1000+ Claims in the Quran - Invalid Unless Proven, Surah 11
18 May 2014
Surah 11 : ‘HUD’
(Mecca, 621 AD. Verses 12, 17 & 114 later?)
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 the sharia laws, 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 big words and corresponding demands and deeds, 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 11/1b: “(This (the Quran*) is a Book, with verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning) - - -.” In plain words: The verses are in plain language and are to be understood literally where otherwise is not clearly said – in “basic and fundamental” words. But all the same Muslims try explaining away anything which is wrong in the Quran and which they do not find “explanations” for, with that it "this is not to be understood literally – it must be allegories", etc. It is one of their three "last – and often used - lines of defense” when errors in the Quran cannot be explained or explained away. (The other two are: “You cannot deduce anything from one or a few verses which looks wrong – the Quran (or the surah) must be understood as a whole”. And the really “low prose” one: “You are lying or making up things because you are an Islam-hater or are listening to Islam-haters” – this no matter how correctly you are quoting the Quran or the Hadiths or whatever, and how correct your other information and logic are.) Also see 3/7b+c above and 19/97, 26/2, 27/1, 28/2, 41/3, 43/2, 44/2, 44/58, 54/17, 54/32 .
A very essential point to remember when Muslims try to claim clear mistakes are allegories or similar. They often do. And Muslims trying to flee from indications or proofs in the Quran for that things are seriously wrong in the religion of Muhammad, might remember that the only main persons they in case cheat, are themselves.
###### More down to the Earth: Muslims often explains away mistakes, etc. in the Quran with the claim that what is written there is not what is meant - it is a parable or an allegory or something. A book where you have to guess what is literally meant and what is parables - and what the parables in case mean - definitely is not easy.
######That the Quran tells - directly or indirectly, but clearly - that the texts in the Quran is clear, explained by Allah, and to be understood literally, you find f.x. these places: 3/7b, 3/138a, ##6/114ca, 11/1b, 15/1d, 18/1d-e, 18/2a, 19/97b, 20/113b+c, 24/34, 24/54j, 26/2a, 27/1b-d, 28/2, 36/69e, 37/117c, 39/28b, 41/3da, 43/2a, 43/3c, 43/29b, 44/2b-c, 44/13d, 44/58b, 54/17a, 54/22b, 54/32a+b, 54/40a, 65/11f, and 75/19. Worth remembering each time a Muslim or Islam tries to "explain" away errors, etc. by claiming the text means something different from what it says. In such cases either the Muslim/Islam lies when he/she claims the text means something different from what it says (the claim often is that it is a parable or something), or the Quran lies when it says that the book uses clear texts where nothing else is indicated.
#The listed points are all collected under 3/7b and 44/58b.
Or perhaps Allah is so clumsy and helpless when he explains things, that he needs help from humans to explain what "he really means"? (Nonsense to say the least about the hidden claims behind such "explanations".)
WHO CAN EXPLAIN SOMETHING BETTER AND MORE CORRECTLY AND COMPLETELY THAN AN OMNISCIENT GOD?
003 11/1c: "- - - (verses*) - - - further explained in detail - - -". The problem only is that too many of the "explanations" are wrong or logically invalid. A 100% proof for that no god is behind those "explanations" and thus the book.
But who can explain better than a god? What then does it prove when Muslims very often have to "explain" what the claimed god "really means"? WHAT PERHAPS IS THE MOST ESSENTIAL POINT HERE, IS THAT THE QURAN ITSELF MEANS THAT EVERYTHING IS EXPLAINED IN DETAIL, AND THUS THAT IT IS TO BE UNDERSTOOD LITERALLY LIKE IT IS TOLD AND EXPLAINED. THIS PROVES THAT ISLAM'S AND MUSLIMS' CLAIMS THAT ERRORS AND OTHER NO-GOOD POINTS ARE ALLEGORIES, ETC. ARE WRONG.
#004 11/1d: “- - - from one (Allah*) Who is Wise - - -". Not if all the logically invalid "shortcuts" and deductions and claims in the Quran is from him.
#005 11/1e: “- - - from one (Allah*) Who is - - - Well-Acquainted (with all things)”. The mistaken facts in the Quran shows he is not well enough acquainted with all things. Or that someone else made the Quran. But also see 2/233h above.
006 11/2a: "(It (the Quran*) teacheth) that ye should worship none but Allah". There have been many teachers and many teachings through the times - many (or most) of them have turned out to be wrong - especially the ones who only were based on belief or blind belief (taqlid). And this even more so in cases where the teaching has "happened to" give the - normally self proclaimed - "prophet" much power on Earth.
##007 11/2b: “(Say) ‘Verily, I (Muhammad') am (sent) unto you (people*) from Him (Allah*) - - -“. According to Ibn Warraq and to Muhammad Asad the word “(Say)” does not exist in the Arab original. This means that here it is Muhammad who speaks. There are a few places (8? + angels speaking according to Ibn Warraq) like that in the Quran. But how is it possible that Muhammad speaks in a book (presumed to (?) be made by Allah or existed since eternity – and sent down by Allah? (Some Muslims say the word is just forgotten – but how many more words may then have been forgotten in the Quran? And forgotten or not: Addition without telling it is an addition, is a falsification). Also see 2/286c.
008 11/3a: "- - - See ye (Muslims*) forgiveness from your Lord (Allah*) - - -". Allah can forgive nobody unless he exists and in addition is a god (not f.x. from the dark forces).
As for forgiving from Allah: See 2/187d above.
009 11/3b: "- - - turn to Him (Allah*) in repentance - - -". In addition to 11/2a just above: To what avail if it is true what the Quran states again and again that Allah predestines everything, and the predestinations are made according to an unchangeable Plan - a Plan nobody and nothing can change?
010 11/3c: "- - - He (Allah*) may grant you enjoyment - - -". We are back to the major problem in the Quran: There only is the word of a little reliable man (al-Taqiyya, Kitman, "war is deceit", "break even your oaths", etc.) for that Allah exists and even is a major god. If this is not true, Allah can do or give nothing.
011 11/3e: "- - - for a term appointed - - -". Predestination - Allah has appointed terms and times for everything according to the Quran.
012 11/3f: "- - - and bestow His (Allah's*) abounding grace on all who abound in merit". We are back to the old fact: This only may be true of Allah exists and if he in addition is a god.
013 11/3g: "- - - merit!". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is according to its own partly immoral moral code.
014 11/6d: "- - - all is in a clear Record". But why does an omniscient god need a record?
015 11/7g: "- - - that He (Allah*) might try you, which of you is best in conduct". Why does an omniscient, predestining god need to try anyone?
016 11/7h: "Ye (humans*) shall indeed be raised up after death". An interesting claim as Muhammad and his god never really proved they had such power (it is mentioned one place quoting a legend), whereas if the old books tells the truth, Yahweh proved such power several times.
017 11/7k: "- - - the Unbelievers would say, 'This (Resurrection*) is nothing but obvious sorcery!" Now resurrection of the soul you find in most religions, but remember that the Quran claims that Allah reassembles you atom for atom and wake you up again bodily - which may be difficult to believe. (But as Islam's pleasures in Paradise mainly are bodily pleasures - top food, drink, women, clothes, housing, surroundings, weather, shade - this only have a meaning if you are resurrected bodily to enjoy it. But honestly resurrected in soul only - as a free spirit - you will be far more free, and honestly spiritual activities and pleasures are far more pleasurable and satisfying than luxury and sex, especially in the long run - - - but primitive, rough warriors hardly knew this, and more down-to-earth "carrots" had to be used".
018 11/8a: "If We (Allah*) delay the penalty for them (non-Muslims*) - - -". Opponents (and followers) asked for proofs. Muhammad was not able to prove one thing. Here he is fast-talking to neutralize such requests for proofs.
019 11/9b: "- - - blasphemy". To express doubt about Allah only is blasphemy if he exists and is a major god - and there only are the words of a man with dubious moral and character for both. (And how should it be possible to blaspheme if he happens to belong to the dark forces, which f.x. the Quran's moral rules, laws, acceptance of dishonesty and thieving, rules for war, etc. may indicate. By calling him a god?)
020 11/11a: "Not so (go wrong*) those who (good Muslims*) show patience and constancy, and work righteousness; for them is forgiveness (of sins) and a great reward". This is the ideal for Muslims according to the Quran - but remember that war and suppression are among the top duties, and that the Islamic moral code is such that the ultimate idol is the stealing/robbing, extorting, enslaving, womanizing, raping, distaste and war mongering, murdering man Muhammad - a man who on top of all had so little respect for the truth that he more or less institutionalized al-Taqiyya (lawful lie), Kitman (lawful half-truth), Hilah (perhaps the most correct definition is that you can tell lies, but make mental reservations inside you, and thus do not sin), etc. and according to the Quran advised deception, betrayal and even breaking your oaths (2/225, 5/89, 16/91, 66/2 - and can you break oaths, you also can break weaker promises and words) if that gave a better result. (The Quran also contains at least a few obvious lies he made - f.x. that miracles would make no-one believe, a claim any intelligent man knows is untrue.)
As for forgiving from Allah: See 2/187d above.
021 11/11c: "- - - for them (good Muslims*) is forgiveness - - -". There only are two who can forgive - the victim and a god. Thus Allah only can forgive if he exists and is a god.
Another point is that to forgive - or for that case to punish or reward or fulfill prayers - means for Allah to change his Plan concerning the sinner/person, something which according to the Quran is something nobody and nothing can make him do. See 2/187d above.
022 11/12a: "- - - of what is revealed - - -". Was it really revealed? - and in case by what or whom? The Quran itself proves it is not from a god - too much is wrong. Then remain dark forces, an illness (TLE - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy?) or a cold, scheming human brain.
023 11/12d (Medina?): "Why is not a treasure sent down to him (Muhammad*), or why does not an angel come down with him?" This is one of the many requests for proofs or at least for a real sign Muhammad had to explain away - he was never able to prove even his smallest claims concerning central parts of Islam. He had to use fast-talk or worse to waylay such requests. And who is it normally who has to relay on fast-talk and worse? The cheat and the deceiver.
#024 11/12f: "It is Allah that arranged all affairs!" Once more: It is Allah who decides and predestines everything - the famous predestination many Muslims deny is more than partly, because if Allah decides everything, it is highly immoral to punish man for his claimed sins, and also the claimed free will of man is an impossibility in case. But many places like here the Quran are 100% categorical: It is Allah who decides and arranges all things!
Besides: Even if man had only a part of 1% free will, out go Allah's total precognition and his unchangeable Plan - the laws of chaos see to that.
p>025 11/13c: "He (Muhammad*) forged it (the Quran*)". Already at that time, many thought this. It is impossible to prove it - others (men or perhaps dark forces) may have made it. But what the Quran itself proves 100% - or 110% or more - is that it is not made by a god. No god makes that many and often big mistakes, that many contradictions, that many cases of invalid logic and unclear language, etc. It simply is heresy and slander and imbecility to accuse a god for having made this book.
026 11/13d: "Bring ye then ten surahs - - -". This is an argument he could use among naive and often illiterate, or at least not much read semi-wild rough warriors. Anyone knowing a little about literature knows that the Quran is no high class literature - not even after the language was polished for 250 years by top Muslim scholars - from it was written in an alphabet containing mainly the consonants only around 650 AD (not later than 656 AD) and until it got its final forms (NB: Plural, as there were many parallel editions, of which at least 14 were officially accepted as "different ways of reading" - a nicer word for "variants") around 900 AD. Many a good writer with knowledge about folklore, legends, and fairy tales, etc. could have done a lot better, especially compared to what it likely was like from the more primitive alphabet and pens around 656 AD. But to what avail? - not one single believing Muslim would ever admit a competing book was better literature, because then earth would disappear under him and under the religion. Few if any Muslims have the backbone to face this reality.
####027 11/13f: "- - - and call (to your (skeptics'*) aid) whomsoever you can, other than Allah - - -". Well, there always were Yahweh - he is likely to have made as well, if the old books are reliable. But that aside: Judged as literature the Quran at most is 3. class, a truth any knower of good literature who also knows the Quran can confirm. Helter-skelter placing of different topics. Repetitions, repetitions, repetitions of the same stories. Only two possible ends of stories: Either the involved become good Muslims, or they are bad people. All mentioned prophets or claimed prophets - even to a degree Jesus - are parallels to Muhammad's situation at the time of telling. Literally may be 3ooo mistakes - unbelievable in such an after all short book - of which may be unbelievable 2000 are wrong facts (we know of no other book in the entire history of literature with the possible exception of some within science fiction and crazy humor with so many mistakes), a large number (hundreds) of contradictions both to itself - and many of them serious, some so much so that they are destroying for the central claims in the book - and to reality. A large number of cases of invalid or wrong logic and the same of unclear language. As for unclear language there is so much of it, that Islam has had to make a separate rule for how to understand them: If a text is possible to understand in 2 or more ways, both/all are deemed to be correct, even if the meaning varies wildly. It is called "different ways of reading" - a more polite expression for "different varieties". Etc., etc. And not to forget: It is a boring book - f.x. most Muslims have never read the whole book (a fact which makes mullahs' and others manipulating with cherry-picked sentences and untrue claims - f.x. about miracles performed by Muhammad - easy for them).
It is an educated guess that at least 50% of all writers good enough to have books published, would have been able to write a book of better literature quality than the Quran, if they got enough information about old folklore, legends, religion, apocryphal scriptures, fairy tales, etc. The same goes for at least 80% of persons studying relevant history, etc., included the above mentioned subjects, if they are good enough at writing to have had any books published. (We here omit the question of the language itself, as the language of today's Quran is not identical to the one of the "original" Quran - the language of the Quran was polished by top scholars through some 250 years until it got its final form around 900 AD - and around that time in 14 different (or more) accepted varieties - called "different ways of reading", 2 of which are used today (Warsh and Hafs). Two facts no lay Muslim will admit, because he does not know it. But his religious leaders and scholars know it - but may resort to al-Taqiyya or Kitman or deceit or worse (all of which are permitted and even advised in Islam to use "if necessary" to defend and to promote the religion) when asked.)
028 11/14b: "- - - (your false gods) answer not your (call) - - -". What the Quran and Islam and Muslims NEVER mention is that also Allah NEVER once through history unmistakably has answered anyone. The only words there ever were (?) are the words from Muhammad. And anyone who has read the Quran, the Hadiths, and Islamic history, with one's brain engaged, knows what kind of man he in reality was - it is not hidden in those books (though glossed over with glorious words - if you skip them, you see the reality about Muhammad). Islam only has made Muhammad's moral - or lack of moral - their moral code, and therefore are unable to see how horrible parts of it are. Most Muslims even honestly believe it when they claim Islam is a very moral and ethical religion, this goes even for - to phrase it a bit strongly - the only part of Islam's moral which is strong, is sexual moral for free women. Oh, well, there are ok rules for taking care of boy orphans, and semi-good ones for helping the poor and for taking care of girl orphans + do not cheat or kill Muslims without a good reason. But just look at some of the other moral rules!
029 11/14c: "- - - revelations - - -". Was it really revelations? - and in case from whom?. As a god is out of the question - too much is wrong and/or low quality in the book - 3 possibilities remain: Dark forces, a sick brain (f.x. TFL - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy), or a cold brain - perhaps Muhammad's. Or a combination of 2 o 3 of these - f.x. TLE + convenient additions from Muhammad (not a little of the texts in the Quran was convenient for Muhammad).
What at least is sure, is that Muhammad's and Islam's claims that the claimed revelations were from a god, is wrong: No omniscient god ever was behind a book of a quality like the Quran.
030 11/14e: “- - - this revelation (the Quran’) is sent down (replete) with the knowledge of Allah, - - -”. Well, all the mistakes, contradictions, etc. show that either it is not made by an omniscient god or that something else is wrong.
031 11/14f: “- - - this revelation (the Quran’) is sent down (replete) with the knowledge of Allah, - - -”. This is one of the many texts in the Quran with at least 2 possible meanings. It also may mean "knowledge about Allah". But there is no knowledge at all - nothing was ever documented or proved. There only is belief about him - and worse: The tales about him all are from a man with doubtful moral and reliability. (The meaning instead may be that Allah knows the claimed revelation is sent down, but this only can be the case if he exists and is something supernatural.)
032 11/14g: "- - - there is no god but He (Allah*)!" This is one more never proved claim from the Quran. But even if we omit all claimed gods from all other religions, there still remains Yahweh, the old Jewish and Christian god which the Quran admits exists, even though it wrongly mixes him up with Allah. And the teachings of these two gods are fundamentally so different, that in spite of Islam’s never proved claim, those two cannot be the same god (unless he is mentally much ill). Remember here that science long since has proved that the Quran's claims that the Bible is falsified, is wrong (that is to say, it is difficult to prove it 100% before some 500 BC (and f.x. NT is much younger), because there are too few that old manuscripts - but even then it was a written religion, and written religions are difficult to change much. If Muslims stand by their claims, they will have to prove it - it is their claims, and it is therefore they who have to prove it. (But Islam never is able to prove fundamental claims)). Also see 6/106b above.
But there is one interesting proof about OT: The Quran indirectly, but very clearly, confirms that it cannot have been falsified until after the year 33 AD: Jesus according to the Quran was a good Muslim. He read and he did teach from the old Jewish books in the synagogues. This he could not have done if he was a good Muslim and the scriptures were falsified. This even more so as Islam claims that all the old prophets - which include Jesus - received a copy of the claimed correct texts from Heaven. There are so enormous difference between the old Jewish texts (the Jewish Bible roughly is OT in the Bible), that there is no chance a top prophet like Jesus would not notice. And neither the Bible nor the Quran mentions that he anywhere stopped reading/teaching for such reasons or ever made the slightest remark about falsified texts of that kind. It happened he criticized the additional scriptures of the Pharisees, etc., but never a word about the old scriptures being falsified.
The only possible conclusion: The Quran here proves that OT was not falsified until after 33 AD.
But we know from a large number of scriptures and fragments, that nothing in the Bible has been falsified then or later. The best proof for this, is that if even one proved falsification had been found, Islam had told the entire world. It never did. (There are many claims, but from different Muslims tying to prove that the Quran is the truth, but guess if there had been a difference if a proved case had been found!) It has till now never happened.
033 11/14h: "Will ye (non-Muslims*) even then submit (to Islam)?". Who in his right mind will submit to a religion if he/she sees that something is seriously wrong with it and understands that there is no god behind it? - or at least not behind its claimed holy book. Actually Islam as far as we find is the only one of the big religions which itself directly proves something is very wrong with the religion - no god ever was involved in a book of a quality like the Quran (and it does not help that the book - a book claimed sent down from Heaven and made long before Muhammad was even born, + a lot of other time anomalies - is full of mistakes)
034 11/15: "Those who desire the life of the Present and its glitter - to them We (Allah*) shall pay (the price of) their deeds therein - without diminution". At the same time explaining why non-Muslims may have a good life, and claiming they would be punished in the next life - as normal for Muhammad none of these two claims were documented. Standard fast-talk.
035 11/17a (= Medina?): “Can they (non-Muslims*) be like those (Muslims*) who accepted a Clear (Sign) from their Lord (Allah*) - - -?” For building up his followers’ feeling of being superior to “the masses”, this is good psychology. This even more so if you want your followers to become a separate group, felling distance to other people or groups.
036 11/17e: "- - - a witness from Himself (Allah*) - - -". Muhammad. But was he a witness? - and in case from whom, as no god was involved in a tale with so much wrong like in the Quran? Or was he simply an impostor like so many other self proclaimed "prophets"?
037 11/17f: "- - - the Book of Moses before it (the Quran*) - - -". Comment YA1512: "- - - the Holy Quran which is compared to the original Revelation given to Moses - - -". The Quran and Islam claims that all prophets of the old got a book similar to the Quran (not necessarily identical in all details, but similar - and the difference cannot have been big, as they and the Quran all were copies of the "Mother Book" mentioned in 13/39, 43/4 and 85/21-21, and revered by the god in his Heaven). There are not many knowledgeable non-Muslims who would get the idea that Moses got something similar to the Quran. Islam needs strong proofs here. The same goes for all the other Jewish prophets, included Jesus. We have not heard about one non-Muslim who knows both those books, who believe in such a claim. (Most of them do not even laugh when this is mentioned - it is too far out even for laughing.)
The Bible mentions nothing about Moses receiving a book - the 10 Commandments and the Law (which he himself wrote down and sometimes called "the Book of Covenant"), yes, a full physical book, no.
038 11/17i: "- - - a witness (Muhammad*) from Himself (Allah*) doth teach - - - a guide and a mercy (the Quran*)." Do read the complete Quran and especially the surahs from Medina - and read it with your brain and your other relevant knowledge engaged, not only your eyes and your wishful thinking. How much of a reliable guide do you find among all the mistakes, contradictions, wrong/invalid logic, etc.? - and how much mercy are you able to find? - real mercy, not glossy words. How much of a teacher of f.x. good morality and of mercy was really Muhammad?! Remember here the basic law for a good moral code: "Do to others like you want others do to you".
039 11/17k: "- - - (the Quran is*) a guide - - -". Often claimed in the Quran, but no claim becomes true even if it is repeated often. On the other hand "repeat a lie often enough, and people start believing it", to quote the infamous Joseph Goebbels. (It here may be symptomatic that it is not uncommon - f.x. C. G. Young - to compare the moral(?) code and the ideology of Islam and its Quran with just Nazism.)
040 11/17m: "- - - those of the Sects that reject it (the Quran*) - - -". Already at the time of Muhammad there were persons who lost faith in his teachings and left the religion - even rather prominent persons. What had they learnt inside which made them leave? One may ask the same question today, because some 75% of those who become Muslims in adult age, leave the religion again within 3 years.
041 11/17o: "- - - the Fire will be their (non-Muslims'*) - - - meeting-place". Often claimed, never proved. See 3/77b above.
042 11/17p: "- - - the Fire will be their (non-Muslims'*) promised meeting-place". No promise from Allah - positive or negative - has any value unless he exists and in addition is a god.
043 11/17q: “Be not in doubt thereof (the Truth – the Quran – from Allah*))”. Wrong. The Quran is so full of mistakes, etc., that it is utterly naïve not to doubt. That the Quran is the truth, is just a claim, not a proved fact.
044 11/17r: “- - - the Truth from thy Lord (Allah*) - - - “. Either it is a mistake that the Quran is from an omniscient god, or it is a mistake that Allah is omniscient. Too much is wrong in the book.
045 11/17t: "- - - yet many among men do not believe!" Not very strange, at least not among persons having enough knowledge and intelligence to see at least some of all the mistakes, etc. in the Quran, and also to see the difference between a claimed good and benevolent god and a war and hate god.
046 11/18a: "Who doth more wrong than those who invent a lie against Allah?" But what if the Quran is made up - is it a lie against Allah? - and is it still a lie against Allah if he in reality is no god, but only a pagan superstition taken over by Muhammad (Muhammad took over the main pagan god al-Lah/Allah, called him only Allah, said he was real, but that all other gods were made up, except Yahweh, whom he claimed - as always without proofs - was just another name for Allah).
047 11/18c: "- - - witnesses - - -" Why do Allah arrange a “court” and why the witnesses, and why the writing down - in this case and in some other cases in the Quran? If Allah is omniscient, he knows everything and this all is just theatre – a farce. Or is he not omniscient? Why does he need witnesses?
But it may be an efficient tale to tell followers of a leader here on Earth, if they are not trained in thinking. And these variants of course also are in the Arab text, as the relevant word(s) there has/have more than one meaning.
048 11/18d: "- - - the Curse of Allah - - -". What is it worth if Allah is something from the dark forces (he is not a god if he is behind the Quran - too much is wrong)? - and what is it worth if Allah is a fiction from a sick brain (f.x. TLF - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy - like modern science think)? - and what is it worth if Allah just was a fiction in a cold human brain? (Religious fiction has many a time made a good platform of power for a man or a group.)
049 11/19b: "Those who would hinder (men) from the path of Allah - - - these were they who denied the Hereafter". Some of them may have denied a next life altogether. But religions with a next life were well known, and nothing strange. But the difference was that Muhammad claimed you would be resurrected in body - piece for piece and atom for atom (but as a young adult) - and this was difficult for many to believe.
050 11/19c: "Those (non-Muslims*) who would hinder (men) from the path of Allah and would seek in it something crocked - - -." M. Asad (A11/35 - 11/38 in the 2008 English edition) tells that the Quran her implies that ##################"belief in resurrection, Allah's judgment and a life in the hereafter is here postulated as the only valid and lasting source of human morality".
A most illuminating piece of information, because all your good deeds in this case is motivated only from: "What merit can I gain with Allah?" There is an ocean between this and NT: Help your fellow humans from love or at least empathy and because he/they need help - and gain merit in Heaven on top. One hidden reason why so few of the help and aid NGOs originated in Muslim area? - why Islam had to be forced into abolishing slavery? - etc.? Allah and Yahweh the same god? - only possible to believe if you strongly want to believe it and overlook lots of facts.
Remember that the foundation under all inter-human real moral codes is: "Do onto others like you want others do onto you". Read the Quran and look for things which do not fit this rule, and you will find too much.
Besides the claim is naively wrong. Most of human moral codes are based on old experience and knowledge about what gives the best results, though sometimes colored by ideologies - like the robbing, suppression, apartheid, etc. and war ideology in Islam - but this often results in partly immoral moral codes.
###051 11/19d: "(See 11/19c just above*) - - - belief in resurrection, Allah's judgment and a life in the hereafter is here postulated as the only valid and lasting source of human morality". Look at this sentence and think it over. What deep truths does it divulge about Muhammad, about the Quran, and about Islam - even today? - and about the ethics, value of empathy, and the moral code of those three? For sexual morality parts of it is better in Islam than f.x. among Christians (though not better than what the Bible wants Christians to practice), in other parts from worse to much worse (f.x. lawful rape of slaves or captives, and sex with children, the easy divorces for men, etc.). Also in most other branches of morality the Quran/Islam is from inferior to NT to outright ugly (stealing, raping, extortion, apartheid, suppression, torture, murder, dishonesty in words and deeds ok, etc. - all in the name of the god) if you use "do to others like you want others do to you" as a basis.
052 11/20a: "They (opponents to Islam*) will in no wise frustrate (His (Allah's*) design on earth - - -". Once again the predestination: None can change Allah's predestined plans. But it is not true unless Allah exists and is a top god.
053 11/20c: "- - - protectors (gods*) besides Allah - - -". Except for in Arabia where the pagans had gods beside al-Lah (not Allah, but the original pagan god al-Lah/Allah whom Muhammad took over and only called Allah*), no other places had gods besides (a pagan) Allah/al-Lah. They simply did not believe in Allah and had their own - and if the Quran's claim that its god was for the entire world, the god had known that this expression was wrong. But by repeating and repeating it, Muhammad gave a picture of a god known all over - or at least had been known all over, but with competition from local (false) gods. Good psychology as long as the listeners accepts anything in blind belief.
054 11/20e: "They (negative non-Muslims*) lost their power to hear, and they did not see!" But maybe that was just what they did - understood that something was very wrong.
055 11/21a: "They (non-Muslims*) are the ones who have lost their own souls - - -". The Quran is full of loose claims and as loose statements - and like all the others of any consequence also this one is not documented or in any other way proved. It even may be wildly wrong if Allah does not exist or if he exists, but belong to the dark forces. And it definitely is wrong if there somewhere is a real god - f.x. Yahweh - who rules the claimed afterlife.
056 11/21b: "- - - the fancies (invented gods*) they (non-Muslims*) they invented have left them in the lurch!" But if also Allah is invented, will the Muslims also be left in the lurch? After all there never was a proof for Allah - only demands for and glorious words about blind faith, just like in ever so many religions - and blind faith and "taqlid" have cheated many a person. After all it is clear that no god made the Quran - too much is wrong in it. What then if f.x. there is a next life ruled by a benevolent god, not a war god like the claimed Allah - where will Muslims in case end? - not to mention if Allah is someone from the dark forces in disguise?
#057 11/22a: “Without a doubt, these (the non-Muslims*) are the very ones who will lose most in the Hereafter!” All the mistakes, wrong logic, etc. in the Quran make it very clear it is not from a god. Partly because of that – and this alone is a 100% proof for that something is wrong – there is every reason to doubt Islam is a genuine religion. And if it is a made up religion – and Islam will have a tough job proving the opposite – there is every reason to doubt Muslims will fare any better than others in a possible next life. On the contrary: If there is a next life and does exist a real religion, and if this is run by a good god, the Muslims will not fare well if they have lived according to the Quran’s horrific ethics, and even worse moral code, inhuman treatment of fellow - but non-Muslim - humans, etc.
058 11/23a: "But those who believe (in the Quran*) - - - they will be the Companions of (Paradise*) - - -". May be true - but only if the Quran is a message from a god, and in addition tells the full truth and only the truth. Also see 11!22b above.
059 11/23c: "- - - Companions of the Garden (Paradise*) - - -". = The ones bound for Paradise. See 19/9f above. Remember that the deep differences between the Bible's Paradise and the one of the Quran, is one of the strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - if they had been, their Paradise had been one and the same.
060 11/23d: "- - - to dwell therein (in Paradise) for aye!" But verse 11/108c below may indicate that may be it is not forever.
061 11/24b: “These two kinds (of men (non-Muslims vs. Muslims*) may be compared to the blind and deaf, and those who can see and hear well. Are they equal when compared?” On the other hand: Most Muslims are totally blind and deaf to any fact they do not want to see or hear - who is the best, such a Muslim or a person able to see and understand that something is deeply wrong in the Quran and in Islam?
062 11/24c: "Will ye (people*) not then take heed?" = Will you not accept that Islam is the best?. But is a claimed religion with no proof for its god, and with a "holy" book which itself by means of all its errors proves it is not from a god, and on top of all with a partly horrible moral code, "the best"? - yes, is it any good at all?
063 11/25-49: The story about Noah is told several times in the Quran - the Quran is not very good literature in this way, too. The only known older source for information (?) about Noah, is the Bible - mainly 1. Mos. 5/28 to 9/28. Some of what is told about him in the Quran, is like in the Bible, some is a dramatizing of what is told about him in the Bible, some has little or nothing to do with what is told about him in the Bible - and some conflicts with what is told in the Bible. As Muhammad had no divine connections for his book in spite of his claims - no god was ever involved in a book of a quality like the Quran with all its mistakes, etc. and all its deplorable quality as literature - and thus had no sources of information that way, from where did he get this new information?
064 11/25c: "I (Noah*) have come to you with a Clear Warning - - -". Noah here mimics Muhammad - like the Quran tells more or less all claimed prophets in the book does. Whether the tales are true or not, they have the effect that Muhammad's words seems to be normal for prophets, and thus "tell" that Muhammad was a normal prophet.
065 11/26b: "That ye (the people of Noah*) serve none but Allah: verily, I do fear for you the Penalty of a Grievous Day". See 11/25c above.
066 11/27a: Noah got similar reception like Muhammad in Mecca = Muhammad's reception is normal (this was before he gained power) for a prophet = Muhammad is a normal prophet. Good for his few followers to "know". (There are many stories like this in the Quran - all prophets are more or less parallel stories to Muhammad's up to the time when the verse was told to his followers, even to a degree Jesus.)
067 11/27c: "But the Chiefs of the Unbelievers among his People said: 'We see (in) thee (Noah*) nothing but a man like ourselves - - -". See 11/12c above.
068 11/27d: "- - - nor do we (Noah's contemporaries*) see that any follow thee (Noah*) but the meanest among us - - -". Which means Noah had followers according to the Quran. Which again means they were taken on board the ark, like mentioned in 11/40 - a prophet could not leave good Muslims to drown. In the Bible only Noah and his family - 8 persons - were on board. AND NB: In 11/40 also the Quran tells that only the animals + not even the whole of Noah's family was to enter the ark. The followers were ditched?
But by adding poor followers, Muhammad got the picture of Noah's situation to be a close parallel to his own in 621 AD. Ergo poor followers in the beginning were a sign for Muhammad being a real prophet. Psychologically a good story to tell Muhammad's follower They are so obvious to see, that we only point to some of them.
069 11/29a: "I (in this case Noah*) ask you for no wealth in return (for my preaching*) - - -". This is identical to one of Muhammad's slogans or claims. Muhammad claimed to be of an old line of prophets which included among others Noah, and then his words gained more weight if the old prophets experienced and said the same as he - also an "indication" for that he was what he claimed. That he in reality demanded much wealth (for bribes) and power "for Allah", and lots of women, is another story. This verse also is one of the many which has no similarity to what is told in the Bible.
070 11/29c: "- - - ignorant ones - - -". Persons not knowing or not wanting Muhammad and his new religion. The Quran - and at least partly Islam - is a bit peculiar here; When it comes to knowledge or lack of such, the only thing which according to the Quran really counts for the evaluation of somebody's knowledge, is their knowledge about (and acceptance of) Islam.
#####071 11/29d: "- - - ignorant ones - - -". There is an irony here, as the non-Muslims often were a lot more knowledgeable than the Muslims. This grew even clearer as the uneducated hordes from the deserts started to attack old cultures like the Greek/Roman and the Persian ones. And also later the non-Muslims in Muslim areas made up more than their share of the educated people for most kinds of science. It f.x. is a fact Muslims never mention that a large percentage of the non-religious scholars, doctors, translators of f.x. Greek scriptures, etc. in Muslim areas were non-Muslims (mostly Jews or Christians), but as they wrote in Arab, Islam takes the honor for their work. We may here mention that it took more than 400 years before the first Islamic university was built - the Nizamiyya madrasa (in 1066 - a year easy for at least the British to remember). And in 1095 AS - just 29 years later - ######Imam Abu Hamid ibn Muhammad al-Ghazali (born in 1058 AD in Khorasan in Persia, died 19. Des. 1111 AD) put an end to philosophy and scientific thinking not related to religion/Islam with his book "On the Incoherence of the Philosophers" (a book sometimes not mentioned by Islam, even though as for the progress of their culture it was in a way the end), and his book - based partly on mysticism - "Revival of the Religious Sciences", which also meant not a little to the petrifaction of and to over time making obsolete the Muslim parts of the world. But it gave Europe a breathing space, and time to catch up and together with America overtake the Muslim area - if not the world today had been very different.
#072 11/30a: "Who will help me (Noah*) against Allah if I drove them (the believers in Allah - 11/29*) away?" Contradicted by the Bible - there only Noah's nearest family were believers and could enter the ark. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.
073 11/31a: "I (in this case Noah*) tell you not that with me are the Treasures of Allah, nor do I know what is hidden (Muhammad was unable to foretell the future/make prophesies - and strangely so was Noah according to the Quran*) - - -". The main topic similar to 11/29 above.
##074 11/31b: "- - - nor do I (Noah aka Muhammad*) know what is hidden - - -". = I do not see the future = I cannot make prophesies. And a man who cannot make prophesies is no real prophet. (There are made other definitions for a prophet, but how many are willing to accept that a person unable to make prophesies is a real prophet? In the really old Israel the title even was "a seer" not "a prophet" (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 just "borrowed" this weighty and glorious title, and may be needed one more alibi for that prophets could lack the ability to make prophesies. (But what kind of prophet is one such who is unable to make prophesies - and on top of all never is able to produce a single proof for a connection to a god?)
But note how Muhammad made Noah like himself = as Noah was a prophet, the claimed similarity "proved" that also Muhammad was one. Muhammad made similar "adjustments" of old stories many places in the Quran, and thus "proved" he himself had to be a prophet, as he was treated just like he claimed the old and perhaps real prophets were treated.
075 11/31c: "- - - nor claim I (Noah aka Muhammad*) to be an angel". Which was as well, because the real and historical Muhammad - in contrast to the glorified picture in Islam - was very far from being an angel, this even in Islamic literature (skip the glorification and read his demands, incitements and deeds, etc. and you get the true Muhammad - a quite inhuman and self centric story).
076 11/32c: "- - - bring upon us (non-Muslims*) what thou (Noah*) what thou threaten us with - - -". = Bring us proof. Like so many other stories about prophets or claimed prophets in the Quran an exact parallel to Muhammad's situation, and thus a "confirmation" of that Muhammad was a prophet like the old ones. But Muhammad never was able to prove anything - in contrast to f.x. Noah who proved his words shortly after, according to the old books.
077 11/34b: "Of no profit will be my (Noah's*) counsel to you (his non-Muslim (!) opponents), much as I desire to give you (good) counsel, if it be that Allah willeth to leave you astray - - -". The predestination again - if Allah has decided that you are to end in Hell, nothing and nobody can change your fate.
078 11/34d: "He (Allah*) is your (people's*) Lord". Only if he exists and is a real god and a top god.
079 11/34e: "And to Him (Allah*) will ye (people*) return". Only if he exists, is a top god and the Quran also in other ways tells the full truth and only the truth about him. (Well, they may also return to Allah if he belongs to the dark forces.)
080 11/35b: "He (Noah? Muhammad?*) has forged it?" Already then some people saw that things might be wrong. This always has been a suspicion. And if even Noah met the suspicion, it was easier for Muhammad's followers to tackle it.
NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!
####081 11/35d: "If I (Muhammad*) had forged it (the Quran*) on me were my sin! But if Muhammad forged the Quran or parts of it, the resulting sins were very far from being only hitting him. Very far from! They will hit each and every Muslim living according to a made up religion in case (and too many facts indicate that this is the reality.) Especially terrible if there somewhere exists a real god Muslims have been prohibited from looking for - f.x. the very different god Yahweh.
Claims like this - and sometimes as illogical as here - are some places in the Quran used by Muhammad to underline and strengthen his claim that his teaching (and thus also his moral code) is divine.
It is so extremely obvious that if Muhammad has made up the Quran, and if there somewhere exists a next life with a not made up god, this would have serious results also for Muhammad’s' followers - so extremely obvious and easy to see, that there is no chance an intelligent man like Muhammad did not see this. One more of his clear lies in the Quran.
NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!
082 11/36b: "So grieve no longer over their (evil) deeds". Quite a contrast to NT and its view on loosing people to Hell.
083 11/37a: "- - - inspiration - - -". Muhammad claimed to get the verses of the Quran by inspiration, and it had value to impress on his followers that also older prophets got information that way, as it meant that Muhammad's claimed way of getting verses, was a normal one for prophets. The word is not used in such a connection anywhere in the Bible. One more indication for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god.
084 11/37b: "- - - address Me (Allah*) no (further) on behalf of those who are in sin - - -". What a contrast to "the lost lamb" and "the eleventh hour" in NT. Allah and Yahweh the same god? No. The new Covenant in NT similar to the Medina surahs? No - only if you are on a bad "acid" trip. The fundamental principles of the religions are too different - and we remind you one cannot blame a falsified Bible, as science clearly has proved that this never proved claim from Muhammad is wrong - - - and Islam has proved it even stronger.
085 11/40b: "- - - and the fountains of the earth gushed forth (and made the flood for Noah*) - - -.” The Quran does not explicit say that the flood covered the entire world, and as there are no traces of such a flood found, many Muslims try to tell you that the flood only was regional. Not educated Muslims may honestly believe so, but the educated ones know that is one more untrue story – another al-Taqiyya or Kitman – because the Quran clearly tells that the Ark ended on a high mountain in Turkey (Some sources say Syria, but Wikipedia that it lies in Anatolia in Turkey), Mt. Al-Judi (11/44b), 2089 m high, something which demanded so high a level of water that it was physically impossible unless the flood was universal (the water had disappeared to non-flooded places if not). Perhaps 1ooo - 2ooo m above our sea level minimum? - or more?
But that makes a problem for this verse. Really big quantities of water - giving may be 1000 m or more of water all over the globe (8848+ m to cover "the highest mountains" to quote the Bible = roughly 4 times all the water in all oceans, seas, lakes, and rivers on Earth today added) - could not gush forth from the Earth without leaving huge empty holes in there – either really empty, or at least with highly reduced pressure, (though most likely empty, as it is nearly impossible to compress water and then explain the gushing with expansion of the water (to compress water to double density, we have read that you need a pressure of 44000ooo kg/cm2 – or very roughly 30 times the pressure at the centre of Earth)). These holes would be too big (in order to contain enough water) to be stable, and would collapse. There is nowhere on Earth traces from such big collapses.
And to where did the water go afterwards?
(It is here among other places you will meet the explanation like the flood = the filling up of the Mediterranean Basin – a story so obviously an al-Taqiyya (lawful lie) that it is distasteful. That filling up happened 4 – 5 million years ago, and long before modern man existed. Besides it happened because Africa and Europe slowly drifted apart and the Strait of Gibraltar very slowly opened – centimeters a year – which means that the opening and thus the stream of water was small in the beginning. The filling up took a hundred years and may be much more, with the water level rising slowly – one or a few meters a year – and nothing like the cataclysm of the flood of Noah. Something no educated Muslim has an excuse for not checking up before telling stories like this, especially since this is a well known story among educated people, and they most likely were aware of the real facts before spinning such a tale. (There is a theory that the water may have dug out a canal much faster, but even in that case it took some years).
Also the filling up of the Black Sea a few thousand years ago cannot explain the Big Flood - not like that flood is described.
##086 11/40d: “We (Allah*) said (to Noah*):’Embark therein (the ark*), of each kind (of animals*) two - male and female, and your family - - -”. The Quran says nothing about the size of the ark. But the Bible according to the scientific magazine Lexicon says nearly 200 m long, some 30 m wide and some 12 m high with 3 floors. That makes some 18000 square meters roughly speaking. (NIV tells 300 cubits long, 50 cubits wide and 30 cubits high = 140 m long, 23 m wide and 13.5 m high. With 3 floors that means some 9600 sq. m. only. Another given measure is 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high - roughly the same). But there are much more than 10ooo kinds of “normal” animals, nearly 2ooo kinds of birds, and at least 10 million kinds of insects and other insect-like animals, and easily a million other small animals – like slugs, worms, etc. There simply would not be enough space for so many, not to mention 2 of each. In addition it would be the question of food for all the animals. The Quran says nothing about how long time the voyage lasted, but according to the Bible it lasted about one year (1. Mos. 7/11 and 1. Mos. 8/13-14). That would take one heck of a lot of food for so many animals - and how did they f.x. store the meat for the carnivores, or live insects for some spiders, etc.? All that food would take up a lot of space - much more than the animals themselves. Impossible in that “small” boat. And on top of that, there was the question of special food for special animals - eucalyptus leaves for the koala bears f.x. It further is likely that Noah’s home was in the south of Iraq (if he ever existed) according to science - - - and then there is the question where they found f.x. reindeer, polar bears, caribous, condors, lamas, pumas, kangaroos, orangutans, koalas, etc., etc., just to mention a few. And there is the question on who were feeding and giving water to all these animals, not to mention who kept it all clean - the family of Noah after all was rather small (8 according to the Bible).
Also the laws of nature tell that one pair of each would not be enough to establish all the animal races - no DNA variety. And the DNA variety science has found, talks about very different lengths of time since most animal groups were just a few ones (so-called "bottle-necks") and few if any two animals shows "bottle-necks" at the same time - and not one shows a "bottle-neck" 5ooo-7ooo years ago (well, perhaps the cheetah). The story simply is not true. There is a small chance that a man like Noah once lived and survived a flood big enough for him to seem to cover the entire world - f.x. he survived with his family and his cattle, etc. Science knows about one or two really huge floods at roughly the right time - at least one in Mesopotamia (now Iraq) around 3600 BC. But everything is in an after all much smaller scale. And not like told by a presumed omniscient god in the Quran (or for that case in the Bible).
Muslims try to reduce the problems by telling that Noah only should bring two of each of domesticated cattle - but that is not what the Quran says, and besides: How did all the other animals survive if the flood was universal? - and the DNA variety? - and the missing "bottle-necks"? But they further tell that it just was a big, but regional flood - which is not said in the Quran, but it as mentioned also is not said it was worldwide (but see the point about Mt. Al-Judi - 11/44b). And then some make a real blunder - or try cheating - because what follows below is not well known by most people, though well known to the more educated ones, and thus cheating of the “rank and file” is easy: F.x. “The Message of the Quran”, certified by a top Muslim university (Al-Azhar Al-Sharif Islamic Research Academy, Cairo) tells:
"The flood must have been the filling up of the Mediterranean Sea" - without mentioning that this happened (as mentioned; when the Gibraltar Strait opened) some 4 - 5 million years ago or more, and very long before modern man existed.
All this also without mentioning that the filling up took many years - may be as much as 100 or more - as the opening was small in the beginning and the stream also slowed down before the basin was full. Near what is now Israel and Egypt the water rose just one or some meters a year - no terribly rough flooding, like described in the Quran (f.x. 11/42).
How could the slow filling up of that sea give a flash flood in what is now Iraq, where this is supposed to have happened? - in or near south Iraq somewhere.
Not to mention how could the filling up of the Mediterranean Sea make the Ark end up on the 2089 m high Mt. Al-Judi? (11/44b).
May be they mix it up with the filling up of the Black Sea (also mentioned by Muslims)? But also that took time (months or a few years) - and was far from Iraq. This happened after the last ice age that stopped 10ooo – may be as late as under a warm period (even less ice) some 5700 years ago if we remember correctly. The time may be ok, but then either Noah or the story in case has travelled – and also this filling up cannot explain the weather and the waves and the landing on Mt. al-Judi.(11/44b).
There also is a very speculative theory about an asteroid or something falling into the Indian Ocean. But it is a very speculative theory only built on old legends and a hint of Chinese history. In China there is a tale about a huge flood late in the reign of Empress Nu Wa, and a corresponding one in India that connect it to a very rare planet constellation. This alignment of the planets happened 10. May 2807 BC, and if everything is true the big flood started that date - may be connected to the not documented but claimed landing of an asteroid in the Indian Ocean. But the theory is very speculative.(Popular scientific magazine "Discover" 11/2007).
Finally there is the extreme, but little known flood in Mesopotamia – now approximately Iraq – some 5600 years ago. It may easily explain the flood itself, and if this was an extraordinary “ordinary” flood, it also may explain the weather. But even if big, it was a local happening. (But then the Quran does not directly claim it was covering the entire world – but on the other hand see the point about Mt. Al-Judi - 11/44b).
And as mentioned there is the conundrum of the tall mountain which does not fit the Muslim “explanations” about a “local” flood: The Quran claims the ark stranded on a mountain in Turkey (Mount al-Judi – earlier named Qardu (11/44) - not Ararat in Turkey). For the ark to have stranded on a 2089 m high mountain, the flood had to be universal – if not the water had streamed away to empty, lower places – elementary knowledge of physics. No Muslim claiming a local flood, ever mention this - the main thing is to gloss over mistakes in the Quran to make the religion seem sound, not to find out what is true. This in spite of the ominous future for all Muslims if the Quran is not from a god and thus Islam is a made up religion - not to mention if there somewhere else exists a god who would not like their moral code etc. (not many gods will do - too immoral - but after all perhaps some of the dark or bloody ones.
For a university to back a bluff like the flood = filling up the Mediterranean Sea, etc. is dishonest and tells something, especially when they "forget" 11/44 (11/44b) and other verses and Mt. al-Judi which is a well known "fact" to religiously educated Muslims - the professors at a university have to know such facts, and know it is wrong, or at least check if they were not sure. The way the Mediterranean was filled up is a well known fact among also Muslims with relevant education, included professors at the big universities. Similar claims in 23/27 – 11/40.
Do you understand why we always have to check when we work with Muslim sources?
#087 11/42a: “So the Ark floated with them on waves (towering) like mountains, and Noah called out to his son (who was at the shore*) - - -”. When a boat is floating among waves like mountains - necessarily breaking against the shore - it is not possible to communicate with anyone ashore. Muhammad, living in a desert, may not have known. But no god had made a mistake like this - telling they could communicate. That kind of waves are too noisy, and so is the wind which normally accompanies that kind of seas, plus you both - and especially the boat - have to stay far from the shore not to be taken by the waves and smashed against the mentioned shore. ######Dramatic fairy tale with wrong facts. Contradicts anything known for anyone who has ever been close to the roaring sea.
This also is a proof for that the dramatic scenarios in the Quran cannot be explained with the filling of the Mediterranean or the Black Sea: Even an enormous waterfall does not produce waves “like mountains“ - a relatively stable stream of water does not do that except close to the waterfall, even when it is enormous, and as they are reduced proportionally to the distance they run – double distance = half the energy per meter wave front, because they spread out in a (semi) circle (NB: This does not go for windblown waves with linear wave fronts, and definitely not if the wind is still blowing and transferring energy to the waves – only where the source of the waves is a “point” like a waterfall – or a stone thrown into the water). And a waterfall – no matter how big - never produce a terrible storm (mentioned other places). Another point is that this filling up happened some millions of years too early - easy to check - but some Muslim scholars still try to use this "explanation".
This claimed part of the story is not from the Bible.
088 11/42b: Noah cried to his son, "who had separated himself from the rest", from the ark floating among huge waves: "Embark with us - - -". It is not possibly possible to get from a shore to a ship in that kind of weather. Any god - and any sailor - had known, but desert Arabs likely not. Who made the Quran?
This claimed part of the story is not from the Bible.
089 11/43a: “The son (of Noah*) replied - - -“. In that kind of weather neither a call nor a reply was possible – the roaring of the wind and the crashing of the waves are far too noisy even if a short distance had been possible. In addition you have the effect of the wind “blowing away” the sound of your voice. Any god had known - then who made the Quran? Also see 11/42b above.
090 11/43h: “- - - and the son (of Noah*) was among those who was overwhelmed in the Flood”. (Another place the Quran also tells that Nosh’s wife also ended in Hell, though not yet). Contradiction:
21/76: “We (Allah*) listened to his (Noah’s*) (prayers) and delivered him and his family from great distress”. His family: All saved. But all the same his son drowned. (And he only had 3 according to the Bible) The mathematics and the logic are difficult. Also a contradiction of the Bible: In the Bible he lost no son.
091 11/44a: “O, earth swallow up thy water - - -“. This is from the big flood of Noah. For Earth to swallow that much water is physically impossible. If the flood was local like some Muslims like to tell, the water could go to the sea. But the fact that the Quran tells the ark ended at the 2089 m high Mt. al-Judi (11/44b - earlier Mt. Qardu according to Muhammad Asad: “The Message of the Quran”) in Syria. According to Wikipedia it lies in Anatolia in Turkey, which seems to be the correct place. This indicates that it was something really big – the water cannot reach high up on a tall mountain in Turkey, unless the water level is roughly the same all over the world. It was and is impossible for Earth to swallow that amount of water. (We may also add that science has found no traces from that big a flood, which they should have done if it happened just some millennia ago.)
IF THE WATER COVERED ALL MOUNTAINS LIKE THE BIBLE SAYS, THERE MUST HAVE BEEN ROUGHLY 4 TIMES AS MUCH WATER EXTRA AS WHAT TODAY ARE IN ALL OCEANS, SEAS, LAKES, RIVERS AND GLETCHERS PUT TOGETHER. IF IT ONLY COVERED "LOW" MOUNTAINS LIKE MT. AL-JUDI, THERE STILL HVA TO BE ROUGHLY DOUBLY AS MUCH WATER AS WHAT EXISTS TODAY. WHERE DID THAT MUCH WATER COME FROM AND WHERE DID IT GO?
(An enormous flood in Mesopotamia around 3600 BC (discovered in 1929 by the British archeologist C. Leonhard Woolley) may be the reality behind the tales about the Big Flood. The story in case lived by the words of mouth for perhaps 2500 years before it was written down, and the amount of water easily may have been exaggerated.
##092 11/44b: "The Ark rested on Mount Al-Judi (According to Wikipedia it lays in Anatolia in Turkey, another source says in Syria) - - -". This is a contradiction to the Bible, which says Mt. Ararat in present Turkey, but this does not matter much. What matters is that it is said to end on a mountain (11/44b) which is 2089 m high. (According to Wikipedia Mt. al-Judi lies in Anatolia in Turkey, near the border of Syria and near the present city of Cizre). This means that a local flood was impossible - with a local flood that deep, the water had streamed away faster than the Niagara to lower places without water. And as Syria (and also Turkey) is in the middle of Islamic area, nobody knows this better than the Muslims. All the same you meet "serious" claims for a regional flood - or hopeless stories from university level like the filling up of the Mediterranean Sea - which maximally could fill up to the normal sea level (and according to Islam (YA comment 1531) Noah lived somewhere in or near the Tigris Valley "800 to 900 miles (some 1300-1500 km*) from the Persian Gulf". When you read Islamic literature even of claimed high quality, you slowly - or not so slowly - become disillusioned when it comes to the reliability of even the claimed top writers: It seems that the main thing is to make the Quran seem true, and then they adjust reality a little here and a little there to attain this. But like so often when one makes up "facts", facts have a tendency to live their own life - here you see "facts" which are wrong, there you see "facts" which contradicts each other, etc. And when you have met enough such al-Taqiyyas (lawful lies) and Kitmans (lawful half-truths), etc. your belief in their reliability starts to corrode - this even more so as you know mostly it is information they either know are wrong (f.x. that the slow filling up of the Mediterranean Sea some million years before modern man existed could bring the Ark from the Tigris Valley and land it on a high mountain in Turkey) or information which is easy to check if they really do not know it - f.x.: "When did the formerly dry desert basin which became the Mediterranean Sea fill up?". You simply have to check all claims they make - too many of them are wrong.
But what is the reliability of a religion which accepts the use of lies "if necessary", and which has to rely on lies to make their stories, claims and religious dogmas seem - not be, but seem - true? A religion which on top of all only is built on a book which itself proves it is not from a god, and a book told only by a single man of doubtful moral quality believing in the use of dishonesty, cheating, broken words, etc., a man liking power and riches for more power and women, and a man who on top of all this again never was able to prove a comma of his central claims.
093 11/45d: "- - - Thou (here indicated to be Allah*) are the Justest of Judges". See 1/1a and study the immoral parts of the Quran's moral code plus the unjust and/or immoral parts of sharia, and see if you agree.
##094 11/46b: (Allah said): “O Noah! He (your son*) is not of thy family: for his conduct is unrighteous.” This is one of the inhuman points in the Quran and in Islam. If my - I who write just this - son had done something wrong, I might have scolded him and may be punished him - but he still would be my son.
095 11/47b: Noah has just lost one of his 3 sons, but says: "O my Lord (here claimed to be Allah*)! I do seek refuge with Thee, lest I ask Thee for what I have no knowledge. And unless Thou forgive me (for praying for his son's life*) and have Mercy with me, I should indeed be lost!" Being humans, we refrain from any comments on this verse. But it tells very much about Islam.
As for forgiving from Allah: See 2/187d above.
096 11/48b: "- - - Peoples (non-Muslims*) whom We (Allah*) shall grant their (some people*) pleasures (for a time), but in the end will a grievous Penalty reach them from Us (Allah*)". Muhammad's standard explanation for why non-Muslims often had a better life than Muslims: It was/is Allah's unfathomable decision - but take comfort; he will punish them in the end and you will come out on top. There is much comfort to be found in such a belief, especially for small souls.
097 11/49a: "- - - stories from the Unseen - - -". All too many of the stories in the Quran are not from the unseen, but from apocryphal (made up) stories (often based on Biblical ones), folklore, legends, and fairy tales (f.x. the name Luqman - the title of surah 31 - is the name of a wise man from several old Arab fairy tales (a fact never mentioned by Muslims)), and then "adjusted" and sometimes - like the story of Noah - made more dramatic to fit Muhammad's new religion, where Muhammad with a straight face told is followers that this was the pure truth from his god, even if parts of it is physical impossible. Also see 11/49d below. But would an omniscient god stoop to use such tales as basis for his religion? - tales which to a large degree even were not true?!! Who in reality made the Quran?
098 11/49c: "- - - stories - - - which We (Allah*) have revealed unto thee (Muhammad*) - - -". No omniscient god would need to reveal legends and fairy tales known in Arabia at the time of Muhammad, just a little twisted to make the tales fit Muhammad's new religion, and pretend they were true stories.
099 11/49g: "- - - the End is for those who are righteous". Is it then for Muslims? Parts of the Quran are not much righteous (though most Muslims are unable to see this, as they are brought up believing this and this is glorious and morally god).
100 11/50a: "- - - the 'Ad People - - -". A powerful tribe in the very old Arabia according to old Arab folklore - they may have existed (before Moses in case according to the Quran, because the Quran claims he mentioned Hud - in reality likely later (if ever)). Muhammad claimed their demise was because they sinned against Allah. Science knows about other possibilities in a harsh and warlike land.
101 11/50c: "- - - Hud - - -". A claimed prophet in Arabia (to the 'Ad people). You meet him nowhere outside the Quran and linked books. He - like all claimed or documented(?) prophets in the Quran - met with similar problems like Muhammad met when it came to being believed - satisfying at least for Muhammad's followers who then "understood" that Muhammad's problems were normal for prophets, and that Muhammad thus had to be a prophet. His real interest for the story is that he (and a few others included Moses during his 40 years exile from Egypt before the Exodus), are claimed to have worked as prophets in Arabia, whereas the Quran tells that Muhammad worked for a people - the Arabs - who had had no prophet before.
####With the partly exception of Jesus - who was too well known - all prophets or claimed prophets told about in the Quran, are bent into a frame to be parallels to Muhammad. A coincidence?
102 11/50e: "Ye (the 'Ad tribe from before Moses*) have no other god but Him (Allah*)". For one thing neither science nor Islam has found any trace of Islam or Allah or a parallel to the Quran before 610 AD, and 'Ad is at least 2ooo years earlier. For another see 6/106b above.
103 11/51d: "- - - will ye (non-Muslims*) not then understand?". May be like the skeptics of Muhammad's stories, that was just what at least some of them did: Understood that something was very wrong.
104 11/52b: "Ask forgiveness from your (peoples'*) Lord (Allah*), and turn to Him (in repentance)". To what avail if Allah already has predestined everything according to his unchangeable Plan, like the Quran states many places?
105 11/52c: "He will send you the skies pouring abundant rain - - -". Once more a natural phenomenon Muhammad without documentation claims for his god - like any believer in any religion can do as long as no proof is required.
106 11/52d: "- - - (Allah will*) add strength to your (Muslim's*) strength - - -". There never was documented such a case - lots of claims, but never a proved case.
107 11/53d: As for this verse - like so many others: Do you see the exact parallel to Muhammad's position at the time when the verse was released?
108 11/54b: "I (Hud*) call Allah to witness - - -". No value unless Allah exists - and what the value is if he in case is from the dark forces, is uncertain. (Though he in that case may bear witness for the mistakes and even lies in the Quran).
109 11/54-55: "- - - I (Hud*) am free from the sin of ascribing to Him (Allah*) other gods as partners". This is no sin unless Allah exists and is a god. Well, it may be a sin towards another god if another god - f.x. Yahweh - exists and takes offence from your believing in other or pagan gods. According to the Bible it f.x. is clear that Yahweh will react negatively to persons believing in a god of war like f.x. Allah - and a god who on top of all accepts the use of dishonesty, apartheid (Muslims shall suppress non-Muslims), terrorism, stealing/looting, rape, murder and war.
Besides: Non-Muslims do not have gods in addition to Allah, as they do not believe Allah is a god. They have another/other god(s) INSTEAD OF Allah.
110 11/55: "Other gods as partners". By using this formula - and he uses it often - Muhammad indicates that Allah is the god everyone everywhere knows about or at least was known from the old, but that many have added other gods in addition to him. This picture is false - except for in Arabia where many had al-Lah (also sometimes named Allah) as one of their gods - the same pagan god Muhammad dressed up and called only Allah - the rest of the world had other gods not in addition to, but instead of Allah, and most did not even know about al-Lah/Allah. They had their oven gods and they were self-sufficient and not added to Allah. But psychologically a good sentence for Muhammad and his preaching.
111 11/56a: "I (Hud*) put my trust in Allah - - -". A bit risky as long as not even his existence is proved - not to mention if he exists, but belongs to the dark forces, something too many facts may point at, if he is not pure fiction.
112 11/56c: "There is not a moving creature, but He (Allah*) hath grasp in its forelock". = Allah directs it = the predestination once more: Allah decides everything. (To hold the forelocks is an Arab expression for that the one grasped has to obey what you decide. The universal god often uses Arab references, and like here references only Arabs understand if they are not explained. There normally are not similar references from other parts of the world - strange for a universal god who has had thousands of prophets all over the world during thousands of years according to the Quran - - - and mostly only Arab references, Arabisms.)
113 11/56e: "Verily, it is my (Hud's*) Lord (Allah*) that is on the straight Path". Not if he follows the Quran - too much is wrong and crooked in that book.
115 11/59d: "- - - (the 'Ad people*) disobeyed His (Allah's*) Prophets - - -". When you are making up stories, it is difficult to remember all details and not stumble or make a slip here and there. According to Islam Hud was the first prophet in Arabia - he clearly was before Moses, because Moses is said to talk about him as an earlier prophet. But when Hud was the first and only (claimed) prophet the 'Ad people ever had, how come that they then disobeyed Allah's prophets (plural)? A small, but revealing mistake - revealing because it often is just this kind of small slips which uncovers the deceiver and the swindler.
Another question: If the 'Ad tribe ever existed, did they - and thus Hud - exist so early that Moses could talk about them? = 2000+ years before Muhammad. (There is a possibility that 'Ad did exist. They in case started sometime between the 23. and the 10. century. 'Ad is mentioned by the old historian Claudius Ptolemy in his "Geographos" (though not necessarily as confirmed knowledge), but Hud not.)) From where did Muhammad get information about him? As the Quran and all its mistakes are from no god - no god delivers that kind of quality - Islam's claim that he got it from a god, does not hold water as too much is wrong in the Quran, and there is no known source of information neither about Hud nor about the two other claimed Arab prophets, Shu'yab and Salih.
116 11/60a: "And they (the 'Ad people*) were pursued by a Curse in this Life - and on the Day of Judgment". Loose claims like this are cheap and cozy propaganda to listen to for believers - especially for the blind ones with a strong wishful way of thinking. The good thing for the preacher is that he never has to prove anything.
117 11/60b: “Removed (from sight (= killed*)) were ‘Ad (a presumed large and rich Arabian tribe, “borrowed” from Arabian folk tales - it may or may not have existed*) - - -”. Some thousands more killed by the good and benevolent god Allah - for their sins according to the Quran. (Science has additional reasons for why a tribe might disappear in a barren land, ridden by raids and strife and war). Notice that Hud and Muhammad had parallel experiences with being rejected - that is the norm for all prophets and Muhammad in the Quran.
118 11/61e: "- - - it is He (Allah*) Who hath produced you from the earth." This is one of the may be 13 different ways man - Adam - is created according to the Quran. See chapter about the creation of man in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" - http://www.1000mistakes.com . Even if you are a creationist, Adam could not be created in more than one way, and evolutionists believe all the 13 ways the Quran claims he was created, are wrong, as man was not created, but developed from earlier primates. Even in modern Islamic litterateur you find that man was created, most often from clay.
119 11/61f: "- - - ask forgiveness of Him (Allah*) - - -". Only 2 can forgive - the victim and the god. Is Allah a god? - does he even exist, god or not? There only is the claim from a man with a doubtful reliability, but with a strong wish for power.
As for forgiving from Allah: See 2/187d above.
120 11/61g: "- - - ask forgiveness of Him (Allah*), and turn to Him (in repentance) - - -". Why? - if Allah has predestined everything long before according to an Unchangeable Plan, like the Quran states absolutely several places, this just is a waste of time and effort. - especially since the Plan is impossible to change according to several verses in the Quran.
121 11/61h: "- - - my (Salih*) Lord is (always) near, ready to answer". The ironic fact is that there nowhere and at no time is registered a proved answer from Allah - or any other proved contact. Lots of claims, but no proved case.
122 11/62c: "Dost thou (now) forbid us (the Thamuds*) the worship of what our fathers worshipped?" Sentences like this might make one start thinking, when one knows that Muslims believe because their fathers and their and their mullahs/imams and teachers and surroundings tells this is the true belief because their fathers etc. have told them it was true (taqlid), and because there is a strong social pressure never to question such claims - in one Arab word: Because of "taqlid". Muslims hardly ever go into the material with the question "where is the truth?"
123 11/64a: “This she-camel of Allah - - -“. This refers to an old Arab legend Muhammad used in the Quran: A camel came out from a solid cliff and became a prophet. Worth a laugh - believe it if you want. There is nothing similar in the Bible.
124 11/67a: “The (mighty) Blast overtook the wrongdoers (Thamud - another large and rich tribe “borrowed” from Arabian folk tales*), and they lay prostrate (and dead*) in their homes before the morning - - -”. Another some thousands killed. A good, benevolent and merciful god.
125 11/67b: “The (mighty) Blast overtook the wrongdoers (the people of Thamud*), and they lay prostrate (dead*) in their homes before the morning - - -.” A blast is something from f.x. an explosion. But this is contradicted by:
7/78: “So the earthquake took them (the people of Thamud*) unawares, and they lay prostrate (= dead*) in their homes in the morning”. (Also and NB: An earthquake never kills 100% - except for in low quality high-rise buildings seldom more than maximum 30%.)
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”. DISHONESTY. That is wrong – there is no – no – connection between earthquakes and storms, as they are caused by entirely different mechanisms, and this any higher educated person knows, but all the same they use it as an argument. ####(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 compulsory if necessary to defend or promote the religion.
126 11/68b: "For the Thamud rejected their Lord (Allah*) - - -". According to old Arab folklore and pre-history, the Thamud tribe was the successor of the 'Ad tribe and often called "the second 'Ad", and according to the Quran both tribes were eradicated by Allah because they refused to accept Allah - the one and mighty god which was preached about all the time since Adam and Noah by prophets, at least according to Islam - but never a trace of any kind of monotheism found by science - and neither by Islam - that early. In this - and most other cases in the Quran - the prophets experienced parallel stories to what Muhammad had experienced up to the time of the verses he told, according to what Muhammad told or retold in the Quran - which of course told Muhammad's followers that he was a normal prophet and also that the bad and non-intelligent "infidels" would be punished. There also was a number of scattered ruins of houses, hamlets, and towns (a still famous one is Petra in Jordan) in and around Arabia - Muhammad told they all were empty because the people had sinned against Allah and been punished, though science knows a number of other reasons for empty ruins, especially in warlike desert areas.
The Thamuds likely existed. They are named "Tamudaei" by Aristo of Ghios, Ptolemy, and Pliny. But the oldest known reference to them is an inscription made by the Assyrian king Sargon II in 715 BC - 500 years after Moses - and disappear from history around 600 - 400 BC, which is when their prophet Salih must have lived. The trouble is that the Quran very clearly tells that Salih lived before Shu'ayb, who according to the same book lived 4 generations after Lot - which means that Shu'ayb lived somewhere around 1700 BC (and Salih before that). This means that the Quran places Salih and the Thamus at least 1100 years and likely some centuries more wrong in history. Quite a mistake for a god.
127 11/73c: "For He (Allah*) is indeed worthy of all praise - - -". See 1/1a above and see if the god you meet in the Quran is worthy of all praise.
128 11/76d: "- - - a Penalty that cannot be turned back!" What Allah has decided and predestined, nobody and nothing can change, according to the Quran.
129 11/77a: “When Our (Allah’s*) Messengers (it is clear from the text they were angles (they f.x. ate no food*) came to Lut (Lot*) - - -.” But this is clearly contradicted by:
See identical comments to 11/69a above.
(8 contradictions - or more.)
#130 11/77d: "- - - (Lot*) felt himself powerless to protect them (his visitors*)". But the original Arab text says: "- - - he (Lot*) was straightened as regards the reach of his arm in their behalf". This was an Arab idiomatic phrase (meaning what is said in the first quote). There are a number of idiomatic Arab phrases in the Quran - phrases foreigners cannot understand without explanation. No omniscient god making a book for the entire world - a book he claims is easy to understand and with simple and clear language - would use obscure expressions from backward parts of the globe - phrases most people in the world would not understand unless there was an Arab from a given time in history around to explain the meaning. Then who made the Quran?
#### Muslims claim that you cannot really understand the Quran unless you read it in Arab - one of their standard last resort arguments for fleeing from difficult facts and arguments: "You do not know what you are talking about, because you have not read the Quran in Arab". But that is to turn reality upside down: No god - omniscient or not - who wanted to reach the whole world, would be so stupid as to use in his holy book a language making his book impossible for people to understand until after years of linguistic studies of a language they on top of all did not need for anything else - - - and to top even this: A primitive tribal language. We repeat: Who made the Quran?
131 11/78d: "(Lot said*): Here are my daughters (if ye marry) - - -". Here the Puritanism has got the better of the translator - the circumstances clearly tell it was not for marriages. Besides: How could Lot's 2 daughters (1. Mos. 19/30) marry one or two whole towns?
The real reason for this twist in the Quran, is likely to be that Lot according to that book was a prophet, and no prophet could be so immoral as to offer his daughters for unmarried sex. Wishful thinking seems to be more central than honest translation.
132 11/79c: "- - - what we (the men of Sodom and Gomorrah*) want!". The two towns were infamous for homosexuality - guess what the word "sodomize" refers to.
133 11/81a: “(The angel messengers (from Allah*)) said: O Lut (Lot*)! We are Messengers from thy Lord!” But this (that they were angles) is clearly contradicted by:
Identical comments to 11/69a above.
134 11/84c: "- - - Shu'ayb, one of their brothers - - -". A claimed prophet claimed to have worked in Madyan. His story is very similar to those of Hud and Salih - see 11/50b and 11/61b - and other prophets in the Quran, and by coincidence(?) to the story of Muhammad up till when this surah was told (in 621 AD - the year before the flight to Medina and his start towards power and a war religion).
And like Muhammad, Shu'ayb were from the local people = Muhammad being an Arab teaching the Arabs was a normal case.
135 11/84d: "- - - Shu'ayb - - -". To place the special claimed Arab prophets chronologically, it seems that Islam claims the succession was this (YA1064): Noah (not an Arab prophet, though*), Hud, Salih, Abraham (not Arab), Lot/Lut (not Arab), and Shu'ayb. Shu'ayb is said to be 4 generations after Lot, though we do not find this specified in the Quran, which in case means also he was before Moses (around 1275 - 1235 BC). Lot of course was a contemporary of Abraham - his nephew. Abraham lived - if he is not fiction - ca. 1800-2000 BC according to science, which means that Shu'ayb (if not fiction) lived about one century later or a bit more - say around 1700 BC. Which makes impossible the Muslim claim that Shu'ayb was identical to the father-in-law of Moses, Jethro. Science tells that if the Exodus ever took place, it happened ca. 1235 BC, and if the Bible is correct Moses then was 80 years, which means he lived from ca.1315 BC to ca. 1195 BC (he became 120 years according to the Bible). There in case are some 300 - 500 years between Shu'ayb and Moses (and Jethro). There is no reliable source for the claim that Shu'ayb did eve exist.
136 11/85b: "- - - commit not evil in the land with the intent to do mischief". We had better not list the history's cases of Muslim aggression through the times - intending on power, riches, rape, slaves, suppression, etc. Besides the list may be too long for a PC if we knew all of them - much horror have happened during raids, wars, slave hunting, suppression, etc. through the centuries. (Muslims often complain about the Crusaders and later the Mongols (Hulagu Khan 1258 AD), but the Crusaders and the Mongols were in orphanage compared to some Muslim atrocities in especially Africa and Asia. Only that during the crusades and during the Mongols' attack the Muslims were victims, whereas in other cases they were "heroes".)
137 11/85bb: "- - - mischief". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code. When Muslims f.x. went on raids for stealing, raping, slave taking, and murder, that was not mischief. Some religion!
138 11/86: "But I (Shu'ayb*) am not set over you to keep watch". Just like Muhammad at this time (621 AD) - also see 11/50b, 11/61b, and 11/84b (all similar to Muhammad's story until 622 AD). But much changed - included only being a warner and not keeping watch - when Muhammad became strong enough for harsher ideas.
############139 11/87c: "- - - the worship which our fathers practiced - - -". "Taqlid". The reason why Muslims believe in Islam is that their fathers and surroundings claim it is the truth, not that they ever have gone into the material to see if it at all is possible that it can be the truth. (Which it is not with all those mistakes, etc. in the Quran).
140 11/88b: "- - - my (Shu'ayb's*) success - - - can only come from Allah". Shu'ayb did not succeed. Does this indicate that Allah was not powerful or did not exist?
141 11/88c: "In Him (Allah*) I (Shu'ayb*) trust - - -". Risky as long as is not proved if he is trustworthy. In all other aspects of life blind belief or relying on glossy words, is the surest way to be cheated - a fact which should be remembered when it comes to so serious questions as Hell contra Heaven. If you just accepts your father's or neighbor’s words for something they never have checked is reality or truth (taqlid), then good luck - you deserve what future you get, in this and in a possible next life.
142 11/90a: "But ask forgiveness of your Lord (Allah*) - - -". Allah can forgive no-one unless he exists and is a god (if he is from the dark forces, it is less likely "forgiveness" from him is valid).
As for forgiving from Allah: See 2/187d above.
143 11/91c: "Were it not for thy (Shu'ayb's*) family, we should certainly have stoned thee. For thou hast amongst us no great position!" Is it possible to make a closer parallel to Muhammad's position in Mecca in 621 when this surah was released? - he had to flee shortly after, because the support from his family grew weaker. It is strange how all prophets in the Quran fit Muhammad's position at the time when the respective surahs are launched - and thus "verify" that his position is normal for prophets, and thus that he is a normal prophet. Some co-incidence!
144 11/92a: "But, verily, my (Shu'ayb's*) Lord (Allah*) encompasseth on all sides all that ye do!" We are back to the old fact: This only can be true if Allah exists (but in this case it may be true even if Allah belongs to the dark forces).
#145 11/95c: Shu'ayb - Salih - Hud. These are the 3 big non-biblical claimed prophets in the Quran (+ Muhammad of course). All were Arabs working in Arabia. A universal god should have had a bigger choice including other countries and continents - and perhaps also some success and/or different stories, not only parallels to Muhammad. One of the half hidden, but clear and strong Arabisms in the Quran. See 4/13d above.
146 11/99: "And they (Ramses II and his chiefs*) are followed by a curse in this (life) and on the Day of Judgment - - -". Ramses II was hardly followed by any curse in this life. About the possible next? - it is cheap and easy to claim things as long as you can evade any requests for a proof. On the other hand: Such claims carry little weight for persons with at least a medium brain.
147 11/100: "These are some of the stories We (Allah*) relate unto thee (Muhammad*) - - -". Yes, it is strange for a god to relate stories from legends, fairy tales etc. - known to be made up ones - and claim them to be the true ones.
148 11/101a: "It was not We (Allah*) who wronged them: they wronged their own souls - - -". Correct if man has free will, wrong if Allah predestines everything like the Quran claims again and again, perhaps if man has partly free will which some Muslims try to explain away this total contradiction with no possible explanation (even partly free will also is 100% contradicting many verses in the Quran clearly stating that it is Allah who decides everything).
149 11/101c: "- - - the decree of thy (Muslims'/humans'*) Lord (here indicated Allah*) - - -". The old truth once more: Allah can make no decree if he does not exist (but if he exists, he can issue decrees even if he belongs to the dark forces.)
150 11/101d: "- - - nor did they (other gods*) add aught (to their(non-Muslims'*) lot) but perdition". But what will be the case for Muslims if the Quran is made up? - and with all those mistakes it at least is from no god. (The question is especially interesting if there somewhere is a real god they have been prohibited from looking for).
151 11/102a: "- - - He (Allah) chastises - - -". A parallel comment to all other comments about the fact that Allah can do nothing unless he exists and has power - though if he exists and belong to the dark forces, there are things he can do.
152 11/103a: "In that (the claim that Allah punishes severely - 11/103*) is a Sign (for the existence of Allah and his power*) - - -". A not proved claim from a man who believed in dishonesty, deceit, and even broken words/oaths, is a "sign" - Quran-speak for proof - for that Allah exists. Is there anyone out there who understands why we are skeptical to the Quran - and thus to Muhammad and to Islam?
153 11/104: "- - - for a term appointed". = For a predestined time.
##154 11/106-107: “- - - there will be for them (sinners*) therein (nothing but) the heaving of sighs and sobs. They will dwell therein for all the time that the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth endure, except as thy Lord (Allah*) willeth”. No hope for all the eternity - except perhaps in the last part of that last sentence. Muslims are unable to agree on if that may mean that Hell once in the very far future may come to an end, at least for some inmates - likely the (failed) Muslims in case. (And similar for Heaven according to 11/108.)
155 11/107a: “They (the sinners*) will dwell therein (Hell) for all time that the heavens and the earth endure - - -.” More or less identical to 11/108b below except that 11/108 is about Paradise. And an open question is: What happens afterwards? - the Quran gives no answer to this.
###156 11/107b: (A11/133 – in 2008 edition A11/134): "(Sinners shall stay in Hell forever), except as thy Lord (Allah*) willeth.” This sentence is one of the big enigmas in the Quran and in Islam – you meet the same curious and cryptic message in 6/128c, 11/107b, 43/74b-c, 78/23, (plus some Hadiths): The entire Quran tells that sinners are to stay in Hell forever, but this may mean there all the same may be a way out – at least for some? It has been debated for days and months and years and centuries in Islam – no sure answer is found. Yes, the Quran uses a clear and distinct language – everything is easy to understand, just like Muslims claim.
We may add that some Muslims scholars speculate on that one possible meaning is that the Muslim sinners will be let out from Hell after enough eons - but perhaps only the Muslim ones. Also see 51/13a below.
257 11/107d: "- - - (Allah*) is the (sure) Accomplisher of what He planneth". = Nothing can change Allah's predestined plan. (But why then f.x. pray to Allah when you have problems? - it will change nothing, as nothing can change his predestination. And why go to a doctor if Allah already has decided how your illness will end?)
###158 11/108c: (A11/133 – in 2008 edition A11/134): “They (the good Muslims*) will dwell therein (heaven) for all the time that the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth endure”. What does this mean? The heaven is forever and the Earth until the Day of Doom according to many verses in the Quran. Will they dwell there only as long as the Earth exists, or - - -? In old Arab – so old that f.x. Tabari had to explain – (translated from Swedish): “- - - as long as heaven and Earth exists - - -“ means forever. And that is good and well - - - except for that Islam then has to explain if this means that also Earth will exist forever, and in case how the Earth can exist forever, when the Quran tells that Earth as we know it, will be finished at the Last Day. The Quran has a most complicated way of using such “a plain and easily understood language that no-one can misunderstand it.” And, yes, these variants also are in the Arab text, as the relevant word(s) there has/have more than one meaning.
###159 11/108e: (A11/134 – in 2008 edition A11/135): (Good Muslims will stay in heaven forever), “except as thy Lord (Allah*) willeth - - -.” Exactly nobody knows or understands what this means - the last part of the sentence is explained nowhere in the Quran. The same words are used about Hell in 11/107b (and similar in 6/128c, 43/74b-c, 78/23, plus some Hadiths), and some Muslim thinkers say it may mean that perhaps Hell will not last forever - at least not for all its inmates. Can Heaven come to an end? Can it change? Can it become ever better? Or what? Islamic scholars are bound by duty and indoctrination – and by lack of training in critical thinking - to be optimists, and promises that nothing will happen “unless Allah wills to bestow on them a yet greater reward (which will not take much – the Muslim heaven mainly is materialism and sex, and for women only materialism mostly because of all the houris who compete with them*) (Razi). But not one single soul has ever been able to do anything but guessing and hoping when it comes to this sentence. And as said before these variants also are in the Arab text, as the relevant word(s) there has/have more than one meaning – or here: No clear meaning.
160 11/108f: "- - - (Paradise is*) a gift without break". - - - if the Quran tells the truth, the full truth, and only the truth.
###161 11/109a: "They (pagans*) worship nothing but what their fathers worshipped (before them)". Most likely correct. But what if the Quran is made up? - it is not from a god with that many mistakes, etc., etc. In that case this is exactly what also all Muslims do each and every day. And even worse if the book is from some dark forces, like its everlasting and partly immoral and unethical moral and ethical codes - and lack of empathy - may implicate.
And not to forget: Also most Muslims during history and today believed and believe in Islam mainly because of "taqlid", not because they have studied the Quran with their knowledge and brain engaged to find out what is and what is not true. This in spite of the price there is to pay if the Quran is not from a god, and perhaps another god is ruling the perhaps next life.
162 11/109c: "- - - we (Allah*) shall pay them (pagans*) back (in full) their portion without (the least) abatement". Once more: If Allah exists and is a god. If he exists, but is from the dark forces, it may be even worse. But if he does not exist, Muhammad got a lot of followers and warriors free of charge - just paid by fast words and loot.
163 11/110a: “We (Allah*) certainly gave the Book to Moses, - - -”. According to science he certainly did not - those books are written 400-700 years later. (The Bible tells Moses got the 10 commandments written on tablets of stone + he got the law verbally and wrote it down later himself. "The Law" is sometimes used as a name for the Books of Moses, but in reality the laws only are a part of it).
164 11/110d: "- - - had it not been that a Word had gone forth before from thy Lord (Allah*) - - -" These words mean the revelations in the Bible. They are to be respected - but NB: The not falsified Bible, as the Quran and Islam claim - without any documentation and today even in spite of strong proofs for that the claim is wrong - that the Bible was and is falsified. They claim they talk about a claimed original Bible from before it was falsified, and when it was similar - not necessary identical even though they claim both were copies of the claimed "mother book" in Heaven - but at least very similar. Islam has to stick to these claims in spite of all proofs - and partly by throwing dirt on all science, Jews and Christians to make the claims less unbelievable - because if the Bible is not falsified, it is very obvious to everybody that the Islam is a made up religion. It is easier and better to just go on believing what your parents believed and taught you (taqlid), than to have to face the question if the beliefs you have based your life on, are fictions - blind belief is the best, even though the Quran tells the blind man has low value, and even if the price for being wrong is terrible in the possible next life. Yes, if there somewhere is a real god, a real paradise, and a real hell, and you have believed in a false religion (which is a possibility for Islam, as it is very clear that the Quran with all its mistakes, etc., etc. is not from a god) - well, what then?
165 11/110e: "- - - they (Jews and perhaps Christians*) are in suspicious doubt concerning it (the Bible*). Not more in doubt than that hundreds of Jews preferred death or fleeing, to accepting Muhammad's new religion. But claims like these are soothing to listen to for believers - at least for the ones too blind or too naive to see the difference between loose claims and reality.
166 11/112a: "Therefore stand firm (in the straight path) as thou art commended (!!*) - thou and those who with you turn (unto Allah); and transgress not (from the Path): for He seeth well all that ye do". One of many pep-talks simply. But also see 11/111b above.
167 11/113a: “- - - and incline not to those who do wrong, or the Fire will size you - - -”. To incline towards non-Muslims is so bad a sin that it gives worse than death penalty - Hell. (Well, the claim is never proved.)
168 11/113e: "- - - ye (non-Muslims*) have no protectors other than Allah - - -". Well, omitting everything else, both the Bible and the Quran mention the old Jewish and Christian god - in the Bible named Yahweh.
####169 11/114b: "- - - prayers - - -". These are the times for prayers (translated from Swedish):
Fajr: Before dawn.
Zuhr: Shortly after dinner time.
'Asr: During the afternoon.
Maghrib: Shortly after sundown.
'Isha' After night has fallen.
Shi'ia Muslims believe you can combine the dinner and afternoon prayers and the sundown and night prayers and pray 3 times a day (but of course 5 prayers all together, as this is specified by the Quran.)
Allah forgot(?) to tell how to arrange things in the high north and south - and Muhammad hardly knew there was a problem. Muslims later had to make rules for this themselves.
More serious: For Allah was the fixed prayers so essential, that he made it one of the pillars in Islam. Yahweh on the other hand, was/is totally uninterested in such formalism. One of the many proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - if one or both exists.
Most serious: The differences in weight laying on formalities and fixed times and numbers concerning prayers between Yahweh and Allah, is one of the at least 100% profs for that the two are not the same god.
As serious: What is the rationale and the effect of prayers in Islam, if Allah all the same long time ago has predestined everything, and done so according to his Plan nobody and nothing can change? If nothing can change it, also prayers have no effect and no value.
A sample of prayer times:
The prayer times does not follow the watch, but the sun. The times are exactly computed, but there are plenty of margins both ways - Allah is not too difficult (though some scholars say it is not exactly computed, and the margins not margins, but parts of not clearly specified times). These samples are for Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (13. Feb. 2011), and thus the names are a little different (but a rather similar pronunciation except the first one). The times vary some from day to day and from place to place.
Name of prayer: Subuh Zahor Azar Mahgrib Isyak
Time: 06.05 13.26 16.36 19.27 20.36
170 11//114c: "- - - good - - - evil - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like these, it is meant in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.
171 11/115a: "- - - be steadfast in patience." Something the entire world should know and remember: The Quran impresses and impresses and impresses "patient perseverance": Persevere and sooner or later the "enemy" tires and you have won, whereas the "enemy" must retreat or even accept you as his Master(s) - some future for non-Muslims!! We have visited most Muslim areas except south of Sahara, and there are few, if any, place we would like to live for a long time. A possible - possible - exception is Sabah on Borneo.
172 11/115b: "- - - Allah will not suffer that the reward of the righteous to perish" If he exists and is a major god - and if the Quran has described him correctly.
173 11/117b: "- - - if its men best were likely to mend." But:
If Allah decides absolutely everything, like the Quran claims many places - why has he not decided this?
And why has he to decide? - if he predestines everything like the Quran claims, the men just have done as he decided.
If Allah is totally omniscient, like the Quran claims many other places, why does he not know?
174 11/118b: “If thy Lord (Allah*) had so willed, He could have made mankind one People - - -”. Either Allah really likes strife and war - really a benevolent god - or in reality he is unable to do this. Like someone bragging to impress acquaintances or girls.
175 11/119b: "- - - for this He (Allah*) created them". The Quran tells different places that Allah created some for Hell and some for Paradise, and this decision Allah made 5 months before you were born according to Hadiths, cannot be changed - no matter what you want or wish or pray or do you in reality have no chance against his decisions and predestination. Some difference from the Bible and a lot of other religions.
176 11/119c: "I (Allah*) will fill Hell with jinns (a being from old Arab pagan religion, legends, and fairy tales*) and men all together." A benevolent and good god? - Hell is no nice place. And he will fill it. Try to find something like this in the Gospels.
177 11/120b: "All that We (Allah*) relate to thee (Muhammad/Muslims*) of stories about the prophets - with it We make firm thy heart - - -". Nearly all the prophets the Quran tells about, met the same problems like Muhammad up to the time when the surah was published (this surah is from 621 AD) - reassuring to know for his followers: Muhammad was a normal prophet with normal difficulties, and his opponents would be punished.
178 11/120e: “- - - in them (the stories in the Quran*) there cometh to thee (Muhammad/the Muslims*) the Truth - - -”. That the Quran is the truth, is just a claim, not a proved fact. With all the mistaken facts, contradictions, mistaken grammar, etc, and perhaps even more mistakes in the book, it can at best be partly true - and then the trouble is to find out what is true and what not, of the tales you do not positively know are wrong.
179 11/122: "And wait ye (non-Muslims*)! We (Muslims*) too shall wait!" A warning?
180 11/123a: "To Allah do belong the unseen (secrets) of the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth - - -". Often claimed, never documented.
181 11/123c: "- - - and to Him (Allah*) goeth back every affair (for decision) - - -". = Allah decides everything. We are back to the "fact" of total predestination - "everything" - a "fact" many Muslims denies or tries to explain away, as it means Allah is highly immoral when ha punishes someone for bad deeds he himself has decided they should do.
Also remember that Allah's total predestination is one more strong proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god.
182 11/123d: "- - - put thy (human/Muslim*) thrust in Him - - -". Risky if he does not exist. Not to mention risky if he exists, but belongs to the dark forces. (If he made the Quran, he is no god - too much is wrong).
183 11/123e: "- - - thy (Muslims'*) Lord (Allah*) is not unmindful of aught that ye do". We are back to the fundamental questions: If he exists, if he is a benevolent major god - and if the Quran has described him correctly.
2708 + 183 = 2891 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".