PART II, CHAPTER 1, Subchapter 4, Section 3 (= II-1-4-3)

MISTAKES AND ERRORS - MISTAKEN FACTS - IN THE QURAN, THE HOLY BOOK OF MUHAMMAD, MUSLIMS, ISLAM, AND ALLAH. THE "COMPLETE" LIST - THE "ENCYCLOPAEDIA" - BASED ON SURAH AND VERSE NUMBER

(PART II, CHAPTERS 1 - 10 included subchapters = MEGA MISTAKES, MISTAKES, ERRORS, CONTRADICTIONS, INVALID LOGIC, ABROGATIONS, ETC. IN THE QURAN - THE HOLY BOOK OF MUHAMMAD, MUSLIMS, ISLAM, AND ALLAH. AT LEAST 100% PROOF FOR THAT SOMETHING IS WRONG - NO OMNISCIENT GOD MAKES MISTAKES)

For the fact mistakes and errors based on themes, see Part II, Chapter 1, Subchapter 3, Sections 1 through 16.

SOME CLEAR FACT MISTAKES AND ERRORS IN SURAHS 11 THROUGH 20 IN THE QURAN - THE HOLY BOOK OF MUHAMMAD, MUSLIMS, ISLAM, AND ALLAH

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.

SURAH 11:

*001 11/1: “- - - from one Who is Wise and Well-Acquainted (with all things)”. The mistaken facts in the Quran shows he is not well enough acquainted with all things. Or that someone else made the Quran.

**002 11/2: “(Say) ‘Verily, I am (sent) unto you (people*) from Him (Allah*) - - -“. According to Ibn Warraq the word “(Say)” does not exist in the Arab original. That means that here it is Muhammad who speaks. There are a few places (8? + angels speaking) like that in the Quran. But how is it possible that Muhammad speaks in a book (pretended to (?) be made by Allah or existed since eternity – and sent down by Allah? (Some Muslims say the word is just forgotten – but how many more words may then have been forgotten in the Quran?)

003 11/7a: “He (Allah*) it is Who created the heavens (plural and wrong) and the earth in six days” - and another place says 8 days (contradiction). Once more: It took a lot of more time. And any god knows that - but Muhammad did not. (Muslims sometimes say that the Arab word for day, also may mean aeon, but as we have found this translation of the word in no quality book and heard it from no really educated person, this seems to be an obvious try to explain this blunder away). Also see the 4 Mega Mistakes.

004 11/7b: “- - - heavens - - -“. Wrong. See 2/22a.

00a 11/14a: “- - - this revelation (the Quran*) is sent down - - -“. That is just the question for Islam: No god sends down a book so full of mistakes, etc.

005 11/14b: “- - - this revelation (the Quran’) is sent down (replete) with the knowledge of Allah, - - -”. Well, all the mistakes show that either it is not made by an omniscient god or that something else is wrong.

*006 11/14c: “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 that 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? In case; why did he need to cheat them? And: There never was a clear answer unmistakeably form Allah.

007 11/17a: “- - - Clear (Sign) - - -“. See 2/99.

Besides: 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 are no ptoof for Allah and impossible to ptove him, automatically there also is no proof for, and impossible to prove Muhammad's claimed connection to Allah.

008 11/17b: “Be not in doubt thereof (the Truth – the Quran – from Allah*))”. Wrong. The Quran is so full of mistakes, etc., that it is utterly naïve not to doubt.

009 11/17c: “- - - the Truth from thy Lord (Allah*) - - - “. Either it is a mistake that the Quran is from an omniscient god, or it is a mistake that Allah is omniscient. Too much is wrong in the book.

*010 11/22: “Without a doubt, these (the non-Muslims*) are the very ones who will lose most in the Hereafter”. All the mistakes, wrong logic, etc. in the Quran make it very clear it is not from a god. Partly because of that – and this alone is a 100% proof for that something is wrong – there is every reason to doubt Islam is a genuine religion. And if it is a made up religion – and Islam will have a tough job proving the opposite – there is every reason to doubt Muslims will fare any better than others. On the contrary: If there do exist a real religion and if this is run by a good god, the Muslims will not fare well with if they have lived according to the Quran’s horrific ethics, even worse moral codex, inhuman treatment of fellow human, but non-Muslim, beings, etc.

011 11/28: “- - - Clear Signs - - -“. In this case it is said to be Noah who was speaking, and according to the Quran Noah was a devoted Muslim - - - but there never was a clear sign/proof for anything concerning Allah – not anything at all is proved. (That is one of the main reasons why blind belief is demanded and glorified by Muhammad and by Islam).

012 11/40a: “- - - and the fountains of the earth gushed forth (and made the flood for Noah*) - - -.” The Quran does not explicit say that the flood covered the entire world, and as there are no traces of such a flood found, many Muslims try to tell you that the flood only was regional. Not educated Muslims may honestly believe so, but the educated ones know that is one more untrue story – another al-Taqiyya or Kitman – because the Quran clearly tells that the Ark ended on a high mountain in Syria, something that demanded so high a level of water that it was physically impossible unless the flood was universal (the water had disappeared to non-flooded places if not). Perhaps 1000 m above our sea level?

But that makes a problem for this verse. Really big quantities of water - giving may be 1000 m of water all over the globe - could not gush forth from the Earth without leaving huge empty holes in there – either really empty, or at least with highly reduced pressure, (though most likely empty, as it is nearly impossible to compress water and then explain the gushing with expantion of the water (to compress water to double density, we have read that you need a pressure of 44000ooo kg/cm2 – or very roughly 30 times the pressure at the centre of Earth)). These holes would be too big (in order to contain enough water) to be stable, and would collapse. There is nowhere on Earth traces from such big collapses.

(It is here among other places you will meet the explanation like the flood = the filling up of the Mediterranean Basin – a story so obviously an al-Taqiyya (lawful lie) that it is distasteful. That filling up happened 4 – 5 million years ago, and long before modern man existed. Besides it happened because Africa and Europe slowly drifted apart and the Strait of Gibraltar very slowly opened – centimetres a year – which means that the opening and thus the stream of water was small. The filling up took a hundred years and may be much more, with the water level rising slowly – one or a few meters a year – and nothing like the cataclysm of the flood of Noah. Something no educated Muslim has an excuse for not checking up before telling stories like this, especially since this is a well known fact among educated people, and they most likely are aware of the real facts before spinning such a tale.

**013 11/40b: “We (Allah*) said (to Noah*):’ embark therein (the ark*), of each kind (of animals*) two - male and female, and your family - - -”. The Quran says nothing about the size of the ark. But the Bible according to the scientific magazine Lexicon says nearly 200 m long, some 30 m wide and some 12 m high with 3 floors. That makes some 18000 square meters roughly speaking. (NIV tells 300 cubits long, 50 cubits wide and 30 cubits height = 140 m long, 23 m wide and 13, 5 m high. With 3 floors that means some 9600 sq. m. only.) But there are much more than 10ooo kinds of “normal” animals, nearly 2ooo kinds of birds, and at least 10 million kinds of insects and other insect-like animals, and easily a million other small animals – like slugs, worms, etc. There simply would not be enough space for so many, not to mention 2 of each. In addition it would be the question of food for all the animals. The Quran says nothing about how long time the voyage lasted, but according to the Bible it took more than one year. That would take one hec of a lot of food for that many animals - and how did they f. ex. store the meat for the carnivores, or live insects for some spiders, etc.? All that food would take up a lot of space - much more than the animals themselves. Impossible in that “small” boat. And on top of that, there was the question of special food for special animals - eucalyptus leaves for the koalas f. ex. It further is likely that the Garden of Eden was in the south of Iraq (if it ever existed) according to science - - - and then there is the question where they found f. ex. reindeer, polar bears, caribous, condors, lamas, pumas, kangaroos, orang-utans etc., etc., just to mention a few. And there is the question on who were feeding and giving water to all these animals, not to mention who kept it all clean - the family of Noah after all was rather small (8 according to the Bible). Also the laws of nature tell that one pair of each would not be enough to establish all the animal races - no DNA variety. Actually the DNA variety science has found, talks about very different lengths of time since most animal groups were just a few ones. The story simply is not true. There is a small chance that a man like Noah once lived and survived a flood big enough for him to seem to cover the entire world - f. ex. he survived with his family and his cattle, etc. Science knows about one or two really huge floods at roughly the right time (one in Mesopotamia and the flooding of the Black Sea - see below)). But everything is in an after all much smaller scale, and not like told in the Quran.

Muslims try to reduce the problems by telling that Noah only should bring two of each of domesticated cattle - but that is not what the Quran says. They further tell that it just was a big, but regional flood - that is not said in the Quran, but it is also not said it was a worldwide one (but see rhe end of the "travel" below). But then some make a real blunder - or try cheating - because what follows below is not well known by most people, only to the more educated ones, and cheating of the “rank and file” therefore is easy: F. ex. “The Message of the Quran”, certified by a top Muslim university (Al-Ahzar Al-Sharif Islamic Research Academy, Cairo) tells:

1. The flood must have been the filling up of the Mediterranean Sea - without mentioning that that happened (when the Gibraltar Strait opened) some 4 - 5 million years ago. (See above).
2. All this also without mentioning that the filling up took many years (see above) - may be as much as 100 or more - as the opening was small in the beginning and the stream slowed down long before it was full. Near what is now Israel and Egypt the water rose just some meters a year - no terribly rough flooding, like described in the Quran (f. ex. 11/42).
3. How could the slow filling up of that sea, give a flash flood in what is now Iraq, where this is supposed to have happened? - in or near Iraq somewhere.
4. May be they mix it up with the filling up of the Black Sea (also mentioned by Muslims)? But also that took time - and was far from Iraq. That happened after the last ice age that stopped 10ooo – may be as late as under a warm period (even less ice) 5700 years ago. The time may be ok, but then either Noah or the story in this case has travelled – and also this slow filling up cannot explain the weather and the waves.
5. There also is a very speculative theory about an asteroide or something falling into the Indian Ocean - an old tale mentioning a special astronomical constallation in case pinpoints the start of the flood to 10. May 2807 BC. But it is a very speculative theory only built on old legends and a hint of Chineese history.
6. Finally there is the extreme, but little known flood in Mesopotamia – now approximately Iraq – some 5200 years ago. It may easily explain the flood itself, and if this was an extraordinary “ordinary” flood, it also may explain the weather. But even if big, it was a local happening. (But then the Quran does not directly claim it was covering the entire world – but on the other hand see just below - the end of the journey).
7. And another conundrum that does not fit the Muslim “explanations” about a “local” flood: The Quran claims the ark stranded on a mountain in Syria (Mount al-Judi (11/44) - not Ararat in Turkey. Mt. al-Judi today is identifiead as the 2089 m high "jabal judi" or "judi dagh" near the modern town Cizre south of the Turkish border.) For the ark to have stranded on a high mountain, the flood had to be universal – if not the water had streamed away to empty, lower places – elementary knowledge of physics.

For a university to back a bluff like the flood = filling up the Mediterranean Sea, etc. is dishonest and tells something - the professors at a university have to know such facts, and know it is wrong, or at least they have no excuse for not checking if it was possible. It is a well known fact in educated circles. Similar claims in 23/27 – 26/119

*014 11/42: “So the Ark floated with them on waves (towering) like mountains, and Noah called out to his son (who was at the shore*) - - -”. When a boat is floating among waves like mountains, it is not possible to communicate with anyone ashore. Muhammad, living in a desert, may not have known. But no god had made a mistake like this - telling they could communicate. That kind of waves are too noisy, and so is the wind that normally accompanies that kind of seas, plus you have to stay far from the shore not to be taken by the waves and smashed against the mentioned shore. Dramatic fairy tale with wrong facts.

This also is a proof for that the dramatic scenarios in the Quran cannot be explained with the filling of the Mediterranean or the Black Sea: Even an enormous waterfall does not produce waves “like mountains“ - a relatively stable stream of water does not do that except close to the waterfall, even when it is enormous, and as they are reduced proportional to the distance they run – double distance = half the energy per meter wave front, because they spread out in a (semi) circle (NB: This does not go for windblown waves with linear wave fronts, and definitely not if the wind is still blowing and transferring energy to the waves – only where the source of the waves is a “point” like a waterfall – or a stone thrown into the water). And a waterfall – no matter how big - never produce a terrible storm (mentioned other places).

015 11/43: “The son (of Noah*) replied - - -“. In that kind of weather neither a call nor a reply was possible – the roaring of the wind and the crashing of the waves are far too noisy even if a short distance had been possible. In addition you have the effect of the wind “blowing away” the sound of your voice. Also see 11/42 just above.

016 11/44: “O, earth swallow up thy water - - -“. Physically impossible with that amount of water. But if the flood was local, the water could go to the sea. (But the fact that the Quran tells the ark ended at Mt. al-Judi (earlier Mt. Qardu according to Muhammad Asad: “The Message of the Quran) in Syria, indicates that it was something really big – the water cannot reach high up on a mountain in Syria, unless the water level is roughly the same all over the world.

017 11/53: “- - - Clear (Sign) - - -“. Wrong. See 2/99.

018 11/59: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

019 11/63: “- - - Clear (Sign) - - -“. Wrong. See 2/99.

020 11/64: “This she-camel of Allah - - -“. This refers to an old Arab legend Muhammad used in the Quran: A camel came out from a solid cliff and became a prophet. Believe it if you want.

*021 11/67: “A (mighty) Blast overtook the wrongdoers (the people of Thamud*), and they lay prostrate (dead*) in their homes before the morning - - -.” Well, in 7/78 they were killed by an earthquake. One of them must be wrong – simply one more contradiction, even though the claimed absence of any contradictions is said in the Quran to prove it is sent down from Allah. The presence of contrasictions concequently then should prove it is not from Allah.

022 11/69: “- - - glad tidings - - -“. At best only partly right. See 2/97c above and 61/3 below.

023 11/88: “- - - Clear (sign) - - -“. Wrong. See 2/39.

*024 11/92: “He (Lot*) said, ’O my people!” Lot was an immigrant from far away (Ur in Chaldea in South Iraq – now he was living near the Dead Sea, most likely in what is now Jordan). This according to both the Bible and the Quran. The people of Sodom and Gomorrah were not Lot’s people. And both the Quran and the Bible show there were distance between Lot and the locals – they definitely had not become his people. But as the Quran states that prophets (which Lot was according to the Quran) except Muhammad only were sent to their own people, the book needs to make him a local in the area, belonging to the local people.

025 11/93: “And O my (Lot’s*) people!” See 11/92 just above.

026 11/103: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

027 11/107: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

028 11/108: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

029 11/110: “We (Allah*) certainly gave the Book to Moses, - - -”. According to science he certainly did not - those books are written 400-700 years later. (The Bible tells Moses got the 10 commandments written on tablets of stone + he got the law verbally and wrote it down later. The Law is sometimes used as a name for the Book of Moses, but in reality the laws only is a minor part of it).

030 11/120: “- - - in them (the stories in the Quran*) there cometh to thee (Muhammad/the Muslims*) the Truth - - -”. With all the mistaken facts, mistaken grammar, etc, and perhaps even more mistakes in the book, it can at best be partly true - and then the trouble is to find out what is true and what not, of the tales you do not positively know are wrong.

031 11/123: “- - - heavens - - -“. Wrong. See 2/29.

Surah 11: At least 31 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.

SURAH 12:

001 12/1: “- - - the Perspicuous Book (the Quran*)”. A book with this many mistakes, invalid logical points, etc, is hardly perspicuous.

002 12/2a: “We (Allah*) has sent it (the Quran) down - - -“. No omniscient god has sent down a book with this many mistakes, contradictions, cases of wrong logic, etc. Which means that either Allah is not omniscient, or that someone else has made the Quran.

003 12/2b: “- - - in order that ye may learn wisdom”. No-one learns wisdom from a book with lots of mistakes and wrong logic.

004 12/7: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

005 12/19+20: Here is something wrong - or one more contradiction. Verse 19 tells that “travellers” found Joseph in the well where his brothers had thrown him down, and took him for a slave and concealed him. Verse 20 tells his brothers sold him for a few dirhams (small silver coins). Both cannot be true.

00a 12/31: There is little logic in 2 points here: Why giving them knives before showing them Joseph? (Some Muslims say it was to cut fruit, but when you cut fruit, you cut the fruit and lay down the knife mostly – few had had the knife in their hands at any given moment, and fewer holding the blade. And it is not a natural reaction to be so stupefied by a face, that all and every of them cut their fingers – one or at most two could have done so, though unlikely, but not more.

00b 12/32: What was the logic of putting Joseph in prison when it was proved he was not guilty? This after all was at a moment where the wife should have been careful. (Muslims have a kind of explanation, but only a kind of). But imprisonment is necessary for the story.

*006 12/40: “(Islam*) is the right religion - - -”. Can a religion based on a book with so many mistakes, and with not a single valid proof for anything essential, really be a “right religion”? Simply no. Especially not when all the book rests only on the words of a man with very doubtful moral – thieving/robbing, womanizing, raping, enslaving, murdering, lying – even not respecting his own oaths - etc.

007 12/41: “- - - he will hang from a cross - - -”. Egypt at the time of Joseph did not use execution by crucifixion.

008 12/49: “Then will come after that (period) a year in which the people will have aboundant water - - -“. But the Arab word that is used her, and that is translated with “aboundant water” is “yughathu” or “yughath” which in reality is said to means “to be relieved by rain” (Joseph Al-Fadi (Christian)). As also “The Message of the Quran” has that translation (translated from Swedish): “- - - a year when the people will be blessed by rain - - -“, and has a similar comment to the word and as we have met this translation before, we judge that Yusuf Ali has “stretched” his transcription a little. But in Egypt one has little and no rain – it is the flood in the Nile that brings water. (“The Message of the Quran elegantly explains that it must mean rain further south in Africa, that made the Nile big, but that is not what the Arab text says).

009 12/51a: “What was your (the ladies’*) affair when you ye did try to seduce him (Joseph*) - - -“. According to 12/23 it only was the wife of the Aziz that tried this. Mistake and contradiction.

*010 12/51b: The women in Potifar’s (this name is from the Bible - the Aziz (title or job?) in the Quran) house said: “Allah protect us”. The name and the god Allah did not exist in the old polytheistic pantheon in Egypt - and definitely not among the upper class (from slaves and traders they might have heard about Yahweh, but not Allah, and hardly even al-Lah that early). Their gods were Osiris, Aton, Amon, and other ones. Actually there is found not one single trace of monotheism among the upper class in Egypt in the old times. (Except Akn-Aton and his sun god)

011 12/52: The wife of Potifar (the Aziz): “- - - Allah will never guide - - -”. See 12/51b.

00c 12/69: Joseph told Benjamin: “Behold! I am thy (own) brother - - -“. It does not fit verses 70 – 77 that he told it at this time.

012 12/77: “If he (Benjamin*) steals, there was a brother of his (Joseph*) who did steal before (him)”. Here something is wrong: The child/youth Joseph was not accused of stealing. (As for Joseph’s age when he was brought to Egypt, Yusuf Ali in “The Meaning of the Quran” says he was 16 or 17 or may be even 18. We find no reason for believing anything – he may have been of that age or younger or even much younger).

013 12/84: “And his (Jacob’s*) eyes became white with sorrow - - -“. Eyes cannot become white (and more or less blind) from sorrow. That happens because of illness or physical malfunction in the eye – sometimes related to age. Any god had known – Muhammad perhaps not.

014 12/94: “When the Caravan left (Egypt), their father (Jacob*) said (to his sons*) - - -“. But 12/87 says: “O my (Jacob’s*) sons! Go ye (to Egypt*) and enquire about Joseph and his brother - - -“. Jacob simply did not come along to Egypt at that trip – Jacob could not speak to his sons when they left Egypt. A mistake and a contradiction of the real situation. (This also is clear from 12/96: “When the bearer of the good news came (to Jacob’s home*) - - -.” Jacob could say nothing to his sons until they were back home with him.)

015 12/95: “They (Jacob’s sons) said (= answered when the caravan left Egypt*): ‘By Allah (?*)! Truly thou art in thine old wandering mind.’” See 12/94 just above.

00d 12/99: “- - - he (Joseph*) provided a home for his parents - - -“. Not possible, as his mother (Rachel) died already when Benjamin was born – he could provide a home only for his father. (Islam explains or “explains” this with claiming that he reckoned the sister of his mother (Leah - also wife of Jacob) to be his mother, but there is nothing in the Quran saying so. But then it is quite normal for Islam to make claims without facts.) Also: How could Abraham be a good Muslim when he married 2 sisters at the same time? - strictly prohibitted by Allah in Sharia.

00e 12/100: “- - - parents - - -“. See 12/99 just above.

015a 12/100 (A95 – in 2008 edition A98, A99): “- - - and they Jacob and his family*) fell down in prostration, (all) before him (Joseph*) - - -.” Here is a big conundrum inside a riddle surrounded by a puzzle for Islam. A pious prophet like Jacob impossibly could prostrate himself before a human. And an as pious prophet like Joseph impossibly could have accepted it. Something has to be wrong in the text. This even though the Arab text “wa-kharru lahu sudjdjadah” literally means “- - - and they fell down before him in (alternatively “like in”) prostration (or “praying to him” according to the Swedish copy)”. Islam has no good explanations that we have found. According to ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Abbas the “him” in “before him” must refer to Allah – which it most clearly does not do. Razi explains that Joseph’s dream was not fully fulfilled, etc. Actually here the text is very clear – and the only thing Muslim scholars agree on, is that the literal meaning must be wrong, and this without having a good alternative meaning.

016 12/101: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

017 12/104: “And no reward dost thou (Muhammad*) ask of them (people/Muslims*) for this (the new religion*) - - -“. No, nothing except 20% of all stolen/robbed values and slaves from raids and wars, 100% of all values taken from victims that surrendered without fighting, plenty of women and lots and lots of absolute and undisputed power/dictatorship, and lots and lots of free warriors – he only had to pay them with promises about paradise and promises about rich spoils of war stolen from humans, countries and rich cultures. And the “poor-tax” (mostly 2.5 to 10% - mostly around 2.5% - of what you owned each year if you were not too poor) – which he far from only spent for the poor – and the sometimes brutal zakat – the tax from non-Muslims (though neither the 20% nor the 100% nor the taxes were all for his personal use – much was spent for waging more wars and for “gifts” to make neighbouring Arabs good Muslims + some was given to the poor),

And the price was cultures of surrounding peoples and humans and lives they destroyed – to gain more power for him. It is indisputably clear from the Quran that he at least liked women and power.

018 12/105a: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

019 12/105: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

020 12/108: “- - - evidence clear - - -“. There is not one single clear evidence neither for Allah nor for Muhammad being a prophet in all the Quran. Not one. (There may be some exceptions for evidences for a god in points taken from the Bible, but those in case are proofs for Yahweh, not for Allah – those two gods cannot be the same one, unless that god is mentally ill – schizophrenic – as the teachings are fundamentally too different, especially like one meets Yahweh in “the new covenant” in NT – f. ex. Luke 22/20). Also see 2/99.

021 12/109: “Nor did We (Allah*) send thee (as Messengers) any but men, whom We did inspire – (men) living in human habitations.” Wrong. According to the Quran also angels were sent, f. ex. to Abraham, to Lot, and to Mary, and at least to jinns were sent jinns as messengers.

00f 12/111a: “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 you use are really wrong, the result frequently becomes very ’original’”. Also: "Correct facts multiplied by one student give a better answer than false facts multiplied with a number of wice men".

00g 12/111b: “It is not a tale invented - - -”. When there are so many mistakes in a book, what do you expect the reader to believe? - at least details have to be invented.

**022 12/111c: “- - - a confirmation of what went before (the Bible) - - -”. When there are so many and so serious mistakes in a book, it is not to be expected that the reader can believe too much. Just the story about Josef is taken from the Bible (which “went before“). But the story is much changed (may be he in reality has retold a local legend about Josef, slightly based on the Bible) - it is no confirmation. On the background of all the documented mistakes in the Quran, which is easiest to believe, if any - the Quran or the Bible? At least some of the details in this story in the Quran are illogical. More to the point: There are too many and too fundamental differences - the Quran does not confirm the Bible.

023 12/111d: “- - - a detailed exposition of all things - - -“. Wrong. There are many things necessary for normal life – not to mention modern life – that is not made clear, and even more so for details. F. ex. the Muslim laws on inheritance were far from clear in the Quran, and in many, many things Islam have no guiding lines from Allah – they have to extrapolate from other or similare things said or done in the Quran or in Hadiths.

024 12/111e: “- - - a Guide - - -“. See 12/111d just above.

Surah 12: At least 24 mistakes + 6 likely mistakes.

SURAH 13:

001 13/1a: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

00a 13/1b: “- - - the Book which hath been revealed - - -“. That is one of the questions: Is it revealed – and in case by whom? See 13/1b just below.

**002 13/1c: “- - - the Book: that which hath been revealed unto thee from thy Lord (Allah*) - - - “. That is the question, to quote Hamlet: Did a god really produce a book with that many mistakes and invalid “proofs“? No.

An alternative is that the f. ex. the Devil impersonated Gabriel and in other cases told Muhammad “by inspiration” (to quote “The Meaning of the Quran” by Yusuf Ali) what thus was "revealed" to him. The inhumanity of the religion would then be explained. Personally we doubt this, if for no other reason, then because even a devil would not make so many mistakes, contradictions, etc. - he simply would not want to be found out by his victims sooner ot later.

Another alternative is that it all stems from a sick brain – TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) + lust for power may easily explain everything.

Yet another alternative is that it was not revealed, but made up in cold blood. The fact that many of the mistakes are in accordance with the wrong science of the time and area of Muhammad, and also the fact that Muhammad was not stupid enough to believe everything that is said in the Quran, may indicate that it is made up.

As for the last argument: F. ex. that miracles would not make some people believe, Muhammad was too intelligent and knew too much about people to believe himself – f. ex. Jesus was a good proof of the opposite: A lot did not believe in spite of everything, but quite a number came to believe because of what they saw and witnessed. The same was the conclusion of the story that Muhammad himself told about the magicians and Moses: They came (according to Muhammad’s own words) to believe after a small miracle.

***003 13/1d: “(the Quran*) is the Truth“.

1. There are many mistaken facts that history, geography, archaeology, literature, art, etc., proves are wrong. (At least unbelievable 1700+ !!! places with mistaken facts, and perhaps 3000+ errors all together).
2. There are “more than 100 divergences (mistakes*) from the rules and structure of normal Arab language”, according to Ali Dashi “Twenty-three years”.
3. There are verses where it clearly is Muhammad that is speaking, in stark contradiction to all statements that the book is made by Allah or has existed from eternity (though some of the places - f. ex. 6/114 in Yusuf Ali or 27/91 in Pikthall or Dawood - the mistakes are camouflaged by dishonest translators inserting the word “Say”, according to Ibn Warraq.)
4. The Quran states that the Quran is in pure Arab language. But according to al-Suyuti there are at least 107 foreign words used in the book, and Arthur Jeffery (specialist in Arab and in non-Arabic words in the Quran) says ca. 275 words from Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek, and also from Syria, Ethiopia, and Persia. Even the word Quran is said to be from Syria. (The Arabs later found an excuse for those mistakes: Al-Tha’alibi tells that the Arab started to use those words and made them Arabic. An easy but dishonest explanation.)
5. There was used an alphabet without vowels, and to make it even worse, when writing the Quran/surahs in the old time, they did not even use the small points newer Arab uses to specify different letters. Because of this it often is difficult or impossible to know which word is meant. To use an English example: If you only have the consonants “h” and “s” and put in vowels, the result may be “house” or “hose” or “his” or “has”. Because of this there are thousands of possibilities for mistakes - or different meanings. Muslims tell the Quran was finished not later than 656 AD, but that is not true - only the simplified version using the old unfinished alphabet was used then, and lots of versions were written as the language and the alphabet were completed. Not until 900 AD was the Quran finished, and by then there existed numbers of versions. Muslims under the very learned Ibn Mohair (died 935 AD) finally canonized 14 versions (see Preface). Over the centuries 11 fell out of use, and then one more - today there are mainly two - one dominant (Hafs) and one somewhat used in parts of Africa (Warsh). After all that, how can anybody pretend that the Quran of today is sent down from Allah letter-by-letter and comma-by-comma? – the comma did not even exist!
6. The language in the original Quran was so little exact, that there frequently is necessary to insert explanations.
7. And how then can anyone pretend that the language in the Quran of today is perfect and correct language word for word and meaning for meaning just as dictated by Allah, when one knows that they spent 250 years “de-coding” the original texts and polishing the language?
8. And even more so: How can anyone pretend with a straight face that the Quran(s) of today is the one and perfect one from Allah, when the clergy/religious leaders and the educated elite at least, know that there were at least 14 “correct” versions earlier (to camouflage that they were different versions, Muslims call them “ways of reading” – you meet the word even today, because even today there are “different ways of reading”) - versions that over the centuries by an arbitrary process was reduced to 3 and then to 1-2. (The one dominating today, most likely dominates because it happened to be used when Egypt printed Qurans in 1924, according to Ibn Warraq).
9. Of the 14 and more versions that existed, how can one be sure that the most correct versions were the ones that finally came to dominate? - or that those version (Hafs and Warsh) had all interpretations of the primitive writings correct (especially as they are not quite similar)?
10. There are lots of places in the Quran where the logic is wrong – mainly because Muhammad draws conclusions or make statements without first proving that it really is Allah that made this and this. F.ex. the sun and the moon and night and day may be good proofs for Allah, but ONLY if it first is proved that it really is Allah that made them and runs them. Muhammad never really proves anything. Never. He just claims or states. The results are invalid claims with invalid logic, not real “signs” or “proofs”. Valueless. Or even worse, as the use of such arguments proves to the entire world that he has no real and true facts/arguments. Even worse: The use of bluffs is the hallmark of cheats and deceivers.
11. The facts in the point above are even more essential here in this point - in places where he indicates or even uses the word “proof”. The problem is the same, and the only possible conclusion is the same: Valueless demagogy that proves that he had no real and true facts/arguments. Even worse: The use of bluffs is the hallmark of cheats and deceivers.

There is little reason to believe the Quran ever was perfect and withut mistakes, and even less reason to believe that the Quran of today is so (it simply is not). This even if you omit all the mistakes we know about. At very best the book only is partly true. Also see 13/39.

004 13/2a: “- - - heavens - - -.” Plural and wrong. See 2/22.

**005 13/2b: “Allah is He Who raised the heavens (plural and wrong) without any pillars that ye can see: - - -”. A Muslim information organisation was 1-2 years ago asked to explain this sentence. They replied not 100% politely, that anyone with an IQ of 60 or more had to understand that this meant that the pillars did not exist. The person that asked replied that he knew the difference between non-existent and invisible - the meaning in the sentence above is “invisible” - and asked them please to give him a real explanation. They never answered.

There exist no pillars - visible or invisible. And actually the idea is ridicules, as there exists no material heaven that needs to be kept in position - the heaven we see is just an optical illusion. Any god - even small ones - would know this, but Muhammad naturally not. Besides no man or animal or bird has ever banged into such an invisible pillar – and no plane collided with one.

006 13/2c: “- - - explaining the Signs in detail - - -“. Wrong and/or logically invalid “explanations” in reality are not explanations at all – even if they were in detail, which they in many cases are not.

*007 13/3a: “And it is He (Allah*) Who spread out the earth, - - -”. Similare things are said some places in the Quran - the earth is flat and spread out. It may be round or roundish, but like a pancake, not like a sphere. That was the geography of the Arabs at the time of Muhammad - though it hardly was the geography of any god. (There is one translator to English that says “egg-shaped” – but it is a wrong translation (the Quran there talks about an ostrich's nest on the flat ground, but the translator says it is about an ostrich's egg). All the same he often is quoted by Muslims – some may honestly want to believe him, others know they are using “al-Taqiyya” – the lawful lie - that is an integrated part of Islam (but of none other of the big religions)).

008 13/3b: “He draweth the Night as a veil o’er the Day”. Wrong. The night simply is lack of sunlight. Lack of something can never be a veil over anything. And even more so: Lack of light cannot hide sunshine.

009 13/4: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

*010 13/13: “- - - the thunder repeateth His praises - - -“. Hardly – the thunder is just a natural and automatic reaction to the lightning (which again is natural and automatic reactions to electrical charges). Islam will have to prove that the thunder – vibrations in the air - has enough brain to be able to prise Allah in this way, in order to be believed.

00b 13/14: “For Him (Allah*) (alone) is prayer in Truth - - -“. Yes, but only if Allah exists (and is the only god). There was a good reason why Muhammad demanded and glorified blind belief: There existed and exists no real proof and no documentation for the existence of Allah – or for that case for Muhammad’s connection to a god. And this blind belief only is to be based on the words of a morally suspect man like Muhammad. (The real, historical Muhammad is only distantly related to the glorified saint Islam paints.)

011 13/15a: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

*012 13/15b: “Whatever beings there are in the heavens and in the earth do prostrate themselves to Allah (acknowledging subjection)”. As for in the Heaven, it is difficult to say yes or no. But for the Earth: No non-Muslim ever prostrate themselves for Allah. The same goes for all animals, fishes and insects, etc.: None of them has ever been observed prostrating themselves to any god, Allah included – and for Allah it should be extra easy to observe, as he prefers 5 prayers with prostrations a day, some by day and some by night (even more easy to notice as few animals, etc. normally are awake and active both day and night). Islam has some heavy proofs to produce here to make this point in the Quran credible.

013 13/15c: “- - - so (prostrate themselves for Allah*) do their (the living beings’*) shadows in the mornings and evenings”. Shadows are just lack of sunlight – and they for natural reasons are long and flat in the mornings and evenings. Islam will have to prove that this result of the Earth’s spin in the sunshine, makes the lack of sunlight some places consciously decide to prostrate “themselves” for a god. If no proofs are produced, this clearly is a fairy tale on an intellectual level fit for small children.

014 13/16: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

015 13/17a: “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.

016 13/17b: “- - - show forth Truth and Vanity.” As said before: The Quran can at very best only be partly true.

017 13/18: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

00c 13/19a: “- - - that which hath been revealed - - -“. Well, has it been revealed? – and in case by whom? (A god had not sent down something with that many mistakes, etc., but the Devil in disguise could – but might have been too intelligent to do so, as there sooner or later would come questions about the mistakes and wrong logic, etc., and hence about his inhuman and bloody religion. He then would loose credence. May be the whole book was made up?)

018 13/19b: “- - - that which hath been revealed unto thee from thy Lord (Allah*) - - -”. See 13/17.

019 13/19c: “- - - that which hath been revealed unto thee from thy Lord (Allah*) is the Truth, - - - “. Well, at best it is partly true - as said before. See f. ex. 13/17.

020 13/28: “- - - for without doubt in the remembrance of Allah do hearts find satisfaction”. This only is true for some Muslims, and in difficult times also some more Muslims seeking comfort in religion – and also some because of social or other reasons only. Science tells that a minor fraction of the people (may be 10%) has an internal drive for a god, and some more that resort to such thinking when life is difficult – in 2006 or 2007 they even found which gene in our DNA that produces this drive. One theory is that religion is favoured by evolution because it makes the group closer knit and then the chances for survival bigger. These people find satisfaction in their religion - any religion - if they do believe in it. And if they happen to be Muslims, they then find satisfaction in Allah. But NB: The satisfaction does not derive from the god they believe in – he/she may well be a fiction, like Allah seems to be (strongly indicated by all the mistakes in the Quran) – but from their own belief, as it is strong enough to make them feel sure it is right, and then feel secure in that security (false or not does not matter, as long as they themselves believe their belief is right). There is a possibility that this feeling of security, and hence safety and reduced nervousness, is another Darwinian reason for this inherited trait – it may in some way give an edge in the fight for survival.

The question these ideas of course produce is: Is there a god or are they all made up from our needs for something supernatural?

We should try to find out, because if it all stems from inside us, we should at least try to find something better than inhuman and immoral war religions. And if there is a real religion one should search for that one.

00c 13/31: “If there ever was a Quran with which mountains were moved - - - (it would be this one)“. Well, hitherto the Quran itself has not moved even one grain of sand. Ok, it has guided or misguided many humans, and they have done things, but the Quran itself has done nothing.

021 13/36: “Those to whom We (Allah*) have given the Book (the Quran*) - - -”. The infernal question: Is a book with that many mistakes sent down by a god? No - simply out of the question.

022 13/37a: “Thus We (Allah*) revealed it (the Quran*) - - -“. Did Allah reveal it? See 13/1b and 13/19a.

023 13/37b: “Thus We (Allah*) revealed it (the Quran*) to be a judgement of authority in Arabic.” A book with that many mistakes and contradictions, that much invalid logic, that inhuman moral and without ethical or moral philosophy, is no basis for “judgement of authority”. If Muslims disagree, they will have to bring strong proofs to be believed.

024 13/38a: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

025 13/38b: “For each period is a book revealed”. Hardly. Homo Sapiens - modern man - is may be 200ooo years old (and there were humans or humanoids long before that). There is no trace of any book or of monotheism from all those years up to the next major step, that happened may be 60ooo+ years ago. At that time something happened – nobody knows what – that started Homo Sapiens on his course towards Modern Man (it is likely it happened somewhere in the western part of Asia, perhaps in the Caspian area and perhaps ca. 64ooo years ago). Then no book up to the next major step: Agricultural Man, 15ooo years ago, give or take a few thousand years – probably somewhere in the Middle East. No book and no trace of monotheism anywhere in the world. The next step: Towns. No books to regulate the life or religion for Homo Urbanus (man in town) – not until long time after towns and even cities had started to pop up, and still no trace of monotheism of any kind, not to mention Allah. The first traces of real monotheism – and later a book about a monotheistic god – came with the Jews (the name is used in wide understanding chronologically), and perhaps the Zoroastrians in Mesopotamia. And even then it is highly unlikely that they (Israel) had books before the period in Egypt and may be much later (that Abraham had a book or books, is so unlikely that Islam will have to prove it if they will insist on that – it is extremely unlikely that a nomad of that time even knew how to read.) Also the Zoroastrians had a book, but that Muhammad did not know – at least not until late in his life. After that – and before the Quran – science knows about only one or two books (depending on whether you reckon the “Bible” of the Jews + NT to be one or two – or many - books) as basis for monotheism – add one if you include the Zoroastrians.

During most those periods and aeons there is found no traces of such other such a book or of monotheism in any kind of science: Archaeology (with a ?-mark for Akn-Aton and his sun), literature, folklore, history, art, architecture. Islam will have to produce very strong proofs for the opposite – till now they just have produced cheap statements and even cheaper words and claims - - - and not one real proof.

Worse: When there finally came a book, it only built on the (wrong) knowledge in a tiny and underdeveloped part of the world – whereas the Quran states that every people in all times have had their prophets (and a book). Worse: If the Quran is a copy of the Mother Book, and all the 124ooo+ prophets through the times and all over the world got a somewhat similar copy (a revered Mother Book that may be existed since eternity cannot change?), that must have been a strange experience for many of them – “all” is about Arabia and Muhammad.

Worst: Islam tells that the reason why “the Book” had to be rejuvenated at intervals, was that the world and the societies changed (in addition to the never proved or documented claim that the Bible is falsified). But how to change the "Mother Book" that these claimed holy books are copies of? And the world and the cultures and the societies have changed more the last 300 years – yes, even the last 100 years – than in all the 200ooo or more years before. Why do we not need a new book after all these changes? – if Allah is omniscient, he 13.7 billion or more years ago (when the universe was created) knew that at least parts of the Quran would be hopelessly inadequate (f. ex. some laws) and too dangerous (f. ex. atomic, chemical and bacteriological weapons combined with a most ruthless and inhuman war religion), not later than around 1900 AD. Ours is a period that really needs a book teaching love and peace among humans and nations – not hate and suppression and inhumanity and war (like f. ex. the Quran and the religion of Gjingis Chan and a few other war religions).

**00d 13/39: “- - - with Him (Allah*) is the Mother of the Book (the original book of which the Quran is said to be a copy of*) “. Mere humans like us thinks it is unlikely in the extreme that an omnipotent and omniscient god has a book awash with mistakes as a revered Mother Book in his Heaven. There also are a lot of problems to explain, if it was made by the god a long time ago - not to mention if it is an unmade book that has existed forever, like many Muslims insists:

1. If the book is that old and existed before, why did the god have to send down imperfect books - Torah, OT, NT? Or was the "Mother Book" changed now and then to be able to send down different copies?
2. How to explain that in some surahs it is Muhammad that is speaking?
3. How to explain that the god some times has to change - abrogate - his message? - and did he really get everything right in the book this last time? Especially if he is copying the Mother Book he ought to? Or does the revered Mother Book change?
4. How could he change the messages, if it was all written a long time ago - or always existed - in a Mother Book he copied? Or does the revered Mother Book change?
5. How come that so many verses are answers or comments to things that happened in Mecca and Medina to Muhammad and during the life of Muhammad? - Muhammad f. ex. quarrelled with his wives, and Allah sent down surahs to explain that Muhammad as always was right - and like always a little bit to late to avert problem, but relevant to his needs just then? - remember the free will of man. Nearly all of it is about Muhammad and Arabia and little about rhe other claimed 124ooo prophets and their needs and cultures and countries.
6. How to explain that it could have been written aeons ago, when Allah had given the humans (a certain amount of?) free will? - human acts will upset the texts in chaotic ways. (Predestination and human free will are 100% incompatible and 100% impossible to combine). The point is: The human with free will can always change his mind once more.
7. Islam says texts had to be changed a little over time, because times changes - therefore new holy books. But the 300 last years time has changed more than from Adam till 1700 AD. Well, even the last 100 years as mentioned. Why are no prophets and no holy book necessary? (Also see 13/38).
8. If the “mother book” is aeons old, why then is nearly the all talk to Muhammad, a little to a few others, and nothing to the other 124ooo (according to Hadiths)? The first prophets - when everything was new – after all needed most information and help.
9. How to explain that most of the stories in the Quran are based on religious fairy tales? - any god had known they were untrue.
10. How to explain all the mistakes? – any god had known better.
11. How to explain all the invalid statements? – any god had known better.
12. How to explain all the invalid “signs” (treated as proofs)?
13. How to explain the invalid “proofs”? – any god had known better.
14. How to explain the directly wrong statements, “signs” and “proofs”?
15. How to explain the contradictions? – no god contradicts neither himself nor reality.

Also see 13/1.

Surah 13: At least 25 mistakes + 4 likely mistakes.

SURAH 14:

001 14/1a: “A Book (the Quran*) which We (Allah*) have revealed - - -”. The same old question: Can a book with so many very clear mistakes really be revealed by an omniscient god? And is it a coincident that many of the mistaken facts are in accordance with what one believed in Arabia at the time of Muhammad – even with fairy tales? A god’s stories? - impossible.

002 14/1b: “- - - revealed - - -“. See 13/1a and 13/19a above.

*003 14/1c: “- - - in order that thou (Muhammad – by means of the Quran*) mightest lead mankind out of the depths of darkness and into light - - -“. No book with that many mistakes and that doubtful moral can lead anyone into light. The same goes for any religion so suppressing, inhuman and full of hate, discrimination, blood and war, and “all power to Muhammad/the leader”.

004 14/2: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

005 14/4: “We (Allah*) sent not a Messenger except (to teach) in the language of his (own) people - - -.” Wrong. If you can call Moses a Messenger, he had to speak Egyptian in Egypt – not Hebrew. And Lot was from Ur in Chaldea (not too far from the Persian Gulf in Iraq), not from Sodom or Gomorrah – when the Quran says the people of Sodom and Gomorrah were his people, also that is wrong, this even more so as the Quran makes it very clear that not only was he a stranger, but also he was not integrated with the locals. And Jonah was not from Nineveh where he had to preach. Also Abraham was a foreigner with a language foreign to the place he settled down (Canaan and Sinai) – if one reckons him to be a messenger. The same goes for Joseph in Egypt in case. And not to forget Jonah in Niniveh.

006 14/5a: “- - - Our (Allah’s*) Signs - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

007 14/5b: “- - - in this there are Signs - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

008 14/9: “- - - Clear (Sign) - - -“. There are no clear signs for Allah or for Muhammad in the Quran – not one. See 2/99.

009 14/10: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

010 14/12a: “No reason have we (Muslims*) why we should not put our trust in Allah”. Wrong. All the mistakes, etc. in the Quran proves 100% that it is not from a god, and all the mistaken facts that are in accordance with wrong science in the Middle East at the time of Muhammad, strongly indicate that it is made by one or more humans in Arabia at the time of Muhammad. In both cases the religion is a made up one, and Allah may not even exist.

011 14/12b: “For those who put their trust should put their trust in Allah.” Wrong. See 14/12a just above.

00a 14/19a: “- - - Allah created the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth in Truth - - -”. It is impossible to know if it is true, as long as the Quran only offers words and not a single proof. Words are very cheap - especially when it is clear that there are MANY mistakes etc. in the book.

012 14/19b: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

013 14/22: “It was Allah who gave you a promise of Truth (the Quran*) - - -.” With that many mistakes the Quran at best is partly true.

014 14/24: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

00b 14/27: “- - - with the Word (the Quran*) that stands firm - - -.” Can words with that many mistakes and bent logic, etc. stand firm on other platforms than cheating, brain washing, pressure and wish for power?

015 14/32: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

016 14/35: “Remember Abraham said: ’O my Lord! Make this city (Mecca*) one of peace and security; - - - “. Abraham never visited Mecca. Besides: There was no city at the time of Abraham – this both according to reality and to the Quran. Remember how Hagar run back and forth there without finding people and without finding water. Mecca as a city was only a few generations old as a town at the time of Muhammad - some 2500 years after Abraham. Also see 2/127.

017 14/48: “- - - Heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See2/22.

Surah 14: At least 17 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.

SURAH 15:

00a 15/1a: “These are the ayat (verses*) of Revelation - - -“. Well, is the Quran a revelation? – and in case by whom? There theoretically are 4 possibilities:

1. A god – but the Quran proves that is not the case; too many mistakes, etc.
2. Some dark forces, f. ex. the Devil – perhaps in disguise. The inhuman religion of war may point in this direction.
3. Humans at the time of Muhammad. The fact that many of the mistakes in the book are in accordance with wrong science in the Middle East at that time, may point in this direction.
4. Muhammad himself. Muhammad’s lust for power - and women - may point this way. It also easily will explain rhe point above. Add his lack of ethics and moral and it also may explain point above that one, too.
5. The clear conclusion is that it at least was not revealed by a god, like the Quran claims.

001 15/1b: “- - - a Quran that makes things clear.” With that many mistakes, it makes few things clear and some things very unclear - f. ex. the foundation that Islam rests on.

00b 15/6: “O thou (Muhammad*) to whom the Messages is being revealed”. See 15/1a above.

002 15/9: “We have, without doubt, sent down the Message (the Quran*)”. Wrong. There is a lot of well-founded doubt about that. Too many mistakes, among other things.

003 15/14 + 15: “- - - They would only say (when experiencing a miracle*): ‘Our eyes have been intoxicated - - -”. Wrong. At least some had come to believe. These two verses are a piece of fast-talk. There is some fast-talking in the Quran - trying to explain away things and facts and ideas and not least questions that are difficult to explain or answer. See the chapter about fast talk in the Quran. And there are even more fast-talk among Muslims today, trying to explain away mistakes, abrogation, changes in Islam around 622, etc., not to mention trying to present Islam as a peaceful religion. Just in this case one tries to explain away questions for proofs for Allah and for Muhammad's connection to a god.

**But the really bad thing about this point is that it is one of the points where Muhammad himself knew he was lying – at least some would believe in Islam if he produced miracles. He was too intelligent and knew too much about people not to know this – this even more so as he himself told about heathens becoming Muslims after they had experienced miracles (f. ex. the magicians of Pharaoh), and he also had a good example in Jesus – some refused to believe no matter, but quite a number of others did after miracles made by Jesus (made also according to the Quran).

004 15/16: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

*005 15/17: “- - - We (Allah*) have guarded them (the Zodiacal Signs*) from every evil spirit accursed:” According to the Quran, the stars – included the Zodiacal signs – are fastened to the lowermost of 7 (material – they have to be so if the stars can be fastened to one of them) heavens. But jinns/bad spirits wanted to spy on the heavens, and had to be chased away by shooting stars = guarded. And then the Zodiacal signs were guarded at the same time. According to science this is utter nonsense to at least the fifth power. Any god had known – even baby ones – but Muhammad not. Then who made the Quran with all its mistaken facts, etc.?

**006 15/18: “But any (jinn/bad spirit*) that gains a hearing (by spying on the heavens*) by stealth, is pursued by a flaming fire, bright (to see).” According to the Quran, the stars are fastened to the lowest of 7 material (see 15/17 just above) heavens. The stars are lights and decoration, but are also used for shooting stars for weapons to chase away jinns and bad spirits. Muhammad did not know that the mass of a star is somewhere in the range of 1 shooting star x 10 to the 20. or more power and utterly impossible to use as a shooting star in our atmosphere – for the reason of size, for the reason of heat, for the reason of irradiation, for the reason of gravity, for the reason of sheere size, etc. As said in 15/17 just above: Scientific nonsense and insanity to at least the 5. power. No god uttered this faity tale stuff – but Muhammad did not know any better. Then who made the Quran?

007 15/19a: “And the earth We (Allah*) have spread out (like a carpet); - - -”. In the Quran the Earth is flat - which is wrong. Just ask any god.

*008 15/19b: “- - - set thereon (on the Earth*) mountains firm and immoveable - - -.” But no mountain was ever set down – not to mention from somewhere above. They without exception did grow up, no matter whether they grew up because of volcanism or because of tectonic activity (the only two ways mountains are made). Any god had known – but Muhammad not.

009 15/26: “We (Allah*) created man from sounding clay, - - -“. Flatly wrong. See 6/2.

010 15/26: “We (Allah*) created man from - - - mud - - -”. Wrong. See 6/2.

011 15/27: “And the Jinn race, We (Allah*) created before, from the fire of a scorching wind.” Here is something wrong. It is said several places in the Quran that the Jinns were created from fire - and one place it is said from fire without smoke.

012 15/28: “I (Allah*) am about to create man, from sounding clay, - - -.” Wrong. See 6/2.

013 15/28: “I (Allah*) am about to create man, from - - - mud - - -”. Wrong. See 6/2.

014 15/33: “- - - man, whom Thou didst create from sounding clay, - - -”. Wrong. See 6/2.

015 15/33: “- - -man, whom Thou didst create from - - - mud, - - -”. Wrong. See 6/2.

016 15/71: “There are my daughters (to marry)”. Here modesty has got the better of the Quran (or the translator). The men of Sodom or Gomorrah were not going for marriage - neither could a few daughters marry a lot of men. It is talk about sexual abuse. Most likely a dishonest translation – but in that case: How many other places in the Quran are explained dishonestly?

017 15/75: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

018 15/77: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

019 15/81: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

020 15/85: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

021 15/86: “For verily it is thy Lord (Allah*) who is the Master-Creator, knowing all things.” The mistakes in the Quran means that someone else has made the book – or that Allah knows not all things.

022 15/99: “- - - the Hour that is Certain (the Day of Doom*)”. Because of all the mistakes in the Quran, certainly also the Day of Doom is uncertain – at least in the form described by the Quran – as this easily may be an error, too. This even more so as all the mistakes in the book prove that it is not made by a god, and Muhammad was a prophet unable of prophesying, and who then is left to tell us the true future? (By the way: What is a prophet unable to prophesy? – a title stolen because it sounds impressive? Muhammad never made real prophesies (there were a few sayings that are remembered because they happened to become true, but no real prophesying). Whereas a real prophet is a man/person making prophesies. The only possible conclusion: Muhammad was no real prophet; he only "borrowed" the title – like so many other things. May be a messenger for someone or something – perhaps for himself(?) - but not a genuine prophet.)

Surah 15: At least 22 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.

SURAH 16:

001 16/2a: “He (Allah*) sent down His angels with inspiration (“ruh”*) - - -.” But the Arab word “ruh” does not mean “inspiration” but “Spirit”.

00a 16/2b: “He (Allah*) doth send down His angels with inspiration (“ruh”) - - -.” But the Arab word “ruh” does not really mean inspiration – it means the Spirit or the Holy Spirit. We may add that Muslims often claims that the Holy Spirit just is another name for the angel Gabriel. But here it is clear that the (Holy) Spirit – “ruh” – is not included among the angels (the angels "transported" ruh). (Actually Muhammad never quite understood what the Holy Spirit – one of it’s at least 5 names – was). Also see 70/4, 78/38 and 97/4 where the same word – “ruh” – is used.

002 16/3: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

003 16/4: “He (Allah*) has created man (the word “man” used like this, means the human race = in this case Adam*) from a sperm-drop - - -”. Wrong. Even if it dhould really mean not Adam, but men generally, it is wrong. A sperm-drop is just half the explanation - also an egg cell is necessary. But Muhammad did not know that. (Human egg cells are too small to be seen with only eyes when it is lying in human tissue, blood and gore). Also see 6/2.

00b 16/5: “And cattle He (Allah*) has created for you (men) - - -“. Hardly. Cattle and their progenitors existed for may be millions of years. Man only after long aeons found ways of utilizing them - some 15ooo years ago only.

00c 16/8: “And (He (Allah*) has created horses, mules, and donkeys for you to ride and use for show - - -“. See 16/5 just above.

004 16/11: “- - - verily this (different food plants*) is a Sign for those who are given thought.” Verily it will be - - - but not until the day when Islam proves it really was Allah that created these food plants. Until that day it only is a clear sign that Islam and the Quran only have claims and cheap words and no proofs to show. Because if they had real arguments, they did not have to resort to logically invalid claims only. (This is an unavoidable conclusion from some persons giving things thoughts).

005 16/12: “- - - verily this (sun, moon, stars, day, night*) are Signs for men that are wise.” Wrong. See 16/11 just above.

006 16/13: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

*007 16/15a: “And He (Allah*) has set upon the earth mountains standing firm, lest it should shake with you; - - -”. Mountains do not hinder earthquakes (really other places in Islamic literature seems to indicate that what the book really means, is that the Earth can become unstable and capsize - impossible for a globe, but possible for a flat Earth). Some Muslims vaguely tries to find a way around the Quran and “explain” that mountains grow (are not “set upon earth”), but that in case is no explanation in this case - both growth from tectonic movements and from volcanic activity may result in earthquakes - - - the opposite effect of what the Quran says.

008 16/15b: “(Allah has made*) roads - - -“. Wrong – if Islam does not really prove it. The roads in the Middle East at the time of Muhammad in reality only were tracks most places – made not by Allah, but by the walking of men and animals through centuries and millennia.

*009 16/36a: “For We (Allah*) assuredly sent amongst every people a Messenger, (with the command),’Serve Allah, and eschew Evil’: - - -”. The Quran insists that every people everywhere and every time through history has been sent prophets for Allah. The Hadiths mention that through the times there have been 124ooo prophets or more, and even that number is just an expression for innumerably many. But nowhere in the world - except in Israel (and in a way in Egypt under pharaoh Akn-Aton, who only accepted the sun as god - not Allah, and the Zoroastrians in Persia) - at any time or under any circumstances there are traces of prophets preaching monotheism before year one AD. Not in history, not in folklore, not in traditions, not in history, not in art, not in literature, not in archaeology, not any place - not even in fairy tales or legends. Especially when you compare this to the results of just two “prophets”: Jesus and Muhammad, it is not possible that 124ooo or more prophets through the times have left not a single trace. This statement about all the prophets for Allah simply is not true.

010 16/36b: “So travel through the earth, and see what was the end of those who denied (the Truth)”. There were scattered ruins in Arabia. The Quran/Muhammad tells they all are results of Allah’s punishment of infidels. Hardly true - at least not for all of them.

011 16/36c: “- - - those who denied (the Truth)”. With all the mistakes in the Quran, it is impossible to believe that the book or Islam represents the full truth and only the truth. (That is one of the main reasons why Islam can accept not a single mistake in the Quran no matter how obvious the mistake is - if there are mistakes, something is wrong with the book - - - - and consequently with the religion).

00d 16/38: “- - - a promise (binding) on Him in Truth, - - -”. What is true in a book full of mistakes?

012 16/39: “- - - the rejecters of the Truth - - -”. See 16/38 just above.

013 16/48a: “- - - Allah’s creations, (even) among (inanimate) things - how their (very) shadows turn round, - - -, prostrating themselves to Allah”. Wrong – see 13/15c.

014 16/48b: “- - - Allah’s creations, (even) among (inanimate) things - how their very shadows turn round, from right to left - - -“. Wrong: This is not a general law – it only is true on the northern hemisphere. On the southern it is from left to right – and Islam pretends to be a universal religion. Even a mentally retarded god had known this – but Muhammad of course not. Who made the Quran?

015 16/49a: “And to Allah doth obeisance all that is in the heavens (plural and wrong*) and on earth, whether moving (living) creatures or the angels - - -“. Wrong – if Islam does not prove the opposite. Animals, birds, insects, fish, worms, etc. – they never are observed making obeisance to Allah (or to any other god). No rituals, no 5 prayers a day/night (even more so: Few animals are naturally active both night and day – “prayers” should be easy to notice), no servility except sometimes towards their own leaders, etc. And surely non-Muslim humans do not do obeisance to Allah – though sometimes to other real or made up god or gods.

016 16/49b: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

017 16/50: “They all (all living beings*) revere their Lord (Allah*)”. Wrong – if Islam does not produce good proofs. See 16/49a above.

018 16/52: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

019 16/62: “- - - they (people*) attribute to Allah what they hate (daughters*)”. Wrong – if Islam pretends to be a universal religion. Some places on Earth – like in Arabia – girl babies may have been hated. But most places they only were of lower value, and far from hated. Then some places they were valued more or less equally. There also were places where daughters were valuable – f. ex. because they meant money/valuables to their parents when they married. There even were a few places were the societies were matriarchates, and the girls the main sex. (This is one of the many points in the Quran that points to some human(s) in Arabia as the maker(s) of the Quran – there are too many points like this.)

020 16/64a: “And We (Allah*) sent down the Book (the Quran*) - - -”. The old and impertinent - but very pertinent - question is: Did an omniscient send down a third rate book? - third rate because it has so many mistakes and so much invalid/twisted logic that you cannot rely on anything you cannot control via other sources + not well written. The simple fact is: No god would make a book like this.

021 16/64b: “(The Quran was sent down*) for the express purpose, that thou (Muhammad*) shouldst make clear to them things - - -”. How is it possible to make things clear by means of a book full of mistakes, contradictions, and invalid/false “proofs“?

022 16/64c: “- - - and that it (the Quran*) should be a guide - - - to those who believe”. A book with so many mistakes etc. is no guide for anybody.

00e 16/64d: “- - - and that it (the Quran*) should be a guide and a mercy to those who believe.” Can a book with so much inhumanity, hate and blood be a mercy to anyone? – except perhaps to Muhammad himself and to his successors and helpers who gained/gains riches and power?

023 16/65a: “And Allah sends down rain from the skies, and gives therewith life to the earth after its death: - - -”. If rain is all it takes to make earth flourish, it was not dead before the shower - there was lots of live seeds and may be roots. And is it Allah or some other god - or nature - that sends it down?

024 16/65b: “And Allah sends down rain from the skies, and gives therewith life to the earth after its death: verily in this is a Sign for those who listen.” See 16/65a just above. It is some sign to use an invalid proof. The Quran often talks about Signs that shall document or prove Allah. The sorry thing is that each and every one of them, with the possible exception of some taken from the Bible, are without any value as proof for a god, and not one single proves anything about the existence of Allah. The two most frequent reasons are that they in reality are just claims taken from thin air, or they build on statements that are not proved. See separate chapter about this.

025 16/65c: “- - - verily in this (rain, etc.*) is a Sign for those who listen.” Possibly so for those who only listens and do not think. For those who also think, it actually is a sign of nothing, until Islam proves that it really is Allah that makes the rain, etc., and that all the unproven and undocumented claims in the Quran are not just so much thin air and cheap words. Well, actually it proves one thing: That the Quran, Muhammad, Islam, the Muslims, all have nothing more to show for the religion than unproven and undocumented claims – if they had had some reliable proof, they had used them instead of just words and twisted logic.

026 16/66: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

027 16/67: “- - - in this (fruits, etc.*) also is a Sign for those who are wise”. Wrong. See 16/65b and 16/65c just above.

028 16/69: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

029 16/73: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

030 16/77: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

*031 16/79a: “Nothing holds them (the birds*) up but (the power of) Allah”. Wrong. What hold them up are the laws of aerodynamics. Muhammad would not know this, but all gods would.

032 16/79b: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah – especially as the initial claim is wrong (see 16/79a just above). See 2/39 above.

00f 16/81a: ”He (Allah*) made you garments - - -”. Proofs for that Allah did this?

00g 16/81b: “He (Allah*) made you garments to protect you from the heath”. This is another point where one may wonder: Did the maker of the Quran know only the Middle East? – most garments are made to protect humans from the cold.

033 16/82: “- thy (Muhammad’s*) duty is only to preach the Clear Message”. It is not possible to preach a clear message from a book full of mistakes.

034 16/89a: “- - - We (Allah*) have sent down to thee the Book (the Quran*) - - -”. Yes, that is the big question for Islam. If Allah exists, and if he sent down the Quran, and if Muhammad retold everything correctly - f. ex. did not “doctor” the surahs in Medina to get warriors or peace in his family - Islam is a religion. If it is not true, what then? - and what happens in case to all Muslims if there is a next life run by a real god they have been prohibitted to search for? Can a book full of mistakes be sent down by a god - not to say an omniscient one? Flatly no.

035 16/89b: “- - - the Book (the Quran*) explaining all things, - - -”. Except that some of the explanations obviously are wrong. And except that many things are not explained.

036 16/89c: “- - - (the Quran is*) a Guide - - - to Muslims”. A book with that many mistakes and that much twisted logic and that much hate and inhumanity cannot be a real guide to anyone (and if someone all the same uses it as a guide, it tells volumes about them).

00h 16/102a: “- - - the Holy Spirit has brought the revelation - - -“. Muhammad Azad: “The Message of the Quran” tells that the Arab word “ruh al-qudus” (= the Holy Spirit) is used 3 times in the Quran (2/87, 5/110 – both connected to Jesus – and here), and that here it means the angel Gabriel. The Holy Spirit in Arab = Gabriel? That in case means that in 2/87 and 5/110 Jesus is strengthened with the angel Gabriel - a bit far from what the Bible tells. (It is likely Islam sets the Holy Spirit = Gabriel because the Quran tells that Gabriel brought large parts of the Quran (other parts came to him in dreams, etc.), so that when it says that the Holy Spirit brought him verses, that must mean that the book is talking about Gabriel - not 100% logical."

037 16/102b: “- - - revelations from thy Lord (Allah*) - - -”. Once more: Can the revelations be from an omniscient god, when so many of them are wrong or contain mistakes? Out of the question!

038 16/102c: “- - - revelations from thy Lord (Allah*) in Truth - - -”. With all the mistakes, the revelations told in the Quran, at best are partly true.

039 16/102d: “- - - revelations from thy Lord (Allah*) in Truth, in order to strengthen those who believe - - -”. It is a strange way for a religion to strengthen its believers at least partly with wrong and/or not reliable “information”. There are far too many mistakes in the Quran for any sentient educated being with fresh eyes, to believe it is reliable.

040 16/102e: “- - - revelations from thy Lord (Allah*) in Truth, in order to strengthen those who believe, and as a Guide - - - to Muslims”. It tells volumes about Islam, if they use a book full of mistakes + discrimination, hate and war against non-Muslims as a guide for their believers - the Muslims. And even more if the religion/religious leaders try to “explain” away even obvious mistakes instead of finding out what is true and what not.

041 16/102f: “- - - revelations from thy Lord (Allah*) in Truth, in order to strengthen those who believe, and as a Guide and Glad Tidings to Muslims”. What kind of glad tidings can be built on at least to a large part mistaken and/or valueless statements and as wrong facts? It is bad if Islam really believes everything - that means they are too blind - or blinded - to see even the most obvious mistakes. But it is much worse if (some of) the leaders and learned men/teachers see the mistakes and bluff their audiences. And not least: If all the mistakes means that Islam is a made up religion - such religions do happen - and blocks the way for its (mis-) believers to a true religion (if such one exists), what then? Besides: Is it permission to steal and rob and rape and take slaves that are “glad tidings”? – fighting, women and looting are very central in the Quran.

042 16/103: “- - - this (the Quran*) is in Arabic, pure and clear”. Wrong in many ways: There are alien words, there are orthographical mistakes, there are grammatical errors and there are lots and lots of places where even today Islam does not know the exact meaning of words or verses (the last partly because the book originally was written by means of an unfinished alphabet).

043 16/104: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

044 16/105: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

045 16/109: “Without doubt, in the Hereafter it is they (non-Muslims*) who will perish.” Because of all the mistakes, etc. in the Quran, there is real reason for doubt about the hereafter – and even more so about if it really is like described in the Quran. Because of this – and because of all the other mistakes in the Quran – there is real reason for doubt about who will perish.

046 16/115: “He (Allah*) has only forbidden you dead meat, and blood, and the flesh of swine, and any (food) over which the name of other than Allah has been invoked”. Wrong. Hadiths – f. ex. Al-Bukhari and Muslim – are very clear on the fact that also meat from donkey is forbidden. (This is one of the cases where Hadiths abrogate the Quran. Perhaps Allah forgot that donkey meat was forbidden in the Mother Book, or Muhammad forgot to mention it?)

047 16/123: “So We (Allah*) has thought thee (Muhammad/Muslims*) the inspired messages (the Quran*) - - -“. No omniscient god has thought anyone so much mistakes, invalid logic, invalid signs, invalid proofs, like what you find in the Quran.

048 16/125: “- - - the Way of thy Lord (Allah*) - - -“. The Quran does not represent the way of an omniscient god – not a good one at least: Too many mistakes, etc.

Surah 16: At least 48 mistakes + 8 likely mistakes.

SURAH 17:

001 17/1: “(Allah took Muhammad*) to the Farthest Mosque” = the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem according to Islam – but they still disagree on whether it was a real trip or a dream. But anyhow: The old Jewish temple was destroyed by Titus and his Roman Army in 64 AD, and nothing of any consequence was built on this small mountain until the Dome of the Rock was built in 690 AD, some 630 years later - - - and some 60-70 years after surah 17 - “The Night Journey” - was dictated around or after 621 AD. There simply was no mosque to visit around 621-630 AD. Is this a later addition to the Quran? - after all the book existed in many versions which were copied and copied by hand and thus could change a little now and then, and it was not really finished until around 900 AD. (Muslims explains this away with that the few walls of the old Jewish temple is what is meant, but that definitely is not what the Quran says.)

002 17/2: “We (Allah*) gave Moses the Book (the Quran), - - -”. According to all information and to science this is wrong. God /Yahweh gave him (according to the Bible) the 10 commandments only + he told him the law (later a part of the Torah) that he himself wrote down. The Book of Moses in reality is several hundred years younger.

00a 17/4: “- - - (and twice they (the Jews*) should be punished)!” The Jews have been “punished” at least twice during history – does that mean they are in reality are safe now, except for minor episodes?

003 17/9a: “Verily the Quran doth guide to that which is most right (or stable) - - -”. That is not possible on basis of a book with may be 3000+ mistakes, contradictions, invalid logic, and worse. It is worth adding that “The Message of the Quran” (remark 10 to this surah) specifies that “most right” includes “ethical principles and everything that promotes human life”. A bit special for a religion that has no ethical or moral philosophy, only the dictates from the morally very special war lord and robber baron Muhammad – and reckons robbing, enslavement, rape of slaves, suppression, discrimination, murder, hate, war as “lawful and good” and very clearly permitted, and even encouraged by the god and the religion. (Well, Allah and Muhammad got many warriors – and for free). Similar claims, see 2/213 – 48/28.

004 17/9b: “- - - and (the Quran*) giveth the glad tidings to the Believers - - -”. What kind of glad tidings can be built on a book containing hundreds of mistakes? - tidings of a fool’s paradise? And can even such tidings be reliable, when built on some hundreds of mistakes + hundreds and hundreds of unproven statements hanging in the air, resting on unproven words? (See separate chapters). And what kind of glad tidings are built on moral and etics like what you find in the Quran - live a good life at the expences of catastrophes for many others?!

*005 17/12: “- - - all things have We (Allah*) explained in detail”. Wrong. A lot of things are not explained in detail - f. ex. Muslim laws has had to be supplemented with many more paragraphs than the ones in the Quran and in Hadith - and still Muslim law are far from perfect concerning modern life and societies, and even concerning daily life. And just? - A man telling that a woman has behaved indecently is lying to Allah according to Allah and the Quran, if he cannot produce 4 witnesses, EVEN IF HE SPEAKS THE FULL TRUTH, AND THE OMNISCIENT ALLAH KNOWS THIS. And much worse: A raped woman is to be punished if she cannot produce 4 MEN who witnessed the very act - normally absolutely impossible. (For one thing rape normally happens in hidden places, and for another: How many men will come forth to tell: “We saw that she was raped, but did not try to help her” - and then be strictly punished for that omission? Those two points in the Quran are the most horribly unjust and inhuman paragraphs we have ever seen or heard about in any even half civilized law. Is sharia half civilized? Is Allah good or/and just?

00b 17/15: “- - - nor would We (Allah*) visit with Our Wrath until We had sent a Messenger (to give warning)”. This Islam will have to prove - see 17/16 just below.

00c 17/16: “When We (Allah*) decide to destroy a population, We (first) send a definite order to those among them who are given the good things of this life (= the rich and/or leaders*) and yet transgress - - -”. This Islam will have to prove, because f. ex. many a natural catastrophe has happened absolutely without a warning - f. ex. the tsunami that in December 2004 hit Muslims far, far harder than any other religion. We never heard that f. ex. Malaysia or Indonesia or Sumatra or Ashe had received warnings.

006 17/41: “- - - their flight (from the Truth)!” At best from partly true statements - the Quran at best is only partly true.

007 17/42: “If there had been (other) gods with Him (Allah*) - - - behold, they would certainly have sought out a way to the Lord of the Throne”. Wrong – it is a possibility, but very far from a certainty. F. ex. are hierarchies possible, or splitting the “job”.

*008 17/44a: “The seven heavens - - -”. There are no seven heavens. See 10/6.

00d 17/44b: “- - - there is not a thing but celebrates (= all things celebrates*) His (Allah’s*) praise - - -”. This Islam will have to prove - it is an unlikely statement built on no obvious fact(s).

009 17/46: “- - - (the unbelievers*) turn on their backs, fleeing (from the Truth)”. At most from what is partly the truth, as the Quran has lots and lots of mistakes.

010 17/55: “We (Allah*) gave David (the gift of) the Psalms”. According to science the psalms are a lot younger than King David – at least most of them. A god had known.

011 17/59: “And We (Allah*) refrain from sending the Signs (miracles that would prove Allah and Muhammad’s connection to him*), only because the men of former generations treated them as false - - -“. This is a flat lie – and Muhammad was too intelligent not to know it. Not all, but a lot of people came to believe (f. ex. during the times of Jesus and Moses according also to the Quran) because of clear miracles in the old times – and a lot would come to believe at the time of Muhammad and at the time of today if there were clear miracles connected to a religion.

012 17/61: “- - - one (Adam*) whom Thou (Allah*) didst create from clay - - -”. Wrong simply and plainly. See 6/2.

013 17/73: “- - - that (the Quran*) which We (Allah*) had revealed to you (Muhammad*)”. A book with so many mistakes, etc. like you find in the Quran, is not made by a god.

014 17/77: “(This was Our (Allah’s*)) way with the messengers We sent before thee (Muhammad*), thou wilt find no change in Our ways.” Wrong. There is so much difference between especially NT and the Quran, that it is not the same religion at all. F. ex. Jesus was for peace, Muhammad for war. And science has clearly shown that the Bible is not falsified – Islam in case will have to prove it, and after 1400 years of thorough searching they have found not one single proof, only loose claims. (Guess if they had told the world about it if they really had found a proof!!)

015 17/81: “Truth (the teachings of Muhammad*) has (now) arrived, - - -”. As these teachings build on the Quran, and the Quran contains lots of mistakes, the teachings are at best partly the truth.

016 17/82: “We (Allah*) sent down - - - in the Quran - - -”. Islam will have to prove that the Quran really is sent down, and sent down from an omniscient god. Without VERY good proofs, it is difficult to believe an omniscient god has sent down such a mess, and especially if he intended to save people for his Heaven. Yes, without such proofs, it simply is impossible to believe it.

*017 17/88: “If the whole mankind and Jinns (originally figures from Arab folklore and fairy tales – and not mentioned by any other prophet throughout times, even though they are pretty active and part of what Islam claims is the same basic religion as the Jewish and the Christian one*) were gathered together to produce the like of this Quran, they could not produce the like thereof”. Wrong. A flock of naïve primitives or people indoctrinated from childhood might believe this. But a number of good writers today and through history would be able to do that - this everyone knows who have read some good books. The Quran is not especially good literature to be polite, in spite of what Islam declares - rather dull, repeating the same stories time and time again, and using the same points and the same finish over and over, and not least: There are few if any original thoughts or ideas - they are "borrowed" from other sources, included made up sctiptures, legends and faity tales. See also 10/37a and 10/37b.

018 17/92: “Or thou (Muhammad*) cause the sky to fall in pieces, as thou sayest (will happen) - - - “. No matter what Muhammad says will happen, and Allah accepts to repeat in his (?) book thousands and millions of years before Muhammad said it (!), it is wrong. The sky is an optical illusion, and cannot fall down in pieces.

019 17/95: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/2a.

020 17/98: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

021 17/99a: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

022 17/99b: “- - - of which there is no doubt - - -”. With this many mistakes - something like three or four pr. page in our book when you count just the surely mistaken facts - there is nothing in the Quran that can be no doubt about, unless it is really proved correct. And nearly nothing in the book is proved.

00e 17/101: “To Moses We (Allah*) did give nine Clear Signs - - -.” According to the Bible he got his staff cum snake + 10 plagues = 11 “signs”. Which book is most reliable – if any?

*023 17/102a: “- - - I (Moses*) consider thee indeed, O Pharaoh, to be one doomed to destruction!” Pharaoh Ramses II was not doomed to destruction, at least not this time. He did not drown, in spite of what the Quran says. – and he lived for several years after the possible exodus. (Which may be one of the reasons why some Muslims want the exodus from Egypt to have happened under pharaohs we do not know as well as Ramses II - preferably one we do not know if he may have drowned or not).

024 17/102b: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

***025 17/103: “- - - We (Allah*) did drown him (pharaoh Ramses II) and all who were with him.” The pitiful fact is that we know from history that Ramses II did not drown. He even did not die until some years after possible the exodus, according to history.

026 17/105a: “We (Allah*) sent down the (Quran) - - -”. If Allah is omniscient, he did not make such a second or third-rate book - only all the mistaken facts makes it at least second rate, and then there are f. ex. all the invalid statements and proofs, not to mention the simply wrong ones and the contradictions.

027 17/105b: “We (Allah*) sent down the (Quran) in Truth, - - -”. Perhaps - and perhaps not. The stumbling stone for these statements in the Quran is the large collection of mistaken facts and invalid signs, etc. in the book. It at best is partly true.

028 17/105c: “- - - and in Truth it has descended - - -”. See 17/105 just above.

029 17/105: “- - - Glad Tidings - - -.” At best only partly right. See 2/97c and 17/9b above and 91/13 below.

030 17/106a: “- - - a Quran which We (Allah*) have divided - - -“. If any omniscient god has had anything at all to do with a sorry work like making or “sending down” the Quran, Islam will have to prove it.

031 17/106b: “We (Allah*) have revealed it (the Quran*) by stages.” See 17/106a just above.

***032 17/107: “Say: ‘Whether you believe it or not, it is true that those who were given knowledge beforehand (= Christians and Jews mainly*), when it (the Quran*) is recited to them, fall down on their faces in humble prostration”. One word: Nonsense. And what is worse: The one that composed this verse knew it was a lie – which also Muhammad knew when he made or recited it. A few Jews and Christians are said to have converted by 656 AD when the Quran is said to be written, though very few if any in 621 when this surah was made, but as a general rule: Utter nonsense. Just look at the history of conflicts between Islam, Jews and Christians, not to mention all the Jews in and near Medina that rather became fugitives or were killed, than to accept Islam – f. ex. Khaybar - and no more is necessary to say. You sometimes meet dishonesty like this in new, emerging religions and sects. It is a way of gaining “weight” for their statements, especially when they have few facts or proofs to show for themselves. Just one small fact that disproves this fairy tale: The 700 Jews in Khaybar could have saved their lives and possessions by becoming Muslims in time. To a man they chose not to.

033 17/108a: “And they (Jews and Christians when they hear the Quran*) say: ‘Glory to our Lord! Truly has the promise of our Lord been fulfilled (and the Messiah has come*)!” Made up propaganda. See 17/107 just above.

034 17/108b: “And they (Jews and Christians) say: “Glory to our Lord! Truly has the promise of our Lord been fulfilled!” As for the likeliness that this is true, see 17/107 above. But Islam (in this case “The Message of the Quran”) tells that it may refer to all the mentioning of Muhammad in the Bible (of which we have found none that is not just wishful statements that are obviously wrong – see “Muhammad in the Bible?”), but that it most likely means joy for finally getting the Quran, which Allah had promised and now finally had sent. There is no reference to a promise of something like the Quran in the Bible, and Jews and Christians at all times did reckon the Quran to be so wrong and so distant from the Bible, that it was not even heresy. Verse 107 and 108 simply are fairy tales made up to back up Muhammad - a not unusual technique to use by emerging new sects or religions. It may be based on a few converts at that time, or free fantasy - dishonesty happens when new religions and sects are made. And later.

035 17/109: “They (Jews and Christians*) fall down on their faces in tears (when they hear the Quran*)”. As honest as 17/107 and 17/108 just above.

*00f 17/111a: “- - - Allah, Who begets no son - - -”. Well, Jesus called Yahweh “father”. Besides it is funny to read the Quran scolding Arabs to believe Allah had daughters - al-Lat, al-Uzza and (al-) Manat - because it is plain stupidity to believe a god who wanted family, would choose to have daughters. He was sure to choose sons. That imbecility was enough proof in the man-centred old Arabia, to “prove” that the very idea had to be wrong. But when Yahweh may be wanted some company - a son - that is an utter impossibility in spite of this. Even more funny because the Quran, Muhammad, Islam and Muslims tell it is impossible for mere humans to understand a god - - - but everyone seems to be sure that a god wants to be alone, and neither do they ask if a god perhaps has a reason (that we may or may not understand for having a son, nor ask if he just wants company. Who knows a god's wishes?

*00g 17/111b: “- - - and has no partner in (His) dominion - - -”. Well, Islam says that Allah is the same god as Yahweh. If we discuss from that hypothetical statement just here: In the very old Hebrew religion there was a female partner/wife of Yahweh - his Amat (source: New Scientist and at least two others). In the strictly masculine Semitic culture the Amat was forgotten over the centuries. But may be she still existed all the same at the time of Muhammad - and may be even today?

Surah 17: At least 35 mistakes + 7 likely mistakes.

SURAH 18:

001 18/1a: “- - - Allah, Who hath sent down to his Servant the Book”. Well, the sinister question is: Can a book that full of mistaken facts and other facts, really be sent down by an omniscient god? If yes, does that mean that Allah is not omniscient/omnipotent? If no, does it mean that someone else who is/was not omniscient, has made (up) the Quran? The last question is most sinister, especially if it means that Islam is a made up religion, and even more so if this (may be?) made up religion blocks the road for its “believers” to a real religion (if such one exists). The answers have got to be: No omniscient god would make such an unreliable book (among other reasons because man had to see the mistakes sooner or later), and it is likely it is made by one or more humans at the time of Mohammad (among other reasons because the mistakes and many of the stories are in accordance with what one believed in Arabia at that time).

002 18/1b: “(Allah*) hath allowed therein no Crookedness.” In a book that full of mistaken facts and other mistakes, there is a lot of crookedness. Especially the use of invalid “signs” and “proofs” smell.

003 18/2a: “(He (Allah*) hath made it) Straight (and Clear) - - -”. A book that full of mistaken facts and other mistakes, f. ex. linguistic ones, (and perhaps religious ones, too - why should they be exceptions?) is neither straight nor clear.

004 18/2b: “- - - Glad Tidings - - -.” At best only partly right. See 2/97c and 17/9b above and 91/13 below.

00a 18/4: “(It is wrong*) that Allah hath begotten a son”. Well, we are back to the old facts that Jesus according to the Bible - written on the background of thousands of witnesses/listeners - many times called God/Yahweh Father, that humble humans - f. ex. Muhammad - are unable to understand completely the ways and wishes of a god (may be Yahweh wanted a son for some reason), and that Islam has to deny that Jesus was the son of Yahweh, in order to make (or pretend?) Mohammad the greatest prophet. Besides: Where are Islam’s proofs? - in spite of Islam’s glorifying of blind belief - a psychologically wise slogan when all one have are doubtful and at least partly wrong texts from a doubtful, self proclaimed “prophet” of at least as doubtful character - it is naïve in the extreme to believe blindly in so serious matter as eternity. If your chosen religion is a made up one - which every blind believer in every religion believes just their religion is not - where do you end if there is a next life? - and what if there is a real religion that you have not found, because of your blindness. Perhaps all religions are made up and just is a result of an inner longing in some people for something absolute (science have found that many weak - and some stronger - souls have such a longing in their genes or psyche), but in that case one at least does not have to make life as miserable for ones fellow men (and even more for the women) as Islam preaches - hate, rape, stealing, enslavement, and war.

*005 18/5a: “No knowledge have they (the Christians*) of such a thing (that Yahweh may have a son*)”. Wrong. There is a lot of information in the Bible. Now of course Muhammad, the Quran, and Islam all declare that the Bible has been falsified - they have to, as that was the only way for Muhammad to explain the differences between his “quoting” the Bible and quoting of religious legends, fairy tales, etc., and the Bible proper (it also is common among religious sects or religions to say that other sects or religions have misunderstood or falsified information), and also between Islam and Christianity. But science clearly has shown that the Bible is not falsified.

But the Quran is based only on what a single man said - only one man. A man that lived 600 years later, who brings not one single proof or witness - only claims and statements taken from nowhere and from legends. Also a man for whom it was essential (just read the Quran and see) to be the greatest of prophets, which meant he had to reduce Jesus. And a man who craved very much for power - once more; just read the Quran and see how he glues himself to his platform of power; his religion and the god of that religion - which meant that his teachings had to gain priority over other teachings. And a man telling he got his teachings directly from an omniscient god - which meant it was impossible to accept that there were mistakes in the teachings (a problem that today is a nightmare for Islamic scholars, because there very obviously are lots of mistakes, and it is difficult to find good enough ways of “explaining” the mistakes away, except for to people with no - or not enough - knowledge, or not able to think for themselves - - - or believing so strongly that they anyhow do not want to see facts that do not fit what they believe.)

Whereas the Bible is written by many different persons, and as for NT many of whom knew Jesus or his closest co-workers, the Disciples, and nearly all wrote at times when there still were thousands of witnesses alive that had personally heard and seen what Jesus said and did.

We do not say that the Bible is right. We even less say that all details in the Bible are right, as it is clear that some details are wrong also in the Bible, at least in Genesis (creating it all).

But there is no doubt that according to all rules for evaluating information, the Bible should be more reliable than the Quran. The OT is written some 1000 years earlier and consequently 1000 years closer to what happened, and also had at least a lot of verbal traditions to build on. And NT was written 450 – 600 before the Quran, and with lots and lots of witnesses to what had happened still alive when much of it was written. Muhammad on the other hand had few sources, and they were mixed up with fairy tales (like the Child Gospels, from which he f. ex. has got the story of the bird Jesus made from clay) or so-called apocryphal gospels or books - all of which are proved to be made up or propaganda for sects, or - well - fairy tales. Ok, he said he got his information from a god - but that is very easy and very cheap to say - many a founder of many a sect or religion have said the same thing. And there is not a single proof - not one single - for it being true in all the Quran, in spite of wishes and demands from both sceptics and followers. Questions that at best were answered with some fast-talk about what Allah could do if he wanted (but he never “wanted”) or that none of them would believe even if Allah sent real (supernatural) proofs (something any person that knows a little about people or about psychology knows is not true - supernatural proofs/wonders had made at least some believe. What is worse: Muhammad was a wise man who understood human nature - he had to know that he was lying each time he told just this). And do not forget: The glorified ideal Muhammad was in reality a highwayman and thief, an extorter, a rapist, a murderer and mass murderer, an enslaver, a warlord lusting for power, and a warlord telling that “war is betrayal”.

There also is the fact that science knows some 13ooo scriptures or fragments with relation to the Bible or biblical circumstances. Plus 30ooo+ other manuscripts with referances to the Bible. They all are in accordance with the modern Bible, and when they find that the translators of the Bible have misunderstood or not been quite exact enough, the translation of the Bible is corrected in later editions - one wants and strives for to have everything as correct as possible. In stark contrast: When Islam finds scriptures or fragments that is not quite the same as the 1-2 they use today, the findings are denied and hidden - a star example is the many copies of the Quran found in Yemen in 1972; when it became clear that details - some of them of significance - were unlike what was written in the Quran(s) of today, scientists were denied access to them any more.

Conclusion: Any student and any professor of history will say that according to normal rules for evaluation, the Bible is far more reliable than the Quran as a source for historical information. And any psychologist will confirm that Muhammad must have known he lied each and every time he said that (supernatural) proofs of Allah had made no-one believe in Allah anyhow. And more: No serioud scientist uses information from the Quran from before 610 AD in his science - it is not reconed to be reliable.

00b 18/5b: “What they (the “infidels”*) say (about Jesus being the son of Yahweh*) is nothing but falsehood”. Tell that to all the witnesses that heard Jesus say so. There were so many listening to Jesus, that if a thing like this (Jesus calling Yahweh his father, and obviously in a traditional meaning - though perhaps a created, not a born son) was a lie, but was written in scripts meant for many to read, there had been serious protests and corrections. We do not say Jesus spoke the truth - even if he is accepted also by Islam to be an honest prophet. But we say it is highly unlikely that he did not say - many times - that Yahweh was his father. There simply were too many witnesses to what he said.

*00c 18/9a: “Or dost thou reflect that the Companions of the Cave - - -”. This is an old tale - a religious legend - that is incorporated in the Quran. The story of the 7 sleepers is well known - and is just a fairy tale. The 7 were Christians from Ephesus in what is now Turkey, that fled to a cave during a pogrom under “Cesar” Decius the story goes.

Decius had the cave walled up to kill them. Instead the 7 fell asleep, and did not wake up until in the 30.th year of the reign of the pious Theodosius - that is in 448 AD. Decius reined for just over two years around/just after 250 AD. That means that if the fairy tale had been true, they had slept some 195 years (the Quran says 300 or 309 years - even in the fairy tale it is wrong). Islam has troubles explaining this story, and the “explanations” we have seen, are very “lofty” and diffuse - f. ex. that it really is told about an older Jewish fairy tale - or that it derives from misunderstandings about the Esseers - the members of the Qumran society (near the Dead Sea) but without giving any sources or documentation - only speculations. Besides the age does not matter – it is as made up even if it should happen that the original is a bit older. They also tell it is an allegory - which they mostly do when they have difficulties finding “explanations” that are possible to believe. But an allegory of what? And it obviously is not meant to be an allegory - among other things the meanings of an allegory in the Quran normally are very easy to see or are explained. The Quran further normally tells when it is telling an allegory or something similar, and not least; the Quran itself stresses that it shall be understood literally if nothing else is said. The sleepers also mentioned in 18/13 – 18/22 – 18/25. Also see 18/13 below.

006 18/9b: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

007 18/13: “We (Allah*) relate to thee their (the 7 sleepers) story in truth: - - -”. As this is a well-known fairy tale, and as the Quran has so many other mistakes, carefully said: At best it is only partly the truth. But note that it is stressed that the story is the truth - not an allegory, not made up, but the truth..

008 18/14: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

009 18/17: “- - - the signs of Allah - - -.” There is not one single sign in the Quran that clearly is from Allah, and thus not one single “sign” that proves anything about Allah. Any priest in any religion can just as easy say they are signs of his god(s). Words are that cheap.

010 18/22: “(Some) say they (the 7 sleepers) were three, the dog being the fourth among them, (others) say they were five, the dog being the sixth - doubtfully guessing the unknown; (yet others) say they were seven, the dog being the eight”. If Muhammad got this story from a real story via a god, not from a well known fairy tale, the god had known their number (well, a god also had known the number that was told in a legend), but Muhammad obviously not. Also see 18/13 just above.

011 18/25: “So they (the 7 sleepers) stayed in their Cave three hundred years, and (some) add nine more”. See 18/13 and 18/22. (If one relies on some historical facts mentioned in the main variety of the legend, they slept some 195 years).

012 18/26: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

00d 18/27a: “- - - the Book (the Quran*) of thy Lord (Allah*): - - - “. Is it really the words of a god? - with that many mistakes?

013 18/27b: “- - - the Book (the Quran) of thy Lord (Allah*): none can change His Words (the Quran*) - - -”. Wrong. Reality can change the words when the words are wrong. And many verses were abrogated (“We (Allah*) sends another as good or better”) - a few even by Hadiths - not to mention that the whole religion was changed in and after 622 AD from peaceful to war and hate and stealing and rape. Islam cannot admit this change, because it may expose mistakes in the religion, but people are able to read, and it is easy to find in the Quran.

014 18/29: “Say, ’The Truth is from your Lord (Allah*)”. Allah’s words as presumed “referred” in the Quran at best is partly the truth - mind all the mistakes.

015 18/31: “- - - bracelets of gold - - -“. Which is right and which is wrong? – in 76/21 the bracelets are from silver. One of them has to be wrong. A mistake and one more contradiction – in spite of that “contradictions does not exist in the Quran – which is a proof for that it came from Allah”.

016 18/37a: “- - - Him (Allah*) Who created you out of dust - - -”. Wrong - man was not created out of dust. See 6/2.

*017 18/37b: “- - - Him (Allah*) Who created you out of dust, then out of a sperm-drop - - -”, Wrong, or at best half true. Humans are not made out of a drop of sperm - though the Quran says so repeatedly. Humans - and animals - are made out of sperm + an egg cell. Arabs knew a lot about foetuses (from slaughtering of animals), but an egg cell is so small, that one does not notice it - hardly possible to see in all the blood and intestines and gore, etc. - so the Quran tells the semen is “planted” in a woman and grows to a being. Muhammad did not know better as that was an accepted theory at his time – Greek and/or Persian “knowledge” originally - but an omniscient god had known - - - so who made the Quran?

017b 18/50 (A53 – omitted in 2008): “Behold, We (Allah*) said to the angels,’ Bow down to Adam’: they bowed down except Iblis. He was one of the Jinns - - -.” But here is a clear mistake – or more likely; A. Yusuf Ali’s religion and al-Taqiyya may have suppressed his honesty: The original Arab text here do not say he was a jinn: It says something like (translated from Swedish): “He (Iblis*) belonged to the multitude of invisible beings”. The text here honestly and clearly indicates that he was an angel before he became the Devil. On the other hand the Quran other places tells he was made from fire, which in case means he according to this book in reality was a jinn. This is one more place where the Muslim scholars agree that the text in the Quran is wrong (though they never say this in clear words) as it here most clearly is indicated that Iblis was an angel.

018 18/51: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

019 18/55: “- - - now that guidance (the Quran) has come to them (the “unbelievers“)”. A book with so many mistakes is not really guidance.

020 18/56a: “- - - glad tidings - - -.” At best partly true only. See 2/97c above and 61/13 below.

021 18/56b: “- - - in order therewith to weaken the truth (the teachings of Muhammad/the Quran*), - - -”. To repeat the reality: With so many mistakes in the Quran, it can maximum be partly true.

022 18/56c: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

023 18/57: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

***024 18/86a: The next mistakes concern a certain Dhu’l Quarnayn - a name meaning “the Two Horned One“, and it is an Arab “nickname” for the famous Macedonian king Alexander the Great (see f. ex. “the Oxford Dictionary of Islam”), who lived around 330 BC (died 323 BC) - some 950 years before Muhammad. Muslims never tell that Dhu’l Quarnayn is Alexander the Great - perhaps because every educated European at once would know that a lot of the information about him in the Quran is wrong - we know a lot about him.

You will even meet Muslims denying Alexander is Dhu’l Quarnayn - “proving” their statements with f. ex. that Alexander today is well known to have been a polytheist, whereas the Quran indirectly, but very clearly tells he was a good Muslim (another one of the Quran’s mistakes).

It may be of interest to mention that Ibn Ishaq seems to have believed that Dhu’l Quarnayn was an Egyptian of Greek origin (page 139 in the 2007 edition from Oxford University Press, edited by A. Guillaume). And that Ibn Hisham in his note no. 186 to that book knew what he was talking about. He says that Dhu’l Quarnayn was a Greek (Alexander also was king of Greece) and simply states: “His name was Alexander. He built Alexandria and it was named after him” (Alexander the Great founded Alexandria - a well known historical fact). But Ibn Hisham refrains from using the full name Alexander the Great. It never was a secret for the learned ones that it was Alexander the Great who founded Alexandria, not even at the time of Ibn Hisham (dead ca. 840 AD), but to mention his full name might perhaps cause difficult questions from many quarters, as it was clear that at least some of what was told about Dhu’l Quarnayn obviously had to be recognized as fairy tales by anyone knowing the story of Alexander the Great. May be Ibn Hisham was brave by even identifying him as the founder of Alexandria?

18/86a“- - - he (Alexander) reached the setting of the sun, - - -”. To reach the setting of the sun means to go west. In addition to all the other mistakes in this story we know that Alexander never went west (the furthest west he ever was, was his homeland Macedonia north of Hellas, and Egypt). See also 18/8b and 18/86c just below.

**025 18/86b: “- - - when he (Alexander) reached the setting of the sun - - -”. Anyone who knows two millimetres about geography and astronomy knows this is wrong and ridiculous to the extreme: The sun does not set on Earth – and absolutely in a pond of dirty water. Also see 18/86a and 18/86c just above and just below.

***026 18/86c: “- - - he (Alexander the Great*) found it (the sun*) set in a spring of murky water”. This statement - or fairy tale - deserves a series of exclamation marks - anyone today who has finished primary school, knows among other facts:

1. The sun is too big to settle anywhere on Earth.
2. Not to mention that it is far too big to settle in a pond - murky or not.
3. And that if the sun ever came within a million miles from the Earth, there would be no spring or pond any more - far too hot.

Muhammad did not know the size or temperature of the sun, but an omniscient god had known.Who made the Quran?

Muslims try to “explain” it by f. ex. telling that what he saw was the reflexion of a sunset in a spring. Think of the great warrior king Alexander - riding west and west and west with his men, day after day and week after week to find the place where the sun set. Then one day he hits upon one more pond - even one with dirty water. When he stands so that that dirty spring is in the straight line between him and the sun, he sees the red and yellow mirror image of the sunset in the muddy surface - a sight he has seen time and again and again before on the surfaces of ponds and springs and rivers and lakes and seas - and he hails his men: “Now we have reached our goal!! Here is where the sun sets!! Now let’s go home and tell about our great discovery“.

Believe it whoever wants.

But whoever believes it needs to see a professor of history - or a psychologist to mend his brain. Also see 18/86a and 18/86b just above.

027 18/90: “- - - he came to the rising of the sun - - -”. It is not physically possible to come to the place where the sun rises from the Earth as the Quran indicates, because it does not rise from the Earth - and if it had, both Alexander and the Earth had been rather fried. Also see 18/86 x 3 just above.

*00e 18/94: “- - - Gog and Magog -. - -”. These are from the Bible. In the Bible one is a country and the other a king – king Gog of the country Magog. In the Quran they are two bad people. Who is right? Remember that Muhammad did not know the Bible well. A god had known. Then who composed the Quran?

**028 18/95: “He (Alexander*) said: ’(The power) in which my Lord (Allah!!!*) has established me is better - - -”. The Quran clearly indicates that Alexander was a pious Muslim (some 950 years before Muhammad!). To make an understatement: That is wrong. Alexander was a polytheist. (Muslims sometimes try to use this mistake as a proof for that Dhu’l Qarnayn was not Alexander). Also see 18/86a, 18/96b and 18/96c below.

***029 18/95-97: A people that lived in a valley were terrorized by two other people - Gog and Magog. They (the locals*) asked Alexander for help. He said: “I will erect a strong barrier between you and them: ‘Bring me blocks of iron’”. And he let build a wall of iron blocks produced by the locals straight across the valley, strong enough to be impossible for the people of Gog and Magog to get through, and tall enough to be impossible to get over even with the longest ladders - be sure that Gog and Magog knew about ladders. But nowhere on the entire earth there existed that much iron blocks around 330 BC – blocks of iron the locals were asked to bring him. (Note here that 18/93 tells the wall had to cross “(a tract) between two mountains” under which mountains a people lived – the wall had to have some length to cross “a tract” big enough for a whole people to live – it took a lot of iron blocks.)

(Besides it is all ridiculous: Very few valleys - and no big valley - have only one possible way in and out - Gog and Magog could in case get around the wall. And if not, it always was possible to dig under the wall - this was a valley in which people lived, and such a valley would have soil under the wall.) See also 18/86a -18/86b – 18/86c.

**030 18/96a: “At length, when he (Alexander - or really the workers making the wall*) had filled up the space between the two steep mountain-sides, he said, ’Blow (with your bellows)’. Then, when he had made it red as a fire - - -”. It would not be possible to make the whole of such a big wall red like fire at around 330 BC. They neither had the means - that kind of fire - nor the technology. It would be more than difficult even today. Fairy tale.

**031 18/96b: “Then, when he (Alexander the Great) had made it (red) as fire, he said: ’Bring me, that I may pour over it, molten lead” (Dawood says bronze we think).

1. We do not think there any one place on Earth was enough lead - or bronze - for such a job.
2. Even if it did, metal was expensive - the locals had to be very rich to have so much lead/bronze. And this goes even more so for enough iron blocks to build a huge wall.
3. It would not be technically possible to heat such a big and long wall to “make it (red) as fire” ca. 340 BC - it is hardly possible today.

**032 18/98: “This is a mercy from my Lord (Allah*)”. Wrong. Alexander the Great was no Muslim, but a polytheist.

033 18/105: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

034 18/106: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

Surah 18: At least 34 mistakes + 5 likely mistakes.

SURAH 19:

001 19/7: “- - - his name shall be Yahya (John*): on none by that name We (Allah*) have conferred distinction before”. But Johanan (John), son of Kareah, was a distinguished man in 2. Kings, 25/23. In addition our sources say that the word “distinction” is not in the Arab edition, but added by Yusuf Ali to circumvent an obvious mistake, as the name John was not unknown in Hebrew. (Yusuf Ali’s comment 2461). Other translators – f. ex. Muhammad Azad in “The Message of the Quran” – say in their comments to the point that the exact translation is (translated from Swedish): “We (Allah*) have never before named anybody with his (John the Baptist’s) name before”. But the name John (Johanan in Hebrew) is mentioned 27 times in OT = before John the Baptist – it was a quite common name. From relevant history also were the priest-king John Hyrcanus and the general John the Essene. There both were many Johns and men of distinction named John before John the Baptist. Simply wrong.

002 19/10: “- - - Thy Sign - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

*003 19/18: “- - - I (Mary, mother of Jesus*) seek refuge from thee to (Allah) Most Gracious: (come not near) if thou dost fear Allah”. It is highly unlikely that a Jew - and especially one working in Yahweh's temple - should seek refuge from a then highly polytheistic god from another country. As one see from what happened to Jesus, the monotheism and Yahweh were strong in Israel at that time. If the Quran tells the truth when it tells that Mary was working in the Temple, it is absolutely impossible - she had got into serious troubles if she addressed any other god than Yahweh (but then the Quran most likely is wrong also on this point - We have found nothing about Mary working in the Temple in the Bible or any other source, and if it had been true, most or all Christian sources had mentioned it, as it would mean one more connection between Jesus and Yahweh. (Actually it is incorrect that she worked in the Temple. This legend is taken from the apocryphal - made up - “’proto gospel’ after Jacob” - - - but Muslims all the same tell that the differences between the Quran and the Bible is because the bad non-Muslims have falsified the latter one – not because Muhammad ever so often used twisted fairy tales as basis for stories in the Quran.) Our Muslim sources also do not mention if there exists any other reliable source for this story in the Quran - which Islam frequently does not do when they have no sources, only statements built on nothing or like here on what legends and stories the story-tellers told in long evenings. Her work in the Temple simply is a fairy tale shined up and used like a true story in the Quran - by Allah or by Muhammad, and presumably sent down from Allah and copy from the Mother Book in Heaven, a book perhaps made by Allah, but most likely - according to Islam - never made, but existed from eternity (impossible as angels are speaking at least one place in the book - it must be made after the first angels were created. Not to mention that Muhammad speaks some 8 places in the book).

You are free to believe it if you want.

***004 19/24+25: "But (a voice) (the new-born baby Jesus*) cried from beneath the (palm-tree): ’Grieve not! For thy Lord hath provided a rivulet beneath thee; ’And shake towards thyself the trunk of the palm-tree (normally date palms are minimum 50 cm wide and strong – impossible for a human to shake*): it will let fall fresh ripe dates upon thee”. This story is “borrowed” from chapter 20 in an apocryphal – made up - “proto gospel” said to be after some Mathew. “Borrowed” by Muhammad or Allah, but presumably sent down as a copy from the Mother Book in Heaven. Believe the last if you want. There are few if any original stories in the Quran - mostly they are “borrowed” from different sources, but often changed a little. In this special case one also finds the story in “The Childbirth of Mary and the Salvador’s Childhood” if we remember the name correctly, and it has perhaps entered the Quran via “The Arab Childhood Gospel” (source; among others Ibn Warraq). As said before: Muhammad took stories from such fairy tales, and then accused the Bible of being falsified when it did not tell the same made up legends and tales. But no newborn baby is able to think rationally or to speak fluently - if it had really happened it had to be a miracle, and there is no chance that it had been forgotten in NT, as it had strengthened Jesus' connection to something supernatural quite a lot.

00a 19/27: “O Mary! Truly a strange thing (the baby Jesus*) hast thou brought!”. Mary had had to be very fat and very lucky if none of “her people” had noticed she was pregnant - be it at home or in the Temple.

***005 19/28: “(Mary*) O sister of Aaron!” This is the most famous mistake in the Quran. The likely reason is that in Arab the names Mary and Miriam (the sister of Moses and Aaron) both are written Maryam. Muhammad was not well versed in the Bible, and thought it was the same woman, even though some 1200 years separated them. The Hadith tells that Muhammad was told by his followers that he was wrong, and tried to explain away the mistake, but without real success. Muslims today tend to “explain” the blunder by saying it was an age-old way of paying respect to a woman to connect her to a person of high standard, and similar “explanations” but the “explanations” generally are not accepted by science, even not by all Muslim scientists - this may be partly because Muhammad also has made the father of Moses, Imran, the father of Mary another place in the Quran. (This last fact is by some Muslims “explained” with that they are two different Imrans. But also this is not accepted by the science, as it is clear that it in both cases it is the same man it is talked about - the founder of “Imran’s house” or Imran’s tribe). Some Muslims say it is an allegory, but it clearly is not told like an allegory – to call stories that turns out to be wrong allegories also is a standard Muslim way of explaining away difficult points when other “explanations” fail. And remember: Both the Quran and Islam strains that the Quran is to be understood literally if nothing else is said. Allegories, etc., also have points very easy to see, or are explained (which is not the case here) if Muhammad had intended to make a point of something. A clear mistake according to science. This is even more clear as Hadith tells Mohammad himself was unaware he had made a mistake, and tried unsuccessfully to explain it away when he was corrected by his nearest co-workers

**006 19/30a: “I (baby Jesus*) am indeed a servant of Allah, - - -”. See 3/51.

**007 19/30b: “(Allah has*) given me revelations and made me (the baby Jesus*) a prophet - - -”. Even Islam (f. ex. the learned Ikrimah, quoted by Tabari) accepts the impossibility that a baby is a prophet, but the explaining it away is vague and hypothetical. A very clear mistake. This even more so as there is not one single chance that this wonder had been forgotten in or omitted from NT if it had been true. Actually this is one of the points where many Muslim scholars accept there is a mistake in the Quran.

**008 19/30-33: The baby Jesus is talking and discussing in his cradle. Also this is “borrowed” from apocryphal Child Gospels - in this case as far as we know via “The Arab Child Gospel” - also called “The first Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ” – an apocryphal scripture from 2. century. There is not a single chance that a wonder like this had been omitted from the Bible, as it would have strengthened Jesus’ position quite a lot. This even more so as there are not many tales about Jesus as a child, and this story would have made that part of his life less blank. Once more a fairy tale used like a true story by Allah or Muhammad. Even a book like “The Message of the Quran” is not able to defend this as a true story, but it only offers speculations and presumptions to explain away the impossibility. Also see 19/30b just above.

A very clearly not true story - a clear mistake. We have never met a Muslim explaining why the Quran often took its stories from well known, but made up legends and fairy tales, and then explained the differences from the Bible by insisting that the Bible is faked.

"The Message of the Quran" (A24 – in 2008 edition A23): As baby Jesus impossibly could be a prophet, there has to be other explanations, according to the Muslim scholars. As said: ONE MORE PLACE WHERE mUSLIM SCHOLARS AGREE THAT SOMETHING MUST BE WRONG IN THE QURAN.

*009 19/34: “Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary: (it is) a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute”. We are back to what is the truth in the Quran - with all the mistakes it is a difficult question. What is sure is that Jesus did not say he was a servant of the known polytheistic, foreign god al-Lah/Allah (in that case he had had very few followers and had been killed much earlier), and that he called God/Yahweh “father”. In this case the text refers to verses 30 through 33 (see 19/30a, 19/30b, 19/30-33 just above), which already are shown to be clear mistakes. Another clear mistake.

00b 19/35: “It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son”. We hope it really is the god that is talking here, because if it is Muhammad; how is a human to know what is befitting for a god? - and majesties often have children - many children. F. ex. Ramses II had 67 sons and an unknown number of daughters, and Djingis Khan had so many children that science still can trace his DNA in Asia (source: New Scientist). And if this statement is true, there is the enigma of Jesus’ saying “father” and “my father” about Yahweh (the word “father” is used at least 163 times in the Bible, and the word “son” at least 66 times about the relationship between Yahweh and Jesus – frequently by Jesus himself) – both the Bible and the Quran says Jesus was honest - and science has shown that the Bible is not falsified in spite of Islam's never documented claims. (Alao remember: Muhammad calls Yahweh Allah, as he insists it is the same god - something that is possible only if Yahweh/Allah is schizophrenic as there are too many and too grave differences between the two teachings.)

010 19/36: “Verily Allah is my (Muhammad’s*) Lord and your (Muslims’*) Lord - - -“. This is a serious one: Here clearly it is Muhammad himself – Muhammad the man - that is speaking. How is that possible in a book made by a god before the universe was created or may be one which has existed since eternity, and a copy of a revered Mother Book sent down from Heaven by Allah? (There are a few mistakes (?) like this (8?) in the Quran – see 6/114a.)

011 19/58: “- - - Signs - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

012 19/65: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

013 19/67: “We (Allah*) created him (Adam) before out of nothing”. Man was not made out of nothing. Actually man was not created at all, but developed from earlier primates. See also 6/2. (Another small contradiction: In 52/35 and others it is indicated that man was not made from nothing.)

014 19/68: “So, by thy Lord (Allah*), without doubt, We (Allah*) shall gather them together - - -”. With all the mistakes in the Quran there are good reasons for doubts.

00ba 19/71: “Not one of you but will pass over it (the bridge Sirat - to be passed the Last Day*)”. Very similar to Zoroastrian, where the bridge is named Chinavad.

016 19/73: “- - - Clear Signs - - -“. There is not one single clear sign (=proof) for neither Allah nor for Muhammad’s connection to a god in all the Quran – only claims and statements backed by not proved words or by nothing.

017 19/77: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

00c 19/88-89: “They say: ’(Allah) Most Gracious has begotten a son!’ Indeed ye have put forth a thing most monstrous!” See among others 19/35.

00d 19/92: “For it is not consonant with the majesty of (Allah) Most Gracious that He should beget a son”. See among others 19/35.

018 19/93: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

019 19/98: “- - - Glad Tidings - - -.” At best only partly right. See 2/97c and 17/9babove and 91/13 below.

Surah 19: At least 18 mistakes + 5 likely mistakes.

SURAH 20:

001 20/2: “We (Allah*) have not sent down the Quran to thee to be (an occasion) for thy distress - - -“. The main fact is that Allah (if he exists) did not send it down at all – no omniscient god makes that many and that obvious mistakes, etc.

002 20/4a: (The Quran is*) “A revelation from Him (Allah*)”. The unanswered question is: Would an omniscient god send down a book with so many mistakes? - not to mention if he would have it as a not perfect, but all the same deeply respected Mother Book in his perfect Paradise? There is an answer: Either it is wrong that Allah sent it down, or it is wrong that Allah is omniscient - if he exists.

003 20/4b: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

004 20/6: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

005 20/47a: “Verily we (Moses and Aaron*) are messengers sent by thy (Ramses II’s*) Lord (Allah*) - - -“. Wrong – Ramses II was a polytheist. Besides: He might have heard about Yahweh (but would not respect the god of slaves very much), but never of Allah.

006 20/47b: “- - - we (Moses and Aaron*) come from thy (Ramses II’s*) Lord (Allah*)!” See 20/47a just above.

007 20/53: ”He Who has made for you the earth like a carpet spread out; - - -”. In the Quran the Earth is flat. May be round like a pancake, but definitely flat - not like a sphere. That is what Muhammad believed, as that is what geography was like at his time - but a god had known it was wrong. (Actually there are 7 Earths according to the Quran (65/12) - one on top of the other according to Hadiths.) See also 2/22 (?), 15/19, 43/10, 71/19, 79/30, 88/20.

008 20/54: “- - - in these (plants and cattle*) are Signs for men endued with understanding.” There are no real signs in the Quran – not for Allah, not for Muhammad’s religion, nor for Muhammad’s connection to a god. The only signs “men endued with understanding” gets from sentences like this in the Quran, is the question: Why did Muhammad have to use invalid proofs and twisted logic, and the conclusion: Muhammad’s use of invalid arguments proves that he had no real arguments/facts – if he had had, he had used them instead. And actually there is one more point: The use of made up claims and statements are the hallmarks of a cheat and a swindler.

009 20/55: “From the (earth) did We (Allah*) create you - - -”. Wrong. Man was not created from earth. See also 6/2.

010 20/69-70: The magicians of the pharaoh all became Muslims when they saw Moses performing areal miracle. All the same the Quran repeats and repeats and repeats that the reason why Muhammad was unable to perform miracles, (included making real prophesies), was that nobody would believe anyhow. This is one if the scenes that make it clear that Muhammad knew he was lying each time he used those excuses and “explanations”.

*011 20/71: “- - - I (Pharaoh Ramses II*) will have you crucified - - -”. If not our sources are very wrong, Egypt at that time did not crucify people.

*012 20/78: “Then the Pharaoh pursued them with his forces, but the waters completely overwhelmed them and cover them up”. May be the water covered up the troops, but not the Pharaoh - - - Ramses II did not drown, and he did not die until years later according to science. Another thing: They most likely did not cross the Red Sea proper. The original Hebrew Bible in reality uses a name that also has the meaning “Sea of Reeds”. The Sea of Reeds was a big, shallow lake south of the Bitter Seas in the area where you now find the Suez Canal. For Moses to walk past a big lake with his some 2 million Jews (600ooo men + women and children according to the Bible) and belongings and animals is one thing. To march down the western side of the Red Sea and plan to cross that sea by boats they did not have, is quite another thing – remember that they did not know that Yahweh would split the sea (and most of them hardly had believed it if they had been told). The fact that the Hebrew name for the sea they crossed (?) – Yam Suph – also means “the Sea of Reeds” is mentioned in footnotes many times in NIV – and in other literature.

013 20/85: “- - - the Samari had led them astray”. But the Jews still had not arrived in Samaria and there existed no Samarians (actually the name Samaria/Samarians as far as we can find, was not coined until 722 BC - more than 500 years after the exodus that happened (if it happened) ca. 1235 BC.). Muslims try to “explain” the mistake by saying may be it is meant “shmeer” = stranger, or “shomer” = watchman = samara in Arab - - - but if you cherry-pick from a whole language, it always is possible to find words that are look-alikes – and that the Arab word here is a look-alike, is totally irrelevant, as these Jews of the old hardly spoke Arab. But if the Quran means some other thing than it says here – or is possible to misunderstand - how many other places in the book are there similar or worse/religious mistakes?

014 20/87: “- - - the Samara - - -“. See 20/85 just above.

015 20/95: “- - - O Samari - - -“. See 20/85 above.

016 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 had been removed. Any god had known.

017 20/113: “Thus We (Allah*) sent this (the Quran*) down - - -“. No book with that many mistakes is revered as a Mother Book by an omniscient god, and no omniscient god makes a copy of a book full of mistakes and sends it down as a holy book and the source for a religion dedicated to himself.

018 20/114: “High above all is Allah, the King, the Truth!” Allah as shown in the Quran at best represents partly truth and partly mistakes.

019 20/116: “Prostrate yourself to Adam”. Wrong, as Adam did never exist - man developed from an earlier 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 in the Rift Valley in East Africa, 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 = from the mother – carrying only the feminine DNA). Then around 60ooo+ (64ooo?) years ago, something happened to Homo Sapiens (may be in the area south of the Caspian Sea). 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 – here named Adam - 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. That archaeologists named them Adam and Eve, in a way 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 and use this as a religious proof for creation, 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. It is a well known scientific fact among learned people.

020 20/126: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

021 20/127: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

022 20/128: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

023 20/133: “- - - Clear Signs - - -“. There is not one single clear sign (= proof) anywhere in the Quran neither for Allah nor for Muhammad’s connection to a god. Without exception all the “signs”, “clear signs”, and “proofs” only are claims or statements resting only on air and/or twisted logic or on other not proved claims. (There may be one exception; arguments taken from the Bible – but they in case tell about Yahweh, not about Allah. Islam likes to claim that they are one and the same god, but the teachings – especially as you find them in NT (the new covenant Muslims never mention – cfr. the last Easter of Jesus, f. ex. Luke 22/20) – fundamentally are so different, that it is impossible that the two can be one and the same, not unless the god at least is schizophrenic.)

SURAH 20: At least 23 mistakes,

Subtotal here: 795 mistakes + 112 likely mistakes.

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?