes mistakes). And irony: There is not one single case in 1400 years where it is documented that Allah has given even one single person any kind of aid - lots of claims and words, but not one single documented case. And then there is the problem with Yahweh - who according to relevant books have aided many.

212 7/192b: "- - - nor can they (other gods*) aid themselves!" This is correct if they do not exist, wrong if they do exist. It is highly likely most of them do not exist - but there are some strange stories about f.x. Yahweh if the old books tell the truth. Allah is in a weak position - for one thing his claimed "holy" book has so many mistakes, etc. that it is from no god, and for another thing he was and is unable to prove even that he existed, not to mention prove that Muhammad had any connection to him or that what Muhammad told was even partly true. Muhammad and his Quran proves that something is very wrong concerning Allah and hence with Muhammad and with Islam.

213 7/194b: "- - - let them (other gods*) listen to your prayer - - -". Here the Quran indicates that such prayers are in vain. But there are two facts Muslims never mention: 1) Never in 1400 years have there been even one documented case of a prayer to Allah which had effect - claims, but never a documented case. And: 2) If it is correct like the Quran claims and states several places that everything in the world is predestined according to Allah’s unchangeable Plan - a plan nobody and nothing can change (also prayers, f.x. for help) - - - as Allah cannot simply change anything in his Plan. Thus prayers in Islam just is a waste of time and effort - a fact never mentioned by Muslims.

214 7/196a: "For my (Muhammad's*) Protector is Allah - - -". The old, bitter fact: Only if he exists and is a god, big or small.

215 7/196b: “- - - Allah, who revealed the Book (the Quran*) - - -”. Well, that is an essential question: Is it really Allah who made a book with that many mistakes? Impossible.

216 7/196c: "- - - Allah, who revealed the Book (the Quran*) (from time to time) - - -". The Quran claims that as the times changed, new messages had to be sent (but not after Muhammad, even though there have been much more - MUCH more - changes after Muhammad than during all the times before him put together: 124ooo prophets before Muhammad according to Islam, zero and nil after. And also no new holy book. Understand it who can.

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

Believe it if you are able to.

217 7/197a: "But those ye (non-Muslims*) call upon besides Him (Allah*), are unable to help you - - -". See 7/192a+b above.

###218 7/198b: In connection to this verse M. Yusuf Ali - a Muslim scholar who knew the real, historical side of Muhammad, not only the glossy picture from the imams, very well, in all his stealing and robbing, raping, womanizing, lying, torture, murder, and blood - wrote this about Muhammad (YA 1169): "Even now, after fourteen centuries, ##########a life (Muhammad*) of unexampled purity, probity, justice, and righteousness is seen in the false light by blind detractors!" It simply is very difficult to believe that it is humanly possible honestly to believe in such a shining picture for a learned scholar. And what then about uneducated Muslims?

Is this really the "realism" in Islam?

In that case it is easy to see why many Muslim areas are pretty backward.

Are we living in the same world?

Or is this really what the Muslim moral code is like?

Did Yusuf Ali really believe what he said? - one of the foremost Muslim scholars and translators in the last century?! - or is it perhaps an al-Taqiyya meant to satisfy the clergy/religious scholars?"

Or does this tell something about Islam and al-Taqiyya - the lawful lie Muslims are urged to use if necessary to defend and forward the religion (and some other things)???

The sentence made a huge impression on us, and told us much about Muslim integrity and moral backbone.

219 7/199a: “(Muhammad*) Hold to forgiveness (towards the “infidels”*). This verse is abrogated – made invalid - by at least these verses: 2/191, 2/193, 3/38, 3/85, 3/148, 4/90, 5/33, 5/72, 8/12, 8/38, 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 bloody threats, but also verses 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 28 abrogations).

Many non-Muslims - and Muslims - say that terrorists and others cherry-pick and choose and disuse the Quran when they hate and kill. #####But in reality it is the militants and the terrorists who are right: According to the surahs from Medina it is the peaceful Muslims who are not good Muslims - and the surahs from Medina mostly override the peaceful ones from Mecca as they are younger, as mentioned before. (As this book is meant to be one to open and find out things – an “encyclopedia” - we sometimes repeat essential information, so that readers do not have to search too much - in addition to that many things are repeated because the Quran often repeats and repeats and repeats itself, and we have to give the answers). But some mullahs, militants and terrorists really do know how to read the Quran correctly. And the horrible fact is: It is the militants who do read it correctly (with the possible exception of self murder).

Most of the verses telling about peaceful coexistence with and treatment of non-Muslims are found in the some 86 surahs from Mecca (610-622 AD). Practically all the bloody, suppressing, hate, rape, robbery (“good and lawful”) and war verses are from Medina (622-632 AD). That means that many or most of the peaceful ones are nullified by the much harsher ones from Medina, a fact which turned the religion into one of disgust and haughtiness towards others, and war and robbing and conquest - a religion that fitted the warring desert Arabs (by far the majority in Arabia at that time) most well (it is symptomatic that Muhammad did not start getting large quantities of followers until he stopped preaching peace, and started preaching robbing, stealing, slave taking, ”lawful and good” rape, suppression, war and riches and power also in this life - - - and abrogated the peaceful verses to get a warriors‘ and robbers‘ religion.)

You will see that in many cases it is the same verses/points that are abrogated (and thus often at the same time are contradicted) by many other verses, and the other way around. The reason simply is that many or most of the harsh verses – mainly from Medina where Islam changed to a war religion – each abrogates and contradicts many or most of the same softer verses – mainly from the earlier time (the Mecca period).

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

220 7/199c: "- - - the ignorant". Beware that when the Quran talks about knowledge or lack of such, it normally only refers to knowledge about Muhammad's religion and god. This also is one of Muhammad's many negative names for non-Muslims.

221 7/201a: "- - - bring Allah to remembrance, when lo! They see (right)!" Not if they rely on the Quran - Allah's presumed book - as too much is wrong in it. A god does not make mistakes and even less in the high numbers of plural - there simply is no god behind such a book.

222 7/201b: "- - - (aright) - - -" Beware that when the Quran uses expressions like this, it is meant in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

223 7/202c: "- - - deeper into error - - -". The question is: Are they (non-Muslims) in error? At least some may believe in an existing god. And what about Muslims if the Quran is a made up book? - remember it at least is from no god, with all those mistakes, etc.

#####224 7/203a: (A165): “If thou (Muhammad*) brings them (skeptics*) not a revelation, they say: ‘Why hast thou not got it (a revelation/miracle*) together (yourself*)?’”. But “The Message of the Quran” tells that the Arab words “law la ‘djtabaytaha” make troubles (this is omitted in the 2008 English edition) as it has several meanings, and they instead say a more likely meaning is: “Why doest thou (Muhammad*) not seek to obtain it (from Allah*)?” Rather a different detail – and at least two different meanings. A clear language in the Quran? And these variants naturally also are in the Arab text, as the relevant word(s) there has more than one meaning.

It also tells something that Muslims have left out some comments which are not flattering or which are disturbing, from the book - even in such a grave matter as religion it is not the truth one searches for, but confirmation of the religion - true or not true. Consequences if the Quran is made up? - does not matter, as you will not meet them in this life. And besides: "We" "know" that what our fathers told us is correct (taqlid).

Beware that each and every abrogation normally also is a contradiction (and you will also find them in our list of contradictions), but a contradiction is not necessarily an abrogation. Further: Many of the mistaken facts at the same time are contradictions to reality - some of them are listed here, but you will find many more in the chapters about the mistaken facts in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran", though even there we list far from all contradictions with reality in the Quran.

To give you a visual impression of how bad the situation in the Quran regarding mistakes and errors really is, we have chosen to show "all" the abrogations for each contradicting verse/point, (and the same for internal contradictions) instead of just writing a sum - see "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran". Each and every number in that list show one verse abrogating or being abrogated by another – and if you add all together, you will see that this list contains 4556 collisions between verses. As each collision takes 2 verses, ###################that means that in this list there are 2278 abrogations = 2278 mistakes or errors made by the god because of trying and failing or because he changed his mind now and then. AND IN REALITY THERE ARE MANY MORE. (But remember that as many of the verses are contradicted many or very many times by different verses, less than 150 verses are involved in the list – but as said: There are more, as we have found far from all. (Only 9/5 abrogates 124 milder verses according to some Muslim scholars - and may be as many as 500 verses all together are abrogated according to some Muslim scholars).

If this book is ever printed, one will save paper and expenses by just writing the numbers - how many and which ones.

PS: We have added some abrogations just before launching this on Internet. As we will add a few more when we finish the book "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" - in 2015 or 2016 we hope, we wait with correcting the mathematics till then.

225 7/203d: "I (Muhammad*) but follow what is revealed (the Quran*)to me from my Lord (Allah*) - - -". A book with so much wrong is not from any god.

226 7/203g: "- - - this (the Quran*) is (nothing but) lights from your (Muslims') Lord (Allah*) - - -". There is not much light in a book with perhaps unbelievable 3ooo mistakes, etc.

227 7/203j: "- - - (the Quran is) Mercy - - -". There is not much mercy in the surahs from Medina - at least not for non-Muslims. And there is mercy for no-one if the book is a made up one - actually it in that case is the opposite to mercy to Muslims, as they have been prohibited from searching for what is really truth, and from trying to find out if a real god exists. Also see 1/1a above.

228 7/204: "- - - that ye (Muslims*) may receive Mercy (from the Quran*)". Is there real mercy in a religious book not from any god and with LOTS of mistakes, etc. + a partly highly immoral moral code and similar law? Plus at least a few lies.

229 7/206: "- - - bow down before Him (Allah*)". An undocumented god? - or a superstition? - or a dressed up pagan god? - or perhaps even a dressed up devil according to one theory? - or simply a dreamed up false god, a made up mental idol?

There never and nowhere was a proof neither for Allah's existence, nor for the claim that he is a god, nor for his claimed power.

1819 + 229 = 2048 remarks. 


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".