1000+ Claims in the Quran - Invalid Unless Proven, Surah 89

 

SURAH 89: AL-FAJR (The Break of Day)

(Mecca, 611 - 615 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.

002 89/5a: "Is there (not) in these (verses 1-4*) an adjuration (or evidence) for those who understand?" No, there is not. There exists nowhere any valid proof at all for Allah or for Islam or for Muhammad - why do you think Muhammad and Islam so much glorifies blind belief and are so aggressive if anyone says that Muhammad is not reliable like a holy saint? If there had existed the smallest proof, Islam had long since seen to it that every person on Earth had known it.

003 89/6a: "- - - the 'Ad (people) - - -". A tribe from old Arab folklore. It may or may not have existed. But if it ever existed, it is highly unlikely it came to an end in the way the Quran describes - unless Islam produces some proofs for once.

004 89/7: (YA6114): “- - - Iram - - -“. Is this the name of a city? – the capital of 'Ad in case? Or is it the name of a man – an old hero (from 'Ad?)? Islam does not know. But there is a difference between a city and a man.

A small but telling episode: In 2012 science found a reference to a place named Iram in an old cuneiform scripture. Muslims at once screamed: "The Quran is proved" - they even did not add "on this point". But:

1. There existed at least 2 - 3 places named Iram in the old times. This has been known for years.

2. Iram also could be the name of a man.

3. Islam does not know if the Quran here meant a place or a man.

4. Even if the Quran meant a place, one does not know which of the Irams it talked about.

5. One also does not know which of the Irams the cuneiform tablet referred to.

This thus is totally invalid as a proof for the Quran. The only thing it proves, is that there existed at least one place named Iram somewhere. (But science as said already knew there existed at least 2 or 3.)

But this easy it is for (some?) Muslims to find "proofs" for their religion - and this much are many of the "proofs" for the Quran and for Islam really worth.

005 89/9a: "- - - Thamud - - -". A tribe from old Arab folklore. Muhammad said they were eradicated by Allah because of sins, but this he said about all tribes from old folklore, empty buildings and ruins. It is unlikely to be true, unless Islam for once brings at least one real proof.

006 89/11: "- - - transgressed - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

007 89/13: "Therefore did thy (Muslims*) Lord (Allah*) pour on them ('Ad, Thamud, Pharaoh Ramses II, etc.) a scourge - - -". Muhammad claimed that the inhabitants of all ruins in and around Arabia and in all tales about earlier people in Arab folklore + Ramses II and his people, were killed by Allah because they had sinned against him. In case this is true, Allah is a far more bloody and revengeful god than Yahweh - but science has a number of other explanations for their disappearances (in a harsh and warlike land there really are other possible explanations - this even more so as Muhammad as normal never proved anything about his claims on this point, just like on most other points).

008 89/14: "For thy (Muslims'/people's*) Lord (Allah*) is (as a Guardian) - - -". We are back to the old fact: Not unless he exists - and in this case also not unless he in addition is a good and benevolent god.

009 89/15a: "Now, as for man, when his Lord (Allah*) trieth him - - -". A trial only was possible if Allah exists (but if he does, a trial was possible no matter if Allah is a god or something else dressed up like a god - actually the last explanation in case is most likely, as there is no reason for an omniscient god to try anyone, as he knows everything already, and even more so if he also predestines everything).

010 89/15b: "Now, as for man, when his Lord (Allah*) trieth him - - -". The old question to this unanswered enigma: Why did - and does - an omniscient god need do try his followers when he according to many places in the Quran knows well their innermost self?

011 89/22: "And thy (people’s*) Lord (Allah*) commeth - - -". Often claimed, never proved - - - and not possible unless Allah do exist (see 89/15a above).

012 89/27a: "- - - the righteous - - -". Muslims.

013 89/27b: "- - - righteous - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

014 89/28: "- - - thy (people's*) Lord (Allah*) - - -". If he exists and if he is a god, and if the Quran in addition has explained his relationship to man correctly.

015 89/29: "- - - My (Allah's*) devotees - - -". See 89/28 just above - except if he exists, it is possible to be his devotees no matter whether he belongs to the good or the dark forces.

016 89/30: "- - - My (Allah's*) Heaven - - -". See 89/28 above. As for the heaven see 10/9f above.

9198 + 16 = 9214 remarks.

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

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".