(A possible exception: Some proofs borrowed from the Bible, but they in case are for Yahweh.)
Comments in this book numbered by 3 numbers (included 00 or 0) a few places followed by one small letter = clear cases. Comments numbered by 00 or 0 followed by 1, 2 or 3 letters (big or small) = likely cases.
In chapter VIII/5 is quoted a number of - though far from all - places where the Quran/Muhammad has taken natural phenomena and used them as “proofs” for Allah - - - without one single time to prove that Allah was behind those phenomena. Words are very cheap, and any priest in any religion can say the same about his god or gods - yes, one has not even got to be a priest, as any man and woman can say the same. Words are that cheap and easy. Remember also that in the Quran “Sign” often is synonymous with “Proof”. Muhammad many times even was asked for proofs, but had only some fast talk and unproven statements + some boasting (?) about what Allah could do “if he willed”, to offer - not the slightest wisp of a proof.
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 proof for Allah and impossible to prove him, automatically there also is no proof for, and impossible to prove Muhammad's claimed connection to Allah. If there is no Allah and/or no connection between Muhammad and a god, what then is Islam?
Muslims will say that the Quran proves itself, as it is sent down by an omniscient god. But an omniscient god does not send down lots of mistakes and invalid “signs” etc. The only thing the Quran proves is that it is not made by someone omniscient. An omniscient god simply does not make that kind of and that number of mistakes. Neither does he use invalid “signs” nor “proofs” - especially not as any omniscient god had to know man sooner or later would discover the cheating, and loose confidence in him and his book.
We also are unable to understand why an omniscient god had to change his religion so fast and so much - and brutal - in and after 622 AD. Was his earlier not bloody teachings that wrong?
And if there is just a small god - or a man - trying to bully himself to power, behind the Quran, and not really one who knew everything, proofs for omniscience and -potence are absolutely necessary. “Strong claims demands strong proofs.” But as there are no proofs for the claims, all those claims are invalid as proofs.
But there are more claims for “Signs” (mostly synonymous with “proof” in the Quran) and “Proofs” - ones not based on claims about nature. Actually so many that we just pick a few of them.
00a 2/39: “Those (non-Muslims*) who - - - belie Our (Allah’s*) Signs - - -”. Reference to unspecified and unproven signs. Unproven signs according to all laws of logic, proves nothing. There are many like this in the Quran - we only quote some of them.
00b 2/41: “- - - sell My (Allah’s*) Signs - - -”. See 2/39 just above.
00c* 2/87: “We (the god*) gave Jesus - - - clear (signs) - - -”. Yes, if the Bible speaks the truth, Jesus had clear signs. But the Jew Jesus was speaking about the Jewish (and Christian) god Yahweh. Now Muslims like to tell that Allah and Yahweh is the same god, but that is not possible unless that god is mentally ill. There is so big difference between Yahweh, especially as we meet him in NT (the teachings on which the Christian religion is based), and the hard and bloody warrior god we meet especially in the some 22 surahs from Medina, that it is not possible it can be the same one - not unless he at least is deeply schizophrenic.
00d 2/118: “We (Allah*) have indeed made clear the Signs unto any people who hold firmly to the Faith - - -”. The “Signs” possible to find in the Quran, offers not one single proof for Allah - - - unless you are prepared to believe anything and any loose words. Here like so many other places in the Quran is just another not proved statement about unspecified, not proved signs. Normally such ways of arguing are hallmarks of cheats and deceivers - and we remind you of what kind of man Muhammad was - highwayman, rapist, murderer and warlord, believer in breaking his word if that gave better result (f. ex. "war is betrayal") etc., after first having been an Arab salesman (also salesmen have no reputation for being 100% honest - and ask any sailor about the Arab ones. Here Islam of course says he was honest - and it may or may not be true).
001 2/129: “Our Lord (Allah*)! Send amongst them (Muslims/Arabs) a Messenger (Muhammad*) of their own who shall rehearse Thy Signs - - -”. It is symptomatic that Muhammad never ever was able to produce one single real and undisputeable “sign”, even though he was asked for it many times.
00e 2/151: “- - - rehearsing to you (Muslims*) our (Allah’s/Muhammad’s*) Signs - - -”: Quite likely Muhammad did - but if he rehearsed only the ones in the Quran, not one single of them was or is proved true, (with the possible exception of some signs from the Bible proving Yahweh).
00f 2/159: “Those who conceal the clear (Signs) We (Allah*) have sent down - - -”. No danger - not one single valid or clear sign/proof for Allah is sent down (unless it is omitted from the Quran). But it is VERY typical for the Quran to talk about “signs” as they were proven facts. (And at the same time often accept nothing about other gods without demanding proofs).
002 2/187: “Thus doeth Allah make clear His Signs to men - - -”. Not one single proved sign is referred to - not really an unproved one, either.
003 2/209: “If ye (Muslims*) backslide after the clear (Signs) have come to you - - -”. It is not possible to backslide after clear signs that never arrived - the only thing that ever arrived in Mecca or Medina or other places, were unproved words - and words which any man, woman or priest can produce.
00g* 2/211: “Ask the children of Israel how many clear (signs) We (the god) have sent them.” Yes, if the Bible speaks the truth - quite a number. But that in case proves the Jewish/Christian god Yahweh, not Allah - as said in 2/87 it is impossible that the two can be the same, even though Muslims like to pretend/say so - too fundamental differences. (A small curiosum: Yesterday a newspaper in Kuala Lumpur, capital of the Muslim country Malaysia, was forbidden to use the name Allah for the Christian God. (This has been done infrequently through history) “Allah is the name of the Muslim god, and cannot be used about the Christian one, (Yahweh or normally called God by Christians*)”. Q.E.D - Allah is not Yahweh according to this Islamic country.)
004 2/219: “They (Muslims*) ask thee (Muhammad*) how much they can spend (on gambling*); say: ‘What is beyond your needs.’ Thus doth Allah make clear to you His Signs - - -.” One thing is that this making clear is that the signs are far from clear to us. Worse: What signs? There are no proven signs about Allah anywhere in the Quran.
(Another curiosity: 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. Actually that is part of a wider fact: It is not possible for humans to prove a god. This only a god can do (by doing something supernatural). And this is very clear: Neither Allah nor Muhammad produced a single proof for Allah, in spite of many requests. But Jesus did give proofs according to both the Quran and the Bible - if one of them speaks the truth).
00h 2/231 “Do not treat Allah’s Signs as a jest - - -”. Once more: These just are invalid or imaginary signs treated like solid proofs - they all are invalid by all and any law of logic. Anyone reading the Quran will find a large number of them - they are so easy to find, that we do not include many more of them. No omniscient god would use invalid “signs” or “proofs”.
005 2/241-242: “For divorced women (provision should be made) on a reasonable (scale). This is the duty of the righteous. Thus doth Allah make clear His Signs to you - - -” We must admit we do see neither a sign, nor how it is made clear. At least there is no proven sign.
006* 2/252: The Jews’ (or Israelis‘) King Saul/Talut and David beat the Philistines in battle and felled Goliath - - - “ These are all Signs of Allah - - -”. If they were signs, they were signs of the Jewish god Yahweh. See 2/87.
00i 3/19: “But if any deny the Signs of Allah, Allah is swift in calling to account.” He can call no one to account as long as not a single proven sign exists to deny.
007* 3/49: “I (Jesus*) have come to you, with a Sign form your Lord (the god*), in that I make for you out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, and it becomes a bird by Allah’s leave”. (this tale is “borrowed” from one of the apocryphal (= made up religious fairy tales*) so-called “Child Gospels”, in this case the so-called Egyptian one, but also mentioned in the so called Arab one from Syria around 500 AD, and in the Gnostic (made up) Thomas’ Child Gospel - it is not from the Bible*), I heal the blind, and the lepers, and I quicken the dead (stories “borrowed” from the Bible*) - - -(some more not from the Bible*). Surely therein is a Sign for you if ye did believe.” If it had been proven, it had been a sign. Now only the ones "borrowed" from the Bible may perhaps be true - but in that case they are proofs for Yahweh.
All is totally invalid as a proof for Allah, as long as:
The Gnostic and other stories, tales and “gospels” were made up by semi-Christian or sometimes semi-Jewish sects to fit their special points of view on how a god should be. The sects were quite widespread once upon a time. Muslims frequently use these and other made up tales to try to “prove” their statements. Not to mention how often one meets Muslim references to the so called Barnabas Gospel - - - perhaps made up at the Caliphs Muslim court in Baghdad (in the 1400 century?)
AND IT IS A STRANGE (?) FACT THAT THE QURAN OFTEN AGREES WITH MADE UP STORIES FROM APOCRYPHAL BOOKS AND STORIES WELL KNOWN IN ARABIA AT THE TIME OF MUHAMMAD, INSTEAD OF THE MAY BE TRUE ONES IN THE BIBLE, AND NOT LESS PECULIAR THAT IT THEN EXPLAINS THAT THE REASON FOR THE DIVERGENCES IS THAT THE BIBLE IS FALSIFIED.
00j 3/86: “How shall Allah guide those who reject faith after they accepted it and bore witness that the Messenger (Muhammad*) was true and that Clear Signs had come unto them?” Well, on basis of this sentence it is not possible for Allah to guide anyone, because Muhammad/the Quran is proven (by science) full of mistakes, and not one single so called sign is proven true - with the possible exception of some “borrowed” from the Bible, and they in case prove Yahweh/God, not Allah.
008 3/106-108: Bad people will go to Hell, good Muslims will go to Paradise, the book states her - without any documentation - and continues: “These are the Signs of Allah”. Well, it is a statement hanging in thin air - typically for the Quran; not proven and impossible to prove. Believe it if you are primitive and naïve enough - especially thinking about the fact that all and everything is based only on the words of a somewhat “special” warlord, rapist and dictator who liked power - and ask questions if you are not entirely naïve.
00k 3/118: “We (Allah*) have made plain to you the Signs - - -”. Wrong. The only thing that is made plain about the so called signs is that at least the ones not “borrowed” from the Bible without exception are just lose statements and cheap words any priest and any believing man or woman can use about any god in any religion - real or imagined.
What does it tell about the Quran and about Muhammad that loose statements and as loose claims are pretended to be facts and proofs? After all that kind of argumentation is one of the hallmarks for cheaters, deceivers and swindlers. The same for fast talk - you find also that in the Quran.
00l 4/56: “Those who reject Our (Allah’s) Signs, We shall soon cast into the Fire - - -”. As long as no reliable sign is sent, there is no excuse for casting anyone into Hell.
009 5/114: (Jesus said*): “O Allah our Lord! Send us from heaven a Table - - - for - - - a solemn festival and a Sign from Thee - - -”. This is NOT a story from the Bible. And if it had been true, you can be 100% sure it had been there, as it would be one more solid proof for Jesus' connections to something supernatural. Muslims explains away any discrepancy between the Quran and the Bible with the (as normal for Islam unproved) statement that the Bible is falsified. But if any Christian had wanted to falsify parts of the Bible, it would have been to strengthen Jesus, not to weaken him. A wonder like this had strengthen his esteem a lot, and it never had been omitted if it was true - falsification of the Bible or not. Science believes the tale is inspired by a twisted recollection (Muhammad did not know the Bible well, and especially not NT) of the last Easter meal of Jesus. This in addition to that Jesus had been killed years before if he had been preaching about the known foreign polytheistic god al-Lah (the name changed to Allah by Muhammad).
A “sign” from a made up - and definitely not proved - story really is a valuable and worthy sign.
010 6/19: “’What thing is the most weighty in evidence (of Allah*)?’ Say: ’Allah is witness between me (Mohammad*) and you (Muslims*); this Quran hath been revealed to by inspiration - -”.
011 6/97: “It is He (Allah*) Who maketh the stars (as beacons) for you, that ye may guide yourself, with their help, through the dark spaces of land and sea: We detail Our Signs for people who know”. Well, but where is the proof for that Allah had anything to do with the making of the stars at all? The Quran even flagrantly proves that Allah/Muhammad have not the faintest idea neither of what the stars are nor where they are (according to the Quran they are points of fire that even can be used for weapons against bad spirits, fastened to the nonexistent lowest of 7 material heavens - which means that according to the astronomy of that time they are situated somewhere between the Earth and our moon (as the moon was fastened to another heaven, that could not be the lowest one)). Some “sign” and some detailed explanation!
012 6/104: “Now have come to you (people/Muslims*), from your Lord (Allah*), proofs - - -”. But no proof is mentioned. The statement simply is hanging in the air. Another loose statement treating non-existing proofs as facts.
013 7/37: “Who is more unjust than one who invents a lie against Allah or reject His Signs?” What if someone has invented lies about Allah and made up the “signs”? There are lots and lots of words, but no proofs - not even when repeatedly asked for proofs, Muhammad was able to produce a single, small one - only fast talk and even some mistakes, signs and hallmarks of someone unreliable without a real case.
014 10/82: “And Allah by His Words doth prove and establish His Truth, however much the Sinners may hate it”. There only are five truths that are established by the presumed words of Allah - the Quran:
015 18/9: “Or doest thou reflect that the Companions of the Cave - - - were wonders among Our (Allah’s*) Signs?” The religious fairy tale - legend - about the 7 sleepers in Ephesus fleeing from emperor Decius (252-254 AD) emerged around 400 AD, and was known in Arabia (some Muslims try to move it to the area and time of the Dead Sea Scrolls to make the fairy tale loan less obvious, but the story is too easy to recognize - besides; a faity tale is a fairy tale even if it should happen to be a little older.) This made up religious fable or legend is used in the Quran as a fact and a real wonder and consequently as a sign/proof for Allah. But first the tale has to be proved - and a fairy tale needs a strong proof - to have any value as a proof for anything at all.
016 18/13: There is real irony in 18/13: “We (Allah*) relate to thee (the listeners*) their (the 7 sleepers‘*) story in truth - - -”. In truth? - a fairy tale?
017 18/17: “Thou wouldst have seen the sun, when it rose, declining to the right from their (the 7 sleepers‘*) Cave, and when it set, turning away from them to the left, while they lay in the open space in the midst of the Cave. Such are among the signs of Allah - - -”. Some sign; presumed sleeping men in a lightly revised fairy tale. (But the Quran have nearly no tale not known beforehand in Arabia - all are taken from older fairy tales, folk tales, fables, legends, the Bible, the Torah and a few from tales from countries further east, and then twisted a little to fit in the Quran. It was not strange that sceptics told Muhammad and Muslims that they just told old tales.)
018 20/128: “Is it not a warning to men (to call to mind) how many generations before them We (Allah*) destroyed, in whose haunts they (now) move? Verily, in this are signs for men endued with understanding”. This is a theme Muhammad/the Quran frequently return to: In the Middle East there were scattered ruins from towns and hamlets and houses. Muhammad told that they all were remnants from earlier “unbelievers” punished by Allah for not believing their supposed prophets. As usual without a single proof for all places put together. (In Pakistan this year Muslims proposed to put placards with quotes like this on old ruins - proofs and warnings about the fate of “infidels”. This really tells something about those Muslims and about the level of education even today - in 2007 AD (This was weitten in the 2007 AD edition). What then about naïve, primitive and zero educated poor people 610-632 AD? - were they easily “impressed”?)
His explanation is even more difficult to believe, as any professor and even student of archaeology can give many other explanations for ruins in arid areas - and especially in arid areas where the inhabitants were all waging war against everybody else at times.
Absolutely not a valid sign without a real proof.
019* 21/91: “- - - and We (the god*) made her (Mary’s*) son (Jesus*) a Sign for all peoples.” Very correct - but a sign for Yahweh/God, not for Allah - not unless Islam proves Allah is the same god as Yahweh/God. And the two religions and the two gods - especially the war god Allah from the surahs from Medina compared to the benevolent God from NT - are too different for that to be possible - not unless the god is seriously ill mentally.
Definitely not a proof for Allah. May be a proof for Yahweh/God.
020 26/97-103: Non-Muslims end in Hell and nobody can help them. “Verily, in this is a Sign - - -”. Yes, but only if it is true, not just words made up to frighten naïve and/or primitive people to accept a certain religion. Islam presents not one single proof, only cheap words ANYONE can use. How can we learn if Allah really had something to do with it? Islam really has a job to do to prove it. This especially as they never bother to prove things - statements from nowhere are their profession.
021 26/197: “Is it not a Sign to them that the Learned of the Children of Israel knew it (as true)?”
021 30/25: “And among His (Allah’s*) Signs is this, that heaven and the earth stand by His Command - - -”. A most easy statement, as long as Muhammad refused to prove anything at all. Invalid.
022 30/37: “See they not that Allah enlarges the provision and restricts it, to whomsoever He pleases? Verily, in that are Signs for those who believe”. There are signs of Allah in the fact that some are rich, some are poor and some are directly in distress? Islam must prove that no other explanations for riches and poverty are possible. Without such proof these presumed signs are invalid as proofs.
023 32/26: “Does it not teach them (non-Muslims*) a lesson, how many generations We (Allah*) destroyed before them, in whose dwellings they now go to and fro? Verily, in that are Signs - - -”. This had been signs if it was clear that it really was Allah who had destroyed them.
024 34/9: “We (Allah*) could cause - - - a piece of the sky to fall upon them (non-Muslims*). Verily this is a Sign for every devotee that turns to Allah - - -”. The sky is an optical illusion made by the bending of light in the upper atmosphere - not a material heaven like Muhammad believed. It is not possible to make a piece of an optical illusion fall, and absolutely not upon someone. (the Arabs knew about meteorites - the Quran really speaks about a falling piece of the sky, not a meteorite).
Besides: This statement only is a claim, not a proven fact. If a child boasts: "My father is stronger than yours", it easily may be wrong".
A totally invalid statement. In this case also an untrue statement. Some sign of Allah.
00m 34/43: “When our Clear Signs are rehearsed to them - - -”. One more place where the word "sign" - here even strengthened with the word “clear” - is used like if the so-called signs are manifested facts. But not one single of them is a proven fact - as said before; with the possible exception of some shanghaied from the Bible, but those in case prove Yahweh/God.
There are literally hundreds of places in the Quran where the word “Sign” is misused like this.
025 38/29: “Here is a Book (the Quran*) which We (Allah*) have sent down unto thee (Muhammad*), - - - that they (people*) may mediate on its Signs, and that men of understanding may receive admonition”. What follower would ever admit he was not a man of understanding? - especially if he had little knowledge. But in the Quran there is not one valid sign specifically proving Allah. Not one single. And what is then this “proof” worth for Islam? - negative and less than nothing, because one starts wondering what kind of god - or man - uses invalid proofs?
026 40/4: “None can dispute about the Signs of Allah but the Unbelievers”. This may be absolutely correct:
Yes, only non-Muslims can - or actually are permitted to - discuss or dispute the signs of Islam. And even for us it is so dangerous, that this book can not be printed unless the printer is very brave, in spite of the book being very down-to-earth and based entirely on the Quran + correct scientific knowledge.
027 45/19+20: “They (non-Muslims*) will be of no use to thee in the sight of Allah: it is only wrongdoers (that stand as) protectors, one to another; but Allah is the Protector of the Righteous. These are clear evidences to men - - -”. Read these two sentences, and see if it is a proof - not to say a clear proof - of anything, as long as the statements are not proved. 100% invalid.
***028 46/8: “Say: ’ Had I (Muhammad*) forged it (the Quran*), then can ye obtain no single (blessing) for me from Allah:” What an unbeatable proof!!!
029 Muhammad is said to prove that he was a prophet, by answering 3 cryptic questions brought by Uqbab. Abu Mu’ayt from Jewish rabbis in Medina - he got the answers from Allah via Gabriel. The first concerned the “seven sleepers”. Any god had known the story is made up - a Christian legend - but Muhammad did not know this. The second concerned Alexander the Great (Dhu’l Qarnayn - an Arab name for him) - and Muhammad answer fairy tales any god had known were wrong. The third concerned the Holy Spirit - and Muhammad had no real answer. But the conclusion after the fiasco (it was not known then that it was a big fiasco) was clear: The story was indicated to be an unmistakable proof for that Muhammad was a prophet. Worse: EVEN TODAY WHEN WE EASILY SEE WHAT IS WRONG, MUSLIMS REFUSES TO ADMIT THE OBVIOUS AND TRY TO EXPLAIN THE ERRORS AWAY - AND RECKON THE WRONG INFORMATION AS SURE PROOF OF HIS BEING A REAL PROPHET, IN SPITE OF THAT NO GOD HAD GIVEN HIM ANSWERS SO FAR FROM THE REALITY. It should be a matter of doubt for any thinking person - but then Muslims are not thought how to think, but only to accept and obey. This really is an interesting “proof”.
Besides: The criterias for really being a prophet, are:
(Muhammad fulfilled none of these points. Well, he may comfort himself with that there are other, less strict definition of the word prophet, too - f. ex. a person that speaks a god's words and not his own - or something like that. According to this weaker definition he may have been a kind of a prophet - if Allah exists, if Muhammad had real connections with him - - - and if Muhammad did not too often speak his own words, f. ex. to calm down angry wives or scolding personal enemies (not all Muslim scholars like f. ex. surah 111). But a "bona fide" real prophet according to the real criteria? - Nyet. Which is a good English word that means "No" with at least two lines under it.)
00n 62/5: “Evil is the similitude of people who falsify the Signs of Allah - - -”. What does it mean that invalid signs are falsified? Especially in a book with so many mistakes?
This should be enough about invalid "signs" in the Quran, as these points are so very easy to find for anyone who reads the the book. Whenever you see the word “Sign” ask yourself: Is this meant to be a sign, or is it just another claim or reference to not proved "signs" pretending to be facts? If it is said to be a sign: Is this just another statement built on no proof and thin air? And if it is said to be a sign built on proofs: Check if the “proofs” it rests on, really are proofs, and not just other statements founded on cheap words.
We believe we have checked all places where the words “sign” or “proof” are used in the Quran. With the exception of some taken from the Bible, we have found none - NONE - that is valid according to any law of logic. They only are just claims or statements, or rest on other claims or statements not proved. A few even are directly wrong.
As for the ones taken from the Bible, some are wrong, some are proved by science to be correct, and quite a number are not proved neither right nor wrong. But at least the Bible to a large degree rests on many writers and many witnesses - though points can be wrong anyhow. It also is written much nearer what happened in time, a few years to some tens of years later for NT, compared to more than 600 years and mainly recited from words-of-mouth and legends for the Quran for the same stories. And told only by a warlord and worse: One aspiring for power and one believing in using lies and even broken oaths if this could forward his case.
It really is very sobering that the Quran is built only on the words of one single man - a man that today would be treated with much suspicion in a court, because of his life and behaviour when living as a self-proclaimed prophet, highway man and warlord. Highwaymen, murderers, rapists and warlords do not rate very high for trustworthiness. And self-proclaimed prophets? There have been numbers of them through history. They often like power, women and often a good life - and frequently are not too “difficult” on how to obtain it. Muhammad at least liked power and women.
It also is sobering to know that it is a fact that easy words, cheap, loose statements, and invalid “signs” and “proofs” all are hallmarks for parasites and deceivers, not to say swindlers. Like Goebbels: “Tell a lie often enough, and people start believing in it”.
NB: If you find any mistakes anywhere, please inform us. If it is a real mistake, it will be corrected.
NB, NB, NB:
1. Read first the 2 small chapters "Some Essentials for how the Quran is to be read and understood" (VII-10-1) and "The Quran is to be understood literally if nothing else is indicated" (VII-10-2).
2. http://www.1000mistakes.com is blocked by many Muslim authorities. To debate with persons in such areas, cut and paste what you want from the pages and send it under titles different from http://www.1000mistakes.com.
3. http://www.1000mistakes.com is one of 9 pages which Muslim organisetions warned especially against in 2008 and 2009 - it could make especially procelytes lose their belief in Islam; correct and "down-to-the-earth" information works. In this connection it is worth noting that in the "warning" http://www.1000mistakes.com was one of 3 which neither was accused of bringing wrong facts, nor of being a hate page.
4. Comment 141 (to verse 6/149) in “The Message of the Quran” (see point 5) explains (translated from Swedish) about Allah's claimed omniscience vs. man's claimed free will:
“With other words: The real connection between Allah’s knowledge about the future (and consequently about the unavoidable in what is to happen in the future*) on one side and man’s relatively (!!*) free will on the other – two statements that seems to contradict each other – lies outside what is possible for humans to understand, but as both statement are made from Allah (in the Quran*) both must be true”. Unbelievable. Blind belief is the only correct and intelligent way of life, even in the face of the utterly impossible!!
5. And an afterthought: In the book “The Message of the Quran”, certified by Al-Azhar Al-Sharif Islamic Research Academy in Cairo (one of the 2-3 top universities in the Muslim world on such subjects) in a letter dated 27. Dec. 1998, it is admitted rather reluctantly that there are no proofs for Allah, and that it is not possible to prove him. An additonal point here is that if there is no proof for Allah and impossible to prove him, automatically there also is no proof for, and impossible to prove Muhammad's claimed connection to a god. And if there is no Allah and/or no connection between Muhammad and a god, what then is Muhammad? - and what than is Islam? - a made up, invalid religion?
6. Further: All the mistakes, contradictions, etc. in that book prove 100% that the Quran is not made by an omniscient god - no god makes such and so many mistakes, etc. If then Islam is a made up religion, what then about all the Muslims who have been prohibitted from looking for a real religion (if such one exists)? And where will they in case wake up after living and practising such an inhuman war religion like Islam is according to the Quran (and to Hadiths), if there is a second life somewhere? - Hell or Paradise?
7. NB and PS: No matter how sure you are about something, if it is not proved, it is not knowledge, only belief or strong belief, and can be wrong. Only what is proved or possible to prove is knowledge.
(As http://www.1000mistakes.com is blocked in many Muslim areas - which shows they are afraid of it and lack arguments (if they had real arguments for http://www.1000mistakes.com is wrong, blocking was unneccessary) - "cut and paste" whatever you want from it and send if you want to inform or to debate there. Remember to omit the name http://www.1000mistakes.com).
PS: If we are blocked centrally - f. ex. by spam (there is too much at times already from unfriendly sources) we will reopen with new address somewhere else, and announce the new address om f. ex. http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/islam. Also if your comments to us do not reach us, any comments posted on a thread with "1000 mistakes" in the title on that forum will be read by us - it is a big international debate page. We cannot answer on that page, though, as it is not safe enough - we have had death threaths (better to kill an opponent, than to check if a religion brainwashed into you only on the word of a man who even practised lies (f. ex. "war is deceit") and advocated breaking even your oaths if that gave a better result, is true ot made up - old beliefs are hard to question).
Please inform all and everybody and all relevant fora - f. ex. Internet pages for debate or information - about the address http://www.1000mistakes.com. It is information that is urgently needed by many, not least by Muslims. No god made a book with so many mistakes and other wrongs - and if the Quran and Islam are made up by humans or dark forces, where are the followers of this inhumanly dark and brutal war religion heading for in a possible next life?