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

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 21 THROUGH 30 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 21:

001 21/4: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22.

*00a 21/6: “- - - not one of the populations which We (Allah*) destroyed - - -“. Muhammad claimed that the scattered ruins and ruin villages and towns were destroyed by Allah because its inhabitants have sinned. In an arid, hard and warlike area this hardly is the full truth – may be no truth at all.

002 21/10: “We (Allah*) have revealed for you (O men!) a book (the Quran*) - - -”. Once more: Has an omniscient god revealed a book with so many mistakes? - or has Muhammad made all the mistakes when telling what Allah told him? In plain words: No. (- or has Muhammad or some accomplice made up all of it from fantasy and knowledge that was often wrong?).

003 21/16: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

004 21/18: “- - - nay, We (Allah) hurl the Truth against falsehood, and it knocks out its brain, and behold, falsehood doth perish!” Does the same happen if one hurls the Quran with all its mistakes? With all its mistakes, etc., the Quran at best is partly the truth.

005 21/19: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

*006 21/20: “They (all creatures in the heavens and the Earth*) celebrate His (Allah’s*) praises night and day - - -“. Islam will have to prove that all animals, birds, fishes, insects, worms, etc., etc. really does this – and all non-Muslim humans – before one can believe them and the Quran on this point.

007 21/22a: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

008 21/22b: “If there were, in the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth, other gods besides Allah, there would have been confusion in both!” The logic is wrong. There exist both hierarchic and parallel (one boss for each department or aspect) systems for management. One can say there could be confusion, but not that there would be. The proof is invalid.

009 21/24: “But most of them know not the Truth - - -”. Well, the “truth” as given in the Quran, at the very best is only partly true - too many mistakes.

00b 21/26: “And they say ‘(Allah) Most Glorious has begotten offspring’. Glory to Him! They are (but) servants raised to honour“. We do not know what is the truth about al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat - the daughters of al-Lah/Allah in the old Arab religion. But Jesus at least told many times that Yahweh was his father.

**010 21/30a: “Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens (plural and wrong) and the earth were joined together (as one unit of Creation), before We (Allah*) clove them asunder?” Heaven is an optical illusion - a fact that is well known today, but Muhammad did not know it - and an illusion cannot be “cloven asunder” from a material thing. We also have met Muslims saying that the theory of the Big Bang proves the Quran. But the Big Bang “clove something asunder” 13.7 billion years ago, whereas our sun (Helios or Sun*) is a 3. generation star, and it and the planets included Earth are just 4.57 billion years old. The differences in age, and far more the fact that our sun is 3. generation, (which means that the stuff the earth - and the sun – is made from, has been through two cycles of being fluid and mixed parts of former suns that became super novas (exploding stars) and were spread over large parts of cosmos where it mixed with remnants of other exploded super novas, and at last coalesce to make a new sun and planets) makes the Big Bang totally irrelevant in this connection – for all the previous 9 billion years the Earth and the sun and the planets just were scattered atoms, molecules and fragments in a celestial “mixer” – not an Earth, etc. that could be identified and could “be joined together” or “clowen asunder”. At least the professors at Al-Ahzar University know this, and it is dishonesty to try to cheat people by using this “argument” in f. ex. “The Message of the Quran” - a book pretending to give, as seen from the Muslim point of view, correct information on and explanations of the Quran, certified by one of the highest authorities on the Quran in the Muslim world, the above-mentioned university. (Beware that the latest edition in English of that book is made more conservatively “correct” than former ones).

011 21/30b: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

**012 21/30c: “We (Allah*) made from water every living thing.” Wrong - the living things were not made from water. Some Muslims say modern science proves the Quran here, as science tells life started in water. But life only started in water, it was not made from water - there is a huge distinction there. The really bad thing here, is that this lie also is told by well educated Muslims – f. ex. it is thoroughly explained in comment 38 to 21/30 in “The Meaning of the Quran” – Muslims that have so much education and knowledge that they know the difference between to be “made in” water and be “made from” water very well. How reliable are then other things they claim? See also 6/2. We may add that this is the only place in the Quran where – possibly – also the “creation” of plants are included, this in spite of that plants are the basis for all life.

013 21/31a: “And We (Allah*) have set on the earth mountains - - -”. The mountains are not “set on” the Earth - they have without exception “grown up”, no matter whether they are a result of tectonic or volcanic activity. Any god knew this, but Muhammad not. Does this indicate who the real composer of the Quran is?

*014 21/31b: “And We (Allah*) have set on the earth mountains standing firm, lest it should shake with them - - -”. Some experts on Islam and the Quran say this refers to that the disk that is the Earth (in the Quran the Earth is flat, but perhaps a round disk) might shake and become unstable, and because of this may slip away or tip around and drop everything - included humanity - off the Earth.

We refer to some Muslim scholars: Jalalan, (p. 437), Baydawi (p. 686), Tabari (p.589), and Zamakhshari (part 4, p. 381): They all tell that “if it was not for these unshakeable (!!*) mountains, the earth would slip away.”(!!!*)

****And Jalalan, Baydawi, and Zamakhshari all say that “- - - He (Allah*) placed unshakeable mountains (not more so then that they shake during earthquakes*) on Earth lest it tilts with people.” This obviously is what the Quran really meant, and this even more obviously was the meaning Muhammad told his followers, as it is what the learned Muslim scholars were sure was the truth.

But this “truth” is so ridiculous, that let us go on to the alternative explanation – the one that is in vogue in Islam now that they know the original “truth” was wrong: That the mountains hinder earth-quakes.

That is not correct. Well, it is so far from the truth, that it is not even wrong - it is sometimes the opposite of the truth:

1. According to f. ex. heavyweights like “New Scientist” and “Nature” mountains sometimes can CAUSE earthquakes because of their considerable weight and pressure on the underground. Yes, even variations in the amount of water (= weight) in big mountain lakes or glaciers sometimes causes minor and medium earthquakes. The same goes for heavy snow-falls in the mountains sometimes – snow in the mountains and rain lower down is a normal phenomenon = imbalance in weight. (There f. ex. are more earthquakes in the north in winter than in summer).
2. *It is well known today that mountains are made because of tectonic activity (that always causes earthquakes - though sometimes too feeble for human so feel) or volcanic activity that often causes earthquakes. That means that mountains in reality are made by earthquakes (or actually by the same mechanisms that make most earthquakes), it does not hinder such quakes.Any god had known this, but Muhammad not - this is new knowledge to humans. Then who composed the Quran?

*015 21/31c: “- - - and We (Allah) have made therein (in the mountains*) broad highways (between the mountains) - - -”. We honestly did not know Allah - or any other god - built highways. And here we could make a cheap joke (tell your congress-men (or similar) to ask Allah build your roads, instead of spending all that tax money on it). But we refrain from it.

Well, it would be possible for Muhammad to say - true or not true - that Allah showed the first travellers where to travel. But in no case Allah built the roads - or highways. Unless Islam really proves he did - but Islam never proves, they only tell or state or claim, even though they demand proofs from everyone else. Or they say it is said so in the Quran, and that proves it. But a book with that many mistakes has little value as a proof - and besides it is logically impossible to use the Quran to prove the Quran, as circular proofs are without value.

016 21/32a: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

017 21/32b: “And We (Allah*) have made the heavens (plural and wrong*) as a canopy - - -”. Wrong. The heaven as we see it, is not made as a canopy - it is not even material. The heaven as we see it, is just an illusion made from bending of light by day, and from our inability to see the correct 3 dimensions at those distances by night.

**018 21/32c: “And We (Allah*) have made the heavens (plural and wrong*) as a canopy well guarded - - -”. Muhammad was unable to see the difference between stars and shooting stars. In the Quran it is told that the shooting stars (mistaken for being ordinary stars) are “arrows” used to chase away bad spirits or jinns (beings “borrowed” from old Arab folklore and unknown to any other “prophet” than Muhammad) wanting to spy on Heaven. Any child today knows the difference between a real star and a shooting star, and also what would happen on and to the Earth if shooting stars were real stars. Even a baby dwarf god had known this - but Muhammad not, as it is modern knowledge. The pertinent or impertinent question is: Who then composed the Quran?

019 21/32d: “- - - Signs - - -“. Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 and 20/54 above.

Actually: 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.

**020 21/33: “- - - all (the celestial bodies) swim along, each in its rounded course.” Wrong. There only is one celestial body that has a rounded course, and then only compared to Earth: The moon – Luna. And if you compare it to the sun, its course is not really rounded any more, but a kind of wavy, and even more so if you compare it to the galaxy. The sun also has no rounded course, even if you compare it to the galaxy – it follows a kind of a bent sinus curve above and below the equator of the galaxy. The same go for very many of the stars we see – no circle, but bent sinus. Earth's course of course follows, but is more complicated because of its circling the sun at the same time. And our galaxy – together with the rest of the Local Group of galaxies (a few dozen galaxies) and many others – are on our somewhat linear way towards something called “the Great Attractor” which nobody knows what is - - - while it at the same time is walzing around in our Local Group, which is wandering in and part of a larger group of a thousand or more galaxies. You do not find round courses in space, unless you cherry-pick part movements – and all courses we can see without telescopes have a somewhat linear main direction because of this movement in the direction of “The Great Attractor”, but irregular because of local circling or similar.

021 21/37: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

022 21/45: “I (Muhammad*) do but warn you (people*) according to revelations (the Quran*).” The Quran may be a revelation from Muhammad or from other humans or from some invisible powers, but not from an omniscient god – no omniscient god makes mistakes, and in the Quran there may be unbelievable 3000 or more places with some kind of mistake (included repetitions), if you count absolutely everything and all details. More than 5 for each and every page in our book!! Many of the mistakes just are details – but a god does not make even details wrong. And a number of the errors definitely are more than details.

023 21/50a: “And this (the Quran*) is a blessed message - - -”. A message with that many mistakes, invalid points and wrong proofs, is not blessed.

024 21/50b: “And this (the Quran*) is a blessed message which We (Allah*) have sent down”. How many ways is it possible to ask the question: Can it be true that an omniscient god has sent down a book with such a number of mistaken facts, contradictions and other wrongs - f. ex. linguistic and perhaps religious mistakes? Not to mention: How likely is it that a book of such a miserable quality, at least concerning wrong facts and invalid proofs, and as literature, can have a prominent place as the revered Mother Book in the home of an omniscient and omnipotent god? It simply is impossible.

*00c 21/50c: “- - - will ye (people*) then reject it (the Quran*)?” Of course we will reject it. When people with some intelligence and education are face to face with a book with lots and lots of mistakes, contradictions, twisted arguments and as twisted logic, with points where it is clear the narrator knew he was lying – and everything told from one single narrator with a most questionable ethic and morality, but with a strong liking for women and power, and religion his main platform for power, it is very naïve even to ask that question. No intelligent, educated, not brain washed person really has another choice than to reject it if no real proofs are produced. (And Islam has been unable to produce one single real proof for Allah or for Muhammad’s claimed connection to a god – any god – and hence for Islam being true, in 1400 years - - - why do you think Muhammad and Islam glorify and demand blind belief?)

025 21/56a: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

026 21/56b: “- - - He (Allah*) Who created them (man*) (from nothing).” Wrong. Man was not created from nothing. He was not even created. See 6/2.

*027 21/56c: “- - - He (Allah*) Who created them (man*) (from nothing): and I (Abraham) am a witness to this (truth)”. This really is an unintended joke. It is told that Allah did something that is not true - and Abraham witnesses that it is the truth, and this even though he lived millions of years later! Yes, he even lived later than the claimed Adam, and still was a witness to Adam's creation!!Some proof for Allah!! Is it possible that Allah himself has sent down this? But it does tell some things about proofs in the Quran – and from Muslims. Also see 6/2.

028 21/76: “We (Allah*) - - - delivered him (Noah*) and his family from great distress (the big flood*)”. Wrong: The Quran is very clear on that one of his sons (he just had 3 - Shem, Ham and Japheth – according to the Bible (1. Mos. 9/18)) drowned in the flood. Mistake and solid contradiction. Similar claim in 37/76.

029 21/77: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

030 21/80: “It was We (Allah*) Who thought him (King David*) the making of coats of mail”. But coats of mail and similar are older than ca. 950 - 1000 BC – the time of David.

031 21/82: “And of the evil ones (jinns*) it was some who (worked for him = Solomon*) - - -“. Islam will have to bring strong proofs for this. There were fairy tales like this that Muhammad could “borrow” stories from, but never any proved case of any jinn really working for anyone. It also in no case had been omitted from the Bible if it had been true - it had glorified Solomen far too much to be forgotten.

032 21/91: “- - - Sign - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah – or Muhammad. See 2/39 and 20/54 above.

00d 21/96a: “- - - Gog and Magog (people) - - -”. The names are from the Bible. But in the Bible they are a king (Gog) and his country (Magog), whereas in the Quran they are two bad peoples. Which book is most reliable?

*033 21/96b: “Until the Gog and Magog (people) are let through (their barrier), and they swiftly swarm from every hill”. Gog and Magog according to the Quran (surah 18) were two groups of people (tribes?) imprisoned in a valley behind a tall, strong barrier made from iron blocks erected by Dhu’l Quarnayn/Alexander the Great. But there is nowhere on Earth – let alone in the area Alexander travelled – a valley big enough to produce food for two large tribes of people (“swarm from every hill” = large tribes), that is impossible to get out from, even if the main valley and the main way out is blocked. Besides the whole storey is nonsense: Even if they could not get through or over such a barrier, given time it always would be possible to dig under it. Even if it had been erected on solid rock, around 330 BC when the Quran pretends this happened (Alexander died 323 BC), people knew how to make short tunnels even through a rock if they really wanted to, f. ex. by means of fire + water. And there would always be paths across the mountains from a big valley. Besides: Where is the valley? Today every inch of the globe is mapped, and there is no walled in valley anywhere. Not in the east where Alexander travelled, and nowhere else. (And Gog and Magog are not to be released until shortly before the Day of Doom, according to the Quran, so they should still be in the valley).

034 21/104a: “The day We (Allah*) roll up the heavens (plural and wrong - like some 180+ other places in the Quran where the word is used separately, and at least 199 places all in all) like a scroll - - -”. It is not possible to roll up an optical illusion. And at least the observable Universe is a sphere – diameter 27.4 billion light-years – and how to roll up a sphere? (Of course Islam can say the Universe is (part of) a “brane” (a thick “sheet” of stars some trillion light-years wide) – another contradiction to the Quran – but then they first will have to prove that “branes” exists, as they just are a scientific or science fiction speculations).

035 21/104b: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

00e 21/108: “- - - therefore bow to His (Allah’s*) Will (in Islam).” Is that an intelligent thing to do for intelligent, learned people who know how much is wrong in the Quran, and know its very doubtful background? It needs strong proofs to prove it is a real religion with a real god – and if it is not: What then if there exists a real religion somewhere, and you are forbidden (f. ex. by Islam) to search for it? – it will be a rude awakening on The Last Day (if it exists).

036 21/109: “- - - in truth - - -“. With that many mistakes and twisted claims, the Quran at best is partly true.

00f 21/112: “- - - against the blasphemies you utter!” Is it blasphemy to doubt what is told about Allah, when there are weighty reasons for doubt? (- all the mistakes etc. in the Quran).

Surah 21: At least 36 mistakes + 6 likely mistakes.

SURAH 22:

001 22/5a: “We (Allah*) created you out of dust - - -”. Wrong. Man was not created out of dust. See 6/2.

002 22/5b: “- - - then (Allah created you) out of sperm”. Wrong. Human beings are not created out of sperm, even though it is obvious that Muhammad believed so - the Quran indicates that sperm is planted in a woman and grows. Human beings in reality are made from 1 sperm cell + 1 egg cell, but it is likely Muhammad did not know this - such an egg cell is too small to be seen in all the blood, intestines, and gore in an opened carcass without magnification. His belief also corresponds to an old Greek theory. See also 6/2.

003 22/6: “- - - Allah is the Reality - - -“. Not unless Islam brings real proofs. It is too naïve to blindly believe in a religion only based on a book with lots of mistakes, contradictions, twisted facts and invalid logic – told by a man with a highly suspect moral, but a strong liking for women and power and with his religion as his platform of power.

004 22/7: “- - - there can be no doubt about it - - -”. With all the mistakes in the Quran, there is every reason for doubt about quite a lot of things.

005 22/8: “- - - (the Quran is*) a book of Enlightenment - - -”. With all its mistakes it is not. Worse: With all those mistakes you never know what is true and what not.

006 22/16: “- - - Clear Signs - - -“. There are no clear signs (= proofs) neither for Allah, nor for Muhammad’s connection to him in all the Quran. See 2/99.

007 22/18a: “Seest thou not that to Allah bow down in worship all things that are in the heavens (plural and wrong) an on earth - - -?” No, we do not see that. This just is another of the mistakes and cheap words/claims – and one more sample of animism - in the Quran, unless Islam really proves that it is reality.

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

009 22/23: “- - - bracelets of gold and pearls - - -.” In f. ex.76/21 they are from silver.

010 22/26: “Behold, We (Allah) gave the site, to Abraham, of the (sacred) House (Kabah*) - - -”. Abraham never visited Mecca. See 2/127. It is a made up story to give Muhammad’s teaching more credence, and make it more interesting among Arabs.

**00a 22/29: “- - - the rites (during Hajj in Mecca*) prescribed for them (Muslims*) - - -“. The rites in Mecca during Hajj are all taken over from the pagan/heathen times in Arabia – and in addition they are ever so childish and primitive; run 7 times back and forth between 2 small hills, walk 7 times around a building, throw some stones at a mark impersonating the devil, and kill one or more helpless animals for sacrifice, those are the main acts.

1. Who prescribed old pagan rites to be the only right ones for the presumed only, real god?
2. Who prescribed so shallow and childish rites for a presumed unfathomable, “deep” god?
3. Who prescribed that neither any rites from anywhere else in the world nor something new and soul-sustaining from Allah ought to be used in a presumed world religion – only the old, shallow pagan rites of the heathen old Arabia?

00b 22/33: “- - - their place of sacrifice is near the Ancient House (Kabah*).” Wrong. The place for sacrifice is in Mina, kilometres from the Kabah.

011 22/34: “To every people did We (Allah*) appoint rites (of sacrifice) - - -.” Just one problem: The Christians have not been given/ordered any kind of sacrifices – or rites for such.”

00c 22/37: “It is not their (the sacrificial animals’) meat nor their blood, that reaches Allah: it is your piety that reaches Him - - -“. Does an omniscient god have to see you killing helpless animals to see that you are a pious believer? – not if he really is omniscient. If Allah really is omniscient and if the only purpose with sacrificing animals is to prove your piety, then the sacrifice in reality is without meaning, as an omniscient god all the time knows very well whether you are a pious believer or not. Actually the Quran many places makes it absolutely clear that Allah knows also the innermost corners of even the deepest parts of your soul. To what avail and what meaning and what logic is a “test” or a “proof” of your piety, if Allah already knows the answer on beforehand? - and by the way: The same goes for testing your piety in war and battle and kill and be killed, something that even was meaningless if Allah were a good god - not to mention if he knows the answer already.

*012 22/40a: “Did not Allah check one set of people by means of another, there surely would have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques - - -.” Wrong – this is far from the only way an omniscient and omnipotent god could manage the world. One alternative is f. ex. to change man a little and teach him how to live in peace. Only members of a culture and religion of war and looting and suppressing do not immediately see this. This point just is an artificial alibi for war and conquest – and suppression and looting.

*013 22/40b: “- - - monasteries, churches, synagogues, - - -, in which the name of Allah is commemorated - - -“. The name of Allah is not commemorated there – on the contrary the name of Yahweh (or simply God) is what one commemorates there. Muslims will claim that it is the same god – as usual without proving anything - but the teachings are fundamentally so different, that that is impossible that they are the same unless the god is mentally seriously ill. Also they will claim that the reason for the differences in the teachings are that the Bible is wilfully falsified – something science long since has proved for one thing is not true (even the oldest scriptures are like today, except for minor mistakes normal when manuscripts are copied by hand), and for another was physically impossible (not possible to make the same falsifications in all the thousands of manuscripts spread over thousands of kilometres and owned by thousands of different owners – that often even disagreed (even strongly sometimes) on many topics). How would you f. ex. make Jews and Christians agree on what and how to falsify in the OT? But it was the only way out and the only way Muhammad could save his religion and his platform of power when he finally understood how much was different between his teachings and the Bible.

00d 22/47: “Verily, a Day in the sight of thy (humans’*) Lord (Allah*), is like a thousand years of your reckoning”. Well, in 70/4 it is like 50ooo years. Another contradiction that "does not exist in the Quran" and thus “proves” that the book is from Allah.

013 22/51: “- - - Our (Allah’s*) Signs - - -“. There is not one single sign clearly from Allah in all the Quran. With the possible exception of some taken from the Bible, there is not even one single sign that is proven made by a god – any god. (And the ones from the Bible in case proves Yahweh, not Allah – two very different gods (especially as we meet Yahweh in the NT and the new covenant there – which Muslims never mention) if not Islam really proves the opposite. But Islam never proves anything fundamental).

014 22/52a: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

015 22/52b: “- - - Allah is full of knowledge and wisdom - - -.” Not if the Quran is representative for his knowledge and wisdom – Islam will have to produce real and reliable proofs if they insist that Allah has much knowledge and wisdom.

016 22/53: “- - - the wrongdoers are in schism far (from the Truth)”. At very best they are far from "bits and pieces of truth", at least as the truth is pretended to be in the Quran, as that book at best contains bits and pieces of what is true.

017 22/54a: “- - - (the Quran) is the Truth - - -“. With that many mistakes, twisted arguments, etc., it at best is partly the truth only.

018 22/54b: “- - - (the Quran) is the Truth from thy Lord (Allah*) - - -.” Wrong. No omniscient god ever made, or revered, or forwarded, or built his religion on a book with that many mistakes, contradictions, and doubtful, unproven claims. A devil in disguise or a man craving for a platform of power might do so, but not an omniscient and omnipotent god.

019 22/54c: “- - - Allah (the Quran*) is the Guide of those who believe, to the Straight Way.” Wrong – a book with that many mistakes, twisted facts/logic, etc. is not representing a straight way, at least not to Paradise.

020 22/55: “Those who reject Faith (Islam*) will not cease to be in doubt concerning (Revelation)”. Perhaps correct - may be there will be a revelation made by some god (perhaps by Yahweh) some time. But we are in no doubt at all that there are good reasons for serious doubts about the Quran’s claims, statements and descriptions - why should the claims and statements we cannot check be more reliable than the ones we can, and among which we find far too many to be wanting or wrong?

021 22/57: “- - - Our (Allah’s*) Signs - - -.” There is not one single sign in all the Quran clearly made by Allah. Only (unproved) claims.

**00e 22/62: “- - - Allah - He is reality - - -”. Well, that is one of the big points that neither the Quran nor Hadith nor Islam’s learned men have been able to give the slightest proof for. Even some Muslim intellectuals admit so. This in spite of all the “signs” and “proofs” that say so in the Quran - they have one thing in common: NOT ONE OF THEM GIVES ONE SINGLE VALID PROOF OF ALLAH - they all are claims or statements built on air or on not proved “facts” or other claims or statements that are not proved. A fact that “smells”. He may simply be something made up in the imagination of a Muhammad pretending Allah to be an avatar of - or identical to - Yahweh. The last is not possible, as the essences of the two teachings are too different, but Muhammad could pretend so. And: Cheating is the hallmark of cheaters.

022 22/64: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

00f 22/65: Has Muhammad Ali made an “al-Taqiyya” (lawful lie) here? He says that Allah “withholds the sky (rain) from falling on the earth”. But according to “The Message of the Quran” the Arab text says that Allah withholds the heaven from falling down on Earth. Quite a scientific mistake in case. And also a dishonesty from Yusuf Ali in case.

023 22/67: “- - - thou (Muslims*) art assuredly on the Right Way”. That only is true if the Quran is correct - - - and the Quran contains lots of mistakes, twisted arguments, twisted logic, some outright lies, etc. (all of which are hallmarks for cheats, deceivers and swindlers – persons normally looking for money, women and/or power in dishonest ways. Muhammad liked women and power – and money for “gifts” and bribes to possible followers).

024 22/72a: “- - - Our (Allah’s*) Clear Signs - - -“. Wrong. See 2/99.

025 22/72b: “- - - these Signs - - -“. Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 and 20/54.

*026 22/78: “It is He (Allah*) Who has named you Muslims, both before and in this (Revelation) - - -“. Wrong. The name was never used before – there is no kind of trace of it anywhere. This is one of the cases where Islam will have to prove their claim.

Surah 22: At least 26 mistakes + 6 likely mistakes.

SURAH 23:

001 23/12: “Man We (Allah*) did create from a quintessence (of clay)”. We have never understood what a quintessence of clay is, but it is absolutely sure it is wrong: For one thing man was not created - according to science he developed from earlier primates. For another thing - even if one had accepted Islam’s statement that man is created, Adam in no way could have been created in many ways - see 6/2. And for a third thing: Man is not created from only one or a few minerals like in clay.

002 23/13: “Then We (Allah’) placed him (the future baby*) as (a drop of) sperm in a place of rest - - -“. Wrong. Muhammad believed sperm was a kind of seed that could grow to become a human being (and if the man climaxed first, it became a boy, whereas if the woman climaxed first it became a girl, according to him in Hadiths). The reality is that the sperm is not planted in a woman, but unifies with an egg cell and the resulting zygote then starts growing.

*003 23/14a: “Then We (Allah*) made the sperm into a clot of congealed blood - - -”. Wrong. And doubly wrong:

1. The sperm is not made into a clot of congealed blood.
2. Sperm (1 cell from it) combines with an egg cell and becomes a zygote.

Muhammad did not know better, as this was what one believed in Arabia at his time - without a microscope it is impossible to see exactly what happens. But a god had known. There is a saying that “the taste is the proof of the cake”. Muhammad and the Quran and Islam and Muslims had and have very busy times to find “explanations” - some of them rather unlikely - to “explain” why Allah/Muhammad did not produce one single real proof for that a supernatural being was involved, even tough many friends and as many foes asked sincerely for it. Yes, Allah did not even have to make the slightest miracle to prove his existence. All he had to do was to tell the truth in all these cases that now are proved to be wrong - like in this case. If Allah really did exist, and if he really was/is omniscient - why then did he make up so many wrong answers? - when all he had to do was to tell the truth - like the reality of how a foetus is made - and little by little there would be the strongest of proofs for his existence and for that Muhammad spoke the truth. He never did. Actually in all the Quran there is not one single scientifc "fact" that is not in accordance with what one believed to be the truth in Arabia at that time (and much of it actually Greek or Persian "knowledge".)

Like it is now, all these facts are incredibly strong proofs for that there was no omniscient god involved in creating the Quran - and what then about Islam? - is it a made up, false religion? Not to mention: What will then in case happen in a possible next life to all humans - Muslims - who have had their chances to look for a real religion (if such one exists) blocked by Islam?

*004 23/14b: “- - - then We (Allah*) made a (foetus) lump; We made of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh”. Wrong - 100% wrong: Flesh is made first, and then bones develop inside the flesh of the foetus. It must be remarked that Muhammad’s tale about how a baby is made, is in accordance with old Greek medical beliefs – f. ex. the famous doctor Galen and Aristotle – which was known in the Middle East at the time of Muhammad. Any god had known better. Then who made the Quran?

005 23/17: “And We (Allah*) have made, above you, seven tracts (= seven heavens*) - - -”. Wrong. There are no seven (material) heavens. See 2/29.

00a 23/19: “Also a tree springing out of Mount Sinai, which produces oil, and relish for those who use it for food”. Muslim scholars agree on that here it is meant olive trees. But there have been questions – the area around Mt. Sinai is quite dry, and absolutely not known for olive trees.

*006 23/27: (Said by Allah to Noah*)”- - - take thou aboard pairs of every species, male and female - - -”. Impossible. There simply are too many animals + necessary food for any ark or boat or ship to take two of each. Even a modern super tanker fixed up for such a job, had been far too small - and the ark was a wooden boat. See 11/40. And who did the feeding, watering and cleaning for all these animals? And who gathered them and gathered the food for all of them - and how was the food stored so as not to spoil?

Muslims try to tell that most likely Allah meant only the domesticated animals. But that is not what the Quran says. And the Quran is to be understood by the word, if nothing else is said - see 3/7. Besides: Islam tells the Ark stranded on a 2089 m high mountain in Syria (Mt. Al-Jedi), and in that case there had to be so much water on Earth that all animals had drowned if they were not in the ark.

007 23/30: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

*008 23/39: “(The prophet (Muhammad*)) said - - -.” But Muhammad was no real prophet. The definition of a prophet is a person that:

1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
2. Makes prophesies that always or at least mostly come true.
3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.

A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said that did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens). The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2), and finally both he and Islam said and says that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad “except the Quran” – prophesying is a kind of miracle. (This last fact also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in there Hadiths, are made up stories).

Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet as he did not have the gift of prophesying. He only “borrowed” that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.

009 23/45: “- - - Our Signs - - -“. There are no signs in the Quran that clearly come from Allah – see 2/99.

010 23/48: “- - - and they (Pharaoh and his chiefs*) became the ones who were destroyed (drowned*))”. But at least the pharaoh (Ramses II) was not destroyed/drowned. Ramses II did not die by drowning. And we know he died only some years after the (possible) exodus.

011 23/49: “And We (Allah*) gave Moses the Book - - -“. Wrong. Moses never got something even remotely similare to the Quran or the Bible. What he got according to both the Bible and the Quran, was the 10 Commandments. That was all he physically got according to the Bible. But he was told the Laws – later part of the Book of Moses – and wrote them down later himself. Science tells that what is called The Book of Moses is several centuries younger.

012 23/58: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

013 23/66: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

014 23/70a: “Nay, he (Muhammad*) has brought them the Truth (the Quran*) - - -”. At very best bits and pieces of what Muhammad brought may be true - see all the mistakes.

*015 23/70b: “- - - but most of them (the non-Muslims*) hate the truth”. Wrong. It seems that the ones really seeking the truth, mostly are non-Muslims. Muslims, and not to mention many of their religious leaders, seem to be seeking - or inciting to and glorifying - blind belief in spite of real knowledge; they seem to be the ones hating the truth in all cases where the truth is not what their religion says.

I myself started to study the Quran some years ago to find the truth concerning Islam. The main thing I have found till now, is that real truths show that there are so many mistakes in the Quran, not to mention contradictions, invalid “signs” and “proofs” - hallmarks of deceivers and cheats - etc., that it impossibly can come from an omniscient god. And so many mistakes that it is impossible to trust what is said in the book, unless one has solid extra proofs, or at least confirmation from other, reliable sources.

And also that Muhammad in at least some cases has had to know he was not saying the truth - on a few points what he says, contradicts the fact that he was a wise man understanding people. He simply was lying. But then one of his slogans was: “War is deceit”, and he also told that the result counted more than even keeping one’s oath sworn by Allah. Sorry.

016 23/71a: “If the Truth (as told in the Quran*) had been - - -”. At most bits and pieces of the Quran are true. See all the mistakes.

017 23/71b: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

018 23/85: “They (non-Muslims*) will say, ‘To Allah’”. Wrong. If they name the name of a god, they will say the name of their own god (in old Arabia that might have been the polytheistic al-Lah).

*019 23/86: “Who is the Lord of the seven heavens - - -?” Wrong. There are no 7 heavens (and remember: They had to be material ones, because according to the Quran, the stars are fastened to the lowest heaven, and you can fasten nothing to something non-material). See 2/29.

020 23/87: “They will say,’ (They belong) to Allah”. Wrong. See 23/85 above.

021 23/89: “They will say,’ (It belongs) to Allah”. Wrong. See 23/85 above.

022 23/90: “We (Allah*) have sent them (non-Muslims*) the Truth (the Quran*) - - -”. Either Allah is not omniscient or someone else has made the Quran – it at best is partly true only.

023 23/90: “We (Allah*) have sent them the Truth - - -”. At best bits and pieces of what is sent (= the Quran) are true. Too many mistakes.

00b 23/91: “No son did Allah beget - - -”. Perhaps not. But if Islam still says that Allah = Yahweh, it is sure that the Bible says that Jesus called Yahweh his father many times and to MANY listeners. And we have found far fewer mistakes in the Bible - and especially in NT - than we have found in the Quran, even though we red also the Bible with critical eyes. And: Also the Quran tells Jesus was honest. And finally: Science has clearly shown that the Bible is not falsified - in spite of Islam's never documented claim.

024 23/105: “- - - My (Allah’s*) Signs - - -“. There is not one single sign in all the Quran clearly made by Allah – only claims that any priest in any religion can make.

025 23/116: “Therefore exalted be Allah, the King, the Reality - - -“. If there is one thing that is not proved in Islam, it is the reality of Allah. Everything in the religion rests only on blind belief in a tale told by a man with very dubious moral, but a strong wish for power – a man using his religion as his platform of power (like many others). And a self proclaimed prophet unable to make prophesies (= a stolen or “borrowed” title).

Surah 23: At least 25 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.

SURAH 24:

001 24/1a: “A surah which We (Allah*) have sent down - - -.” Also this surah contains mistakes, and is consequently not sent down by an omniscient god.

002 24/1b: “- - - Clear Signs - - -“. There are no clear signs for Allah anywhere in the Quran – the “signs” either contain twisted facts or twisted logic or both or rest on nothing that is proved, and are thus without logical value. See 2/99.

003 24/18: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

004 24/25: “- - - Allah (= the Quran*) is the (very) Truth - - -“. With all the mistakes, etc. the Quran (Allah’s words) at best is partly true.

005 24/34: “- - - verses making things clear - - -”. A book with this many mistakes does not make many things clear. At least not correctly.

006 24/35: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

007 24/41a: “- - - it is Allah Whose praise all beings in the heavens (plural and wrong) and on earth do celebrate - - -“. This has not been documented or clearly shown anywhere or any time.

008 24/41b: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

009 24/42: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

010 24/44: “It is Allah Who alternates the Night and the Day - - -“. It is nature that alternates night and day – but words are cheap, and any religion can tell it is their god(s) that do it. Islam will have to produce proofs for that it really is Allah that makes the Earth spin around in the light from the sun – the reason for the alternation. But Islam rarely proves anything – only claims. And Islam also has Al-Taqiyya - the lawful lie - no other of the big religions have it.

*011 24/45: “And Allah has created every animal from water”. Simply and obviously wrong. See 6/2. Some Muslims try to say that science has proved this verse (+ two others - 21/30 and 24/54) as science has shown that life started in water. But there is an enormous difference between “from” water and “in” water. No place in the Quran there is even a whisper about that life was created in water, only from. We also mention that in the Quran nothing is said about how the plants were created, even though the plants are the basis for all life on Earth. Perhaps from water like the animals? Wrong simply.

012 24/46: “We (Allah*) have indeed sent down signs that makes things manifest - - -“. What is claimed sent down, is the Quran, and a book with so many mistakes, etc., makes nothing manifest – except perhaps scepticism to the religion and to Muhammad.

00a 24/58: “- - - doff your clothes for the noonday heath - - -.” The Quran is said to be a copy of the Mother Book in Heaven, and that such copies have been sent to the other prophets for Allah throughout the world and times – 124000 or more of them, according to Hadith, and to all people - also according to the Quran. Would a prophet among the Inuits or the Samoyeds in the cold north even understand this? And one among the old aborigines in Australia or Indians in South America before 1492 – what would he understand from his copy of the Mother Book, speaking about cows and sheep and camels and Arab customs and rules – and about Muhammad and his wives and family quarrels? If the Mother Book was meant for the entire world, like Islam claims, why does it only concentrate on Arabia and mainly one prophet far into the future for most of the really old prophets Islam tells about? Something is wrong here. (Mind you: We talk about the claimed Mother Book that the Quran is claimed to be a copy of – the Mother Book for all humans – all prophets – everywhere and through all times.)

013 24/58: “- - - thus does Allah make clear the Sign to you - - -.” See 24/61 below.

014 24/59: “- - - thus does Allah make clear the Signs to you - - -.” See 24/61 just below.

015 24/61: “Thus does Allah make clear the Signs to you - - -“. There is not one logically valid clear sign (= proof) of Allah or of Muhammad’s connection to a god anywhere in the Quran. They without exception are just claims or based on nothing or on other not proven claims.

016 24/64a: “Be quite sure that to Allah doth belong whatever is in the heavens (plural and wrong*) and on earth.” It is impossible to be sure of that on basis of a book like the Quran with that many mistakes, contradictions, twisted facts, and that much invalid logic, etc.

017 24/64b: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

Surah 24: At least 17 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.

SURAH 25:

001 25/1: “Blessed is He (Allah*) Who sent down the Criterion (the Quran*) - - -“. The Quran is not made by any omniscient god – too many mistakes, etc.

002 25/2a: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

00a 25/2b: “- - - no son has He (Allah*) begotten - - -”. If Allah is another god than Yahweh, this may be correct. If Islam insists Allah is just another name for Yahweh (which it can not be, because fundamental aspects of the teachings are too different) it may be another question, as Jesus frequently called Yahweh his father in front of many witnesses. The word “Father” is used at least 163 times in the Bible for Yahweh’s relationship to Jesus, and “son” at least 66 times for Jesus’ relationship to Yahweh.

*00b 25/2c: “- - - nor has He (Allah*) a partner in his dominion - - -”. Well, if Allah should happen to be just another name for Yahweh: In the very old Hebrew religion there was a female deity - Yahweh’s Amat (woman or wife). (Source: New Scientist among others). In the very masculine society there, she simply was forgotten. And then there is the question of Jesus and of the Holy Spirit, which even the Quran mentions a few (3 ?) times - a kind of partners? At leasr underlings.

003 25/4: “But the Misbelievers say: ’Naught is this but a lie which he has forged, and others have helped him at it.’ In truth it is they who have put forward an iniquity and a falsehood”. With this many mistakes in the Quran, it is a very open question if it is the misbelievers who have put forward a falsehood. It might even be Muhammad. The Quran at least is not from an omniscient god - too many mistakes, etc.

004 25/6a: “Say: ’The (Quran) was sent down by Him (Allah*) Who knows the Mystery (that is) in the heavens (plural and wrong) and the earth - - -”. Same old question: Can a book with hundreds of mistakes have been sent down by an omniscient god? - and if not: Who composed it? Not an omniscient Allah.

005 25/6b: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

*006 25/20: “And the messengers whom We (Allah*) sent before thee (Muhammad*) were all (men) who ate food - - -.” Wrong. There were sent angels as messengers at least to Abraham (who was frightened because they did not eat food) (11/69), Lot (11/77) and to Mary, mother of Jesus (19/17). And also Jinns were sent as messengers that were not men according to the Quran (6/130).

007 25/33a: “- - - We (Allah*) reveal to thee (Muhammad or the Muslims*) - - -”. Did a god reveal a book with that many mistakes, contradictions, loose statements and invalid “signs” and “proofs”? No.

008 25/33b: “- - - We (Allah*) reveal to thee (Muhammad or the Muslims*) the truth - - -”. At most bits and pieces of the "revelation" (the Quran) are true - see all the mistaken facts and other mistakes - f. ex. linguistic ones, and not unlikely religious ones as they should make no exception.

009 25/33c: “- - - We (Allah) reveal to thee (Muhammad or the Muslims) the truth and the best explanations (thereof).” The best explanations are never - never - built on a lot of mistaken facts. The Quran also many places states that belief in Islam is built on intelligence, intellectual capacity, and knowledge. Is it?

Sometimes it seems like it is built on sheer blind belief and suppression of the true facts. (“The Message of the Quran” even tells that it is primitive not to be able to see that the Quran is made of a god, without any proofs. And another place that it is a no good believer that search for real proofs. The sorry truth is that it is primitive and naïve to believe only because something is said or written, or because your forefathers and -mothers believed so. Or because a man of very ubious moral said so.)

010 25/35: “- - - We sent Moses the Book - - -”. Wrong. The Torah (containing those books) was written many hundred years later according to science - may be as much as 800 years later. (Moses got the 10 commandments in writing + the law verbally and wrote it down himself later, according to the Bible. The law is a part of the Book of Moses.)

011 25/36: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

012 25/37: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

013 25/45a: “- - - He (Allah*) doth prolong the Shadow!” It is the turning of the Earth that prolongs shadows. Any god had known, but Muhammad not - it is new knowledge. Then who made the Quran? Not an omniscient god. And Allah is said to be omniscient - or is he?

*014 25/45b: “If he (Allah*) willed, he could make it (the shadows) stationary!” The only way to do that is to stop the Earth spinning. Islam will have to prove that Allah is able to do that - especially since all the mistakes in the Quran give serious and reasonable doubt about if he is omnipotent - and omniscient.

We also will remark that sayings like “If Allah willed - - -” are frequent in the Quran. The phrases are typical for some ones that have to boast to gloss over that they are not able to prove themselves - you f. ex. often hear it from half bully children trying to impress others. If that is the case here, it is either Allah or Muhammad who frequently has to boast like that. (See separate chapter).

015 25/49: “- - - with it (water*), We (Allah*) may give life to a dead land - - -“. If all it takes to awaken the nature is water, the land is not dead, but alive with roots and seeds – it only looks dead.

016 25/54: “It is He (Allah*) Who has created man from water”. Flatly wrong. See 6/2 and 24/45.

*017 25/56: “- - - glad tidings - - -“. Wrong. At the very best one can say that the Quran brought some glad tidings to all the bad ones, wanting loot and slaves, and among some longing for a strong religion - - - if it was not because the Quran itself proves 100% that something is very wrong in the book. So wrong that it neither can be made nor revered by any god – not even by a small mini god. Too much is wrong in the book.

***018 25/57: “No reward do I (Muhammad*) ask of you - - -“. Nothing - - - except 20% of everything stolen or extorted in/after raids and wars, 100% of what was looted or extorted without fighting, plenty of women and total and unrestricted power. And 2.5% (up to 10%) of your possessions each year in “poor-tax” - - - partly for the poor, but also at least as partly to pay the lukewarm to become or stay Muslims, and not to forget to use for waging war. And a little to himself and all his women and few children (may be not of the "poor-tax"). Hypocrisy.

****To be exact the "poor-tax" - zakat - according to Hadiths after Al-Bukhari (comment 1 to Chapter 24) is for 8 different purposes:

1. 1 The "Fuqara" - a cathegory of poor people.
2. The "Al-Masakin" - another cathegory of poor people.
3. The persons administrating the zakat.(Originally Muhammad).
4. Bribing people to become Muslims and in other ways to promote Islam.
5. Bribing lukewarm Muslims to stay Muslims.
6. To free Muslim captives.
7. To help indebted persons.
8. To wage war for the religion - and its leader(s).
9. To assist travellers (often pilgrims to Mecca).

It seems that a sizeable percentage was used for points 4 and 7. (You also will find claims that there are 5 purposes for the zakat. Then they lump 1 and 2 together and omit often 6 and 8. We some plases in this book have used that list.)

*019 25/59a: “He (Allah*) Who created the heavens (plural and wrong) and the earth and all that is between, in six days - - -”. Wrong. It took 4.6 billion years. (Actually the latest numbers are 4.57 billion). Even in the Quran you can find contradicting information saying it took 2 + 4 + 2 days = 8 days.

020 25/59b: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

**021 25/62: “And He (Allah) is it Who made the Night and the Day follow each other”. Wrong. It is the turning of the Earth that causes this - any god had known.

**We may add that the Quran many places talks about natural phenomena, and says Allah makes it or causes it. This needs solid proofs, as it is things that happens by itself from physical laws - and especially since words and statements are very cheap, and even more so AS ANY PRIEST IN ANY RELIGION CAN SAY JUST THE SAME ABOUT HIS GOD(S) FREE OF CHARGE - words are that cheap. Strong claims demand strong proofs, scientists say, and Muhammad did not prove one single of these statements or claims. Not one single.

022 25/73: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39 above.

Surah 25: At least 22 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.

SURAH 26:

001 26/2: “- - - the Book that makes (things) clear - - -”. With all the mistakes, it makes very little clear, as one cannot rely on what is said, without controlling it.

002 26/4: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39 above.

003 26/6: “- - - the truth of what they (unbelievers*) mocked at!” At best the Quran represents partly the truth - too many mistakes, etc.

004 26/8: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

005 26/15: “- - - Our (Allah’s*) Signs - - -“. There are no valid signs for Allah in all the Quran. See 2/39 and 2/99.

006 26/16: “- - - the worlds - - -“. There are no 7 worlds, in spite of that the Quran says so. See 65/12 below.

007 26/23: “- - - the Worlds - - -“. See 26/16 just above. And 65/12 below.

008 26/24: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

*009 26/29: “If thou (Moses*) dost put forward any god other than me (the pharaoh*), I will certainly put you in prison.” Wrong – in Egypt one had many gods. Even more: According to one of Islam’s tries to explain away the mistake of placing Xerxes’ man Hamon at Ramses II’s court - and hundreds of years wrong - the high priest (Ha-Amon) of one of the main gods – Amon – even was present and one of the pharaoh’s main advisers at this meeting (a “fact” that makes this sentence impossibly illogical).

00a 26/42: “- - - ye (the sorcerers*) shall in that case (if you win over Moses*) be (raised to posts) nearest to my person (Ramses II).” It is highly unlikely that the mighty pharaoh Ramses II said that to a flock of sorcerers – and especially for winning over an after all small opponent.

010 26/47: “- - - the Worlds - - -“. See 26/16 above and 65/12.

011 26/49a: Pharaoh Ramses II said: “Surely he (Moses*) is your (the sorcerers’) leader - - -.” Wrong. Ramses II knew Moses and knew he had been away for 40 years (according to the Bible - an unspecified number of years, but years, according to the Quran) – he could not be the leader of the local sorcerers.

012 26/49b: “- - - I (Pharaoh Ramses II) will cause you (Moses and others*) to die on the cross!” But the old Egypt did not use crucifixion for punishment.

*013 26/63: “Then We (Allah*) told Moses by inspiration: ‘Strike the sea with thy rod’. So it divided, and each separate part became like the huge, firm mass of a mountain”.According to science the Jews started the exodus (if it ever happened - and if it did, it happened ca. 1235 BC during the rein of Ramses II - one of the greatest pharaohs ever - and some years before Ramses II’s death (Muslims often wants to change this – preferably to around 1500-1600 BC - because we know Ramses II did not drown, but science is clear on this point)) from Goshen in the north east of Egypt – to be specific: In the Nile delta. They travelled south roughly parallel to what is now the Suez Canal, and to the west of it. Then they turned south east, before they again headed south - still roughly parallel to what is now the Suez Canal, but now to the east of where the canal now is. Then they continued south parallel to the Red Sea. Before the Suez Canal came, between the Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea, here was unbroken low and quite flat land with some scattered lakes, the biggest of which were the Bitter Seas.

According to science the Jews may have been cornered against one of the seas during the above mention leg towards southeast, a sea named the Timsah Sea – or Yam Suph in Hebrew. In the old Hebrew scriptures the Jews were cornered against Yam Suph, which can mean the Red Sea (the most frequently used translation) or the Sea of Reeds – both names are possible. The Sea of Reeds was a shallow sea - as for the exact depth our sources are vague, but quite likely just a few meters at most. (The longest reed we have been able to find, is a special kind of rice growing in the Tonle Sap Lake in Cambodia. It can be up to 5 -7 m. The reeds growing in Egypt are shorter, and to get the name “Sea of Reeds”, the lake had to be shallow enough for the reeds to get their “heads” above the water over at least a large part of the lake). To guess: From one or two and up to a few meters deep as indicated above.

In such shallow seas there simply was not deep enough water to make “each separate part - - - like the huge, firm mass of a mountain”. Wrong in case – and it is likely this is the case, even if the more dramatic Red Sea most often is used as a translation. This because for Moses it had been plain stupidity to march south along the western side of the Red Sea when he wanted to go east to Sinai, and then have to cross that sea to reach his destination, with all those people, equipment, animals, etc. in boats they did not have. (The Bible tells they were 600ooo men, which means some 2 mill. included women and children – a number that is mathematically possible (though not likely) after the 430 years the Bible says the Jews lived in Egypt).

014 26/66: “But We (Allah*) drowned the others (the Egyptians).” Wrong, at least for Ramses II himself - he did not die from drowning, and he did not die until some years later.

015 26/67: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39 above.

016 26/77: “- - - the Worlds - - -“. The Quran tells there are 7 (flat) worlds – Hadiths adds that they are placed one on top of the other, and names them. Wrong. See 65/12.

017 26/98: “- - - Lord of the Worlds - - -“. See 26/77 just above and 65/12.below.

018 26/103: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

019 26/109: “- - - lord of the Worlds”. Wrong. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.

020 26/119: “- - - in the Ark filled (with all creatures).” Wrong. No boat could take that many tens of thousands of animal (included insects and similar) pairs + food for them. And even more so not a wooden boat - not possible to build big enough and strong enough for such size. See 11/40.

021 26/121: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

022 26/127: “- - - Lord of the Worlds.” Wrong. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.

023 26/139: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39 above.

024 26/145: “- - - Lord of the Worlds.” Wrong. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.

025 26/158: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

026 26/161: “- - - their (the people of Sodom and Gomorrah*) brother Lot - - -“. Wrong. Lot was a stranger to the two towns, and it is very clear both from the Quran and the Bible that he did not mingle well with those locals. He came - together with Abraham - from Ur in Chaldea (in south Iraq). He was no “brother” of them – not even in the figurative meaning of the word. (The word here obviously is used to make Lot and the mentioned people fit the pattern the Quran claims is universal: That the prophets come from the people they are to teach. But here and in a few other cases that is incorrect). Also see 27/56 – it is very clear Lot was no brother of theirs - also not a naturalized "brother". (“Drive out the followers of Lut (Lot*) from our city - - -“.)

027 26/164: “- - - Lord of the Worlds.” Wrong. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.

028 26/174: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

029 26/180: “- - - Lord of the Worlds.” Wrong. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.

030 26/190: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39 above.

031 26/192a: “Verily, this (the Quran*) is a revelation from the Lord of the Worlds (Allah*)”. If is true that it is a revelation, Allah is not omniscient or Muhammad made a lot of mistakes when reciting it, or Muhammad made it up himself, or there have been a lot of mistakes when compiling the book around 650 AD and later copying it. Something definitely is wrong.

032 26/192b: “- - - lord of the Worlds - - -.” Wrong. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.

*033 26/193: “With it (the Quran*) came the Spirit of Faith and Truth”. If truth came down with the Quran, it must have been mutilated later. NB: This is one of the places where Quran mentions "the Holy Spirit".

**034 26/196: “Without doubt it (the Quran*) is (announced) in the revealed Books (the Torah, the Bible*) of former peoples.” There is very much doubt about that, as the basic elements of the teachings are too different – especially compared to NT and “the new covenant” that is the fundament for Christianity. And it also is absolutely sure that the Quran is not announsed in the Bible or in any Jewish scriptures. Also see the chapter about Muhammad in the Bible.

**035 26/197: “Is it not a Sign to them that the Learned of the Children of Israel knew it (is true)?” In the Quran and also in Hadith, it is claimed there were one or a very few learned Jew(s) who accepted Muhammad as may be a prophet. The stories might even be true. But we are back to the old truth: “One swallow makes no summer”. It is absolutely sure that the Jews as a group - learned or not - did not accept his teachings for the truth even in the face of death (f.ex. in Khaybar), one or a few exceptions may be excepted. The same is the truth today.

No, it was no valid sign.

***036 26/209: “- - - and We (Allah) never are unjust”.

1. A man correctly telling that a woman has been indecent, is lying to Allah if he cannot produce 4 witnesses - even if an omniscient Allah has to know he is speaking the truth.
2. A woman who has been raped, is forbidden to tell who it was, unless she can produce 4 MALE witnesses WHO HAS ACTUALLY SEEN THE ACT. If she cannot produce 4 such witnesses, and all the same tells who the rapist is she shall have 80 whiplashes for slander.
3. **A woman who is raped and cannot produce 4 MALE witnesses (that on top of all will be punished for not helping her if they witness about what they saw) that saw the very act, is to be strictly punished – may be stoned – for indecency - if she is unable to hide she has been raped - . Probably the most unjust and amoral law we have ever seen in a “modern” society.
4. It is 100% permitted for an owner to rape his female slaves or prisoners of war (may be this is why Muslims so often rape women during conflicts - f. ex. earlier in Bangladesh and earlier and now in Africa). The Quran even directly tells that it is no sin to rape also your married slaves or prisoners of war, as long as they are not pregnant.
5. **It is glorious and the Muslims’ right to steal, rob, plunder, enslave and to kill non-Muslims during jihad - and almost any conflict is declared jihad (holy war). It is “just and good”.

There are more if you look. Pleas never tell us that Allah as described in the Quran never is unjust. These 5 points - and more - are morally horrible. Some of it actually the most unjust we have ever seen in any law.

*037 26/210-211: “No evil ones have brought down this (Revelation). It would neither suit them - - -“. May be no evil spirits have brought down the Quran. But is definite that no omniscient god has done so – too many mistakes, etc. It also is definite that no good or benevolent god or spirit did it – far too inhuman, full of hate and suppression and blood – not to mention the wretched ethic and moral in the book. All the same it is possible it was not sent down by bad or evil forces (even bad supernatural forces would be too intelligent to make a book with so many mistakes, contradictions, invalid logic, etc., as they had to know they would be found out sooner or later and loose their cresability) – it simply is possible, and even likely, that it was made by one or more men (all the wrong science and "knowledge" in accordance with the local beliefs in and around Arabia at that time, and a lot more points in that direction). But what is absolutely sure, is that an Islam like the one one finds in the surahs from Medina suits evil spirits and forces very well: Inhumanity, stealing, blood, hate, war. Just ask Muslims what they think about the Mongols attacking them in the east. The religion in Mongolia under and after Djingis Khan basically was quite similar to Islam. When Islam used their war machine and inhumanity in f. ex. India and other places, they according to all Muslims were heroes. Then they met Mongols that did just the same to Muslims - - and the Mongols were terrible monsters. But then the southern Mongols became Muslims and continued in the same way like before, but now against non-Muslims - - - and now they were great heroes according to Islam. Ask them if the f. ex. remember the name Timur Lenk (Tamerlane).

Islam as described in the surahs from Medina, definitely suits evil forces/spirits.

*038 26/211: “- - - nor would they (non-Muslims*) be able (to produce it) (something similar to the Quran*)”. Wrong. In spite of all the glorious words Muslims use about the Quran, the book is not good literature. There are lots and lots of mistake. There is lots of wrong logic. There are numbers of linguistic mistakes. There are lots and lots of contradictions. There hardly is anything original in the book - the stories are taken from the Bible and a few other old books, from made up religious tales, from folklore and from fairy tales and just changed a little, and the fundamental thoughts borrowed from neighbouring cultures – mainly Jewish and Christian, but also some from the east (Zoroastrians f. ex. and perhaps a little from Buddha – the Arabs had connections as far east as China, and at that time Buddhism was strong in parts of what is now Pakistan and India (but was later drowned in blood by Islam). Also in laws and morality there was little new - if any; there were a few changes compared to the old Arabia, but also here the ideas came from neighbouring cultures. And the same stories are told again and again - most boring. But good writers - not the original composer - polished the Arab language in the book for some 250 years (until ca. 900 AD).

There would be no problem for a good or medium writer to write something with similar - or better - contents.

Claims like that the Quran is good literature you can tell to the naïve, uneducated illiterate natives of the old (and for that case modern) times. Skip it when you are talking to an educated modern person who knows the Quran (far too few does – many had been disgusted) and knows a little about literature. The Quran may be intelligent religious tales for its time, but it is not a good piece of literature. Boring, repetitive, a melee of this and that – no logical system in the tales, the tales and thoughts all “borrowed” from others and well known, etc.

Surah 26: At least 38 mistakes + 1 likely mistake.

Surah 27:

001 27/1: “- - - a Book (the Quran*) that makes things clear - - -”. The more mistakes, contradictions, etc. there are in a book, the less clear it can make things. It simply looses credibility. The Quran in many cases simply is incredible – literally speaking.

002 27/2a: “A Guide (the Quran*)”. See 27/1 just above.

003 27/2b: “- - - glad tidings - - -“. Wrong. At the very best one can say that the Quran brought some glad tidings among all the bad persons, wanting loot and slaves, and among some longing for a strong religion - - - if it was not because the Quran itself proves 100% that something is very wrong in the book. So wrong that it neither can be made nor revered by any god – not even by a small mini god. Too much is wrong in the book.

004 27/6a: “(Allah is*) All-Knowing”. If that is right, he has not composed the Quran - far too many mistakes. Or to be blunter: The composer of the Quran is someone who is not all knowing.

*005 27/6b: “- - - the Quran is bestowed upon thee (Muhammad/Muslims*) from the presence of One who is Wise and All-Knowing (Allah*).” Islam claims that the Quran is the copy of the Mother Book that is revered in Heaven by Allah and his angles there. It further is claimed that the book either is made by the omniscient and omnipotent god Allah – the only god – or has existed since eternity, and is so fundamental that it is not made even by the god. This verse may be understood as a strengthening of the last claim: The Quran is not said to be made by or sent down by or from Allah, but sent down from “the presence of “Allah. The fact that spoils this lofty and undocumented claim (claims normally are undocumented in Islam – though they demand documentation and proofs from anybody else) is the huge number of mistakes, twisted facts, contradictions, twisted and invalid logic, etc. in the book. No god – omniscient or not – has ever made such a sloppy work. And also: A large number of the mistakes, rites, ways of thinking, etc. are in accordance the culture and “knowledge” in what we now call the Middle East around the time of Muhammad – but no omniscient god would have to use mistaken science, customs and rules and ways of thinking from a special century and a special, small area and from a short time periode on the miniscule planet Earth, when he made the book – or it in other ways came into existence – before the universe was created (which happened 13.7 billion years ago according to science). Propaganda? At least it is wrong.

There is one more fact that makes it impossible that the book is from eternity: There is at least one place in the Quran that angels (sccording also to Muslim scholars) are speaking (and at least 8 places where Muhammad is speaking). That means that the book cannot have been made - or at least not finished - until after the first angels had been created (they could not speak in the book before they were created). It is clear in the Quran that the angels are not from eternity - Allah created them from light. And It cannot have been made in a time that makes it impossible for Muhammad to have his say at least the mentioned 8 times.

006 27/8: “- - - the Worlds.” The Quran falsely tells there are 7 Earths. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.

007 27/9: “- - - I am Allah - - - the Wise!” Not very wise if he made the Quran and all its mistakes, etc.

008 27/14: “- - - see what was the end (death by drowning*) of them (pharaoh Ramses II and his men*)”. Wrong at least for Ramses II personally - he did not die until some years later, and not by drowning.

*00a 27/16 – 44: These stories – also repeated other places in the Quran - about King Solomon, the ants, the jinns slaving for him, the hoopoo, and not to mention the Queen of Sabah – are fantastic like were they from a fairy tale - - - which is what they are: They are “borrowed” from the made up - apocryphal - scripture “Second Targum of Ester”. No god needs to steal old fairy tales and retell them with small – or big – twists to make them fit his religion/tales, and then call them facts. But Muhammad often did so. That is the reason why his contemporaries so often said that what he told just were old tales – they simply recognized the legends, fairy tales and stories.

009 27/16: “We (King Solomon*) have been thought the speech of the Birds.” Wrong. One thing is that there is not one bird “speech” but one for each of at least 2000 different kinds of birds, and actually even more, as some birds have different “dialects” from one place to another – even if you were thought cockney English, you would not understand Italian or Arab or Swahili. More fundamental is the fact that the birds’ brains are too small for developing coherent speech. The last years science has found that birds brain may be more efficient that our, gram for gram, but that all the same it is far too small for this – the minimum size where it is theoretically possible for a brain to get faculties rudimentarily similar to the human brain, is guessed to be a brain the size of a cat’s. Coherent, intelligent speech from birds simply is physically impossible.

*010 27/18: An ant spoke to other ants and in a way possible for King Solomon to hear. Wrong. Ants do not have the brainpower for composing complicated (for non-human terrestrial beings) sentences - see 27/16 just above - and they do not have organs for pronouncing words - not even “ant -language” words. Not to mention that they lack the power to speak loud enough for humans to hear. A fairy tale. (It is worth mentioning that Islam to a degree admits this. “The Message of the Quran calls it a legend – comment 17. But if this is a legend told like a truth, how many more are there like that in the Quran?)

**011 27/19: “So he (Solomon) smiled at her speech - - -”. Wrong. See 27/16 and 27/18 just above. It would be impossible for Solomon to hear what the ant also could not pronounce – also because if it could speak and if it could speak loud enough for us the hear, the diminutive size of an ant would make the words far too high-pitched for our ear to register.

**012 27/22-26: A bird - the hoopoo - making long, coherent speech/sentences of its own composition. No bird on Earth can do that - they do not have the brain capacity (see 27/6b). A fairy tale.

013 27/24: “I (the hoopoo*) found her (the queen of Sabah*) worshipping the sun - - -“. Sabah was at the southern end of the Arabian Peninsula – approximately Yemen today. In the old times this whole peninsula had a moon religion, not a sun religion – al-Lah (whom Muhammad later renamed to Allah) originally was a moon god. It is documented that also in old Sabah the main god was the moon god (source; “The Lunar Passion and the Daughters of Allah”). We may add that Muslims say that even if the moon religion was the dominant, there also may have been sun worshippers. That is true, but not for the ruler of the country – the ruler has to be very strong or be a member of the official and main religion, if not there will be problems (look at Kashmir f. ex. – it all started with a Hindu ruler over a majority of Muslim underlings).

Besides she – the queen – did not worship Allah, because that name was not created yet. Perhaps the moon god al-Lah (later as mentioned renamed by Muhammad to Allah) or the old El.

014 27/25: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

015 27/28: “Go thou (the hoopoo*), with this letter of mine, and deliver it to them: then draw back from them, and (wait to) see what answer they return….” No bird is able to do this. Not even the pigeon brings letters – it only is able to return with a letter. (The pigeons have to be brought in cages from the one who is to receive the letters, to the ones that are to send the message. Then when the bird is let loose, it simply wants to return home - - - and carries the letter to its nest, where the receiver can collect it. This is the only possible way for using birds for carrying a letter. Except in fairy tales.)

00b 27/36: King Solomon is a good Muslim. Anyone is free to believe it if he wants to.

**00c 27/37: King Solomon is offered gifts from Sabah but answers with anger: “Go back to them (the rulers/queen of Sabah*), and be sure we shall come to them with such hosts (armies*) as they will never be able to meet (= attack them*) - - -.” This answer has no logical reason or meaning, especially as the gifts were rich (“abundance of wealth”- 27/36). Also Islam agrees to that something is wrong here, as "a prophet could not answer good gifts with a war of aggression", but they do not have any good explanations – only rather lame speculations about perhaps it in reality is Allah who is speaking and threatening them with what he will do if they do not become Muslims (1500 years before Muhammad! – King Solomon ruled 961 – 922 BC give or take maximum 10 years according to Wikipedia). “Let there be no compulsion in religion”? BUT THIS IS ONE OF THE PLACES WHERE MUSLIM SCHOLARS AGREE THAT SOMETHONG IS WRONG WITH THE TEXT IN THE qURAN.

*00d 27/39: “- - - (one) of the Jinns - - -”. Jinns are beings with a diffuse role in the Quran. They are “borrowed” from old Arab fairy tales and legends. Allah made them from fire, the book tells (or may be from the fire of a scorching wind - one of the many contradictions in the Quran). There is said little about their shape - perhaps roughly like humans. They also have a diffuse role in the “pantheon” - they definitely do not belong in the heaven, but neither in hell. There simply is said nothing about where they belong. Neither is anything said about their role in the “life” of heaven and hell or their real connection to the “inhabitants” those two places - or to earthlings. As we said; much is diffuse concerning them and their life, except that they must be beings that can die - and end in hell mostly it seems. As said they are borrowed from old Arab folklore and fairy tales and mostly seem not really to belong in the religion, though they are mentioned quite frequently. Generally we feel they are a little suspect most of the time, but not always. Some were f. ex. servants (or slaves) for King Solomon (but only according to the Quran, not to the Bible), and in the older times - not 100 years ago - there shall have existed laws for marriage etc. between humans and Jinns, though no marriage ever took place!!

Do they really exist in the hidden world? - or are they in reality just something from fairy tales used for the mysterious effect? Another curiosity: No other prophet ever mentioned jinns - creatures created from fire, able to marry humans, and creatures that go on to a next life, though most of them to Hell.

016 27/44a: “- - - she (the Queen of Sabah*) thought it (the floor*) was a lake of water (though it was slabs of glass) - - -“.

1. They did not have the technology to make that quality of glass ca. 1000 BC. (Solomon ruled from ca. 961 BC till 922 BC (plus or minus max 10 years)).
2. They did not have the technology to make big slabs – and they had to be really big to make the cracks so few that they were not noticed - of glass ca. 1000 BC. Even today it is difficult, as it needs days and weeks and even months of very exact and slow cooling for that big slabs not to crack. (Cfr. the making of large astronomical telescopes).

017 27/44b: “- - - the Worlds.” Once more: There are no 7 worlds in spite of the Quran (and the Hadiths). See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.

018 27/52: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

019 27/60: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

020 27/61: “(Allah*) made rivers in its (the Earth’s) midst - - -”. Wrong. The Quran believed the Earth was flat, and then there is a midst. But the Earth is a sphere, and the surface of a sphere has no midst. Besides: Is it Allah or rain that makes rivers?

021 27/63: “- - - glad tidings - - -“. In this case it refers to rain. That is glad tidings in deserts like in Arabia, but hardly in f. ex. Amazonas or England or a lot of other places. Another of the many "Arabiaisms" in the Quran. In Muhammad’s local area rain was glad tidings, in the area of a world religion that claims at best only is partly true – but why is Arabia the only cultural and otherwise centre of the Quran if it is for all the world – and from an omniscient god?

022 27/65: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

023 27/76: “- - - this Quran doth explain to the Children of Israel most of the matters in which they disagree”. Very wrong. For one thing the Quran is so different from the Mosaic religion (and even more different from Christianity), that it clearly is not the same. For another: A book with that many mistakes, etc. can explain very little.

024 27/77a: “And it (the Quran*) certainly is a Guide - - -.” A book with that many mistakes and worse, certainly is no Guide – at least not a good or reliable one.

*025 27/77b: “And it (the Quran*) certainly is - - - a Mercy to those who believe.” With all its aversion against knowledge (except religious and related knowledge – f. ex. astronomy to follow the dates, special days, etc. exactly), its demand for hate and war, its dark and total dominance over all aspects of life, etc., - and the suppression of half its members (the women) - it is no mercy even to believers.

026 27/79: “- - - for thou art (on the path of) manifest Truth (the contents of the Quran*)”. But the contents of the Quran is a mixed lot, and maximum some of it really is true - see all the mistakes.

027 27/81: “- - - Our (Allah*) Signs - - -.” There are no logically reliable signs from/about Allah in all the Quran. See 2/99.

028 27/82: “- - - Our (Allah’s*) Signs.” Wrong. See 27/81 just above and 2/99.

029 27/83: “- - - Our (Allah’s*) Signs - - -“. Wrong. See 27/81 and 2/99 above.

030 27/84: “- - - My (Allah’s*) Signs - - -“. Wrong. See 27/81 and 2/99 above.

031 27/87: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

***032 27/91: “For me (Muhammad*), I have been commanded to serve the Lord (Allah*) of this City (Mecca - from 615-616 AD when Muhammad still lived there*) - - - “. This is a serious one: It is Muhammad who is speaking once more - - - in a book presumed to be copy of a “mother book” in Paradise, a book that may be existed from eternity or perhaps was made by Allah. Pikthall and Dawood both camouflage this very revealing mistake (there are a few more where either angles (37/164-166) or Muhammad speaks) by adding the word “say:”, but that is not in the original, according to Ibn Warraq, “Why I am not a Muslim”, p.175. Dishonest by Pikthall and by Dawood in case. But then it happens you meet dishonesty when Muslims tries to “explain” things - even in books you should believe were intellectually of high quality and moral. (Like Al-Azhar University, Cairo, certifying that the Big Flood could be explained by the filling up of the Mediterranean See. They know very well that both the time and the way it happened prohibit that explanation - some 4 – 5 million years ago and “slowly” over a period of perhaps 100 years, and not least; wrong place, as the Garden of Eden is believed to have been situated in what is now south Iraq (if it ever existed)).

Anyhow a nice moment for Muhammad – he liked power. (Just look at how he glued himself to his platform of power; his god).

033 27/93: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39 above.

Surah 27: At least 33 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.

SURAH 28:

001 28/2: “These are verses of the Book (the Quran*) that makes (things) clear”. With that many mistakes, contradictions, and suspect arguments in the book, at most some things can be made clear.

*00a 28/3a: “We (Allah*) rehears to thee some of the story of Moses and Pharaoh in Truth - - -”. The story about Moses differs not a little from the one told in the Bible - which for this part is more than 1000 years nearer in time to what (may be) happened - and with stronger traditions concerning Moses. It is a question, which one is most reliable. In any case: Both have the death of Pharaoh Ramses II wrong (but when it comes to the Bible it is possible to explain this - not so with the Quran, which is told by Allah, and Allah is omniscient (the human narrator of the Bible can have mixed Ramses II with one of his 67 sons or one of his generals - for Allah such a mistake is impossible)).

002 28/3b: “- - - in Truth - - -“. With all the mistakes etc. in the Quran, it at best is just partly true.

*00b 28/6: “- - - Haman - - -”. In the Quran Haman is a high leader of some sort under the Pharaoh. But science says this is the Haman from the book of Esther in the Bible. Haman was according to the Bible a powerful minister under the Persian king Xerxes (Hebrew: Ahasuerus) (486 - 465 BC) and a central person in the mentioned book - Muhammad may well have heard about him. In that case something is very wrong, because Ramses II naturally was king/pharaoh in Egypt, and on top of that lived some 800 years earlier. Haman could not be his top minister.

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

**Here Islam has another explanation that just might have been true: One of the main gods in Egypt at that time was Amon. According to “The Message of the Quran” the title of the high priest of Amon, was Ha-Amen - which could be understood as Hamon. Not very likely, especially as that is the kind of “explanations” one frequently finds when Islam has problems finding better stories. But after all possible. Except that a god does not make such mistakes. And except for 28/38a: “Pharaoh said: ‘O Chiefs! No god do I know for you but myself - - -”. Pharaoh cannot at the same time be the only god in Egypt (very wrong as said) and have the high priest (Ha-Amen) of another god as his second in command. Like so many times Muslim "explanations" covers only part of the picture and thus is proven wrong. Also see 38a below.

The question also is how Muhammad could have heard about Ha-Amen nearly 1900 years later - after Amon and his high priest had ceased to be part of a large religion, in contrast to Haman, who was part of the Jews’ religious traditions. This even more so as there were thousands of Jews in Arabia at that time, who could have told Muhammad, but few from Egypt. Of course Muslims will say that Allah knew. But if an omniscient Allah had told this, he - as said above - had not made any mistake with the name. And if the mistake came from Muhammad after Allah had told him: How many more mistakes did Muhammad make?

00c 28/8: “- - - Haman - - -”. See 28/6 just above.

003 28/30: “- - - Worlds - - -“. The Quran falsely tells there are 7 Earths. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.

004 28/35: “- - - Our (Allah’s*) Signs - - -“. See 27/81, 2/39 and 2/99 above.

005 28/36: “- - - Our (Allah’s*) Clear Signs - - -“. See 27/81 and 2/99 above.

*006 28/38a: “Pharaoh said: ‘O Chiefs! No god do I know for you but myself - - -”. This is one of the really good ones, because Egypt at the time of Ramses II had a good number of gods, included some central ones with a strong clerical organisation - not to mention: How then explain Islam‘s own story about Ha-Amen in 28/6 above? (It is typical for many “explanations” of mistakes in the Quran that Muslims “explain” something, but are then unable not to “collide” with other information in the book - f. ex. explaining the heavens as the modern universe without telling how the stars then could be fastened to the lowest heaven). But at the time of Muhammad the old gods were reduced - Egypt was partly Christian (the forefathers of the present-day Copts). A real god had not made this blunder, but Muhammad could not know. Then who composed the Quran?

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

00d 28/38b: “- - - Haman - - -”. See 28/6 above.

*007 28/40: “So We (Allah*) sized him (Ramses II*) and his hosts, and flung them into the sea - - -”. Wrong at least for Ramses II himself - he did not drown and he died years later.

008 28/43: “We (Allah*) revealed to Moses the Book”. Wrong. Moses got no book. The books of Moses were written centuries later - they just were named after him. (Moses got the 10 commandments only in writing according to the Bible. In addition he was told the law, which he himself wrote down later. The laws are parts of the later Books of Moses).

009 28/45: “- - - Our (Allah’s*) Signs - - -“. No omniscient god would use invalid signs. See 27/81, 2/39 and 2/99 above.

010 28/47: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

*011 28/48a: “- - - When the Truth (the Quran*) has come to them (the Quraysh - the leading tribe in Mecca*) - - -”. If it was not because the word “truth” is so central and so disused in Islam, we had stopped commenting on it long time ago - it is so obvious that the Quran can be only partly the truth. See all the mistakes - some small, some big blunders, some repeated many times and really cemented - - - but even one mistake is impossible for an omniscient god. Is Allah omniscient? Or did someone else compose the Quran? If Allah is not omniscient, that means something is wrong with the religion. If Muhammad or another human composed it, it is a false religion.

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

012 28/48b: “- - - (the Signs) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

013 28/49: “Then bring ye (people*) a Book (the Quran*) from Allah, which is a better Guide - - -“. A book that full of wrong facts, twisted arguments, contradictions, invalid statements and as invalid logic is no good guide for anyone.

*014 28/52: “(Jews and Christians*) – they do believe in this (Revelation) - - -“. Flatly wrong. A few became Muslims, but the overwhelming majority had to flee, were made slaves, or were killed/murdered/executed because they refused to believe in Muhammad’s tales. Cfr. f. ex. what happened in and around Medina in the years after this surah was told (in 621 AD or later). One more place where an intelligent man like Muhammad knew he was lying.

*015 28/53a: “They (Jews and Christians*) say: ‘We believe therein, for it is the Truth from our Lord - - -“. Well, this is what Muhammad claimed. The reality as clearly told in Islamic written sources you find in 28/52 just above - and like in 28/52 also here Muhammad had to know he was lying. Also see 28/48a and 28/48b.

016 28/53b: “- - - the Truth - - -“. The Quran at best only is partly true – too many mistakes, etc.

017 28/53c: “- - - indeed we (the Jews and Christians*) have been Muslims (bowing to Allah’s will) from before this”. No comments necessary – except see f. ex. 28/52, 28/48a or 28/48b above.

018 28/53d: “- - - for it (the Quran*) is the Truth - - -”. No. With that many mistakes, etc., the Quran hardly is the truth - at best partly the truth.

019 28/53e: “- - - for it (the Quran*) is the Truth from our Lord (Allah*) - - -.” A book with that many mistakes, contradictions, and other errors is not from a god – omniscient or not.

*020 28/59a: “Nor was thy Lord (Allah*) one to destroy a population until he had sent to its Centre a messenger - - -”. The Quran speaks about lots of prophets - in the Hadith it is mentioned 124ooo through the times and throughout the world. (And one impolite, but pertinent reminder: Muhammad was unable to make real prophesies – he in reality was no prophet, only “borrowed” that big title). But with the exception of Israel and to a degree in Persia (and some rulers that did so on their own accord for political reasons + a small sect in Arabia, most likely inspired by Jews and Christians) there are no traces anywhere, any time after prophets for monotheistic religions - not in history, not in archaeology, not in literature, not in art, not in architecture - not even in folklore or fairy tales.

*Besides: MANY places were destroyed by war, famine or other catastrophes through the time without being visited by prophets for a monotheistic religion warning them first - in spite of the Quran’s saying all such things only happen in accordance with the plans of Allah.

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

021 28//59b: “- - - Our (Allah’s*) Signs - - -“. No god would use invalid signs/proofs. See 2/99.

022 28/75: “- - - then they (the non-Muslims*) shall know that the Truth is in Allah (alone) - - -”. That is to be hoped that if Allah is a god. But judging from the Quran, at most in him is partly the truth.

00e 28/82: “Those who reject Allah will assuredly never prosper”. As for a possible next life discussion really is impossible - we know nothing, and can know nothing. Some will say they know, but they will be very wrong - what they do, is believing strongly. Knowledge is not possible without solid proved facts, and the only real fact in Islam is that one single man told stories he either refused to or was unable to document - either because a god did not want to (with illogical and/or sychologically wrong excuses) or was unable to, or because a god did not exist. There are lots of words - but words are cheap. There are lots of statements - but statements hanging in thin air without proofs are as cheap. There are lots and lots of “signs” - but a few are downright wrong, and the rest is completely valueless as proofs for Allah, as they in reality are just unproved claims or statements hanging in the air and only proves that words are cheap - they are statements that any priest in any religion can say about his god or gods, as long as he does not have to produce real proofs - - - like Muhammad steadfastly or from sheer necessity did not produce. And there even are verses telling they prove Allah. But not one single of them proves anything about him - they are as valueless as the “signs” and for the same reasons - a few even are plainly wrong. Especially we should mention all the natural phenomena that the Quran says are signs indicating or proving Allah, but without one single time proving that it really is Allah that makes the phenomena, and thus the only thing they prove, is that Islam never has been able to produce s single real proof, for any priest in any religion can say exactly the same cheap words about natural phenomena and his god(s). Which further proves that Islam has had to rely on cheap words to influence their congregations and others. One can speculate about why.

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

023 28/84: “- - - the doers of evil are only punished (to the extent) of their deeds”. Flatly wrong. There is an abyss of injustice between what sins most sinners have committed, and the punishment they get in Hell.

024 28/87: “- - - the Signs of Allah - - -“. There is no sign clearly showing Allah in all the Quran. Each and every claimed “sign” can as easy be claimed by any other god – and actually they do not signify any god at all, as it is not proved they are made by a god. (Possibly some taken from the Bible may be valid, but they in case signify Yahweh, not Allah – Muslims like to claim (as normal for Muslims without proofs) that Yahweh and Allah is the same god, but the teachings are fundamentally too different).

Surah 28: At least 24 mistakes + 5 likely mistakes.

SURAH 29:

*00a 29/2: “Do men think - - - they will not be tested?” But why is it necessary to trst anyone if Allah is omniscient and knows everything before? – even decides everything before (in spite of the claim that man has (limited?) personal freedom to decide – though even Islam is unable to explain how it possible to combine the statement that Allah decides everything before, with the statement that man has free will (not strange, as it is a version of the time travel paradox, and that paradox is proved unsolvable)) – if all this, then why are tests necessary to find an answer Allah already knows?

001 29/15: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

002 29/23: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

003 29/28a: “- - - Lut (Lot*); behold, he said to his people (the people of Sodom and Gomorrah*) - - -.” Wrong. Those people for one thing were not Lot’s “natural” people, as he was a stranger from very far away (Ur in Chaldea in what now is South Iraq, but now living near the Dead Sea), and for another both the Bible and the Quran make it very clear that he also was not a naturalized member of those communities – he was an outsider. (May be the Quran tells they were his people so as to be able to say he was a prophet to his own people, like they falsely claim every prophet was – in spite of Joseph (Egypt), Moses (Sinai 40 years), Abraham (Canaan), Lot (Dead See area), Jonah (Nineveh).

004 29/28b: “Do you (men of Sodom and Gomorrah*) commit lewdness (homosexuality*), such as no people in Creation (ever) committed before you.” Wrong. Homosexuality was nothing new – it even exists among some “higher” animals, sometimes as a sign of dominance – and it is in the DNA of a minor part of humanity. If Islam stays on their claim that this was something “no people in humanity (ever) committed before”, they will have to prove it.

005 29/35: “- - - an evident Sign - - -.” There are no evident or clear signs for Allah – or for Muhammad’s connection to a God - in all the Quran. See 2/99.

00b 29/39a: “- - - Haman - - -”. See 28/6.

006 29/44a: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

007 29/44b: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

*008 29/45: “- - - remembrance of Allah is the greatest (thing in life) without doubt.” There is much doubt about this if he has composed the Quran - the mistakes proves he in case is very far from omniscience, the valueless “signs” and “proofs” proves he is not very good at logical thinking, and his use of invalid excuses and his inability to send proofs of his existence, proves he is not omnipotent. And if someone else made the Quran, the doubt is even greater, as then both the Quran and Islam are without any value at all - or with negative value, as much of the religion is rather inhuman (f. ex. wars, terrorism, suppression of all non-Muslims, suppression of women and freedom to rape many of them, thoughts about slavery, and enmity towards non-Muslims).

***009 29/46: “- - - our (Muslims*) and your (Jews and Christians*) god is one - - -”. This is not correct unless he is schizophrenic, as too many fundamental aspects are too different between the two teachings. To mention a few points:

Islam:	The New Testament:
Do not kill without a good reason.	Do not kill.
To wage war is a religious duty.	Do not kill.
An eye for an eye.	Turn the other cheek
You cannot carry another’s burden.	Carry your fellow man’s burden.
Religion shall run the country.	My land is not of this world.
Be killed for Allah and go to Paradise.	Become like a child to go to Paradise.
Paradise = Earth-like luxury plus women	Paradise = Heaven for your soul.
(for women = luxury and a share of the husband).	(for women = Heaven for your soul.)
Paradise = resurrected body.	Paradise = the soul lives on.
Do not lie except for good reason.	Do not lie.
Do not mourn the unbeliever.	“The lost lamb”.
Break an oath and pay damage for it.	To break any oat is a severe sin.
Al-Taqiyya – Muslims’ lawful lie.	Do not lie.
To rob and steal may be “good and lawful”	Do not steal.
To rape a female slave is “good and lawful”.	So immoral that it is not even mentioned.
Help others to gain merit in heaven.	Help others because they need it – and gain merit in heaven.

(For those who do not know: Jesus said that if someone hit you on one cheek, turn the other towards him = do not do the same and answer bad with good. And: Jesus said that a shepherd would search for a lost lamb = to save a lost soul is very valuable, and there is reason to mourn the not saved ones.)

We know both religions have been misused – though with one serious difference: Christ has been misused in contradiction to his teachings, Islam very often in accordance with its teachings, because of the Quran’s often bloody religion and lack of real moral. The sentences above are some of the teachings – some of the fundaments.

Only Islam says it is the same god - and they are wrong, unless the god is mentally ill.

010 29/47a: “- - - We (Allah*) have sent down the Book (the Quran*) - - -“. No god ever sent down a book with that many mistakes, etc. – not to mention revered it in his own “home” as the Mother Book.

011 29/47b: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

012 29/49a: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

013 29/49b: “- - - Our Signs - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

014 29/52: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22.

015 29/54: “- - - of a surety, Hell will encompass the Rejecters (non-Muslims*) of the Faith (Islam*).” No, that is no surety with all the mistakes in the Quran strongly reducing a reader’s belief in the reality of the religion. Even more: If someone has made up the Quran, and there exists another, real religion, the rejecters of Muhammad and Islam have a chance of finding that religion.

*016 29/61a: “If indeed thou ask them who has created the heavens (plural and wrong - like at least 198 other places in the Quran*) and the earth - - - they (non-Muslims*) will certainly reply, ’Allah’”. Wrong. If they believed a god created it, they would certainly name their own god (which in the old Arabia might have been the polytheist al-Lah).

017 29/61b: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

018 29/63: “And if indeed thou ask them (non-Muslims*) who it is that sends down rain from the sky - - - they will certainly reply, ’Allah’”. Wrong. See 29/61 just above.

019 29/68: “- - - rejects the Truth (the Quran*) - - -”. Wrong. With such a number of mistakes, it maximum is partly the truth.

020 29/69: “And those who strive in Our (Cause) – We (Allah*) will certainly guide them to Our Paths - - -“. With so much wrong in the Quran, it is likely that this is wrong, too. At least it is far from a certainty.

Surah 29: At least 20 mistakes + 2 likely mistakes.

SURAH 30:

*001 30/2-4: “The Roman Empire (Bysantz/Constantinople*) has been defeated (by Persia*) in a land close by (Damascus 613 AD, Jerusalem 614 AD, Egypt 615-616 AD – may be a battle in Syria in 615 AD – just pick your choice (the surah is from 615 or 616 AD)); but they, (even) after (this) defeat of theirs will soon be victorious – Within a few (“bid”) years.” Bysantz defeated Persia in 628 AD after they first had had a number of defeats at the start of the war.

1. 1. The Arab word “bid” means “a few” and “means a number of no less than 3, no more than 9” according to comment 2 to this surah in “The Message of the Quran”. It took at least 12 years.
2. This was a pep-talk to his followers. No-one – not even Muhammad himself – said that it was a prophesy - - - except that many Muslims say so afterwards.
3. It is very clear from the Quran that Muhammad did not have the gift of being able to make prophesies (a kind of miracles), and it is as clear that he never even pretended to or claimed to have that gift. This was just one of the (few) cases where a little of all that he said through his life happened to come partly true (actually: So much that he said and spoke it is a miracle that not more happened to come true – and more true than in this case. And NB: This is the only heavy claim Islam has about him being able to make prophesies (though there are other claims). There are a number of theories and claims about his ability which he as said did not claim or or pretend to have himself, but this is the only one Islam reckons to be a “heavy” claim”. Once - nearly - in a lifetime = a prophet?

002 30/8: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

003 30/9: “- - - Clear (Signs) - - -“. Clear signs about Allah and Islam does not exist in the Quran. One may wonder why Muhammad used invalid proofs – invalid proofs and arguments normally are the hallmarks of cheats and swindlers. It also indicates lack of real facts and proofs. See 2/39.

004 30/10: “- - - Signs of Allah - - -“. No omniscient and omnipotent god had used strongly suspect “signs”, etc. to prove himself , not to mention added his name for strengthening the claim. See also 2/39.

005 39/16: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

006 30/18: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

007 30/20: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

*008 30/20: “Among His (Allah’s*) Signs is this, that He created you from dust - - -”. Wrong. Man was not created from dust - really he was not created at all according to science. See 6/2. There is an extra irony in the fact that the Quran uses a piece of wrong information to “prove” Allah. Contradiction of reality.

009 30/21a: “- - -His Signs - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

010 30/21b: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

011 30/22a: “And among His (Allah’s) Signs is the creation of the heavens (plural and wrong) - - -“. Very clearly a wrong proof – a wrong “sign” – as there are no 7 heavens. Irony? At least a contradiction of reality.

012 30/22b: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

013 30/22c: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

014 30/23a: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

015 30/23b: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

016 30/24a: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

017 30/24b: “- - - He (Allah*) sends down rain from the sky and with it gives life to the earth after it is dead: verily, in that are Signs (for Allah*) for those who are wise.” Wrong. If just water made the earth come alive, it meant that it just looked dead, but was alive with seeds, etc. And those who are wise will see the irony in using doubtful “facts” as proofs for Allah.

018 30/24c: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

019 30/25: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

020 30/26: “- - - all (beings*) are devotedly obedient to Him (Allah*).” Wrong. No non-Muslim is devotedly obedient to Allah. And no Muslim sinner is devotedly obedient to any god. Islam also will have to prove that also all non-human beings, included worms and slugs and microbes - are devotedly obedient to him. Yes, they will even have to prove that all Muslims are devotedly obedient to him and not hypocrites.

021 30/27: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22a.

022 30/28: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

*023 30/30a: “- - - no change (let there be) in the work (wrought) by Allah: that (Islam*) is the standard Religion - - -”. No “standard” religion can be based on a book with so many obvious mistakes. And hopefully no “standard” religion can be base on hate, suppression and blood. (This paragraph is one of the reasons why Islam states - or pretends - that the Quran is perfect, and why Islam can admit not even the most obvious mistakes - all mistakes must be “explained” away, because there can be no change in Allah’s work – the Quran).

*00a 30/30b: “- - - no change (let there be) in the work (wrought) by Allah: that (Islam*) is the standard Religion: But most among mankind understand not”. The impolite, but most pertinent, question is: May be it is really the non-Muslims that have understood? - understood that something may be wrong.

00b 30/32: “Those who split up their Religion, and become (mere) Sects - - -“. We have been told there have existed and exist some 3ooo Muslim sects. We have not been able to verify the number, but it is clear there are quite a number – from Wahhbism in Saudi Arabia and stricter, to Amaddiyyas and others. It also is clear that through the history there have been more – some have been eradicated in blood even, as there is no compulsion in religion, according to Islam. As the Quran is said to be very clear and easy to understand, one impertinent question is: Which of the sects understands it correctly? – and why do all the others understand it differently? – and last, but very far from least: What is really the correct understanding?

024 30/37: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

*025 30/42: “Travel through the earth and see what was the End of those before you (non-Muslims*) - - -.” In the Middle East there were ruins here and there. Muhammad claimed they all were from people punished because they were non-Muslims and sinners. In an arid and harsh area populated by warring and feuding tribes, there were many other reasons for empty houses. Islam will have to provide strong proofs for the claim that they all were result of religious disbelief, if they want to be believed on this point.

*00c 30/43: “- - - the right Religion (Islam*) - - -”. Is it possible that the right religion can be based on a book with that many mistakes, repeated or made by an Arab salesman, highwayman, murderer (he let at least 26 opponents and others murder - Ibn Ishaq names 10 of them), torturer and rapist (he - at an age of nearly 60 - at least raped the newlywed, 17 year old Safijja after he had let her husband Kinana be tortured to death, and Raihana bint Amr after he had murdered the male part of her family and made the rest slaves.) Source for this information: Muhammad Ibn Ishaq: “Life of the Prophet Muhammad” - the in Islam most respected of the old (dead 768 AD) writers about Muhammad. (It was written for the second Abbasside caliph in Baghdad, Mansur, around 750 AD). Neither Arab salesmen, nor highwaymen, nor torturers, nor murderers, nor rapists have the best of reputations for being honest (even if Islam insists he was, but Islam hardly is the most reliable source on just that point). This Arab salesman, highwayman, torturer, murderer and rapist and inhuman warlord, was even unable to produce one single small proof for his story. But he (?) produced lots of loose statements and invalid “signs” and “proofs”.

He is the only source Islam is built on.

Can this be "the Right Religion"?

026 30/46a: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

027 30/46b: “- - - glad tidings - - -“. Wrong. At the very best one can say that the Quran brought some glad tidings among all the bad warriors, wanting loot and slaves, and among some longing for a religion - - - if it was not because the Quran itself proves 100% that something is very wrong in the book. So wrong that it neither can be made nor revered by any god – not even by a small mini god. Too much is wrong in the book for that.

*028 30/47a: “We (Allah*) did indeed send, before thee (Muhammad*), messengers to the (respective) peoples - - -”. The Quran tells there were sent prophets by Allah too all peoples throughout the times - the Hadith (the second main “pillar” of “knowledge” about Islam) mention 124ooo, and even that may even be only a symbolic number. But neither in archaeology, nor in architecture (temples or stones reused for building f. ex.), nor in literature, nor history, nor folklore, nor even in fairy tales are there the slightest traces from those prophets. That so many prophets should leave not even a whisper of a trace - flatly no.

029 30/47b: “- - - Clear Signs - - -“. See 2/99 above.

*030 30/48: “- - - then does He (Allah*) spread them (the clouds*) in the sky as he wills, and break them into fragments, until thou seest raindrops issue from the midst thereof - - -”. It is not possible to get it more wrong than this. What happens is not that the clouds break apart, but straight opposite: That droplets come together to form drops. No further comments. But ANY god had known better.

031 30/53: “- - -Our (Allah*) Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 and 2/99 above.

032 30/58: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

033 30/60: “- - - the promise of Allah is true - - -“. The promises of Allah are expressed via Muhammad and the Quran. Muhammad was a man of highly suspect morality according to his deeds told in Islamic religious and historical (the Quran, Hadiths, Ibn Ishaq to mention the most central ones) literature. The second is a book dictated by that man, and containing huge numbers of mistakes, twisted arguments, twisted logic, inhuman ethics and moral, etc., etc. Islam will have to bring real proofs to be believed – and Islam has till now been unable to prove anything fundamental - - - they instead glorify and insist on naïve blind belief.

Surah 30: At least 33 mistakes + 3 likely mistakes.

Subtotal till now: At least 1076 mistakes + 142 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. 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 www.1000mistakes.com .

3. 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" 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 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 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 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. 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 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 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?