(The “complete” list is in Part II, Chapter 1, Subchapter 4, Sections 1 through 8.)
Comments numbered by 3 numbers (included 00 or 0) a few places followed by one small letter = clear mistakes. Comments numbered by 00 or 0 followed by 1, 2 or 3 letters (big or small) = likely mistake.
*001 2/145+146: “If thou, after the knowledge (of the new qiblah (= what direction to face when you are praying*)*), wert to follow their (the People of the Book‘s*) (vain) desire - then wert thou indeed (clearly) in the wrong. The People of the Book know this as they know their own sons.” But it is most obvious that this is not true - neither Jews nor Christians know this - - - and especially not Christians, who have no qiblah – direction of facing when praying. (churches mostly make their congregation face east, but there is no qiblah). Similar info in 2/149.
***002 2/256: “- - - no compulsion in religion - - -“. This “flagship” for proving the peaceful Islam, disused daily by most Muslims and very frequently by Islam itself, is very wrong, because it is abrogated (made invalid) by at least these verses from the more bloody and inhuman later Medina surahs:2/191, 2/193, 3/28, 3/85, 3/148, 4/81, 4/90, 5/33, 5/72, 5/73, 8/12, 8/38-39 (the warning), 8/39, 8/60, 9/3, 9/5, 9/14, 9/23, 9/29, 9/33, 9/73, 9/123, 25/36, 25/52, 33/61, 33/73, 35/36, 47/4, 66/9 (ca. 30 different verses!!!). This includes many advising or permitting political, social, economical, etc. compulsion (with the sword in the background if you protest) – we mention a few here: 3/28, 3/85, 3/148, 4/81, 5/72, 5/73, 9/23, 14/7, 15/3, 33/73, 35/36.(At least 29 contradictions). (as for 5/33: Remember that almost all the wars and raids Muhammad fought, were wars of aggression, even if he called it jihad – even Badr, Uhud and the Trench/Medina were battles of defence in a war of aggression started and kept alive by Muhammad’s raids - mainly for money. Non-Muslims should not defend themselves and their belongings, according to 5/33). MUSLIMS NEVER - NEVER - MENTION THAT THIS VERSE IS THOUTOUGHLY ABROGATED, AND THUS WITHOUT VALUE.
In addition to this there are other kinds of compulsion than the sword – economy, brutal taxes, social stigma, “Berufsverbot” (good jobs prohibited), physical insecurity, etc. And all of them were backed by the sword – conform and obey and pay or else - - -!!
It must be added that some Muslims say this nonsense in good faith - they really believe it. But not one single Muslim educated in his religion, does not know he is lying each time he says that there is no compulsion in religion under Islam – but then defending and promoting Islam are two of the cases where Al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), is not only lawful, but compulsory in Islam, if it is necessary to use it. (A small PS: One or two of the verses may or may not be a little older than 2/256, but there once was a long debate in Islam if an older verse could abrogate a younger, and the conclusion was that that was possible).
One final small, but essential fact: 2/256 does not say “there is no compulsion in religion” like Muslims often quotes it – it says “Let there be no compulsion in religion”. It is not the statement of a fact, but a demand or a wish.
If this verse had not been abrogated, it had been “Glad Tidings”. Yes, even if Muslims had been honest and told the verse is abrogated by at least some 30 harsh later verses had helped – at least it had helped the moral standard of Muslims to be that honest.
**003 3/154: “Even if you had remained in your homes (instead of taking part in the battle of Uhud, where many were killed*), those for whom the death was decreed would certainly have gone forth to the place of their death (= they had died anyhow*)”. Here we have the predestination. You can as well do battle, because Allah has decided long time ago when you are to die. If your time is up, you will die no matter, even if you are lying in your bed. That means that to do battle is not dangerous, but you can win a lot of wealth - or slaves - and if you die in battle, you are sure to go to Paradise with its luxury life and willing houries (in addition to your wives), which you are not sure of if you die at home. The only intelligent thing to do is to fight for your prophet - or his successors. Today it is easy to prove by statistics that it is very wrong - but Muhammad did not know about statistics (and a god had not even needed statistics to know it was stupidity). Actually Islam today back-pedals very much concerning predestination - telling f. ex. that the Quran does not mean real predestination - but without explaining what it is instead. But in some cases the book is so clear, that it is impossible to explain it away - f. ex. many places connected to statements that when your time is out, you will die anyhow, and therefore you can as well go to war. An efficient war religion. See f. ex. 3/154).
004 3/190: “- - - there are indeed Signs for men of understanding - - -“. Psychologically a good slogan; who does not want to belong among the wise men, and who is not flattered by being included among the wise ones by the demi-god of a leader? – especially the uneducated and naïve followers - - - or the brainwashed ones. But the only two things a man of real understanding can learn from statements that are clearly invalid, because they just are cheap words that never are proved – only backed by demands and flatter for blind belief:
Also see 2/99.
005 4/11+12: The verses about inheritance are far from clear in Islam. Muhammad stated fixed proportions. But the trouble is that those proportions may add up to more than the full value of the property. If there f. ex. are these inheritors after a man’s death: 1 wife = 1/8 (3/24), 3 daughters = 2/3 (16/24), 1 father = 1/6 (4/24) and 1 mother = 1/6 (4/24). If you add these you will see that they are to inherit 27/24, which is mathematically and practically impossible. Or if a man dies and leaves only a sister and a brother: The sister gets ½ and the brother the double of what the sister gets = 3/2, which is an absurd joke. And what if a man had 2 wives, one with a child and the other not: Does the one with child get 1/8 and the other ¼? Etc. Juridical problems concerning inheritance are complicated under Islam because of these mistakes. But the shares are said to be ordained by Allah, the All-knowing!!!
00a 5/60: “Those who incurred the curse of Allah and his wrath, those of some he transformed into apes and swine - - -”. Hardly likely. This needs strong proofs.
**006 6/109: “- - - what will make you (Muslims) realise that (even) if (special) Signs came, they will not believe?” Wrong. If there were real proofs of a god, at least a good number of people would believe - that is a psychological fact. Mohammad even proved he knew that by telling that a few miracles from Moses made Pharaoh's magicians Muslims. And Jesus showed that miracles made wonders when it came to making people believe - and Muhammad at least knew a little about that. The sentence really sounds like fast-talk to “explain” why Allah/Muhammad was unable to produce unmistakeable proofs for Allah. Worse: An intelligent man like Muhammad knew this argument is a lie - and all the same he used it frequently. This simply is one of the places in the Quran where Muhammad knew he was lying. Similar claim f. ex. in 17/59.
00b 6/145: “I (Muhammad*) find not in the Message received by me by inspiration any (meat) forbidden to be eaten - - - unless it is dead meat, or blood poured fort, or the flesh of swine – for it is an abomination (nobody knows why it is prohibited*) – or - - - (meat) on which a name has been invoked, other than Allah’s”. This surah “appeared” ca. 621 AD. Some 6 years later Allah or Muhammad obviously discovered they had made a mistake and forgotten that also meat from donkey is forbidden for Muslims – this according to Hadiths (f. ex. Al-Bukhari) Then this verse was abrogated in order to add that kind of meat. This is one of the cases where the Quran is abrogated by Hadith. (But beware that if a Muslim is forced to eat these kinds of meat – f. ex. from sheer hunger – or is cheated to eat it – f. ex. someone tells him wrongly that the sausage contains no pork and he trusts what is said - then it is no sin). Similar claim in 2/173 – 16/115.
007 6/146: “For those who followed the Jewish Law, We (Allah*) forbade (to eat*) every (animal) with undivided hoof, and We forbade them the fat of the ox and the sheep - - -“. Skipping the fact that Allah and the god of the Jews, Yahweh, is not the same god – not unless he is schizophrenic – the correct last part is: - - - “the fat of cattle, sheep or goat” (3. Mos. 7/23). A minor mistake, but an omniscient god had not forgotten the goat.
008 6/151: “Come, I (Muhammad*) will rehearse what Allah hath (really) prohibited you from - - - (f. e x.*) be good to your parents”. This very obviously is wrong and a bit of a contradiction compared to other places in the Quran – Muhammad very obviously meant exactly the opposite; that you were ordered to be god to your parents. An omniscient god would not make such a mistake. Who made the Quran?
Also Muslim scholars agree that here the text is wrong – it is absolutely contrary to what the Quran says about this all other places. Which give you an unbeatable proof against any Muslim boasting that the book being without any mistakes at all. A proof and a fact sanctioned by Islam! (And besides: If here is a mistake, how many more are there?) Just remember: 6/151 (6 in Scandinavian = sex, and 151 has sex in both ends (1 + 5 = 6, and 5 + 1 = 6). Easy to remember.
00c 7/56: “Do no mischief on earth, after it has been set in order - - -“. According to our book, murder, rape, stealing/robbing, hate, suppression, murder, war, etc. are mischief. But may be it only is against Muslims that is immoral and forbidden? (Exemple: The crusaders doing bad things to Muslims were bad people. Muslims doing the same and worse against non-Muslims in f. ex. Sind (now mainly Pakistan) or Africa were heroes - and worse; they even today are reckoned to be heroes).
00d 7/102: “Most of them (people*) We (Allah*) found not men true to their covenance - - -“. “The Message of the Quran” (7/102, comment 81) tells that the exact word-for-word translation is: “We found by them nothing that tied them to what is truth and right”. And that book continues by telling that this may include man’s capability to instinctively to see the difference between right and wrong.
Now the fact that some of the most fundamental moral questions get the same answer in many societies indicates that something deep inside man tells some common moral truths: You shall not steal, you shall not be a nuisance – or worse – to others, you shall not rape, you shall not kill, etc. But Islam and the Quran is the best proof for that these inner messages are easy to override for a charismatic leader and for a society, and make immoral behaviour a praiseworthy moral codex: To steal/rob, rape, enslave, murder, and more – it all is “good and lawful” in the Quran.
009 9/36: “The number of months in the sight of Allah, is twelve (in a year) – so ordained by Him (Allah*) - - -“. A year is the time the Earth needs to make a full circle around the sun. A month really is the time the moon needs to make a full circle around the Earth. These two circles are not synchronized. Because of this something is wrong in this statement, as 12 such months are some 11 days less than a natural year. The Islamic year is an artificial construction whether ordained by Allah or not, the Muslim year is not really a year (103 Muslim years = roughly 100 real years). You will find Muslims glorifying the Muslim year that slides along the real year, but the plusses are much smaller than the minuses - - - plus it makes something wrong with this verse: A Muslim year simply is not a year.
00e 10/27: “But those who earned evil will have a reward of like evil - - -“. Muhammad, his men and his successors did enormously much evil – stealing/robbing, raping, enslaving, destroying places and lives and lands and cultures, extorting, terrorizing, torturing, murdering, inciting to hate and war and mass killings and suppression of other humans – only that it was sanctioned by a god, according to Muhammad, though a god that in case neither were omniscient, nor omnipotent (he f. ex. had to explain away all questions for miracles – some times with obviously logically invalid claims), not to mention benevolent - it will take quite a lot to give them “a reward of like evil.”
010 10/31: “’- - - who is it that rules and regulates all affairs?’ They (non-Muslims) will soon say, ‘Allah‘”. Wrong. People of other religions would name their own god (or gods). (Though non-Muslim Arabs at that time might say al-Lah - the old polytheistic Arab top god, a name that sounds like Allah.)
011 10/94: “- - - be nowise of those in doubt (about Islam*).” With all the mistakes etc. in the Quran, it is sheer naivety not to be in doubt, and at least check the facts.
012 10/96: “Those against whom the Word of thy Lord has been verified - - -.” That is one of the main problems for Islam – as it was for Muhammad: There exists no real verification of Islam – not one single proof, and not one single place. Only cheap words and claims that in NO case are verified. But glorification of and demands for blind belief you find aplenty.
Whenever we meet people using bluffs and defending bluffs – like here – for us that strongly indicates not only that they have no real arguments, but also that they know it themselves, and just try to defend wishful thinking or beliefs they are mentally unable to question.
013 11/14: “If then they (your false gods) answer not your (call), know ye that this Revelation (the Quran*) is sent down (replete) with the knowledge of Allah, - - -”. This is logically 100% wrong, as whether false gods or other gods answer or not, proves nothing about Allah. The only thing which may prove Allah, are unmistakable answers or deeds from Allah. Would a god try to cheat his - mostly illiterate and uneducated - audience in cheap and primitive ways like this?
00f 12/111: “This is - - - instruction for men endued with understanding.” It may be so – many Muslim thinkers and learned men were and are intelligent men. But to what avail? – when you give even the most intelligent persons wrong information from the start, their conclusions inevitably become just mistakes and errors, no matter how intelligent they are. To quote late Henrik Ibsen in “Peer Gynt”: “Naar utgangspunktet er som galest, blir resultatet tidt originalest” – which means something like ”When the facts are really wrong, the result frequently becomes very ’original’”. Also: “If you multiply correct information with one student, you get a better answer than when you multiply wrong information with a bunch of geniuses”.
014 13/17: “Thus doth Allah (by parables) show forth - - -”. Can it really be an omniscient god that shows forth so many mistakes? Nyet – a good English word that means no with some lines under it.
015 20/106+107: “He will leave them (mountains/mountain chains that will be removed*) as plains smooth and level. Nothing crooked or curved wilt thou see in their place”. This would be correct on a flat Earth. But as the Earth is curved, there has got to be curved lines at least where the big mountain chains will be removed. Any god had known.
016 20/116: “Prostrate yourself to Adam”. Wrong, as Adam did never exist - man developed from a primate. We debated with some Muslims some time ago about this, and they triumphantly told us we were wrong, for now science had found that there had been an Eve and an Adam. Which is quite true. But what they did not mention, was that this Eve lived about 160ooo - 200ooo years ago, and represented a so called “bottleneck” - a time when the human race nearly died out and only Eve had girl children, or the DNA of the other girl children died out later (this result is from tests of mitochondria DNA - mDNA - and mDNA only tells about the female side of the story, as mitochondria only goes from parents to child via the egg cell – carrying the feminine DNA). Then around 60ooo+ (ca. 64ooo?) years ago, something happened to Homo Sapiens. He still was Homo sapiens, but something – science does not know what - happened that started him on the road to technical and other developments. And there was another bottleneck - something similar to what happened to the “archaeological Eve” - happened once more. But this time it is readable in the Y chromosome, which only men have, and consequently only shows the masculine side. This shows that all men living today, has a common “father” (by archaeologists not by coincidence named “the archaeological Adam” or just “Adam”) - a single man that lived 140ooo (some say 100ooo) years later than Eve. Those archaeologists named them Adam and Eve, is quite logical. But they have nothing to do with the Adam and Eve in the Bible or with “Adam and his wife” in the Quran - how could they f. ex. be man and wife when they lived 100ooo - 140ooo years apart, and one in Africa, the other may be in Asia? Not to mention essential facts like this when they talk of the archaeological Adam and Eve, we find dishonest. And at least the scholars in Islam – the ones that teach their students and congregations and are interviewed and write and speak in the media – do know this very well. It is a well known scientific fact.
017 22/29: “- - - the rites (during Hajj in Mecca*) prescribed for them (Muslims*) - - -“. The rites in Mecca during Hajj are all taken over from the pagan/heathen times in Arabia – and in addition they are ever so childish and primitive; run 7 times back and forth between 2 hills, walk 7 times around a building, throw some stones at a mark pretended to be the devil, and kill one or more helpless animals, those are the main acts. An omniscient god should be able to prescribe something more valuable to the soul - and to the god.
00g 22/33: “- - - their place of sacrifice is near the Ancient House (Kabah*).” Wrong. The place of sacrifice is in Mina, kilometres from the Kabah.
018 22/34: “To every people did We (Allah*) appoint rites (of sacrifice) - - -.” Just one problem: The Christians have not been given/ordered any kind of sacrifices – or rites for such.” And how many religions really have rites “given by their god”, and how many religions do not pretend this?
00h 22/37: “It is not their (the sacrificial animals’ meat nor their blood, that reaches Allah: it is your piety that reaches Him - - -“. Does an omniscient god have to see you killing helpless animals to see that you are a pious believer? – not if he really is omniscient. If Allah really is omniscient and if the only purpose with sacrificing animals is to prove your piety, then the sacrifice in reality is without meaning, as an omniscient god all the time knows very well whether you are a pious believer or not. Actually the Quran many places makes it absolutely clear that Allah knows also the innermost corners of even the deepest parts of your soul. To what avail and what meaning and what logic is a “test” or a “proof” of your piety, if Allah already knows the answer on beforehand? - and by the way: The same goes for testing your piety in war and battle and kill and be killed, something that even is meaningless if Allah were a good god.
019 22/40: “- - - monasteries, churches, synagogues, - - -, in which the name of Allah is commemorated - - -“. The name of Allah is not commemorated there – on the contrary it is the name of Yahweh (or simply God) that is commemorated there. Muslims will claim that it is the same god – as usual without proving anything - but the teachings are fundamentally so different, that it is impossible that they are the same unless the god is mentally seriously ill. Also they will claim that the reason for the differences in the teachings are that the Bible are willfully falsified – something science long since has proved for one thing is not true (even the oldest scriptures are like todays', except for minor mistakes normal when manuscripts are copied by hand), and for another was physically impossible (not possible to make the same falsifications in all the connections in all the thousands of manuscripts spread over thousands of kilometres and owned by thousands of different owners – that often even disagreed (even strongly sometimes - f. ex. Jews and Christians) on many topics and would protest to falsifications of their valuable and cherished holy scriptures). Besides: How do you change words in an old scripture in such a way that modern science is unable to see the scratching or whatever? – because also all the old manuscripts had to be “corrected”, not only a change of texts when new copies were written. But this never proved claim that the Bible is falsified was the only way out and the only way Muhammad could save his religion and his platform of power when he finally understood how much was different between his teachings and the Bible.
00i 29/2: “Do men think - - - they will not be tested?” But why?! If Allah is omniscient and knows everything before – even decides everything before (in spite of the claim that man has (limited according to some Muslims) personal freedom to decide – though even Islam is unable to explain how it possible to combine the statement that Allah decides everything before, with the statement that man has free will (not strange, as it is a version of the time travel paradox, and that paradox is unsolvable)) – if all this, then why test to find an answer Allah already knows?
020 29/69: “And those who strive in Our (Cause) – We (Allah*) will certainly guide them to Our Paths - - -“. With so much wrong in the Quran, it is likely that this is wrong, too. At least it is far from a certainty. Similar claims in f ex. 2/137 – 27/79.
00j 30/32: “Those who split up their Religion, and become (mere) Sects - - -“. We have been told there exist or have existed some 3ooo Muslim sects. We have not been able to verify the number, but it is clear there are quite a number – from Wahhbism in Saudi Arabia and stricter, to Amaddiyyas and others. It also is clear that through the history there have been more – some have been eradicated in blood even, as there is no compulsion in religion, according to Islam. As the Quran is said to be very clear and easy to understand, one impertinent question is: Which of the sects understands it correctly? – and why do all the others understand it differently? – and last, but very far from least: What is really the correct understanding?
021 30/2-4: “The Roman Empire (Bysantz/Constantinople*) has been defeated (by Persia*) in a land close by (Damascus 613 AD, Jerusalem 614 AD, Egypt 615-616 AD – may be a battle in Syria in 615 AD – just pick your choice (the surah is from 615 or 616 AD)); but they, (even) after (this) defeat of theirs will soon be victorious – Within a few (“bid”) years.” Bysantz defeated Persia in 628 AD after they first had had a number of defeats at the start of the war.
022 32/22: “And who does more wrong than one to whom are recited the Signs of his Lord (Allah*), and who then turns therefrom?” There is nothing wrong in being sceptical to a religion built only on a book with many mistakes and not one single valid proof, and with many “signs” and “proofs” without any value, and which may have the effect of cheating uneducated or not intelligent persons - and on top of all a book which is told only by a man whose honesty normal, intelligent people would suspect because of the morality of his deeds and demands and some of his words –
023 33/8: “That (Allah) may question the (custodians (see 33/8 just above*)) of Truth concerning the Truth they (were charged with) - - -”. The Quran says/pretends that the old scriptures of Israel were the same as in the Quran, but that bad Jews distorted them. If that had been true, they at best were charged with bits and pieces of truth - see all mistakes, lofty “explanations” and invalid “signs” and “proofs” in the Quran.
024 33/62: “(Such was) the practice (kill non-believers without mercy*) (approved) of Allah among those who lived aforetime: no change wilt thou find in the practice (approved) of Allah.” Muhammad here refers to the Mosaic and the Christian religions (and he sets Allah = Yahweh) when he talks about “those who lived aforetime”. But even though OT is hard against many non-Jews, the war and the killing was to get room for living for the Jews, not wanton murdering just because they were not Jews or for plunder and slaves. And in NT: Try to find a single place saying that non-believers shall be murdered just because they have another religion – such an order simply does not exist. Any god had been lying if he said this, but Muhammad did not know the Bible well, so may be – just may be – he thought he spoke the truth. In any case it was a good statement for a warlord trying to secure and enlarge his platform of power. (This surah is believed to be from 627 – 629 AD – before he had gained absolute control by conquering Mecca in 630 AD.)
**025 35/24: “- - - and there never was a people, without a warner (a prophet for Allah*) having lived among them (in the past) - - -”. As said before: Neither in archaeology, nor in architecture, nor in art, nor in history, nor in literature, nor in folklore, nor in folk tales - not even in fairy tales we find a single trace of any teaching of monotheism, with two well known (Yahweh and Allah) and two or three less known exceptions (Pharaoh Akn-Aton, praying to the sun, an Arab sect around 600 BC - likely inspired by the two monotheistic religions in the area, and the Zoroastrians after a fashion). Some places one or a few gods dominated, but no traces from monotheism.
In the Americas - absolutely no traces.
In Australia - absolutely no traces.
In the Pacific - absolutely no traces.
In Europe - absolutely no traces.
In Africa - absolutely no traces with the exception of one single man: Pharaoh Akn-Aton - but he so definitely was not speaking about Allah. He wanted the sun for the only god.
In Asia - absolutely no traces, except in what we now call the Middle East: The Christians, the well known Jews and as already mentioned the Zoroastrians (after a fashion) and a less well known Arab monotheistic and at that time not very old sect - most likely inspired by the Jews. Of course there was Buddha, but he was/is no god, and besides he accepted that gods existed, but told they were on wrong ways not leading to nirvana - no monotheism. 124ooo (or more - the number is said to be symbolic, as there may have been more) prophets had to have left some traces somewhere.
This statement simply is not true. If Islam still insists, they will have to produce strong proofs. “Strong statements demands strong evidence”, to quote science - not just loose claims, invalid “signs” and “proofs”, and more loose statements. Similar claims in 16/36 – 30/47 – 39/71 – 43/6.
026 38/87: “- - - a Message to all the Worlds.” Likely the Quran and Islam should reach all the 7 Earths that the Quran mentions – but there are no 7 Earths (flat - and one above the other according to Hadiths.) See 65/12.
**00k 39/7: “No bearer of burdens can bear the burdens of another”. Can this really be true? In that case this is yet another proof for that Allah cannot be the same god as Yahweh, because one of the things Yahweh stresses in the NT via Jesus, is that a good Christian shall help others with their burdens.
*027 42/30: “Whatever misfortune happens to you, is because of things your hands have wrought - - -”. Wrong. Sometimes it is because of bad luck and coincidence and sometimes f. ex. by what others do. F. ex. if some terrorists - normally Muslims - kills or mutilates you for things you absolutely are not guilty of. And not least it may be because of natural catastrophes – like the 2004 tsunami that killed more than 300ooo, mostly Muslims. Besides: How does this verse correspont to all the claims that Allah decides everything?
**028 43/6: “But how many were the prophets We (Allah*) sent amongst the people of the old?” Well, Hadith says 124ooo - and it is not true, because some of so many had had to leave some traces. There are none.
Besides: With so many different people so many different places in the world - why were there no other prophet any place in the world at the time of Muhammad - yes, none at all for a very long time before Muhammad? According to the time scale of Genesis and the Torah and the Bible that the Quran do not correct, and 124ooo prophets, it should mean hundreds or a few thousands for each generation. Even for the correct age of homo sapiens - modern man - there should be nearly one new prophet some place each ande every year!
And: Islam’s explanation for why Allah wanted new holy books on Earth now and then, is that the world changes, and then some details in the holy book needs adjusting. Why then is Muhammad said to be the last one? – and the Quran to be the last book, a book that is too inhuman, too primitive on justice, and too outdated on warfare (too destructive) for modern societies, just to mention 3 subjects. The world has changed MUCH more between Muhammad and now, than between Adam and Muhammad, and man needs new instruction for a less inhuman world - and an omniscient god had known that on beforehand. Besides: If the holy books are copies of the Mother Book in heaven, that means the Mother Book has to be changed for each new edition to give a corrected copy to send down - but the Mother book is perfect and unabrigded since the start of time!?
029 61/13: “- - - Glad Tidings - - -“. Permission to steal/rob, suppress, rape, enslave, keep harems, murder, etc. which are central parts of the Quran – is that “Glad Tidings”? Direct orders to go to war and kill and suppress and enslave and loot and destruct, and may be be killed or wounded yourself – is that “Glad Tidings”? Direct orders to concentrate only on religious knowledge and knowledge related to religion (indirectly very clear in the Quran and directly and unmistakably very clear in Islam from very early – and totally dominant from 1095 AD) – is that “Glad Tidings”. Total destruction or conquest of all advanced countries and cultures they met in Africa, Europe and Asia at least as far east as what was then India – destruction it took the locals at least 200 years to overcome (if ever) – is that “Glad Tidings”? The inhumanity in the war religion – is that “Glad Tidings”? The reduction of women to third class citizens – if really citizens – (Islam’s claim that women were/are better off under Islam than before, only is true for some parts of what is now the Muslim area, mainly in parts of Arabia – and even there it was not true everywhere and had not necessarily been true today if it was not for the suppressing factor of Islam) – it that “Glad Tidings”? The enslavement and suppression and mass murders/slaughtering of non-Muslims – was and is (see Muslims at war and terror even today) that “Glad Tidings”? What a war religion did and does to the societies and the personal soul – is that “Glad Tidings”? The suppression of thinking – all non-religious philosophy, and all religious non-conform (to Islam) thinking – is that “Glad Tidings”?
Well, yes, it is for some Muslims – the ones of the warriors that survived in good health and became rich from looting, and the ones of the leaders that became rich in wealth and women from looting/slave taking and taxation plus became powerful, then and today. Plus for the minority that needs a religion to feel well – but they had felt as well if they believed strongly in another religion (this is a fact we see from religious people in any religion).
For everyone else it was everything from “Bad Tidings” to terror – and still is (just look at the backward societies it resulted in once the riches from looting came to an end – and even worse when the hard taxation or pogroms of non-Muslim underlings, reduced the number and/or economy of those underlings and hence the tax income for the Muslim leaders. Look f. ex. at the development in India, China, Brazil of today – especially India and China were far behind many of the Islamic countries around 1950, but what has been happening during these years? Take away the oil, the money from outside the area and the ideas from outside, more or less forced on the clergy and the leaders from media and others – what has really happened in the Islamic area since f. ex.1950 compared to many other places?
Yes: For everyone else it was and still is everything from “Bad Tidings” to terror.
For Muslims the part about heaven is “glad tidings” – if it is true. Also the fact that killing, rape, enslaving, suppression and stealing are “good and lawful” in the service of Allah (and anything can be declared a jihad) are glad news for the right – or wrong – kind of Muslims. The rest of the tidings are terror also for them – hate, war, suppression of women, stagnant society, immoral moral, only religious knowledge really counts, servility under authorities, etc. Even for Muslims this claim at best only is partly true.
Especially so if Islam is a made up religion. And even more so if there in addition somewhere is a true religion that Islam blocks its members from even looking for.
The very best one can say about the Quran and “Glad Tidings”, is that for some parts of it partly was glad tidings, and that for some others parts of it brings peace to the soul – like strong believers gain from ANY of the main religions.
For all others – included the majority of Muslims – it was “Bad Tidings”. For Muslims especially so if Islam is a made up religion. Which it seems to be from the proofs of the Quran and from the demands from and the life of Muhammad. There are many more of this claim – partly true for at least some Muslims in a way, but terror for all others – in the Quran – f. ex. 2/119 – 17/9 – 33/45 – 33/47.
***030 84/15+16: “For his Lord (Allah*) was ever watchful of him (non-Muslim*)! So I (Muhammad*) do call to witness the ruddy glow of Sunset - - -”. A serious one - here it once more is Muhammad who is speaking - in what is said to be the copy of the Mother Book (13/39 - 43/4) in Heaven, made of Allah or existed since eternity. How is that possible?
NB: If you find any mistakes anywhere, please inform us. If it is a real mistake, it will be corrected.
NB, NB, NB:
1. Read first the 2 small chapters "Some Essentials for how the Quran is to be read and understood" (VII-10-1) and "The Quran is to be understood literally if nothing else is indicated" (VII-10-2).
2. http://www.1000mistakes.com is blocked by many Muslim authorities. To debate with persons in such areas, cut and paste what you want from the pages and send it under titles different from http://www.1000mistakes.com.
3. http://www.1000mistakes.com is one of 9 pages which Muslim organisetions warned especially against in 2008 and 2009 - it could make especially procelytes lose their belief in Islam; correct and "down-to-the-earth" information works. In this connection it is worth noting that in the "warning" http://www.1000mistakes.com was one of 3 which neither was accused of bringing wrong facts, nor of being a hate page.
4. Comment 141 (to verse 6/149) in “The Message of the Quran” (see point 5) explains (translated from Swedish) about Allah's claimed omniscience vs. man's claimed free will:
“With other words: The real connection between Allah’s knowledge about the future (and consequently about the unavoidable in what is to happen in the future*) on one side and man’s relatively (!!*) free will on the other – two statements that seems to contradict each other – lies outside what is possible for humans to understand, but as both statement are made from Allah (in the Quran*) both must be true”. Unbelievable. Blind belief is the only correct and intelligent way of life, even in the face of the utterly impossible!!
5. And an afterthought: In the book “The Message of the Quran”, certified by Al-Azhar Al-Sharif Islamic Research Academy in Cairo (one of the 2-3 top universities in the Muslim world on such subjects) in a letter dated 27. Dec. 1998, it is admitted rather reluctantly that there are no proofs for Allah, and that it is not possible to prove him. An additonal point here is that if there is no proof for Allah and impossible to prove him, automatically there also is no proof for, and impossible to prove Muhammad's claimed connection to a god. And if there is no Allah and/or no connection between Muhammad and a god, what then is Islam?
6. Further: All the mistakes, contradictions, etc. in that book prove 100% that the Quran is not made by an omniscient god - no god makes such and so many mistakes, etc. If then Islam is a made up religion, what then about all the Muslims who have been prohibitted from looking for a real religion (if such one exists)? And where will they in case wake up after living and practising such an inhuman war religion like Islam is according to the Quran (and to Hadiths), if there is a second life somewhere? - Hell or Paradise?
7. NB and PS: No matter how sure you are about something, if it is not proved, it is not knowledge, only belief or strong belief, and can be wrong. Only what is proved or possible to prove is knowledge.
(As http://www.1000mistakes.com is blocked in many Muslim areas - which shows they are afraid of it and lack arguments (if they had real arguments for http://www.1000mistakes.com is wrong, blocking was unneccessary) - "cut and paste" whatever you want from it and send if you want to inform or to debate there. Remember to omit the name http://www.1000mistakes.com).
PS: If we are blocked centrally - f. ex. by spam (there is too much at times already from unfriendly sources) we will reopen with new address somewhere else, and announce the new address om f. ex. http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/islam. Also if your comments to us do not reach us, any comments posted on the thread "What is it with http://www.1000mistakes.com ?" (or make a page containing "1000 mistakes" in the title yourself if you want) on that forum will be read by us - it is a big international debate page.
Please inform all and everybody and all relevant fora - f. ex. Internet pages for debate or information - about the address http://www.1000mistakes.com. It is information that is urgently needed by many, not least by Muslims. No god made a book with so many mistakes and other wrongs - and if the Quran and Islam are made up by humans or dark forces, where are the followers of this inhumanly dark and brutal war religion heading for in a possible next life?