Allah in the Quran, Chapter 44

 

Chapter 44

ALLAH'S MORAL CODE

 

001 We stress that if you read the Quran you will find many more points touching or revealing for the Quran's at times immoral moral code (it partly is far from the golden rule: "Do to others like you want others do to you" - too often very far (but that is not uncommon for war religions and dishonesty, deceit, war, suppression, and apartheid ideologies)).

002 The moral code in the Quran is a sorry chapter - but quite a normal one for dishonesty (al-Taqiyya, Kitman, Hilah, disused oaths, etc.), war and suppressing religions (in spite of Islam's propaganda about being "the Religion of Peace", there is no way of seriously denying that it is a religion of war - a populist slogan may be good propaganda, but only the reality is the reality). Glorifying of and demands for killing and war and murder and blood has no similarity to a religion of peace or to a "good and benevolent god". The same goes for stealing, terrorism, rape, slave taking, extortion, etc. - nothing similar to a religion or god of peace, nothing similar to a religion or god of high moral standard, nothing similar to a "good and benevolent" religion or god. But quite typical for war, blood, apartheid, and looting religions and cultures.

003 But remember that most Muslims are so used to this moral code, and it is so impressed on them from they were toddlers what a good moral code it is, so that they are unable to see the injustice and even horrors in it, and honestly believe that it is a perfect code - and do not understand why not others accept and adopt it.

004 Islam and the Quran also are typical for war religions - and for war-like political organizations and nations: When a moral code is formed, "we" - the ones forming it and representing our ideas - are the top ones and the top quality. The Nazis the best quality people in that Germany, the fascists best in Franco's Spain, the communists best in the Soviet Union, China, and North Korea - - - and the Muslims best in the world according to the Quran and Islam ("Do non-Muslims have half the value of Muslims?"). It was so marked that "we" are the top, that even within Islam, the Arabs for centuries demanded to be the top (there was a lot of strife because of this).

005 It happens one meet - often honest - questions from Muslims why Islam is so much disliked. There are many religions, but none is disliked to the same degree as Islam - because its haughtiness, dishonesty, and harsh deeds.

Read the Quran's moral code with an open mind, and add Islam's haughtiness, and you have most of the answer.

006 Muslims' ability to believe - and blindly believe - without real documentation, and also to believe in spite of clear proofs for that things are wrong, are typical for strong believers in any religion. They are very similar to many pagan religions in this way. (Islam is a pagan religion if the Quran is not from a god, or if that possible god is not correctly described in the book.)

######## Another - and serious - point is that to "explain" that the Quran means something different from what it really says, is to corrupt it.

Also: What is sure, is that no god ever made a holy book as full of wrong facts, other errors, contradictions, unclear language, etc. like the Quran. ### Besides: Which one of the 20-30 known versions accepted by Islam of the Quran (see 15/9c) - if any (and there were even more versions through the times) - is in case the correct one?

Finally: Always when you read the Quran, Hadiths, and other Islamic books, you should remember that Muhammad accepted the use of and himself used dishonesty in many forms in words and deeds. Even if the names are younger, it was he who institutionalized dishonesty like al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), Hilah (the lawful pretending/circumventing), the use of deceit ("war is deceit" - and "everything" is war), betrayal (f.x. the peace delegation from Khaybar), and even the disuse of oaths (2/225, 5/89, 16/91, 66/2 - and the star case 3/54 (if Allah could cheat, cheating is ok) ), which also includes the disuse of words and promises, as they are weaker than oaths = when oaths can be disused, so can words and promises. On top of this it is very clear from the Quran and all other central Islamic books, that Muhammad also liked respect and power and women. Combine these lusts with his acceptance of and personal use of dishonesty - even the gravest kinds: How reliable is that kind of men normally? - and how true and reliable are their never proved claims and tales?

¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤

*007 2/26h: “- - - He (Allah*) causes many to stray - - -.” The main point here is that it is Allah who causes it. Can Allah then be a benevolent god, when straying means you will end in Hell? There is quite a difference between this and "the lost sheep" in NT (the shepherd - God/Jesus - lost a sheep (similitude for a human) and went far out to find it). This is one of the places where there are worlds between the basic ideas of Allah and of God/Yahweh - so fundamental differences that it is clear that Muhammad's claim that Allah = Yahweh is wrong - - - unless the god is highly schizophrenic. (See f.x. Luke 15/8-10 and 15/11-31 or Matt. 18/12-14 and 20/8-13).

All this means Allah is deceiving persons. We also here touch Al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) and Kitman (the lawful half-truth), etc., and lawfully breaking of even oaths (and what then about normal promises or words?) which is something which is special for Islam. You find this kind of accepted dishonesty in no other of the major religions – and in few of the minor ones. (Personally we have found something similar only in a small pagan religion in New Guinea.)

Actually al-Taqiyya, Kitman, and Hilah are not explicitly introduced in the Quran. It is based on conclusions Islamic scholars have made from things said and done about (dishonest) planning or cheating, honesty, breaking of oaths (introduced in the Quran), etc. in the book and in Hadiths. See the verses below. Institutionalized by Muhammad and his Quran, but formalized by the scholars.

The Quran and Islam tell that in principle you should be honest. But in many cases where dishonesty will give a better result, you are permitted to lie (Al-Taqiyya, Kitman, Hilah) and even to deceive - done by Muhammad, and thus permitted - or make false oaths or to break oaths you have made (2/225a, 5/89a+b, 13/42, 27/50 and some more)). In some cases Allah will say it is ok because it is a minor thing or because you did not really mean your oath, and in other cases he will say; “ok – if you pay me some money or give me a gift for expiation afterward”. And then in some cases it is not only permitted, but advised to use it if necessary: To defend or promote Islam.

Al-Taqiyya, Kitman, and Hilah can be used at least in these cases (for deceit, betrayal, broken oaths, etc. there are given no real limitations if the broken oath, etc. will give a better result. By implication this also goes for ordinary words or promises, as an oath is something stronger than a normal promise or a normal given word):

  1. To save your or others' health or life.
  2. To get out of a tight spot or a dangerous problem or position.
  3. To make peace in a family.
  4. When it will give a better result than honesty or honoring one’s oath.
  5. To cheat women (should be remembered by girls with Muslim boyfriends wanting sex - or wanting a marriage to get work permit or residence permit in a rich country.)
  6. To deceive opponents/enemies.
  7. To betray enemies.
  8. To secure one’s money (very clear from Hadiths).
  9. To defend Islam. (Advised if necessary to succeed.)
  10. To promote Islam. (Advised if necessary to succeed.)

But al-Taqiyya is a double-edged sword: In the short run you may cheat and deceive some ones – actually also in the long run if the opposite part does not know about this side of Muslims and of Islam, or if he/she is naïve.

But the serious side effect is that people quickly learn that one can never know for sure when to believe a Muslim in serious questions: Is he honest or is he using f.x. an al-Taqiyya?

And there is another side effect: Muslims have difficulties being believed even when they are telling the full truth – for very good reasons the opposite parts are reluctant to fully believe them, as may be they tell the truth or maybe they just are practicing al-Taqiyya or Kitman.

And yet another side effect: How can Muslims know when to believe their leaders and others? (This may be one of the reasons for why Muslims produce so may conspiracy theories - they go looking for "the real truth" behind what is told, no matter if the tale is an al-Taqiyya or the plain, sterling truth).

And all these side effects – which really over time may be the main effects – are made worse because Muslims have no way of strengthening their words by swearing, as oaths from Muslims are without much value, because they are permitted false oaths and to break their oaths – it is no sin to do so if you did not really mean the oath or have a reason for breaking it, and especially not if you give Allah a gift for expiation afterwards (necessary in serious cases).

008 2/89h: “Allah is the enemy to those who reject Faith”. Whereas Yahweh leaves his flock in a safe place to try to save the lost ones. Quite a difference between the two books. And between the two claimed gods.

###009 2/94a: “If the last Home, with Allah (Yahweh*), be for you (Jews*) specially, and not for anyone else, then seek for ye death, if ye are sincere - - -“. Wrong - and a contradiction of the Bible and its moral code. A Jew (or a Christian) cannot seek death to go to Heaven, because self murder – also indirectly – is a serious sin (destroying the gift from God - your life) = end in Hell. Any god had known – but obviously not Muhammad. Worse: Muslim scholars today know this, but use the argument anyhow when teaching their congregations. Al-Taqiyya - the lawful lie.

010 2/98a: "Whoever is an enemy to Allah and His angels and Messengers (included Muhammad*) - - - lo! Allah is an enemy to those who reject Faith". Included an enemy to those who opposes Muhammad.

011 2/142e: "He (Allah - in reality here Muhammad and his Quran*) guideth whom He will - - -". As no god included Allah - if he exists - was behind a book of such a miserable level of knowledge and logic, it is not Allah who in case is the guide, but the maker of the Quran - be it dark powers or humans.

012 2/190a: "Fight in the cause of Allah - - -". A clear order. And a convenient order for Muhammad (and for his successors), as this here on Earth in reality meant "fight for Muhammad when he wants".

013 2/190c: "Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you - - -". This is one of the fundamentals behind the sharia laws concerning war - except that soon it was not necessary that "they" were fighting the Muslims - most Muslim wars and raids were wars of aggression (mainly for riches, slaves, power and spreading Islam). Later all the 4 main "law schools" agreed on that the fact that the other part was non-Muslim, was enough reason for declaring jihad - holy war - against them. This point of view was not even questioned in Islam until around 1930, and then because of influence from western thinking.

014 2/224b: "And do not make Allah's (name) an excuse in your oaths against doing good - - -." If breaking your oath (the use of Allah's name by swearing by Allah - the only god Muslims shall swear by) gives a better result, you are advised to break your oath, like Muhammad did and said he would do any time under such circumstances, according to the Quran and Hadiths. Pay expiation if there is a reason for that.

015 2/224d: "And do not make Allah's (name) an excuse in your oaths against - - - making peace between persons - - -." Break your oath if you find this will give a better result. Pay expiation if you think this is necessary. In cases of making peace - and also f.x. when you want to cheat women - also al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), and Hilah (the lawful pretending/circumventing) are permitted, if you think this will give better result than honesty.

#########016 2/225a: “Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your heart”. If you swear an oath without thinking it over - or not enough over – you are not bound by it. But how are other people to know if the oath you have made, is binding for you or not - or if you will break it? Besides; you may break also a more serious oath if that will give a better result, but you may have to pay expiation to Allah for it. See f.x. 2/224e-f above.

017 2/230d: "Such are the limits ordained by Allah - - -". As the Quran with all its errors, etc. is from no god, the claimed limits also are not from a god. Then from whom?

###018 2/244a: “Then fight in the cause of Allah - - -". An order not possible to misunderstand - from the good idol Muhammad leading the claimed "religion of peace".

###019 2/244b: “Then fight in the cause of Allah - - -". Nearly all armed conflicts Muhammad had, were acts of aggression. Totally incompatible at least with NT. As for OT, it permitted war, but for the limited purpose to create and defend a Jewish state, whereas most of Muhammad's conflicts were raids for riches and some for power and/or spreading his new religion + in a few cases for revenge.

020 2/244f: "- - - Allah heareth and knoweth all things." One of the innumerable not documented claims you find in the Quran - but some of them (like this one) acted as good "whips" for obedience and discipline from their leaders (included Muhammad) over the followers. But also see 2/233h above and 35/38b below.

021 2/246f: "- - - fight in the cause of Allah". Even though this is (pretended to be) said to the Jews, it is one of the points behind the laws for war in the sharia laws, and behind even modern time glorification of war in Islam.

022 3/148a: “And Allah gave them (the warriors) a reward in this world (and will consequently give it to you if you fight bravely*) and the excellent reward of the Hereafter”. 80% of the spoils of war - included slaves and women - were for the warriors and their leaders (the remaining 20% were for Allah/Muhammad/the religious leaders - which soon also became political leaders (100% if the victim gave in without a fight)). Women made slaves were fun, because to rape female slaves was your right and no sin. In addition: To do battle for Islam was - and is - a “heavy” application for Paradise, and a sure way to get there no matter what kind of life you have led, if you are killed in battle for Islam (which soon also meant - and means - an easy way for the leaders to recruit warriors). But it is a strange fact that leaders never become suicide bombers.(The Quran tells that suicide is a sin deserving Hell (is this told - or "explained" away to the suicide bombers?) + perhaps the leaders do not like to die yet?)

023 3/148c: “For Allah loveth those who do good - - -". Allah can love no-one unless he exists - and there is not one single proof, not even a clear indication, for his existence.

###But an extra point: What is the meaning of "good" in this connection? What the Quran calls "good" too often is far from good - often really bad - according to normal religions, normal moral codes and normal cultures. Cfr. f.x: "Do to others like you want others do to you".

024 3/148d: “For Allah loveth those who do good (in this case: To wage war for Allah and Muhammad*)”. To do battle for Allah - to steal and burn and kill and murder and destroy and rape for the good and benevolent deity - are good things which Allah loves. (Actually that it shall be made in the name of the god, makes it even more disgusting.) Did anyone say that modern terrorists have to twist the words of the Quran to find incitements to their deeds? And also: Muhammad got cheap warriors and gained wealth and power - in wars and robberies that really were illegal according to the Quran, as they in reality were wars of aggression, not really of defense. And they gave him the possibility to rape at least two women - Rayhana bint Amr and Safijja bint Huayay.

025 3/152b: “Allah did indeed fulfill His promise to you when ye with His permission were about to annihilate your enemy - - -". Very far from the moral code of NT - you find nothing similar in all the NT. Yahweh and Allah the same god?. Hardly. Or "nyet" to quote a Russian.

026 3/167c: "- - - fight in the way of Allah - - -". That the raids and wars were and partly are made in the name of the god, make them even more detestable, especially as most of them were raids and wars of aggression - mainly for riches, slave and power - and for spreading Islam by means of the sword directly and indirectly.

##027 3/169a: “Think not of those who are slain in Allah’s way as dead. Nay, they live - - - in the presence of their Lord (Allah*)”. What better can a warrior ask for? - and thinking like that, they made - and make - cheap soldiers for Muslim leaders. But what if Muhammad - or dark forces - made it all up? - at least no god made the Quran with that many mistakes, etc. So where will all the Muslims in reality end if there is a next life?

028 3/172j: "- - - a great reward". Paradise. It takes a special kind of religion to have a paradise - and one full of mainly bodily pleasures only - as the reward for fighting and killing, raping and stealing, mutilating and suppressing and dishonesty. And to make it extra repulsive: All dishonesty, atrocities, and inhumanities are to be done in the name of the god!

029 3/174c: "- - - they (Muslims at war*) followed the good pleasure of Allah - - -". That his followers wage war, is the good pleasure of Allah. "The religion of peace"? - a god of peace? If you are sufficiently naive or indoctrinated you may be able to believe this.

###030 4/40a: “Allah is never unjust in the last degree - - -.” Wrong. Examples: Suppression of others (non-Muslims) is “good and lawful and just” . The same is stealing and robbing if it is possible to find an excuse to call it jihad (to do things like this in the name of the god makes it extra disgusting) – and the same for rape of any not pregnant female captive or slave. But a top of injustice is: A raped woman is to be punished strongly for indecency if she cannot produce 4 male witnesses to the actual rape - nearly always impossible. Allah in the Quran at times is extremely unjust.

Another point is that this is one of the places where Muhammad knew he was lying in the Quran. F.x. stealing/looting was normal practice in Arabia, but there is no way for the follower of a good and benevolent god to honestly believe that to steal and rob are just deeds. The same goes for hurting or killing others - f.x. in a war or fight not in real self defense. A third sample is taking slaves - impossible to justify morally (but easy economically if you see it only from your own side). F.x. even the old Greeks with their advanced and deep moral thinking, were unable to find a general moral justification for taking slaves. And rape - destroying other human's lives just for your own pleasure! But to Muhammad and the Quran and thus to Islam it is "lawful and good" and to be enjoyed (8/69). A cheap way for Muhammad to get warriors - and a nice life for many a Muslim man - but unjust to a high power - - - and no way for an intelligent man like Muhammad not to know this.

031 4/75c: “And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah and those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)? Men, women and children (crying for help and rescue*) - - -.” Muhammad’s version of the glorious hero on the white horse - and "forgetting" to add "- and power and riches for Muhammad". Another inciting dream "pushed" by good psychology - claimed help to women and children is a good motif. Especially when the men know there are loot and rape and slaves to take in addition.

Actually this is one of the more disgusting sayings connected to war: Everybody knew and know that the main thing was power and riches and slave and rape. Then this is immoral use of moral reasons. But then Islam always after it became a religion of war, was "the Religion permitting Dishonesty". And its moral code was and is somewhat "peculiar".

*032 4/77b: “Our Lord! Why hast Thou ordered us to fight?” This is a question from a Muslim not wanting to fight (though see 4/77a just above) - ####and we should remember that after all today they are the majority (but the trouble for non-Muslims is that it is difficult and impossible to know who are terrorists, who are helping terrorists, who give money to terrorists, who has sympathy with terrorism and who are just plain - and often sympathetic - humans). But the verse makes it very clear - as do many other verses in the Quran - that war for the religion is a duty and an order. Who said that terrorists have to disuse the Quran to find incitement and reasons?

*033 4/77c: “Our Lord! Why hast Thou ordered us to fight?” Jesus never ordered anyone to fight, except for by intellectual means - never. On the contrary he was extremely pacifistic. One more of the many points which alone proves that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same religion - and then there are all the other proofs in addition.

###034 4/84b: “Then fight in Allah’s cause - - -”. The religion of peace? - from a good and benevolent god?

035 4/91c: "- - - We (Allah*) have provided you (Muslims*) with a clear argument against them (non-Muslims you do not rely on*)". And the clear argument is: If you do not trust them, kill them - and how many non-Muslims do f.x. extremist Muslims rely on? The Quran and NT from the same god? You bet!!

036 4/94f: "- - - with Allah are profits and spoils abundant". One more sentence which alone proves that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - and then there are all the other proofs in addition.

Stealing - spoils - was a central part of Muhammad's religion in Medina (not so earlier in Mecca). You never find such incitements in NT. Jesus and Muhammad in the same religion? No answer necessary.

#037 4/95h: “Unto all (in Faith (= all Muslims*)) hath Allah promised good: but those who strive hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by special reward -". But what is such a promise worth unless Allah exists and is a powerful god?

But remember as for punishment and rewards - and forgiving: They cannot be given unless there are made changes in the Plan of Allah, which several verses in the Quran states nobody and nothing can make. (A predestined reward is not a reward, but theater.)

038 4/119d: "Whoever, forsaking Allah, takes Satan for a friend - - -". The one does not necessarily implicate the other, especially if Allah just is a dressed up, non-existing pagan god (al-Lah - Allah - simply was the main Arab pagan god at that time). And especially not if there exist other real gods - f.x. Yahweh. (This even more so if Allah is from the dark forces, like some points in the Quran and also in its moral code, etc. may indicate. Compare some points there or in the Sharia law to "do to others like you want others do to you", and weep.

####039 4/142a: “The hypocrites – they think they are overreaching Allah, but he will overreach them (literal meaning: 'He (Allah*) is their deceiver'*) - - -.” This is one of Islam’s alibis for Al-Taqiyya and Kitman: When Allah could cheat, then of course his followers can do the same.

Just for the record: Al-Taqiyya and Kitman can be used at least in the cases mentioned below (for broken oaths there are given no real limitations if the broken oath will give a better result. By implication this also goes for ordinary promises and words, as an oath is something stronger than those. For cheating/deceit/betrayal there may - may - be the limit that it is to be used in connection to war - but many things are called parts of a war especially by extremists.)

  1. To save your or others' health or life.
  2. To get out of a tight spot or a dangerous problem.
  3. To make peace in a family.
  4. When it will give a better result than honesty or honoring one’s oath.
  5. To cheat women (should be remembered by girls with Muslim boyfriends wanting sex - or wanting a marriage to get work permit or residence permit in a rich country.)
  6. To deceive opponents/enemies.
  7. To betray enemies.
  8. To secure one’s money (very clear from Hadiths).
  9. To defend Islam. (Advice if necessary to succeed.)
  10. To promote Islam. (Advice if necessary to succeed.)

But al-Taqiyya is a double-edged sword: In the short run you may cheat and deceive some ones – actually also in the long run if the opposite part does not know about this side of Muslims and of Islam, or if he/she is naïve. But in the long run one discovers that Muslims can lie without sinning, and thus that it is impossible to rely 100% on a Muslim’s word in serious cases - he may be using an al-Taqiyya, a Kitman or even be relying on Muhammad's words about deceiving or about breaking oaths if this gives a better result.

Also see 4/142b just below.

Rules and permission like this for the use of dishonesty only exists in Islam - "the Religion of the Truth". No other of the big religions accepts and partly relies on dishonesty.

####040 4/142b: (A4/157 – in 2008 edition A158): “The hypocrites – they think they are overreaching Allah, but He will overreach them (non-Muslims*) - - -“. Literal meaning: “He is their deceiver”. But f.x. Rezi has: “He (Allah*) will requite them for their deception.” There is a clear distinction here: In the first case Allah deceives the non-Muslims so that may be the plans crumble before they give any Muslims problems. In the other case he avenges what they did. 2 different meanings. And these variants also are in the Arab text, as the relevant word there has more than one meaning. Clear language in the Quran?

We also add that this sentence: “He (Allah*) is their deceiver” is one of the moral alibis Islam uses for its doctrines of “al-Taqiyya” (the lawful lie), “Kitman” (the lawful half-truth), and Hilah (the lawful pretending/circumventing) – a kind of permitted dishonesty included in Islam, but in no other of the major religions. Al-Taqiyya, Kitman, Hilah, and also broken oaths can be used without sinning in a number of cases – f.x. to save your life, to get you out of serious problems, to save your money, to cheat women – and it shall be used if necessary to promote or defend the religion. (It only is guesswork how many proselytes who have been cheated by al-Taqiyya and/or Kitman when wondering if Islam is a true and good religion or not. Or how many non-Muslims who have been cheated to believe that the Quran is not the basis for a teaching of suppression, inhumanities and blood, but a peaceful and benevolent book promoting peace. Not to mention how many girls who have been deceived into marriage, when the Muslim boy just wanted a residence or work permit - or simply into sex.) Also see 4/142a just above. (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.)

We finally point to the fact that the literal meaning - "He (Allah*) is their deceiver" - tells gigabytes about the Quran, Muhammad and Islam. It also is legion miles away from the NT - one of the really strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same religion.

###041 4/144c: “Take not for friends unbelievers rather than believers: do ye wish to offer Allah an open proof against yourselves?” This is really a strong one: To make good friends with non-Muslims is a clear proof that you are not a good Muslim - this even for Allah, not to mention for all the Muslim society. This verse may give a strong social pressure NOT to associate with non-Muslims.

042 4/149e: "- - - Allah - - - hath power (in the judgment of values)". If Allah is behind the moral and hardly existing ethical codes in the Quran, the book proves this claim wrong.

*043 5/15h: “- - - there hath come to you (Jews, Christians*) from Allah a (new) light (Muhammad*) - - -“. Well, that is one of the questions: Did a man so morally degenerated and preaching a religion based on a book with so many mistakes, etc. and so much wrong logic, really represent a god? And did a war religion with a partly immoral moral code represent a benevolent god? Simply no to each of the questions.

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

######044 5/35g: “- - - strive with might and main (see 5/35a-b*) in His (Allah’s*) cause - - -”. For us this is one of the most detestable points in the entire Quran and Islam: Fight and lie and steal and rob and mutilate and rape and enslave and hate and murder and get rich and suppress in the name of your god, and as a service to your god - a claimed good and benevolent god!

The same god as Yahweh? Jesus and Muhammad in the same religion? Don't ask silly questions.

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

045 5/42e: "For Allah loveth those who judge in equity". Please study the Quran's moral code and the sharia laws, and then read this sentence once more.

046 5/46f: “- - - we (Allah*) sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law (of Moses*)”. According to the Bible Jesus was not sent to change the old laws – that was not his main purpose. All the same he did so – changed some and even nullified some of them, especially most of all the additions made by the times by Jewish religious thinkers and leaders. This was more or less formalized during his last Easter, when the new covenant (f.x. Luke 22/20) was made. (This covenant is never mentioned by Islam, and most Muslims without religious education have not even heard about it. This even though it is one of the main and most central facts in the Christian religion).

#########It is worth remembering that at least in 3/50a and 5/15c the Quran confirms that Jesus changed old Jewish laws. Especially it is worth remembering this all the many times Muslims claims that Jesus confirmed the old laws of Moses, without mentioning a whisper about that both the Bible and the Quran confirm he changed or terminated a number of them.

047 5/55a: "Your (Muslims'*) (real) friends are (no less than) Allah, His Messenger (Muhammad*), and the (fellowship of) Believers (Muslims*) - - -." Clear message: Non-Muslims are not your real friends - one step on the road to making an "enemy picture".

048 5/56f: "- - - the Fellowship of Allah that must certainly triumph". Pep-talk. Besides at least that Muslims "must certainly" triumph is wrong. But good psychology as long as Muhammad's followers believed the words came from a god.

049 5/64h: “Amongst them (the Jews*) We (Allah*) have placed enmity and hatred till the Day of Judgment. Every time they kindle the fire of war, Allah doth extinguish it; but they (ever) strive to do mischief on earth. And Allah loveth not those who do mischief”. And why should you love them when Allah obviously did dislike them? Allah’s dislike is a good motif and explanation for ruthlessness against them. (Muhammad treated the Jews in and around Medina very ruthlessly – chased away (because of too strong opposition did that he could not kill them in the beginning) a large part, enslaved big groups of women and children and murdered the rest of the survivors – except some who for some years were permitted to live as semi slaves on what used to be their own farms, for a very stiff price. Plus he personally raped and enslaved for his own harem at least two of the women after having murdered or enslaved their families – Rayhana bint Amr and Safijja bint Huayay (he later married Safijja)). Well, the verse is good hate propaganda – and hate is a good background for incitements to war, and for explanations for atrocities.

It is irony - but normal - for a religion of war to accuse others for enmity.

050 5/64j: "And Allah loveth not those who do mischief". Whom Allah dislikes naturally is for "us" to detest. On the other hand: Muslims did and do a lot of mischief according to all normal moral rules - what about their relationship to a possible god? - this question is even more urgent if Allah is a made up god and if there exists another, benevolent god somewhere, not liking lies (al-Taqiyya, etc.), stealing, rape, mistreatment of innocents, torture or murder.

051 5/81a: “If only they had believed in Allah, in (Muhammad*) - - - never would they (Jews and Christians*) have taken them (other non-Muslims or Pagans*) for friends - - -”. It is just tragic - most religions are today able to live together in peace and reasonable harmony. But Islam is so bent on distaste and superiority complex against all non-Muslims, and on the idea of conquering all other religions and suppressing its peoples, that integration is difficult. The only position Islam really can accept, is superiority.

052 5/81c: "- - - believed in Allah, in the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -". A variant of Muhammad's main mantra to glue himself to his god and his platform of power.

###053 5/89a: “Allah will not call you to account for where is futile in your oaths - - -" = oaths you just throw around - f.x. in anger or from habits, or for oaths you for other reasons did not mean, do not count, and is no sin for Allah. Quite a different from normal religions. Besides: How can others know when you mean an oath and when not? (Well, in some cases you can guess, but what about all the border-line cases and the cases where it sounds like you mean it?) The Quran and Islam are very special when it comes to breaking oaths and some other kinds of dishonesty (f.x. al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) and Kitman (the lawful half-truth)) - it is the only of the big religions with such rules for accepted dishonesty, and the only of the big religions which accepts dishonesty, even as a part of the religion/religious life.

###054 5/89b: “Allah will not call you to account for where is futile in your oaths, but He will call you to account for your deliberate oaths: (if you break such one*) for expiation, feed 10 indigent persons, on a scale of the average for the food of your families: or clothe them, or give a slave his freedom. If that is beyond your means, fast for three days. That is the expiation for the (breaking of*) oaths ye have sworn. But keep to your oaths.” In principle: Keep your oaths, at least if you meant them. But if you break them, not much is lost, as it is just to pay expiation if necessary, and everything is ok. And if the oath was made without thinking things over, you are not even bound by it or bound to pay expiation for it. Guess if this is different from NT! (- and from most other religions included all the big ones!) (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.)

No other of the big religions has dishonesty as an integrated and accepted part of the religion - also here remember al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), and Hilah (the lawful pretending/circumventing) - and "war is deceit". Just for the record: Al-Taqiyya, Kitman, and Hilah can be used at least in these cases (for deceit, betrayal, broken oaths, etc. there are given no real limitations if the broken oath, etc. will give a better result. By implication this also goes for ordinary words and promises, as an oath is something stronger than a normal word or promise):

  1. To save your or others' health or life.
  2. To get out of a tight spot or a dangerous problem.
  3. To make peace in a family.
  4. When it will give a better result than honesty or honoring one’s oath.
  5. To cheat women (should be remembered by girls with Muslim boyfriends wanting sex - or wanting a marriage to get residence permit or work permit in a rich country.)
  6. To deceive opponents/enemies.
  7. To betray enemies.
  8. To secure one’s money (very clear from Hadiths).
  9. To defend Islam. (Advisable if necessary to succeed.)
  10. To promote Islam. (Advisable if necessary to succeed.)

But al-Taqiyya is a double-edged sword: In the short run you may cheat and deceive someone – actually also in the long run if the opposite part does not know about this side of Muslims and of Islam, or if he/she is naïve. But in the long run one learns that there is no way to really be sure a Muslim speaks the full truth - or the truth at all - in serious questions. (This also may be a big problem for Muslims telling the truth about something without being believed - they have no reliable way of strengthening their words.)

###055 5/89c: "That is the expiation for the oaths ye (Muslims'*) have sworn (and broken*)". Even though it is advisable to keep your oats, if you break one, it is just to pay expiation, and everything is ok. The Religion of Truth?!? - an ironical joke. "The Religion of Honesty"? - not even a joke (may be that is why you hear this last name seldom and never from Muslims and Islam).

056 6/45a: "Of the wrongdoers (non-Muslims*) the last remnant was cut off (killed*). Praise be to Allah - - -". Yes, praise be to Allah for that all non-Muslims and sinners there (actually many places) were killed - lots of millions of non-Muslims have been killed or murdered by Muslims. Tales like this in a claimed holy book plus the preaching in accordance with such verses has its effect on the mentality of the followers. This verse is one of the reasons for the disregard Muslims have for non-Muslims ("half human value? - or less?" - from a recent debate in Pakistan), and the disregard for other peoples' property and well-being and lives: Rape a girl in Eritrea - it is "good and lawful" as we call this a Jihad, and her well-being does not interest neither us nor Islam. Kill an American - if he had been old enough, he had had to pay tax to America, and thus he is guilty of fighting Islam and merits to be killed (believe it or not, but this argument really is not only used, but widespread: "All Americans are guilty and can be killed, because they have to pay tax to USA" - - - Jihad = "self defense in the widest meaning of the word", so wide that it is a parody).

####057 6/45b: "Of the wrongdoers (non-Muslims*) the last remnant was cut off (killed*). Praise be to Allah - - -". This "Praise be to Allah" is one of the points which makes Islam a morally sick and distasteful religion. A claimed benevolent and good god who is to be praised for stealing, rape, repeated atrocities, apartheid, and mass murder, and for the reason they had another religion only, is distasteful outside our vocabulary, and as wrong morally. We are sorry - we have big vocabularies from lives in reading and learning, but we do not have strong enough words for this.

058 6/106f: "- - - turn aside from those who join gods with Allah". Do not mingle with non-Muslims.

####059 6/108d: “Thus have We (Allah*) made alluring to each people its own doings”.

Comment A6/92 (A6/93 in the 2008 English edition): “Lit., ‘thus godly have we made….', etc. implying that it is in the nature of man to regard the belief which have been implanted in him from babyhood, and which he now shares with his social environment, as the only true and possible ones – whit the result that a polemic against those beliefs often tends to provoke a hostile psychological reaction.” This is said as an explanation why Islam sometimes meets a negative reaction. But the book skips the fact that this also goes for Muslims: If they are strongly indoctrinated, they may react strongly to arguments and facts they do not like – and without thinking over, or being mentally able to think over – even true facts. This is likely to be the explanation for why most Muslims are able to be blind to all the mistakes in the Quran and proofs for that things are very wrong in that book and thus with Muhammad and in Islam.

#########060 6/108e: “Thus have We (Allah*) made alluring to each people its own doings”. This sentence should be extremely thought-provoking also to Muslims. They are very typical samples.

061 6/122b: "Can he who was dead, to whom We (Allah*) gave life - - - be like him who is in the depth of darkness - - -?" Alternative explanation: Can a man who has become a Muslim be compared to something as lowly as a non-Muslim? Of course not. (But what if the Quran is a made up book? - it at least is from no god with all those mistaken facts, etc.)

###062 6/151a: “Come, I (Muhammad*) will rehearse what Allah hath (really) prohibited you from - - - (f.x.*) be good to your parents”. This very obviously is wrong and a bit of a contradiction compared to other places in the Quran – Muhammad very obviously meant exactly the opposite; that you were ordered to be god to your parents. An omniscient god would not make such a mistake. Who made the Quran? PS: This is one of the verses Muslim scholars (but not always imams or laymen) admits must be wrong - - - and omniscient gods do not make mistakes.

Also practically all Muslim scholars as mentioned agree that here the text is wrong – there is said there are 19 such places in the Quran, 1000+ Mistakes in the Quran lists 15 points where it is absolutely contrary to what the Quran says about this all other places. This gives you an unbeatable proof against any Muslim boasting that the book being without any mistakes at all. A proof and a fact sanctioned by Islam! (And besides: If here is one mistake, how many more are there?) Just remember: 6/151 (6 in Scandinavian = sex, and 151 has sex in both ends (1 + 5 = 6, and 5 + 1 = 6). An easy verse number to remember.

And besides: If here is a mistake and if Islam admits 15 - or perhaps more (we like said have heard 19) - how many more are there in reality?

Surah 6 is a bit hard upon the wishful thinking of Muslims:

- In 6/50 Muhammad confirms he cannot see what is hidden - the future - killing all the claimed miracles claimed made by Muhammad concerning seeing what was hidden, and indirectly also documenting he was no prophet - not knowing the future = unable to make prophesies, and a person unable to make prophesies is no prophet. (f.x. 5. Mos. 18/21 - in the same speech of Moses where Islam claims Moses foresees Muhammad when talking about "a prophet like me" - quite an irony when 18/21 indirectly, but clearly tells Muhammad was not even a prophet - he only "borrowed that impressive and imposing title. (And among many others 18/2 tells Moses was speaking about Jewish "brothers" - Islam has cherry-picked and twisted 18/15 and 18/18 in an al-Taqiyya.)

Also connected to 6/50;(A.6/39): "This denial on the part of the Prophet (Muhammad*) of any claim to supernatural power - - -". This states that Islam admits Muhammad had no supernatural power at all = absolutely no prophet. And definitely no miracles from him.

Then 6/91c: "Who then sent down the Book which Moses brought?" This is intended as a rhetoric question with only one possible answer: The god. But as Moses did not get any book(s) both according to the Bible and according to science (the so-called Books of Moses were written at least some 500 years after the time of Moses according to science), this try to make up a "proof" for that Allah might have sent down the Quran, was a total miss. Any god had known this and not made such a flop. Then who made the Quran?

In connection to 6/106 (6/106b) Allah's very existence is doubted.

In connection to 6/108 "The Message of the Quran" (comment6/93) explains "- - - it is in the nature of man to regard the beliefs which have been implanted in him from childhood, and which he now shares with his social environment, as the only true and possible ones" - which explains in details why Muslims believe in spite of all facts proving something is seriously wrong with the religion.

In connection to 6/149 (comment 6/141 in the same book) Islam has to admit that the claim that Allah decides everything - predestination - is impossible to combine with the claimed free will for man (and without free will it is morally wrong to punish man for sins) - but "it all the same must be true, because Allah says so (in the Quran*)" the ultimate defeat for brain against blind belief.

And in 6/151 may be the most well-known of the mistakes in the Quran accepted by Islam to be a mistake: "You are prohibited from - - - being good to your parents" (well, may be "Mary, sister of Aaron" is even more well-known, but that one is frequently tried explained away).

063 6/151b: This also is a really strange contradiction: “Come, I (Muhammad*) will rehearse what Allah hath (really) prohibited you from – - (to*) - - kill not your children on a plea of want (poverty*) - - -.” Read it once more: You are prohibited from not to kill your children if you are poor!! – also this (see 6/151a just above) is the opposite of what is said everywhere in the book. The Muslim sources we have found, agree on that also this is wrong – and actually we agree with them – this is so far out of the Quran’s normal points of view concerning children, that it must have been an accident.

But this means that here you have another clear mistake in the Quran – certified by Islam as a mistake – to serve for free to any Muslim or non-Muslim claiming that the book is perfect and without mistakes “to the last comma”. Just ask them if they have ever read 6/151? (And ask if they are aware of that the comma did not exist in Arab when the Quran was written around 650 AD).

And: When this is wrong – how much more is wrong in the book? Also see 6/151a just above.

###064 7/28b: “Allah never commands what is shameful - - -.” This is contradicted by several points in the Quran, f.x.:

  1. 2/230: “If a husband divorces his wife (irrevocably), he cannot, after that, remarry her until after she has married another husband and he has divorced her.” This situation is not common, but it does happen in a culture where divorce is so easy as in Islam. In Islam the woman then has to prostitute herself in legal forms, to be permitted to do so (the intermediate marriage has to be a “fulfilled" one).
  2. Enslaving is “lawful and good”.
  3. Killing and murdering and war are not only "lawful and good", but the best service to Allah.
  4. A raped woman who cannot produce 4 male witnesses to the very act, is to be punishes severely for indecency.
  5. Allah commands/permits sex with children. For an adult to enjoy sex with a child is utterly shameful. For an adult to introduce a child to sex is inhuman and even more shameful. Muhammad even demonstrated that it was ok at least from the girl is 9 – and worse: She – Aishah - became his favorite wife the rest of her childhood.
  6. Allah commands that one can take slaves in a jihad - and almost any skirmish or war where Muslims are involved, is declared jihad. For centuries (till ca. 1930 – 1940) all the four law schools of Islam said that if the opposite parts were pagans, this was good enough reason to declare jihad – which means that at least theoretically any slave hunter in Africa or Asia could claim to be waging jihad. To force fellow humans to become slaves, to toil for free for you, to be free for you to sell or mistreat or use for a sex toy, is utterly inhuman, utterly selfish, utterly immoral – and utterly shameful. Not to mention that they are grotesque acts to commit in the name of a presumed god and benevolent good.
  7. To rape a child captive/slave/victim is grotesquely selfish, immoral, inhuman and grotesquely shameful - - - but Allah has commanded that it is ok if the child is mot pregnant - and over 9 years according to Islam (the age of Aishah when Muhammad started to have sex with her - anything Muhammad did is just and right).
  8. To rape any woman prisoner/slave/victim – a fellow human being – is nearly as selfish and shameful and bad as raping a child. But in the Quran it is “good and lawful” if the woman is not pregnant. That it is "lawful and good" may be a reason why rape is so common by Muslim warriors/soldiers. (Another possible reason is that empathy is not an integrated part of Islam - and the same with moral philosophy).
  9. To murder opponents – also personal opponents – in the name of a presumably good god is something much more than shameful.
  10. To incite to discrimination, hate and war, in the name of a presumably good god is even worse than this again – and a proof for a god or a “prophet” full of hypocrisy.
  11. To lie and/or steal/rob/plunder and extort in the name of such a god – and with his permission as “good and lawful” - is nearly a bad and as much hypocrisy as raping and killing and apartheid/suppression. And to do so in the name of a god, makes the god, the religion and the acts even more perverted and distasteful. But all these points have this in common:
    1. They attract selfish warriors to a robber “prophet’s” army – and to his successors’.
    2. They attract greedy warriors to a robber “prophet’s” army – and to his successors’.
    3. They attract inhuman warriors to a robber “prophet’s” army – and to his successors’.
    4. They attract primitive warriors to a robber “prophet’s” army – and to his successors’.
    5. It is a cheap way for a robber “prophet” – and for his successors – to get an army – a cheap army and an inhuman army.
     

    Finally: Severe or capital punishment for a woman who has been raped, but is unable to produce 4 male eye witnesses to the very act, most likely is the most inhuman, most immoral, most unjust, and most shameful law we have ever come across in any at least half civilized religion or culture, and Allah/Muhammad has introduced this law. Well, the law is as bad for a boy or man who has been homosexually raped.

    065 7/56f: "- - - the Mercy of Allah is (always) near to those who do good". Does this include the Muslims living also in accordance with the immoral parts of the Quran's moral code?

    066 7/102a: “Most of them (people*) We (Allah*) found not men (true) to their covenant - - -“. “The Message of the Quran” (A7/81 - A7/83 in 2008 English edition) tells (in the Swedish edition) that the exact word-for-word translation is: “We found by them nothing that tied them to what is truth and right”. And that book continues by telling that this may include #####man’s capability to instinctively(!!!*) to see the difference between right and wrong.

    Now the fact that some of the most fundamental moral questions get the same answer in many societies, indicates that something deep inside man tells some common moral truths (though to call it this a "capability to instinctively to see what is truth and right" is deeply wrong - this and similar claims from Islam solely is dictated from the deep lack of proofs for anything at all of the central points in their religion): You shall not steal, you shall not be a nuisance – or worse – to others, you shall not rape, you shall not kill, you shall not lie, etc. But Islam and the Quran are the best proof for that these inner messages are easy to override for a charismatic leader and for a society, and make immoral behavior praiseworthy and a moral code: To steal/rob, extort, rape, enslave, murder, and more – it all is “lawful and good” if you just observe the right formalities in Islam. To what claimed covenant are they true?

    Besides: Is there really a clear covenant between Allah and the Muslims, or have Muhammad and his followers just made promises and believe it is a covenant? - and if there is a covenant: What is it worth if Allah is a made up god? Not to mention if he exists, but is from the dark forces?"

    067 7/179b: “Many are the Jinn and men We (Allah*) have made for Hell - - -.” Here Allah tells that many of the men and Jinns he had made, were made for Hell. But this is contradicted by verses telling that all men and Jinns are made to serve Allah:

    1. 51/56: “I (Allah*) have only created jinns and men, that they may serve Me.”
     

    - - - or does the bloody and immoral parts of services Muhammad/Allah demand, condemn you to Hell afterwards?

    068 8/7b: “Allah promised you one of the two (enemy) parties (either the caravan or the small army at Badr) - - -“. Allah promised the Muslims a nice little fight – very nice of him. “The Religion of Peace”???

    069 8/12b: “I (Allah*) will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their fingertips off them, but this is told by Muslims (comment A8/15 translated from Swedish) to be an Arab expression meaning : ###"Kill absolutely every one of them". (Only to smite off their fingertips, would make them unable as good archers afterwards). A good and benevolent religion full of mercy.*) - - -.” “The god of Peace heading the Religion of Peace”? To call this religion “the Religion of Peace” is an insult to the intelligence of the world – and the reason why the world does not laugh at the claim, is lack of knowledge about the Quran. (That is to say: If they knew what the Quran demands against non-Muslims, few would laugh.) But also see 8/12d below.

    070 8/13a: "This (kill them*) because they contended against Allah and His Messenger - - -". How much Allah and how much Muhammad?

    Also one more proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same religion - there never in the entire Bible is an incitement to war for the god (there were wars in OT, but defense or - mainly - to establish and later defend a national country for the Jews, never waging war for Yahweh, not to mention for Jesus or any other prophet).

    071 8/13h: "- - - Allah is strict in punishment". See 3/77b above.

    072 8/14a: "- - - for those who resist Allah, is the penalty of the Fire". As practically all the may be 82 armed "episodes" - one every 6 weeks in Medina for "the Religion of Peace"!! - (http://www.1000mistakes.com/jihad-holywar/index.php names more than 60 of them and what was the purpose of each of them) under Muhammad, were aggression from Muhammad and his Muslims - mostly for loot, slaves and extortion - this is an interesting statement: ####Defend yourself against Muhammad's raiders who wants to steal everything you have got, rape and enslave your women and children, kill or enslave yourself - - - and go to Hell for "resisting Allah" as everything and every attack Muhammad made were "holy battles" and "holy war" - jihad. Included every single attack and raid for wealth which made up 90% of his raids or more!

    073 8/14e: "- - - Allah is strict in punishment". See 3/77b above.

    074 8/16a: “If any (Muslim warrior*) do turn his back to the (the enemy*) on such a day (during battle) - - - he draws on himself the wrath of Allah, and his abode is Hell - - - “. Fight for Allah and Muhammad or end in Hell. One verse is the carrot, this one the whip. War is a central part of the life and the religion - - - "the Religion of Peace"!!! (This claim is a joke for anyone who really has read the Quran).

    075 8/18a: "- - - Allah is He Who makes feeble the plans and stratagem of the Unbelievers". True or not true - it is good for the moral of warriors to believe things like this.

    076 8/19e: "- - - for verily Allah is with those who believe - - -". If he exists and if he is behind the war religion Islam.

    077 8/19g: "- - - Allah is with those who believe". Some difference from NT: "Yahweh is with those who do good and right".

    078 8/24c: “Oh ye who believe! Give your response to Allah and His Prophet (Muhammad*), when He calleth you to that which will give you life - - -.” To follow the call for war, will give you a beautiful next life – - - and Muhammad a cheap and committed warrior.

    079 8/26d: "- - - strengthened you (Muslims*) with His (Allah's*) aid - - -". There is nowhere in history a clear case of aid from Allah - you bet Muslims had told about it if there had been.

    ###080 8/29c: "- - - He (Allah*) will grant you a Criterion (to judge between right and wrong),- - -". In 1400 years he has not been able to do so. The Muslims have got the Quran included the basis for the sharia laws - perhaps from Allah if he exists and is no god (no god was ever involve in a book of that quality), may be from dark forces (the immorality and inhumanity in the Quran and in the sharia laws may indicate this), may be from a mental illness (TLE - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) like modern medical science suspects, or may be from one or more cold scheming brain(s), perhaps Muhammad himself, like all the mistakes which are in accordance with wrong science in Arabia at that time used in the Quran, and also the wide use in the Quran of local Arab folklore, legends and fairy tales may indicate this. Compare the Quran and the sharia laws, though, to the basis for all true ethics, moral, and just laws: "Do against others like you want others do against you", and there is only one possible conclusion: After 1400 years Muslims still have not received a criterion telling the difference between right and wrong. Also see 8/29d just below.

    ####081 8/30d: “They (non-Muslims*) plot and plan, and Allah too plans; but the best of planners is Allah”. When Allah can make devious and cheating plans, of course his followers also can. This verse is may be the main alibi for the institution of al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) and its brothers Kitman (the lawful half-truth), and Hilah (the lawful pretending/circumventing) - three lawful ways of dishonesty you find in no other of the large religions. Worse: For promoting or defending Islam, they are not only permitted, but advised to use "if necessary". (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.)

    Just for the record: Al-Taqiyya, Kitman and Hilah can be used at least in these cases (for broken oaths, etc., there are given no real limitations if the broken oath will give a better result. By implication this also goes for ordinary words and promises, as an oath is something stronger than a normal word or promise):

    1. To save your or others' health or life.
    2. To get out of a tight spot or a dangerous situation.
    3. To make peace in a family.
    4. When it will give a better result than honesty or honoring one’s oath.
    5. To cheat women (should be remembered by girls with Muslim boyfriends wanting sex - or wanting a marriage to get residence permit in a rich country.)
    6. To deceive opponents/enemies.
    7. To betray enemies.
    8. To secure one’s money (very clear from Hadiths).
    9. To defend Islam. (Advised if necessary to succeed.)
    10. To promote Islam. (Advised if necessary to succeed.)
     

    But al-Taqiyya is a double-edged sword: In the short run you may cheat and deceive some ones – actually also in the long run if the opposite part does not know about this side of Muslims and of Islam, or if he/she is naïve. But in the long run it means that people learn Muslims cannot be relied on in serious questions. And it also means problems for Muslims telling a plain truth without being believed - there is no way for them to strengthen their words, as even oaths are unreliable.

    Also remember that Muhammad in addition to "normal" dishonesty - he f.x. knows he is lying at least a few places in the Quran - used both betrayals, deceiving and broken oaths. The Islamic personification of truth and honesty?

    All this is "lawful and good" in Islam.

    ###082 8/39a: “And fight with them (the Unbelievers who will not convert to Islam*) on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere”. Comments should be unnecessary. Fight war till Islam dominates everywhere. An order and an incitement.

    We may add that “The Message of the Quran" adds (remark 41 to surah 8) that only war in self defense is permitted, but self defense in “the widest meaning of the word”. And the “widest meaning” is a very wide expression – absolutely anything can be (and is) explained as being done in self defense, as the non-Muslims are the guilty ones for everything. One striking sample you may meet, is the “fact” that “all Americans are guilty of aggression against Islam and can be killed, because they pay tax to the state of USA”. No concession because they after all are forced to pay tax – few do it gladly. No concession to the millions who do not pay tax. No concession to the ones that oppose the war in the Middle East. Not even concession to the - still some millions (f.x. youths) - who do not pay tax (f.x. students) and in addition oppose that war. Everybody is guilty – slay them. That is how “in the widest meaning” sometimes is used. "Only in self defense" here in many cases simply is a bitter joke with no real meaning or value except as propaganda.

    083 8/40a: “If they (the enemy*) refuse (to stop fighting – and remember that for hundreds of years the Muslims mostly were the aggressors*), be sure that Allah is your Protector - - -.” Allah helps you in any fight against “infidels”- real defense or "defense in the widest meaning of the word" = attack or raids for wealth and slaves and power and for expanding Islam.

    #####084 8/41a: “And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah (/Muhammad*) - - -.” These 20% - 100% in some cases - in reality were for Muhammad to use. Did he "demand no payment for what he did" like he claims some places in the Quran?

    And this is totally foreign to Yahweh and Jesus - one more proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same religion: Too different moral codes, etc.

    085 8/44b: “And remember when ye met (in battle at Badr*), He (Allah*) showed them to you as few in your eyes, and He made you appear as contemptible in their eyes - - -.” Remember – because this Allah may do the next time, too, and you will win like at Badr. Comforting to know - true or not.

    086 8/48a: "Remember Satan made their (sinful) acts seem alluring to them - - -". A number of acts accepted or advocated or even ordered in the Quran are from sinful to extremely sinful in all other of the large religions - and nearly all of the small ones - and also conflicting human rights and against all normal moral laws and rules. Not to mention that Islam's moral code conflicts with the very basis of all inter human moral: "Do onto others like you want others do onto you". The Quran is not made by any god, not to mention a good or benevolent god - too many errors, etc. and too horrible moral - or immoral - code. If the Quran is made by dark forces or even by one or more selfish humans, it is not strange if Satan has made the Muslims' sinful acts just and alluring to them. Are thus Muslims included here?

    #087 8/60a: “Against them (the unbelievers*) make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, included steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies (and Muhammad’s enemies*) - - -.” Inside information from “the Religion of Peace”.

    We may add the modern Muslim point of view (YA1226): "It is your duty to be ready against all, for the sacred Cause under whose banner you are fighting". (YA1227): Be always ready to put your resources (wealth and life*) into your Cause. You will not do so in vain. Allah's reward will come in various forms. He knows all, and His reward will always be more generous than you can possibly deserve". (YA1228) "It (fighting for Islam*) should be a joyful duty not for itself, but to establish the reign of peace and righteousness (remember here that words like this is used in accordance with the Quran's partly immoral moral code*) and Allah's Law". There are more like this. Also today Islam really is "the Religion of Peace".

    The Quran at many points, included ones like this, is the antipode of especially NT. War of religion is another strong proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same religion. (Oh, also Christians have been involved in religious wars, but in spite of the Bible's message, not because of it.)

    ##088 8/60c: (A8/64 - 2008 English edition 8/65): "- - - the enemies of Allah - - -". Definition according to A8/64: "(The enemies of Allah are*) everyone who deliberately opposes and seeks to undermine the moral laws lay down by Allah" - and those people automatically are "an enemy of those who believe (Muslims*) in Him (Allah*)". The definition of "the enemies of Allah" is very interesting because of the Quran's too often very primitive, medieval or even pre-medieval, and at too many points immoral moral code based on a Nazi-like apartheid, suppressive ("Übermench" rule, "Untermench" suppressed) war ideology, and because of the extremely immoral moral underlying and expressed in some of the Sharia laws (f.x. "a woman is to be seriously punished for unlawful sex if she is raped, but cannot bring 4 male witnesses to the act" or: "a man who correctly accuses a woman for unlawful sex is unjust unto Allah, if he cannot bring 4 witnesses" - even though an omniscient Allah knows he is speaking the truth). The definition is given is these words: Allah's enemy is "everyone who deliberately opposes and seeks to undermine the moral laws laid down by Allah (= Muhammad's quoted words in the Quran*) - - -". Oppose f.x. the "lawful and good" military (nearly always Muslim) aggressions and raids, stealing/robbing, raping, extortion, enslaving, betraying ("war is betrayal"), murdering, etc., etc. during "holy wars" - and practically everything is called jihad (holy war) - or opposing the incitements for going to war on the slightest religious reason or alibi ("self defense in the widest meaning of the word" - the ideology that makes every disagreement a jihad) and you are an enemy of Allah.

    And at least as bad: As the Quran with all its mistakes, etc. is from no god, also its so-called moral code also is not from any god, included Allah if he was a god.

    Also of sinister meaning is YA's comment that "- - - everyone - - - who actively opposes and seeks to undermine - - - (Allah's/Muhammad's (im)moral laws*) is, "eo ipso", an enemy of those who believe in Him (Allah*)". If you talk against Islam and its partly immoral moral rules, etc. you do not disagree with the Muslims, but you are an enemy of them. No wonder connections - or lack of such - sometimes are strained, and no wonder killing non-Muslims often are ok. Who wants to make friends with enemies? - enemies it is ok to kill. "The Religion of Peace" founded by a good and benevolent god?

    089 8/60e: “Whatever (money, time or your life*) ye shall spend in the Cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly”. Resources counts – for you to go to Paradise, for Muhammad (and Allah) to be able to make war. And warriors like you count – for you to gain loot or be sure to go to Paradise, for Muhammad (and Allah? – an omnipotent god really should not need war and mass murder and inhumanities? – especially not a good god,) to be able to make war and gain riches for f.x. “oiling” (bribes), and power and followers for his religion and platform of power.)

    090 8/62b: "He (Allah*) it is that hath strengthened thee - - -". Often claimed, never proved.

    091 8/66b: “- - - but (even so (even if Allah has lightened the fight for you - by sending angle warriors?*)) if there are a hundred of you, they will vanquish two hundred, and if a thousand, they will vanquish two thousand, with the leave of Allah - - -”. Another pep talk, and somewhat more realistic than 8/65e above. Besides: If you lose, know that is was not the enemy who was too strong for you, but Allah in his unfathomable wisdom who wanted it like that. (And Allah always has a good reason leading to a final victory).

    But why cannot an omnipotent god just decide how he wants things to be and make it like that? Why does a presumably good and kind and loving and benevolent and omnipotent god have to let humans live through so much blood and murder and hate and rape and misery? Something in the Quran just does not add up.

    ##092 8/72d: “Those who believed - - - and fought for the Faith, with their property (= gave money - like many Muslims do even today*) and their persons (= went to war personally*), in the cause of Allah, as well as those who gave them (warriors, terrorists*) asylum and aid (like what a large numbers of Muslims do today also - at least giving money and sympathy and aid to “the cause” included terrorism*) - all these (are good Muslims*)”. Comments unnecessary. Except one more strong proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same religion.

    0093 9/13b: “Will ye (Muslims*) not fight people who violated their oaths (like Muhammad did himself*), plotted to expel the Messenger - - -". See 9/1e above.

    ######By the way: Should not the world react to a religion which has dishonesty, deceit, betrayal, and broken words/promises/oaths (2/225, 5/89, 16/61,66/2) as officially accepted working tools, when that religion accepts no dishonesty from others but use claimed - claimed - dishonesty from them as slander and tools for making an enemy picture of them?

    "One rule for Loki and one for Thor"? - one for Muslims and a weaker one for others? This in spite of that Islam is the only big religion with dishonesty as an integrated part of the religion?

    094 9/14b: "Fight them (the Unbelievers*) - - -". Compare this to "- - - turn the other cheek - - -" (f.x. Matt.5/38-42). Jesus and Muhammad in the same line of prophets? - stop joking. Islam has to prove claims like this if they want to be believed.

    ##095 9/14e: “Fight them (the “unbelievers”*), and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame, help you (to victory) over them - - -”. When you fight non-Muslims, you are doing the work of the good and benevolent god Allah.

    Some religion: Hating, fighting, stealing, plundering, raping, enslavement, and murdering are the work of the god.

    And remember: The “ethics” and "morality" in the Quran was for then, for now and forever - for us and for our children and our descendants for all future.

    “What a wonderful world!” to quote Louis Armstrong.

    But why does an omnipotent god need humans for doing the killing and suppression?

    096 9/16i: "- - - take none for friends or protectors except Allah, His Messenger (Muhammad*) and the (community of) Believers (Muslims*) - - -". Strongly contradicted by Yahweh and by Jesus in the Bible.

    097 9/19g: "- - - strive with might and mind in the cause of Allah - - -". Guess if this conflicts with the Bible! Even in the rather hard and harsh OT the wars were not for Yahweh, but for establishing and then defending a national state for the Jews, not for the religion. And in NT war is hardly accepted at all. Yahweh and Allah the same god? Nope. Jesus and Muhammad in the same religion, not to mention in the same line of prophets? - more than nope.

    ##098 9/19h: “They (Muslims doing good deeds*) are not comparable in the sight of Allah (with the ones killing/waging raids/war for Muhammad/Allah*)”. Terrorists and others using weapons and stealing and murdering for Allah, are the best Muslims.

    Guess if verses like these do their work on some single-minded or fanatic Muslims. Who said “there are verses in the Quran that can be disused for war and terror”? Wrong: It hardly is possible to be a really pious Muslim without using weapons against non-Muslims.

    ###Yet another 120% proof for that Yahweh an Allah are not the same god - and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same religion: The differences are too many, too deep, and too fundamental (except perhaps if the god is deeply schizophrenic, helpless and sadistic).

    099 9/19j: "- - - Allah guides not those who do wrong". Something to think about the next time you do something which is lawful according to sharia, but obviously wrong? - like punishing a raped woman to take a clear example. - or treating other human beings - male or female - in ways you would dislike to be treated yourself. Or anything conflicting with "do to others like you want others to do to you".

    100 9/19k: "- - - Allah guides not those who do wrong". Allah can guide nobody if he does not exist - and even if he could guide; where do you end up if you follow a guidebook of a quality like the Quran?

    ###101 9/20b: “Those who believe, and suffer exile and strive with their might and main (= fight in raids/war*), in Allah’s cause, with their goods (= giving money to war expenses*) and their persons (= fighting personally in raids/war or terrorism - “any stratagem of war”*), have the highest rank in the sight of Allah - - -”.

    Terrorists (- "any stratagem of war" -) and other warriors are doubtlessly the very best Muslims.

    In possible future times of troubles - remember that Muslims are ordered to make Islam the dominant religion and to suppress the members of all other religions - the few (? - 30% of Muslims “understand why terrorists do what they do“ according to international polls, tough that number varies some*) Muslims living according to the highest “ethics” for Muslims, will make a powerful and efficient 5. column in the West and other places. That is a simple military and security fact.

    ###102 9/20c: “Those who believe, and suffer exile and strive with their might and main (= fight in raids/war*), in Allah’s cause, with their goods (= giving money to war expenses*) and their persons (= fighting personally in raids/war or terrorism - “any stratagem of war”*), have the highest rank in the sight of Allah - - -”. It is hardly worth the bother to tell that you find nothing like this in the Bible, not to mention in NT. Yahweh the same god as Allah? Jesus in the same line of prophets as Muhammad? Anyone able to believe such claims either need much more knowledge or a psychiatrist. An at least 200% proof against those 2 claims.

    #####103 9/20e: "(Warriors/terrorists*) have the highest rank in the sight of Allah". One more of the revealing fundamental points in the Quran. It is facts like these which tell the true story about Islam, not the cheap propaganda glorifications like "the very good man Muhammad" or "the Religion of Peace". And these many revealing points scattered all over especially the surahs from Medina, uniformly tell a dark story: A religion of war, suppression, apartheid - and not least about lawful dishonesty, lawful immoral and lawful inhumanity. (There are many parallels to Djingis Khan's war religion, to Nazism and to apartheid in the Quran and in Islam. Islam also has a superiority complex against all non-Muslims - it f.x. is seriously debated f.x. in north Pakistan if even "the people of the Book" have half the value of a Muslim or less, and the Pagans are even worth far less).

    *104 9/21a: “Their (terrorists/warriors*) Lord (Allah*) doth give them glad tidings of a Mercy (that terrorists/warriors for Allah are forgiven practically any sin*) from Himself (from Allah personally*), of His good pleasure (from the fighting and murdering they have done for the good and kind and benevolent god*), and the Gardens for them, wherein are delights (earth-like riches, luxury, and women*) that endures”. The ultimate pep talk for war, terror and murder? In the name of a presumably peaceful religion and a kind and good god?

    As for forgiving from Allah: Also see 2/187d and 67/9c above.

    *105 9/22b: “They (terrorists/warriors*) will dwell therein (in paradise) forever. Verily (it definitely is no proved verity/truth*) in Allah’s presence is a reward, the greatest (of all)”. Warriors/terrorists are in so high esteem in the eyes of Allah, that they will be invited to live in the parts of paradise that has Allah’s presence. (In the Muslim paradise some parts are even better than others - Jesus f.x. only lives in the 2. heaven, whereas Moses was a better prophet and lives in heaven number four, and top prophets like Abraham and Muhammad of course in number seven, closest to Allah, who resides above number seven. In addition some regions of the heavens are better than others - in the heaven for ordinary Muslims, there f.x. are 4 or 6 or perhaps more gardens - Islam does not know for sure - one better than the other (just hope you, your wives and your children do not merit different gardens).

    Compared to 9/21 this may be an even more ultimate pep talk.

    106 9/22d: "Verily in Allah's presence is a reward, the greatest (of all)". We are back to the old question: Does he even exist? The only place you ever find him, is in the Quran and other books based on the words of a man of very doubtful morality, who liked power, riches for bribes - and women. And a man who advised his followers to use dishonest means when that gave a better result - this even according to the Quran itself. (F.x. lies, deceit, broken oaths, etc.)

    ###107 9/24a: “If (your closest family or closest relatives*) are dearer to you than Allah, or His Messenger (Muhammad*), or the striving (waging war*) in His (Allah’s*) cause - then wait until Allah brings his Decision (- he will punish you*)”. Islam is a religion of extremes. Nothing - NOTHING - can be permitted to mean more for you than Muhammad - and war for Islam - on this earth, and Allah in the possible next. This is as bad as Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Kim Il Jung, and Pol Pot at their most extreme. And friendly contacts - not to mention friendship - with non-Muslims are gigabytes on the way in direction of Hell.

    108 9/25b: “Assuredly Allah did help you in many battlefields - - -.” – and consequently he can be expected to do the same in future battlefields. A good pep talk.

     

    109 9/26c: "- - - forces which ye saw not - - -". Muhammad claimed that here like in some other battles Allah sent down large forces of angel warriors to help the Muslims in battles". But why take part in primitive battles, when he - Allah - "just can say 'Be' and it is"? Such claims about the necessity of wars and battles have no meaning when an omniscient god is involved. But if there was no god, but only a charismatic warlord pep-talking to his warriors, there suddenly is logic in it all.

    ####110 ##9/29a: “Fight those who believe not in Allah - - -.” A most clear order - - - in spite of “no compulsion in religion” (2/256). One of those clear orders which shows reality and belies the glorious words about a "Religion of Peace". As said before: Whenever there is discrepancy between reality and propaganda, we believe in the reality.

    Compare this sentence with the 3 samples below and weep:

    1. 2/256: “Let there be no compulsion in religion”. This is the flagship for all Muslims who wants to impress non-Muslims about how peaceful and tolerant Islam is. But NB! NB! The surah says: “Let it be - - -.” It is an incitement or – judging also from 2/255 – more likely a wish, it is not a manifested fact. It is a hope or a goal for the future, it is not something that exist – and all the same most Muslims quote it like this: “There is no compulsion in Religion” - - - a small, little “Kitman” (lawful half-truth – an expression special for Islam together with “al-Taqiyya, “the lawful lie" and Hilah, "the lawful pretending/circumventing") makes the Quran and the religion sound much more friendly and tolerant than it really is.
    2. 5/28: “If thou (“infidels”, Cain*) dost stretch thy hand against me (Muslims, Abel*), it is not for me to stretch my hand against thee to slay thee - - -.” When you read this, remember that Muslims have few if any overall moral codes. What they have to do, is to look for “What did Muhammad say about such things?” If he has said or done something, they take that as a moral code – good moral or not. If not, they have to look in the book: “Is there a parallel situation somewhere?” If they find – sometimes by stretching imagination – that is the way to act, or the alibi for how one wishes to act. Mind also that this verse is one of the very few in the entire Quran that is in accordance with the teachings of Jesus – one of the very few. And it is totally “murdered” by abrogations.
    3. 29/46: “And dispute ye not with the People of the Book - - -. “ No comments – but read 9/29 once more.
     

    111 9/34d: "And there are those who bury gold and silver and spend it not in the Way of Allah - - -". You should spend at least some of your money in ways advice by the Quran - for the poor, for spreading Islam, for paying for the costs of war, etc.

    112 9/34e: "And there are those who bury silver and gold and spend it not in the Way of Allah: announce unto them a most grievous penalty - - -". If you are well off and do not spend at least a reasonable part of your wealth for religiously accepted purposes - which includes waging war on non-Muslims - you will be strongly punished. A nice rule for a warlord who needed to finance wars and raids.

    ###113 9/39a: “Unless ye (Muslims*) go forth (in war/battle for Islam/Muhammad*), He (Allah*) will punish you with a grievous penalty (normally in the Quran a synonym for Hell*) - - -”. An order not possible to misunderstand for a pious - or fanatic - Muslim.

    Yes, a religion built on peace, goodness and heavenly ethics.

    THIS IS THE ORDER ALSO TODAY - JUST LISTEN TO SOME IMAMS, MULLAHS, AYATOLLAHS, ETC. - see 9/38d.

    THIS VERSE TELLS HORRIBLY MUCH ABOUT ISLAM AS IT IS TAUGHT IN THE QURAN - AND ALSO MANY PLACES IN TODAY'S ISLAM.

    One of the really strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - not to mention for that Jesus and Muhammad were not in the same religion.

    114 9/44e: “And Allah knoweth well those who do their duty (the Muslims going to war for Allah/Muhammad*)”. It is not possible to deny - like most Muslims and many politically correct other ones try to do today - that war (against “unbelievers”) is a duty for Muslims. It is impossible to say it more directly than the Quran does here. And also that Allah knows the ones who goes to war - and the ones who do not. Ominous for the ones who do not. Also see 2/233h above. "The Religion of Peace"?

    ##115 9/45a: “Only those ask thee (Muhammad*) for exemption (from doing battle*) who believe not in Allah and the Last day”. Terrorists and fanatical mullahs/imams are right and do right according to the Quran, because the Quran is pretty clear on what it means. And the ones only claiming there are verses which can be disused by terrorists to defend their activity, are pretty naive and without knowledge about the book. "The Religion of Peace"? This claim is an insult to anyone who has read the surahs from Medina with an open mind.

    116 9/46b: “If they (the ones reluctant to go to war*) had intended to come out (to the battlefield*), they should certainly have made some preparations therefore; but Allah was averse to their being sent forth, so he made them lag behind - - -”. Pep talk about the ones not wanting to go to war ‘do not mind them - they are bad quality Allah did not want’ - no reason to lose your nerve. But if it was Allah who made them lag behind, why then punishment of men for it?

    117 9/46c: "- - - He (Allah*) made them (some Muslims*) lag behind (and do not go to war) - - -". Allah made them lag behind, but they were punished in many ways anyhow. There especially is one story in Hadiths about psychological cruelty and punishment which is worthy the brainwashed and brainwashing Soviet Union of Stalin.

    118 9/49c: “(Many say*) ‘Grant me exception (from going to war*) and draw me not into trial’. Have they not fallen into trial already?” The Muslims not wanting war are already judged and doomed.

    BUT THERE IS AN EXTRA POINT HERE: MUSLIMS SHOULD NOT BE JUDGED BAD JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE MUSLIMS - WITH A PARTLY HORRIBLE MORAL CODE, ETC. - THE MAJORITY IS JUST AS HUMAN AS NON-MUSLIMS, f.x. not wanting wars.

    119 9/51c: “Nothing can happen to us except what Allah has decreed for us - - -”. Well, Islam tells it is the free will of man that brings on bad incidents and bad life. This verse contradicts that claim, to say the least of it: Everything happen according to Allah's will. So just go safely to war.

    A warrior or terrorist can only win - riches and glory or Paradise. (Mutilation, becoming a cripple etc. is never mentioned).

    Well, as said he may become a cripple f.x. and live a long life in misery - but that is never mentioned. Also his family may live in misery if the man is a cripple - also this is never mentioned.

    Also the Quran NEVER mentions that the non-Muslims are humans, and what the devastation of their culture and lives means to them - it is of absolutely no consequence and without the slightest interest. The destruction of Persia - and for that case the East Roman culture or the terror in Pakistan/India and Africa - represented long series of terrible dramas and catastrophes for people and culture and science, but the only things which counted - and still counts - for Islam, was a lot of spoils of war - and power and riches for their leaders, and like it or not: Frequently forcing people to become Muslims - frequently by weapons, and always using social and other kinds of pressure - and by extra tax (jizya), often high. Even today we have never met a Muslim able to see this side of their wars or murders or suppression, not to mention what rape and enslavement meant to millions of victims - never to this day, not one single time have we heard a Muslim regret this. Only in the western culture the ability to see the fate of the victims is widespread - a military weak spot, but one of the points which perhaps make the western culture better than some others of the big ones. (To say anything good about the West is politically incorrect, but we do not care for what is politically correct - we are able to think ourselves, and what counts is what is correct, not what is politically correct).

    ####120 9/52c: "But we (Muslims*) can expect for you (non-Muslims*) either that Allah will send his punishment from Himself, or by our hands". The last part of the sentence means that when Muslims are fighting or in other ways are being adverse to non-Muslims, they are doing the work of Allah - punishing them for him. Mistreating, raping, extorting, suppressing, torturing, murdering non-Muslims are sermons to Allah! Comments? Yahweh and Allah the same god ?Jesus and Muhammad in the same religion?

    121 9/62a: "- - - it is more fitting if they (people*) should please Allah and his Messenger, if they are Believers". A nice piece of divine declaration for any dictator.

    122 9/73c: “Strive (fight*) hard against the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites - - -”. There is nothing like this in the Bible. In OT there is fighting, but for the Jews' country, not for the religion, and NT hardly accepts armed conflicts at all. Yahweh and Allah the same god? Nyet - which is a good English word meaning NO with capital letters and at least 3 lines under it.

    123 9/75a: "Amongst them (some bad Muslims/hypocrites/non-Muslims*) are men who covenanted with Allah, that if He bestowed on them of His bounty - - -". They covenanted with the god that if he made them rich, they would be generous. Some covenance. Some god.

    124 9/75e: "- - - when He (Allah*) did bestow of his bounty - - -". According to this verse in the Quran, Allah kept his part of such a covenant. So definitely different from NT. Jesus talked about religion, not about making economical deals. (This even more so as the Muslims had to go out and steal the riches themselves.)

    125 9/81h: This verse in short: The ones not willing to do battle may end in hell. Do you want to end there? One more of the really strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god and Jesus and Muhammad neither serving the same god nor the same religion - the differences between them - and between their teachings, moral codes, etc. are far too big, too deep, and too fundamental

    ##126 9/85b: “Allah’s plan is to punish them (the ones not wanting to go to war*) with these things in this world, and that their souls may perish in their (very) denial of Allah”. Refusing war means:

    1. Social contempt.
    2. To most likely end in Hell.
    3. To deny Allah.
     

    Is it possible to put more social and religious pressure on a man to make him go to war - willing or not? Anyone saying Islam is peaceful, either has not read the Quran, is repeating “correct” words but wrong meanings, or is a Muslim (who believes it or not believes it).

    But if Allah predestines everything like the Quran states MANY places, how can he then punish persons for acts he himself has predestined?

    127 9/89a: “Allah hath prepared for them (his warriors/terrorists) Gardens under which rivers flow, to dwell therein: that is the supreme felicity”.

    Once more - to say the least of it: Incitement to wage war for Muhammad - and for Allah if he exists. On the other hand: How will "life" in such a boring paradise be in the long run - no mental activity at all?

    128 9/91i: Verse 9/91 in short says that only those with heavy reasons for staying at home when Allah - Muhammad - wants a raid or a war, were to be excused for not joining the raid or war party.

    This means it is different - and contradicting - in the extreme from the Bible, and especially from NT and the New Covenant. It simply is incompatible with especially the NT. One more heavy and 100+% proof for that Yahweh and Allah were not the same god - and Jesus and Muhammad neither in the same line of prophets, nor in the same religion. (On the last point: ####Is it possible to find two characters who morally, ethically and in teaching were more different and further apart than Jesus and Muhammad? - the messenger of love versus the messenger/warlord of dishonesty, hate, crime, suppression and war. Besides one was a prophet or more according to both the Bible and the Quran, whereas the other even himself admitted he did not have the ability of making prophesies ("see the unseen") = not a real prophet.

    129 9/111a: “Allah hath purchased of the Believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the Garden (of Paradise): they fight in His (Allah’s) Cause, and slay and are slain (and go to Paradise afterwards*) - - -.” It may be a good, if de-humanizing (war mostly is) deal - - - if Allah and his Paradise exists. If not the only person gaining anything was Muhammad (and all the mistakes, etc. in the Quran prove absolutely that at least something is seriously wrong in that book).

    130 9/111d: “- - - they (warriors/terrorists*) fight in His (Allah’s (or Muhammad’s?*)) cause, and slay and are slain (and get great reward in Paradise*)”. Can anyone really read the Quran - even a Muslim - and afterwards believe the Quran represents a good, peaceful, benevolent god? One is reminded of the blood orgies of the Mayas and Incas, except that Islam mostly kills at the spot - like the Assyrians. And "the Religion of Peace"?? Wrong.

    131 9/111k: "Then rejoice in the bargain which ye (Muslim warriors*) have concluded: that is the achievement supreme”. A good bait – but see 9/111a and 9/111e above.

    132 9/113d: "It is not fitting, for the Prophet and those who believe, that they should pray forgiveness for Pagans, even though they be of kin - - -". This cynical sentence tells a few megabytes about the Quran, about Muhammad, and about Islam - not to mention about the Quran's and Islam's moral code. Even if this was the only difference between the Bible and the Quran, this alone had been a 100% proof for that Yahweh and Allah is not the same god. And remember: Science has proved far beyond any even unreasonable doubt that the Bible and especially the NT is not falsified in spite of Muhammad's many, but never proved, claims - may be some mistakes, but no falsifications. And the best proof for this is Islam: If one single real falsification had been found, Islam had screamed about it to every living being on Earth, included rats and worms. No such scream has ever been heard.

    133 9/120e: “It was not fitting for (them - see 9/120a just above*) to refuse to follow Allah’s Messenger, nor to prefer their own lives to his - - -”. Incitement to war. What does just this tell about Islam? What it does tell about Muhammad and Islam is that the Quran is? - not a fairy tale, but a demon tale?

    And: Make Muhammad a powerful warlord! Hitler said similar things (actually some intellectuals compared Nazism to Islam before WW2.)

    134 9/120h: "- - - nothing could they suffer or do, but was reckoned to their credit as a deed of righteousness - - - in the cause of Allah - - -”. This only - only - can be true if Allah exists and if everything in addition is correctly told in the Quran - a book choke full of wrong facts, mistakes, contradictions, etc.

    135 9/121a: "Nor could they (Muslims*) spend anything (for the Cause (of Allah/Muhammad*)) - small or great - nor cut across a valley, but the deed is inscribed to their credit - - -". Words are easy when one neither has to pay them nor prove them. And when you read the Quran you may notice that everything is built on never proved claims and promises only.

    136 9/121b: "- - - Allah may requite their (warriors') deeds with the best (possible reward)." A nice reward if Islam is a true religion. A very cheap way for Muhammad to pay his warriors if the religion is a made up one. And here it is very thought provoking that the Quran is not from a god - no god makes that many mistakes, not to mention reveres them in a "mother book" in his heaven. (And no benevolent god has a moral code and war code like in the Quran).

    137 9/123d: "- - - know that Allah is with those who fear him". If he exists. If he is a god. And if the Quran has described him correctly.

    ####138 10/21b: “- - - they (people*) take to plotting against our (Allah’s*) Signs! Say: ‘Swifter to plan is Allah!’” (The original - translated from Swedish (omitted in the English 2008 edition) A10/33: "Allah is swifter (than you) making plans"). This is another of the main alibis for al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth*), and Hilah (the lawful pretending/circumventing): When Allah can use devious means like indicated here, of course any Muslim can.

    Just for the record: Al-Taqiyya and Kitman can be used at least in these cases (for broken oaths there are given no real limitations if the broken oath will give a better result. By implication this also goes for ordinary promises, as an oath is something stronger than a normal promise):

    1. To save your or others' health or life.
    2. To get out of a tight spot or a dangerous problem.
    3. To make peace in a family.
    4. When it will give a better result than honesty or honoring one’s oath.
    5. To cheat women (should be remembered by girls with Muslim boyfriends wanting sex - or wanting a marriage to get residence permit in a rich country.)
    6. To deceive opponents/enemies.
    7. To betray enemies.
    8. To secure one’s money (very clear from Hadiths).
    9. To defend Islam. (Advisable if necessary to succeed.)
    10. To promote Islam. (Advisable if necessary to succeed.)
     

    But al-Taqiyya is a double-edged sword: In the short run you may cheat and deceive some ones – actually also in the long run if the opposite part does not know about this side of Muslims and of Islam, or if he/she is naïve or wants to believe. But in the long run the real result is that Muslims have no way of strengthening their word to be believed - yes, knowing about al-Taqiyya, Kitman. etc. anyone has to be a bit careful believing a Muslim - you never know when he may be using a "lawful lie", etc.

    #####139 10/35i: "How judge ye?" We judge that religion and a possible eternal life is too serious a matter to accept that mistakes, contradictions, lies, etc., etc. can be hidden when trying to find out if a god/gods exist(s), and in case which one(s) is/are true and which not. Only complete honesty can lead to a correct answer in such a question - and the Quran/Islam most likely is the most dishonest of all big religions - the only one who on top of all not only accepts, but advocates dishonesty on central points "if necessary" to win a discussion - not to find the truth, but to win a discussion or a new believer.

    140 10/44b: "Verily (though this definitely is no proved verity/truth*), Allah will not deal unjustly with man in aught - - -". Perhaps. But some of the moral rules and some of the laws said to be from him, are pretty unjust and/or immoral - some even worse. Actually 1 or 2 of the laws in sharia - Allah's laws - may be the most unjust and immoral in any somewhat civilized culture in this whole world.

    141 10/58a: "- - - the Bounty of Allah - - -". The good things from Allah. But one point Islam never points to, is that all the bounty Muhammad and his Muslims - and many later Muslims - ever "received", were things (and humans) they stole/looted with permission from Muhammad and later leaders (and Muhammad also claimed Allah had given his permission).

    At least for the "bounty" in this life, the claim is wrong unless Islam proves the opposite.

    It may here be worth remembering that the Quran at least one place clearly and directly tells that there still is much bounty left to be stolen in the world. (Islam never - never - mentions that looting = stealing.)

    142 10/100a: "No soul can believe, except by the Will of Allah - - -." Is it then morally acceptable to condemn all the others to Hell, when their lack of belief is because Allah has decided and predestined it so? (According to Hadiths he decides whether to send you to Hell or to Heaven 5 months before you are even born). Very different from NT where everybody have the possibility and are welcome to search for Heaven.

    ##143 11/19c: "Those (non-Muslims*) who would hinder (men) from the path of Allah and would seek in it something crocked - - -." M. Asad (A11/35 - 11/38 in the 2008 English edition) tells that the Quran here implies that "belief in resurrection, Allah's judgment and a life in the hereafter is here postulated as the only valid and lasting source of human morality".

    #####A most illuminating piece of information, because all your good deeds in this case is motivated only from: "What merit can I gain with Allah?" There is an ocean between this and NT: Help your fellow humans from love or at least from empathy and because he/they need help - and gain merit in Heaven on top. One hidden reason why so few of the help and aid NGOs originated in Muslim area? - for why people collecting money to international NGO's sometimes say that when they come to doors with Muslims name on it, they often get little or nothing? - for why Islam had to be forced into abolishing slavery? - etc.? Allah and Yahweh the same god? - only possible to believe if you strongly want to believe it and overlook lots of facts.

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

    ###144 11/19d: "(See 11/19c just above*) - - - #######belief in resurrection, Allah's judgment and a life in the hereafter is here postulated as the only valid and lasting source of human morality". Look at this sentence and think it over. What deep truths does it divulge about Muhammad, about the Quran, and about Islam - even today? - and about the ethics, value of empathy, and the moral of those three? For sexual morality parts of it is better in Islam than f.x. among Christians (though not better than what the Bible wants Christians to practice), in other parts from worse to much worse (f.x. lawful rape of slaves or captives, and sex with children, the easy divorces for men, etc.). In most branches of morality the Quran/Islam is inferior to NT if you use "do to others like you want others do to you" as a basis.

    145 13/42a: “- - - but in all things the master planning is Allah’s.” Allah is the one who decides in reality. This is one of the verses on which Islam and Muslims have founded the rules for al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), Hilah (the lawful pretending/circumventing), etc. - the moral alibi and explanation for it. When Allah could device plots, also his followers could and can do so.

    Just for the record: Al-Taqiyya, Kitman, and Hilah can be used at least in these cases (for broken oaths there are given no real limitations if the broken oath will give a better result. By implication this also goes for ordinary promises, as an oath is something stronger than a normal promise):

    1. To save your or others' health or life.
    2. To get out of a tight spot or a dangerous problem.
    3. To make peace in a family.
    4. When it will give a better result than honesty or honoring one’s oath.
    5. To cheat women (should be remembered by girls with Muslim boyfriends wanting sex - or wanting a marriage to get residence permit in a rich country.)
    6. To deceive opponents/enemies.
    7. To betray enemies.
    8. To secure one’s money (very clear from Hadiths).
    9. To defend Islam. (Advised if necessary to succeed.)
    10. To promote Islam. (Advised if necessary to succeed.)
     

    But al-Taqiyya is a double-edged sword: In the short run you may cheat and deceive some ones – actually also in the long run if the opposite part does not know about this side of Muslims and of Islam, or if he/she is naïve or wanting to believe. But in the long run the real result is that Muslims have no way of strengthening their word to be believed - yes, knowing about al-Taqiyya, Kitman. etc. anyone has to be a bit careful believing a Muslim - you never know when he may be using a "lawful lie", etc.

    In addition there f.x. are acceptance of use of deceit and betrayal, and not least acceptance and sometimes even the advice to break ones word/promise/oath (2/225a, 5/89a, 16/91b, 66/2a).

    You find no acceptance of any of these kinds of dishonesty from Jesus.

    146 15/3b: “Leave them (the disbelievers*) alone, to enjoy (the good things of this life) and to please themselves - - -.” This was in 621 AD. It did not take long before Allah needed to change and contradict his word, when he started to change his rather peaceful religion to one of inhumanity and blood (luckily many Muslims do not live according to those parts if the Quran). This verse is contradicted – made invalid - 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).

    ###147 15/14: "Even if We (Allah*) opened out to them a gate from heaven, and they (disbelievers*) were to continue (all day) ascending therein (they would not believe*) - - -". This is one of the places in the Quran where Muhammad explains away the difficult question why he could prove nothing. ######And it is one of the places where he knew the fast-talk was a lie: If there was opened a gate to Heaven, and people knew it led to Heaven, there would have been a run for it, and "seeing is believing", at least in cases like this - and Muhammad was too intelligent and knew too much about people not to know this. The same goes for any intelligent person today - they know this would be the result. Even intelligent, brainwashed Muslims know this deep down.

    148 15/14+15: “- - - They would only say (when experiencing a miracle*): ‘Our eyes have been intoxicated - - -”. Wrong. At least some had come to believe. These two verses are a piece of fast-talk. There is some fast-talking in the Quran - trying to explain away things and facts and ideas and not least questions which are difficult to explain or answer. See the chapter about fast talk in the Quran. And there are even more fast-talk among Muslims today, trying to explain away mistakes, abrogation, changes in Islam around/after 622 AD, etc., not to mention trying to present Islam as a peaceful religion. Just in this case one tries to explain away questions for proofs for Allah and for Muhammad's connection to a god.

    #####But the really bad thing about this point is that it is one of the points where Muhammad himself knew he was lying – at least some would believe in Islam if he produced miracles or could in other ways prove his claims. He was too intelligent and knew too much about people not to know this – this even more so as he himself told about heathens becoming Muslims after they had experienced miracles (f.x. the magicians of Pharaoh), and he also had a good example in Jesus who got many believers from making miracles – some refused to believe no matter, but quite a number of others did after miracles made by Jesus (made also according to the Quran).

    149 15/80+83: “The people of the Rocky Tract (Al-Hidjr in northern Hidjaz in Arabia*) - - - the (mighty) Blast sized them in the morning (and killed them*)”. Allah had many killing sprees - and what was ok for a god, may be morally right for his followers?

    #####150 16/38j: “- - - a promise (binding) on Him (Allah*) - - -". Not least: How binding is a promise for a claimed god who accepts and he himself uses dishonesty (f.x. al-Taqiyya - the lawful lie - and Kitman - the lawful half-truth), deceit ("Allah is the best of 'planners' (our quotation marks - because this verse indicates he uses deceiving plans*)" and "war is deceit"), and even broken words/oaths (according to the Quran - 2/225a, 5/89a+b, 16/91e, 66/2a)?

    151 16/52d: "- - - to Him (Allah*) is duty due always - - -". Only if he exists and is a god.

    152 16/71c: "- - - those more favored (rich because Allah has made them so*) are not going to throw back their gifts (from Allah*) to those whom their right hand possess, so as to be equal in that respect." Equality among human beings is not for Islam - it is to deny the favors of Allah.

    153 16/71e: "Will they (rich Muslims*) then deny the favors of Allah". An arrangement giving others, or slaves, part in the riches, is an insult - denying the favors - to Allah. No further comments.

    ##154 16/75b: “- - - a slave under the dominion of another - - - a man on whom We (Allah*) have bestowed goodly favors - - - are the two equal? (By no means); praise be to Allah.” #############This “praise be to Allah,” tells many pages about the Muslims’ evaluation of slaves and of fellow humans.

    155 16/90c: “- - - and He (Allah*) forbids shameful deeds - - -.” Strongly contradicted by f.x.:

    1. 2/230: “So if a husband divorces his wife (irrevocably), he cannot, after that, remarry her until after she has married another husband (and “fulfilled” that marriage*) and he has divorced her.” This situation is not often to meet, but it does happen. It is a most shameful deed in those cases to force the woman to prostitute herself to be permitted to go back to her husband. And NB: He divorced her, but she has to pay the price of repairing the mistake.
     

    Not to mention that 16/90 is contradicted by some of the “moral” rules in the Quran: Stealing/robbing, discrimination, enslavement, rape, murder, war, etc. – all “good and lawful” if you in some way can claim you do it in the name of a benevolent, good god. Or the rule that a raped woman who cannot produce 4 male witnesses who have seen the actual act – and will be punished for not helping her in case – is to be strictly punished for illegal sex. Most likely the most unjust and shameful law we have ever heard about.

    156 16/90g: "- - - He (Allah*) forbids - - - rebellion". Wrong. The Quran only forbids rebellion against Islam and Muslim leaders, not against non-Muslim authorities. A very nice situation for Muhammad and later leaders.

    ###157 16/101a: “When We (Allah*) substitute one revelation for another - - -“. (“Substitute” is an English word which here has exactly the same meaning as the other word derived from Latin; “abrogate”). Allah tells he is changing his instructions now and then. But:

    (Abrogation)
    1. 6/115: “- - - none can change His (Allah’s) Words - - -“. Well, he is contradicting himself, as he clearly changes it himself when something forces him to – try and fail?
    2. 10/64: “Hereafter, no change can there be in the Words of Allah.”
     

    Also read 10/64 above.

    Surah 16 came in 622, surahs 6 and 10 both came in 621. Allah thus abrogates himself, 6/115 and 10/64 with 16/101.

    (2 contradictions).

    #####But the real importance of this verse, is that it is one of the foundations and alibis for Islam's rule of abrogation (= making some - or actually many - Quranic verses invalid) - f.x. the famous 2/256: "Let there be no compulsion in religion" is thoroughly abrogated and invalid, a fact no Muslims ever mention.

    ####158 16/101b: "- - - Allah knows best what He reveals - - -". When revelations are contradicting or there are other errors, it is not Muhammad who has made mistakes, but Allah who in his unfathomable wisdom has chosen to do it like that, so do not question it!

    ######159 16/101ba: "When We (Allah*) substitute one revelation for another - - -". Many Muslims claim that abrogation (making points or verses invalid by introducing others with different contents) does not exist in the Quran/Islam (because it proves that Allah was/is not omniscient - he has to try and fail and/or he changes his mind some times, and thus changes his unchangeable Plan), among others this verse proves they are wrong.

    ###160 16/106a: "Anyone who, after accepting faith in Allah, utters Unbelief (= doubt or wish to leave Islam*) - - - on them is Wrath from Allah - - -". It is prohibited not only to leave Islam (though many does so nowadays), but even to doubt the teachings - full of mistaken facts or not. Here it is indicated that the punishment is for Allah - remember this is in 622 AD and Muhammad still is weak - it changed later. But you bet this verse counts for the ones who wish to "help" Allah with the punishment.

    161 16/111c: "- - - none will be unjustly dealt with". Not if Allah exists, the Quran is from him, and it in addition tells the plain and full truth only. With one reservation: What is the definition for "unjustly" in the Quran and Islam? - in Islam there are rules among the most unjust you are able to find in any culture.

    162 17/26b: "- - - but squander not (your wealth) (on helping others*) in the manner of spendthrift. Verily (it definitely is no proved verity/truth*) spendthrifts are brothers of the Satans - - -". The only possible meaning here, is that if you use too much of your possessions to help others, you are sinning against Allah (squandering his gifts?). The abyss here between the Quran and NT is immense - see f.x. the story about the widow's offering (Mark 12/42-43). Yahweh and Allah the same god? Jesus and Muhammad in the same line? A clear no to both.

    163 17/43b: "He (Allah*) is high above all that they say! - Exalted and Great (beyond measure)!" We may remind you that when you read the Quran, you should read the demands, deeds, etc., not the glorious words. The demands and deeds and introduced rules are reliable - the glorious words are cheap and may be propaganda. Read 1/1a above and see if you agree to this verse.

    ###164 17/59h “And We (Allah*) refrains from sending the Signs only because the men of former generations treated them as false- - -". But there is an interesting remark in Asad’s note and explanation (A 17/71 -: “His (Muhammad’s*) only miracle was and is the Quran itself”. This is an accepted fact among Muslim scholars and Islamic religious leaders. AND ALL THE SAME THEY CONTINUE AND CONTINUE TO TELL THEIR CONGREGATIONS ABOUT THE (MADE UP) MIRACLES CONNECTED TO MUHAMMAD THAT THE HADITHS TELL ABOUT – AND NOWHERE IN THE HADITH COLLECTIONS DO YOU FIND A WARNING THAT “THE QURAN PROVES THAT THESE MIRACLES ARE MADE UP LEGENDS. An honest religion? Honest “priests”? Honest professors? (These are among the reasons why it is impossible to rely on Islamic literature – you all the time know you have to check the “facts” before you can use the information (or disinformation or wishful thinking)).

    Remember this whenever a Muslim will tell you about some of all the miracles they claim Muhammad performed. That he made no miracles at all, also is very clear from the fact that he had to explain away all requests for such ones - if he had made any miracle, he and his followers had informed about it loudly and often.

    Also remember that foretelling/prophesies are a kind of miracle: To see the unseen or what has not yet happened. This thus also confirms that claims about Muhammad making foretelling/prophesies like you sometimes meet from Muslims, are made up ones - Muhammad was unable to make any kind of miracle.

    For the sake of record we quote the here relevant part of M. Asad's comment in full ones more, and now directly from English (on Internet): "In many places (not only here in 17/59*) the Quran stresses the fact that the Prophet Muhammad - - - was not empowered to perform miracles similar to those with which the earlier prophets are said to (and in some cases confirmed by the Quran*) have reinforced (NB: Muhammad claimed it would not reinforce his teaching*) their verbal (also Muhammad's were verbal - only written down afterwards*) messages. His only miracle was and is the Qur'an itself - - -". There has never existed one single Muslim scholar who did not know - and knows today - this. ALL THE SAME THEY HAIL MUHAMMAD'S CLAIMED MIRACLES AS PROOFS FOR HIS GOD AND HIS BEING A PROPHET IN SUCH WAYS THAT THE UNEDUCATED MASSES TO A LARGE DEGREE BELIEVE - YES, ARE SURE - THE MIRACLES ARE A REALITY. An honest al-Taqiyya (lawful lie). But if the scholars, imams, ayatollahs lie about this to forward the religion, how much more do they lie about?

    165 19/74a: "But how many (countless) generations before them have We (Allah*) destroyed - - -?" Benevolent god?

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

    NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

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

    ##166 20/70a: “So the magician were thrown down to prostration (because Moses had done a real miracle*): they said: ‘We believe in the Lord of Aaron and Moses (because they had seen the miracle*).” But Muhammad contradicted this effect:

    ###*Muhammad many times in the Quran explains that the reason for that he/Allah would/will make no miracles, was that it would not make anyone believe anyhow – AND HERE ALL THE MAGICIANS BECAME BELIEVERS BECAUSE OF JUST ONE SMALL MIRACLE. (This is one of the reasons why one knows Muhammad knew he was lying each time he used the excuse that miracles would not make anyone believe anyhow – he had himself here told that miracles worked, and this was as early as ca. 615 - 616 AD, which means he told this before he used most of his claims that miracles would not work. There thus is no doubt that he knew he was lying - but then to be dishonest when defending or promoting Islam is not a sin in Islam - cfr. the rules for al-Taqiyya (lawful lie), etc.)

    And not least: WHY DID HE HAVE TO LIE EVEN IN THE QURAN?

    ##########But when he lied about this, how much more did he lie about in the Quran? - not to mention in Hadiths?

    (At least 5 contradictions).

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

    NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!

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

    167 20/128b: "- - - how many generations before them We (Allah*) destroyed - - -". A Most Merciful, Most Forgiving, benevolent and good god?.

    168 22/40d: “Did not Allah check one set of people by means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques - - -.” Wrong – this is far from the only way an omniscient and omnipotent god could manage the world. One alternative is f.x. to change man a little and teach him how to live in peace. Only members of a culture and religion of war and looting and suppressing do not immediately see this. This point just is an artificial alibi for war and conquest – and suppression and stealing/looting. (Scientists believe Muhammad's success and power destroyed him morally – a not unusual phenomenon for absolute dictators and others). Also see 22/39a above.

    169 22/58b: This is one of the verses from 624 AD: "Those who leave their home in the cause of Allah, and are then slain or die - on them will Allah bestow, verily, a goodly Provision (Paradise*) - - -". Why did it take 12 years from Muhammad started his mission till he here mentioned fighting and war for the first time, even though it is one of the central "facts" in the revised Islam (the Islam from Medina)?

    (Beware that even though Muhammad started his mission in 610, he was not very active outside his family and nearest ones the first few years - and that in Mecca the original Islam was a quite peaceful religion. Islam did not become a religion of war until after Muhammad started as a robber baron in Medina and needed warriors.)

    170 22/60c: "- - - if one has retaliated to no greater extent than the injury he received, and is again set upon inordinately, Allah will help him - - -". If you are attacked more times after a reasonable reaction the first time, you are permitted to do whatever you like and use whatever means, and Allah will accept and forgive it (A22/74). Also this is widely different from the moral ideas behind NT. Not the same god - and Jesus and Muhammad absolutely not in the same religion (remember f.x. Jesus' "Love your enemy", "Turn the other cheek").

    As for forgiving from Allah: Also see 2/187d and 67/9c above.

    171 22/68a: “If they (“infidels”) do wrangle with thee, say. ‘Allah knows best what it is ye are doing'” – and leave them alone. This was ca. 616 AD. But from some 6 years later and more came lots of contradictions and abrogations. This verse is abrogated – made invalid - by at least these verses: 2/191, 2/193, 3/38, 3/85, 3/148, 4/90, 5/33, 5/72, 8/12, 8/38, 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 bloody threats, but also verses 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 28 abrogations).

    ###172 24/15c: "- - - it (this refers to the hours his child wife Aishah spent alone in the desert with a young man, and the - probably wrong - slander this caused*) was most serious in the sight of Allah". Slander may be a serious, but not a most serious sin - that word you have to reserve for robbery, rape, dishonesty, slave taking, torture, terrorism, murder, mass murder, etc. - and if you are religious; for the gravest sins against the god(s) like f.x. making up competing gods and/or disusing a god/gods for personal gains like riches for keeping or for use (f.x. for bribes), respect and power.

    If on the other hand Allah was a made up platform of power for Muhammad and his co-workers, well, then it might have been most serious for him (Muhammad) as it touched Muhammad, at least if there exists a real god somewhere. F.x. if Muhammad started off originally wanting to serve the old Jewish and Christian god he had heard about, but somewhere stumbled out from "the narrow road" of Yahweh and on to "the straight and easy road". #####(This is one of the possible explanations, especially as science tends to think that Muhammad believed in something when he started his mission, but over time became more "relaxed" and scheming and like so many a leader was morally destroyed by his success and power.

    But honestly: What has the family problems of Muhammad to do in a claimed holy book for all times and all the world, not to mention: How is it possible for a god to revere texts like this? (Remember that the Quran is an exact copy of "the Mother of the Book" which according to the Quran is revered by Allah and his angels in Heaven.) ###Yes, how is it possible that this episode is described in a "mother book" billions of years before it happened, unless predestination is total, free will exactly zero point zero zero, and we all just are puppets-on-strings? ##########And where is then the justice in rewards and punishments?

    And not least: Does stuff like this at all belong in a book claimed revered by a god?

    173 24/55g: "- - - the one (religion*) He (Allah*) has chosen for them (Muslims*) - - -". As no god has been involved in the making of the Quran - so much is wrong in that book that it is heresy and slander even to accuse a god of having taken part in a work of such a quality, not to mention claiming that he reveres it as or like a "mother book" (13/39, 43/4, 85/21-22) in his own "home"/Heaven - also no god has chosen something as full of errors like the Quran as a basis for their religion. And as no god has chosen the Quran/Islam, this also includes Allah - if he exists. (And who then made the choice?) #####Also beware that in principle - and many places even today - it is not permitted for Muslims to choose a religion themselves - - - not unless they choose or "choose" Islam.

    174 25/68c: "- - - nor slay such life as Allah has made sacred except for just cause - - -". The 10 Commandments: "You shall not Kill". There is a deep difference between these two sentences. The same god? Jesus and Muhammad in the same religion? Guess!

    ###175 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!

    176 26/127b: “- - - (Allah is*) Lord of the Worlds.” Often claimed in the Quran, never documented. Words are cheap.

    ###177 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 stealing riches, etc. all are right in Islam? Muhammad did all this and more.

    ###178 27/50: “They (non-Muslims*) plotted and planned, but We (Allah*) too planned - - -.” As said other places: When Allah can deceive, any good Muslim of course can do the same. THIS IS ONE OF THE VERSES WHICH MAKES THE "MORAL" FOUNDATION FOR AL-TAQIYYA (THE LAWFUL LIE), KITMAN (THE LAWFUL HALF-TRUTH), ETC. - WHEN ALLAH COULD DECEIVE, IT OF COURSE WAS/IS MORALLY OK TO DO SO. Muhammad institutionalized it by his points of view on deceit and breaking of even oaths. (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.)

    Just for the record: Al-Taqiyya and Kitman can be used at least in these cases (for deceit, betrayal, broken oaths, etc. there are given no real limitations if the broken oath, etc., will give a better result. By implication this also goes for ordinary words and promises, as an oath is something stronger than a normal word or promise):

    1. To save your or others' health or life.
    2. To get out of a tight spot or a dangerous problem.
    3. To make peace in a family.
    4. When it will give a better result than honesty or honoring one’s oath.
    5. To cheat women (should be remembered by girls with Muslim boyfriends wanting sex - or wanting a marriage to get residence permit in a rich country.)
    6. To deceive opponents/enemies.
    7. To betray enemies.
    8. To secure one’s money (very clear from Hadiths).
    9. To defend Islam. (Advised if necessary to succeed.)
    10. To promote Islam. (Advised if necessary to succeed.)
     

    But al-Taqiyya is a double-edged sword: In the short run you may cheat and deceive some ones – actually also in the long run if the opposite part does not know about this side of Muslims and of Islam, or if he/she is naïve or wants to believe. But in the long run the real result is that Muslims have no way of strengthening their word to be believed - yes, knowing about al-Taqiyya, Kitman. etc. anyone has to be a bit careful believing a Muslim - you never know when he may be using a "lawful lie", etc.

    In addition there like said there is the acceptance of the use of deceit and betrayal, and not least acceptance and sometimes even the advice to break ones word/promise/oath (2/225a, 5/89a, 16/91b, 66/2a).

    You find no acceptance of any of these kinds of dishonesty from Jesus.

    #179 27/51: "- - - We (Allah*) destroyed them (the 9 sinners*) and their people (all of them)". But did anyone but the sinners deserve death? - "a parent shall not be punished for what the child does" according to the Quran, and the child shall not be punished for what the parents do. (If you belong to the ones blaming Yahweh for being a bit bloody in OT, please read a little about the claimed history of Allah.)

    180 31/13e: "- - - false worship is indeed the highest wrongdoing". Does this also go for Muslims if the Quran is a made up book? False against what god in case?

    181 31/20c: "- - - (Allah*) has made His bounties flow to you (Muslims*) in exceeding measures - - -". For one thing many a Muslim does not have material means and good life "in exceeding measures", and for another: Similar claim is put forth many places in the Quran, but never proved. On the contrary: Within a work or an area or both there normally there is a correlation between your toil and your outcome - your bounty. This indicates it not a god, but your/somebody's work and/or background which decides how big your bounty will be, not a god.

    ##Another fact: They did not get anything as a gift - they had to produce it or steal it themselves.

    182 32/13j: “If We (Allah*) so willed, We could certainly have brought every soul its true guidance: but the Word from Me (Allah*) will come true, ‘I will fill Hell with Jinns and men all together’”. Here are two more differences between Yahweh and Allah:

    1. Yahweh did not have this choice because man really had free will.
    2. Yahweh tries to get as many as possible to Heaven (Luke 15/8-10 + 15/11-31 and Matt. 18/12-14 + 20/8/13). Allah has early made a conscious decision to fill Hell with "Jinns and men altogether".
     

    The same god? Impossible.

    #####183 33/36a: "It is not fitting for a Believer (Muslim*) - - - when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger, to have any option about their decision - - -". Full control - absolute power - no thinking, only obedience. The ultimate dream for any dictator. One extra point here is that in reality it was Muhammad who made the decisions here on Earth - not even Muhammad claimed he got all details dictated from Allah. And the final touch: No god dictated the Quran - too many wrong facts and other mistakes, contradictions, etc. - then who in reality dictated here that one should obey among others - and the only one on Earth - Muhammad absolutely blindly?

    ####Note how close Muhammad attaches himself to the power of his claimed god - in plain words: "Obey me - Muhammad". You find this many, many places in the Quran. Power was the main thing Muhammad sought - and riches to gain more power. The Quran clearly indicates that power - and respect - meant even more for him than women. And he was eager for (young) women - willing ones and not willing ones - and at least one child.

    #########184 33/39c: "And enough is Allah to call (men) to account." This is a sentence in the Quran Muslims have forgotten - and keep forgetting - when they punish humans for religious or religiously related mistakes or "crimes". And this even is a relatively late surah. Are they sinning or is this sentence abrogated? (We may here remind you that many Muslims denies the rule of abrogation, as abrogations are profs for that the god has to correct earlier mistakes - which in case are more proofs for that Allah makes mistakes, which no omniscient god does.

    ###185 33/60e: "- - - We (Allah*) shall certainly stir thee (Muslims*) up against them (bad or not Muslims*) - - -". To twist an old proverb: This sentence alone tells more than a 1000 choice slogans about "the religion of peace". What you say when you forget to guard your words or do not think it necessary, always by far is more reliable than carefully chosen claims. Also see next comment just below.

    #####186 33/60f: "- - - We (Allah*) shall certainly stir thee (Muslims*) up against them (bad or not Muslims*), then they will not be able to stay in it (the city*) as thy neighbor’s for any length of time". This tells as much as the comment just above. Something to remember when you accept Muslims to your city? There already are demands for special treatment for Muslims many places. Well, we remind you that most - at least 70% on average according to research - are as ok as you and me. But the problem is: Who is who?.

    187 33/62b: “Such (to kill non-Muslims not living according to Islam’s laws of suppression of non-Muslims*) was the practice (approved) of Allah among the ones that lived aforetime: no change wilt thou find in the practice (approved) of Allah (now or in the future*)”. If Islam/Muslims grow strong enough some time, this is what to expect, according to their holy book. How had the world looked today, if the industrial revolution with its superior weapons, ships and economic and military superiority had happened in the Muslim area? - Islam has no moral, ethical, empathetically, ideological or philosophical ideas against suppressing other people - on the contrary it is a religious duty. Actually Islam has no moral or ethical philosophy at all - that was decided once and for all before 1100 AD by the religion, with al Ghazali - "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad" - as the grave digger with his book "The Incoherence of the Philosophers". (There were a few thinkers for some more time - about 100 more years - in Spain, but they got little influence on the mainstream Islam).

    Islam's moral and ethical philosophy simply is: "What did Muhammad do in a comparable situation?"

    188 33/64c: "Verily, Allah has cursed the Unbelievers - - -". Only perhaps true if Allah exists and is a major god - - - and if the Quran in addition has told the full truth and only the truth about him.

    189 36/2a: “By the Quran - - -". Here Muhammad - or Allah(?) - is swearing by the Quran. Sentences in the Quran starting with "by" normally are oaths. One of the proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. Allah often swears in the Quran, and it is permitted - yes, laudable in some cases - to break an oath. According to Yahweh and Jesus you shall not swear at all (Matt. 34-37), and if you do it all the same, you have to honor it.

    One central question. Two very different answers. = Very different gods and moral codes and religions.

    190 40/33b: "- - - no defender shall ye (non-Muslims*) have from Allah - - -". Now we are back to the fact that many moral, ethical and even judicial codes are very different between especially NT and the Quran. This means that Yahweh may think you are a good person who at least tries to live according to his basic ideal: "Do unto others like you want others do unto you", even if Allah wants to send you to hell for not wanting to steal/rob, enslave, suppress, and murder for him and Muhammad. So may be Yahweh will interfere? - if any of them exists. (Well, to interfere against Allah should not be too difficult, as it is highly unlikely he exists - the only rumor about him is in a book full of mistakes, dictated by an man with doubtful morality, believing in the use of dishonesty, and liking respect, power, riches - at least for bribes - and women.

    191 40/74b: "Thus does Allah leave the Unbelievers to stray". This he only can do if he exists and in addition is a god. If not their behavior is because of something else.

    Besides: Compare this to "the lost coin" (Luke 15/8-10), "the lost sheep" (Matt.18/12-14), "the lost son" (Luke 15/11-31), "the 11. hour" (Matt.20/8-13). Not the same gods, Jesus and Muhammad not in the same religion.

    ####192 44/22b: "- - - sin". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code. We also may mention that just this word often covers very different deeds, acts, words, and thoughts in the Quran and Islam, compared to 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 exist. One more of the 100% proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god.

    193 47/4a: “Therefore, (because Allah wants it!! - see 47/3*) when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks - - -.” A clear order.

    ##194 47/4b: “Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight (and remember the Muslims practically always were the aggressors – to gain riches and slaves and power - - - and some new proselytes*)), smite at their necks - - -.” Surah 47 is from 622 AD and Mecca, but some verses likely from Medina – and it is possible to see the change towards war already. It contradicts and abrogates a lot of peaceful verses. This verse contradicts (and abrogates) at least these verses (here are 88 out of the 124 Muslim scholars say are abrogated by 9/5): 2/109, 2/190, 2/256, 2/272, 3/20, 4/62, 4/81, 4/90, 5/3, 5/28, 5/48, 5/99, 6/60, 6/66, 6/70, 6/104, 6/107, 6/112, 6/158, 7/87, 7/188, 7/193, 7/199, 8/61, 9/68, 10/41, 10/99, 10/102, 10/108, 11/12, 11/121, 13/40, 15/3, 15/94, 16/35, 16/82, 16/125, 16/126, 16/127, 17/54, 18/29, 18/56, 19/39, 20/130, 21/107, 21/112, 22/49, 22/68, 23/54, 23/96, 24/54, 26/216, 27/92, 28/50, 28/55, 29/18, 29/46, 32/30, 34/25, 34/28, 35/23, 35/24a, 36/17, 39/41, 41/34, 42/6, 42/15, 42/48, 43/83, 43/89, 44/59, 45/14, 46/9, 46/135a, 46/135b, 46/135b, 50/39, 50/45, 51/50-51, 51/54, 52/45, 52/47, 53/29, 67/26, 73/10, 73/11, 79/45, 86/17, 88/22, 109/6. They are all quoted under 9/5. (At least 91 contradictions).

    ####195 47/4c: This is a really serious one: “Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; at length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them) - - -.” BUT OUR SOURCES TELL THAT THE WORDS “(in fight)” IS NOT WRITTEN IN THE ARAB TEXT – IT IS ADDED BY THE TRANSLATOR (and by more than one). Muslims primarily shall read the Quran in Arab, and there, in case our sources are correct, ######the text is: “Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers, smite at their necks - - -“. It in case simply is a permanent order to be aggressive.

    The real religion of peace. And of honesty.

    196 47/4j: "- - - but (He (Allah*) lets you fight) in order to test you - - -". There are so many ways of testing a person. Why did "the Religion of Peace" have to do it by raids and wars for wealth and slaves and power?!! There is no logic in this, too, unless the explanation is that in reality it was Muhammad who wanted warriors and needed to "explain" why "Allah wanted it".

    Besides: No omniscient, predestining god needs testing at all - he knows everything on beforehand, so that testing is without a meaning. What then is the real reason for all the "testing"?

    #197 47/4k: “But those who are slain in the way of Allah - He (Allah*) will never let their deeds be lost.” "Make war for the religion of peace" and go to Paradise. But this only is true if Allah exists and is a major war god (only a war god rewards ill deeds, and makes them look god in the perpetrators' eyes - well, also devils do).

    ####Perhaps as bad: If the Quran is not true in everything and from a god, the slain ones - and others - are cheated (but Islam accepts cheating in wide cases, and Muhammad used it himself.)

    198 47/4m: "- - - He (Allah*) will never let their (slain warriors') deeds be lost - - -". If the Quran tells the truth, if Allah exists, if Allah is a major god of war (only gods of war and devils reward or "reward" ill deeds and make them look good in the doers' eyes).

    199 47/7b: “O ye who believe! If ye will aid (from the context it is clear it means in war*) (the cause of) Allah, He will aid you, and plant your feet firmly.” Seemingly a good deal. A strengthening of the morality of Muhammad's warriors. But the deal is good only for Muhammad and his successors if Allah does not exist or is not a god.

    200 47/8d: "- - - (Allah) will send their (non-Muslims'*) deeds astray (from their mark)". Also this Allah cannot do unless he exists and is something supernatural. And as bad deeds according to the Quran may be good deeds according to especially NT and its new covenant (f.x. Luke 22/20), and the other way around - and the differences at places are huge - perhaps Yahweh will intervene?

    #####201 47/31d: This verse - and quite a number of others - does not give meaning if Allah is omniscient and knows everything. If he is omniscient, he also knows everything about you. Not to mention if he on top of all predestines everything, so that you just are a puppet in a puppet theatre reacting to his Plan only.

    But if this is Muhammad needing an explanation for why he sends warriors out to steal and enslave and enlarge his power, then suddenly tales like these are logical - if his followers were naive enough or blind enough.

    202 47/33e: "- - - make not vain your (peoples'*) deeds - - -". If Allah does not exist, all your deeds for him are in vain - not to mention what they are if he belongs to the dark forces. If any other god exists, only the deeds you have done for that god will not be in vain concerning religion and a possible next life.

    #####203 48/10d: ANOTHER STRONG ONE FOR MUHAMMAD: "- - - then anyone who violates his oath (to Muhammad - see 48/10b above*), do so to the harm of his own soul, and anyone who fulfils what he has covenanted with Allah (in reality with Muhammad*) - Allah will soon grant him a great Reward (free of charge for Muhammad*)". No comment should be necessary here, except; "no payment does Muhammad ask for his preaching" - a square lie (he demanded 20% of everything robbed/stolen - 100% if the victims gave in without a fight - some 2.5% tax from Muslims, land tax from non-Muslims (tax of unspecified size, but often 50% of what was produced), and Jizya, a tax of unspecified size, but often large, from non-Muslims. (Taxation of non-Muslims at times and places were so high, that they had too little left to live from, and had to flee.) Of course all was in the name of Allah, but here on Earth all those riches were for Muhammad - he spent the better part of it for bribes and for war + for women). Also hypocrisy is lies.

    204 48/16g: "- - - Allah will give ye (Bedouins*) a goodly reward (for going to war*)". The religion of peace?? Try to find things like this in NT! One more at least 100% proof for that Yahweh and Allah were not the same god - and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same line of anything of any consequence.

    205 48/16i: "- - - He (Allah*) will punish you (Bedouins*) with a grievous Penalty (for not going on raids and to war*)". The good and benevolent god for "the religion of peace"?

    206 48/17g: "- - - (Allah) will admit him (the warrior*) to Gardens - - -". This Allah only can do if he exists and if he is a god, none of which is proved.

    207 48/20b: "Allah has promised you (Muslims*) many gains that ye shall acquire (from plunder*) - - -". See 48/19a above.

    208 48/20c: "Allah has promised you (Muslims*) many gains that ye shall acquire (from plunder*) - - -". Try to find things like this in NT! One more at least 100% proof for that Yahweh and Allah were not the same god - and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same line of anything of any consequence.

    209 49/15c: “Only those are Believers who have believed in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad*), and have never since doubted, but have striven with their belongings and their persons (= made war*) in the Cause of Allah: such are the sincere ones". Sugar to terrorists included the self murder ones.

    210 50/45b: “We (Allah*) know best what they (the “infidels”*) say; ###and thou (Muhammad*) art not one to overawe them by force.” Knowing the 22 – 24 surahs from Medina, and knowing the later history of aggression that Islam has behind it, this verse is a big, ironic or sardonic joke. This surah is from 614 AD: Just you guess if it was contradicted and abrogated from 622 AD on!! This verse is contradicted and often “killed” by reality and 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).

    211 52/24: “Round about them (Muslims and their houris*) will serve (devoted) to them, youths (handsome) as pearls well guarded”. These are the servants in Paradise – forever young, handsome men. There is said nothing about from where they come, and as normal in the Quran it is said not a word about how secondary persons in a story feel or like life, or how Paradise is for them. The central persons - you and the ones similar to you - are in Paradise "rich" and on top, and that is what counts – others are of little interest. Empathy with underdogs (f.x. women, houris, servants) does not exist in the Quran. Well, some to the poor Muslims (but do not give too much) and to orphans, but but for that you find nothing.

    And there is another aspect to these handsome youths. The Quran frowns strongly at homosexuality, but all the same it at least some places is silently accepted. Are these youths a silent temptation - or more - in such a connection?. Muhammad wanted to attract also these warriors? - after all a warrior is a warrior.

    Yet another proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god: One more serious difference between their paradise. There are no servants in Yahweh's Paradise. (There cannot be servants in a perfect paradise, because to be servants is not perfect for the servants, and a paradise which is not perfect for everyone living there, is not a perfect paradise. Similar can be said about houris, who have to be sex-dolls for even the most selfish, rough, and primitive warrior.)

    ###212 54/40a: “And We (Allah*) have indeed made the Quran easy to understand - - -.” Anyone wanting to try to “explain” away difficult points like mistakes or invalid logic or contradictions by calling them allegories etc. should read this sentence. It even is written 4 times and thus a solidly cemented and nailed "truth": The Quran is to be understood literally and search for hidden meanings is only for Allah, and such search only is for the ones “in whose hearts is perversity - - -.” This is mentioned many places in the Quran.

    Also see the chapter "Literal language in the Quran - according to the Quran" in "1000+ Comments on the Quran".

    There is no doubt whatsoever about that the Quran itself means that the Quran is to be understood literally mainly. And that to look for hidden meanings are wrong, if nothing is directly specified about it being a parable or something. Remind any Muslim trying to “explain” away problems by pretending or claiming they are allegories, etc., about this fact.

    ##213 57/10a: “And what cause have ye why ye should not spend in the cause of Allah? - For to Allah belongs the heritage of the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth.” Scattered many places in the Medina (and the Mecca) part of the Quran you will find incitements to giving money or spending resources for Muhammad and the faith. Some places it simply may mean spending for charity to the poor. But often it refers to spending for war (in this verse there is little doubt that this is what is meant, as this is a verse glorifying war, this even more so as just this expression - "spend in the cause of Allah" - normally refers to spending for raids and war). Also - and especially when Muhammad talks about “giving a nice gift to Allah”, “a beautiful loan” or something similar - it means that you/the Muslims should give their lives for Allah “and his Messenger” (if the Quran is made up, the “gift” is just for Muhammad) and be repaid in the next life - cheap for Muhammad and later Muslim leaders at least, especially if the religion is a made up one, like all the mistakes, contradictions, etc. may indicate.

    We have skipped many of these verses. But thinking it over they are verses meaning much for Muslims' giving of money to among others terrorists and terrorist organizations. May be we will include some more of those verses if this is ever revised. But remember that there exist a number of sentences like this in the Quran - also economy counts for a leader trying to gain more political or military power.

    214 57/10e: “Not equal among you (Muslims*) are those who spent (freely) and fought, before the Victory, (with those who did so later). Those are higher in rank than those who spent (freely) and fought afterwards. But to all has Allah promised a goodly (reward).” Spend money and fight in war for Muhammad (and his successors) and Allah, and Allah will give you a rich reward. Another mighty incitement for getting money and warriors for war. (But does an omniscient and omnipotent god really need war? – he knows everything and can do everything in better ways. The Quran says it is to test you – but does an omniscient god need to test you, when he knows everything and all the answers before, and even predestines everything? And can a god really be a good and benevolent one, when the main thing he wants from his underlings, is that they behave like devils against each others? – when someone says something, but gives instructions for or does something very different, we believe in the instructions and deeds, not in the cheap words.)

    215 57/11a: “Who is he that will loan to Allah a beautiful loan (this expression in the Quran normally means to risk or give your life (in war)*)? For (Allah) will increase it manifold to his credit, and he will have (besides) a liberal reward.” A good promise for attracting or pepping up warriors – or perhaps for attracting resources for waging war. A good deal for the warriors and for the givers of resources if the words are true. But if Muhammad is the cold and scheming manipulator going all out for power no matter what the cost will be to others, like he looks like in history, and not the saint Islam has made him, the only one that really gained from this, was Muhammad himself plus his co-operators and later his successors. The sobering fact here is that history all too often is more clear-eyed than religion, especially compared to religions built only on blind faith mixed with obvious mistakes and worse like Islam. Besides: Be killed in war and the god will reward you. This may remind one of the Old Norse religion or of Gjingis Khan’s religion - but it DEFINITELY is no confirmation of the Bible, and especially not NT. And is this a good god?

    216 57/11d: "- - - Allah will increase at manifold his (the warriors*) credit - - -". If you go on raids or to war for Allah/Muhammad, Allah will repay you many times up in your claimed next life, especially if you are killed in action. A cheap way to pay the warriors in this life - "fight on credit for Muhammad". And especially cheap if Allah does not exist, not to mention if there "at the other side" really is a good and benevolent god, not liking persons who has lived according to a harsh and partly immoral, unethical and unjust war religion.

    217 58/2d: "- - - (sin) - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code. We also may mention that just this word often covers very different deeds, acts, words, and thoughts in the Quran and Islam, compared to 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 exist. One more of the 100% proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god.

    218 58/10c: "- - - but he (the Devil*) cannot harm them (people/Muslims*) in the least (= make them sin*), except as Allah permits - - -". But how then can Allah punish man for sins Allah has permitted - even via the Devil - (and according to other verses in the Quran even decided by predestination)??

    And: ####Does this mean that Allah is the real ruler also of Hell, like many Muslim scholars believe (because if Allah is omnipotent, it is not possible for the Devil to work unless Allah permits it)? What does this in case tell about the claimed "good and benevolent" god Allah?

    219 58/22a: “Thou wilt not find any people who believe in Allah and the Last Day, loving those who resist Allah and his Messenger, even though they were their fathers or their sons, or their brothers, or kindred.” Really bad people it should not be loved. This sentence deserves no comment, but it is an all too common one in sects where the leaders want full control over their followers.

    ##220 59/6a: “What Allah has bestowed on His Messenger (Muhammad*) (and taken away) from them (Banu al-Nadir*) – for this ye (the Muslim warriors*) made no expedition with either cavalry or camelery - - -.” This was very nice for Muhammad, because when there was no fight and the enemy just gave in, all the spoils of war was called “fay” and was for Allah/Muhammad alone. Muhammad in a short time got a good economy. We may add that you often find Islam boasting about rich plunder. But you will never - never - find Islam reflecting over what terror, what destruction, what catastrophe - and what setbacks to the culture - the Muslim attacks and destruction and murdering meant to others. Empathy with others, not to mention with non-Muslims, at least was outside Islam's capability - and still is at least within large parts of Islam.

    #####It must be added that to be thieves, robbers, enslavers and murderers - and rapists - in the name of a god, makes both the religion and the god extra distasteful - and it makes the claim that Allah is a good and benevolent god an unintended, black joke. Compare Islam to the gold standard; "do against others like you want others do against you" and shudder in distaste. ####Also remember that dishonesty is not only words, but also deeds - to steal/rob are dishonest - to say the least of it - deeds.

    221 60/1b: “Take not my (Allah’s or Muhammad’s - “my” is written with “m”, not “M”, so likely Muhammad's*) enemies (non-Muslims*) as friends (or protectors) - - -”. To mingle with non-Muslims may result in ideas or knowledge that is not good for Muslims to have - f.x. that there are lots of mistakes and contradictions in the Quran, or that not all non-Muslims are bad.

    222 61/12d: “(If you go to war and/or are killed for Muhammad*) He (Allah*) will forgive you your sins, and admit you to Gardens beneath which rivers flow, and to beautiful mansions in Gardens of eternity - - -.” Try to find something even remotely similar to this in the NT!! The same god? Make a bet. Jesus and Muhammad in the same religion? Make another bet - if you need.

    223 61/13b: “(And in war you will get*) help from Allah and a speedy victory.” See 61/12a above – and in addition you will not have to fight much, for the victory will be easy. Yes, the religion of Peace*.

    224 64/17a: “If you loan to Allah, a beautiful loan - - -". In the Quran this expression normally incites you to fight in raids/war for Allah/Muhammad and risk your life for him/them.

    225 64/17b: “If you loan to Allah, a beautiful loan, He will double it to your (credit), and he will grant you Forgiveness - - -“. Very similar thinking to the worst medieval excesses made by the Roman Catholic Church once upon a time. But good slogans for recruiting warriors – and money.

    There is a lot more like this - much of it just with other words. Add this to all the other pep talk for warriors in the Quran, and you get something that should never be forgotten - not even by USA.

    And of course there is the problem of never knowing who the few are who will turn terrorists, and the not few who are willing to help them - with money at least. The 5. column. Some 30% of Muslims at least have sympathy for or “understand why” terrorists are at work, international polls show - more and much more in some places.

    And all the same: Never forget that the majority of Muslims absolutely do not want anything but peace and a quiet family life. The ideology of hate and war and suppression is detestable, but not so all the ones of them who are normal people.

    It is too late to keep Islam at a distance - too many have emigrated to the west. The absolute majority have moved vest for economical reasons, but for Muslims to move into “enemy” territory and then later to try to take control, is a strategy of war frequently advocated in the Quran. That f.x. was what happened in Indonesia. Besides a scattered few may move west because of or partly because of that ideology - but then it only takes a few to wreak havoc. May be one should not make the problem bigger until we see how the ones already here will develop - how the integration and the culture will develop. Though Paris and other places may be sinister warnings.

    As for forgiving from Allah: Also see 2/187d and 67/9c above.

    226 64/17c: “If you loan to Allah, a beautiful loan, He will double it to your (credit), and he will grant you Forgiveness - - -“. Strongly contradicted by the Bible - one of the at least 200% proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - and Jesus and Muhammad not even in the same world morally speaking. 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 lose claims and as lose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

    #####227 66/2a: "Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths (in some cases)- - -". According to other places in the Quran, the cases when you can break your oat without sinning, are:

    1. Oaths you have given without really meaning them.
    2. Oaths where you later see you will get a more satisfactory result if you break your oat. In serious cases, though, you should pay a "fine" - expiation - to Allah to be forgiven".
     

    Can anyone please tell us what remains of trustworthiness of a Muslim's words and oaths - especially when you add to this the al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), the Kitman (the lawful half-truth), the Hilah (the lawful pretending/circumventing), deceit, and permitted betrayals? - and his point of view that "war is deceit" (and everything is war). And much worse in this case: WHAT REMAINS OF MUHAMMAD'S TRUSTWORTHINESS - NOT TO MENTION THE QURAN'S TRUSTWORTHINESS?

    ##228 66/2b: "Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths (in some cases)- - -". According to other places in the Quran, the cases when you can break your oat without sinning, are:

    1. Oaths you have given without really meaning them.
    2. Oaths where you later see you will get a more satisfactory result if you break your oat. In serious cases, though, you should pay a "fine" - expiation - to Allah to be forgiven".

    One of the at least 200% proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and Jesus not in any line morally connected to Muhammad. NT tells you not to swear at all ( f.x. Matt. 5/34), and if you do it all the same, you have to keep your word.

    ##229 66/9d: “O Prophet (Muhammad*)! Strive hard against the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell - - -.” A clear order and a clear explanation why they are sub-human, and thus deserve to die. “Untermench” always are ok to kill – they deserve it. It also is the right of the “Übermench” to do so – and in the Quran no doubt the Muslims are the “Übermench”. (Quite like the Nazi philosophy - except that according to the Nazis, Arabs were "Untermench". (Übermench = super humans, Untermench = sub humans.)

    ###Also the big differences between the Bible's and the Quran's hells are more than big and fundamental enough to prove that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - if they had been, also their hells had been more or less identical.

    ######230 67/9c: "(Non-Muslims said*): '- - - ye (Muslims*) are in nothing but an egregious delusion (about Allah and Islam*)". As for the Quran, all the mistaken facts and other errors, the contradictions, the low quality of the book as literature (except the linguistics - good because of polished for some 250 years afterwards (from ca. 650 AD to ca. 900 AD)), the unclear language, etc. prove with mathematical certainty that the book is not from any god. As for Allah he of course could have existed in spite of the fact that the Quran is a made up book - made up by dark forces, a mental illness (TLA - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy), or by humans (the only remaining alternatives). But when you add Allah's background - he originally was the pagan god al-Lah which Muhammad simply dressed up, and without the slightest proof claimed was the real god and the only god. Then you add Muhammad himself - a man who wanted respect and power, not to mention riches for more power - and women, and a man who did not hide that he believed in the use of dishonesty to reach a goal (he lied even in the Quran - f.x. the "explanation" that nobody would believe anyhow, even if Allah proved himself by making some miracles; Muhammad was too intelligent and knew too much about people to believe in that claim himself. And there was al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) and Kitman (the lawful half-truth), etc., even though they were not formalized until later. And not to forget "War is deceit - war is betrayal", and "break your word/promise/oat if that gives a better result - pay expiation later if necessary". (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is "The Religion of Honesty".))

    Add this and add to Muhammad's unreliability and low morality (easy to see in the Quran if you skip the glorifications and read the reality) the fact that neither Muhammad, nor Allah ever was able to prove anything at all of any essence concerning Islam or Allah, add the fact that Allah has not manifested himself one single time neither during the life of Muhammad, nor before, and nor afterwards, neither manifested nor proved himself in any way - numbers of claims, but not one single proved case. The only place Allah ever manifested himself, was in the mouth of Muhammad. Add the fact that both science and even more so Islam (they have searched harder) have delivered so strong circumstantial and empirical proofs for that the Bible is not falsified, that it practically is a mathematical proof (45ooo old scriptures : 0 proved falsification in reality is a mathematical proof) - and that thus Allah's claimed history disappears, as he is not the same god as Yahweh (the teachings and everything are fundamentally and morally too different) - yes, not only disappears, but are proved to be made up and wrong.

    Add the fact that Jesus' acceptance of OT as genuine, both to Jews, Christians, Muslims, and most historians prove that OT was not falsified at his time, and then in case not falsified until after 33 AD, + add the Qumran scrolls to this. Except for minor detail differences normal for handwritten manuscripts, they are identical to today's OT. They are from 150-50 BC, and thus the same OT as Jesus used. Together this prove that even the OT is not falsified. The Quran's never documented claim also here is wrong.

    Add all this, and you end up with a probability for Allah's existence far below one to a million. The circumstantial and empirical proofs for that he does not exist, are so strong that it practically is a mathematical certainty. And Jesus + the Qumran scrolls are a full 100% proof alone, for that even OT is not falsified, and thus that much is seriously wrong in the Quran.

    Then finally add the Muhammad's and Islam's partly immoral moral code, their partly unethical ethical code, their very immoral code of war and terror, their code for dishonesty, deceit, betrayal, etc., their partly unjust judicial code, their political code (apartheid/fascism/Nazism), and the Quran's cultural code (f.x. knowledge = knowledge related to Islam only), you end up with such a strong empirical proofs proof for that if Allah after all exists, he is no good and/or benevolent god, that also these in practice are so strong that they have to be classified together with mathematical proofs in strength and reliability.

    Combine all this and there just is one conclusion possible concerning f.x. forgiving: The chances for that this claimed god can forgive, by far is less than one to a million. (And the same goes for that he f.x. can punish or reward or for that prayers to him can have any effect - for the same reasons: Even if the infinitesimal chance for that he exists should happen to be a reality, his predestined Plan cannot be changed.)

    And to what paradise does a religion built on a made up book - in worst case made up by dark forces - and worshipping a god which does not exist, or at best is the pagan, dressed up and malevolent god al-Lah, lead?

    Or to what Hell if there somewhere exists a real god Muslims are prohibited from looking for?

    The bottom line is that the Quran provably is a made up book, and no Allah has ever or in any way proved even his existence. Or his power to forgive or anything else.

    ##231 68/39b: "- - - Covenant with Us (Allah*) on oath - - -". What is really an oath worth in Islam and for Muslims, as oaths can be broken - pay expiation if necessary? (2/225, 5/89, 16/61, 66/2).

    232 71/14a: "Seeing that it is He (Allah*) who has created you - - -". I do not see that - not without very strong proofs. This is typical technique from Muhammad: Pretending that a starting point (here that Allah has created) is true and proved, and then making deductions from that. But as long as the starting point is not proved, it has nothing to do with logical deduction - but such a technique often is used by cheaters, swindlers, charlatans, deceivers, etc. to cheat people. And you frequently meet this technique also from Islam and from Muslims.

    #####233 73/20e: (A73/12 - English 2008 edition 73/13): "- - - there is no doubt that jihad was first sanctioned during the Medina period - - -". Which confirms that Muhammad and Islam did not think about or talk about or insist on or glorify war until after Muhammad started needing warriors for his raids for riches and later also for conquests in and after 622 AD. Was this very fundamental change in the religion at this time a coincidence? And why did not the omniscient god Allah know before 622 AD and Muhammad's need for warriors, that fighting was a good thing, a duty for all fit Muslim men, and a sure way to Paradise for even the worst sinner?

    234 73/20f: "- - - fighting in Allah's cause - - -". One of the at least 200% proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. Even in the centuries when the Jews fought wars - mainly (not exclusively, but mainly) from Joshua around 1195 BC and some centuries on - it was to establish and later defend a country for the Jews, NOT for the sake of the god. And to try to compare it with NT, is a waste of time. "Islam, the Religion of Peace" - is it a slogan based on al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) or an unintended black joke?

    235 73/20i: "- - - and loan to Allah a Beautiful Loan". This expression in the Quran normally means: "Go to war when Muhammad calls, and risk/give your life for Allah/Muhammad" - in reality for Muhammad here on this Earth.

    ###236 73/20k: "- - - ye (Muslims*) shall find it in Allah's Presence (= in Paradise) - - -". But what is really "Allah's presence"? There are 7 heavens and Allah lives above number seven - both claims according to the Quran. It is not specified in the Quran, but it seems normally good Muslims end in gardens in the first heaven. This means there are 6 heavens between them and Allah. The Quran also does not specify the distance between the heavens, but relevant Islamic literature mention 100 years (of travel). (We also have seen 500 years, but the difference really means nothing in this case.)

    A normal speed for a walker is some 3.5 - 4 miles/6 km an hour. Say you walked together with a caravan, which walked for 12 hours a day (the main thing for a caravan is to reach its goal and make money, so they often walked from dawn till dusk, and even ate when walking).

    1. That would mean 45 miles (some 72 km) a day.
    2. There are 365 days a year = some 16.400 miles (some 26.300 km) a year.
    3. As there are said to be 100 years between the heavens, this means some 1.64 million miles (2.63 million km) between the heavens.
    4. And the distance between the 1. and the 7. heaven consequently a little less than 10 million miles (a bit less than 16 million km).
    5. Better than 40 times the distance to the moon.
    6. And remember that Allah lives above the 7. heaven = even further off further off.
    7. (And the distance from Earth to Allah is the same plus the distance from Earth to the lowest heaven. If the first and the last distance are similar to the ones between the heavens, we end up with something like 13 million miles/21 million km between Earth and Allah, and Allah sitting somewhere well on his way to Venus or Mars.)
     

    Not just "in Allah's Presence" neither for the normal good Muslims in the first Paradise, nor for the Muslims on Earth.

  12. Better than 40 times the distance to the moon. And this is the distance between the 1. and 7. heaven. The distance between Earth/humans and Allah is a lot more.

##### If the Islamic books have given reasonably correct information about the distances, this is a rough picture of what the Quran means with "Allah's Presence" for normal Muslims in Paradise.

We remind you that the old astronomers had calculated the distance to the end of the universe, represented by the fixed stars above the 7. heaven, to some 73 million miles/117 million km. Plenty of space for Allah. (Except that according to the Quran the stars are fixed to the lowest one of the 7 heavens.)

But if the Islamic books have given reasonably correct information about the distances, this is a rough picture of what the Quran means with "Allah's Presence" for normal Muslims. 10-13 million miles/16-21 million km.

237 74/56b: “He (Allah*) is the Lord of Righteousness - - -.” A Lord making laws which f.x. say that killing and raping and stealing are “lawful and good” (8/69a-d) at least when it is done in his name, and who says that a woman shall be strictly punished for indecency if she is raped and cannot bring 4 male witnesses to the very act, is not righteous – on the contrary: He belongs to the most inhuman, worst and most unjust beings in the entire universe. The last mentioned law – about punishing the raped woman – is among the very most unjust laws that have ever existed (may be together with the law that says that stealing/robbing, extortion and killing in jihad – everything is jihad – is “good and lawful”), especially as Allah (if he exists and is omniscient) knows she is not guilty. On many points the opposite of benevolent.

  1. A man correctly telling that a woman has been indecent is lying to Allah if he cannot produce 4 witnesses - even if an omniscient Allah has to know he is speaking the truth.
  2. A woman who has been raped, is forbidden to tell who it was, unless she can produce 4 MALE witnesses WHO HAS ACTUALLY SEEN THE ACT. If she cannot produce 4 such witnesses, and all the same tells who the rapist(s) is/are, she shall have 80 whiplashes for slander. And she also is to be strictly punished for illegal sex, even though an omniscient god knows she is telling the truth!! Probably the most unjust and amoral law we have ever seen in any not extremely primitive society or culture.
  3. It is 100% permitted for an owner to rape his female slaves or prisoners of war (may be this is why Muslims so often rape women and children 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 married prisoners of war, as long as they are not pregnant. The price for the victims is of no interest for Islam and the Quran - and most Muslims.
  4. It is glorious and the Muslims’ right to steal, rob, plunder, and to kill non-Muslims during jihad - and almost any conflict is declared jihad (holy war). It is “just and good”.

238 93/1: "By the Glorious Morning Light - - -". Muhammad/Allah swearing by the light - sentences in the Quran starting with "by" normally are oaths in the Quran. One of the clear indications in the Quran for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and for that Jesus and Muhammad are not in the same line of prophets like the Quran likes to claim (in addition to that Muhammad was no real prophet - he "did not see the unseen" so he was unable to make prophesies (even though some Muslims try to claim the opposite in contradiction to what the Quran says itself), and a "prophet" unable to make prophesies, is no real prophet - - - but it is an impressive and imposing title to "borrow" - many a self proclaimed messenger from one or more gods have "borrowed" this title).

Also: Especially the NT very clearly states that you shall not swear at all (Matt 5/34), and it is clear that if you do so all the same, you have to honor your oath, whereas in the Quran you can break any oath if that gives a better result - pay expiation if necessary (but to be fair: The Quran advises not to break a confirmed oath (!) if there is not a good reason. To break other oaths matters little.) This last part is a very clear proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - and for that Jesus and Muhammad were not in the same religion - as the moral code is too deeply different.

239 93/1-2: "By - - -". A sentence in the Quran starting with "by" normally is an oath - here it seems that the Quran swears that verse 3 is true. But whenever Muhammad or the Quran swears - or in other ways promises - remember that according to the rules for al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) and Kitman (the lawful half-truth), etc., it is permitted to lie to defend and to forward Islam (and for 6 - 8 other topics), and that according to Muhammad's own words and deeds in the Quran, even oaths should be broken if that will give a more satisfying result - pay expiation to Allah afterwards if necessary (2/225, 5/89, 16/91, 66/2).

240 93/2: "And by the Night - - -". Muhammad/Allah swearing by the night - sentences in the Quran starting with "by" normally are oaths in the Quran. One of the clear indications in the Quran for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and for that Jesus and Muhammad are not in the same line of prophets like the Quran likes to claim (in addition to that Muhammad was no real prophet - he "did not see the unseen" so he was unable to make prophesies (even though some Muslims try to claim the opposite in contradiction to what the Quran says itself), and a "prophet" unable to make prophesies, is no real prophet - - - but it is an impressive and imposing title to "borrow" - many a self proclaimed messenger from himself or from one or more gods have "borrowed" this title.

Also: Especially the NT very clearly states that you shall not swear at all (Matt 5/34), and it is clear that if you do so all the same, you have to honor your oath, whereas in the Quran you can break any oath if that gives a better result - pay expiation if necessary (but to be fair: The Quran advises not to break a confirmed oath (!) if there is not a good reason. To break other oaths matters little.) This last part is a very clear proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - and for that Jesus and Muhammad were not in the same religion - as the moral codes are too deeply different.

241 95/1-3: "By - - -". A sentence in the Quran starting with "by" normally is an oath - here it seems that the Quran swears that verse 4 is true. But whenever Muhammad or the Quran swears - or in other ways promises - remember that according to the rules for al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) and Kitman (the lawful half-truth), etc., it is permitted to lie to defend and/or to forward Islam (and for 6 - 8 other wide topics, f.x. to cheat women), and that according to Muhammad's own words and deeds in the Quran, oaths should be broken if that will give a more satisfying result - pay expiation to Allah afterwards if necessary. (Some oaths are not binding at all, and others only if you confirm them afterwards, but if you break a confirmed oath you should pay expiation afterwards, at least if the oath is about something serious. 2/225, 5/89, 16/91, 66/2).

242 100/1-5a: This (the entire part we quote) is an oath, not talk about war. Allah or Muhammad swears by something - in this case by the magnificent war horses the Arabs had plenty of for use in all the wars and fighting between tribes. “By the (Steeds) that run, with panting (breath), And strike sparks of fire, And push home the charge in the morning, And raise the dust in clouds the while, And penetrate forthwith into the midst (of the foe) en masse - Truly Man is, to his Lord (Allah*), ungrateful - - -” This verse is not about war, but about the ungrateful men – or perhaps about war all the same (Muslim scholars say no)? – or about the unruly inner self of man? – but anyhow: Allah or Muhammad swears by the respected war horses that man is ungrateful to Allah.

Oaths also are clear indications for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same religion - and the fact that you are permitted to break even words/promises/oaths (2/225, 5/89, 16/91, 66/2 - and the star case 3/54 (if Allah can cheat, cheating is ok - but how much cheating is it then in the Quran?) is a strong proof for the same. The moral code simply is too deeply different.

242 comments. Sub-total = 4964 + 242 = 5206.


>>> Go to  Next Chapter

>>> Go to  Previous Chapter

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".