1000+ Comments on the Quran: Surah 26 -- Ash-Shu'ara' (The Poets)

Revelation: Mecca 615 - 616 AD

(See general comments on Surahs here: Introduction)


 

The quotes and comments

(There are pretty many historical anomalies and texts which could not have been reliably written in the claimed "Mother Book" before it happende, if man has partly or full free will. But what to do when there are many of them in the Quran? And we have mentioned far from all - go looking and you will find many more (this gose for all the Quran).)

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 sharia, 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 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 26/1: "Ta' Sin Mim". Some Arab letters (called abbreviated letters) start a number of the surahs - most of them definitely have no meaning, a few may or may not have one, but even in the cases they may have a meaning, that meaning in case has no connection to the contents of the actual surah. Nobody knows why they are there. Clear language?

###003 26/2a: “These are verses of the Book that makes (things) clear.” In other words: Told an explained in clear words. But all the same Muslims as a last way out, explains – and in religious blindness often honestly believe – that errors are not errors, but are camouflaging hidden meanings or allegories. In addition there are some hundred points in the book where the exact meaning is unclear - either literally unclear or there are two or more possible meanings, often varying wildly (some places because the meaning has been expressed unclear, other places because the Arab alphabet was not complete when the Quran was written down - the vowels and the points used in Arab to signify some letters were not yet existing - and the reader has to guess these, and then there are many cases where the meaning varies according to what letters you guess are meant. To take an English sample: If you have the consonants h and s and know they represent a word, this word may be "has" or "his" or "house" or "hose").

004 26/2b: “These are verses of the Book that makes (things) clear.” A book with so many mistakes, contradictions, cases of invalid logic, so much unclear language, etc., makes very little clear in reality.

005 26/2c: "- - - the Book - - -". The Quran is a bit confusing on this point - like on a number of others. This title it sometimes use for the Bible or the old Jewish scriptures, and sometimes for the Quran. In this case it means the Quran.

006 26/3a: "- - - fretter thy soul - - -". This is claimed said to Muhammad (by Allah*).

007 26/3b: "- - - they (opponents of Muhammad*) do not become Believers". A historical anomaly.

008 26/3c: "- - - they (opponents of Muhammad*) do not become Believers". 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.

Also see 3/154e, 6/149a, 7/34a, and 14/22b above.

009 26/3d: "- - - Believers". = Muslims - only Muslims believe according to the Quran.

010 26/4a: “If (such) were Our (Allah’s*) Will - - -". See 14/19d above.

011 26/4b: “If (such) were Our (Allah’s*) Will, We could send down to them (non-Muslims*) from the sky a Sign, to which they would bend their necks in humility.” Really a super boast? - especially since Muhammad never was able to show even a valid mini-proof? Or a true statement from a “benevolent” god who did not do it because he wanted the majority of humans going to Hell? Or just some bragging from the maker of the Quran whoever he be, to consolidate his power?

012 26/4c: “- - - Sign - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39b above.

###013 26/4d: "- - - a Sign, to which they (people*) would bend their necks in humility". Comment A26/4: "Inasmuch as the spiritual value of man's faith depends on its being an outcome of free choice and not of compulsion, the visible and audible appearance of a 'message from the skies' would, by its obviousness, nullify the element of free choice and, therefore, deprive man's faith in that message of all its moral significance'. This is rubbish, politely speaking, and an al-Taqiyya (a lawful lie): Choices made by a person's free will, has got to be made on basis of what the person know, and the more he or she knows about something, the more likely it is that correct choice about that thing is made. Therefore the addition of correct information - f.x. real proof for that a god exists - can have no negative significance morally for the person's decisions or choices. On the contrary: Withholding of essential, correct information forcing the person to make decisions or choices on basis of serious lack of central information easy for a god to provide, is morally a very doubtful deed by that god. Worse: Top Muslim scholars know enough about logic and moral to know that this is the case, and even so they are capable of producing "explanations" like this, trying to cheat less educated people. But then al-Taqiyya is not only permitted when it comes to defend or forward Islam, it is advised if it gives a better effect. How much in the Muslim scholars' arguments are al-Taqiyyas or Kitmans (lawful half-truths) like this?

014 26/5a: "- - - a newly-revealed message - - -". Were the verses and surahs really revealed? - and in case from whom, as with so many errors, etc. they were not from a god.

015 26/5b: "- - - message from (Allah) - - -". Wrong. No god ever was involved in a book so full of mistaken facts and other mistakes like the Quran.

016 26/5c: "- - - (Allah) Most Gracious - - -". See 1/1a above.

017 26/5d: "- - - they (skeptics*) turn away therefrom (from new verses from Muhammad*)". They had good reason for this if they were among these who understood that something was very wrong in Muhammad's new religion.

018 26/5e: "- - - they (skeptics*) turn away therefrom (from new verses from Muhammad*)". See 26/3c above.

019 26/6a: "They (skeptics*) have indeed rejected (the Message (from Muhammad*) - - -". See 26/5d above.

020 26/6b: "They (skeptics*) have indeed rejected (the Message (from Muhammad*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

021 26/6c: "They (skeptics*) have indeed rejected (the Message (from Muhammad*) - - -". See 26/3c above.

022 26/6d: "- - - indeed - - -". See 2/2b above.

023 26/6e: "- - -(the Message) - - -". Muhammad's new religion/the Quran.

024 26/6f: “- - - the truth of what they (unbelievers*) mocked at!” At best the Quran represents partly the truth - too many mistakes, etc.

025 26/7a: “Do they (non-Muslims*) not look at the earth - how many noble things of all kinds We (Allah*) have produced therein?” See 11/7a above.

026 26/7b: “Do they (non-Muslims*) not look at the earth - how many noble things of all kinds We (Allah*) have produced therein?” Yes, we see a lot of noble things - and also a lot of ignoble and terrible things, like Darfur, women’s and non-Muslims’ life in some Muslim areas, terrorists, catastrophes, etc - in the world. But we see no proof of any god - and definitely not of a god who has proved he is Allah.

027 26/8a: "Verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

028 26/8b: “- - - Sign - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39b above.

029 26/8c: "Verily, in this (the natural products claimed made by Allah*) is a Sign: but most of them (non-Muslims*) do not believe". Very naturally as for one thing the "sign" is invalid as long as it is not proved made by Allah - and who except cheats and deceivers use invalid "proofs"? And for another thing already a number of his contemporaries saw that something was very wrong in this new religion - f.x. his claimed quotes/stories from the Bible.

030 26/9a: "- - - verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

031 26/9b: "- - -(Allah is*) - - - the Exalted in Might - - -". A might often claimed, but never proved in or outside the Quran. Not once.

032 26/9c: "(Allah is*) Most Merciful". See f.x. 1/1a or 25/70d above.

033 26/10a: "- - - thy (Muhammad's/Muslims'*) Lord (here intended to be Allah*) - - -". According to the Bible, the involved god was Yahweh, not Allah.

034 26/10b: "- - - Moses - - -". A historical anomaly.

035 26/10-66: The story of Moses here roughly is the same as in the Bible, except for that many details are different (but remember that when you meet the story in the Quran about Moses and the fish and the wise man, that story is not from the Bible). These details he either has got from somewhere - and the only source for information about Moses was the Bible + made up legends, etc. - or they are made up. But there is one fundamental difference: In the Bible there is no religious strife between Moses and the Egyptian - the message simply was: "Let my people go!" In the Quran the religion has got an important role. Also here it is the question about from where Muhammad got this information, as it as said is not from the only known real(?) source, and as he cannot - like Muslims claim - have gotten it from the god, as no god was ever involved in a book of a quality like the Quran with all its mistaken facts, contradictions, etc., etc.

There also is another fundamental difference; In the Bible the god involved is Yahweh, in the Quran it is Allah. (In spite of the Quran's claims, these two gods are not the same one - too many things are too deeply different between them and between their teachings for this to be true. The Quran likes to claim that the reason is that the Bible is falsified, but both science and Islam thoroughly have proved that this never documented lose claim also is not true: Among some 44ooo relevant manuscripts or fragments, they have found not one proved falsification. Neither has Islam been able to explain hot tens of thousands of papers spread on 3 continents could have been identically falsified, and falsified in ways modern science are unable to find traces from. (This part simply is one more of Muhammad's lies in the Quran - in this case the only way he had to save his new religion and his own position at the top of it.))

036 26/11a: "The people of the Pharaoh: will they not fear Allah?" The people of Egypt were polytheists. It is likely at least many of them had heard about Yahweh, the god of their Jewish slaves, but Allah they had never even heard about - perhaps al-Lah, but not Allah. There is not even a trace found from monotheism under Ramses II - the pharaoh of Moses. (Islam prefers to talk about other pharaohs - preferably older ones - because science knows Ramses II did not drown, but science is not in doubt.)

037 26/11b: "The people of the Pharaoh: will they not fear Allah?" There is no trace of religious preaching by Moses in this story in the Bible.

038 26/11c: "- - - Pharaoh (Ramses II*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

039 26/12a: "He (Moses*) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

040 26/12b: "I (Moses*) do fear they (the Egyptians*) will charge me with falsehood". According to Bible, they might charge him not with falsehood, but with murder (according to both the Bible and the Quran he had killed a man before he fled from Egypt 40 years (according to the Bible) earlier.) See 26/14 below.

041 26/13: "- - - Aaron - - -". A historical anomaly.

042 26/14: "- - - a crime charge - - -". Moses originally fled from Egypt because he killed a man - this according both to the Bible (2. Mos. 2/12) and to the Quran.

043 26/15a: "- - - both of you (Moses and Aaron*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

044 26/15b: “- - - Our (here indicated Allah’s*) Signs - - -“. There are no valid signs for Allah in all the Quran. See 2/39b and 2/99 above.

045 26/16a: "- - - both of you (Moses and Aaron*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

046 26/16b: "- - - Pharaoh (Ramses II according to science) - - -". A historical anomaly.

047 26/16c: "- - - the Lord and Cherisher of the worlds". The Jews did not reckon their god to be for the entire world, only for the Jews. Islam will have to document that Moses said this - it also is not in the Bible.

048 26/16d: “- - - the worlds - - -“. There are no 7 worlds, in spite of that the Quran says so. See 65/12 below.

049 26/17: "- - - the Children of Israel (originally a name for the Jewish patriarch Jacob - 1. Mos. 32/28) - - -". A historical anomaly.

050 26/18a: "(Pharaoh) - - -". A historical anomaly.

051 26/18b: "(Pharaoh) said: 'Did we not - - -". See 26/3c above.

052 26/19: "- - - a deed of thine (Moses*) - - -". This refers to that Moses killed a man before he fled from Egypt - according to the Bible 40 years before.

053 26/20a: "- - - Moses - - -". A historical anomaly.

054 26/20b: (YA3149): “Moses said: ‘I did it then, when I was in error.” 3 possible implications: “I was wrong in doing it in a temper and in being hasty,” or “I was wrong in taking the law into my own hands, but repented and asked Allah’s pardon,” or “That was a time when I was under your influence, but since then I am a changed man, as Allah has called me.” The exact meaning unclear - like so often in the Quran.

055 26/21: "- - - my (Moses'*) Lord (here indicated to be Allah*) - - -". Contradicted by the Bible, which says Moses' 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.

056 26/22: "- - - the Children of Israel (originally a name for the Jewish patriarch Jacob - 1. Mos. 32/28) - - -". A historical anomaly.

057 26/23a: "Pharaoh - - -". A historical anomaly.

058 26/23b: "- - - the Lord and Cherisher of the Worlds (plural and wrong*) and the earth - - -". The Jews did not reckon their god to be for all and everything, only for the Jews. Islam will have to document that Moses said this - it also is not in the Bible.

059 26/23c: “- - - the Worlds - - -“. Wrong. See 26/16a+b above, and 65/12 below.

060 26/24a: "(Moses) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

061 26/24b: "- - - the Lord and Cherisher of the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth, and all between - - -". The Jews did not reckon their god to be for the entire world, only for the Jews. Islam will have to document that Moses said this - it also is not in the Bible.

062 26/24c: “- - - heavens - - -“. Plural and wrong. See 2/22d.

063 26/26a: "(Moses) said (to Ramses II*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

064 26/26b: "(Moses) said (to Ramses II*): "Your Lord (Allah*) and the Lord of your fathers from the beginning." This contradicts reality, as we know Allah never was the god of the old Egyptians - there never was any monotheism, except Akn-Aton and his sun god (and on top of all the old al-Lah most likely was the moon god once upon a time). And for another it contradicts the Bible: Moses never tried to pretend Yahweh was the god of the Egyptians according to the Bible, or discussed religion at all - his only topic according to the Bible was: "Let my people go".

065 26/27a: "(Pharaoh) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

066 26/27b: "(Pharaoh) said: "Truly your messenger - - -". See 26/3c above.

067 26/27c: "Truly your messenger (Moses*) who has been sent to you (Pharaoh Ramses II*) is a veritable madman!" Notice that this is the same as was said about Muhammad by some in Mecca. If you read the Quran, you will see that most of the claimed or real prophets told about, are told to have had similar experiences like Muhammad. Simply Muhammad's way to tell his surroundings and followers - true or not true - that this was the normal reception of prophets, and thus that he was a normal prophet.

068 26/28a: "(Moses) said (to Ramses II*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

069 26/28b: "- - - Lord of the East and the West, and all between!". The Jews did not reckon their god to be for all and everything, only for the Jews. Islam will have to document that Moses said this - it also is not in the Bible.

070 26/29a: "(Pharaoh) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

071 26/29b: "(Pharaoh) said: 'If thou - - -". See 26/3c above.

*072 26/29c: “If thou (Moses*) dost put forward any god other than me (the pharaoh*), I will certainly put you in prison.” Wrong – in Egypt one had many gods. Even more: According to one of Islam’s tries to explain away the mistake of placing Xerxes’ man Haman at Ramses II’s court - and hundreds of years wrong - the high priest (Ha-Amon) of one of the main gods – Amon – even was present and one of the pharaoh’s main advisers at this meeting (a “fact” that in case makes this sentence impossibly illogical - but then it is typical for Muslims' explaining away of mistakes in the Quran, that the "explanations" "explain" some aspects with a mistake, but collides with others). It is impossible that Ramses II said this if at the same time a high priest - Haman/Ha-Amon - of a main god was present. Or the other way around: If Ramses II said this, Islam’ "explanation" about Haman as Ha-Amon is proved wrong. Make your choice - but science knows that Amon was a top god among many others in Egypt, so it is highly unlikely Ramses II said what the Quran claims, unless Islam has real proofs.

The religious part - and other details - in this debate are not from the Bible. (According to the Bible the only thing Ramses II now said about the god of the Jews, was a short sentence saying that he did not know him and would not respect him (2. Mos. 5/2), and he said pretty little about Yahweh later, too).

073 26/30: "(Moses) said (to Ramses II*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

074 26/31a: "(Pharaoh) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

075 26/31b: "(Pharaoh) said: 'Show it then - - -". See 26/3c above.

076 26/32: "- - - (Moses) threw - - -". A historical anomaly.

077 26/33: "- - - it (Moses' hand) was white to all beholders". According to the Bible it was white and leprous (2. Mos. 4/6). Seemingly a minor detail, but for one thing leprosy was no minor thing at that time, and for another to afterwards remove also the leprosy told much more about something super-natural than just to remove a shining color. Two details: 1) according to the Bible it was Aaron who threw the rod/staff (2. Mos. 7/10). 2) It is not mentioned in the Bible that Moses used the miracle with his hand.

078 26/34a: "(Pharaoh) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

079 26/34b: "(Pharaoh) said - - -: 'This is indeed - - -". See 26/3c above.<

080 26/35: "His (Moses'*) plan is to get you out of your land - - -". What is the basis for this claim? - there was nothing indicating that Moses had such plans. Besides: This is not from the Bible, so from where did Muhammad get his "information"? As no god was involved in the Quran, the only alternatives are legends, apocryphal (made up) scriptures, fairy tales or fantasy.

081 26/36a: "They (Ramses II's advisers*) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

082 26/36b: "They (Ramses II's advisers*) said: 'Keep him (Moses*) and his brother (Aaron*) - - -".

See 26/3c above. 

083 26/38: "- - - a day well-known". It is unclear what this means - it also is not mentioned in the Bible. Muslim scholars guess it refers to a festival, but they have no source for this belief.

084 26/39: "And the people were told - - -", There is no reference to such things in the Bible.

085 26/40a: "- - - that we (the Egyptians*) may follow the sorcerers (in religion) if they win?" This contradicts the Bible - there it was no question of following this or that religion, only "let my people (the Jews*) go". Also see 26/35 above.

086 26/40b: "- - - that we (the Egyptians*) may follow the sorcerers (in religion) if they win?" Such a demand is nonsense compared to what we know about the religion of Egypt at that time. For one thing it had fundamental grips on the population - even a royal decree about changing to another religion would not work - see Akn-Aton's try even if that was not just at this time. And for another the magicians would have the same religion as the people, so why then a silly demand like this? (Some Muslims claims it is meant the forwarding of the worship of the pharaoh, but the pharaoh was not the main god in Egypt.)

087 26/41a: "- - - they (the sorcerers of Ramses II*) said to Pharaoh - - -". Historical anomalies.

088 26/41b: "- - - they (the sorcerers of Ramses II*) said to Pharaoh: Of course - - -". See 26/3c above.

089 26/41c: "Of course - shall we (the sorcerers*) have a (suitable) reward if we win". For one thing this is not from the Bible (see 26/35 above), and for another thing hardly anybody spoke like that to one of the mightiest pharaohs ever.

090 26/42a: "He (Ramses II*) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

091 26/42b: "He (Ramses II*) said: 'Yea (and more) - - -'". SEE 26/3c above.

092 26/42c: “- - - ye (the sorcerers*) shall in that case (if you win over Moses*) be (raised to posts) nearest to my person (Ramses II).” It is highly unlikely that the mighty pharaoh Ramses II said this to a flock of sorcerers – and especially for winning over an after all small opponent. But it sounds good in a religious speech to uncritical believers.

093 26/43: "(Moses) said (to Ramses II*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

094 26/44a: "- - - (the sorcerers) said: 'By the might of Pharaoh - - -". A historical anomaly.

095 26/44b: "- - - (the sorcerers) said: 'By the might of Pharaoh - - -". See 26/3c above.

096 26/45: "- - - Moses threw - - -". A historical anomaly.

097 26/46a: "- - - the sorcerers (of Ramses II*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

098 26/46b: "- - - the sorcerers (of Ramses II*) fell down - - -". See 26/3c above.

###099 26/46-47: "Then did the sorcerers fall down, prostrate in adoration, Saying 'We believe in the Lord of the Worlds - - -". For one thing this is not from the Bible. But much more serious in this connection is that this is one of the proofs for that Muhammad knew he was lying each time he explained away his inability to produce any miracle as a proof for his god and for his own connection to a god, with that Allah did not want because it would make no-one believe in Allah anyhow. Here Muhammad is telling - early in his career and before many of those "explaining" away - about a minor miracle which made all those sorcerers suddenly become ardent believers in just Allah. Also see 26/51 below.

100 26/47: “- - - the Worlds - - -“. See 26/16c above and 65/12 below.

101 26/48: "- - - Moses and Aaron - - -". Historical anomalies.

102 26/49a: Pharaoh Ramses II said - - -. A historical anomaly.

103 26/49b: Pharaoh Ramses II said: “Surely he (Moses*) is - - -". See 26/3c above.

104 26/49c: Pharaoh Ramses II said: “Surely he (Moses*) is your (the sorcerers’) leader - - -.” Wrong. Ramses II knew Moses from the royal court from before Moses had to flee (see 26/18-19), and knew he had been away for 40 years (according to the Bible - an unspecified number of years, but years, according to the Quran) – he could not be the leader of the local sorcerers.

105 26/49d: "Be sure I (Pharaoh Ramses II) will cut off your hands and your feet on opposite sides - - -". According to our information this Arab way of punishing was not used in Egypt at the time of Ramses II.

106 26/49e: “- - - I (Pharaoh Ramses II) will cause you (Moses and others*) to die on the cross!” But the old Egypt did not use crucifixion as punishment. Similar claim in 7/124 – 20/71.

107 26/50a: "They (the sorcerers of Ramses II*) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

108 26/50b: "They (the sorcerers of Ramses II*) said: 'No matter - - -". See 26/3c above.

109 26/51: "Only, our (the sorcerers*) desire is that our Lord (Allah) will forgive us our faults, that we may become foremost among the Believers". For one thing this is not from the Bible. For another thing it is a contradiction to reality - one know there was no religion like Islam in Egypt around 1235 BC when the Exodus happened according to science - if it happened. But more serious: That Muhammad told that such an after all small miracle could make all the sorcerers such strong believers, proves very strongly that he knew he was lying each time he told miracles would make no-one believe. Also see 26/46-47 above.

110 26/52a: "By inspiration We (Allah*) told Moses - - -". All the other things aside: The word "inspiration" is not mentioned in the Bible in connections like this. Yahweh gave his messages either by direct contact, by visions, or by means of dreams (4. Mos. 12/6-8). But this was the method by which Muhammad claimed he got most of his information and orders from his god, and then it had value that his followers believed this was the normal way of contact with their god for prophets - and thus that Muhammad was a normal prophet with normal contact with his god. You will find several claims in the Quran saying that different prophets received their information etc. by inspiration. A number of places - like here - this information is added without having any meaning or value for the story - obviously for some reason outside the story, like telling the audience about the claimed normal way for the god to contact his claimed prophets.

To get his verses and surahs "by inspiration", was a very convenient way to receive it: Not possible for anyone to check, and very easy to subtract or add points or more - - - and easy to make up verses and more. This religious part of the story about Exodus is not from the Bible - but by adding it, Muhammad made it fit one of his 3 - 4 standard receipts for tales in the Quran.

111 26/52b: "- - - Moses - - -". A historical anomaly.

112 26/53a: "- - - Pharaoh - - -". A historical anomaly.

113 26/53a: "- - - Pharaoh sent heralds - - -". See 26/3c above.

114 26/53-58: This is not from the Bible. Where is it from?

#####115 26/56: (A26/30): "Thus the Quran illustrates the psychological truth that, as a rule, a dominant nation is unable really to understand the desire for liberty on the part of the group or groups which it oppresses, and therefore attributes their rebelliousness to no more than unreasonable hatred and blind envy of the strong". Something to think over for Muslims who through the times suppressed and worse so many? And who have as an official goal in the Quran to conquer and suppress every country and every non-Muslim.

116 26/57-58: (A26/31 – the alternative explanation left out in the 2008 edition): “So We (Allah*) expelled them from gardens, springs, treasures and every kind of honorable positions - - -.” Is it here the Egyptians that over time have robbed the Jews? - or now robbed the Jews? – or is it Allah who punishes the Egyptians afterwards? Islam is still debating this unclear point.

117 26/58-59: (YA3169): “Treasures, and every kind of honorable position; Thus it was, but We (Allah’*) made the Children if Israel inheritors of such things”. But the alternative meaning of these two verses is: Verse 58 “We (Pharaoh*) have dispossessed the Israelis from everything good in the land, and made them our slaves”. Verse 59 (Allah comments): “Poor ignorant man (Pharaoh*)! You may oppress those who are helpless, but We (Allah) have declared that they shall inherit these things”. As one understands, the language in the original Quran is clear, distinct and impossible to misunderstand (!). Some very different meanings.(We may add that according to the Bible, the Jews were given valuables when leaving. Muslim scholars claim this proved the dishonesty of the Jews - and not one of them as far as we have seen, has mentioned that this could be part of this inheritance if they were promised inheritance by the god. Also not one of them as far as we have seen, mention that even if they had got very much, it would be lousy payment for likely some generations of slave work. For some reason or others, they just claim it proves Jewish dishonesty.)

#118 26/59a: "- - - but We (Allah*) made the Children of Israel inheritors of such things (riches, etc. - see 26/58 just above*) - - -". Also the Bible says the god (via Moses) saw to that the Jews received some riches when leaving Egypt (2. Mos. 12/36). Muslims today have a tendency to blame the Jews for dishonesty and robbing in this connection, but is such an accusation right, fair, or honest when both the Bible and the Quran indicate that this was the work of the god?

119 26/59b: "- - - the Children of Israel (the Jews*) - - -". A time anomaly.

120 26/60a: "So they (the Egyptians*) pursued them at sunrise". A historical anomaly.

121 26/60b: "So they (the Egyptians*) pursued them at sunrise". See 26/3c above.

122 26/61: "- - - the people of Moses - - -". A time anomaly.

123 26/62: "(Moses) said - - -". A time anomaly.

*124 26/63a: “Then We (Allah*) told Moses by inspiration: ‘Strike the sea with thy rod’. So it divided, and each separate part became like the huge, firm mass of a mountain”. According to science the Jews started the exodus (if it ever happened - and if it did, it happened ca. 1235 BC during the reign of Pharaoh Ramses II - one of the greatest pharaohs ever - and some years before Ramses II’s death (Muslims often wants to change this – preferably to around 1500-1600 BC - because we know Ramses II did not drown, but science is clear on this point)) from Goshen in the north east of Egypt – to be specific: In the Nile delta. They travelled south roughly parallel to what is now the Suez Canal, and to the west of it. Then they turned south east, before they again headed south - still roughly parallel to what is now the Suez Canal, but now to the east of where the canal now is. Then they continued south parallel to the Red Sea. Before the Suez Canal came, between the Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea, here was unbroken low and quite flat land with some scattered lakes, the biggest of which were the Bitter Seas.

According to science the Jews may have been cornered against one of the seas during the above mention leg towards southeast, a sea named the Timsah Sea – or Yam Suph in Hebrew (meaning the Sea of Reeds). In the old Hebrew scriptures the Jews were cornered against Yam Suph, which can mean the Red Sea (the most frequently used translation) or the Sea of Reeds – both names are possible. The Sea of Reeds was a shallow sea - as for the exact depth our sources are vague, but quite likely just a few meters at most. (The longest reed we have been able to find, is a special kind of rice growing in the Tonle Sap Lake in Cambodia. It can be up to 5 -7 m. The reeds growing in Egypt are shorter, and to get the name “Sea of Reeds”, the lake had to be shallow enough for the reeds to get their “heads” above the water over at least a large part of the lake). To guess: From one or two and up to a few - perhaps 3 to 5 - meters deep as indicated above, or perhaps a bit more at the deepest places.

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

125 26/63b: "- - - Moses - - -". A time anomaly

126 26/63c: "- - - by inspiration - - -". See 26/52a above.

127 26/65: "- - - Moses - - -". A time anomaly

128 26/66: “But We (Allah*) drowned the others (the Egyptians).” Wrong, at least for Ramses II himself - he did not die from drowning, and he did not die until some years later. The Bible has a similar mistake, but the Bible is written by humans, and humans can have mistaken one of Ramses II's generals or one of his 67 sons (the number varies from one source to another, as it in reality is unclear) for the pharaoh - an omniscient god does not make such mistakes.

129 26/67a: "Verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

130 26/67b: “- - - a Sign - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39b above. (In this case it really was a sign if the story is true - but a sign for Yahweh in case, not for Allah unless Islam has really good profs for the opposite.

131 26/67c: "- - - most of them (here likely the Jews*) do not believe (here indicated in Islam*)". Not very strange - they saw a lot was wrong in Muhammad's new religion.

132 26/67d: (YA3173): "- - - people who are blind in their obstinate resistance to the Truth, accomplish their own destruction - - -". Worth thinking over as all the errors in the Quran, etc. and also the fact that Muhammad sometimes speaks in the book, proves 100% and more that it is an unavoidable truth that something is seriously wrong with the Quran - and hence with Islam?

133 26/68a: "- - - verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

134 26/68b: "- - - (Allah is*) the Exalted in Might - - -". Perhaps, but in case he has never clearly shown it (besides - the story with Moses according to the Bible was about Yahweh's miracles, and Yahweh and Allah are so different that they cannot be the same god - at least Islam will have to prove it, not only give loose words for it).

135 26/68c: "- - - (Allah is*) Most Merciful - - -". See 1/1a above.

136 26/69a: "- - - Abraham - - -". A historical anomaly.

137 26/69b: "- - - he-(Abraham*) said to his father and his people - - -". Historical anomalies.

138 26/70a: "- - - they (Abrahams people*) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

139 26/70b: "- - - they (Abrahams people*) said: 'We worship - - -". 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.

Also see 3/154e, 6/149a, 7/34a, and 14/22b above.

140 26/70-86: This is not from the Bible (actually not the rest of section 5, too). From where did Muhammad get this information, as no god gave him the Quran?

141 26/71a: "They (the people of Abraham*) said - - -". A time anomaly.

142 26/71b: "They (the people of Abraham*) said: 'We worship - - -". See 26/70b above.

143 26/72: "He (Abraham*) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

144 26/72-73: "Do they (false gods*) listen to you (Terah in the Bible, Azad in the Quran - father of Abram/Abraham*) when ye call (on them), Or do you good or harm?" But if you ask the same question about Allah, he has not done one single of those things in a provable way during his entire claimed existence - not once - just listen to Islam's silence about this. Besides it is not said in the Bible that Abraham's people were polytheists.

145 26/74a: “They (Abraham's people*) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

146 26/74b: “They (Abraham's people*) said: ‘Nay, but we found our fathers - - -". See 26/70b above.

###147 26/74c: “They (Abraham's people*) said: ‘Nay, but we found our fathers doing thus (what we do)”.

(A26/38): “(Zamakhshari): ‘- - - ancient usage and precedence in time are no proof of (a concept’s) soundness”. Razi, for his part, states that (this*) verse represents ‘one of the strongest (Quranic) indications of the immorality (Arab “fasad”*) inherent in (the principle of) "taqlid", i. e. the blind, unquestioning adoption of religious concepts or practices on basis of one’s uncritical faith in no more than the “authority” of a scholar or a religious leader.”

But the book skips the fact that this also goes for Muslims: If they are strongly indoctrinated, they may react strongly to arguments and facts they do not like – and without thinking over – or being mentally able to think over – even true facts. And also for them it is highly immoral just to accept a religion or something just because their fathers and others believe in it.

But there hardly is a major religion more authoritative and with a clearer demand for blind belief than Islam. Or with stronger and more ruthless indoctrination.

Also see 6/108b and 23/1b above.

148 26/75: "He (Abraham*) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

149 26/77: “- - - the Worlds - - -“. The Quran tells there are 7 (flat) worlds – Hadiths adds that they are placed one on top of the other, and names them. Wrong. See 65/12.

150 26/77-82: This is not from the Bible like so much of the "biblical" stuff in the Quran. Here is listed a lot of things Abraham claims his god - here meant to be Allah - does. But the Bible disagrees: According to the Bible Abraham's god was Yahweh, not Allah.

151 26/78a: "- - - (Allah*) Who created me (Abram/Abraham*) - - -". See 6/2b and 7/158i above.

152 26/78b: "- - - (Allah*) is He Who guides me (Abram/Abraham*) - - -". See 16/107b above.

153 26/79-81: A number of the natural occurrences Muhammad frequently and without ever proving anything, claimed for Allah. Claims without proofs are just cheap words.

154 26/81: "- - - (Allah will cause me*) to live (again) - - -". See 7/158i above.

155 26/82: "- - - (Allah*) will forgive - - -". Allah can forgive nobody unless he exists and is a god.

156 26/83a: "- - - wisdom - - -". Beware that when the Quran talks about wisdom, knowledge or similar, it nearly always is about knowledge about the Quran and Islam + a few sciences which were helpful to the religion, like Arab (to understand the Quran) or astronomy (to keep track of religious days in Islam's moving year - it is some 11 days shorter than the natural year so that 100 natural years = ca. 103 Muslim years). This was "Islamic knowledge".

All other sciences - included even medicine - were "foreign knowledge" and thus an enemy to the religion. The Muslim area had a period from around 820 AD to 1095 AD (ca. 100 years more in the far west) when sciences at times flowered, but it was in spite of Islam, not because of Islam, and Islam finally won and killed all scientific thinking not related to the Muslim religion. The final battle was won by the book "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" in 1095 by "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad" according to Islam, al-Ghazali. For some 800-900 years there did not come one single new idea or thought which could benefit humanity from all the Islamic area (even today nearly all new ideas, new thoughts, new inventions, new products in the Islamic world are imported ones - many of them strictly against Islam's wishes). In spite of these facts Islam grabs all glory for saving the old knowledge from the old Greece, Persia, etc. - - - this even though the plain story is that this happened against Islam's wishes and even strong opposition and at times bloody persecution - it is like giving the Inquisition the honor for the Renaissance in Europe. And also remember that old knowledge also came from Constantinople before it was conquered and massacred by the invading Muslim Turks - a fact no Muslim mentions.

If Islam gains the upper hand in the world, one must be prepared for a similar stagnant existence - conservative Islam still fights all "foreign knowledge".

But then what do you need f. ex. medicine for, if Allah already has predestined your future or death? - you only insult Him by using medicine by trying to disturb his Plan.

157 26/83b: "- - - righteous - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is as compared to the book's own and partly immoral moral code.

158 26/84a: "- - - honorable - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is as compared to the book's own and partly immoral moral code.

159 26/84b: "- - - truth - - -". See 2/2b above.

160 26/85a: "Make me (Abraham*) one of the inheritors of - - -". Make me qualified for - - -.

161 26/85b: "- - - the Garden of Bliss - - -". Paradise. See 10/9f above.

162 26/86: "Forgive my (Abram/Abraham's*) father, for that he is among those astray". Contradicting the Bible - in the Bible there is no conflict between Abram - later Abraham - and his father. There also is no conflict between Abraham and the others.

163 26/87: "- - - the Day when (men) will be raised up - - -". The Day of Doom.

164 26/88: "- - - the Day - - -". The Day of Doom.

165 26/89a: "But only he (will prosper) that brings to Allah a sound heart - - -". Correct only if Allah exists, if Allah sent down the Quran, and if the Quran tells the full and only truth. Wrong if not.

166 26/89b: "But only he (will prosper) that brings to Allah a sound heart - - -". Contradicted by the Bible, which says it is Yahweh who should be there, 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.

167 26/90a: "To the righteous, the Garden will be brought near - - -". See 26/89a+b just above.

168 26/90b: "- - - the righteous - - -". The Muslims.

169 26/90c: "- - - the Garden - - -". Paradise. See 10/9f above.

170 26/90d: "- - - righteous - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is as compared to the book's own and partly immoral moral code.

171 26/91a: "- - - those straying in Evil - - -". One of Muhammad's many not too sympathetic names for non-Muslims.

172 26/91b: "- - - Evil - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

173 26/91c: "- - - the Fire - - -". Hell.

174 26/91d: "- - - the Fire (of Hell*) will be placed in full view - - -". See 3/77b above.

175 c) above.

176 26/93a: "(other gods*) Besides Allah - - -". See 25/18a above.

177 26/93b: "Besides Allah? Can they (other gods*) help you or help themselves?" A rhetoric question leading up to a perhaps correct answer. But another central point: Also Allah has never proved neither his existence nor his power - a main reason why Islam have to stress the ideal of blind belief, etc. so strongly. But blind belief in all other aspects of life is the easiest way to be cheated.

178 26/94a "- - - the (Fire) - - -". Hell.

179 26/94b: "- - - those straying in Evil - - -". One of Muhammad's many not too sympathetic names for non-Muslims.

180 26/94c: "- - - Evil - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

181 26/95a: "- - - the host of Iblis - - -". Non-Muslims (and some bad Muslims).

182 26/95b "- - - Iblis - - -". The Devil.

183 26/97-103: Non-Muslims end in Hell and nobody can help them. “Verily, in this is a Sign - - -”. Yes, but only if it is true, not just words made up to frighten naïve and/or primitive people to accept a certain religion. Islam presents not one single proof, only cheap words ANYONE can use. How can we learn if Allah really had something to do with it? Islam really has a job to do to prove it. This especially as they never bother to prove things - statements from nowhere are their profession. Also see 3/77b above.

|184 26/97a: "By Allah - - -". Sentences in the Quran starting with "by", normally are oaths - one swears "by" someone or something.

185 26/97b: "By Allah (an oath*), we (non-Muslims*) were truly in error manifest". Only true if Allah exists, is a major god and is correctly described in the Quran. Definitely not true if they follow an existing god (if such one do exist).

186 26/97c: "By Allah - - -". They are swearing by Allah. Most sentences starting with "by" in the Quran, are oaths.

|87 26/97d: "- - - truly - - -". See 2/2b and 13/1g above.

188 26/97e: "- - - error - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this in connection to religion, ethics, moral, etc., it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

189 26/97f: "- - - error manifest - - -". See 2/2b above.

190 26/98a: "- - - (Allah is*) the Lord of the Worlds (plural and wrong*) -- -". Often claimed, never proved - not even Allah's very existence is proved.

191 26/98b: "- - - (Allah is*) the Lord of the Worlds - - -". Contradicted by the Bible, which says Yahweh is the lord, 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.

192 26/98c: “- - - the Worlds - - -“. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.

193 26/99a: "- - - our seducers - - -". Bad non-Muslims leading us away from Allah.

194 26/99b: "- - - guilt". Who are the guilty seducers if the Quran is a made up book? - and remember here that all the mistakes, etc. in that book prove absolutely that no god was involved in making or delivering it.

195 26/100: "- - - we (lost sinners according to the Quran*) have none to intercede for (us) - - -". We are back to the plain fact that the difference between the Quran and its ethical and moral rules are so many and so fundamental that even if you do not qualify for the Quran's paradise, you may well qualify for NT's (and the other way around.) One of the 100% proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and for that Jesus and Muhammad are not in the same league even.

196 26/102: "- - - those who believe - - -". Muslims.

197 26/103a: "Verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

198 26/103b: “- - - Sign - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39b above.

199 26/103c: "- - - most of them (people claimed bound for Hell*) do not believe". One of the many not proved claims in the Quran - only true if Islam is the one and only religion, and if it is correctly described in the Quran.

200 26/103d: "- - - most of them (people claimed bound for Hell*) do not believe". A number of them had a good reason for not believing in Islam; they saw things were very wrong in the new religion.

201 26/104a: "- - - verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

202 26/104b: "(Allah is*) the Exalted in Might - - -". See f.x. 26/68b above.

203 26/104c: "(Allah is*) Most Merciful". Not if he made the surahs from Medina, some of the immoral Islamic moral code, or the most unjust of the sharia laws.

204 26/105: "The people of Noah - - -". A historical anomaly.

205 26/106a: "- - - Noah - - -". A historical anomaly.

206 26/106b: "(Noah said*) Will ye (other people*) not fear (Allah)". Islam claims Allah has been the central and only real god since man/Homo Sapiens started. Science and Islam both have long since proved this wrong, as neither science nor Islam has found one single trace of clear monotheism before the Jews (we know the word is younger, but like many others we use it because it is convenient), and no trace of any Islam before 610 AD (when Muhammad started his preaching).

207 26/107: "I (Noah*) am to you (people*) a messenger worthy all trust". This was more or less what Muhammad claimed about himself, and then it was good psychology that former prophets said the same - this made Muhammad's words more likely. You many places in the Quran find this kind of psychology used.

208 26/108: "(Noah said*) So fear Allah, and obey me". This was one of Muhammad's mantras, and then it was psychologically wise to make it "clear" that this was normal for prophets to say - though you do not find it in the Bible concerning Noah, and also not concerning many biblical known, real prophets". A very nice slogan for any dictator.

209 26/109a: "No reward do I (Noah*)ask of you (people*) for it (my preaching*) - - -". Another - and wrong - of Muhammad's mantras - see 26/108 just above.

210 26/109b: "- - - my (Noah's*) reward is only from (Allah*) - - -". Another parallel to Muhammad legitimizing Muhammad as a claimed prophet. see 26/108 above.

211 26/109c: "- - - (Allah is*) the Lord of the Worlds (plural and wrong*) -- -". Often claimed, never proved - not even Allah's very existence is proved.

212 26/109d: “- - - the Worlds”. Wrong. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.

213 26/110: "So fear Allah and obey me". Identical to 26/108 above.

214 26/111a: "They (the people of Noah*) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

215 26/111b: "They (the people of Noah*) said: Shall we believe - - -". See 26/70b above.

216 26/112: "He (Noah*) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

217 26/113a: "Their (non-Muslims'*) account is only with my (Noah's*) Lord (Allah*) - - -". = It is for Allah only to punish the "unbelievers". Similar to Muhammad's early words - see 26/107 and 26/108 above. But guess if Muhammad changed his mind when he gained raw power!

#218 26/113b: (A26/50): "Noah's answer embodies a cardinal principle of Quranic ethics and, hence, of Islamic law: No human being has the right to sit in judgment on another person's faith and hidden motifs - - -". But this is just what Muslims too often have been and are doing the moment it is clear you are a non-Muslim, not to mention if you are a Muslim wanting to leave the religion.

219 26/113c: "- - - if ye could but understand". The trouble is that if you really understand the Quran - not only the superficial words telling nice things about the religion, but really study what the texts really tell you, you understand and see all the mistakes, etc. and see that this book is not connected to any god.

220 26/114a: "I (Noah*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

221 26/114b: "- - - those who believe". Muslims - believe in Muslims at the time of Noah if you are able to.

222 26/115a: "I (Noah*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

223 26/115b: "I (Noah/Muhammad*) am sent only to warn in public". Parallel to Muhammad - these were his words this early. (Many of the stories are parallels to Muhammad's at the time it was told - legitimating that his situation was normal for prophets, and thus that he was a normal prophet.) Reality changed later when he became powerful - then force and terror entered the picture".

224 26/116a: "They (the people of Noah*) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

225 26/116b: "They (the people of Noah*) said: 'If thou desist not - - -". See 26/70b above.

226 26/116c: "- - - thou (Noah*) shalt be stoned - - -". There is no mentioning of punishment by stoning in the Bible, until in much later times.

227 26/117: "He (Noah*) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

228 26/118a: "- - - those of the Believers (Muslims*) who are with me (Noah)". According to the Quran Noah and his family were good Muslims. No comment - and none necessary (except that Islam here like many other places needs strong proofs.).

229 26/118b: "- - - those of the Believers (Muslims*) who are with me (Noah)". In the Bible there only was Noah's family - 8 persons (if his sons had 1 wife each - 1. Mos. 7/7). In the Quran it seems he had some other followers in addition - but on the other hand not one of his (according to the Bible) only 3 sons.

230 26/119: “- - - in the Ark filled (with all creatures).” Wrong. No boat could take that many thousands of animal and bird pairs (millions if you included insects and similar) + food for them. And even more so not a wooden boat - not possible to build big enough and strong enough for the necessary size. See 11/40.

231 26/121a: "Verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

232 26/121b: “- - - Sign - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39b above.

233 26/121c: "- - - but most of them ( people - and now we are back to Muhammad's time just here*) do not believe". Not strange, at least for the ones who already then saw that something was seriously wrong - f.x. was Noah’s story told by Muhammad quite different from what really was written in the old scriptures.

234 26/122a: "- - - verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

235 26/122b: "(Allah is*) the Exalted in Might - - -". See f.x.26/68b above.

236 26/122c: "(Allah* is*) Most Merciful". See f.x. 1/1a or 26/104c above.

237 26/123a: "The 'Ad people - - -". A tribe from old Arab folklore. It may or may not have existed - some traces may indicate that a tribe with this name once lived, but the rest of what you find about them in the Quran, you only find in the Quran. From where did Muhammad get the stories? As the Quran with all its mistakes is not from a god, the only alternatives are legends, folklore, fairy tales, or fantasy.

238 26/123b: "The 'Ad people - - -". A time anomaly.

239 26/124a: "- - - Hud - - -" The name of a claimed self proclaimed prophet said to be working among the 'Ad tribe in the very old Arabia. You only find him in the Quran. Like many of the other claimed prophets in Quran, he mirrors Muhammad's life up to the time of Muhammad's life when the story was told, and with doom for non-Muslims. As for where Muhammad got his information about Hud from, see 26/123a above.

240 26/124b: "- - - Hud - - -". A time anomaly.

241 26/125a: The self proclaimed prophet (according to the Quran) Hud said: "I am to you a messenger worthy of all trust". This was one of the essences of Muhammad's own preaching. In the tales about claimed former prophets in the Quran, you normally find parallels to Muhammad's life and teachings - it seems to have been essential to him to show that his was a very normal life for prophets (and thus that he was a normal prophet).

242 26/125b: "- - - worthy - - -". See 2/2b above.

243 26/126: The claimed prophet Hud said: "So fear Allah and obey me". This was a very central sentence to Muhammad and it seems to have been essential for him to tell his followers that this was a normal demand from prophets - you find similar sentences from the mouth of claimed former prophets here and there in the Quran - f. ex. see 26/108 and 26/110 above. It seems that Muhammad needed to show everybody he was a normal prophet

244 26/127a: "No reward do I (Hud*) ask of you for it - - -". Also this was one of Muhammad's claims about himself - see 26/125 and 26/126 above. At least for Muhammad this claim was enormously wrong, as he at least claimed total power over his followers, enormous riches (which he according to Islamic books mostly used for bribes to attract and keep followers + not a little to wage war) and lots of women - typical for some false prophets throughout history and even today, whereas real prophets seldom had or wanted much riches and as seldom had more than one wife if any at all (a man like Solomon with all his wives is reckoned to be a powerful king, not a prophet, except in the Quran - the same goes for David (though the word prophet is mentioned)). Also see 26/209a above.

245 26/127b: “- - - (Allah is*) Lord of the Worlds.” Often claimed in the Quran, never documented. Words are cheap.

246 26/127c: “- - - the Worlds.” Wrong. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.

247 26/128: "- - - a landmark on every high place - - -". Altars, poles, etc. to pagan gods often were built/placed on high places.

248 26/129: (A26/57): “And do you get for yourselves fine buildings in the hope of living therein (for ever)?” – or: “- - - that you might gain immortal renown for having built them?” It is anybody’s guess what the Quran really means here, too. Clear speech? And these variants - as always - also are in the Arab text, as the relevant word(s) there has/have more than one meaning. Clear language in the Quran?

249 26/130: (A26/58) "- - - a Quranic prohibition, valid for all times, of all unnecessary cruelty in war, coupled with the positive, clearly-implied injunction to subordinate every act of war - as well as the decision to wage war as such - to moral considerations and restraints". Anyone knowing something about Muslim war history and also of treatment of prisoners of war and of suppressed people after many wars, are able to comment on this kind of claims from present-day Muslim scholars, but we do not like to use so impolite words as the ones necessary to correct these claims, perhaps except the word hypocrisy.

250 26/131: "Now fear Allah and obey me (Hud*)". See f.x. 26/108, 26/110 and 26/126 above.

251 26/132-134: Different never proved or documented claims. See 11/7a above. 

252 26/135a: "Truly - - -". See 2/2b above.

253 26/135b: "- - - the Penalty of the Great Day". See 3/77b above.

254 26/135c: "- - - the Great Day". The Day of Doom.

255 26/136a: "They (the 'Ad people*) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

256 26/136b: "They (the 'Ad people*) said - - -". See 26/70b above.

257 26/137: (A26/59 – in 2008 edition A26/60 but the alternative explanation omitted): “This is no other than a customary service of the ancients”. The old pagans defend their religion with that it is the reliable religion of our forefathers (Ibn Abbas, ‘Ikrimah, Qatadah). Or maybe it was the other way around? – that they accused the Muslims (in this case the presumed prophet Hud) for telling just old nonsense? – “This that you tell us just (is*) repetition of old and outdated ideas.” It actually is clear that what Muhammad told mostly were old stories - often with a twist to make them fit his religion.

258 26/139a: "They (the 'Ad people*) rejected him (Hud*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

259 26/139b: "They (the 'Ad people*) rejected him (Hud*) - - -". See 26/70b above.

260 26/139c: "Verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

261 26/139d: “- - - Sign - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39b above.

262 26/139e: "- - - most of them (non-Muslims*) do not believe". At least some of them - f.x. the Jews - because they saw something were wrong in this new religion.

263 26/140a: "- - - verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

264 26/140b: "(Allah is*) the Exalted in Might - - -". But during 1400 years there was not one single proof for that claimed might - only claims based on the words of a man with doubtful moral and who on top of that liked power and was not adverse to lying (f. e. "Miracles will make no-one believe anyhow"), and deception (f. x. "War is deception") .

265 26/140c: "(Allah is*) Most Merciful". See f.x. 1/1a or 26/104c above.

266 26/141a: "- - - the Thamud - - -". Another tribe from old Arab folklore which may or may not have existed (there are indications for their existence, but what you read about them in the Quran, you only find in that book - from where did Muhammad get the information about them as the Quran with all its mistakes, etc. is from no god, and no reliable sources existed?).

267 26/141b: "- - - the Thamud (people) - - -". A historical anomaly.

268 26/141c: "- - - the Thamud (people) rejected the messengers". See 16/70b above.

269 26/142a: "- - - Salih - - -". Like Hud (see 26/124) a claimed self-proclaimed prophet you only meet in the Quran.

270 26/142b: "- - - Salih - - -". A historical anomaly.

271 26/142c: "Will ye (the Thamud people*) not fear (Allah)?". The claimed 3 Arab prophets mentioned in the Quran (Hud, Salih, and Shu'ayb) all are said to have operated in the time between Noah and Moses. Noah - if he ever lived - is likely to have lived several thousand years ago, and Moses around 1300-1400 BC. If you are able to believe in Muslims at that time, you are free to do so, but neither science nor Islam has found any traces of that religion anywhere earlier than 610 AD when Muhammad started his preaching.

272 26/143a: "I (Salih*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

273 26/143b: "I (Salih*) am to you a Messenger worthy of all trust". See f. ex. 26/125a above.

275 26/144: "So fear Allah, and obey me (Salih*)". See f. ex. 26/108, 26/110 and 26/126 above

276 26/145a: "No reward do I (Salih*) ask of you for it - - -" See f.x. 26/109a and 26/127a above.

277 26/145b: "No reward do I (Salih*) ask - - -". A historical anomaly.

278 26/145c: "- - - my (Salih's*) reward is only from (Allah*) - - -". Another parallel to Muhammad legitimizing Muhammad as a claimed prophet. see 26/108 above.

279 26/145d: “- - - (Allah is*) Lord of the Worlds.” Often claimed in the Quran, never documented. Words are cheap.

280 26/145e: “- - - (Allah is*) Lord of the Worlds.” Contradicted by the Bible, which says Yahweh id the lord, 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.

281 26/145f: “- - - the Worlds.” Wrong. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.

282 26/146-150: The claimed prophet Salih lists good things the Thamud people have, and tells them that if they want to have it and live in peace, they will have to believe in Allah.

283 26/150: "But fear Allah and obey me (Salih*) - - -". See f.x. 26/108, 26/110 and 26/126 above,

284 26/153a: "Thou (Salih*) art only one of those bewitched!" If this is said to "prove" to Muhammad's followers that such words as Muhammad himself met, just were normal for prophets, it is psychologically quite cleverly done.

285 26/153b: "- - - they (the Thamud people*) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

286 26/153c: "- - - they (the Thamud people*) said: 'Thou (Salih*) art only - - -'". See 16/70b above.

287 26/154a: "- - - bring us (people) a Sign, if thou (Salih*) tellest the truth!" The same demands Muhammad met from followers and from opponents - see f. ex. 26/153 just above. Muhammad never was able to prove anything at all. Only claims, statements and evasions.

288 26/154b: “- - - Sign - - -.” One of many requests for proofs about Allah through the times - each and every one of them in vain.

289 26/154c: "- - - the truth!" See 2/2b and 13/1g above.

290 26/155: "Here is a she-camel - - -". This camel was quite an enigma to us in the beginning - how can a camel be a proof for a god in a land where there is a score of camels to each dozen? But finally we found out: This refers to an old Arab legend about a camel which came out from a solid cliff and became a prophet. Then there suddenly is a meaning in the story - this camel was special. But would a universal god use a story only some Arabs could understand (and today even refuses because it is too naive)? Yes, would a god even need to "borrow" old stories at all? NT also has a number of stories, but few of them are borrowed, and the ones which are, are not pretended to be originals.

291 26/156: "- - - the Penalty of a Great Day (of Doom*) - - -". See 3/77b above.

292 26/157a: "- - - they (the Thamud people*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

293 26/157b: "- - - they (the Thamud people*) hamstrung her (the camel*) - - -'". See 16/70b above.

294 26/158a: "But the penalty sized them". Always when some ones are not good Muslims they are penalized in the end (or become good Muslims a few times) - good for the moral of the believers, especially the naive ones and the ones wanting to believe such tales - in both cases good psychology. 

295 26/158b: "Verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

296 26/158c: “- - - Sign - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39b above.

297 26/158d: "- - - most of them (non-Muslims*) do not believe". At least some of them - f.x. the Jews - because they saw something was wrong in this new religion.

298 26/159a: "- - - verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

299 26/159b: "(Allah is*) the Exalted in Might - - -". Often claimed in the Quran, never proved anywhere.

300 26/159c: "(Allah is*) Most Merciful". See f.x. 1/1a or 26/104c above.

301 26/160a: "The people of Lut (Lot*) - - -". Here is referred to the people of the towns Sodom and Gomorra. They were not the people of Lot, as he was from very far off (Ur of the Chaldeans in what now is south Iraq), and it is clear from both the Bible and from the Quran that he also was not naturalized into the communities - but to make good its claim that prophets were sent to their own people, Muhammad needed this way of saying it. But Lot lived in that neighborhood - likely near Sodom.

302 26/160b: "The people of Lut (Lot*) rejected the messengers" - just like Muhammad was rejected in Mecca at the start. The message: To be rejected is normal for prophets - like Muhammad - but they will be punished.

303 26/160c: "The people of Lut (Lot*) rejected the messengers". See 26/70b above.

304 26/160d: "- - - Lut (Lot in the Bible*) - - -". A time anomaly.

305 26/161a: “- - - their (the people of Sodom and Gomorrah*) brother Lot - - -“. Wrong. Lot was a stranger to the two towns, and it is very clear both from the Quran and the Bible that he did not mingle well with those locals. He came - together with Abraham - from Ur in Chaldea (in south Iraq). He was no “brother” to them – not even in the figurative meaning of the word. (The word here obviously is used to make Lot and the mentioned people fit the pattern the Quran claims is universal: That the prophets come from the people they are to teach. But here that is incorrect). Also see 11/92 just above and 27/56 – it is very clear Lot was no brother of theirs - also not a naturalized "brother". (“Drive out the followers of Lut (Lot*) from our city - - -“.)

306 26/161b: "- - - Lut (Lot in the Bible*) - - -". A time anomaly.

307 26/161b: "(Lot said*): 'Will ye not fear (Allah)?" Lot - if he ever lived - lived around 2ooo - 1800 BC. You are free to believe he preached about Allah at that time if you are able to, but neither science, nor Islam has been able to find any trace at all of Islam older than ca. 610 AD - some 2500 years later.

308 26/162c: "I (Lot*) - - -". A time anomaly.

309 26/162b: "I (Lot*) am to you a messenger (not said in the Bible*) worthy of all trust". See f.x. 26/125a above.

310 26/163: "So fear Allah and obey me (Lot*) - - -". See f.x. 26/108, 26/110 and 26/126 above.

311 26/164a: "No reward do I (Lot*) ask of you for it - - -." See f.x. 26/109a and 26/127a above.

312 26/164b: "- - - I (Lot*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

313 26/164c: "- - - my (Lot's*) reward is only from (Allah*) - - -". Another parallel to Muhammad legitimizing Muhammad as a claimed prophet. see 26/108 above.

314 26/164d: “- - - (Allah is*) Lord of the Worlds.” Often claimed in the Quran, never documented. Words are cheap.

315 26/164e: “- - - (Allah is*) Lord of the Worlds.” Contradicted by the Bible, which says the lord is 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.

316 26/164f: “- - - the Worlds.” Wrong. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.

317 26/165: "Of all creatures in the world, will ye (the men of Sodom and Gomorrah*) approach males - - -". Sodom and Gomorra were infamous for homosexuality.

318 26/167a: "- - - O Lut (Lot*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

319 26/167b: "They (the men of Sodom and Gomorrah*) said: 'If you (Lot*) desists not - - -". See 26/70b above.

320 26/168: "He (Lot*) said - - -". A time anomaly.

321 26/169: "O my (lot's*) Lord (here indicated Allah*)!" Contradicted by the Bible, which tells Lot'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.

322 26/171: "- - - an old woman - - -". She cannot have been too old as she was Lot's wife according to both the Bible and the Quran.

323 26/172: "But the rest (Sodom and Gomorrah*) We (here indicated Allah*) We destroyed utterly". Contradicted by the Bible, which tells this was done by Yahweh, not by Allah. (And also by different means.) 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.

324 26/173: "We (Allah*) rained down on them (Sodom and Gomorrah*) a shower (of brimstone)- - -". Also other places in the Quran it is said brimstones - the Bible says burning sulfur (1. Mos. 19/24). A small, but clear contradiction.

325 26/174a: "Verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

326 26/174b: “- - - Sign - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah. See 2/39a above.

327 26/174c: "- - - most of them (non-Muslims*) do not believe". At least some of them - f.x. the Jews - because they saw something was wrong in this new religion.

328 26/175a: "- - - verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

329 26/175b: "(Allah is*) the Exalted in Might - - -". Often claimed, never proved..

330 26/175c: "(Allah is*) Most Merciful". See f. ex. 26/104c above.

331 26/176a: (YA3214): “- - - the Companions (or People*) of the Wood - - -“. Who were they? Another name for the people of Madyan? A group within the Medianites? Neighbors of the Medianites? Or some other tribe or group? Unclear in the Quran.

332 26/176b: “- - - the Companions (or People*) of the Wood - - -“. No matter who they were, if they ever lived, they lived sometime between Noah and Moses, and thus they were a time anomaly for everyone living earlier who could read about them in copies their claimed prophets had got of the timeless "Mother Book" in Heaven - like Muhammad got a copy which he named the Quran.

333 26/176c: “- - - the Companions (or People*) of the Wood rejected the messengers“. See f.x. 26/160b above.

334 26/177a: "- - - Shu'ayb - - -". Another claimed prophet in the old Arabia you only find in the Quran. There were 3 of them, and Shu'ayb was the last one. Some Muslims claim he was identical to the father-in-law of Moses, Jethro (2. Mos. 18/1) but it is clear from Islamic sources that he - if he ever existed - lived a few centuries earlier).

335 26/177b: "- - - Shu'ayb - - -". A historical anomaly.

336 26/178a: "I (Shu'ayb*) am to you a messenger worthy all trust". See f.x. 26/125a above.

337 26/178b: "- - - trust - - -". See 2/2b above.

338 26/179: "So fear Allah and obey me (Shu'ayb*)". See f.x. 26/108, 26/110 and 26/126 above.

 

339 26/180a: "No reward do I (Shu'ayb*) ask of you for it - - -". See f. ex. 26/160 above.

340 26/180b: "- - - I (Shu'ayb*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

341 26/180c: "- - - my (Shu'ayb's*) reward is only from (Allah*) - - -". Another parallel to Muhammad legitimizing Muhammad as a claimed prophet. see 26/108 above.

342 26/180d: “- - - (Allah is*) Lord of the Worlds.” Often claimed in the Quran, never documented. Words are cheap.

343 26/180e: “- - - (Allah is*) Lord of the Worlds.” Contradicted by the Bible, which says the lord is 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.

344 26/180f: “- - - the Worlds.” Wrong. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.

345 26/181-183: One of the good things in the Quran, is demand for honesty in trade (though some places may indicate that it is worse to cheat Muslims than non-Muslims). But then there are facts like al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), deceit, broken promises/words/oaths it that gives a better result). Islam is the only of the big religion which has dishonesty and worse as an integrated part of the religion.

346 26/183: "- - - evil - - - mischief - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

347 26/184: "- - - Him (Allah*) Who created you (people*) - - -". See 6/2b and 21/56c above.

348 26/185a: "They (the People of the Wood*) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

349 26/185b: "They (the People of the Wood*) said: 'Thou (Shu'ayb*) art - - -". See 26/70b above.

350 26/185c: "Thou (Shu’ayb*) art only one of those bewitched!" See f.x. 26/153a above.

351 26/186a: "Thou art no more than a mortal like us (the People of the Wood*) - - -". Another parallel to Muhammad's daily life at that time - and one more "indication" for that Muhammad was a normal prophet.

352 26/186b: "- - - indeed - - -". See 2/2b above.

353 26/186c: "- - - a liar." As a parallel to Muhammad, this is (unintended?) irony, as it is clear Muhammad lied now and then - even broke his oath.

354 26/187: "Now cause a piece of the sky to fall down - - -". Also other prophets got requests for proofs they were unable to fulfill - Muhammad was a normal prophet on this point, too, is the underlying message.

355 26/188a: "He (Shu'ayb*) said - - -". A historical anomaly.

356 26/188b: "(Allah*) knows best what ye do". Why then does he have to test people if he knows everything?

357 26/189a "- - - they (the People of the Wood*) - - -". A historical anomaly.

358 26/189b "- - - they (the People of the Wood*) rejected him (Shu'ayb*". See 26/70b above.

359 26/189c: (A26/77 – in 2008 edition A26/78): “Then the punishment of overshadowing gloom sized them (the people of Madyan), and that was the Penalty of a Great Day.” Does this refer to physical darkness? – but Madyan was destroyed by an earthquake according to the Quran (7/91), and earthquakes are not accompanied by darkness. Or does it refer to spiritual darkness caused by regret – but there was nobody left to feel regret if everybody was dead (a fact that is not mentioned)? Islam does not know the answer – the text does not make it clear.

360 26/189d: “The Message of the Quran” here comments the catastrophe that killed the Madyan people, and the connected darkness told about in the Quran, in this way (A26/77): “This may refer either to the physical darkness which often accompanies volcanic eruptions and earthquakes (which as shown in 7/91, overtook the people of Madyan) - - -“. This is not – repeat: NOT – true connected to earthquakes. It is not unusual if a volcano blows out a lot of ash that it becomes dark, but unusual if it only or mainly emits lava, and it is totally untrue for earthquakes. Dishonesty or al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie - here in case to defend the religion).

If we check 7/91, the footnote number 73 says: “Like the 'harrah' once inhabited by the Thamud tribe, the adjoining region of Madyan shows ample evidence of volcanic eruptions and earthquakes”. This is everything that is said about volcanic activity. The main volcanism stopped some 400ooo years ago, but there has been a little activity later.

Then if you go to 7/91 itself, it says: “Thereupon an earthquake overtook them: and they lay lifeless, in their very homes, on the ground.” Not one single word about volcanism.

They started with earthquake. But as earthquakes never kills 100% (normally max 10% and hardly ever more that 30% except combined with low quality high-rise buildings), the footnote added a hint of the possibility of a volcanic eruption. Then in footnote A78 to 26/189 this has evolved to “- - - volcanic eruptions and earthquakes (which, as shown in 7/91, overtook the people of Madyan.)”.

This is a kind of dishonesty and a kind of intellectual corruption that one meets far too often in Islamic religious literature, included in literature pretending to be on a scientific level. Al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) and its brothers are busy sometimes in Islam - you have to check everything (this also go for so-called "refuting" of arguments or facts adverse to the Quran or Islam - you have to check everything to see what is true and what not).

The next life – if it exists – is a far too serious topic to cheat people about. And if you have to cheat or “al-Taqiyya” or lie – or use pressure or threats - to attract people to your religion, or to make its members stay inside, it is height time to stop up and start thinking why you have to lie or cheat or use pressure. In such cases the chances are high for that something is seriously wrong and the religion not true. A true religion can afford to be honest, so if you have to cheat or make lies or use pressure, that indicates that something is wrong to use an understatement.

If your religion cannot afford total honesty, it is a clear indication for that it is not a true religion. And this alone is nearly a proof for that you are heading a wrong way – if there is a next life. (If not, the way you are heading does not matter – except as a cheap way to a good earthly life for your religious leaders.)

And there is a final, nearly as serious fact: If the persons writing – or like “The Message of the Quran” 2008, revising it – such literature are intelligent ones (and they clearly are), there is no way they do not themselves see that they are manipulating the truth. They are doing this in a cold and psychologically well planned way – efficient to lure and to cheat the naïve and the little educated and the ones who on beforehand wants to believe, but methods easily recognizable for persons trained in critical thinking. Why do they have to use such methods? - and what is a religion(?) needing such methods worth?

361 26/189e: "- - - the Penalty of a Great Day". See 3/77b above.

362 26/189f: "- - - a Great Day". Here the Day of Doom.

263 26/190a: "Verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

364 26/190b: “- - - Sign - - -.” Invalid as proof for Allah or anything. See 2/39b above.

365 26/190c: "- - - most of them (non-Muslims*) do not believe". At least some of them - f.x. the Jews - because they saw something was wrong in this new religion.

366 26/191a: "- - - verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

367 26/191b: "(Allah is*) the Exalted in Might - - -." Often claimed in the Quran, never proved anywhere.

368 26/191c: "(Allah is*) Most Merciful" See f. ex. 1/1a or 26/104c above.

369 26/192a: "Verily - - -". See 2/2b above.

370 26/192b: “Verily, this (the Quran*) is a revelation from the Lord of the Worlds (Allah*)”. Something similar to the Quran is indicated. If is true that it is a revelation, Allah is not omniscient. Something definitely is wrong.

371 26/192c: “- - - (Allah is*) Lord of the Worlds.” Often claimed in the Quran, never documented. Words are cheap.

372 26/192d: “- - - the Worlds - - -.” Wrong. See 26/77 above and 65/12 below.

*373 26/193a: “With it (the Quran*) came the Spirit of Faith and Truth”. If truth came down with the Quran, it must have been mutilated later. NB: This is one of the places where Quran mentions "the Holy Spirit", (though the Arab "Al ruh al Amin" normally refers to the archangel Gabriel - but Muslims often mix the two, and many do not even know the difference and believe they are the same. This even though Muslim top scholars know the Bible, and no-one really knowing the Bible would mix the two; for one thing it indirectly, but very clear is told in the texts that the two are two different beings, and for another the writers of the Bible knew the difference between angels and spirits.).

374 26/193-196a: (A26/85 – in 2008 edition AA26/83): “With it (the Quran) came down the Spirit and the Truth – to thy heart and mind that thou mayst admonish in the perspicuous Arabic tongue. Without doubt it is (announced) in the revealed Books of former peoples.” But is it the Quran that is announced, like it is indicated here, and which is the most widely held view in Islam (even though the Quran definitely is not mentioned, not to say announced, in the Bible)? – or is it the contents that has been sent before (but claimed by Islam to be falsified), like f. ex. Zamakhshari and Baydawi thinks? Impossible to know – the text is not clear on this point.

375 26/193-196b: (A26/85 – in 2008 edition AA26/83): “With it (the Quran) came down the Spirit and the Truth – to thy heart and mind that thou mayst admonish in the perspicuous Arabic tongue. Without doubt it is (announced) in the revealed Books of former peoples.” What is sure here is that if it is meant that the Quran is announced in the Bible, which is the most likely way to understand these verses, it is totally wrong - so wrong that not even Islam looks for such announcements. They try to find foretelling about Muhammad, but not about the Quran - most likely because there is no point in the Bible which can be twisted to a foretelling for that book.

376 26/195: "- - - In the perspicuous Arabic tongue". Was that the best language to choose if Allah intended to reach all humanity? Around 610 AD a rather small and isolated language mainly of primitive nomad tribes, with an unfinished alphabet that even today makes it impossible to know exactly what was meant many places. Latin or Greek or Persian had reached many more, and as they had complete alphabets, it had been possible to write exactly what was meant - unlike in the at that time unfinished Arab alphabet.

377 26/196a: "Without doubt - - -". In a book with so much wrong, there is room for doubt about anything which is not proved. Also see 2/2b above

##378 26/196b: “Without doubt it (the Quran*) is (announced) in the revealed Books (the Torah, the Bible*) of former peoples.” There is very much doubt about that, as the basic elements of the teachings are too different – especially compared to NT and “the new covenant” which is the fundamental one for Christianity. It is plainly wrong - it is absolutely sure that the Quran is not announced in the Bible or in any relevant Jewish scriptures. Also see the chapter about "Muhammad in the Bible" in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran".

Flatly stated: It is incorrect that the Quran is revealed in the Bible (not even Muslims claim this today - and if you run across the claim, their references are not to "documentation" about the Quran revealed in the Bible, but to claimed references to Muhammad there (they only are possible to see if you cherry-pick words and add wishful thinking and a huge dash of al-Taqiyya and/or Kitman - lawful lies and lawful half-truths)). Even this often met claim that Muhammad is foretold in the Bible, as you understand is wrong. And as saidthe basic thoughts are too different between the Bible and the Quran: Both books cannot come from the same god. This is especially easy to see if you compare the Quran to NT.

Some Muslim scholars say it is the basic ideas of the Quran which is foretold in the Bible. Please read the Bible and especially NT, and the Quran and compare - and weep (you will not be tempted to laugh).

379 26/197a: “Is it not a Sign to them that the Learned of the Children of Israel knew it (as true)?”

This sentence is dishonest. It is not proved, but Islam claims that one or some learned Jew(s) accepted Muhammad as a prophet. But only a few of the thousands of learned Jews in case. If the story is true, an honest sentence had said: “- - - a few of - - -” or at most “- - - some of - - -”. There is quite a difference between "- - - the Learned of - - -" and "- - - a few of the Learned of - - -". Dishonesty in a presumed holy book does not give a favorable impression. And why is dishonesty necessary? - and how many other points in the book stems from dishonesty?

As the great majority of the Jews - learned as not learned - denied that Muhammad could be a prophet even as they were robbed of their possessions, slaughtered in wars, and murdered “en masse” as helpless prisoners, or made slaves, it is absolutely sure that what the Jews - learned or not - meant about him, was no sign for Muhammad or Allah. This even more so as to become Muslim was the only way to keep one’s riches and later one’s life, as Muhammad gained power in Medina, and still most Jews refused him. Some “renegade” swallows make no summer.

A true religion easily can live on - and tell - the truth or what one honestly believes is the truth after honest examination. If a religion or any other story needs to use lies or half-truths or even al-Taqiyyas (the lawful lie) or Kitman (the lawful half-truth), not to mention institutionalizes al-Taqiyya and Kitman as means to defend and forward the religion, one must ask why are lies necessary? - and the natural following up question: How much more of what they tell about their religion in reality is lies?

In the Quran and also in Hadith, it is claimed there were one or a very few learned Jew(s) who accepted Muhammad as may be a prophet. The stories might even be true. But we are back to the old truth: “One swallow makes no summer”. It is absolutely sure that the Jews as a group - learned or not - did not accept his teachings for the truth even in the face of death (f.x. the Qurayza tribe - the last big Jewish tribe in Medina), one or a few exceptions may be expected. The same is the truth today.

There also is another fact here: Islam from Mecca (610 - 622 AD) is quite different from Islam from Medina (622 - 632 AD) - a fact NEVER mentioned by Muslims. Therefore, even if some Jewish and/or Christian scholars should have been inclined towards Islam of Mecca - there only is Islam's words for this - it tells little or nothing about how such scholars viewed Islam of Medina in say 632 AD.

No, it was no valid sign.

380 26/197b: "- - - the Children of Israel - - -". Literally the children of the patriarch Jacob. A historical anomaly.

381 26/197c: "- - - (as true) - - -". See 2/2b above.

382 26/198: "Had We (Allah*) revealed it (the Quran *) - - -". No god would ever destroy his reputation by being involved in a book of a quality like the Quran. If it is revealed, it is not from a god.

383 26/198-199: "Had We (Allah*) revealed it (the Quran*) to the non-Arabs, and had he recited it, they (the Arabs*) would not have believed in it". Wrong. There were a number of Arabs who had converted to other religions - included the Mosaic and the Christian ones - religions who had their holy books in other languages.

Besides: The main thing for a universal god should have been that many got the message - to send it via Arabia was quite a bottleneck.

384 26/199: "- - - had he (another prophet than Muhammad - a non-Arab*) recited it (the Quran*) to them (people*), they would not have believed in it". With that much wrong in the Quran, they had had reason for doubt.

385 26/200: "- - - Sinners - - -". 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.

One small remark: As Yahweh's religion and f.x. moral code at many points are totally different from Allah's, you may qualify for Yahweh's Paradise even if Muslims condemn you to Hell - if both exists.

386 26/200-203: Penalty. See 3/77b above.

387 26/201: "- - - grievous penalty - - -". See 3/77b above.

388 26/204: "Do they (non-Muslims*) then ask for Our (Allah's*) Penalty to be hastened on?" Muhammad's opponents sometimes asked him for demonstrations as proofs. He never was able to do this, too - only more or less believable words for explaining things away, as always.

389 26/205-206: “Seest thou? If We (Allah*) do let them enjoy (this life) for a few years (anything is “few” compared to eternity*), Yet there comes to them at length the (punishment) which they were promised!” Even if you think it is unjust that non-Muslims do well and you not, calm down – it just is a result of Allah’s Plan and his endless wisdom, and rest assured; they will be punished in the next life and you come out on top.

390 26/208a: "Never did We (Allah*) destroy a population, but had its warners - - -." Simply wrong. There have been many "acts of God" - natural disasters - which were not warned against. Ache on North Sumatra is heavily Muslim - but was much destroyed by the tsunami 26. Des. 2004 to mention a recent story. And the earth quake in North Pakistan 1-2 years later, to mention another.

<>391 26/208b: "- - - destroy a population - - -". The ones saying Yahweh was murderous in OT, are in for some information if they read the Quran - Allah was/is much bloodier. (And if they compare old Islamic history with European history, they also will find some surprises - but most Westerners complaining about the bad Europe and its history, knows little or nothing about other cultures' military - and raiding and enslaving - history. 

##392 26/209: “- - - and We (Allah) never are unjust”.

A man correctly telling that a woman has been indecent, is lying to Allah if he cannot produce 4 witnesses - even if an omniscient Allah has to know he is speaking the truth.

A woman who has been raped, is forbidden to tell who it was, unless she can produce 4 MALE witnesses WHO HAS ACTUALLY SEEN THE ACT. If she cannot produce 4 such witnesses, and all the same tells who the rapist is she shall have 80 whiplashes for slander.

**A woman who is raped and cannot produce 4 MALE witnesses (that on top of all will be punished for not helping her if they witness about what they saw) that saw the very act, is to be strictly punished – may be stoned – for indecency - if she is unable to hide that she has been raped - . Probably the most unjust and amoral law we have ever seen in a “modern” society.

It is 100% permitted for an owner to rape his female slaves or captives of war (may be this is why Muslims so often rape women during conflicts - f. x. earlier in Bangladesh and earlier and now in Africa). The Quran even directly tells that it is no sin to rape also your married slaves or prisoners of war, as long as they are not pregnant. NB: As for raping a captive there is an even more disgusting fact: It has to be done in the name of Allah - during or after a jihad ("holy war" - practically all conflicts are declared jihad).

**It is glorious and the Muslims’ right to steal, rob, plunder, rape, enslave and to kill non-Muslims during jihad - and almost any conflict is declared jihad (holy war). It is “just and good”.

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

*393 26/210: “No evil ones have brought down this (Revelation) - - -“. A little ironic to meet this claim, as this is one of the theories for who made the Quran. Another thing: When someone has bad conscience, slips of the tongue sometimes just are to deny the thing for which they have bad conscience.

*394 26/210-211: “No evil ones have brought down this (Revelation). It would neither suit them - - -“. May be no evil spirits have brought down the Quran. But is definite that no omniscient god has done so – too many mistakes, etc. It also is definite that no good or benevolent god or spirit did it – far too inhuman, full of hate and suppression and blood – not to mention the wretched ethic and moral in the book. All the same it is possible it was not sent down by bad or evil forces (even bad supernatural forces would be too intelligent to make a book with so many mistakes, contradictions, invalid logic, etc., as they had to know they would be found out sooner or later and lose their credibility - though a possibility is that the god demanded a low quality book to permit the Devil to make such a trap - f. x. may be the god wanted it to be possible for humans to understand something was wrong and thus evade the trap) – it simply is possible, and even likely, that it was made by one or more men (all the wrong science and "knowledge" in accordance with the local beliefs in and around Arabia at that time, and a lot more points in that direction). But what is absolutely sure, is that an Islam like the one one finds in the surahs from Medina suits evil spirits and forces very well: Inhumanity, stealing, blood, hate, war. Just ask Muslims what they think about the Mongols attacking them in the east. The religion in Mongolia under and after Djingis Khan basically was quite similar to Islam. When Islam used their war machine and inhumanity in f. ex. India and other places, they according to all Muslims were heroes. Then they met Mongols who did just the same to Muslims - - and the Mongols were terrible monsters. But then the southern Mongols became Muslims and continued in the same way like before, but now against non-Muslims - - - and now they were great heroes according to Islam. Ask them if the f. ex. remember the name Timur Lenk (Tamerlane).

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

395 26/211a: "- - - it (the Quran*) would neither suit them (the dark forces*) - - -". Please read the surahs from Medina - they on top of all according to Islam's rules for abrogation (making verses invalid when they conflict) are the dominant ones as they are the youngest ones - and then read this sentence once more: There are lots and lots of things in the Quran which suits the dark forces ever so well.

*396 26/211b: “- - - nor would they (non-Muslims*) be able (to produce it) (something similar to the Quran*)”. Wrong. In spite of all the glorious words Muslims use about the Quran, it is not good literature. There are lots and lots of mistakes and contradictions. There is lots of wrong logic. There are numbers of linguistic errors. There hardly is anything original in the book - the stories are taken from the Bible and a few other old books, from made up religious tales, from folklore and from legends and fairy tales and just changed a little. Also in thinking and in laws and morality there was little new - if any; there were a few changes compared to the old Arabia, but those ideas came from neighboring cultures. And the same stories are told again and again - most boring. Also good writers - not the original composer - polished the Arab language in the book for some 250 years (until ca. 900 AD).

Claims like that the Quran is good literature you can tell to the naïve, uneducated illiterate savages of the old (and for that case modern) times. Skip it when you are talking to an educated modern person who knows the Quran (far too few does – many had been disgusted) and knows a little about literature. The Quran may be intelligent religious tales for its time, but it is not and was not a good piece of literature. Boring, repetitive, a melee of this and that – no logical system in the tales, the tales all “borrowed” from others and well known, no new thoughts, boringly told, etc. For similar claims see 17/88

There would be no problem for a good or medium writer to collect stories and write something similar - or better. But for what? - no matter how well written, not one single believing Muslim had admitted it was better than the Quran, as that had meant the Quran was and is not from a god.

497 26/212: "Indeed - - -". See 2/2b above.

398 26/213a: "So call on no other deity with Allah - - -". See 25/18a above.

399 26/213b: "So call on no other deity with Allah, or thou wilt be among those under the Penalty." Sure - if the Quran is correct. Also see 3/77b above.

400 26/213c: "So call on no other deity with Allah, or thou wilt be among those under the Penalty." Contradicted by the Bible, which definitely says that it is better to call for Yahweh than for Allah. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. 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.

401 26/215a: "- - - lower thy (Muslim's*) wing to - - -". This is an Arab expression meaning that you shall help, defend, and care for someone. But would a god use an expression you had to be Arab to understand, if he wanted to reach all the world?

402 26/215b: "- - - Believers - - -". Muslims.

403 26/216a: (YA3234): "'Disobey thee (Muhammad*) - - -' implies that they did something wrong, for the Prophet (Muhammad*) commanded what was right and forbade what was wrong.' Thus hate mongering, war mongering, murder of opponents, stealing/robbing, lying, deceiving and breaking oaths when that is better, extortion, enslaving, raping, raids for riches, is right in Islam? Muhammad did all this and more.

404 26/216b: (YA3234): "'Disobey thee (Muhammad*) - - -'. A historical anomaly.

405 26/216c: “I (Muhammad*) am free (of responsibility) for what ye (“infidels”*) do!” This was in Mecca ca. 615 – 616 AD. The tone rapidly grew more unfriendly after 622 AD when he grew military strong – and the teachings needed some “adjustments” to fit a war religion = contradictions and abrogations: This verse is contradicted and often “killed” (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).

406 26/217a: "- - - put thy trust in (Allah*) - - -". Rather risky as long as nothing ever was documented about him - not even if he exists or if he in reality belongs to the white or the dark side (he does not belong to the white side if he is behind the Quran - too much is wrong in that book, and too many of the moral codes, etc. are immoral (just compare them to "do unto others like you want others do unto you" and see for yourself.

407 26/217b: "- - - the Exalted in Might (Allah*) - - -". at a might never proved - only words, and words are cheap.

408 26/217c: "- - - the Merciful (Allah*) - - -". Read the Quran and the sharia laws. Look not for what is said about Allah's mercy, but for what Allah demands and does and for what rules he introduces, etc. Is he merciful? Any day when there is a difference between what is said and what is demanded and done, we believe in what is demanded and done, not in what is said. Deeds are much more reliable than words. See 1/1a above.

409 26/218a: “- - - Who seeth thee (Muslims*) standing forth (in prayer).” What is the idea and effect of prayers in Islam, if everything is predestined by Allah in accordance with an unchangeable Plan years and decades and more before, like the Quran stated several places?

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.)

410 26/218b: “- - - Who seeth thee (Muslims*) standing forth (in prayer).” Or maybe (Mujahid/Tabari): “- - - Who seeth you wherever thou mayst be.” Both meanings are possible from the Arab text. And these variants - like before - also are in the Arab text, as the relevant word(s) there has/have more than one meaning.

411 26/219: "- - - those who prostrate themselves (= pray*) - - -". See 26/218a above.

412 26/220: "For it is He (Allah*) who heareth and knoweth all things". Remember that - for better or worse. Also see 2/233h above.

413 26/221: "- - - the evil ones - - -". The underlings of Iblis/the Devil.

414 26/222: "They (the evil ones*) descend on every lying, wicked person - - -". Just a few words: Al-Taqiyya, Kitman, "war is betrayal", broken words/promises/oaths, stealing/robbing/looting, raping, enslaving, extorting, torturing, murder, war mongering, discrimination mongering, hate mongering, mass murder, war - and there are more. No more comments.

415 26/222: "They (the evil ones*) descend on every lying, wicked person - - -". We may here mention that Muhammad sometimes lied - even in the Quran, and even accepted the breaking of oaths if that gave better results. Also not a little of his moral code qualifies for the word "wicked".

416 26/223: "- - - most of them (non-Muslims/bad people*) are liars". But most non-Muslims do not belong to a religion which accepts dishonesty and worse as an integrated and accepted part of the religion.

417 26/224a: "And the Poets - it is those straying in Evil, who follow them - - -". Some of the known contemporary poets opposed Muhammad, so he disliked them and even had a couple of them murdered. (Let there be no compulsion in religion?)

418 26/224b: "- - - Evil - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

419 26/225: “Seest thou not how they wander distracted in every valley?”

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

The point here is that the texts in the Quran are said to be precise – which it has to be if the claim that it is made by a perfect god shall have any meaning. And a precise language always means exactly what is said - - - which means that something written in such an imprecise language like in the reality in the Quran cannot come from a god. Or if we pretend that the texts are precise like Islam claims, they have to be understood literally if nothing else is said - not claimed to be allegories, etc. at once it is clear that the information or meaning is wrong.

420 26/226: "- - - they (non-Muslims*) say what they practice not". But this was Muhammad's way of life, too. There often are abysses between words and reality in the Quran. Just read it, and read on one side the glorious words about him and on the other side the realities behind what he said, and behind his demands and deeds and rules. Glorious words are cheap and ideal for propaganda - realities are realities and the real truth.

Worse: Even today there at places are oceans between nice words and reality here and there in Muslim societies - f.x. the Islamic star slogan "no compulsion in religion", what about that some places?

421 26/227a "- - - those who believe - - -". Muslims.

422 26/227b: "- - - righteousness - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is relative to the book's own partly immoral moral codex (Islam has no moral philosophy or thinking, only a pre-medieval code = what did Muhammad say and do in or about a similar situation?).

423 26/227c: "- - - and defend themselves only after unjustly attacked - - -". We do not think it is necessary to comment this in a world where all the 4 Islamic law schools for centuries judged that if an opponent was a non-Muslim society, that was reason enough to declare jihad (= holy war in self defense) - this law was never even questioned until around 1930 AD. A world where jihad can be declared "in the widest meaning of self defense" - which means in all and every case (at least we have never heard about a conflict where Muslims is the one part, where the word Jihad has not been mentioned). And a world where nearly all terrorists are Muslims.

424 26/227d: "- - - unjustly attacked - - -". These words have some peculiar definitions sometimes when Muslims are one part of a conflict (and the same goes for "justified attack" - at least if Muslims are the attackers).

425 26/227e: "- - - unjustly - - - unjust - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like these, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code.

Surah 26: Sub-total: 425 + 11.601 = 12.026 comments.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

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.


>>> 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".