PART VII, CHAPTER 10, SUBCHAPTER 1 (= VII-10-1-0)

FACTS VS. CLAIMS, STATEMENTS, (INVALID) "SIGNS", (INVALID) "PROOFS", ETC. IN THE QURAN: THE QURAN AND ALLAH ACCORDING TO THE QURAN, MUHAMMAD, ISLAM, AND ALLAH

SOME ESSENTIALS FOR HOW THE QURAN IS TO BE READ AND UNDERSTOOD

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.

Contents in this chapter:

1. Some essentials for how the Quran is to be read and understood.(VII-10-1-0)
2. The Quran is to be understood literally if nothing else is indicated.(VII-10-2-0)
3. 400+ points with unclear or difficult to understand or impossible to be sure what is the real and original meaning in the Quran. (VII-10-3-0)

Muslims and Islam for one thing claim that the clear and easy language is a proof for that it is made by a god, and for another that the perfect language is a proof for the existence of Allah (no such proofs exist, so they try to find proofs).

Both claims are very clearly wrong as you will see, as the language all too often is neither clear, nor distinct or specific, nor easy to understand.

And very far from least: Muslims have to use some last resort "explainings away" to explain away mistakes, etc. which are destroying for Islam, but impossible to give real explanations for. (One extra point here: Who with a little intelligence is able to believe that an omniscient god telling he is explaining his religion in "plain and easy to understand words" where only "the sick of heart" will go looking for hidden meanings, is so helpless in choosing the correct words, that mere humans time and again and again and again have to help him and "exsplain what he really means" - - - like what Islam and Muslims have to do literally hundreds of times in the Quran, to make the book fit the meanings they want it to express?

001 3/7: “He (Allah*) it is who has sent down to thee (Muhammad and/or Muslims*) the Book (the Quran*); in it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they (all the verses that are to be understood literally*) are the foundation of the Book: others are allegorical. But those in whose hearts are perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking disorder, searching for hidden meanings, but no one knows the hidden meaning, except Allah.” But may be this one is allegorical, too, because Islam and many a Muslim are hunting for the hidden meanings behind what they claim is an allegory as soon as there are errors and mistakes they cannot otherwise “explain” away. Is this because of “perversity” in their heart? – or perhaps because they do not have the brain, the guts and the backbone needed to meet the question: What does it mean that there are lots of mistakes and other wrongs in the Quran? – or: If all the mistakes and other wrongs in the Quran means that Islam is a made up religion like so many others – what then whit all us Muslims if there all the same is a Day of Doom? - - - and especially if there somewhere is a real god that we have been prohibited from looking for?!

“- - -in it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they (all the verses that are to be understood literally*) are the foundation of the Book”: There is no doubt that the Quran is meant to be meant literally where nothing else is specified. Also see 11/1 just below.

002 11/1: “(This (the Quran*) is a Book, with verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning) - - -.” In plain words: The verses are in plain language and are to be understood literally where otherwise is not clearly said – in “basic and fundamental” words. But all the same Muslims try explaining away anything that is wrong in the Quran and that they do not find “explanations” for, with that it is not to be understood literally – it must be allegories. It is one of their three “last – and often used - lines of defence” when errors cannot be explained. (The other two are: “You cannot deduce anything from one or a few verses that looks wrong – the Quran (or the surah) must be understood as a whole”. And the really “low prose” one: “You are lying or making up things because you are an Islam-hater or are listening to Islam-haters” – this no matter how correctly you are quoting the Quran or the Hadiths or whatever.) Also see 3/7 just above.

003 18/1-2: “Praise be to Allah, Who hath sent to his servant (Muhammad*) the Book (the Quran*), and hath allowed therein no Crookedness: (He hath made it) strait (and Clear) - - -.” In plain words: The verses in the Quran are in straight and clear and not crooked words – to be understood literally (where not something else is said strait and clear). See the comment to 3/7 and 11/1 just above.

004 26/2: “These are verses of the Book (the Quran*) that makes (things) clear.” But all the same Muslims as a last way out, explains – and in religious blindness often honestly believe – that errors are not errors, but are camouflaging hidden meanings or allegories.

005 27/1: “These are verses of the Quran – a book that makes (things) clear.” See 26/2 just above.

006 28/2: “These are the verses of the Book (the Quran*) that makes (things) clear”. See 26/2 above.

007 32/2: “(This is) the revelation of the Book (the Quran*) in which there is no doubt - - -.” And all the same Islam and Muslims doubt very much of it and tells this and this and this must be allegories - - - especially if it is the only way to explain away errors.

008 41/3: “A Book (the Quran*) whereof the verses are explained in detail - - -.” Oh, no! They are not explained in detail, according to Islam and Muslims – they are allegories with the meaning hidden, or with a very different meaning, so we must explain it - - - especially if that is the only way to “explain” away errors and mistakes. Also see 3/7 and 11/1 above.

009 43/2: “By the Book (the Quran*) that makes things clear - - -.” See26/2 above.

010 44/2: “By the Book (the Quran*) that makes things clear - - -.” See 26/2 above.

011 54/17: “And We (Allah*) have indeed made the Quran easy to understand - - -.” It clearly is in plain words that are easy to understand – and the allegories mostly explained or easy to understand. But no! - according to Islam and to many Muslims – much of it is allegories with very hidden or different meanings - - - at least if that is the only way to “explain” away errors or mistakes. Also see 3/7 and 11/1 above.

012 54/22: Identical to 54/17 just above.

013 54/32: Identical to 54/17 above. There is no doubt that Allah/Muhammad meant the Quran to be read straight forward and understood literally where not something else is indicated.

014 54/40: Identical to 54/17 above. Also see 54/32 just above.

There is no doubt whatsoever about that the Quran itself means that the Quran is to be understood literally mainly. And that to look for hidden meanings are wrong. Remind any Muslim trying to “explain” away problems by pretending or claiming they are allegories, about this fact.

Some further documentation about this, with comments from “The Message of the Quran”:

015 24/1: “(This is*) A surah which We (Allah*) have sent down and which We have ordained: in it have We sent down clear Signs; in order that ye may receive admonition.”

"The Massage of the Quran", comment to 24/1: I.e., “the injunctions whereof We (Allah*) have made self-evident by virtue of their wording”: thus Abd Allah ibn ‘Abbas explains the expression faradnaha in this context. - - - The same explanation, also on the authority of ibn ‘Abbas, is advanced by Tabari. It would seem that the special stress on Allah’s having laid down this surah “in plain terms” (the norm, but here stressed extra*) is connected with the gravity of the injunctions spelt out in this sequence: in other words, it implies a solemn warning against any attempt are widening or re-defining those injunctions by means of deductions, interferences or any other considerations unconnected with the plain wording of the Quran".

016 26/225: “Seest thou not how they wander distracted in every valley?”

"The Message of the Quran", comment to 26/100 (26/98 in the Swedish edition – which seems slightly more honest and a little less "corrected" towards orthodoxy): “The idiomatic phrase "hama fi widyan" (lit., “he wandered (or “he roamed”) through valleys”) is used, as most of the commentators point out, to describe a confused aimlessness – and often self-contradictory – play with words and thoughts. In this context it is meant to stress the difference between the precision of the Quran, which is free from all inner contradictions - - - and the vagueness often inherent in poetry”.

The point here is that the text is said to be precise – which it has to be if the claim that it is made by a perfect god shall have any meaning. And a precise language always means exactly what is said - - - which means that something written in such an unprecise language like in the Quran cannot come from a god.

But Islam has some stumbling stones:

017 7/75: “’Know ye (believers*) that Salih (a claimed prophet for the tribe or people Thamus. He according to the Quran lived some time between Noah and Moses – Moses is said to speak about him*) is a prophet from his Lord?’ They said:’ We do indeed believe in the revelation which has been sent through him.'”

Comment to 7/58 (60 in the 2008 English edition): “The contents of this message (lit., ”that with which he has been sent”) appeared to them justification enough to accept it on its merits, without the need of any esoteric “proof” of Silah’s mission. In this subtle way this statement of faith has a meaning which goes far beyond the story of the Thamud. It is an invitation to the sceptic who is unable to believe in the divine origin of a religious message, to judge it on its intrinsic merits and not make his acceptance dependant on extraneous, and objectively impossible, proofs of its origin: for only through the contents can its truth and validity be established”.

Well, proofs – or at least documentation – is not more “objectively impossible” than that the Christians have got documentation in NT, and partly confirmed in the Quran, for that something supernatural was involved (another question is whether one wants to believe in that documentation or not). It ALWAYS is possible for a god to prove his existence (but not for a human to prove a god). What to be aware of here is that Islam has not one single proof for anything concerning the religion – not one single bit; only the word of a man with a very special morality – or amorality. Therefore they have to argue for blind belief and for that proofs are unnecessary, yes, that demands for proofs are intellectual stupidity and lack of intelligence. Which they do. And which is wrong.

One problem, though, is that it is logically and intellectually impossible to know something that is not proved. One maximally can believe strongly – sometimes so strongly that one believes one knows. But not proven beliefs never are more than beliefs – strong or not. Bur even strong beliefs ever so often have been – and are – wrong. People “knew” the Earth was flat – and it was wrong. Then people “knew” Earth was the centre of the geocentric Universe – and it was wrong. Then people “knew” Sol or Helios (2 names for our sun) was the centre of heliocentric Universe – wrong. And then they “knew” our galaxy (“The Milky Way”) was the entire Universe – wrong once more. And in all religions – f. ex. Islam - there are people that “know” they are right and that all others are wrong - - - and most of them have to be wrong (and Muslims with their somewhat special founder and everything built only on claims and with lots and lots and lots of mistakes, etc. in their holy book, in reality are in a most weak position for being the ones – if any – who are right).

But because their total lack of proofs and even of real indicia, Islam claims and claims and strongly claims that the texts in a book with lots of mistakes and errors and wrongs prove that a god has made it, that lack of ability to see this is your stupidity, not that the book is not perfect - and that blind belief is the ideal. Which is a main – if not the main – reason why Muslims and Islam cannot accept or see any mistake in the Quran, no matter how obvious.

018 5/14: “For those, too, who call themselves Christians, We (Allah*) did take a Covenant, but they forgot (read; falsified*) a good part of the Message that was sent them - - -“.

Comment 5/27: “I. e. their going astray from the genuine teachings of Jesus - - -.”

Comment 5/28: “- - - it is obvious that what is alluded to in this context is the concealing of something from oneself; in other words, it is a reference to the gradual obscuring (read; falsification*), by the followers of the Bible, of its original verities which they are now unwilling to admit even to themselves.”

This claim that the Bible is falsified you find many places in the Quran. But we have written about this so many places, that here we only remind you of that this is the only possible “explanation” Islam has and Muhammad had to “explain” away all the many differences between the Bible and the Quran - - - and that science long since and quite clearly has proved this undocumented claim wrong – the Bible may be mistaken here and there, but not one sample of falsification has been found. On the contrary: All the many old manuscripts show that the Bible today is the same as in the old times. The best proof for this is Islam: If one single real proof for falsification had ever been found, the world had been informed about it each and every time there is a debate between Christians or Jews and Muslims. Not a single consonant or wovel has ever been aired about a real proof – only undocumented statements and claims.

019 6/21: “But Satans never inspire their friends (non-Muslims*) to contend with you; if ye were to obey them, ye would indeed be Pagans”.

This claim that you shall shy away form what all non-Muslims say – and from debating with them – you will find several places in the Quran. One obvious possible reason is the same one that all leaders of new and extreme sects are aware of: If your followers get only your information or propaganda, it is much more likely they stay your followers, than if they also get balanced and correct information – this no matter if they understand your words literally or figuratively.

020 6/108: “Thus have We (Allah*) made alluring to each people its own doings”.

Comment 6/92 (6/93 in the 2008 English edition): “Lit., ‘thus godly have we made….”, etc. implying that it is in the nature of man to regard the belief which have been implanted in him from childhood, and which he now shares with his social environment, as the only true and possible ones – whit the result that a polemic against those beliefs often tends to provoke a hostile psychological reaction.” This is said as an explanation why Islam sometimes meets a negative reaction. But the book skips the fact that this also goes for Muslims: If they are strongly indoctrinated, they may react strongly to arguments and facts they do not like – and without thinking over – or being mentally able to think over – even true facts.

021 7/101: “- - - they (non-Muslims*) would not believe what they had rejected before.” (Literally: “- - -to which they had given the lie aforetime”.

Comment 7/80 (7/82 in the 2008 English edition): “- - - an allution to the instinctive unwillingness of most people to give up the notions – positive or negative – to which they are accustomed.”

But the book also here skips the fact that this also goes for Muslims: If they are strongly indoctorinated, they may react strongly to atguments and facts they do not like – and without thinking over – or being mentally able to think over – even true facts.

022 23/24: “- - -(moreover) we (non-Muslims*) have never heard (anything like) this from our forebears of old!” (Literally: “- - - in connection with (Arab “fi”*) our early forebears!”).

Comment 23/11: “- - - a Quranic allution to the fact that people often reject a new ethical proposition on no better grounds than that it conflicts with their “inherited” habits of thoughts and ways of life. Indirectly, this allution implies a condemnation of all blind "taqlid", i. e. an unthinking acceptance of religious doctrines or assertions which are not unequivocally supported by divine revelations, the explicit teachings of a prophet, or the evidence of the unprejudiced reason”.

1. But the book skips the fact that this also goes for Muslims: If they are strongly indoctorinated, they may react strongly to atguments and facts they do not like – and without thinking over – or being mentally able to think over – even true facts.
2. The book here has tailor-made a definition to fit Islam. It has forgotten (?) that for one thing that reason is unable to find the right answer without full and correct information – and the Quran is full of mistakes, that claims about divine revelations are 15 to the dozen in some religious circles and invalid as proofs without documentation (something Muhammad and Allah were unable to produce) – and that the same goes for any self proclaimed prophet, and especially so if his teachings are very much wanting and he himself a questionable person (like the real Muhammad was). But definitions like this frequently are used in Islam and many Muslims really believe this is ok. logic - - - which make straight thinking difficult for them.

023 26/74: “They (non-Muslims*) said: ‘Nay, but we found our fathers doing thus (what we do)”.

Comment 26/38: “(Zamakshari): ‘- - - ancient usage and precedence in time are no proof of (a concept’s) soundness”. Razi, for his part, states that (this*) verse represents ‘one of the strongest (Quranic) indications of the immorality (Arab “fasad”*) inherent in (the principle of) "taqlid", i. e. the blind, unquestioning adoption of religious concepts or practices on basis of one’s uncritical fait in no more than the “authority” of a scholar or a religious leader.”

1. But the book skips the fact that this also goes for Muslims: If they are strongly indoctorinated, they may react strongly to atguments and facts they do not like – and without thinking over – or being mentally able to think over – even true facts.

1. But there hardly is a major religion more authoritative and with a clearer demand for blind belief than Islam.

024 37/69-70: “Truly they found their fathers on the wrong path; so they (too) were rushed down their footsteps”,

Comment 37/25 (37/27 in 2008 English edition): “I. e. blind imitation ("taqlid") of the – obviously absurd – beliefs, valuations and customs (f. ex. some of the Muslim “moral” codexes*) of one’s erring predecessors, and disregard of all evidence (!!!*) of the truth supplied by both reason and divine (?*) revelation, is here shown to be the principal cause of the suffering referred to - - -. (Zamakhshari)”.

No comments necessary – this also fits Muslims 100%, not to say 120%.

025 43/23: “We (non-Muslims*) found our fathers following a certain religion, and we will certainly follow in their footsteps”.

Comment 43/23: “Rezi (one of the foremost Muslim scholars through the times*) says: ‘Had there been in the Quran nothing but these verses, they would have sufficed to show the falsity of the principle postulating (a Muslim’s) blind, unquestioning adoption of (another person’s) religious opinions (“ibtal al-qawl bi’t-raqlid”) - - -‘”.

If he had indicated Islam and the fathers and/or the imams, it hardly would be possible to say this more accurate. Islam is to a large degree based on indoctrination, social pressure and glorification of blind faith.

026 28/63: Those whom we (non-Muslims*) caused to err so grievously, we but caused to err as we ourselves had been erring”.

Comment 28/66: “In its deepest sense, this passage – as so many similar throughout the Quran – points to the moral inadmissibility of accepting an ethical or intellectual proposition as true on no other grounds than that is was held to be true for older generations.”

For members of a religion based only – only – on a book with many mistakes and wrongs and with partly malevolent moral and ethical rules (but so integrated and accepted in and by their religion and culture, that they themselves are unable to see anything wrong or how bad it really is), this should be a reason for some deep thinking, and espcially for Muslims.

027 21/24: “But most of them (non-Muslims*) know mot the Truth, and so turn away”.

Comment 21/31 (21/32 in 2008 English edition): “In other words, most people’s obstinate refusal to consider a reasonable proposition on its merits is often due to no more than the simple fact that it is not familiar to them.”

What we know from our parents and culture must be right – and we do not know anything about clear mistakes (most Muslims honestly do not know about mistakes – they have too often and for too long been told that the Quran is perfect, and been told "explanations" for the mistakes).

And then there is the unbeatable argument for believing in spite of mistakes and anything: "Blind belief is the ideal presented by Muhammad."

028 6/149: The Quran here speaks about the claim that Allah decides everything, and at the same time man has free will – a claim you meet many places in the Quran - - and an absolute impossibility (it is a version of “the Time Travel Paradox, which is proved unsolvable).

Comment 6/141 (6/143 in 2008 English edition): “In other words, the real relationship between Allah’s knowledge of the future (and, therefore, the ineluctability of what is to happen in the future) on one side, and man’s free will, on the other – two propositions that on the face of it, seems to contradict one another – is beyond man’s comprehension; but since they both are postulated by Allah (in the Quran*), both must be true”. A very lame "explanation" or claim.

It is not difficult to understand that Muslims believe like they do, born and bread to believe such impossible and unbelievably illogical and naïve claims on blind faith.

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?