1000+ Comments on the Quran: Surah 11 -- HUD

Revelation: Medina, 621 AD (verses 12, 17 & 114 later?)

(See general comments on Surahs here: Introduction)


 

The quotes and comments

001 "In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful". Please read the surahs from Medina, the immoral parts of the Muslim moral code, the unjust/immoral parts of the sharia laws, and the Quran's rules for lying, thieving/looting, enslaving, raids and wars, plus the rules for treatment of girls and women - free and captured - and see if you agree. Always when there is a distance between big words and corresponding demands and deeds, we personally believe in the demands and deeds. Glorious words are cheap, demands and deeds are reliable. Glorifying words and claims are too cheap for anyone to use and disuse -- when you read, judge from realities, not from propaganda.

002 11/1a: Alif Lim Ra' - Arab letters without meaning, called abbreviated letters. Nobody also knows why they are placed there. Clear language? (Well in just this case and some others they can be understood - here like the Arab word "a scripture"). Normally when these letters can be given a meaning, the meaning has no connection to the surah they head.

####003 11/1b: “(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 which is wrong in the Quran and which they do not find “explanations” for, with that it "this is not to be understood literally – it must be allegories", etc. It is one of their three "last" – and often used - lines of defense” when errors in the Quran cannot be explained or explained away. (The other two are: “You cannot deduce anything from one or a few verses which 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 3/7b+c above and 19/97, 26/2, 27/1, 28/2, 41/3, 43/2, 44/2, 44/58, 54/17, 54/32 .

A very essential point to remember when Muslims try to claim clear mistakes are allegories or similar. They often do. And Muslims trying to flee from indications or proofs in the Quran for that things are seriously wrong in the religion of Muhammad, might remember that the only main person they in case cheat, is oneself.

004 11/1c: "- - - (verses*) - - - further explained in detail - - -". The problem only is that too many of the "explanations" are wrong or logically invalid. A 100% proof for that no god is behind those "explanations" and thus the book.

*005 11/1d: “- - - from one (Allah*) Who is Wise - - -". Not if all the logically invalid "shortcuts" and deductions and claims in the Quran is from him.

*006 11/1e: “- - - from one (Allah*) Who is - - - Well-Acquainted (with all things)”. The mistaken facts in the Quran shows he is not well enough acquainted with all things. Or that someone else made the Quran. But also see 2/233h above.

007 11/2a: ""(It (the Quran*) teacheth) that ye should worship none but Allah". There have been many teachers and many teachings through the times - many of them have turned out to be wrong - especially the ones who only were based on belief or blind belief.

##008 11/2b: “(Say) ‘Verily, I (Muhammad') am (sent) unto you (people*) from Him (Allah*) - - -“. According to Ibn Warraq and to Muhammad Asad the word “(Say)” does not exist in the Arab original. This means that here it is Muhammad who speaks. There are a few places (8? + angels speaking according to Ibn Warraq) like that in the Quran. But how is it possible that Muhammad speaks in a book (presumed to (?) be made by Allah or existed since eternity – and sent down by Allah? (Some Muslims say the word is just forgotten – but how many more words may then have been forgotten in the Quran?). Also see 2/286c.

009 11/2c: (A11/3): “(Say): ‘Verily I (Muhammad*) am (sent) unto you - - - .” This word “Say” does not exist in the Arab text. “The Message of the Quran” uses the expression “(Say, O Prophet)" and explains: “The interpolation, between brackets, of the words “Say, O Prophet” is necessitated by the first-person construction of this sentence”. That means that either we here have one of the places where Muhammad himself is speaking (there are something like 8 places where that is the case in the Quran), or we have one more place in the Quran where Islam confirms in writing that the text in the Quran is not always neither clear nor correct. Clear texts easy to understand – and perfect because it is made by a god?

##010 11/2d: The text in the Arab original is:"Verily, I (Muhammad*) am sent onto you (people*) from Him (Allah*) - - -". Comment A11/3: "The interpolation, between brackets, of the words 'Say, O Prophet' is necessitated by the first-person construction of this sentence. And A. Yusuf Ali is even smarter - he simply and quietly adds the word "(Say)" without mentioning that it is not in the original. (It is Muhammad who is speaking, but it should be Allah). If the text tells something which does not fit Islam, just change it. (But where then goes the reliability of the scholars and the religion?)

011 11/2e: “Verily, I (Muhammad*) am (sent) unto you (people*) - - -“. Was he really sent? - and in case from whom? - dark forces? - illness? - humans? - himself (claiming to have been sent)?

012 11/2f: “Verily, I (Muhammad) am (sent) unto you (people*) from Him (Allah*) - - -“. No person bringing a tale where so much is wrong, is from a god. And no person bringing a "moral" code with so much immorality (lying, stealing, raping, enslaving, suppressing, apartheid, killing, murdering, incitements to dislike and hate) is from a good or benevolent god.

013 11/2g: "Verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

014 11/2h: "- - - glad tiding - - -". The Quran is no good or glad tidings, except for the ones who grew rich by looting, the ones who gained power, plus the ones who needed a religion to lean to (this goes for may be 10% of the people according to science, some + or - depending on bad or good times, but any religion helps them as long as they believe strongly). Especially it is not glad tidings if the Quran id not really made by a god, not to mention if on top of that there somewhere existed a true religion Muslims have been prohibited from searching. A rude awakening if there is a next life?

015 11/3a: "- - - See ye (Muslims*) forgiveness from your Lord (Allah*) - - -". Allah can forgive nobody unless he exists and in addition is a god (not f.x. from the dark forces).

016 11/3b: "- - - turn to Him (Allah*) in repentance - - -". In addition to 11/2a just above: To what avail if it is true what the Quran states again and again that Allah predestines everything, and the predestinations are made according to an unchangeable Plan - a plan nobody and nothing can change?

017 11/3c: "- - - He (Allah*) may grant you enjoyment - - -". We are back to the major problem in the Quran: There only is the word of a little reliable man (al-Taqiyya, Kitman, "war is deceit", "break even your oaths") for that Allah exists and even is a major god. If this is not true, Allah can do or give nothing.

018 11/3d: "- - - good (and true) - - -". There is not much in the Quran you can rely on is true unless it is proved - too much is wrong.

019 11/3e: "- - - for a term appointed - - -". Predestination - Allah has appointed terms and times for everything according to the Quran.

020 11/3f: "- - - and bestow His (Allah's*) abounding grace on all who abound in merit". We are back to the old fact: This only may be true of Allah exists and if he in addition is a god.

021 11/3g: "- - - merit!". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is according to its own partly immoral moral code.

022 11/3h: "- - - The Penalty - - -". See 3/77b above.

023 11/3i: "- - - a Great Day - - -". = The Day of Doom.

024 11/4a: "To Allah is your (people's*) return - - -". Only if the Quran really is from a god, really tells the full truth and nothing but the truth, and if Allah really exists.

025 11/4b: "(Allah*) hath power over all things". A claim which never was proved - like everything in the Quran and in Islam (for comparison: If either the Quran or the Bible is correct, Jesus proved his father's(?)/god's power and his own connection to something supernatural many times - Muhammad never).

026 11/5a: "- - - He (Allah*) knoweth what they (non-Muslims*) conceal - - - for He knoweth well the (innermost secrets) of the hearts". You will be better off in the next life if you are a good and obedient Muslim - and "they" will get their well deserved punishment. Good! But also see 2/233h above.

027 11/5b: "- - - He knoweth well the (innermost secrets) of the hearts". See 2/233h above.

028 11/6a: "- - - (all creatures'*) sustenance dependeth on Allah - - -". According to the Quran everything depends on Allah - but as normal for the book never a thing is proved or documented. And so long as you refuse or are unable to prove anything at all, such words are very cheap - any priest or writer of "holy" text for any god can use them free of charge - - - and does so (you find it in most religions). On the other hand: Such cheap words - often used for propaganda - prove exactly nothing unless it is proved that the god really causes what they claim.

029 11/6b: "Allah knoweth (everything*) - - -". Why then 2/233h above?

030 11/6c: "- - - all is in a clear Record". = all is written on beforehand by Allah = everything is predestined.

031 11/6d: "- - - all is in a clear Record". But why does an omniscient god need a record?

032 11/7a: "He (Allah*) it is who created the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth - - -". Many, many places in the Quran you find Muhammad is claiming natural phenomena for his god - for glorification, for "sign" (normally "Quran-speak" for proof) or directly for "proof". He never even tried to prove or document it - there only was and is his word: The word of the man who was behind the institutionalization of al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), breaking of promises and your words, included your oaths, the man who lived by "war is deceit" - and everything was war - etc. But cheap words like this any mullah - yes, even an ordinary believer - in any religion as easily can claim for his god(s) as long as he can avoid the requests for proofs - loose words and loose claims are as cheap as that - - - one of the reasons why they often are used for propaganda.

But such words and such claims have some things in common:

Unless it is proved that the god really is behind the claimed phenomena, such words and claims are totally without any logical value.

Without such proofs, they also are totally without any value as indications or proofs.

Such claims also show that the user has no valid arguments or facts - if he had, he had used them instead.

Invalid arguments normally are the hallmarks of persons trying to cheat you - be it a politician, a cheat, a deceiver, a swindler - Muhammad may have been all of this as he was going for power and for riches for bribes - and for women. And he was not the glossy semi-saint Muslims like to claim - just read the Quran about his demands and deeds and some lies, and you see this. Skip the glorifying words and claims, and read what he demanded, introduced and did, and you get the real picture - glorious words are cheap, demands and deeds are by far more reliable when you want the truth about a person.

033 11/7b: "He (Allah*) it is who created the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth in six days". It is said 6 days several places in the Quran, but:

41/9-12: Here Allah used 2 + 4 + 2 days = 8 days for the creation (Muslims claim that the two days for creating Earth is included in the 4 days. But the Quran is very clear: 2 days for creating Earth, then 4 days for creating what is on Earth, and finally 2 days for creating the 7 firmaments (wrong – there only is one, and even that is an optical illusion except for the stars, etc.). No doubt about what is written. (Some Muslims also tries to tell that the Arab written word for day also may mean eon (the old Arab alphabet had no vowels or the points modern Arab use to signify special letters, and when one adds vowels, etc. as one likes, a lot different meanings are possible many places in the Quran.) But there is little doubt that the spoken word Muhammad used to his congregation was “day” – and none of the accepted good translators use any other word. Eons also makes Allah and his capabilities to a joke: 2/117: “When He (Allah*) decreeth a matter, He said to it: ‘Be’ and it is” – should he use eons for this small job?) We also should remind you that this verse contradicts reality quite a lot: Creation of the universe has till now taken 13.7 billion years, and of Earth 4.567 billion - both processes are still continuing.

Once more: It took a lot of more time. And any god knows that - but Muhammad did not. Who made the Quran? Also see the 4 Mega Mistakes in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran".

034 11/7c: Muhammad Asad has this translation: "(Allah*) created the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth in six eons" (the same in 7/54)- telling that the Arab word used here for "day" (yawm) also may mean f.x. eon, even though it is very clear that Muhammad's listeners and later Muslims understood "day" - - - until science proved that days could not be right. Mr. Asad also is forced to change from "day" to "eon" in order to use the word "evolution" instead of "creation" in his comment 11/10 to this verse.

Honesty seems not to count too much in Islam, compared to the essential: To make the Quran look right. But where goes the reliability of the religion when you discovers small and big "twists" and lies? - and how much more of the religion, the teaching and its arguments are in reality untrue?

One more point: In the Swedish somewhat older edition, is used "days". It thus may look like it is the editors of the new English edition who have falsified Mr. Azad to get a text nearer to what is scientific correct instead of giving a correct translation of the Quran. Once more: Honesty does not seem to count too much in Islam.

Do you understand why we have to be careful and check a lot when working with Islamic literature?

035 11/7d: “- - - heavens - - -“. Wrong. See 2/22d.

036 11/7e: "- - - His (Allah's*) Throne was over the Waters - - -". This may be from the Bible, because there (1. Mos. 1/2-7) it has a meaning. In the Quran it has no relevance, and Muslims have problems finding reasons for why the throne was over the waters. The explanation you are most likely to meet, is that it was because Allah made all living things from water - a claim which contradicts many other places in the Quran, where Allah created the living beings in many different ways, and not least does it contradict reality which says life was not made from water, but in water. We must admit that to us it tells something when the Quran in 21/30 tells the living beings are made from water, and many even top Muslim writers then tell that here science backs the Quran, because science tells life started in water! Very impressive - there is a huge difference between "from water" and "in water" - but what is a small Kitman (lawful half-truth though in this case a regular lie - an al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie)) when it comes to forwarding Islam?! It really tells something about Muslims and about Islam - and about reliability. Further: The first many millions of years Earth was too hot for water, and even afterwards it took some hundreds of millions years before life started - a long time even for a god to sit on his throne waiting.

037 11/7f: "- - - His (Allah's*) Throne was over the Waters - - -". Comment YA1502: "It is scientifically correct to say that all life evolved out of water, and this statement also occurs in the Quran, 21/30 - - -". Which is a highly incorrect scientifically, because the Quran does not say it has developed out of water or in water - it says that it is made from water, which is something quite different. YA also "forgets" to mention that the Quran has a number of other "explanations" of from what life was created.

A11/10 is no better: "The symbolic (not indicated in the Quran*) reference to ' the throne of His almightiness (Allah*) resting upon water' would seem to point to the Allah-willed evolution (not creating like said in the Quran, but evolution) of all life out of water - a fact clearly (!*) brought out by the Quran (21/30) and in modern times confirmed by biological science (!*)".

Such use of small (or big?) lies - here a Kitman (lawful half-truth according to Islam) - tells much about Muslim scholars and about Islam - and about reliability.

038 11/7g: "- - - that He (Allah*) might try you, which of you is best in conduct". Why does an omniscient, predestining god need to try anyone?

039 11/7h: "Ye (humans*) shall indeed be raised up after death". An interesting claim as Muhammad and his god never really proved they had such power (it is mentioned one place quoting a legend), whereas if the old books tells the truth, Yahweh proved such power several times.

040 11/7i: "- - - indeed - - -". See 2/2a above.

041 11/7j: "- - - the Unbelievers - - -". One of Muhammad's many distaste inducing names for non-Muslims.

042 11/7k: "- - - the Unbelievers would say, 'This (Resurrection*) is nothing but obvious sorcery!" Now resurrection of the soul you find in most religions, but remember that the Quran claims that Allah reassembles you atom for atom and wake you up again bodily - which may be difficult to believe. (But as Islam's pleasures in Paradise mainly are bodily pleasures - top food, drink, women, clothes, housing, surroundings, weather, shade - this only have a meaning if you are resurrected bodily to enjoy it. But honestly resurrected in soul only - as a free spirit - you will be far more free, and honestly spiritual activities and pleasures are far more pleasurable and satisfying than luxury and sex, especially in the long run - - - but primitive, rough warriors hardly knew this, and more down-to-earth "carrots" had to be used".

043 11/8a: "If We (Allah*) delay the penalty for them (non-Muslims*) - - -". Opponents (and followers) asked for proofs. Muhammad was not able to prove one thing. Here he is fast-talking to neutralize such requests for proofs.

044 11/8b: "On the day (of Doom*) it (actually) reaches them (the non-Muslims*), nothing will turn away from them - - -". When you do not have facts, you use loose and never documented claims. The bad thing is that such methods mainly are the hallmark of cheaters.

045 11/9a: "- - - a taste of (Allah's*) Mercy - - -". See 1/1a above.

046 11/9b: "- - - blasphemy". To express doubt about Allah only is blasphemy if he exists and is a major god - and there only are the words of a man with dubious moral and character for both. (And how should it be possible to blaspheme if he happens to belong to the dark forces, which f.x. the Quran's moral rules, laws, acceptance of dishonesty and thieving, rules for war, etc. may indicate).

047 11/10: "- - - he (the non-Muslim or no good Muslim*) is sure to say, 'All evil has departed from me'". Wrong psychology - few who had been trough bad times would say this. They may be glad the bad times are over, but few will be naive enough to believe they cannot return. Hence he would be far from sure to say this.

048 11/11a: "Not so (go wrong*) those who (good Muslims*) show patience and constancy, and work righteousness; for them is forgiveness (of sins) and a great reward". This is the ideal for Muslims according to the Quran - but remember that war and suppression are among the top duties, and that the Islamic moral is such that ultimate idol is the stealing/robbing, extorting, enslaving, womanizing, raping, distaste and war mongering, murdering man Muhammad - a man who on top of all had so little respect for the truth that he more or less institutionalized al-Taqiyya (lawful lie) and Kitman (lawful half-truth - or perhaps an as correct definition is that you can tell lies, but make mental reservations inside you, and thus do not sin) and according to the Quran advised even breaking your oaths (and can you break oaths, you also can break weaker promises and words) if that gave a better result. (The Quran also contains a few obvious lies he made - f.x. that miracles would make no-one believe, a claim any intelligent man knows is untrue.)

049 11/11b: "- - - righteousness - - -". The Quran's definition of the word is to live according to Islam's partly immoral moral code and Muhammad's words and deeds. Righteousness?

050 11/11c: "- - - for them (good Muslims*) is forgiveness - - -". There only are two who can forgive - the victim and a god. Thus Allah only can forgive if he exists and is a god.

051 11/11d: "- - - a great reward". = Paradise.

052 11/12a: "- - - of what is revealed - - -". Was it really revealed? - and in case by what or whom? The Quran itself proves it is not from a god - too much is wrong. Then remain dark forces, an illness (TLE - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy?) or a cold, scheming human brain.

053 11/12b: "- - - they (contemporaries of Muhammad*) say - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above. 

054 11/12c: "- - - they (contemporaries of Muhammad*) say: 'Why has not a treasure been sent down to him (Muhammad*) - - -". How could this end up in the claimed "Mother Book" (of which the Quran is a copy according to Muhammad) billions of years before it was said? One more of the many texts or quotes in the Quran which could not have been reliably written into the claimed "Mother Book" (13/39b, 43/4b+c, 85/21-22) in Heaven (of which the Quran is claimed to be a copy) eons ago, unless predestination was and is 100% like the Quran claims many places (if you look, you will find more cases than we mention - we only mention some of the obvious ones). If man has free will - even partly only (an expression some Muslims use to flee from the problem full predestination contra free will for man (and also contra that there is no meaning in praying to Allah for help, if everything already is predestined in accordance with a plan "nobody and nothing can change" - a problem which Muslims seldom mention), and an expression no Muslim we have met has ever defined) - and can change his mind, full and reliable clairvoyance about the future, not to mention the distant future, is impossible even for a god, as the man always could/can change his mind or his words once more, in spite of Islam's claims. There are at least 3 reasons - 2 of them unavoidable - for this:

When something is changed, automatically the future is changed.

The laws of chaos will be at work and change things, if even a tiny part is made different.

The so-called "Butterfly Effect"; "a butterfly flapping its wing in Brazil may cause a storm in China later on" or "a small bump may overturn a big load".

This that Allah predestines everything like the Quran claims and states many places, is an essential point, because besides totally removing the free will of man (in spite of the Quran's claims of such free will, or some Muslims' adjusted "partly free will for man" - to adjust the meanings where the texts in the Quran are wrong, is typical for Islam and its Muslims) - it also removes the moral behind Allah's punishing (and rewarding) persons for what they say and do - Allah cannot reward or punish people for things he himself has forced them to say or do, and still expect to be believed when he (Muhammad?) claims to be a good or benevolent or moral or just god. Also see 2/51b and 3/24a above.

And as mentioned above, full predestination also makes prayers to Allah meaningless, as everything already is predestined according to Allah's Plan - a Plan which no prayer ("nobody and nothing") can change.

055 11/12d (Medina?): "Why is not a treasure sent down to him (Muhammad*), or why does not an angel come down with him?" This is one of the many requests for proofs or at least a real sign Muhammad had to explain away - he was never able to prove even his smallest claims concerning central parts of Islam. He had to use fast-talk or worse to waylay such requests. And who is it normally who has to relay on fast-talk and worse? The cheat and the deceiver.

056 11/12e: “But thou (Muhammad*) art only there to warn”. And then some more – at least after 622 AD: This verse is contradicted and often “killed” by at least these verses: 2/191, 2/193, 3/28, 3/85, 3/148, 4/81, 4/90, 5/33, 5/72, 5/73, 8/12, 8/38-39 (the warning), 8/39, 8/60, 9/3, 9/5, 9/14, 9/23, 9/29, 9/33, 9/73, 9/123, 25/36, 25/52, 33/61, 33/73, 35/36, 47/4, 66/9. This includes many advising or permitting political, social, economical, etc. compulsion (with the sword in the background if you protest) – we mention a few here: 3/28, 3/85, 3/148, 4/81, 5/72, 5/73, 9/23, 14/7, 1/3, 33/73, 35/36. They are all quoted under 2/256. (At least 29 contradictions.

(2 abrogations.)

#057 11/12f: "It is Allah that arranged all affairs!" Once more: It is Allah who decides and predestines everything - the famous predestination many Muslims deny is more than partly, because if Allah decides everything, it is highly immoral to punish man for his claimed sins, and also the claimed free will of man is an impossibility in case. But many places like here the Quran are 100% categorical: It is Allah who decides and arranges all things!

058 11/13a: "Or they (contemporary opponents of Muhammad*) may say, 'He (Muhammad*) forged it'". This was not something "they may say" - they really said it. A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

059 11/13b: "Or they (contemporary opponents of Muhammad*) may say, 'He (Muhammad*) forged it'". This was not something "they may say" - they really said it. See 11/12c above.

p>060 11/13c: "He forged it (the Quran*)". Already at that time, many thought this. It is impossible to prove it - others (men or perhaps dark forces) may have made it. But what the Quran itself proves 100% - or 110% or more - is that it is not made by a god. No god makes that many and often big mistakes, that many contradictions, that many cases of invalid logic and unclear language, etc. It simply is heresy and slander imbecility to accuse a god for having made this book.

061 11/13d: "Bring ye then ten surahs - - -". This is an argument he could use among naive and often illiterate, or at least not much read semi-wild rough warriors. Anyone knowing a little about literature knows that the Quran is no high class literature - not even after the language was polished for 250 years by top Muslim scholars - from it was written in an alphabet containing mainly the consonants only around 650 AD (not later than 656 AD) and until it got its final forms (NB: Plural, as there were many parallel editions, of which at least 14 were officially accepted as "different ways of reading" - a nicer word for "variants") around 900 AD. Many a good writer with knowledge about folklore, legends, and fairy tales, etc. could have done a lot better, especially compared to what it likely was like from the more primitive alphabet and pens around 656 AD. But to what avail? - not one single believing Muslim would ever admit a competing book was better literature, because then earth would disappear under him and under the religion. Few if any Muslims have the backbone to face this reality.

062 11/13e: "Bring ye then ten surahs forged - - - if ye (non-Muslims*) speak the truth!" Muhammad claimed proofs from everybody else - - - but never proved anything himself - many words and claims, but never a real proof.

####063 11/13f: "- - - and call (to your (skeptics'*) aid) whomsoever you can, other than Allah - - -". Well, there always were Yahweh - he is likely to have made as well, if the old books are reliable. But that aside: Judged as literature the Quran at most is 3. class, a truth any knower of good literature who also knows the Quran can confirm. Helter-skelter placing of different topics. Repetitions, repetitions, repetitions of the same stories. Only two possible ends of stories: Either the involved become good Muslims, or they are bad people. All mentioned prophets or claimed prophets - even to a degree Jesus - are parallels to Muhammad's situation at the time of telling. Literally may be 3ooo mistakes - unbelievable in such an after all short book - of which may be unbelievable 2000 are wrong facts (we know of no other book in all the history of literature with the possible exception of science fiction with so many mistakes), a large number (hundreds) of contradictions both to itself - and many of them serious, some so much so that they are destroying for the central claims in the book - and to reality. A large number of cases of invalid or wrong logic and the same of unclear language. As for unclear language there is so much of it, that Islam has had to make a separate rule for how to understand them: If a text is possible to understand in 2 or more ways, both/all are deemed to be correct, even if the meaning varies wildly. It is called "different ways of reading" - a more polite expression for "different varieties". Etc., etc. And not to forget: It is a boring book - f.x. most Muslims have never read the whole book (a fact which makes mullahs' and others manipulating with cherry-picked sentences and untrue claims - f.x. about miracles performed by Muhammad - easy for them).

It is an educated guess that at least 50% of all writers good enough to have books published, would have been able to write a book of better literature quality than the Quran, if they got enough information about old folklore, legends, religion, apocryphal scriptures, fairy tales, etc. The same goes for at least 80% of persons studying relevant history, etc., included the above mentioned subjects, if they are good enough at writing to have had any books published. (We here omit the question of the language itself, as the language of today's Quran is not identical to the one of the "original" Quran - the language of the Quran was polished by top scholars through some 250 years until it got its final form around 900 AD - and around that time in 14 different (or more) accepted varieties - called "different ways of reading", 2 of which are used today (Warsh and Hafs). Two facts no lay Muslim will admit, because he does not know it. But his religious leaders and scholars know it - but may resort to al-Taqiyya or Kitman or deceit or worse (all of which are permitted and even advised in Islam to use "if necessary" to defend and to promote the religion) when asked.)

064 11/13g: "- - - the truth - - -". See 2/2b above.

***065 11/14a: “If then they (your false gods) answer not your (call), know ye that this Revelation (the Quran*) is sent down (replete) with the knowledge of Allah, - - -”. This is logically 100% wrong, as whether false gods or other gods answer or not, proves nothing about Allah. To use plain words: It is logical nonsense. The only thing which may prove Allah, are unmistakable answers or deeds from Allah. Would a god try to cheat his - mostly illiterate and uneducated - audience in cheap and primitive ways like this? In case; why did he need to cheat them? Who really made the Quran?

066 11/14b: "- - - (your false gods) answer not your (call) - - -". What the Quran and Islam and Muslims NEVER mention is that also Allah NEVER once through history unmistakably has answered anyone. The only words there ever were (?) are the words from Muhammad. And anyone who has read the Quran, the Hadiths, and Islamic history, knows what kind of man he in reality was - it is not hidden in those books (though glossed over with glorious words - if you skip them, you see the reality about Muhammad). Islam only has made Muhammad's moral - or lack of moral - their moral code, and therefore are unable to see how horrible parts of it are. Most Muslims even honestly believe it when they claim Islam is a very moral and ethical religion, this goes even for - to phrase it a bit strongly - the only part of Islam's moral which is strong, is sexual moral for free women. Oh, well, there are ok rules for taking care of boy orphans, and semi-good ones for helping the poor and for taking care of girl orphans + do not cheat or kill Muslims without a good reason. But just look at some of the other moral rules!

067 11/14c: "- - - revelations - - -". Was it really revelations? - and in case from whom?. As a god is out of the question - too much is wrong and/or low quality in the book - 3 possibilities remain: Dark forces, a sick brain (f.x. TFL - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy), or a cold brain - perhaps Muhammad's. Or a combination of 2 o 3 of these - f.x. TLE + convenient additions from Muhammad (not a little of the texts in the Quran was convenient for Muhammad).

068 11/14d: “- - - this revelation (the Quran*) is sent down - - -“. That is just the question for Islam: No god sends down a book so full of mistakes, etc.

069 11/14e: “- - - this revelation (the Quran’) is sent down (replete) with the knowledge of Allah, - - -”. Well, all the mistakes show that either it is not made by an omniscient god or that something else is wrong.

070 11/14f: “- - - this revelation (the Quran’) is sent down (replete) with the knowledge of Allah, - - -”. This is one of the many texts in the Quran with at least 2 possible meanings. It also may mean "knowledge about Allah". But there is no knowledge at all - nothing was ever documented or proved. There only is belief about him - and worse: The tales about him all are from a man with doubtful moral and reliability.

071 11/14g: "- - - there is no god but He (Allah*)!" This is one more never proved claim from the Quran. But even if we omit all claimed gods from all other religions, there still remain Allah and Yahweh. And the teachings of these two gods are fundamentally so different, that in spite of Islam’s never proved claim, those two cannot be the same god (unless he is mentally much ill). Remember here that science long since has proved that the Quran's claims that the Bible is falsified, is wrong (that is to say, it is difficult to prove it 100% before some 500 BC (and f.x. NT is much younger), because there are too few that old manuscripts - but even then it was a written religion, and written religions are difficult to change much. If Muslims stand by their claims, they will have to prove it - it is their claims, and it is therefore they who have to prove it. (But Islam never is able to prove fundamental claims)). Also see 6/106b above.

072 11/14h: "Will ye (non-Muslims*) even then submit (to Islam)?". Who in his right mind will submit to a religion if he/she sees that something is seriously wrong with it and understands that there is no god behind it? - or at least not behind its claimed holy book. Actually Islam as far as we find is the only of the big religions which itself directly proves something is very wrong with the religion - no god ever was involved in a book of a quality like the Quran (and it does not help that the book - a book claimed sent down from Heaven and made long before Muhammad was even born, + a lot of other historical anomalies).

073 11/15: "Those who desire the life of the Present and its glitter - to them We (Allah*) shall pay (the price of) their deeds therein - without diminution". At the same time explaining why non-Muslims may have a good life, and claiming they would be punished in the next life - as normal for Muhammad none of these two claims were documented.

074 11/16a: A continuation of the claim about future punishment of non-Muslims - see 11/15 just above. Also see 3/77b above.

075 11/16b: "- - - the Fire - - -". Hell.

076 11/17a (= Medina?): “Can they (non-Muslims*) be like those (Muslims*) who accepted a Clear (Sign) from their Lord (Allah*) - - -?” For building up his followers’ feeling of being superior to “the masses”, this is good psychology. This even more so if you want your followers to become a separate group, felling distance to other people or groups.

077 11/17b: "- - - Clear (Sign) - - -". There are many "signs" mentioned in the Quran, but not one single one is a valid proof of Allah, as it is nowhere proved that the things really are done or made by Allah.

078 11/17c: “- - - Clear (Sign) - - -“. See 2/99.

There exists a letter dated 27. Dec. 1998, in which it is admitted rather reluctantly that there are no proofs for Allah, and that it is not possible to prove him. An additional 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.

079 11/17d: “- - - Clear (Sign) from their (Muslims'*) Lord (Allah*) - - -“. Well, not even the existence of Allah is proved, not to mention what kind of being he is if he exists. The only thing which is proved, is that if he sent down the Quran, he is no god - there is too much wrong and too low quality literature in that book for any god to ever have been involved in it.

080 11/17e: "- - - a witness from Himself (Allah*) - - -". Muhammad. But was he a witness? - and in case from whom, as no god was involved in a tale with so much wrong like in the Quran? Or was he simply an impostor like so many other self proclaimed "prophets"?

081 11/17f: "- - - the Book of Moses before it (the Quran*) - - -". Comment YA1512: "- - - the Holy Quran which is compared to the original Revelation given to Moses - - -". The Quran and Islam claims that all prophets of the old got a book similar to the Quran (not necessarily identical in all details, but similar - and the difference cannot have been big, as they and the Quran all were copies of the "Mother Book" mentioned in 13/39, 43/4 and 85/21-21, and revered by the god in his Heaven). There are not many knowledgeable non-Muslims who would get the idea that Moses got something similar to the Quran. Islam needs strong proofs here. The same goes for all the other Jewish prophets, included Jesus. We have not heard about one non-Muslim who knows both those books, who believe in such a claim. (Most of them do not even laugh when this is mentioned - it is too far out even for laughing.)

082 11/17g: "- - - the Book of Moses - - -". According to the Bible Moses only got the 10 Commandments (2. Mos. 20/2-17) in writing (on 2 stone tablets - 2. Mos. 32/15 and 34/28). He in addition was told laws, which he himself wrote down. What he here wrote down sometimes was called "the Book of Covenance" and later became part of "the Books of Moses" (there are 5, not 1). But these Books of Moses according to science were not written until centuries later - perhaps around or before 500 BC (we have seen numbers varying from 800 BC to 300 BC, but somewhere between 800 BC and 500 BC are most likely). When Muhammad some places indicates that they were made by or given to Moses, this thus is wrong according to science.

083 11/17h: "- - - the Book of Moses - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

084 11/17i: "- - - a witness (Muhammad*) from Himself (Allah*) doth teach - - - a guide and a mercy (the Quran*)." Do read the complete Quran and especially the surahs from Medina - and read it with your brain and your other relevant knowledge engaged, not only tour eyes and your wishful thinking. How much of a reliable guide do you find among all the mistakes, contradictions, wrong/invalid logic, etc. do you find? - and how much mercy are you able to find? - real mercy, not glossy words. How much of a teacher of f.x. good morality and of mercy was really Muhammad?!

085 11/17j: "- - - (the teaching of Muhammad is*) a guide and a mercy - - -". Wrong. A teaching based on a book full of mistakes (or the other way around?) is neither a guide nor a mercy.

086 11/17k: "- - - (the Quran is*) a guide - - -". Often claimed in the Quran, but no claim becomes true even if it is repeated often. On the other hand "repeat a lie often enough, and people start believing it", to quote the infamous Joseph Goebbels. (It here may be symptomatic that it is not uncommon - f.x. Young - to compare the moral(?) code and the ideology of Islam and its Quran with just Nazism and other branches of Fascism.)

087 11/17l: "- - - mercy - - -". See 1/1a above.

088 11/17m: "- - - those of the Sects that reject it (the Quran*) - - -". Already at the time of Muhammad there were persons who lost faith in his teachings and left the religion - even rather prominent persons.

089 11/17n: "- - - the Fire - - -". Hell.

090 11/17o: "- - - the Fire will be their (non-Muslims'*) - - - meeting-place". See 3/77b above.

091 11/17p: "- - - the Fire will be their (non-Muslims'*) promised meeting-place". No promise from Allah - positive or negative - has any value unless he exists and in addition is a god.

092 11/17q: “Be not in doubt thereof (the Truth – the Quran – from Allah*))”. Wrong. The Quran is so full of mistakes, etc., that it is utterly naïve not to doubt.

093 11/17r: “- - - the Truth from thy Lord (Allah*) - - - “. Either it is a mistake that the Quran is from an omniscient god, or it is a mistake that Allah is omniscient. Too much is wrong in the book.

094 11/17s: "- - - the Truth - - -". See 2/2b above.

095 11/17t: "- - - yet many among men do not believe!" Not very strange, at least not among persons having enough knowledge and intelligence to see at least some of all the mistakes, etc. in the Quran, and also to see the difference between a claimed good and benevolent god and a war and hate god.

096 11/18a: "Who doth more wrong than those who invent a lie against Allah?" But what if the Quran is made up - is it a lie against Allah? - and is it still a lie against Allah if he in reality is no god, but only a pagan superstition taken over by Muhammad (Muhammad took over the main pagan god al-Lah, called him Allah, said he was real, but that all other gods were made up, except Yahweh, whom he claimed - as always without proofs - was just another name for Allah).

097 11/18b: (A11/33 – in the 2008 edition A35): “They (sinners at the Day of Doom*) will be turned back to the presence of their Lord (Allah*) and the witnesses will say - - -.” But who are the witnesses? Many or most Muslim scholars think it refers to the reporting angles that stay with each human and note down everything the person does. Others – like an authority like Ibn Abbas – said it meant the prophets who according to the Quran will be called forth to give witness on the Day of Doom. What is the right answer, nobody knows – the book does not make this clear.

098 11/18c: "- - - witnesses - - -" Why do Allah arrange a “court” and why the witnesses, and why the writing down - in this case and in some other cases in the Quran? If Allah is omniscient, he knows everything and this all is just theatre – a farce. Or is he not omniscient? Why does he need witnesses?

But it may be an efficient tale to tell followers on Earth if they are not trained in thinking. And these variants of course also are in the Arab text, as the relevant word(s) there has/have more than one meaning.

099 11/18d: "- - - the Curse of Allah - - -". What is it worth if Allah is something from the dark forces (he is not a god if he is behind the Quran - too much is wrong)? - and what is it worth if Allah is a fiction from a sick brain (f.x. TLF - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy - like modern science think)? - and what is it worth if Allah just was a fiction in a human brain? (Religious fiction has many a time made a good platform of power for a man or a group.)

100 11/18e: "- - - those who do wrong". Normally one of Muhammad's many superiority/inferiority inducing names for non-Muslims.

101 11/18f: "- - - do wrong". Beware that when the Quran uses expressions like this it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

102 11/19a: "Those who would hinder (men) from the path of Allah - - -". This was in 621 AD and may refer to the trouble Muslims had with the ruling class in Mecca.

103 11/19b: "Those who would hinder (men) from the path of Allah - - - these were they who denied the Hereafter". Some of them may have denied a next life altogether. But religions with a next life were well known, and nothing strange. But the difference was that Muhammad claimed you would be resurrected in body - piece for piece and atom for atom (but as a young adult) - and this was difficult for many to believe.

104 11/19c: "Those (non-Muslims*) who would hinder (men) from the path of Allah and would seek in it something crocked - - -." M. Asad (A11/35 - 11/38 in the 2008 English edition) tells that the Quran her implies that "belief in resurrection, Allah's judgment and a life in the hereafter is here postulated as the only valid and lasting source of human morality".

A most illuminating piece of information, because all your good deeds in this case is motivated only from: "What merit can I gain with Allah?" There is an ocean between this and NT: Help your fellow humans from love or at least empathy and because he/they need help - and gain merit in Heaven on top. One hidden reason why so few of the help and aid NGOs originated in Muslim area? - why Islam had to be forced into abolishing slavery? etc.? Allah and Yahweh the same god? - only possible to believe if you strongly want to believe it and overlook lots of facts.

Remember that the foundation under all inter-human real moral codes is: "Do onto others like you want others do onto you". Read the Quran and look for things which do not fit this rule, and you will find too much.

###105 11/19d: "(See 11/19c just above*) - - - belief in resurrection, Allah's judgment and a life in the hereafter is here postulated as the only valid and lasting source of human morality". Look at this sentence and think it over. What deep truths does it divulge about Muhammad, about the Quran, and about Islam - even today? - and about the ethics, value of empathy, and the moral of those three?

106 11/20a: "They (opponents to Islam*) will in no wise frustrate (His (Allah's*) design on earth - - -". Once again the predestination: None can change Allah's predestined plans.

107 11/20b: "- - - (His (Allah's*) design) on earth - - -". Only fantasy unless Allah exists and is a being with supernatural powers - good or bad.

108 11/20c: "- - - protectors (gods*) besides Allah - - -". Except for in Arabia where the pagans had gods beside al-Lah (not Allah, but the original pagan god al-Lah whom Muhammad took over and renamed Allah*), no other places had gods besides Allah/al-Lah. They simply did not believe in this god and had their own - and if the Quran's claim that its god was for the entire world, the god had known that this expression was wrong. But by repeating and repeating it, Muhammad gave a picture of a god known all over - or at least had been known all over, but with competition from local (false) gods. Good psychology as long as the listeners accepts anything in blind belief.

109 11/20d: "Their (non-Muslims negative to Muhammad*) penalty will be doubled!" See 3/77b above.

110 11/20e: "They (negative non-Muslims*) lost their power to hear, and they did not see!" But maybe that was just what they did - understood that something was very wrong.

111 11/21a: "They (non-Muslims*) are the ones who have lost their own souls - - -". The Quran is full of loose claims and as loose statements - and like all the others of any consequence also this one is not documented or in any other way proved. It even may be wildly wrong if Allah does not exist or if he exists, but belong to the dark forces. And it definitely is wrong if there somewhere is a real god - f.x. Yahweh - who rules the claimed afterlife.

112 11/21b: "- - - the fancies (invented gods*) they (non-Muslims*) they invented have left them in the lurch!" But if also Allah is invented, will the Muslims also be left in the lurch? After all there never was a proof for Allah - only demands for and glorious words about blind faith, just like in ever so many religions - and blind faith has cheated many a person. After all it is clear that no god made the Quran - too much is wrong in it. What then if f.x. there is a next life ruled by a benevolent god, not a war god like the claimed Allah - where will Muslims in case end?

*113 11/22a: “Without a doubt, these (the non-Muslims*) are the very ones who will lose most in the Hereafter!” All the mistakes, wrong logic, etc. in the Quran make it very clear it is not from a god. Partly because of that – and this alone is a 100% proof for that something is wrong – there is every reason to doubt Islam is a genuine religion. And if it is a made up religion – and Islam will have a tough job proving the opposite – there is every reason to doubt Muslims will fare any better than others in a possible next life. On the contrary: If there do exist a real religion and if this is run by a good god, the Muslims will not fare well if they have lived according to the Quran’s horrific ethics, and even worse moral code, inhuman treatment of fellow - but non-Muslim - humans, etc.

*114 11/22b: “Without a doubt, these (the non-Muslims*) are the very ones who will lose most in the Hereafter!” A good claim psychologically to hear for his followers - but like everything else with Muhammad only a not documented claim.

115 11/23a: "But those who believe (in the Quran*) - - - they will be the Companions of (Paradise*) - - -". May be true - but only if the Quran is a message from a god, and in addition tells the full truth and only the truth. Also see 11!22b above.

116 11/23b: "- - - righteousness - - - ". Beware that when the Quran uses expressions like this it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

117 11/23c: "- - - Companions of the Garden (Paradise*) - - -". = The ones bound for Paradise. See 19/9f above.

118 11/23d: "- - - t0 dwell therein (in Paradise) for aye!" But verse 11/108c below may indicate that it may be is not forever.

119 11/24a: “These two kinds (of men (non-Muslims vs. Muslims*) may be compared to the blind and deaf, and those who can see and hear well. Are they equal when compared?” Of course not – the Muslims are much better (at least that is the wanted answer). But see 11/24b just below.

120 11/24b: “These two kinds (of men (non-Muslims vs. Muslims*) may be compared to the blind and deaf, and those who can see and hear well. Are they equal when compared?” On the other hand: Most Muslims are totally blind and deaf to any fact they do not want to see or hear - who is the best, such a Muslim or a person able to see and understand that something is deeply wrong in the Quran and in Islam?

121 11/24c: "Will ye (people*) not then take heed?" = Will you not accept that Islam is the best?. But is a claimed religion with no proof for its god, and with a "holy" book which itself by means of all its errors proves it is not from a god, and on top of all with a partly horrible moral code, "the best"? - yes, is it any good at all?

122 11/25-49: The story about Noah is told several times in the Quran - the Quran is not very good literature in this way, too. The only known older source for information (?) about Noah, is the Bible - mainly 1. Mos. 5/28 to 9/28. Some of what is told about him in the Quran, is like in the Bible, some is a dramatizing of what is told about him in the Bible, some has little or nothing to do with what is told about him in the Bible - and some conflicts with what is told in the Bible. As Muhammad had no divine connections - no god was ever involved in a book of a quality like the Quran with all its mistakes, etc. and all its deplorable quality as literature - and thus had no sources of information that way, from where did he get this new information?

123 11/25-26: Noah had a clear warning from Allah. These details are not from the Bible. And science has found not one single trace from Islam older than 610 AD. Not to mention: Also Islam has been unable to prove anything or any traces from its religion older than 610 AD.

124 11/25a: "We (here claimed to be Allah*) sent Noah to his People (with a mission) - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

125 11/25b: "We (here claimed to be Allah*) sent Noah to his People (with a mission) - - -". This is not from the Bible - in the Bible the people were so bad that Yahweh just made his decision and then asked Noah to build his ark.

126 11/25c: "I (Noah*) have come to you with a Clear Warning - - -". Noah here mimics Muhammad - like the Quran tells more or less all claimed prophets in the book does. Whether the tales are true or not, they have the effect that Muhammad's words seems to be normal for prophets, and thus "tell" that Muhammad was a normal prophet.

127 11/26a: "That ye (the people of Noah*) serve none but Allah - - -". Contradicted by the Bible, which says that the involved god was Yahweh. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

128 11/26b: "That ye (the people of Noah*) serve none but Allah: verily, I do fear for you the Penalty of a Grievous Day". See 11/25c above.

129 11/26c: "- - - verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

130 11/26d: "- - - the Penalty of a Grievous Day - - -". See 3/77b above.

131 11/26e: "- - - a Grievous Day - - -". = The Day of Doom.

132 11/27a: Noah got similar reception like Muhammad in Mecca = Muhammad's reception is normal (this was before he gained power) for a prophet = Muhammad is a normal prophet. Good for his few followers to "know". (There are many stories like this in the Quran - all prophets are more or less parallel stories to Muhammad's up to the time when the verse was told to his followers.)

133 11/27b: "But the Chiefs of the Unbelievers among his People said - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

134 11/27c: "But the Chiefs of the Unbelievers among his People said: 'We see (in) thee (Noah*) nothing but a man like ourselves - - -". See 11/12c above.

135 11/27d: "- - - nor do we (Noah's contemporaries*) see that any follow thee (Noah*) but the meanest among us - - -". Which means Noah had followers according to the Quran. Which again means they were taken on board the ark, like mentioned in 11/40 - a prophet could not leave good Muslims to drown. In the Bible only Noah and his family - 8 persons - were on board. AND NB: In 11/40 also the Quran tells that only the animals + not even the whole of Noah's family was to enter the ark. The followers were ditched?

But by adding poor followers, Muhammad got the picture of Noah's situation to be a close parallel to his own in 621 AD. Ergo poor followers in the beginning were a sign for Muhammad being a real prophet. Psychologically a good story to tell Muhammad's follower They are so obvious to see, that we only point to some of them.

136 11/28a: “- - - Clear Sign - - -“. In this case it is said to be Noah who was speaking, and according to the Quran Noah was a devoted Muslim - - - but there never was a clear sign/proof for anything concerning Allah – not anything at all is proved. (This is one of the main reasons why blind belief is demanded and glorified by Muhammad and by Islam).

137 11/28b: "- - - Mercy - - -". See 1/1a above.

138 11/29a: "I (in this case Noah*) ask you for no wealth in return (for my preaching*) - - -". This is identical to one of Muhammad's slogans or claims. Muhammad claimed to be of an old line of prophets which included among others Noah, and then his words gained more weight if the old prophets experienced and said the same as he - an "indication" for that he was what he claimed. That he in reality demanded much wealth (for bribes) and power "for Allah" and lots of women, is another story. This verse also is one of the many which has no similarity with what is told in the Bible.

139 11/29b: "- - - verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

140 11/29c: "- - - ignorant ones - - -". Persons not knowing or not wanting Muhammad and his new religion. The Quran - and at least partly Islam - is a bit peculiar here; When it comes to knowledge or lack of such, the only thing which really counts for the evaluation of somebody's knowledge, is their knowledge about (and acceptance of) Islam.

141 11/29d: "- - - ignorant ones - - -". There is an irony here, as the non-Muslims often were a lot more knowledgeable than the Muslims. This grew even more clear as the uneducated hordes from the deserts started to attack old cultures like the Greek/Roman and the Persian ones. And also later the non-Muslims in Muslim areas made up more than their share of the educated people for most kinds of science..

#142 11/30a: "Who will help me (Noah*) against Allah if I drove them (the believers in Allah - 11/29*) away?" Contradicted by the Bible - there only Noah's nearest family were believers and could enter the ark. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

143 11/30b: "Will ye (non-Muslims*) not take heed?" See 11/24c above.

144 11/31a: "I (in this case Noah*) tell you not that with me are the Treasures of Allah, nor do I know what is hidden (Muhammad was unable to foretell the future - and strangely so was Noah according to the Quran*) - - -". The main topic similar to 11/29 above.

##145 11/31b: "- - - nor do I (Muhammad*) know what is hidden - - -". = I do not see the future = I cannot make prophesies. And a man who cannot make prophesies is no real prophet. (There are made other definitions for a prophet, but how many are willing to accept that a person unable to make prophesies is a real prophet? In the really old Israel the title even was "a seer" not "a prophet".) Muhammad just "borrowed" this weighty and glorious title, and may be needed one more alibi for that prophets could lack the ability to make prophesies. (But what kind of prophet is one such who is unable to make prophesies - and on top of all never is able to produce a single proof for a connection to a god?)

146 11/31c: "- - - nor claim I (Muhammad*) to be an angel". Which was as well, because the real and historical Muhammad - in contrast to the glorified picture in Islam - was very far from being an angel, this even in Islamic literature (skip the glorification and read his demands, incitements and deeds, etc. and you get the true Muhammad).

147 11/31d: "- - - those whom your (non-Muslims'*) eyes despise - - -". Muslims.

148 11/31e: "- - - Allah knoweth best what is in their (peoples'*) souls - - -". See 2/233 above.

149 11/31f: "- - - indeed - - -". See 2/2b above.

150 11/31g: "- - - wrongdoers - - -". One of Muhammad's many negative names for non-Muslims.

151 11/32a: "They (Noah's people*) said: - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

152 11/32b: "They (Noah's people*) said: 'O Noah! - - -". See 11/12c above.

153 11/32c: "- - - bring upon us (non-Muslims*) what thou (Noah*) what thou threaten us with - - -". = Bring us proof. Like so many other stories about prophets or claimed prophets in the Quran an exact parallel to Muhammad's situation, and thus a "confirmation" of that Muhammad was a prophet like the old ones. But Muhammad never was able to prove anything - in contrast to f.x. Noah.

154 11/33a: "Truly - - -". See 2/2b above.

155 11/33b: "- - - Allah - - -". As mentioned: According to the Bible Noah's god was Yahweh, not Allah.

156 11/34a: (A11/53 – in 2008 edition A56): “Of no profit will be my (Muhammad’s*) counsel to you, much as I desire to give you (good) counsel, if it be that Allah willeth to leave you astray - - -.” Literal translation of the Arab word “yughwiyakum”: “that He (Allah*) shall cause you to err.” This then should be Allah’s exact words. But even in Islam one tries to find out what Allah really means. Al- Hasan al-Basri tells it means: “- - - that He shall punish you for your sins.” Tabari: “- - - that He shall destroy you - - -.” Al-Jubba’i: “- - - that He shall deprive you of all good - - -.” What does it help if the text is the very words of Allah, if they are too unclear to enable even Arab-speaking top scholars agree on what exactly does it mean?

157 11/34b: "Of no profit will be my (Noah's*) councel to you (his non-Muslim (!) opponents), much as I desire to give you (good) councel, if it be that Allah willeth to leave you astray - - -". The predestination again - if Allah has decided that you are to end in Hell, nothing and nobody can change your fate.

158 11/34c: "- - - if it be that Allah willeth - - -". One of many sentences like this in the Quran - Muhammad telling (boasting?) about what Allah could do "if he only would". The only thing is that he never proved he "would". - or could?

159 11/34d: "He (Allah*) is your (people's*) Lord". Only if he exists and is a real god and a top god.

160 11/34e: "And to Him (Allah*) will ye (people*) return". Only if he exists, is a top god and the Quran also in other ways tells the full truth and only the truth about him.

161 11/35a: "Or they (Nosh's contemporaries*) say - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

162 11/35b: "He (Noah? Muhammad?*) has forged it?" Already then some people saw that things might be wrong. This always has been a suspicion. And if even Noah met the suspicion, it was easier for Muhammad's followers to tackle it.

163 11/35c: (A11/54 – in 2008 edition A11/57): In a new repetition of the story about Noah – it is repeated many times in the Quran – comes this: “Or do they (people*) say, ‘He has forged it?’ Say: ‘If I had forged it, on me were my sin! And I am free of the sins of which ye are guilty.” Does this refer to the story of Noah? – that he had forged that story? Or does it refer to the entire Quran? – or both? The disposition of the texts in the book is so bad with bits and pieces strewn around in a mix, and repetitions and repetitions of the same stories and arguments and conclusions, so anything is possible when it comes to the possibility to find loose bits of tale or argument at “funny” places. In this case Islam simply is at a loss to know what to believe. One tends to think the verse is a passage inserted in the story, and that Muhammad is talking both about the story of Noah and about the complete Quran (Ibn Kathir, Tabari). But it is impossible to know. Such “quoting in wrong context” or inserting of text where it does not belong, is very usual in the Quran – so usual that Islam use a special name for it: “A parenthetic inclusion” or similar. It is pretty confusing sometimes, and absolutely does not result in “a clear language easy to understand” – f.x. like here where it is impossible to be sure of exactly he is talking about. To say the least of it: Not a piece of good literature.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

####164 11/35d: "If I (Muhammad*) has forged it (the Quran*) on me were my sin! But if Muhammad forged the Quran or parts of it, the resulting sins were very far from being only hitting him. Very far from! They will hit each and every Muslim living according to a made up religion in case (and too many facts indicate that this is the reality.) Especially terrible if there somewhere exists a real god Muslims have been prohibited from looking for.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

###165 11/35e: "- - - sins - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code. The Quran's and Islam's definition of sins - and of not sins - sometimes differ not a little from in "normal" religions and in normal moral and ethical codes.

166 11/36a: "It was revealed to Noah: 'None of thy People will believe except those who believe already!". According to other places in the Quran this should mean the nearest family of Noah except one son and may be his wife (though if we understand correctly the Quran indicates she survived the flood, but all the same ended in Hell later) + "those who believe" in 11/29. Little of this is in accordance with the Bible.

167 11/36b: "So grieve no longer over their (evil) deeds". Quite a contrast to NT and its view on loosing people to Hell.

168 11/36c: "- - - (evil) deeds". Beware that when the Quran uses expressions like this, it is meant in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

169 11/37a: "- - - inspiration - - -". Muhammad claimed to get the verses of the Quran by inspiration, and it had value to impress on his followers that also older prophets got information that way, as it meant that Muhammad's claimed way of getting verses, was a normal one for prophets. The word is not used in such a connection anywhere in the Bible.

170 11/37b: "- - - address Me (Allah*) no (further) on behalf of those who are in sin - - -". What a contrast to "the lost lamb" and "the eleventh hour" in NT. Allah and Yahweh the same god? No. The new Covenant in NT similar to the Medina surahs? No - only if you are on a bad "acid" trip. The fundamental principles of the religions are too different - and we remind you one cannot blame a falsified Bible, as science clearly has proved that this never proved claim from Muhammad is wrong - - - and Islam has proved it even stronger.

#171 11/38: (A11/57 – in 2008 edition A11/61): Noah said to the surrounding people: “If you ridicule us now (for building the ark*), we (in our turn) can look down on you with ridicule likewise”. But according to Islam Noah was a prophet, and it is impossible to think that a prophet may be human enough to ridicule or scoffing anyone. Therefore the text must be wrong and in reality mean something else – yet another place where Islamic scholars say the text in the Quran must be wrong, though a small wrong this time. Noah must mean “ignorant” – “If you think us ignorant now, we think you ignorant who do not accept our story” to make a longer quotation short (Zamakhshari, Baghawi). Honestly it may be enough confusing to understand unclear text, but one also has to “mend” clear text Islam does not like.

172 11/39a: "- - - Penalty - - -". See 3/77b above.

173 11/39b: "- - - a Penalty lasting". = Hell.

##174 11/40a: (A11/58 – in 2008 edition A11/62): “- - - and the fountains of the earth gushed forth - - -.” Literal meaning (also see 11/40b just below) in the Arab text: “- - - the face of the earth boiled over - - -.” To quote “The Message of the Quran”: “This phrase has been subject to several conflicting interpretations.” - the literal meaning cannot be true. And it really is a confusing sentence, among other reasons because only liquids can boil. And to make the confusion complete, modern Islam even in 2008 once more resort to the filling up of the Mediterranean basin, which happened 4-5 million years ago – nearly at the time of the first traces of the first possible real forefathers of Homo Sapiens 5 – 6 million years ago, and LONG before Homo Sapiens (modern man) itself ever existed, not to mention some million years before a possible Noah a few thousand years ago. To be impolite: What the in Islam respected “The Message of the Quran” writes about this, is gobbledygook and as wrong and meaningless as that word. But when texts in the Quran are so confusing that even the top Islamic thinkers often are at a loss understanding and agreeing on what the texts really mean, and other times only agree that it cannot mean what it says – how then can Muslims repeat and repeat and repeat that everything in the Quran is clear and easy to understand, and demand to be believed?

And how can top learned men in Islam use so wrong facts – to seduce naïve and uneducated people? – that are so well known and so easy to check and even not too infrequently mentioned in media, and then demand to be believed when they claim to have written it in good faith? Especially so as it just is not the first – and neither the last – time they “bend” scientific and other facts to fit their wishes.

175 11/40b: "- - - and the fountains of the earth gushed forth (and made the flood for Noah*) - - -.” The Quran does not explicit say that the flood covered the entire world, and as there are no traces of such a flood found, many Muslims try to tell you that the flood only was regional. Not educated Muslims may honestly believe so, but the educated ones know that is one more untrue story – another al-Taqiyya or Kitman – because the Quran clearly tells that the Ark ended on a high mountain in Syria (Correction: Some sources say Syria, but Wikipedia that it lies in Anatolia in Turkey) , Mt. Al-Judi (11/44b), 2089 m high, something which demanded so high a level of water that it was physically impossible unless the flood was universal (the water had disappeared to non-flooded places if not). Perhaps 1ooo - 2ooo m above our sea level? - or more?

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

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

Also the filling up of the Black Sea a few thousand years ago cannot explain the Big Flood - not like that flood is described.

176 11/40c (YA1533): “- - - and the fountains of the earth gushed forth - - -.” But the Arab expression “far al tannur” has two literal meanings (see also 11/40a above): The one already mentioned and “- - - the oven (of Allah’s Wrath) boiled over - - -.” Which one do you like best? And is the language as clear as Islam claims?

**177 11/40d: “We (Allah*) said (to Noah*):’Embark therein (the ark*), of each kind (of animals*) two - male and female, and your family - - -”. The Quran says nothing about the size of the ark. But the Bible according to the scientific magazine Lexicon says nearly 200 m long, some 30 m wide and some 12 m high with 3 floors. That makes some 18000 square meters roughly speaking. (NIV tells 300 cubits long, 50 cubits wide and 30 cubits high = 140 m long, 23 m wide and 13.5 m high. With 3 floors that means some 9600 sq. m. only.) But there are much more than 10ooo kinds of “normal” animals, nearly 2ooo kinds of birds, and at least 10 million kinds of insects and other insect-like animals, and easily a million other small animals – like slugs, worms, etc. There simply would not be enough space for so many, not to mention 2 of each. In addition it would be the question of food for all the animals. The Quran says nothing about how long time the voyage lasted, but according to the Bible it lasted about one year (1. Mos. 7/11 and 1. Mos. 8/13-14). That would take one heck of a lot of food for so many animals - and how did they f.x. store the meat for the carnivores, or live insects for some spiders, etc.? All that food would take up a lot of space - much more than the animals themselves. Impossible in that “small” boat. And on top of that, there was the question of special food for special animals - eucalyptus leaves for the koala bears f.x. It further is likely that Noah’s home was in the south of Iraq (if he ever existed) according to science - - - and then there is the question where they found f.x. reindeer, polar bears, caribous, condors, lamas, pumas, kangaroos, orangutans, koalas, etc., etc., just to mention a few. And there is the question on who were feeding and giving water to all these animals, not to mention who kept it all clean - the family of Noah after all was rather small (8 according to the Bible).

Also the laws of nature tell that one pair of each would not be enough to establish all the animal races - no DNA variety. And the DNA variety science has found, talks about very different lengths of time since most animal groups were just a few ones (so-called "bottle-necks") and few if any two animals shows "bottle-necks" at the same time - and not one shows a "bottle-neck" 5ooo-7ooo years ago (well, perhaps the cheetah). The story simply is not true. There is a small chance that a man like Noah once lived and survived a flood big enough for him to seem to cover the entire world - f.x. he survived with his family and his cattle, etc. Science knows about one or two really huge floods at roughly the right time. But everything is in an after all much smaller scale. And not like told by a presumed omniscient god in the Quran (or for that case in the Bible).

Muslims try to reduce the problems by telling that Noah only should bring two of each of domesticated cattle - but that is not what the Quran says, and besides: How did all the other animals survive if the flood was universal? - and the DNA variety? - and the missing "bottle-necks"? But they further tell that it just was a big, but regional flood - which is not said in the Quran, but it as mentioned also is not said it was worldwide (but see the point about Mt. Al-Judi - 11/44b). And then some make a real blunder - or try cheating - because what follows below is not well known by most people, though well known to the more educated ones, and thus cheating of the “rank and file” is easy: F.x. “The Message of the Quran”, certified by a top Muslim university (Al-Azhar Al-Sharif Islamic Research Academy, Cairo) tells:

"The flood must have been the filling up of the Mediterranean Sea" - without mentioning that this happened (as mentioned; when the Gibraltar Strait opened) some 4 - 5 million years ago or more, and very long before modern man existed.

All this also without mentioning that the filling up took many years - may be as much as 100 or more - as the opening was small in the beginning and the stream also slowed down before the basin was full. Near what is now Israel and Egypt the water rose just one or some meters a year - no terribly rough flooding, like described in the Quran (f.x. 11/42).

How could the slow filling up of that sea give a flash flood in what is now Iraq, where this is supposed to have happened? - in or near south Iraq somewhere.

Not to mention how could the filling up of the Mediterranean Sea make the Ark end up on the 2089 m high Mt. Al-Judi? (11/44b).

May be they mix it up with the filling up of the Black Sea (also mentioned by Muslims)? But also that took time (months or a few years) - and was far from Iraq. This happened after the last ice age that stopped 10ooo – may be as late as under a warm period (even less ice) some 5700 years ago if we remember correctly. The time may be ok, but then either Noah or the story in case has travelled – and also this filling up cannot explain the weather and the waves and the landing on Mt. al-Judi.(11/44b).

There also is a very speculative theory about an asteroid or something falling into the Indian Ocean. But it is a very speculative theory only built on old legends and a hint of Chinese history. In China there is a tale about a huge flood late in the reign of Empress Nu Wa, and a corresponding one in India that connect it to a very rare planet constellation. This alignment of the planets happened 10. May 2807 BC, and if everything is true the big flood started that date - may be connected to the not documented but claimed landing of an asteroid in the Indian Ocean. But the theory is very speculative.(Popular scientific magazine "Discover" 11/2007).

Finally there is the extreme, but little known flood in Mesopotamia – now approximately Iraq – some 5200 years ago. It may easily explain the flood itself, and if this was an extraordinary “ordinary” flood, it also may explain the weather. But even if big, it was a local happening. (But then the Quran does not directly claim it was covering the entire world – but on the other hand see the point about Mt. Al-Judi - 11/44b).

And as mentioned there is the conundrum of the tall mountain which does not fit the Muslim “explanations” about a “local” flood: The Quran claims the ark stranded on a mountain in Syria (Mount al-Judi – earlier named Qardu (11/44) - not Ararat in Turkey). For the ark to have stranded on a 2089 m high mountain, the flood had to be universal – if not the water had streamed away to empty, lower places – elementary knowledge of physics. No Muslim claiming a local flood, ever mention this - the main thing is to gloss over mistakes in the Quran to make the religion seem sound, not to find out what is true. This in spite of the ominous future for all Muslims if the Quran is not from a god and thus Islam is a made up religion - not to mention if there somewhere else exists a god who would not like their moral code etc. (not many gods will do - too immoral - but after all perhaps some of the dark or bloody ones.

For a university to back a bluff like the flood = filling up the Mediterranean Sea, etc. is dishonest and tells something, especially when they "forget" 11/44 (11/44b) and other verses and Mt. al-Judi which is a well known "fact" to religiously educated Muslims - the professors at a university have to know such facts, and know it is wrong, or at least check if they were not sure. The way the Mediterranean was filled up is a well known fact among also Muslims with relevant education, included professors at the big universities. Similar claims in 23/27 – 11/40.

178 11/40e: "Embark therein (in the ark*) - - - (included*) the Believers". This tells that not only Noah and his family were on board, but also some followers. This contradicts the Bible, where only Noah and his family were there - included all his 3 sons (in the Quran one is lost). On the other hand, by introducing some poor followers (11/27) it was possible for Muhammad to make Noah's situation before the flood a parallel to his own in Mecca in 621 AD when this surah was released, and thus indicate that Muhammad's situation was rather normal for prophets.

179 11/41a: "- - - in the name of Allah - - -". Contradicted by the Bible, which clearly states that Noah's god was Yahweh, not Allah. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

180 11/41b: "- - - be sure - - -". See 2/2b above.

181 11/41c: "- - - (Allah*) is, be sure, Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful." See 1/1a above.

Then the god started his punishment of the sinners:

#182 11/42a: “So the Ark floated with them on waves (towering) like mountains, and Noah called out to his son (who was at the shore*) - - -”. When a boat is floating among waves like mountains, it is not possible to communicate with anyone ashore. Muhammad, living in a desert, may not have known. But no god had made a mistake like this - telling they could communicate. That kind of waves are too noisy, and so is the wind which normally accompanies that kind of seas, plus you both - and especially the boat - have to stay far from the shore not to be taken by the waves and smashed against the mentioned shore. Dramatic fairy tale with wrong facts. Contradicts anything known for anyone who has ever been close to the roaring sea.

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

183 11/42b: Noah cried to his son, "who had separated himself from the rest", from the ark floating among huge waves: "Embark with us - - -". It is not possibly possible to get from a shore to a ship in that kind of weather. Any god had known, but desert Arabs likely not. Who made the Quran?

184 11/42c: Noah cried to his son, "who had separated himself from the rest", from the ark floating among huge waves: "Embark with us - - -". This contradicts the Bible, which tells that all the 3 sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth (numbers or names here not given in the Quran) entered the ark (1. Mos. 7/13)

185 11/43a: “The son (of Noah*) replied - - -“. In that kind of weather neither a call nor a reply was possible – the roaring of the wind and the crashing of the waves are far too noisy even if a short distance had been possible. In addition you have the effect of the wind “blowing away” the sound of your voice. Any god had known - then who made the Quran? Also see 11/42b above.

186 11/43b: “The son (of Noah*) replied - - -“. A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

187 11/43c: “The son (of Noah*) replied: 'I will betake myself to some mountain - - -“. How could this end up in the claimed "Mother Book" (of which the Quran is a copy according to Muhammad) billions of years before it was said? One more of the many texts or quotes in the Quran which could not have been reliably written into the claimed "Mother Book" (13/39b, 43/4b+c, 85/21-22) in Heaven (of which the Quran is claimed to be a copy) eons ago, unless predestination was and is 100% like the Quran claims many places (if you look, you will find more cases than we mention - we only mention some of the obvious ones). If man has free will - even partly only (an expression some Muslims use to flee from the problem full predestination contra free will for man (and also contra that there is no meaning in praying to Allah for help, if everything already is predestined in accordance with a plan "nobody and nothing can change" - a problem which Muslims seldom mention), and an expression no Muslim we have met has ever defined) - and can change his mind, full and reliable clairvoyance about the future, not to mention the distant future, is impossible even for a god, as the man always could/can change his mind or his words once more, in spite of Islam's claims. There are at least 3 reasons - 2 of them unavoidable - for this:

When something is changed, automatically the future is changed.

The laws of chaos will be at work and change things, if even a tiny part is made different.

The so-called "Butterfly Effect"; "a butterfly flapping its wing in Brazil may cause a storm in China later on" or "a small bump may overturn a big load".

This that Allah predestines everything like the Quran claims and states many places, is an essential point, because besides totally removing the free will of man (in spite of the Quran's claims of such free will, or some Muslims' adjusted "partly free will for man" - to adjust the meanings where the texts in the Quran are wrong, is typical for Islam and its Muslims) - it also removes the moral behind Allah's punishing (and rewarding) persons for what they say and do - Allah cannot reward or punish people for things he himself has forced them to say or do, and still expect to be believed when he (Muhammad?) claims to be a good or benevolent or moral or just god. Also see 2/51b and 3/24a above.

And as mentioned above, full predestination also makes prayers to Allah meaningless, as everything already is predestined according to Allah's Plan - a Plan which no prayer ("nobody and nothing") can change.

188 11/43d: “The son (of Noah*) replied - - -“. This conversation contradicts both the Bible and what was physically possible - it is ever so obvious that Muhammad never had been close to a shore in a storm with a roaring sea. No god had made a blunder like this. Then who made the Quran?

189 11/43e: "Noah said - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

190 11/43f: "- - - the Command of Allah - - -". Contradicted by the Bibles, which says the involved god was Yahweh, not Allah. (Actually much/most of the Quran's tales about Noah and the big flood are not from the Bible, and not a little directly contradicts the Bible. This in spite of the fact that the Bible was and is the only known source for information(?) about that flood - well, Muslims claim he got information from Allah, but as the Quran with all its mistakes, etc. is from no god, this claim is not correct. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

191 11/43g: "- - - He (Allah*) hath mercy - - -". See 1/1a above.

192 11/43h: “- - - and the son (of Noah*) was among those who was overwhelmed in the Flood”. (Another place the Quran also tells that Nosh’s wife also ended in Hell, though not yet). Contradiction:

21/76: “We (Allah*) listened to his (Noah’s*) (prayers) and delivered him and his family from great distress”. His family: All saved. But all the same his son drowned. (And he only had 3 according to the Bible) The mathematics and the logic are difficult. Also a contradiction of the Bible: In the Bible he lost no son.

193 11/43i: “- - - and the son (of Noah*) was among those who was overwhelmed in the Flood”. Contradicted by the Bible, which tells that all the 3 sons of Noah survived. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

194 11/44a: “O, earth swallow up thy water - - -“. This is from the big flood of Noah. For Earth to swallow that much water is physically impossible. If the flood was local like some Muslims like to tell, the water could go to the sea. But the fact that the Quran tells the ark ended at the 2089 m high Mt. al-Judi (11/44b - earlier Mt. Qardu according to Muhammad Asad: “The Message of the Quran”) in Syria (According to Wikipedia it lies in Anatolia in Turkey) indicates that it was something really big – the water cannot reach high up on a tall mountain in Syria, unless the water level is roughly the same all over the world. It was and is impossible for Earth to swallow that amount of water. (We may also add that science has found no traces from that big a flood, which they should have done if it happened just some millennia ago.)

##195 11/44b: "The Ark rested on Mount Al-Judi (in present Syria* (According to Wikipeda it lays in Anatolia in Turkey)) - - -". This is a contradiction to the Bible, who says Mt. Ararat in present Turkey, but this does not matter much. What matters is that it is said to end on a mountain (11/44b) which is 2089 m high. (According to Wikipedia Mt. al-Judi lies in Anatolia in Tuykey). This means that a local flood was impossible - with a local flood that deep, the water had streamed away faster than the Niagara to lower places without water. And as Syria (and also Turkey) is in the middle of Islamic area, nobody knows this better has the Muslims. All the same you meet "serious" claims for a regional flood - or hopeless stories from university level like the filling up of the Mediterranean Sea - which maximally could fill up to the normal sea level (and according to Islam (YA comment 1531) Noah lived somewhere in or near the Tigris Valley "800 to 900 miles (some 1300-1500 km*) from the Persian Gulf". When you read Islamic literature even of claimed high quality, you slowly - or not so slowly - become disillusioned when it comes to the reliability of the claimed top writers: It seems that the main thing is to make the Quran seem true, and then they adjust reality a little here and a little there. But like so often when one makes up "facts", facts have a tendency to live their own life - here you see "facts" which are wrong, there you see "facts" which contradicts each other, etc. And when you have met enough such al-Taqiyyas (lawful lies) and Kitmans (lawful half-truths), your belief in their reliability starts to corrode - this even more so as you know mostly it is information they either know are wrong (f.x. that the slow filling up of the Mediterranean Sea some million years before modern man existed could bring the Ark from the Tigris Valley and land it on a high mountain in Turkey) or information which is easy to check if they really do not know it - f.x.: "When did the formerly dry desert basin which became the Mediterranean Sea fill up?". You simply have to check all claims they make - too many of them are wrong.

But what is the reliability of a religion which accepts the use of lies "if necessary", and which has to rely on lies to make their stories, claims and religious dogmas seem - not be, but seem - true? A religion which on top of all only is built on a book which itself proves it is not from a god, and a book told only by a single man of doubtful moral quality believing in the use of dishonesty, cheating, broken words, etc., a man liking power and riches for more power and women, and a man who on top of all this again never was able to prove a comma of his central claims.

196 11/44c: "Away with those who do wrong!". A good slogan for Muhammad - you meet it here and there in the Quran in different wordings.

197 11/44d: "- - - these who do wrong!" One of Muhammad's detest-inducing names for non-Muslims.

199 11/45a: "And Noah called upon his Lord, and said - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

200 11/45b: "And Noah called upon his Lord, and said: '- - - Surely my son (the one claimed lost in the big flood*) is of my family!'". This definitely is not from the Bible - according to the Bible Noah lost no son in the flood. And as Noah according to the Bible (the Quran as normal has few facts, and does not mention the number of sons) only had 3 sons, the loss of one would be so great, that it should have been mentioned.

201 11/45c: "- - - true - - -". See 2/2b above,

202 11/45d: "- - - Thou (here indicated to be Allah*) are the Justest of Judges". See 1/1a and study the immoral parts of the Quran's moral code plus the unjust and/or immoral parts of sharia, and see if you agree.

203 11/46a: (Allah said): “O Noah! - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

##204 11/46b: (Allah said): “O Noah! He (your son*) is not of thy family: for his conduct is unrighteous.” This is one of the inhuman points in the Quran and in Islam. If my - I who write just this - son had done something wrong, I might have scolded him and may be punished him - but he still would be my son.

205 11/46c: (A11/65 – in 2008 edition A11/68): (Allah said): “O Noah! He (your son*) is not of thy family: for his conduct is unrighteous.” This is if the Arab words “innahu ‘amal ghayr Salih” is meant to relate to the unnamed son of Noah (according to the Bible he only had 3 – Shem, Ham and Japheth) (Zamakhshari). But Noah had just made a prayer to his god – Allah according to the Quran – for his son, and if the mentioned words are meant to relate to that prayer, the meaning changes to something like: “Verily, this prayer is unrighteous conduct of you” (Razi, Tabari). Clear and easy and not to misunderstand? And these variants of course also are in the Arab text, as the relevant word(s) there has/have more than one meaning.

207 11/46e: "- - - the ignorant - - -". One more of Muhammad's negative names for non-Muslims. (If you did not know and accept Muhammad and his Quran, you were an ignorant no matter how much other knowledge you had.)

208 11/47a: "Noah said - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

209 11/47b: Noah has just lost one of his 3 sons, but says: "O my Lord (here claimed to be Allah*)! I do seek refuge with Thee, lest I ask Thee for what I have no knowledge. And unless Thou forgive me (for praying for his son's life*) and have Mercy with me, I should indeed be lost!" Being humans, we refrain from any comments on this verse.

210 11/47b: "- - - (Allah*) have Mercy - - -". See 1/1a above.

211 11/47c: "- - - indeed - - -". See 2/2b above.

212 11/48a: "O Noah!" A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

213 11/48b: "- - - Peoples (non-Muslims*) whom We (Allah*) shall grant their (some people*) pleasures (for a time), but in the end will a grievous Penalty reach them from Us (Allah*)". Muhammad's standard explanation for why non-Muslims often had a better life than Muslims: It was/is Allah's unfathomable decision - but take comfort; he will punish them in the end and you will come out on top. There is much comfort to be found in such a belief, especially for small souls.

214 11/48c: "- - - whom We (Allah*) shall grant their (some people*) pleasures (for a time) - - -". Allah predestines ("for a time").

215 11/48d: "- - - grievous Penalty - - -". See 3/77b above.

216 11/49a: "- - - stories from the Unseen - - -". All too many of the stories in the Quran are not from the unseen, but from apocryphal (made up) stories, folklore, legends, and fairy tales (f.x. the name Luqman - the title of surah 31 - is the name of a wise man from several old Arab fairy tales (a fact never mentioned by Muslims)), and then "adjusted" and sometimes - like the story of Noah - made more dramatic to fit Muhammad's new religion, where Muhammad with a straight face told is followers that this was the pure truth from his god. Also see 11/49d below. But would an omniscient god stoop to use such tales as basis for his religion? - tales which to a large degree even were not true?!! Who in reality made the Quran?

217 11/49b: "- - - stories from the Unseen which We (Allah*) have revealed unto thee (Muhammad*) - - -". Muhammad her claims these are stories are not known to man - at least not the details - but that Allah knows them - Allah knows also what man does not see. (It f.x. is a way of playing safe if you know you may have to claim that other stories about the same history are falsified.) And that Allah then has revealed some of them to Muhammad.

218 11/49c: "- - - stories - - - which We (Allah*) have revealed unto thee (Muhammad*) - - -". No omniscient god would need to reveal legends and fairy tales known in Arabia at the time of Muhammad, just a little twisted to make the tales fit Muhammad's new religion.

219 11/49d: "- - - neither thou (Muhammad*) nor thy People knew them (the stories Muhammad told)". Wrong for most of them. Most of the stories you find in the Quran are from tales, legends, and fairy tales well known in Arabia at the time of Muhammad - we even know the exact source for many of them. Even the Biblical stories mostly are not from the Bible, but from legends, fairy tales and apocryphal (made up) scriptures. What people may be "knew not" were the twists to make the fit Muhammad's teaching - and perhaps something made up for the occasion once in a seldom while. Also see 11/49a above.

220 11/49e: “So persevere patiently: for the End is for those who are righteous.” The Muslims will win in the end if they keep fighting.

221 11/49f: "- - - the End - - -". Her it means Paradise.

222 11/49g: "- - - the End is for those who are righteous". Is it then for Muslims? Parts of the Quran is not much righteous (though most Muslims are unable to see this, as they are brought up believing this and this is glorious.

223 11/49h: "- - - those who are righteous". Here intended to mean the Muslims".

224 11/49i: "- - - righteous". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

225 11/50a: "- - - the 'Ad People - - -". A powerful tribe in the very old Arabia according to old Arab folklore - they may have existed (before Moses in case, because the Quran claims he mentioned Hud). Muhammad claimed their demise was because they sinned against Allah.

226 11/50b: "- - - the 'Ad People - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

227 11/50c: "- - - Hud - - -". A claimed prophet in Arabia (to the 'Ad people). You meet him nowhere outside the Quran and linked books. He - like all claimed or documented (?) prophets in the Quran - met with similar problems like Muhammad met when it came to being believed - satisfying at least for Muhammad's followers who then "understood" that Muhammad's problems were normal for prophets, and that Muhammad thus had to be a prophet. His real interest for the story is that he (and a few others included Moses during his 40 years exile from Egypt before the Exodus), are claimed to have worked as prophets in Arabia, whereas the Quran tells that Muhammad worked for a people - the Arabs - who had had no prophet before.

####With the partly exception of Jesus - who was too well known - all prophets or claimed prophets told about in the Quran, are bent into a frame to be parallels to Muhammad. A coincidence?

228 11/50d: "- - - Hud - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

229 11/50e: "Ye (the 'Ad tribe from before Moses*) have no other god but Him (Allah*)". For one thing neither science nor Islam has found any trace of Islam before 610 AD, and 'Ad is at least 2ooo years earlier. For another see 6/106b above.

230 11/50f: "(Your (non-Muslims'*) other gods) ye do nothing but invent!" This may or may not be true. But the interesting additional question here is: As the Quran is not from a god, is also Allah invented?

231 11/51a: "I (Hud - see 11/50b just above) ask you for no reward for this (message)". Quite similar to 11/29a above.

232 11/51b: "My (Hud's*) reward is from none but (Allah*) - - -". Quite similar to 11/29a above.

233 11/51c: "- - - Him (Allah*) who created me - - -". See 21/56c below.

234 11/51d: "- - - will ye (non-Muslims*) not then understand?". May be like the skeptics of Muhammad's stories, that was just what at least some of them did: Understood that something was very wrong.

235 11/52a: "Ask forgiveness from your (peoples'*) Lord (Allah*) - - -". Allah can forgive nobody unless he for one thing exists and for another is a god (not. f.x. something from the dark forces).

236 11/52b: "Ask forgiveness from your (peoples'*) Lord (Allah*), and turn to Him (in repentance)". To what avail if Allah already has predestined everything according to his unchangeable Plan, like the Quran states many places?

237 11/52c: "He will send you the skies pouring abundant rain - - -". Once more a natural phenomenon Muhammad without documentation claims for his god - like any believer in any religion can do as long as no proof is required.

238 11/52d: "- - - (Allah will*) add strength to your (Muslim's*) strength - - -". There never was documented such a case - lots of claims, but never a proved case.

###239 11/52e: "- - - sin - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code. We also may mention that just this word often covers very different deeds, acts, words, and thoughts in the Quran and Islam, than in more normal religions (Islam is a religion of war - in spite of its loud slogans), not to mention how much its meaning in the Quran often differs from the basic of all human moral; "do against others like you want others do against you". Read the surahs from Medina and weep.

240 11/53a: "They (the 'Ad people*) said - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

241 11/53b: "They (the 'Ad people*) said: 'O Hud! - - -". See 11/43c above.

242 11/53c: “- - - Clear (Sign) - - -“. See 2/39b and 2/99 above.

243 11/53d: As for this verse - like so many others: Do you see the exact parallel to Muhammad's position at the time when the verse was released?

244 11/54a: "We (the 'Ad people*) say nothing - - -". See 11/43c above.

245 11/54b: "I (Hud*) call Allah to witness - - -". No value unless Allah exists - and what the value is if he in case is from the dark forces, is uncertain. (Though he in that case may bear witness for the mistakes and even lies in the Quran).

246 11/54c: "- - - sin - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code. We also may mention that just this word often covers very different deeds, acts, words, and thoughts in the Quran and Islam, than in more normal religions (Islam is a religion of war - in spite of its loud slogans), not to mention how much its meaning in the Quran often differs from the basic of all human moral; "do against others like you want others do against you". Read the surahs from Medina and weep.

247 11/54-55: "- - - I (Hud*) am free from the sin of ascribing to Him (Allah*) Other gods as partners". This is no sin unless Allah exists and is a god. Well, it may be a sin towards another god if another god - f.x. Yahweh - exists and take offence from your believing in other or pagan gods.

248 11/55: "Other gods as partners". By using this formula - and he uses it often - Muhammad indicates that Allah is the god everyone everywhere knows about or at least was known from the old, but that many have added other gods in addition to him. This picture is false - except for in Arabia where many had al-Lah as one of their gods - the same pagan god Muhammad renamed and called Allah - the rest of the world had other gods not in addition to, but instead of Allah, and most did not even know about al-Lah/Allah. They had their oven gods and they were self-sufficient and not added to Allah. But psychologically a good sentence for Muhammad and his preaching.

249 11/56a: "I (Hud*) put my trust in Allah - - -". A bit risky as long as not even his existence is proved - not to mention if he exists, but belongs to the dark forces, something too many facts may point at if he is not pure fiction.

250 11/56b: "- - - my Lord and your Lord - - -". Parallel to 11/56a just above.

251 11/56c: "There is not a moving creature, but He (Allah*) hath grasp in its forelock". = Allah directs it = the predestination once more: Allah decides everything. (To hold the forelocks is an Arab expression for that the one grasped has to obey what you decide. The universal god often uses Arab references, and like here references only Arabs understand if they are not explained. There seldom are similar references from other parts of the world - strange for a universal god who has had thousands of prophets all over the world during thousands of years according to the Quran.)

252 11/56d: "Verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

253 11/56e: "Verily, it is my (Hud's*) Lord (Allah*) that is on the straight Path". Not if he follows the Quran - too much is wrong and crooked in that book.

254 11/56f: "- - - the straight Path". The road to the Quran's and Islam's paradise. See 10/9f above.

256 11/57b: "For my /Hud's*) Lord (Allah*) - - - watch over all things". See 2/233h above.

257 11/58a: "- - - We (Allah*) saved Hud - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

258 11/58b: "We (Allah*) saved them from a severe Penalty". See 3/77b above.

259 11/59a: "- - - the 'Ad People - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

260 11/59b: "- - - the 'Ad People; they rejected the Signs of their Lord - - -". See 11/43c above.

261 11/59c: “- - - Sign(s) - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39b above.

262 11/59d: "- - - (the 'Ad people*) disobeyed His (Allah's*) Prophets - - -". When you are making up stories, it is difficult to remember all details and not stumble or make a slip here and there. According to Islam Hud was the first prophet in Arabia - he clearly was before Moses, because Moses is said to talk about him as an earlier prophet. But when Hud was the first and only (claimed) prophet the 'Ad people ever had, how come that they then disobeyed Allah's prophets (plural)? A small. but revealing mistake - revealing because it often is just this kind of small slips which uncovers the deceiver and the swindler.

263 11/60a: "And they (the 'Ad people*) were pursued by a Curse in this Life - and ion the Day of Judgment". Loose claims like this are cheap and cozy propaganda to listen to for believers - especially for the blind ones with a strong wishful way of thinking. The good thing for the preacher is that he never has to prove anything.

264 11/60b: “Removed (from sight (= killed*)) were ‘Ad (a presumed large and rich Arabian tribe, “borrowed” from Arabian folk tales - it may or may not have existed*) - - -”. Some thousands more killed by the good and benevolent god Allah - for their sins according to the Quran. (Science has additional reasons for why a tribe might disappear in a barren land, ridden by raids and strife and war). Notice that Hud and Muhammad had parallel experiences with being rejected - that is the norm for all prophets and Muhammad in the Quran.

265 11/60c: "- - - 'Ad the people of Hud". 2 historical anomalies. See 4/13d above.

266 11/61a: "To the Thamud People (we (Allah*) sent) Salih - - -". 2 historical anomalies. See 4/13d above.

267 11/61b: "- - - the Thamud People - - -". Similar story like the 'Ad ones (see 11/50a above), but presumably a little later than 'Ad.

268 11/61c: "- - - Salih - - -". Similar to Hud - see 11/50c above - but a little later.

269 11/61d: "- - - ye have no other god but Him (Allah*)". See 2/255a and 2/272b above.

270 11/61e: "- - - it is He (Allah*) Who hath produced you from the earth." This is one of the may be 13 different ways man - Adam - is created according to the Quran. See chapter about the creation of man in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" - http://www.1000mistakes.com . Even if you are a creationist, Adam could not be created in more than one way, and evolutionists believe all the 13 ways the Quran claims he was created, are wrong, as man was not created, but developed from earlier primates. Even in modern Islamic litterateur you find that man was created, most often from clay.

271 11/61f: "- - - ask forgiveness of Him (Allah*) - - -". Only 2 can forgive - the victim and the god. Is Allah a god? - does he even exist, god or not? There only is the claim from a man with a doubtful reliability, but with a wish for power.

272 11/61g: "- - - ask forgiveness of Him (Allah*), and turn to Him (in repentance) - - -". Why? - if Allah has predestined everything long before according to an Unchangeable Plan, like the Quran states absolutely several places, this just is a waste of time and effort.

273 11/61h: "- - - my (Salih*) Lord is (always) near, ready to answer". The ironic fact is that there nowhere and at no time is registered a proved answer from Allah - or any other proved contact. Lots of claims, but no proved case.

274 11/62a: "They (Thamud*) said - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

275 11/62b: "They (Thamud*) said: 'O Salih! - - - -". See 11/43c above.

276 11/62c: "Dost thou (now) forbid us the worship of what our fathers worshipped?" Sentences like this might make one start thinking, when one know that Muslims believe because their fathers and their and their mullahs/imams and teachers and surroundings tells this is the true belief because their fathers etc. have told them it was true, and because there is a strong social pressure never to question such claims. Muslims hardly ever go into the material with the question "where is the truth?"

277 11/62d: "But we (the Thamuds*) are really in suspicious (disquietening) doubt as to that (Islam*) which you (Salih*) invitest us". May be they had good reason for that doubt - according to Islam the prophets - included Salih - had a book similar to the Quran, likely with as many mistakes, etc.

278 11/63a: “- - - Clear (Sign) - - -“. Wrong. See 2/39b and 2/99.

279 11/63b: "- - - He (Allah*) hat sent Mercy - - -". As for mercy, see 1/1a above.

280 11/63c: "- - - who then can help me (Salih*) against Allah - - -". Everybody if he does not exist - and nothing at all is ever proved about his existence.

281 11/63d: "- - - if I (Salih*) were to disobey Him (Allah*) - - -". Not possible unless he exists.

282 11/64a: “This she-camel of Allah - - -“. This refers to an old Arab legend Muhammad used in the Quran: A camel came out from a solid cliff and became a prophet. Believe it if you want.

283 11/64b: "- - - a swift Penalty - - -". See 3/77b above.

284 11/65a: "But they (Thamud*) did hamstring her". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

285 11/65b: "But they (Thamud*) did hamstring her". See 11/43c above.

286 11/66a: "- - - thy (Muslims'*) Lord (Allah*) is the Strong One - - -". Often claimed, never proved.

287 11/66b: "- - - (Allah is*) Able to enforce His Will". Often claimed, never proved.

288 11/67a: “The (mighty) Blast overtook the wrongdoers (Thamud - another large and rich tribe “borrowed” from Arabian folk tales*), and they lay prostrate (and dead*) in their homes before the morning - - -”. Another some thousands killed. A good, benevolent and merciful god.

289 11/67b: “The (mighty) Blast overtook the wrongdoers (the people of Thamud*), and they lay prostrate (dead*) in their homes before the morning - - -.” A blast is something from f. ex. an explosion. But this is contradicted by:

7/78: “So the earthquake took them (the people of Thamud*) unawares, and they lay prostrate (= dead*) in their homes in the morning”. (Also and NB: An earth-quake never kills 100% - except for in low quality high-rise buildings seldom more than maximum 30%.)

69/5: “But the Thamud – they were destroyed by a terrible Storm of thunder and lightning”. You meet Muslims referring to the storms that “naturally follow earthquakes”. DISHONESTY. That is wrong – there is no – no – connection between earthquakes and storms, as they are caused by entirely different mechanisms, and this any higher educated person know, but all the same they use it as an argument. (To continue the song about “correcting” the Quran: Mr. Muhammad Asad in “The Message of the Quran” has quietly and without comments changed 69/5 from “storm and lightning” to “earthquake”. An “al-Taqiyya (lawful lie)? Al-Taqiyya is not only permitted, but compulsory if necessary to defend or promote the religion.

Well, in 7/78 they were killed by an earth-quake and in 69/5 by a terrible storm (which is something different from a blast - a storm lasts for some time, a blast is over in a moment, like the blast from an explosion). Two of the alternatives must be wrong – simply two more contradictions. This even though the claimed absence of any contradiction is said in the Quran to prove that it is sent down from Allah. A small additional curiosity: The honest Al-Azhar Al-Sharif Islamic Research Academy at the famous elite Islamic university Al-Azhar University in Cairo has sanctified a change of this verse 69/5: The Swedish edition tells the Arab text says they were killed by an earthquake and the new English one says “by a terrible upheaval (of the earth).” Thus quietly and nicely a contradiction in the timeless Quran has partly disappeared. But does this tell anything about honesty in Islam? – or about a way of thinking in a case where all the possible Muslims' next life is at stake, and the truth should be the absolute essential thing in order to find the really right way? Lying and cheating never is the truth – and why does Islam need such methods? AND CAN THE RIGHT RELIGION BE FOUND BY LIES? NOT TO MENTION: HOW MUCH IS TRUE IN A RELIGION WHO ACCEPTS AND EVEN ADVOCATES LIES "WHEN NECESSARY" (al-Taqiyya, Kitman, even broken oaths (2/225a, 5/89a+b))? As lies are acceptable, then may be more are lies? - and remember the theory that may be Muhammad did not meet Gabriel, but Iblis (the devil) or some other dark forces disguised and pretending to be Gabriel, in which case all the lies, stealing, harsh rules and blood in Islam is easily explained. Also see 7/78 above.

(2 contradictions.)

290 11/68a: "- - - the Thamud - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

291 11/68b: "For the Thamud rejected their Lord (Allah*) - - -". According to old Arab folklore and pre-history, the Thamud tribe was the successor of the 'Ad tribe and often called "the second 'Ad", and according to the Quran both tribes were eradicated by Allah because they refused to accept Allah - the one and mighty god which was preached about all the time since Adam and Noah by prophets, at least according to Islam - but never a trace of any kind of monotheism found by science - and neither by Islam. In this - and most other cases in the Quran - the prophets experienced parallel stories to what Muhammad had experienced up to the time of the verses he told, according to what Muhammad told or retold in the Quran - which of course told Muhammad's followers that he was a normal prophet and also that the bad and non-intelligent "infidels" would be punished. There also was a number of scattered ruins of houses, hamlets, and towns (a still famous one is Petra in Jordan) in and around Arabia - Muhammad told they all were empty because the people had sinned against Allah and been punished, though science knows a number of other reasons for empty ruins, especially in warlike desert areas.

292 11/68c: "For the Thamud rejected their Lord (Allah*) - - -". How could this end up in the claimed "Mother Book" (of which the Quran is a copy according to Muhammad) billions of years before it was said or happened? One more of the many texts or quotes in the Quran which could not have been reliably written into the claimed "Mother Book" (13/39b, 43/4b+c, 85/21-22) in Heaven (of which the Quran is claimed to be a copy) eons ago, unless predestination was and is 100% like the Quran claims many places (if you look, you will find more cases than we mention - we only mention some of the obvious ones). If man has free will - even partly only (an expression some Muslims use to flee from the problem full predestination contra free will for man (and also contra that there is no meaning in praying to Allah for help, if everything already is predestined in accordance with a plan "nobody and nothing can change" - a problem which Muslims seldom mention), and an expression no Muslim we have met has ever defined) - and can change his mind, full and reliable clairvoyance about the future, not to mention the distant future, is impossible even for a god, as the man always could/can change his mind or his words once more, in spite of Islam's claims. There are at least 3 reasons - 2 of them unavoidable - for this:

When something is changed, automatically the future is changed.

The laws of chaos will be at work and change things, if even a tiny part is made different.

The so-called "Butterfly Effect"; "a butterfly flapping its wing in Brazil may cause a storm in China later on" or "a small bump may overturn a big load".

This that Allah predestines everything like the Quran claims and states many places, is an essential point, because besides totally removing the free will of man (in spite of the Quran's claims of such free will, or some Muslims' adjusted "partly free will for man" - to adjust the meanings where the texts in the Quran are wrong, is typical for Islam and its Muslims) - it also removes the moral behind Allah's punishing (and rewarding) persons for what they say and do - Allah cannot reward or punish people for things he himself has forced them to say or do, and still expect to be believed when he (Muhammad?) claims to be a good or benevolent or moral or just god. Also see 2/51b and 3/24a above.

And as mentioned above, full predestination also makes prayers to Allah meaningless, as everything already is predestined according to Allah's Plan - a Plan which no prayer ("nobody and nothing") can change.

293 11/69a: “There came Our (Allah’s*) Messengers to Abraham - - -“. It is clear from the following verses that these messengers were angels. But this is clearly contradicted by:

12/109: “Nor did we send before thee (humanity, man*) (as Messengers) any but men.”

16/43: “And before thee (Muhammad*) also the Messengers we sent were but men - - -“.

21/7: “Before thee (Muhammad*), also, the messengers we sent were but men”.

25/20: “And the messengers whom We (Allah*) sent before thee were all (men) - - -.”

Well, 3/42 - 6/130 - 11/69 – 11/77 – 11/81– 19/17b – 19/19 – 22/75 all say that not all were men. A nice little contradiction to 12/109 – 16/43 – 21/7 – 25/20 which all says all messengers were men.

(8 contradictions - actually many more, as each "yes" contradicts each "no").

294 11/69b: "- - - Abraham - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

295 11/69c: In comment A1565 to this verse M. Yusuf Ali among other things tells about Abraham that "he had triumphed over the persecution of Nimrod". But Nimrod was the great grandson of Noah (1. Mos. 10/6-8), and lived millennia before Abraham. (Look f.x. at the information that after the flood only a few humans were alive. At the time of Abraham the world was populated again, and that takes time). Abraham cannot have been persecuted by Nimrod. (If the story about the flood and the story about Abraham took place in some form or other, science believes there were a couple of millennia’s between them.) Flatly wrong.

296 11/69-83: The stories about Abraham and partly about Lot/Lut are closer to the biblical story than normal for biblical stories in the Quran, but a number of details differ - some of them serious.

F.x. the Quran claimed Abraham took all his family and huge flocks of animals and travelled from Canaan and/or Sinai and lived in the empty, narrow, waterless desert valley where Mecca later was built until he left Hagar and his son Ishmael there. And later he returned there to build the big mosque Kabah for his family. But neither the Quran nor one single Muslim mentions that there are some 1200 km of mostly harsh desert - some of it pretty rugged - between Canaan and Sinai where he lived, and Mecca - or that the mentioned desert vally naturally had no food or water for his animals - or how often his family could visit the big mosque 1200 km off. Believe the story if you are able to.

297 11/70a: "But when he (Abraham*) saw they (his guests*) went not towards the (meal) - - -". Many places in the world it was a wise custom not to eat when visiting an enemy - the food could be poisoned. Here it is indicated that Abraham feared they could be enemies as they would not eat his food. But the real reason was that they were angels, and it is implicated that angels do not eat (contradiction to the Bible - 1. Mos. 18/8 - the 3 visitors ate).

298 11/70b: "- - - the people of Lut (= Lot in the Bible*)". Here it is meant the people in Sodom and Gomorrah - it is not said here, but according to the Bible - 1. Mos. 19/1 - Lot was in Sodom. (Nobody knows exactly where the two towns lay. Some traditions place them where the Dead Sea is now - an unlikely explanation as the Dead Sea is old. The Quran places them near the shore of that sea - which may be correct - - - if they ever existed. But what is clear both in the Bible and in the Quran in spite of these words, is that those people were NOT the people of Lot. He was the nephew of Abraham and born in Ur in Chaldea in South Iraq. He left Ur as a boy or youth together with his grandfather Terah (Azar in the Quran) and his Uncle Abram - later renamed Abraham - and lived for years in Haran in North Iraq until he and Abram continued to Canaan (now approximately Israel) after Terah died, where they settled in Negev. All this is according to the Bible (1. Mos. 11/31-32 + 12/1-8), but not contradicted by the Quran. They later split because their flocks of animals needed wide areas for grass - Abraham stayed in Canaan (now approximately Israel), whereas Lot moved further east to the valley of Jordan, which may fit well with placing Sodom and Gomorrah near the Dead Sea, as this sea is in the southern end of the Jordan Valley.

But what remains is that Lot was a stranger to the area and to the towns of Sodom and Gomorrah. It also is very clear both from the Bible and the Quran that he had not become a naturalized member of the local people - it is clear from the story both in the Bible and in the Quran that he was reckoned to be a stranger. But this sentence is necessary to make Lot confirm to the Quran's claims that Allah sent the prophets (in the Quran Lot is a prophet - not in the Bible) "to their own people". (Claims which are contradicted even in the Quran by the Chaldean (Iraq) Abram/Abraham working in Canaan (Israel), the Canaanite Jew and claimed prophet Joseph working in Egypt, the Egyptian Jew Moses working for 40 years in Midian/Madyan in West Arabia, by the Israeli prophet Jonah working in Nineveh in Assyria in what is now part of Iraq (this is accepted by the Quran) - - - and by the Chaldean Lot living and perhaps working as a prophet near the Dead Sea).

299 11/71a: "And his (Abraham's*) wife - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

300 11/71b: "And his (Abraham's*) wife (Sarah*) laughed - - -". See 11/68c above.

301 11/71c: "- - - she (Sarah*) laughed - - -". Muslim scholars still are debating why she laughed, because there is no clear reason. Also the Bible tells she laughed, but because the angels told such an old couple was going to have a child. In the Quran she laughed before she got this message, and one does not really understand why.

302 11/71d: "- - - We (Allah*) gave her (Sarah, the wife of Abraham*) the glad tidings of Isaac, and after him, Jacob". This is one of at least two places in the Quran where it can be understood like Muhammad believed that both Isaac and Jacob were the sons of Abraham (Jacob in reality was the son of Isaac), and you will meet persons claiming this is what the Quran says - whereas Muslims in the light of later knowledge denies this. We leave the point there - there are so many wrong points in the Quran, that it is not worth the time to use effort on a point which may be or may be not is wrong.

303 11/72a: "She (Abraham's wife*) said - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

304 11/72b: "She (Abraham's wife Sarah*) said: 'Alas for me! - - -". See 11/68c above.

305 11/73a: "The grace of Allah and His blessing on you (Abraham and Sarah*) - - -". Contradicted by the Bible, which tells Abraham's god was Yahweh. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

306 11/73b: "The grace of Allah and His blessing on you (Abraham and Sarah*) - - -". This may have some value if Allah exists and in addition is a god.

307 11/73c: "For He (Allah*) is indeed worthy of all praise - - -". See 1/1a above and see if the god you meet in the Quran is worthy of all praise.

308 11/74: "When the fear had passed from (the mind of) Abraham - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

309 11/75a: "- - - Abraham - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

310 11/75b: "- - - Abraham was - - - given to look to Allah". Contradicted by the Bible, which tells his god was Yahweh, nor Allah. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

311 11/76a: "O Abraham!" A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

312 11/76b: "O Abraham! Seek not this (= plead not for Sodom and Gomorrah*". Here is another contradiction to the Bible: In the Bible (1. Mos. 18/23-33) Abraham pleads Yahweh to spare the two towns, and makes him promise to do so if he can find only 10 righteous men there. But there were no 10 righteous men and the towns were destroyed".

313 11/76c: "- - - a Penalty - - -". See 3/77b above.

314 11/76d: "- - - a Penalty that cannot be turned back!" What Allah has decided and predestined, nobody and nothing can change, according to the Quran.

315 11/77a: “When Our (Allah’s*) Messengers (it is clear from the text they were angles (they f. ex ate no food*) came to Lut (Lot*) - - -.” But this is clearly contradicted by:

See identical comments to 11/69a above.

(8 contradictions - or more.)

316 11/77b: "- - - Lot - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

317 11/77c: "He (Lot*) said: 'This is a distressful day". See 11/68c above.

318 11/77d: "- - - (Lot*) felt himself powerless to protect them (his visitors*)". But the original Arab text says: "- - - he (Lot*) was straightened as regards the reach of his arm in their behalf". This was an Arab idiomatic phrase meaning what is said in the first quote. There are a number of idiomatic Arab phrases in the Quran - phrases foreigners cannot understand without explanation. No omniscient god making a book for the entire world - a book he claims is easy to understand and with simple and clear language - would use obscure expressions from backward parts of the globe - phrases most people in the world would not understand unless there was an Arab from a given time in history around to explain the meaning. Then who made the Quran?

319 11/78a: "- - - his (Lot's*) people - - -". The people of Sodom (outside which it is likely Lot lived just then) and Gomorrah were not the people of Lot. For one thing he was a foreigner from far away (Ur in Chaldea in what is now South Iraq, and it is likely Sodom and Gomorrah - if they are not fiction - was settled near the Dead Sea), and for another it is very clear from both the Bible and from the Quran that he was not naturalized into that culture or people. (But the Quran needs this remark to be able to claim that prophets were sent to their own people, like the Arab Muhammad to Arabs).

320 11/78b: "- - - his (Lot's*) people came rushing towards him - - -". See 11/68c above.

321 11/78c: "- - - abominations - - -". Here: Homosexuality.

322 11/78d: "(Lot said*): Here are my daughters (if ye marry) - - -". Here the Puritanism has got the better of the translator - the circumstances clearly tell it was not for marriages. Besides: How could Lot's 2 daughters (1. Mos. 19/30) marry one or two whole towns?

The real reason for this twist in the Quran, is likely to be that Lot according to that book was a prophet, and no prophet could be so immoral as to offer his daughters for unmarried sex.

323 11/79a: "They (the people of Sodom*) said - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

324 11/79b: "They (the people of Sodom*) said: 'Well you (Lot*) know - - -". See 11/68c above.

325 11/79c: "- - - what we (the men of Sodom and Gomorrah*) want!". The two towns were infamous for homosexuality - guess what the word "sodomize" refers to.

326 11/80a: "He (Lot*) said - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

327 11/80b: "He (Lot*) said: 'Would that - - -". See 11/68c above.

328 11/81a: “(The angel messengers (from Allah*)) said: O Lut (Lot*)! We are Messengers from thy Lord!” But this (that they were angles) is clearly contradicted by:

Identical comments to 11/69a above.

(8 contradictions).

329 11/81b: "- - - Lut (Lot*) - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

330 11/81c: "- - - but thy (Lot's*) wife (will remain behind (and die*)) - - -". One more contradiction to the Bible: In the Bible nothing like this is said, but she makes the mistake to look behind and dies. In the Quran her death is a result of predestination; Allah had decided it before like so often in the Quran.

331 11/82a: "- - - We (Allah*) turned (the cities (Sodom and Gomorrah*)) upside down, and rained down on them brimstones hard as baked clay, spread, layer on layer - - -". Another small (?) contradiction to the Bible: Yahweh simply let it rain burning sulfur - 1. Mos. 19/24.

332 11/82b: A non-Arab word: "sijjil" (brimstone) is from Persian - originally "Sang-o-gil" or "Sang-i-gil" which literally means "clay-stone" or "petrified clay" - reasonably near "brimstone".

333 11/82c: "- - - brimstones - - -(see 11/82b just above)". A11/114 here has one of Muslim scholars' many dishonest comments to "explain" things: "If this supposition (the meaning of the name*) is correct, the "stones of petrified clay" would be more or less synonymous with "brimstones" (so far correct*), which in its turn would point to, which in its turn would point to a volcanic eruption - - -".

This is about as wrong geology as it is possible to get - and even worse: This is tertiary school level - no really educated scholar does not know that this is wrong. Clay is made only in one way: Stone is eroded to very fine grains, and these grains is then separated out in water - and can by chemical processes and physical pressure over millennia be petrified. What comes out of volcanoes, is magma. This can be of different qualities, but not one of those is even a distant relative of clay or clay stone. Any student knows there is a fundamental difference - or many differences - between sediment stone and eruptive stone.

And the comment continues: "- - - probably in connection with a severe earthquake - - -". Also scientific nonsense which educated people at least know enough about to know this they have to check on before they give it as an explanation: There often are minor and sometimes even medium earthquakes connected to volcanic eruptions, but the severe ones you only get in connection with tectonic activity (movement of the tectonic plates the Earth's consists of.) Volcanoes often are found in the intersection zones between tectonic plates, but volcanic eruptions and severe earthquakes come from two entirely different mechanisms. In addition even the worst volcanic eruptions do not unlash enough energy - and not fast enough - to produce a severe earthquake. (Though volcanoes once in a while produce explosions - but the earthquakes from these are reduced proportional to the inverse of between the 2. and the 3. power of the distance. Besides we have never heard about traces of such an explosion some 3800-4000 years ago near the Dead Sea.)

These "explanations" are scientific nonsense - and the facts are so well known, that scholars know it - or at least know enough to know they have to check on the facts before they write about it. This is not even a Kitman (a lawful half-truth), but it may be an al-Taqiyya (a lawful lie). Clay stones NEVER come from volcanoes. Never. Thus a volcano cannot explain a rain of clay stones.

One meets a bit too many Kitmans and al-Taqiyyas in Muslim religious literature, and grows a little disillusioned.

334 11/82d: "- - - brimstones hard as baked clay, spread, layer on layer - - -". No Muslim has ever informed us about such a site near the Dead Sea. In that dry climate it takes some millennia and more to remove thick layers of brimstone. Are the Quran telling the truth or not here?

335 11/83a: (YA1581): “- - - nor are they far from those who do wrong!” Who or what are “they”? – the revenging brimstones? – or the destroyed cities, meaning punishment is not far off for sinners? The book does not give an answer, and Muslim scholars do not know - clear language in the Quran?

336 11/83b: "- - - those who do wrong - - -". Normally one of Muhammad’s many distaste inducing names for non-Muslims.

337 11/84a: "- - - Madyan - - -". An area in west of Arabia and west Jordan, from Aqaba to Moab, to the east of the Dead Sea (though the information varies some from one source to another). It is likely it is the same area which is called Midian in the Bible - Moses lived there the 40 years between his flight from Egypt and his return to Egypt before the Exodus.

338 11/84b: "To the Madyan people (We (Allah*) sent) Shu'ayb - - -". 2 historical anomalies. See 4/13d above.

339 11/84c: "- - - Shu'ayb - - -". A claimed prophet claimed to have worked in Madyan. His story is very similar to those of Hud and Salih - see 11/50b and 11/61b - and other prophets, and by coincidence(?) to the story of Muhammad up till when this surah was told (in 621 AD - the year before the flight to Medina and his start towards power and a war religion).

340 11/84d: "- - - Shu'ayb - - -". To place the special Arab claimed prophets chronologically, it seems that Islam claims the succession was this (YA1064): Noah (not Arab prophet, though*), Hud, Salih, Lot/Lut (not Arab), and Shu'ayb. Shu'ayb is said to be 4 generations after Lot, though we do not find this specified in the Quran. Lot of course was a contemporary of Abraham - his nephew. Abraham lived - if he is not fiction - ca. 1800-2000 BC according to science, which means that Shu'ayb (if not fiction) lived about one century later or a bit more, BC. Which makes impossible the Muslim claim that Shu'ayb was identical with the father-in-law of Moses, Jethro. Science tells that if the Exodus ever took place, it happened ca. 1235 BC, and if the Bible is correct Moses then was 80 years, which means he lived from ca.1315 BC to ca. 1195 BC (he became 120 years according to the Bible). There in case are some 300 - 500 years between Shu'ayb and Moses (and Jethro).

All prophets told about in the Quran, had experiences to Muhammad's. Hardly a coincidence - it "told" his followers and others that Muhammad's problems were "normal" for prophets, and thus that he was a normal prophet (true or not true). 

341 11/84e: "- - - ye (the Madyan people*) have no other god but Him (Allah*)". See 2/55a and 2/272b above.

342 11/84f: "And give not short measure and weight - - -". One of the (few?) good moral rules in the Quran, is the demand for honesty in trade - though the fact that it some places is said you shall not cheat Muslims, to some - or many? - weak souls may indicate that to cheat non-Muslims does not count too much (do not ask a sailor about his opinion about "Arab salesmen" - he may answer in too strong words for your ears).

343 11/84g: "- - - Penalty - - -". See 3/77b above.

344 11/85a: "Give just measure and weight - - -". See 11/84f above.

345 11/85b: "- - - commit not evil in the land with the intent to do mischief". We had better not list the history's cases of Muslim aggression through the times - intending on power, riches, rape, slaves, suppression, etc. Besides the list may be too long for a PC if we knew all of them - much horror have happened during raids, wars, slave hunting, suppression, etc. (Muslims often complain about the Crusaders, but the Crusaders were in orphanage compared to some Muslim atrocities in especially Africa and Asia. Only that during the crusades the Muslims were victims, whereas in other cases they were "heroes".)

346 11/86: "But I (Shu'ayb*) am not set over you to keep watch". Just like Muhammad at this time (621 AD) - also see 11/50b, 11/61b, and 11/84b (all similar to Muhammad's story until 622 AD). But much changed - included only being a warner and not keeping watch - when Muhammad became strong enough for harsher ideas.

347 11/87a: "They (the Madyan people*) said - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

348 11/87b: "They (the Madyan people*) said: 'O Shu'ayb! - - - -". See 11/68c above.

349 11/87c: "- - - the worship which our fathers practiced - - -". The reason why Muslims believe in Islam is that their fathers and surroundings claim it is the truth, not that they ever have gone into the material to see if it at all is possible that it can be the truth. (Which it is not with all those mistakes, etc. in the Quran).

350 11/87d: "Truly - - -". See 2/2b above.

351 11/88a: "- - - a Clear (sign) from my (Shu'ayb's*) Lord (Allah*) - - -". There nowhere in the Quran or other places is one single sign clearly from Allah - and with the possible exception of the "signs" borrowed from the Bible no unmistakable signs for a monotheistic god at all (but the Bible in case indicates Yahweh, not Allah - the teachings are too different to be from the same god, in spite of the Quran's never documented claims).

352 11/88b: "- - - my (Shu'ayb's*) success - - - can only come from Allah". Shu'ayb did not succeed. Does this indicate that Allah was not powerful or did not exist?

353 11/88c: "In Him (Allah*) I (Shu'ayb*) trust - - -". Risky as long as the trustwortyness is not proved. In all other aspects of life blind belief or relying on glossy words is the most sure way to be cheated - a fact which should be remembered when it comes to so serious questions as Hell contra Heaven. If you just accepts your father's or neighbour's words for something they never have checked is reality or truth, then good luck - you deserve what future you get, in this and in a possible next life.

354 11/89a: "- - - the people of Noah or of Hud or of Salih - - - nor of Lut (Lot*) - - -". According to the Quran all these people were killed by Allah because of sins. The Bible says the same for the people of Noah and of Lot - though it makes it clear that as for Lot they were not really his people.

355 11/89b: "- - - Noah - - - Hud - - - Salih - - - Lut(Lot*) - - -". 4 historical anomalies. See 4/13d above.

356 11/89c: "- - - sin - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code. We also may mention that just this word often covers very different deeds, acts, words, and thoughts in the Quran and Islam, than in more normal religions (Islam is a religion of war - in spite of its loud slogans), not to mention how much its meaning in the Quran often differs from the basic of all human moral; "do against others like you want others do against you". Read the surahs from Medina and weep.

357 11/90a: "But ask forgiveness of your Lord (Allah*) - - -". Allah can forgive no-one unless he exists and is a god (if he is from the dark forces, it is less likely "forgiveness" from him is valid).

358 11/90b: "But ask forgiveness of your Lord (Allah*), and turn to Him (in repentance) - - -". What for if Allah already has predestined everything according to his unchangeable Plan, like the Quran strongly states several places? - nothing can all the same change what is to happen - prayers and repentance in case just are wasted time and effort if this is true. And what is Islam if it is not true?

As for the value of prayers in Islam, also see 62/9c. And if you combine 62/9c with 67/9c - a strong one - you get something thought-provoking. (And relevant here: Muslims often are thought that a question or problem can have 2 or more true and correct solutions - Islam is forced to teach this, because if not, many of the mistakes and contradictions in the Quran become too obvious. But this ONLY is true if parallel true solutions are possible. In cases where 2 or more possible solutions are mutually excluding each other, maximum 1 of the mutually excluding ones can be true. It should be a bit thought provoking for Muslims, that just this "small" difference in theoretical thinking and teaching, was one of the reasons (there were several of course) for why Europe and the West exploded into the Technical Revolution, while the Muslim area stagnated). Two star examples are: 1) Full predestination is not possible even for an omnipotent god to combine with even the smallest piece of free will for man - the two are mutually excluding. The same for full and unchangeable predestination long time before, combined with any claimed effect of prayers - the two are mutually excluding each other.)

359 11/90c: "- - - (Allah*) is indeed full of mercy and loving-kindness". See 1/1a above.

360 11/90d: "- - - indeed - - -". See 2/2b above.

361 11/91a: "They (the Madyan people*) said: 'O Shu'ayb! - - -". 2 historical anomalies. See 4/13d above.

362 11/91b: "They (the Madyan people*) said: 'O Shu'ayb! - - -". See 11/68c above.

363 11/91c: "Were it not for thy (Shu'ayb's*) family, we should certainly have stoned thee. For thou hast amongst us no great position!" Is it possible to make a closer parallel to Muhammad's position in Mecca in 621 when this surah was released? - he had to flee shortly after, because the support from his family grew weaker. It is strange how all prophets in the Quran fit Muhammad's position at the time when the respective surahs are launched - and thus "verify" that his position is normal for prophets, and thus that he is a normal prophet. Some co-incidence!

364 11/92a: "But, verily, my (Shu'ayb's*) Lord (Allah*) encompasseth on all sides all that ye do!" We are back to the old fact: This only can be true if Allah exists (but in this case it may be true even if Allah belongs to the dark forces).

365 11/92b: "- - - verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

366 11/93: "- - - the Penalty of ignominy - - -". See 3/77b above.

367 11/94a: "- - - Shu'ayb - - -". A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

368 11/94b: "- - - wrongdoers - - -". One of the many insulting names Muhammad used for non-Muslims.

369 11/95a: “- - - the Madyan were removed (killed*) - - -”. Some thousands or more corpses more on Allah’s score.

370 11/95b: "- - - the Thamud - - -" A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

#371 11/95c: Shu'ayb - Salih - Hud. These are the 3 non-biblical claimed prophets in the Quran (+ Muhammad of course). All were Arabs working in Arabia. A universal god should have had a bigger choice - and perhaps also some success and/or different stories, not only parallels to Muhammad. One of the half hidden, but clear and strong Arabisms in the Quran. See 4/13d above.

372 11/96a: "- - - Moses - - -" A historical anomaly. See 4/13d above.

373 11/96b: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Clear (Signs) - - -". Moses had signs - but according to the Bible they were from Yahweh. And according to science there still was no sign of Allah or Islam for another some 2ooo years - and the same according to Islam..

374 11/97: "- - - Pharaoh (Ramses II*) and his Chiefs - - -". At least 2 historical anomalies. See 4/13d above.

375 11/98: "- - - the Fire - - -". Hell.

376 11/99: "And they (Ramses II and his chiefs*) are followed by a curse in this (life) and on the Day of Judgment - - -". Ramses II was hardly followed by any curse in this life. About the possible next? - it is cheap and easy to claim things as long as you can evade any requests for a proof. On the other hand: Such claims carry little weight for persons with at least a medium brain.

377 11/100: "These are some of the stories We (Allah*) relate unto thee (Muhammad*) - - -". It is strange for a god to relate stories from legends, etc. - known to be made up ones - and claim them to be the true ones.

378 11/101a: "It was not We (Allah*) who wronged them: they wronged their own souls - - -". Correct if man has free will, wrong if Allah predestines everything like the Quran claims again and again, perhaps if man has partly free will which some Muslims try to explain away this total contradiction with no possible explanation (even partly free will also is 100% contradicting many verses in the Quran clearly stating that it is Allah who decides everything).

379 11/101b: "- - - wronged - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

380 11/101c: "- - - the decree of thy (Muslims'/humans'*) Lord (here indicated Allah*) - - -". The old truth once more: Allah can make no decree if he does not exist (but if he exists, ha can issue decrees even if he belongs to the dark forces.)

381 11/101d: "- - - nor did they (other gods*) add aught (to their(non-Muslims'*) lot) but perdition". But what will be the case for Muslims if the Quran is made up? - and with all those mistakes it at least is from no god. (The question is especially interesting if there somewhere is a real god they have been prohibited from looking for).

382 11/102a: "- - - He (Allah) chastises - - -". A parallel comment to all other comments about the fact that Allah can do nothing unless he exists - though if he exists and belong to the dark forces, there are things he can do.

383 11/102b: "- - - wrong - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

384 11/102c: "- - - grievous, indeed, and severe is His (Allah's*) chastisement". See 3/77b above.

385 11/102d: "- - - indeed - - -". See 2/2b above.

386 11/103a: "In that (the claim that Allah punishes severely - 11/103*) is a Sign (for the existence of Allah and his power*) - - -". A not proved claim from a man who believed in dishonesty, deceit, and even broken words/oaths, is a "sign" - Quran-speak for proof - for that Allah exists. Are there anyone out there who understands why we are skeptical to the Quran - and thus to Muhammad and to Islam?

387 11/103b: “- - - a Sign - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39 above.

388 11/103c: "- - - the Penalty of the Hereafter - - -". See 3/77b above.

389 11/103d: "- - - the Penalty of the Hereafter - - -". Hell.

390 11/103e: "- - - a Day for which mankind will be gathered together: that will be a Day of Testimony". = The Day of Doom.

391 11/103f: "- - - the Day of Testimony". The Day of Doom.

392 11/104: "- - - for a term appointed". = For a predestined time.

393 11/105a: "The day it arrives - - -". = The Day of Doom.

394 11/105b: "- - - some will be wretched - - -". = Some will go to Hell.

395 11/105c: "- - - some will be blessed". = Some will go to Paradise.

296 11/106a: "Those who are wretched - - -". The bad ones - those who are bound for Hell.

397 11/106b: "- - - the Fire - - -". = Hell.

##398 11/106-107: “- - - there will be for them (sinners*) therein (nothing but) the heaving of sighs and sobs. They will dwell therein for all the time that the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth endure, except as thy Lord (Allah*) willeth”. No hope for all the eternity - except perhaps in the last part of that last sentence. Muslims are unable to agree on if that may mean that Hell once in the very far future may come to an end, at least for some inmates - likely the (failed) Muslims in case.

399 11/107a: “They (the sinners*) will dwell therein (Hell) for all time that the heavens and the earth endure - - -.” More or less identical to 11/108b below except that 11/108 is about Paradise.

400 11/107b: (A11/133 – in 2008 edition A11/134): "(Sinners shall stay in Hell forever), except as thy Lord (Allah*) willeth.” This sentence is one of the big enigmas in the Quran and in Islam – you meet the same curious and cryptic message in 6/128: All the Quran tells that sinners are to stay in Hell forever, but this may mean there all the same may be a way out – at least for some? It has been debated for days and months and years and centuries in Islam – no sure answer is found. Yes, the Quran uses a clear and distinct language – everything is easy to understand, just like Muslims claim.

We may add that some Muslims scholars speculate on that one possible meaning is that the Muslim sinners will be let out from Hell after enough eons - but quite likely only the Muslim ones.

401 11/107c: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22d.

402 11/107d: "- - - (Allah*) is the (sure) Accomplisher of what He planneth". = Nothing can change Allah's predestined plan. (But why then f.x. pray to Allah when you have problems - it will change nothing, as nothing can change his predestination? And why go to a doctor if Allah already has decided how your illness will end?)

403 11/107e: "- - - (sure) - - -". See 2/2b above.

404 11/108a: "- - - those who are blessed - - -". = Those who are to end in Paradise.

405 11/108b: "- - - the Garden - - -" = The Quran's and Islam's paradise. See 10/9f above.

406 11/108c: (A11/133 – in 2008 edition A11/134): “They (the good Muslims*) will dwell therein (heaven) for all the time that the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth endure”. What does this mean? The heaven is forever and the Earth until the Day of Doom according to many verses in the Quran. Will they dwell there only as long as the Earth exists, or - - -? In old Arab – so old that f.x. Tabari had to explain – (translated from Swedish): “- - - as long as heaven and Earth exists - - -“ means forever. And that is good and well - - - except for that Islam then has to explain if this means that also Earth will exist forever, and in case how the Earth can exist forever, when the Quran tells that Earth as we know it, will be finished at the Last Day. The Quran has a most complicated way of using such “a plain and easily understood language that no-one can misunderstand it.” And, yes, these variants also are in the Arab text, as the relevant word(s) there has/have more than one meaning.

407 11/108d: "- - - heavens - - -". Wrong. See 2/22c above.

408 11/108e: (A11/134 – in 2008 edition A11/135): (Good Muslims will stay in heaven forever), “except as thy Lord (Allah*) willeth - - -.” Exactly nobody knows or understands what this means - the last part of the sentence is explained nowhere in the Quran. The same words are used about Hell in 11/107b (and similar in 6/128c, 43/74d, 50/13c, and 78/23), and some Muslim thinkers say it may mean that perhaps Hell will not last forever - at least not for all its inmates. Can Heaven come to an end? Can it change? Can it become ever better? Or what? Islamic scholars are bound by duty and indoctrination – and by lack of training in critical thinking - to be optimists, and promises that nothing will happen “unless Allah wills to bestow on them a yet greater reward (which will not take much – the Muslim heaven mainly is materialism and sex, and for women only materialism mostly because of all the houris who compete with them*) (Razi). But not one single soul has ever been able to do anything but guessing and hoping when it comes to this sentence. And as said before these variants also are in the Arab text, as the relevant word(s) there has/have more than one meaning – or here: No clear meaning.

409 11/108f: "- - - (Paradise is*) a gift without break". - - - if the Quran tells the truth, the full truth, and only the truth.

410 11/109a: "They (pagans*) worship nothing but what their fathers worshipped (before them". Most likely correct. But what if the Quran is made up? - it is not from a god with that many mistakes, etc., etc. In that case this is exactly what also all Muslims do each and every day. And even worse if the book is from some dark forces, like its everlasting and partly immoral and unethical moral and ethical codes - and lack of empathy - may implicate.

411 11/109b: "- - - verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

412 11/109c: "- - - we (Allah*) shall pay them (pagans*) back (in full) their portion without (the least) abatement". Once more: If Allah exists and is a god. If he exists and is from the dark forces, it may be even worse. But if he does not exist, Muhammad got a lot of followers and warriors free of charge - just paid by fast words and loot.

413 11/110a: “We (Allah*) certainly gave the Book to Moses, - - -”. According to science he certainly did not - those books are written 400-700 years later. (The Bible tells Moses got the 10 commandments written on tablets of stone + he got the law verbally and wrote it down later himself. "The Law" is sometimes used as a name for the Books of Moses, but in reality the laws only is a part of it).

414 11/110b: “We (Allah*) certainly gave the Book to Moses, - - -”. 2 historical anomalies. See 4/13d above.

415 11/110c: "- - - certainly - - -". See 2/2b above.

416 11/110d: "- - - had it not been that a Word had gone forth before from thy Lord (Allah*) - - -" These words means the revelations in the Bible. They are to be respected - but NB: The not falsified Bible, as the Quran and Islam claim - without any documentation and today even in spite of strong proofs that the claim is wrong - that the Bible was and is falsified. They claim they talk about a claimed original Bible from before it was falsified, and when it was similar - not necessary identical even though they claim both were copies of the claimed "mother book" in Heaven, but at least similar. Islam has to stick to these claims in spite of all proofs - and partly by throwing dirt on all science, Jews and Christians to make the claims less unbelievable - because if the Bible is not falsified, it is very obvious to everybody that the Islam is a made up religion. It is easier and better to just go on believing what your parents believed and thought you, than to have to face the question if the beliefs you have based your life on, are fictions - blind belief is the best, even though the Quran tells the blind man has low value, and even if the price for being wrong is terrible in the possible next life. Yes, if there somewhere is a real god, a real paradise, and a real hell, and you have believed in a false religion (which is a possibility for Islam, as it is very clear that the Quran with all its mistakes, etc., etc. is not from a god) - well, what then?

417 11/110e: "- - - they (Jews and perhaps Christians*) are in suspicious doubt concerning it (the Bible*). Not more in doubt than that hundreds of Jews preferred death or fleeing to accepting Muhammad's new religion. But claims like these are soothing to listen to for believers - at least for the ones to blind or too naive not to see the difference between loose claims and reality.

418 11/111a: "- - - of a surety - - -". Very little in a book with this much wrong is sure unless it is proved.

419 11/111b: "- - - of a surety, to all (humans*) will your Lord (Allah*) pay back (in full the recompense) of their deeds - - -". One of the many, many never proved claims in the Quran. With all the mistakes in the book, there only is one thing which is sure here, and that is that this claim is far from sure.

420 11/111c: "- - - for He (Allah*) knoweth well all that they do." The carrot: Be a good Muslim, be god and obedient to Allah/Muhammad and his survivors, and be rewarded. The stick: Be a non-Muslim or a bad or disobedient one and be severely punished". 

421 11/111d: "- - - for He (Allah*) knoweth well all that they do." If he exists and if he is something supernatural - good or bad.

422 11/112a: "Therefore stand firm (in the straight path) as thou art commended (!!*) - thou and those who with you turn (unto Allah); and transgress not (from the Path): for He seeth well all that ye do". One of many pep-talks simply. But also see 11/111b just above.

423 11/112b: "- - - (the straight path) - - -". The road to the Quran's and Islam's paradise - see 10/9f above.

424 11/112c: "- - - for He seeth well all that ye do". The carrot and the stick. You meet it many places and in different words in the Quran. Also see 11/111b and 11/112b above.

425 11/113a: “- - - and incline not to those who do wrong, or the Fire will size you - - -”. To incline towards non-Muslims is so bad a sin that it gives worse than death penalty - Hell.

426 11/113b: "- - - those who do wrong - - -". One of the many distaste-inducing names Muhammad used for non-Muslims.

427 11/113c: "- - - do wrong - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

428 11/113d: "- - - the Fire - - -". Hell.

429 11/113e: "- - - ye (non-Muslims*) have no protectors other than Allah - - -". Well, omitting everything else, both the Bible and the Quran mention the old Jewish and Christian god - in the Bible named yahweh.

430 11/113f: "- - - nor shall ye (non-Muslims*) be helped". Well, see 11/113e just above - Yahweh tells he is a strong helper if the old books tell the truth.

431 11/114a: "And establish regular prayers at the two ends of the day, and at the approaches of the night - - -". You find no demand in the Bible for prayers at fixed times of the day.

As for the value of prayers in Islam, also see 62/9c. And if you combine 62/9c with 67/9c - a strong one - you get something thought-provoking. (And relevant here: Muslims often are thought that a question or problem can have 2 or more true and correct solutions - Islam is forced to teach this, because if not, many of the mistakes and contradictions in the Quran become too obvious. But this ONLY is true if parallel true solutions are possible. In cases where 2 or more possible solutions are mutually excluding each other, maximum 1 of the mutually excluding ones can be true. It should be a bit thought provoking for Muslims, that just this "small" difference in theoretical thinking and teaching, was one of the reasons (there were several of course) for why Europe and the West exploded into the Technical Revolution, while the Muslim area stagnated). Two star examples are: 1) Full predestination is not possible even for an omnipotent god to combine with even the smallest piece of free will for man - the two are mutually excluding. The same for full and unchangeable predestination long time before, combined with any claimed effect of prayers - the two are mutually excluding each other.)

####432 11/114b: "- - - prayers - - -". These are the times for prayers (translated from Swedish):

Fajr: Before dawn.

Zuhr: Shortly after dinner time.

'Asr: During the afternoon.

Maghrib: Shortly after sundown.

'Isha' After night has fallen.

Allah forgot(?) to tell how to arrange things in the high north and south - and Muhammad hardly knew there was a problem. Muslims later had to make rules for this themselves.

More serious: For Allah was the fixed prayers so essential, that he made it one of the pillars in Islam. Yahweh on the other hand, was/is totally uninterested in such formalism. One of the many proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - if one or both exists.

433 11//114c: "- - - good - - - evil - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like these, it is meant in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

434 11/114d: "- - - those who remember (their Lord (Allah*)) - - -". The Muslims.

435 11/115a: "- - - be steadfast in patience." Something all the world should know and remember: The Quran impresses and impresses and impresses "patient perseverance": Persevere and sooner or later the "enemy" tires and you have won, whereas the "enemy" must retreat or even accept you as his Master(s) - some future for non-Muslims!! We have visited most Muslim areas except south of Sahara, and there are few, if any, place we would like to live for a long time. A possible - possible - exception is Sabah on Borneo.

436 11/115b: "- - - Allah will not suffer that the reward of the righteous to perish" If he exists and is a major god - and if the Quran has described him correctly.

437 11/115c: "- - - righteous - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like these, it is meant in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

438 11/115d: "- - - verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

439 11/116a: "- - - wrongdoers - - -". Normally "Quran-speak" for non-Muslims.

440 11/116b: "- - - sin - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code. We also may mention that just this word often covers very different deeds, acts, words, and thoughts in the Quran and Islam, than in more normal religions (Islam is a religion of war - in spite of its loud slogans), not to mention how much its meaning in the Quran often differs from the basic of all human moral; "do against others like you want others do against you". Read the surahs from Medina and weep.

441 11//117a: "- - - wrongdoings - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like these, it is meant in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

442 11/117b: "- - - if its men best were likely to mend." But:

If Allah decides absolutely everything, like the Quran claims many places - why has he not decided this?

And why has he to decide? - if he predestines everything like the Quran claims, the men just have done as he decided.

If Allah is totally omniscient, like the Quran claims many other places, why does he not know?

443 11/118a: “If thy Lord (Allah*) had so willed - - -". One of the most repeated sentences in the Quran - in different varieties. Muhammad tells - or boasts? - about what Allah could do, "if he only willed". It only is that he never will. - or can?

444 11/118b: “If thy Lord (Allah*) had so willed, He could have made mankind one People - - -”. Either Allah really likes strife and war - really a benevolent god - or in reality he is unable to do this. Like someone bragging to impress acquaintances or girls.

445 11/118-119: (A11/151 – in 2008 edition 11/152): “If thy (peoples'*) Lord (Allah*) had so willed, He could have made mankind one People: but they will not cease to dispute, except those on whom thy Lord hath bestowed His Mercy, and for this (“li-dhalika”) did He create them - - -.” But to what do the Arab word “li-dhalika” (= “for this”, “to this end”) refer? Hardly to “they will not cease to dispute”. The sentence simply hangs in the air, without pointing to anything or being connected to anything. Some (like Mujahid and ‘Ikrimah) believes it refers to Allah’s grace upon man. Some (like Al-Hasanand ‘Ata) tell it refers to man’s ability to have meanings different from others’ (this has some relevance to the previous sentence). Others (like Zamakhshari) mean it refers to man’s freedom to make moral choices. Just pick your guess – every Muslim scholar also is just guessing here. As said before: A clear and unmistakably easy to understand language. And these variants of course also are in the Arab text, as the relevant word(s) there has/have more than one meaning – or here: No clear meaning.

446 11/119a: "- - - His (Allah's*) Mercy - - -". See 1/1a above.

447 11/119b: "- - - for this He (Allah*) created them". The Quran tells different places that Allah created some for Hell and some for Paradise, and this decision Allah made 5 months before you were born according to Hadiths, cannot be changed - no matter what you want or wish or pray or do you in reality have no chance against his decisions and predestination. Some difference from the Bible and a lot of other religions.

448 11/119c: "I (Allah*) will fill Hell with jinns (a being from old Arab pagan religion, legends, and fairy tales*) and men all together." A benevolent and good god? - Hell is no nice place. And he will fill it. Try to find something like this in the Gospels.

449 11/120a: "All that We (Allah*) relate to thee (Muhammad/Muslims*) of stories about the prophets - - -". Are the stories from Allah? - or from legends, etc.? May be added some to make them fit Muhammad's situation and teachings? No god would need to use legends and fairy tales as basis for his holy book.

450 11/120b: "All that We (Allah*) relate to thee (Muhammad/Muslims*) of stories about the prophets - with it We make firm thy heart - - -". Nearly all the prophets the Quran tells about, met the same problems like Muhammad up to the time when the surah was published (this surah is from 621 AD) - reassuring to know for his followers: Muhammad was a normal prophet with normal difficulties, and his opponents would be punished.

451 11/120c: "All that We (Allah*) relate to thee (Muhammad/Muslims*) of stories about the prophets - - - (is*) - - - an exhortation and a message of remembrance to those who believe". This is quite a piece of information when you know how much is wrong in the Quran!!

452 11/120d: "- - - with it (stories from claimed or documented prophets*) We make firm thy (Muhammad's/Muslims'*) heart - - -". As mentioned many/all of the stories - true or twisted or made up - were parallels to Muhammad's situation and showed them that what happened to Muhammad, was normal for prophets - "ergo" Muhammad was a normal prophet with normal problems. How true the stories were, may be a question, but they worked.

453 11/120e: “- - - in them (the stories in the Quran*) there cometh to thee (Muhammad/the Muslims*) the Truth - - -”. With all the mistaken facts, mistaken grammar, etc, and perhaps even more mistakes in the book, it can at best be partly true - and then the trouble is to find out what is true and what not, of the tales you do not positively know are wrong.

454 11/120f: "- - - the Truth - - -". See 2/2b above.

455 11/120g: "- - - those who believe". = Muslims - only Muslims believe according to the Quran

456 11/121a: “Say to those who do not believe: ‘Do what ye can: we shall do our part’”. This was in 621 AD. Muhammad/Allah was/were still speaking peace – but not for much longer. This verse is contradicted and often “killed” and abrogated by at least these verses: 2/191, 2/193, 3/28, 3/85, 3/148, 4/81, 4/90, 5/33, 5/72, 5/73, 8/12, 8/38-39 (the warning), 8/39, 8/60, 9/3, 9/5, 9/14, 9/23, 9/29, 9/33, 9/73, 9/123, 25/36, 25/52, 33/61, 33/73, 35/36, 47/4, 66/9. This includes many advising or permitting political, social, economical, etc. compulsion (with the sword in the background if you protest) – we mention a few here: 3/28, 3/85, 3/148, 4/81, 5/72, 5/73, 9/23, 14/7, 15/3, 33/73, 35/36. They are all quoted under 2/256. (At least 29 contradictions).

457 11/121b: "- - - those who do not believe - - -". Any non-Muslim.

458 11/122: "And wait ye (non-Muslims*)! We (Muslims*) too shall wait!" A warning?

459 11/123a: "To Allah do belong the unseen (secrets) of the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth - - -". Often claimed, never documented.

460 11/123b: “- - - heavens - - -“. Wrong. See 2/22d above And also that free will for man cannot exist - and f.x. prayers are without value, as they can change nothing.

As for the value of prayers in Islam, also see 62/9c. And if you combine 62/9c with 67/9c - a strong one - you get something thought-provoking. (And relevant here: Muslims often are thought that a question or problem can have 2 or more true and correct solutions - Islam is forced to teach this, because if not, many of the mistakes and contradictions in the Quran become too obvious. But this ONLY is true if parallel true solutions are possible. In cases where 2 or more possible solutions are mutually excluding each other, maximum 1 of the mutually excluding ones can be true. It should be a bit thought provoking for Muslims, that just this "small" difference in theoretical thinking and teaching, was one of the reasons (there were several of course) for why Europe and the West exploded into the Technical Revolution, while the Muslim area stagnated). Two star examples are: 1) Full predestination is not possible even for an omnipotent god to combine with even the smallest piece of free will for man - the two are mutually excluding. The same for full and unchangeable predestination long time before, combined with any claimed effect of prayers - the two are mutually excluding each other.)

461 11/123c: "- - - and to Him (Allah*) goeth back every affair (for decision) - - -". = Allah decides everything. We are back to the "fact" of total predestination - "everything" - a "fact" many Muslims denies or tries to explain away, as it means Allah is highly immoral when ha punishes someone for bad deeds he himself has decided they should do.

462 11/123d: "- - - put thy (human/Muslim*) thrust in Him - - -". Risky if he does not exist. Risky if he exists, but belongs to the dark forces. (If he made the Quran, he is no god - too much is wrong).

463 11/123e: "- - - thy (Muslims'*) Lord (Allah*) is not unmindful of aught that ye do". We are back to the fundamental questions: If he exists, if he is a benevolent major god - and if the Quran has described him correctly.

Surah 11: Sub-total: 463 + 7173 = 7636 comments.

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000</>

NB: If you find any mistakes anywhere, please inform us. If it is a real mistake, it will be corrected. Please also inform us if we have overlooked points or errors.

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

(A6/92 - English 2008 edition A6/93): "- - - it is in the nature of man to regard the beliefs which have been implanted in him(!) from his childhood, and which he now shares with his social environment, as the only true and possible one - - -". He forgot(?) to mention that this also goes for Muslims.

10/32: "- - - apart from the Truth, what (remains) but error?"

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

#####8/69a-d: "- - - lawful and good - - -". If these words and the context they are taken from ("- - - enjoy what (loot, slaves, and women* + destruction and murder) ye took in war (normally of aggression*), lawful and good - - -") were all you knew about the Quran and Islam, this alone would be enough to remove them from the civilized world, and transfer it to the dark, harsh, and inhuman Medieval ages or earlier. This even more so as this is not "abrogated" (made invalid) by today's Islam, but on the contrary are preached many places all over even today in some Islamic fora and groups and countries. (And even practiced during armed conflicts - Bangladesh, East Timor, East Africa, and Indonesia a "short" time ago. Low intensity active in f.x. Indonesian New Guinea and parts of Africa even now (2010).)

Just remember that most Muslims are ok. Only a minority is militant - 1-2% according to Muslims (but 2% of 1.2 billion = 24 million). Then according to international science some 30% (= some 360 million) are willing to help the militants actively or with money, or at least "understand" them. The rest - the majority - are ok. (But our problem is to know who is who.)

But what is absolutely sure, is that apologists telling that "there are verses in the Quran which can be misused by terrorists", are talking nonsense. According to the Quran it is very clear it is the peaceful Muslims who are not good Muslims, and the activists who are laudable and obeying Muhammad and Allah.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

From 6/149a: "You meet this lack of moral backbone and the ability in Islam and in Muslims to overlook or explain away even the strongest facts, at every point in the Quran where there are mistakes, contradictions or other proofs for that something is wrong in the Quran, and thus with Muhammad and with his religion - proofs they are unable to face for that Islam as told in the Quran is not a religion, but a superstition".

"Religious 'knowledge' nearly always in reality only is belief - often strong belief, but only belief". (In Islam exactly nothing of any consequence is proved - on the contrary: Much is proved wrong and thus that it is from no omniscient god.)

A world dominated by Islam is quite possible - Islam is expanding. Will it end up like North Pakistan or Afghanistan or like Saudi Arabia without oil - or somewhere in between? - and this because of a religion which itself proves that something is seriously wrong with its teaching, and also that there is no god behind its "holy" book (no omniscient god makes mistakes), and thus not behind the religion.

A nice future for our grandchildren?


>>> Go to Next Surah

>>> Go to Previous Sura

This work was upload with assistance of M. A. Khan, editor of islam-watch.org and the author of "Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism, and Slavery".