1000+ Claims in the Quran - Invalid Unless Proven, Surah 28


SURAH 28: Al-Qasas (The Narrations)

(Mecca, 621 AD. Verse 85 - 622 AD?)


001  "In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful". Please read the surahs from Medina, the immoral parts of the Muslim moral code, the unjust/immoral parts of sharia, and the Quran's rules for lying, thieving/looting, enslaving, raids and wars, plus the rules for treatment of girls and women - free and captives - and see if you agree. Always when there is a distance between words and corresponding demands and deeds, 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.


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


002 28/2: “These are verses of the Quran – a book that makes (things) clear.” This like f.x. points 27/1a, 27/1b and 27/1c makes it clear that the Quran means the Quran is using a clear language. Which is essential, as many Muslims try to explain away mistakes, etc. in the Quran with that Allah is a clumsy god unable to say exactly what he means, so "we" intelligent humans must explain what he really wanted to say, or that he did not mean what he said, but an allegory. To be blunt: This is the problem with clumsy gods - we humans must explain and find the words and the obvious explanations or meanings they were unable to express themselves.

Two much used standard ways for Islam and Muslims to try to explain away mistakes, etc.

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

######That the Quran tells - directly or indirectly, but clearly - that the texts in the Quran are clear, explained by Allah, and to be understood literally, you find f.x. these places: 3/7b, 3/138a, 6/114ca, 11/1b, 15/1b, 17/12h, 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/it 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 such claims lying under such "explanations".)





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


#003 28/3a: “We (Allah*) rehearse to thee (Muhammad/Muslims*) some of the story of Moses and Pharaoh in Truth - - -”. The story about Moses contradicts and differs not a little from the one told in the Bible - which for this part is more than 1000 years nearer in time to what (may be) happened - and with a much stronger traditions concerning Moses. It is a question, which one is most reliable. In any case: Both have the death of Pharaoh Ramses II wrong (but when it comes to the Bible it is possible to explain this - not so with the Quran, which is told by Allah (or even has existed since eternity and is never made), as Allah is omniscient and omniscient gods makes no mistakes (the human narrator of the Bible may have mixed Ramses II with one of his 67(?) sons or one of his generals - for Allah such a mistake is impossible)).

Moses and his brother Aaron came to Pharaoh Ramses II (one of the really strong and mighty pharaohs in the history of Egypt - may be the mightiest ever). A lot is known about Ramses II, among other things that he did not drown. Because of this you often meet Muslims claiming this happened earlier and under more unknown pharaohs which we do not know from what they died, but science is not in real doubt, and also the years and numbers do not add up if the stay was much shorter than 430years.

##There is at least one more historical fact connected to this story which is wrong in the Quran: The Quran tells that Allah destroyed all the large, magnificent buildings in Egypt (7/137). There is no kind of scientific indication for that this can be correct - no trace from such a catastrophe at that time neither in archeology nor in history, nor in literature nor even in folklore. And remember: No omniscient god makes mistakes - then who made the Quran?

Another point: As no god ever was involved in a book of a quality like the Quran, also no god rehearsed it to Muhammad.

004 28/4a: "Truly - - -". Definitely not a proved truth - only a not proved claim. See 2/2b above.

005 28/4b: "- - - (Pharaoh*) broke up its (Egypt's*) people in sections - - -". Comment YA3329: "For a king or a ruler to make individual distinctions between his subjects, and especially to depress or oppress any particular class of his subjects, is a dereliction of his kings duties - - -". Is it here pertinent to remind the reader about how Muslims at times and places have treated non-Muslims and sects of Muslims? Or the Arabs' superiority compared to other Muslims, especially the first centuries? Not to mention that it is the Quran's official policy that all non-Muslims shall be suppressed.


Besides the argument is dishonesty, as the Jews were slaves. There never was a society who did not make distinctions between slaves and free - just ask the Quran. This also Muslim scholars know ever so well, but all the same they use arguments like this to blacken the pharaoh. But Ramses II was in exactly the same class as Muhammad on this point - f.x. Muhammad permitted the owner to rape his female slaves included children, but not free ones - - - not unless he first made her/them his slaves/captives. As every Muslim scholar (though not all Muslims) know, Muhammad also practiced this himself.

###006 28/4e: Time anomaly: If - like Muslims often claim - the Quran was written before man was created or even has existed since eternity (NB: In what language and alphabet? - no Arab alphabet existed, and if a more modern alphabet was used, f.x. Hud would understand nothing), and everything is predestined - this cannot have happened if man has free will - if man has free will, the laws of chaos had disrupted things long time ago. If there is free will - even partly - any predestination which the god does not carefully follow up and adjust the course of, will be spoiled by the laws of chaos. If there is any marked degree of predestination, man has no free will. And if man has free will, predestination, except in special cases, is impossible. The claim that general predestination is possible to combine with even a little free will for man, simply is one of the mistakes in the Quran - it is even theoretically impossible (a fact Muslims never can afford to admit, because that means something is seriously wrong with the religion, and it is better to believe in a religion and refuse to see, than to meet the alternative: That the never in any way proved religion, is a made up one.) Thus if there exists free will for man, full clairvoyance is impossible even for a god = things which happened after the claimed "Mother of the Book" (of which all prophets during all times received an exact copy = a parallel to the Quran - according to Muhammad) was written, then are time anomalies, not to mention what kind of anomalies it would be to the claimed prophets living before things happened). Anomalies in this case is another word for error - especially if the Quran in reality was made at the time of Muhammad.

Verse 28/4 is a good sample of things difficult - for f.x. Abraham or Noah - to fully understand from their (claimed by Islam) copies of "the Mother of the Book" (= "the Mother of the Quran"). Other samples are the handling of Muhammad's family affairs in "the Mother of the Book" and consequently in its copies to all the claimed prophets/messengers.

There are very many time anomalies in the Quran - we only point to some of the most obvious ones of them. But as the Quran claims full predestination, predestination gives all these time anomalies. Yes, even a miniscule piece of free will for man, will destroy full predestination - the laws of chaos guarantees that.

The only way to explain the time anomalies in the Quran - as full clairvoyance is impossible also for gods if man has even a little bit free will - is that the Quran originally is written after everything had happened. And then they very clearly are errors in any book claiming to be THE VERITY.

007 28/5b: "And We (Allah*) wished to be gracious to those who were being depressed in the land, to make them leaders (in Faith) and make them heirs". This directly contradicts the Bible - and actually also other parts of the Quran: It here says that Allah wanted to make them - in reality the Jews - the religious leaders and the heirs (of Egypt?). But in the Bible and most places in the Quran it is very clear that the subject only was to get the Jews out of Egypt and out of the slavery.

008 28/5c "- - - leaders (in "Faith" - here indicated Islam) - - -". But neither Islam, nor any Muslim has till this day found a reliable proof for Islam older than 610 AD. (Moses lived some 2ooo years earlier.)

009 28/6c: “- - - Haman - - -”. Science says this is the Haman from the book of Esther in the Bible. Uneducated Muslims say it just was another man with the same name. Educated Muslims are more careful with that claim.

Haman was according to the Bible, a powerful minister under the Persian king Xerxes (Hebrew: Ahasuerus) (486 - 465 BC) and a central person in the Book of Daniel in the Bible - Muhammad may well have heard about him. In that case something is very wrong, because Ramses II naturally was king/pharaoh in Egypt, and on top of that lived some 800 years earlier. Haman could not be his top minister.

Here Islam has an explanation that just may be true: One of the main gods in Egypt at that time was Amon. According to “the Message of the Quran” the title of the high priest of Amon, was Ha-Amen - which could be understood as Haman. Not very likely, especially as this is the kind of “explanations” one frequently finds when Islam has problems finding better stories. But after all possible. Except that a god does not make such mistakes either - a mistake like this means the surah is based on human fallibility.

Some Muslims as said instead want to explain this with that it was another Haman. But science is not in doubt, it is the same. Another question here is: Was the name Haman at all used in Egypt? – it is said to be a Persian name.

But this explanation or "explanation" is invalid and made up if it is true like Ramses II, according to another place in the Quran, says he knows no god except himself. If Ramses II claimed to be the only god, no high priest of another god could be present. (But NB: Egypt had many gods. The claim that Ramses said he was the only god, is not correct.)

010 28/7a: "- - - inspiration - - -". Nothing is mentioned in the Bible about transferring information or orders from the god to any of the prophets or others by inspiration. But as this was Muhammad's claimed main method, it was of value for him to establish that this also was a normal way of the old. (In the Bible you either find direct contact, visions or dreams, when Yahweh wanted to give messages (f.x. 4. Mos.12/6-8).

011 28/7b: The baby Moses: The story here is very lame compared to in the Bible. The details also varies from the Bible - the only old source for Muhammad's claimed story, except legends, fairy tales etc.

012 28/8d: "- - - (it was intended) that (the baby*) Moses should be to them (the Pharaoh and his men*) an adversary and a cause of sorrow, for Pharaoh and Haman and (all) their hosts were men of sin." According to the Bible (no age is given in the Quran) Moses was 80 years when he later returned to free his people. If science has the numbers correctly we now are around 1235 BC. The old pharaoh had died (2. Mos. 2/23), and Ramses II had now taken over as pharaoh. Haman was a name, not a title (and as far as we have found out not an Egyptian name). A man old enough to have a high position when baby Moses was found, would not be alive 80 years later - not to mention still have a high position. Two plain facts the Quran has "forgotten". (A possible explanation is that Muhammad did not know how old Moses was when things started to happen - but any god had known. Then who made the Quran?)

013 28/9b: "- - - we (Pharaoh and one of his wives*) may adopt him (Moses*) as a son." How likely is it that a mighty pharaoh would even think about adopting a slave baby as a son without a good reason? (Also Ramses II's father, Seti I, who may be the pharaoh involved here, was one of the really mighty pharaohs - and he had children, so there was no cause for adopting more). One thing is for the daughter of a pharaoh to do so, if she or her husband f.x. was sterile. Quite another thing it was for a Pharaoh - with children - to do so.

014 28/13a: "- - - the promise of Allah is true - - -". If you ask all Islam even today to show you one single proved case throughout the times, of a promise given by Allah which has been fulfilled by him, they will not be able to answer you. No such case exists. Lots of claims, some co-incidences, not one proved case.

015 28/14a: "- - - We bestowed on him (Moses*) wisdom and knowledge: for thus do We reward those who do good". Simply wrong - you can be as good as the most goodhearted, and it does not influence your intelligence much. And you may be the incarnation of a sadist or cheater or thief or suppressor or robber baron or war lord or slave taker or mass murderer or rapist, and still be intelligent. F.x. Muhammad was wise and intelligent (though with limited knowledge about too many subjects, and with limited creative fantasy - he needed to use old stories and claims, etc.).

016 28/14b: "- - - knowledge - - -". Beware that in the Quran this word normally means religious knowledge mainly.

017 28/14c: "- - - those who do good". Beware that in the Quran words like this normally means people acting according to the Quran's partly immoral moral code.

018 28/16a: "So (Allah) forgave him (Moses) - - -". There only are two who can forgive: The victim and a god. Thus this sentence only can be true if Allah exists and is a god.

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

019 28/16b: "- - - He (Allah*) is the Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful". See f.x. 27/30b above.

020 28/17a: "- - - never shall I (Moses*) be a help to those who sin". A somewhat thought-provoking sentence, as a person who does not sin, never existed. (But as the Quran often mean non-Muslims when it says sinners, may be the meaning is that he never would help non-Muslims - - - but how many Muslims existed in reality at the time of Moses? Exactly no-one is documented - (if Muslims or Islam disagree to this, they will have to prove their words - not by claims like all too often, but with proofs).

Other points are that for one thing this quote is not from the Bible - and for another that the morality behind it is directly opposite of f.x. Jesus' words in the Bible (Jesus said he had come to save the sinners, not to save the ones who already were saved - to heal the (religiously) sick, not the healthy.

021 28/17b: "- - - Sin - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code. We also may mention that just this word often covers very different deeds, acts, words, and thoughts in the Quran and Islam, than in more normal religions (Islam is a religion of war - in spite of its loud slogans), not to mention how much its meaning in the Quran often differs from the basic of all human moral; "do against others like you want others do against you". Read the surahs from Medina and weep.

One small remark: As Yahweh's religion and f.x. moral code at many points are totally different from Allah's, you may qualify for Yahweh's Paradise even if Muslims condemn you to Hell - if both exists.

022 28/18-19: This scene is a bit (an understatement) differently described in the Bible (2. Mos. 2/13-14).

023 28/21a: "- - - wrongdoing - - -". Normally in the Quran this word is a synonym for not acting according to Islam and its somewhat "special" moral code.

024 28/22: "- - - Madyan - - -". Islam claims this is the same as the Bible's Midian. But the Bible's Midian instead may have been in Sudan. Though the very most likely place for Moses' Midian is in Sinai, f.x. because Mt. Horeb (likely another name for Mt. Sinai) and Mt. Sinai (today Jabal Musa (34 degrees east, 28.5 degrees east. Roughly 70 km north northwest from Sharm-el-Sheik (Sharm el Shaykh)) lies south in central Sinai. Also Islam confirms that it was here Moses met his god and got the mission to take the Jews out from Egypt. This is far from Madyan in Arabia as mentioned.

025 28/23-28: The story is roughly like in the Bible - the only source - but many details are different.

026 28/24: "Truly - - -". Definitely not a proved truth - only a not proved claim. See 2/2b above.

p>027 28/27b: "- - - righteous - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it means acting according to the book's partly immoral moral code. 

028 28/30b: "Verily - - -". It definitely is no proved verity/truth. See 2/2b above.

029 28/30d: "Verily, I am Allah the Lord of the Worlds..." Often claimed in the Quran, but never proved. On the other hand the Bible claims it was Yahweh - another god with fundamentally another teaching - who was speaking. Yahweh has proved himself if the Quran and/or the Bible speaks the truth on this point, Allah not.

030 28/30e: "- - - Allah, the Lord of the Worlds - - -". Often claimed, never documented.

031 28/30f: “- - - Worlds - - -“. The Quran falsely tells there are 7 Earths. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.

032 28/33: "- - - truly - - -". Definitely not a proved truth - only a not proved claim. See 2/2b above.

033 28/37a: "- - - guidance - - -". See 2/2b above.

034 28/37b: "- - - certain is it - - -". With so much wrong in the Quran, little is certain without additional proofs.

#035 28/38a: “Pharaoh said: ‘O Chiefs! No god do I know for you but myself - - -”. This is one of the really good ones, because Egypt at the time of Ramses II had a good number of gods, included some central ones with a strong clerical organization. It is typical for many “explanations” of mistakes in the Quran that Muslims “explain” some aspects of it, but are then unable not to “collide” with other information in the book - f.x. explaining the heavens as the modern universe (see 51/47c) without telling how the stars then could be fastened to the lowest heaven (37/6-7, 41/12)). But at the time of Muhammad the old gods were reduced - Egypt was partly Christian (the forefathers of the present-day Copts), and Muhammad perhaps did not know about all the old Egyptian gods.

A real god had not made this blunder, but Muhammad could not know. Then who composed the Quran?

Islam tries to explain this away with that it is not meant literally - only that Ramses II was the top. But in this case - like so often - it is very clear what the Quran says. And also remember that the Quran - and most Muslims - say that the Quran is to be meant literally where nothing else is said - - - and to call something an allegory or say it is figuratively meant, we think is the for Islam the most used means of explaining away of things/mistakes in the Quran which has no explanation.

036 28/38c: “(Pharaoh said*) “O Haman (minister for Xerxes some 800 hundred years later and hundreds of miles/km further northeast – in Persia - and not an Egyptian name either*)! - Light me a (kiln to bake bricks) out of clay - - -". Egypt at that time did not use burnt bricks, but bricks made of a mixture of clay and straw (this actually is mentioned in the Bible in 2. Mos.5/7-15) dried in the sun. It even would be meaningless to burn this kind of bricks, because the straw would be burnt to ashes, and the added strength it gave, disappear. Egypt had the technology for burning clay - they had pottery. But sundried bricks were much cheaper, and good enough for most purposes in that very dry climate.

Another point is that for their big buildings the Egyptians used natural stones, not bricks.

Any god had known all these facts, Muhammad obviously not. Who made the Quran?

037 28/38d: (A28/37 – YA3371): “(Pharaoh said*) “O Haman (minister for Xerxes several hundred years later and hundreds of miles/km further northeast, in Persia - and not an Egyptian name either*)! - - - build me a lofty place, that I may mount up to the god of Moses - - -.” Muslims like to tell this does not refer to something like the tower of Babylon (built from bricks), but to a pyramid - - - and without mentioning a single word about well known facts like it took some 20-30 years to build a big pyramid (and Ramses II at the time science believe this happened if it happened, was not young), or that the pyramids in Egypt were built from natural stones, not from brick, so a kiln has no connection to them. There also is quite a difference between a palace and a pyramid.

038 28/39a: "- - - they (the Egyptians*) thought they would not have to return to Us (Allah - at the Day of Doom)!" If Allah does not exist or if he is not a major god, none of which is clear (there only are claims from a morally doubtful and not entirely reliable person), they were right.

##039 28/39b: "- - - they (the Egyptians*) thought they would not have to return to Us (Allah - at the Day of Doom)!" Comment YA3372: ####"They (the Egyptians*) did not believe in the Hereafter." This is an unbelievable comment, as there have been few cultures ever which have been so concentrated on the next life as the old Egyptians. That f.x. was the reason for mummifying and pyramids.

Another point is that this fact is so well known, that there is no chance that top Muslim scholars do not know it. All the same they make up arguments like this. Dishonesty.

#040 28/40a: “So We (Allah*) sized him (Ramses II*) and his hosts, and flung them into the sea - - -”. Wrong at least for Ramses II himself - he did not drown, and he died years later according to science.

041 28/40b: “So We (Allah*) sized him (Pharaoh*) and his host, and Flung them into the sea: now behold what was the End of those who did wrong!” Well, one thing is that according to the Bible, they were not flung into the sea. But more essential just here is this contradiction:

19/92: “This day (the same day as 28/40*) shall We (Allah*) save thee (Pharaoh Ramses II*) in the body - - -.” Not “save the body” like many Muslims like to insist, but “in the body”. Save him bodily - alive.

042 28/40d: "- - - did wrong - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses expressions like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

043 28/42: "In this world We (Allah*) made a Curse to follow them (Ramses II and his people*) - - -". Not from the Bible (like many of the details in this story). Then from where, as the claim that it is from a god, is wrong? - too many errors in the book.

044 28/43a: “We (Allah*) revealed to Moses the Book”. Wrong. Moses got no book. The books of Moses were written centuries later - they just were named after him. (According to the Bible Moses got the 10 commandments only in writing. In addition he was told the law, which he himself wrote down later - sometimes called "the Book of Covenant". The laws are parts of the later Books of Moses).

The claim is even more wrong as Muhammad's claim was that earlier prophets got a book similar to the Quran (copies of the same claimed "Mother Book" - though with some claimed variations as time passed to adjust it to new situations, without we have ever seen or heard Muslims explain how exact copies of a claimed timeless book revered by a god and his angels, can vary), and the naked laws in the "Books of Moses", are something quite different from the Quran.

045 28/43c: "- - - Insight - - - Guidance - - -". No book claimed similar to the Quran gives reliable insight or guidance - too much is wrong.

046 28/43e: "- - - that they (the Jews*) might receive admonition". You do not receive much admonition from a made up - or at least not delivered by a god - book like the Quran with all its errors. If Muses, like the Quran indicates, got another copy of the same claimed "Mother Book", the reality will be the same there - 2 copies of the same book will be pretty similar - at least if Muslims do not engage mysticism to change the different copies.

047 28/45b: "- - - it is We (Allah*) Who sent messengers - - -". The Quran claims that Allah sent lots of prophets (124ooo or more according to Hadiths), but not one of those claims are proved, and not a single trace from all those claimed prophets are ever found neither by science, nor by Islam. The only one which is "proved" sent by Allah, is Muhammad - and was he really sent, and in case by whom, as no god sends anyone teaching something full of mistakes, etc.?

The claim is wrong unless Islam proves that at least some messengers were sent by Allah, and proves that they really taught Islam.

048 28/45c: "- - - (with inspiration) - - -". This word is not mentioned in the Bible as a means for the god to give information or orders. But as this was the method by which Muhammad claimed he got(?) most of his verses, it was essential to impress on his followers that this was a normal way of communication between the god and prophets, you find similar claim connected to many prophets or claimed prophets in the Quran.

049 28/46e: "Yet (art thou (Muhammad*) sent) as a Mercy from thy Lord (Allah*) - - -". Muhammad with his Quran full of errors and mistakes was from no god - and no mercy to even his own people.

050 28/46g: "- - - (you Muhammad are*) to give a warning to a people to whom no warner had come before thee - - -". According to the Quran, the Arabs had had at least these warners: Abraham (claimed to have been in Mecca), Hud, Salih, Shu’yab, and Moses (some Muslims claim the Quran tells the truth, because none of these had been in Medina. But when you talk about a people, you talk about a people - in this case the Arabs - unless otherwise is specified. If you make the area small enough in cases like this, you may make anything look true.)

051 28/46h: "- - - that they (Arabs*) may receive admonition". And what value would such an admonition in reality have, when there is no god behind the teaching and the book? - no god was ever behind a book so full of errors, contradictions, etc.

052 28/47a: "If (We (Allah*) had) not (sent thee (Muhammad*) to the Quraysh (the leading tribe in Mecca*)) - - -". But was Muhammad a man from an omniscient god? - impossible; there are too much wrong in his "facts", etc.

053 28/47c: “- - - Thy (Allah's*) Signs - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39b above.

#054 28/48a: “- - - When the Truth (the Quran*) has come to them (the Quraysh - the leading tribe in Mecca*) - - -”. If it was not because the word “truth” is so central and so disused in Islam, we had stopped commenting on it long time ago - it is so obvious that the Quran can be only partly the truth, at best. See all the mistakes - some small, some big blunders, some repeated many times and really cemented - - - but even one mistake is impossible for an omniscient god. Is Allah omniscient? Or did someone else compose the Quran? If Allah is not omniscient, that means something is wrong with the religion - not to mention if he does not exist. If Muhammad or another human composed it, it is a false religion. The same and even worse if it in reality is from the dark forces.

###And if it is a false religion and there somewhere exists a real, true one, to which Islam blocks the road to for its believers - - - what then in a possible next life for the Muslims?

#055 28/48b: “- - - When the Truth (the Quran*) has come to them (the Quraysh*) from Ourselves (Allah*) - - -". No god ever was involved in a book of a quality like the Quran.

056 28/48c: "- - - the Truth - - -". That the Quran is the truth, is just a claim, not a proved fact. See 2/2b and 13/1g above and 40/75 below.

057 28/48f: "Why were not (Signs) sent down to him (Muhammad) - - -?" There were frequent questions for proofs - Muhammad never was able to produce anything about it but fast talk and explaining away.

058 28/49c: “Then bring ye (non-Muslims*) a Book (the Quran*) from Allah - - - if ye are truthful!" Muhammad always demanded proofs from everybody else - but NEVER proved anything essential himself. This means he meant proofs were essential, but that he himself was unable to produce such essentials.

Muhammad even was unable to prove the Quran was from Allah or from any other god. He also clearly lied some times. Was he truthful?

059 28/49f: "- - - if ye (opponents*) are truthful!" It is remarkable that Muhammad demanded truthful speech from others, but he himself accepted lies, deceit, and even broken oaths.

Or perhaps just that is not remarkable.

060 28/50a: "But if they (“infidels”*) hearken not to thee (Muhammad*), know that they only follow their own lusts - - -.” The fact was that many followed their own knowledge - but to use the word "lust" sounded better for Muhammad and his followers naturally. Good psychology.

061 28/50c: "- - - guidance from Allah (the Quran and Muhammad*) - - -". There is not much reliable guidance in a guide-book full of mistakes. And what about a guide believing in al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), Hilah (lawful pretending/circumventing) deception ("war is deceit" - and everything is jihad), and breaking his word/promise/oath?

062 28/50e: "For Allah guides not people given to wrongdoing." Once more a deep difference in the teachings of the Quran and the NT: Just these ones are "the lost sheep" NT/Jesus/Yahweh tries to reach more than any others with guidance. (Luke 15/8-10 + 15/11-31 and Matt. 18/12-14 + 20/8-13).

Besides: Allah can guide nobody unless he exists and is something supernatural - white or dark.

063 28/50f: "For Allah guides not people given to wrongdoing." One may ask who - if anyone - then guided the Muslims the next centuries? - you find much wrongdoing and worse in Islamic history during that period and later. Cfr. "do to others like you want others do to you". Wrongdoing, but accepted by the Quran's rather special moral code.

064 28/51b: "- - - receive admonition". - from a book full of errors and worse?

065 28/52b: “(Jews and Christians*) – they do believe in this (Revelation) - - -“. Flatly wrong. And flatly dishonest. A few became Muslims according to Islam, but the overwhelming majority had to flee, were made slaves, or were killed/murdered/executed because they refused to believe in Muhammad’s tales. Cfr. f.x. what happened in and around Medina and Khaybar in the years after this surah was told (in 621 AD or later). Contradicted by reality and history. And: One more place where an intelligent man like Muhammad knew he was lying, because this he knew.

066 28/52d: "- - - this (Revelation (the Quran*)) - - -". Was the Quran really a revelation? - and in case from whom, as no god ever was involved in a book of a quality like the Quran?

###067 28/53c: “They (Jews and Christians*) say: ‘We believe therein, for it is the Truth from our Lord - - -“. Well, this is what Muhammad claimed. The reality as clearly told in Islamic written sources about what you find in 28/52a above - and like in 28/52a also here Muhammad had to know he was lying, because this he knew was untrue. It may have been true for a few, but only for a few in case. Also see 28/48a and 28/48b. A few Jews and Christians may or may not have become Muslims - there only are Muslim sources for the claims - but the majority clearly said no, even in the face of persecution and murder. Generally speaking a dishonesty, ########and as Muhammad here was speaking about Jews and Christians generally, he knew this was a lie.

068 28/53e: “- - - for it (the Quran*) is the Truth from our Lord (Allah*) - - -.” A book with that many mistakes, contradictions, and other errors is not from a god – omniscient or not. And the Bible says the real god was Yahweh.

069 28/53f: “- - - the Truth - - -“. That the Quran is the truth, is just a claim, not a proved fact. The Quran at best only is partly true – too many mistakes, etc.

070 28/53h: “- - - indeed we (the Jews and Christians*) have been Muslims (bowing to Allah’s will) from before this”. No comments necessary – except see f.x. 28/48a, 28/48b or 28/52 above - and except that it is easy to known history that it is not true.

071 28/54d: "- - - evil - - - Good - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

072 28/54f: "- - - out of what We (Allah*) have given them (Muslims*)". According to the Quran Allah have given you everything you have. But had you had so much if you relied on Allah's predestination - that he according to his Plan shall give you this and this - and stopped working? - or if a warrior; stopped stealing?

073 28/55b: "- - - the ignorant - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it normally is meant those who are ignorant of the Quran or refuses it - non-Muslims.

074 28/56b: "- - - but Allah guides whom He wills". Whereas Yahweh according to NT guides all and everybody who wishes to be guided (f.x. Luke 15/8-10 + 15/11-31 and Matt 18/12-14 + 20/8-13). Just and only here is such a fundamental abyss between the ways Allah and Yahweh thinks and acts, that only this is a 110% proof for that they were not the same god, even if there had not been other differences - but there are many.

075 28/56c: "And He (Allah*) knows best those who receive guidance (become good Muslims*)". Why then does he have to test people?

076 28/56d: "- - - guidance". There is not much true religious guidance in a book with no god behind it - and there is no god behind a book as full of errors as the Quran - and no good forces preaching so much hate, suppression and blood. Actually we do not think there ever was a war religion which benefitted even its most ardent believers as human beings - such religions often gave power and riches, but that was it. And that is it.

077 28/57e: "But most of them (Skeptics*) understand not". May be that was just what they did - understood that something was wrong, and seriously wrong, with Muhammad's new religion.

078 28/57f: If the claimed "Mother Book" of the Quran is written before things happen, like Islam claims - may be existed since eternity - the story only can be correct if there is 100% predestination. If even 99% predestination, the laws of chaos would in relatively short time change the story. See heading and 28/4c.

079 28/58a: "And how many populations We (Allah*) destroy - - -". A good and benevolent god.

080 28/58b: "Now those habitations of theirs, after them, are deserted - - -" We are back to the ruins and deserted houses in and around Arabia: All were killed because they sinned against Allah according to Muhammad. But scientists points to a number of other explanations, and Islam will have to produce (not literally) proofs in order to be believed by them.

#081 28/59a: “Nor was thy Lord (Allah*) one to destroy a population until he had sent to its Centre a messenger - - -”. The Quran speaks about lots of prophets - in the Hadith it is mentioned 124ooo through the times and throughout the world. (And one impolite, but pertinent reminder: Muhammad was unable to make real prophesies – he in reality was no prophet, he only “borrowed” that big title). But with the exception of Israel and to a degree in Persia - Zoroastrianism - (and some rulers who did so on their own accord for political reasons + a small sect in Arabia, most likely inspired by Jews and Christians) there are no traces anywhere, anytime from prophets for monotheistic religions - not in history, not in archaeology, not in literature, not in art, not in architecture - not even in folklore or fairy tales.

#Besides: MANY places were destroyed by war, famine or other catastrophes through the time without being visited by prophets for a monotheistic religion warning them first (f.x. Ache in Indonesia in the tsunami in 2004) - in spite of the Quran’s saying all such things only happen in accordance with the Plan of Allah.

The verse is wrong. And we are also not sure that such a vengeful and hard god is a good or benevolent god – when someone says or declares one thing, but demands or does something else, we always believe that the demands and the deeds are more reliable than cheap words. Similar claims in 17/15 - 17/16.

082 28/59c: "- - - nor are We (Allah*) going to destroy a population except when its members practice iniquity". Does this mean that whenever there are f.x. natural catastrophes the victims are bad people? - f.x. the Muslims of North Sumatra in the tsunami 26. Dec. 2004? (Also others were hit in that tsunami, but Muslims by far hardest.)

083 28/60a: "- - - but that which is with Allah is better and more enduring - - -". Correct - but only if the Quran tells the full truth and only the truth. And if it is from a god - and if Allah exists and is a god.

084 28/60b: "- - - will ye (non-Muslims*) not then be wise (and become Muslims*)?" The wise thing to do is first to check if a religion can be true. It often is difficult to prove that a religion is true - actually only the god himself can prove this. But sometimes facts shows that it cannot be true, though Islam is the only of the big religions which itself directly proves that something is seriously wrong, to say it politely - to blame a god for a book with so much mistakes, contradictions, invalid logic, etc. on a god, is an insult, slander and heresy. And if there is no god behind Muhammad and the Quran, what then is Islam?

085 28/61a: “Are (these two) alike? - one to whom We (Allah*) have made a goodly promise (Muslim*) - - - and one (non-Muslim*) who We have given the good things of this life, but who (will go to Hell*)?” Another rhetoric question with an obvious answer enlarging “our” self-esteem and feeling of righteousness. But with an addition: Many religions have a problem with non-believers or believers who are not really good people who have a good life in this world. So also Islam. But the Quran explains this very simple - like some other religions: It is Allah who in his unfathomable wisdom has decided it like that - to try the bad person or for some other reason only Allah understands - but Allah is going to punish him in the next life. A fulfilling explanation that leaves the others' envy half satisfied, and their gloating also half satisfied - and our self esteem at least on par or a little in plus.

You find this argument in variations time and again and again in the Quran.

But is the underlying explanation valid? - that it is for to try persons? Because why does a predestining, omniscient god have to try anyone at all? - and why, if it in reality is Allah who predestines everything one does, according to MANY places in the Quran? If he predestines everything, he also predestines what you do during a test. (With full predestination free will for man does not exist - there are immaterial things impossible also for omnipotent gods, In spite of Islam's lame try to explain away the fact that they see this is impossible: ###"It must be true all the same, because Allah says so in the Quran" (freely quoted after the Swedish "Message of the Quran" - remark A6/141 to verse 6/149).

086 28/61b: "- - - one to whom We (Allah*) have made a goodly promise (Muslim*) - - -". One should beware, though, that throughout history there is not reported one single really proved case neither of Allah giving a promise, nor of Allah keeping a promise. Especially the last case would have been heavily reported by Islam.

087 28/61c: "- - - one to whom We (Allah*) have made a goodly promise (Muslim*) - - -". But for one thing it has never been documented that Allah ever gave a promise - there only is the word of a man with a doubtful morality and reliability, even according to central Islamic literature - for it. And for another thing there never was documented that Allah ever kept a promise. Yes, not even his existence is in any way documented - there only are Muhammad’s claims. (This is a main reason why Islam can accept nothing negative about Muhammad - true or not. He was in many ways a doubtful person, but he is all they have to build on - if his true nature should be highlighted, Islam might collapse.)

088 28/61d: "- - - one to whom We (Allah*)have given the good things of this life, but who, on the Day of Judgment, is to be brought up (for punishment) - - -". Muhammad's standard explanations for why some non-Muslims had a good life, whereas some Muslims had a miserable one: Allah’s unfathomable decision. But sooth yourself: They will be punished in the end, and Muslims come out on top (this is a strange thing - in all ideologies the leaders tells that the ones who obeys them and follow the ideology, are the ones who will in some way or other come out on top).

089 28/62b: "Where are My (Allah's*) 'partners'?" It may well be correct that they do not exist. But does a claimed god who in 1400 - and actually thousands according to the Quran - years never has given a clear proof for his existence, really exist? Or is he, too, a made up god?

##090 28/63: "Those whom we (non-Muslims*) lead astray, as we were astray ourselves - - -”.

Comment A28/66: “In its deepest sense, this passage – as so many similar throughout the Quran – points to the moral inadmissibility of accepting an ethical or intellectual proposition as true on no other grounds than that is was held to be true for older generations.”

For members of a religion based only – only – on a book with many mistakes and wrongs and with partly malevolent moral and ethical rules (but so integrated and accepted in and by their religion and culture, that they themselves are unable to see anything wrong or how bad it really is), this should be a reason for some deep thinking, and especially for Muslims where the ONLY basis was a man of very doubtful moral even according to the Quran (f.x. acceptance and personally use of dishonesty as working tools and of dishonesty - stealing/robbing/extortion/slave taking - to get riches, and with much power (and women) to be gained from making people believe in his god and platform of power).

#######Most Muslims today believe in Islam - and in f.x. it’s partly immoral moral code - only because their fathers and surroundings tell them that the Quran is the truth, no matter how many errors one have to explain away. VERY FEW MUSLIMS HAVE SAT DOWN WITH THE QURAN, ENGAGED THEIR KNOWLEDGE AND BRAIN, AND WITH AN OPEN MIND TRIED TO FIND OUT: HOW MUCH OF THIS IS REALLY TRUE? - OR AT LEAST MAY BE TRUE? Not to mention: HOW RELIABLE WAS A MAN WITH A MORAL CODE LIKE THE ONE THE QURAN CLEARLY - IF YOU LOOK BEHIND THE GLORIFICATIONS - TELLS MUHAMMAD HIMSELF HAD?

090 28/64b: "- - - but they (other gods than Allah*) will not answer them (people*) - - -". A central question for Muslims if there is a Day of Doom: Will there really be an Allah able to answer them? and will he in case belong to the light or the dark forces? Oh, there will be a similar first question - the second one we think is answered if the old books tell the truth - to f.x. Jews and Christians, but after all Yahweh at least has proved his existences (which Allah has not) - - - if the old books tell the truth.

091 28/64e: "- - - guidance - - -". There is little guidance - and no reliable guidance - in a guide-book full of mistakes, etc. like the Quran.

##092 28/67a: "But any that (in this life) had repented, believed, and worked righteousness, will have hopes to be among those who achieve salvation". Only hope? If you are a warrior you are sure - at least if you are killed in war. This verse tells something.

093 28/67c: "- - - righteousness - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is relative to the book's own partly immoral moral code and hardly existing empathy.

094 28/68a: “Thy (Muslims’*) Lord (Allah*) does create and choose as he pleases - - -". As for creation see 21/56c above.

095 28/68b: “Thy (Muslims’*) Lord (Allah*) does create and choose as he pleases: no choice have they (non-Muslims*) (in the matter)”. No matter what you do, you can do nothing to change the destination Allah has predestined.

096 28/68d: "- - - glory to Allah!" See 1/1a above and see if he deserves it.

097 28/68e: "And far is He (Allah*) above the partners they ascribe (to Him)". If he is a real god and there are no other gods: Yes. If he is made up: No.

098 28/68f: "And far is He (Allah*) above the partners they ascribe (to Him)" There also is the question about Yahweh. No believer in Yahweh - at least none who also have studied the Quran some - reckons Yahweh to be a "partner" of Allah - a god beside Allah. He is instead of Allah. And what then? - especially if Allah does not exist or belongs to the dark forces?

099 28/69a: "And thy (Muslims') Lord (Allah*) knows all that their (peoples')hearts conceal - - -". The old reminder: Do not try to cheat Allah - and hence not his representative on Earth, Muhammad.

100 28/69b: "And thy (Muslims') Lord (Allah*) knows all that their (peoples')hearts conceal - - -". But why then does a predestining, omniscient god need to test people - f.x. by sending them into war?

101 28/70a: "And He is Allah". Only if he exists. And he in case only is a god if he is a god and not something else.

102 28/70b: "There is no god but He (Allah)". An often repeated, but never proved claim - and based only on the words of a man whom Islam's book show (not "say", but "show") was a man of depraved moral and with lust for power, riches for "gifts" to attract and keep followers, and for women. Also see 2/255a and 6/106b above.

103 28/70c: "There is no god but He (Allah)". If f.x. Yahweh exists, this claim is not true. And we remind you that even the Quran admits (if it is not wrong here, too) that this old Jewish and Christian god exists (but Muhammad wrongly mixes him up with Allah).

Besides: If Allah just is the old pagan and made up god al-Lah/al-Ilah (the moon god of at least south Arabia - and perhaps Hubal. (The connection between al-Lah/Allah and Hubal is unclear (see second part of 1/1d), and may just be different names for the same god - it is no co-incidence that the crescent moon is the symbol for Allah and for Islam) or al-Ilah or Il shined up, not to mention if he is something shined up/dressed up from the dark forces (Muhammad would have no chance to see the difference), like parts of the Quran's and Islam's moral and also judicial code may indicate - and which is one of only 2-3 possible explanations for who made the Quran, as no god would deliver a book of that quality - what is then the situation? (And what is then the future for Muslims if there is a second life?)


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

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

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


104 28/70e: "- - - for Him (Allah*) is the command - - -". Similar things are often said in the Quran and by Muslims, but never proved anywhere. The only basis for the claim, is a book full of mistakes, contradictions, etc. based only on the word of a man believing in al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), etc., deceit ("War is deceit" - and "everything" is jihad/holy war), and the breaking of words/promises/oaths (2/225, 5/89, 16/91, 66/2) according to the Quran itself - a man liking power and riches for bribes - - - and women.

105 28/70f: "- - - to Him (Allah*) shall ye (all) be brought back". The same comment as for 28/70b just above. Plus: Only if Allah exists and is a major god correctly described in the Quran.

106 28/71b: "If Allah were to make the night perpetual over you to the Day of Judgment, what god is there other than Allah, who can give you enlightenment?" A theoretical experiment totally without logical value as an argument, as long as it is not proved Allah 1): exists, 2): can do it.

107 28/71d "Will ye (non-Muslims*) not hearken?". Not as long as nothing is proved, and there only is a book full of mistakes, contradictions, etc. based only on the word of a man believing in al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), deceit ("War is deceit" - and "everything" is jihad/holy war), and the breaking of words/promises/oaths according to the Quran itself - and a man liking power and riches for bribes - - - and women. In all other aspects of life the sure way to be cheated, if blind belief. In reality religion is no exception - the most sure way to be cheated, is not to use your other knowledge and your brain - the second greatest gift a possible god gave you after life itself - to evaluate religions and claims and sort out the made up ones. The stronger a preacher asks for blind belief from you, the more likely it is that this is all he has to offer you.

108 28/73a: "It is out of His (Allah's*) Mercy that He has made for you Night and Day - - -". Claims as empty of value as 28/71a+b+c+d until it is proved it really is Allah who does it.

109 28/74b: "He (Allah*) will say - - -". Only if he exists and the Quran in addition tells the full truth and only the truth on this point.

110 28/74d: "- - - (Allah's*) 'partners' - - -". For believers in other religions, Allah is a false and made up god, and their god(s) is/are not partner(s) of Allah. But by his choice of words, Muhammad makes it look like Allah is the general god according to all humans, but that they have additional gods. Wrong. And dishonesty - at least outside the old Arabia (well, also inside Arabia, because the old al-Lah/Allah was a lot different from Muhammad's Allah. Also see 25/18a above.

111 28/75b: "And from each people We (Allah*) shall draw a witness - - -". According to Muslim scholars here are meant the prophets claimed by Islam sent to every people and nation in the world throughout all times. There never have been found any kind of traces from such claimed Muslim prophets anywhere, older than 610 AD when Muhammad started his preaching - neither by science, nor by Islam. The claimed many prophets/messengers never existed, unless Muslims/Islam bring proofs instead of claims for them.

112 28/75e: “- - - then they (the non-Muslims*) shall know that the Truth is in Allah (alone) - - -”. That is to be hoped if Allah is a god. But judging from the Quran, at most in him is partly the truth.

113 28/75f: "- - - Truth - - -". That the Quran is the truth, is just a claim, not a proved fact. See 2/2b and 13/1g above and 40/75 below. (Actually all the errors, etc. proves it is not any reliable truth.)

114 28/75g: "- - - and the (lies) which they invented will leave them in the lurch". This will be the case also for Muslims if Allah is a made up god - and the fact that no god would ever be involved in a book with so many errors, etc. like the Quran, may indicate something ominous.

Besides: According to the Bible and to Jesus - a very reliable person according to the Quran - Yahweh is neither invented nor a lie.

115 28/76a: "Qarun was doubtless of the people of Moses - - -". There is good reason for doubt about this, partly because no such person is mentioned in the Bible, and partly because so much is wrong in the Quran, that it is wise to doubt what is not really proved - only of mistaken facts there may be unbelievable 2ooo.

116 28/76c: "Qarun was doubtless of the people of Moses - - -". This story with Qarun as one of Moses' men is meaningless. Except for his early life in Egypt (where the Jews were slaves and consequently very poor), he was a nomad in Sinai/Midian all his life until Exodus, both according to the Quran and to the Bible. Qarun may have been a Jew, but not one of Moses' close people. But as for being a Jew: The Jews in Egypt were poor slaves, and who has heard about so rich a slave? Strong contradiction to a slave's reality.

117 28/76-82: The story about Qarun is not from the Bible (there is a story about a rich man in the Bible, but it is very different and not connected to Moses). Also remember that in the Quran not good people either changes and become good Muslims, or they are punished like here - both endings are good for the moral of the believing Muslims, whether the endings are true or not. And by the way: From where did Muhammad get his story? - as the Quran is not from any god with all its errors, and it is not in the Bible, the only possible sources are legends, fairy tales and fantasy. Also apocryphal - made up - scriptures may be a possible source, but hardly for a story like this. (Some Muslims claim Qarun is Korah in the Bible (Num. 16/1-35), but about the only similarity is that also Korah was swallowed by the earth).

118 28/77a: "- - - the (wealth) which Allah has bestowed on thee (Muslim*) - - -". Everything you own, is a gift from Allah, not a result of your own toil or stealing/robbery.

119 28/77c: "- - - Allah loves not those who do mischief". The behavior of Muslim warriors, assassins, terrorists and others through the times - is that mischief? If not: What kind of religion and what kind of god is this? And if it is: What then about Muslim warriors, assassins, terrorists and others through the times in the possible next life?

120 28/78c: "- - - Allah had destroyed, before him (Qarun - at the time of Moses*), (whole) generations". If you think Yahweh was a big killer in OT, Allah is a much more active and bigger one according to the Quran - and if you say like Muslims wrongly do, that Yahweh and Allah are the same god, Allah has done all Yahweh's killings + all the other ones. A good and mild and benevolent god?

121 28/78eb: "- - - wicked - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

122 28/78f: "- - - Sin - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code. We also may mention that just this word often covers very different deeds, acts, words, and thoughts in the Quran and Islam, than in more normal religions (Islam is a religion of war - in spite of its loud slogans), not to mention how much its meaning in the Quran often differs from the basic of all human moral; "do against others like you want others do against you". Read the surahs from Medina and weep.

One small remark: As Yahweh's religion and f.x. moral code at many points are totally different from Allah's, you may qualify for Yahweh's Paradise even if Muslims condemn you to Hell - if both exists.

123 28/80a: "- - - those who had been granted (true) knowledge - - -". Muslims - Muhammad claimed that the book Moses "really" had got, was a copy of the claimed "Mother Book" in Heaven - the same from which the Quran is claimed copied, and thus the believers among Moses' Jews in reality were Muslims. Believe it if you are able to. And PS: According to the Bible Moses got no book from Yahweh: He got the 10 Commandments in writing (2. Mos. 24/12) + he verbally got the Law. The law he later wrote down (2. Mos. 24/4)- this sometimes was called "The Book of Covenant" - and they centuries later were incorporated in what got the name "The Books of Moses". This partly according to the Bible and partly according to science.)

124 28/80c: "- - - knowledge - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it normally refers to knowledge about the Quran and Islam and related subjects - "Islamic knowledge". All other knowledge was "foreign knowledge" and disregarded by the clergy and the scholars. The sometimes strife and sometimes "war" between the ones who worked for secular sciences and Islam was finally won(?) by Islam in 1095 AD by the book "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" by "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad", al-Ghazali. This book stopped "foreign knowledge" under Islam, and another book from him - a book very much praised by Islam even today - "Ihya ulum al-din" = "Revival of the Religious Sciences" (partly based on mysticism) strongly promoted the so-called "Islamic knowledge". Together the two books were one of the main reasons behind the petrifaction of the Muslim culture, so that it over a few centuries became obsolete and backward compared to the forward moving Europe and later America. But this man and his point of view on knowledge still is hailed by Islam as "the greatest and foremost Muslim after Muhammad". (In the far west philosophy - free and real thinking - lasted ca. 100 more years).

125 28/80d: "The reward of Allah (in the Hereafter) is best - - -". If Allah exists, and if the Quran tells the full truth and only the truth on this point.

126 28/80g: "- - - righteousness - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is relative to the book's own partly immoral moral code and hardly existing empathy.

127 28/80h: "- - - none shall retain - - -". If the Quran tells the truth and only the truth.

128 28/80j: "- - - (good) - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is relative to the book's own partly immoral moral code and hardly existing empathy.

129 28/81: It is told other places in the Quran that also Qarun's whole family, included the children, was killed, even though there nowhere is said that they were guilty of anything. A fair god?

130 28/82a: "(Many of Moses' Jews said): It is indeed Allah who - - -". You are permitted to believe Moses' Jews praised Allah, if you are able to believe so. Science has found no traces from a religion like Islam or a god like Allah anywhere in the world until nearly 2ooo years later.

131 28/82c: "It indeed is Allah Who enlarges the provision or restricts it - - -". One of the Quran's MANY never proved claims. This is the Quran's standard explanation for why non-Muslims and bad Muslims often have a better life than good Muslims: Allah in his unfathomable wisdom has decided it like this - the predestination again. But sooth yourself; you will come out best in the next life. Nothing of this is ever proved, but that does not matter, as long as people believe it. And as this was Muhammad's standard explanation, it was - and is - nice to have it "confirmed" by others like her (and some other places).

132 28/82h: “Those who reject Allah will assuredly never prosper”. As for a possible next life discussion really is impossible - we know nothing, and can know nothing. Some will say they know, but they will be very wrong - what they do, is believing strongly. Knowledge is not possible without solid proved facts, and the only real fact in Islam is that one single man told stories he either refused to or was unable to document - either because a god did not want to (with illogical and/or psychologically wrong excuses) or was unable to, or because a god did not exist. There are lots of words - but words are cheap. There are lots of statements - but statements hanging in thin air without proofs are as cheap. There are lots and lots of “signs” - but a few are downright wrong, and the rest are completely valueless as proofs for Allah, as they in reality are just unproved claims or statements hanging in the air and only proves that words are cheap - they are statements that any priest in any religion can say about his god or gods, as long as he does not have to produce real proofs - - - like Muhammad steadfastly or from sheer necessity did not produce. There even are verses telling they prove Allah. But not one single of them proves anything about him - they are as valueless as the “signs” and for the same reasons - and a few even are plainly wrong. Especially we should mention all the natural phenomena which the Quran says are signs indicating or proving Allah, but without one single time proving that it really is Allah who makes the phenomena, and thus the only thing they prove, is that Islam never has been able to produce a single real proof, for any priest in any religion can say exactly the same cheap words about natural phenomena and his god(s). Which further proves that Islam has had to rely on cheap words to influence their congregations and others. One can speculate about why.

#But when it comes to prosperity in this life, it is clear that the Quran is completely wrong. And it is likely to stay that way, as many Muslim countries forces half their adult population not to work or restricts their work, and the culture is adverse to non-religious knowledge (“foreign knowledge”) and to real or critical thinking - which among other effects means that the entire Muslim world has fewer new patents a year, than the single state of California - and the difference is even worse if one looks at patents of knife-edge technique or technology. This among other reasons will forever keep Muslim states in second-class economy, if they do not have natural resources like oil to sell. Or if they do not become strong enough to exploit or tax others.

And then remains a central question: What is the real truth if the Quran is a made up book - not to mention if it in reality is from the dark forces? (Too many facts for comfort may indicate these two possibilities.)

133 28/83a: "That Home of the Hereafter We (Allah*) shall give to those who intend not high-handedness nor mischief on earth - - -". The behavior of Muslim warriors, assassins, terrorists and others through the times - is that mischief? If not: What kind of religion and what kind of god is this? And if it mischief: What then about Muslim warriors, assassins, terrorists, and others through the times, in the possible next life?

134 28/83c: "- - - mischief - - -". According to the Quran there is a lot of mischief done on Earth, which is not mischief, but laudable deeds, when done by Muslims - and especially so if it is done in the name of their claimed good and benevolent god.

135 28/83e: "- - - the End is (best) for the righteous". If Allah exists and is a god. And if the Quran tells the full truth and only the truth. Besides: As a book of a quality like the Quran is not from any god, who are the righteous?

136 28/83g: "- - - righteous". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is relative to the book's own partly immoral moral code and hardly existing empathy.

137 28/84a: “If any does good, the reward to him is better than his deed - - -". If the Quran tells the truth.

138 28/84b: “If any does good, the reward to him is better than his deed; but if any does evil, the doers of evil are only punished (to the extent) of their deeds.” It is not too difficult to reach Paradise for Muslims: Merits for good deeds are multiplied, and by a factor of up to 10 according to the Quran, whereas bad deeds only are valued once. And if you anyhow are on minus you can always do some good deeds like lying, stealing or murdering or waging war/terrorism for the religion and get lots of merit from the benevolent Allah

139 28/84d: "- - - good - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is relative to the book's own partly immoral moral code and hardly existing empathy.

140 28/84f: "- - - doers of evil - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is relative to the book's own partly immoral moral code and hardly existing empathy.

141 28/85b: "- - - He (Allah*) Who ordained the Quran for thee (people*) - - -". No god ever was involved in - or ordained - a book of a quality like the Quran.

142 28/85c: "- - - He (Allah*) Who ordained the Quran for thee (people*), will bring thee back to the Place of Return". If he exists - and if the Quran tells the full truth and only the truth.

143 28/85f: "My Lord (Allah*) knows best who it is that brings true guidance (Muhammad/good Muslims*), and who (non-Muslims#/bad Muslims*) is in manifest error". Once more back to the old fact: Only if he exists and in addition is something supernatural - white or dark.

144 28/85g: "- - - true guidance (= based on the Quran*) - - -". There is not much true guidance in a book full of mistakes. And there is not much true religious guidance in a book so full of mistakes, etc. that it proves that no god has been involved in it.

145 28/85i: "- - - error - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this one, except in physical meaning, it is meant in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

146 28/86b: "And thou (Muhammad/Muslims*) hadst not expected that the Book (the Quran*) would be sent to thee except as a Mercy from thy Lord (Allah*) - - -". No book like the Quran is sent from a god - or revered by him in his "home" - too many mistakes, etc.

147 28/86e: "- - - (Allah's Message) (the Quran*)". No god ever sent a message with so many errors like in the Quran. It is not from a god.

148 28/86f If the claimed "Mother Book" of the Quran is written before things happen, like Islam claims - may be existed since eternity - a story only can be correct if there is 100% predestination. If even 99% predestination, the laws of chaos would in relatively short time change the story/reality. See heading and 28/4c.

149 28/87a: "- - - let nothing keep you (Muhammad/Muslims*) back from the Signs of Allah after they have been revealed to thee - - -". See 28/87b just below: As there are no reliable signs of Allah anywhere, they also never were/are revealed.

150 28/87b: "- - - Signs of Allah - - -". There is not on single reliable sign which proves Allah. It there had existed one, Islam had written it with letters of fire everywhere.

151 28/87da: "- - - those who joins gods with Allah". See 25/18a above.

152 28/88b: "There is no god but He (Allah)". See f.x. 2/255a, 6/106b or 28/70a above.

153 28/88c: "To Him (Allah*) belongs the Command - - -". Similar often claimed in the Quran, but never proved anywhere.

154 28/88e: "- - - to Him (Allah*) will ye (all) be brought back (on the Day of Doom*)". Often claimed, but true only if Allah exists, is a major god, and the Quran in addition tells the full truth and only the truth on this point.

155 28/88f: "- - - to Him (Allah*) will ye (all) be brought back (on the Day of Doom*)". Contradicted by the Bible, which says you will be brought back to Yahweh that day, not to Allah. 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.

4881 + 155 = 5036 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".