Allah in the Quran, Chapter 57

 

Chapter 57

BLASPHEMY TOWARDS ALLAH?

 

001 Very short and to the point: It is not possible to blaspheme Allah unless he exists and is a god. If he does not exist, or if he after all exists, but is not a god, it of course is not a blasphemy to doubt he is a god (and as the Quran is not from any god - no god delivers a holy book of that quality - it is likely he does not exist). And how do you f.x. blaspheme him if he after all exists, but belongs to the dark forces, like many points in the Quran and f.x. in its moral code may indicate?

##### 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?

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

002 2/88c: "Nay, Allah’s curse is on them (non-Muslims, here likely the Jews of Medina*) for their blasphemy: little do they believe". The Quran here claims that the reason why they did not believe in Muhammad, was that Allah had cursed them - psychologically a much better story for Muhammad to tell his followers, than the plain reality: The Jews understood from their knowledge of the old scriptures how wrong Muhammad's teachings about Biblical stories, and his claim that Yahweh and Allah were the same god, were. As everyone knows, Muhammad claimed that the discrepancies between the Torah/Bible, etc. and the Quran, were because the Jews and Christians had falsified the Bible - his only possible way out if he wanted to save his religion and his own position. Science and even more so Islam later have proved this claim wrong, by being unable to prove one single falsification among literally tens of thousands of relevant old manuscripts (the numbers vary some, but some 300 Gospels or fragments of Gospels, some 13ooo scriptures or fragments from the Bible, and some 32ooo other manuscripts with quotes from the Bible), all older than 610 AD when Muhammad started his new religion, and there thus was a reason for falsifying Muhammad and his teachings out - Islam has been unable to prove any point at all in them falsified. In addition the old copies prove that the scriptures have not been changed = not falsified. Like so often with Islam, there have been - and are - claims, but only claims. (If there had been real proofs, the world had been told about it frequently and in big letters.)

For OT there is another direct proof for that it is not falsified: Both the Bible and the Quran tell that Jesus used the old Jewish scriptures/OT. A prophet like Jesus had not used falsified scriptures. OT thus in case cannot have been falsified until after Jesus died in 33 AD. But in the Qumran scrolls there are copies of the complete or parts of nearly all scriptures in OT. The these scrolls are from ca. 150 - 50 BC = identical to the ones Jesus used some 80+ years later. AND THE TEXTS IN THE QUMRAN SCROLLS ARE IDENTICAL TO THE TEXTS IN OT TODAY with the exception of minor differences normal for hand copied texts. A 100% proof for that OT is not falsified - - - and Muhammad is not there.

########It also is very thought provoking that science has found 45ooo references, etc. older than 610 AD to the Bible, but not one single to the Quran that old - in spite of the claims that Allah sent down tens of thousands of copies to his claimed prophets of the old all over the world.

003 2/88d: "- - - blasphemy - - -". To disbelieve in the Quran is not blasphemy unless Allah really exists and is a major god, and unless the Quran really is a holy book telling the truth, not a perhaps made up book - at least not from a god - full of mistakes. ("Perhaps" because it may - may - genuinely come from supernatural sources, but in case from dark forces, with, in addition to all the errors, all its partly immoral moral, lack of ethics and empathy, etc. which corresponds well to f.x. parts of the Quran's moral code.)

004 4/155c: "- - - Allah hath set the seal on their hearts for their blasphemy - - -." Compare this to "the lost coin" (Luke 15/8-10),"the lost sheep" (Matt. 18/12-14), "the lost son" (Luke 15/11-31), and "the 11. hour" (Matt. 20/8-13)in NT: Two very different gods.

005 5/16e: "- - - guideth (by means of the Quran*) them (non-Muslims*) to a Path that is Straight". Does Islam represent a straight way? - and in case where? - it after all builds on a book no god would ever have made or sent, not to mention revered? It is blasphemy and insults and slander to a god to accuse him of having made a book as full of errors, contradictions, etc. as the Quran.

006 5/17a: "In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ - - -." No Christian - not one single one - says that Allah (or Yahweh) = Jesus. They are separate, but closely connected only. To use an Irish picture: Together with the Spirit they make up the 3 parts of a clover leaf. As for the Trinity, though, Islam may be right, as this is not clearly a part of the Bible (though Jesus said: "My Father (Yahweh/God) and I are one" - figuratively meant). But no Christian says Yahweh/God = Jesus.

A picture may be: Yahweh = the god. Jesus = a co-worker and/or friend. The Holy Spirit = the messenger - an errand boy and helper. Or the King, the crown-prince and the chief of staff or something.

*007 5/17b: “In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ (= put another god by Allah’s side – the ultimate and unforgivable sin according to 4/48 and 4/116*)". No Christian says that Jesus is Allah or the other way around. Neither do they say that Jesus is Yahweh. Also Muhammad never understood the trinity dogma of the Christians. (He believed the trinity consists of Yahweh, Jesus and Mary!!!). But if one looks only at that dogma, Islam may be right that it is not correct - may be. It is only a dogma decided on by humans after much discussion; it is not part of the Bible. (This dogma is from the 4. century, and it got its present form from the so-called Cappadocian Fathers (Gregory of Nyassa (332-395), Basil the Great (320-79), Gregory of Nazeanzus (329-389)). The nearest you come in the Bible, is that Jesus said that he and his father, Yahweh, were one.) Also see 5/17a and 5/73b.

But no-one in his right mind and with some knowledge about the Bible, would ever believe Mary was part of the trinity. Any even baby god had known. Then who made the Quran?

008 5/17c: "In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ - - -." Part of the background for the sharia laws.

009 5/49a: "- - - by what Allah hath revealed (the Quran*) - - -". No omniscient god ever revealed a book of that quality - it is an insult and blasphemy against the god to claim so.

Why has science found some 45ooo references, etc. older than 610 AD, to the Bible, but not one to the Quran or something similar, even though Muhammad claimed Islam was the original religion, and all its claimed prophets of the old had got copies similar to the Quran?

010 5/64b:"- - - (blasphemy) - - -". To talk against Allah is not blasphemy unless he exists and really is a dominant god. There nowhere is any clear indication for that this is the case - only Muhammad's words, a man of doubtful moral even according to Islam's central books (read his demands, deeds, introduced rules, etc., not the cheap and glorious words, and you find the reality behind the glossy blind belief), and a man who had much to gain from deceiving his followers. It also is a book full of wrong facts and other errors, and thus clearly not from a god.

011 5/64g: “- - - the revelation (the Quran*) that cometh to thee (Muhammad*) from Allah increaseth in most of them (non-Muslims - here mainly the Jews*) their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy". Naturally they reacted negatively when told their and Muhammad's god and religion was the same, as they saw how much was deeply different. "Rebellion and blasphemy"? - wrong, but it was good psychology, though, for Muhammad to use strong negative words.

And: Why has science found some 45ooo references, etc. older than 610 AD, to the Bible, but not one to the Quran or something similar, even though Muhammad claimed Islam was the original religion, and all its claimed prophets of the old had got copies similar to the Quran?

012 5/68g: "- - - blasphemy - - -". Doubting in the Quran is not blasphemy unless Allah really exists and is a god, and in addition is reasonably correctly described in the Quran.

013 5/72a: “They (Christians*) do blaspheme who say: ‘God (remember here that according to Muhammad Yahweh = Allah*) is Christ the son of Mary.’ - - - and the Fire will be their abode.” This clearly contradicts – and abrogates:

  1. 2/62: “- - - those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabeans any who believe in Allah (Yahweh = Allah according to the Quran*) and the Last Day, and work in righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord - - -.”
  2. 5/69: “Those who (believe in the Quran), and those who follows the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabeans – any who believe in Allah (here included Yahweh/God*) and the Last day, and work righteousness – on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.”

Another central point is that this is not what Christians say. They say that Jesus is divine, but not that Jesus = Yahweh.

(2 abrogations)

(2 contradictions)

014 5/72c: “They (Christians*) do blaspheme - - -". Only if the Quran tells the full truth and only the truth. And only if Allah exists and in addition is a god.

015 5/73a: “They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity”. Our sources tell that the 3 last words does not exist in the Arab edition, but is added by Yusuf Ali. Then the correct text in case ends: “Allah (Yahweh*) is one of three (gods*).” This obviously is wrong, as Christians only believe in one god. Besides it is a most dubious way of working to make additions to a text, without making the readers aware of that it is an addition – f.x. by at least putting the addition in ( ).

But the claim in any case is wrong: Christians do not say Allah is one of a Trinity, but that Yahweh is one of a Trinity. (But there is a chance for that the Quran here is correct when it denies that the god is part of a trinity, as this is not said in the Bible - this is a Christian dogma from the 4. century, and it got its present form from the so-called Cappadocian Fathers (Gregory of Nyassa (332-395), Basil the Great (320-79), Gregory of Nazeanzus (329-389)). The nearest you come in the Bible is that Jesus said that he and his father, Yahweh, were one.) Also see 5/73b just below.

016 5/73b: “They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity - - -.” Muhammad never understood the trinity - he even believed it consisted of Yahweh, Jesus, and Mary, a mistake no god - agreeing or not agreeing to the Trinity - would have made. But for once there is a possibility that the Quran has a point; the Trinity is formally not a part of the Bible. On the other hand those are the three special ones: Yahweh, Jesus and the Holy Spirit - we may think of them as God, his co-worker and representative, and his errand boy/messenger boy and helper. Trinity or not - those three have a special status according to both the Bible and the Quran (even though the Quran does not agree to which status - it even say the Holy Spirit = the angel Gabriel, which makes anyone really knowing the Bible laugh.) There also is the fact that according to the Bible, Jesus said that he and his father was one - but figuratively meant. Also see 5/773a just above.

017 5/73c: “They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity - - -.” This was to put two other gods at the side of Allah – two times the ultimate sin. This contradicts – and abrogates:

  1. 2/62: “- - - those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabeans any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work in righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord - - -.”
  2. 5/69: “Those who (believe in the Quran), and those who follows the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabeans – any who believe in Allah (here included Yahweh/God*) and the Last day, and work righteousness – on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.”

(2 contradictions). But this is not what Christians say. They say Yahweh is one of three in a trinity.

018 5/73d: "- - - blaspheme - - -". Only if Allah exists, is a god, and is correctly described, and here only if in addition Yahweh and Allah is the same god (he must in case be seriously ill mentally), because Christians talk to and about Yahweh, not Allah.

019 5/103b: "- - - blasphemers - - -". No-one can be blasphemers against Allah unless he exists and in addition is a god. This also is one of Muhammad’s many negative names for non-Muslims.

020 6/19k: "- - - blasphemy - - -". To disbelieve in Allah only is blasphemy if Allah really exists and really is what the Quran claims, but never was able to prove - there only are the words of a not very reliable man, who on top of all had much to gain from making people believe in his tales - tales choke full of wrong facts and other errors. At least it is very clear that there is no god behind a book as full of mistakes, etc. as the Quran - and what then about the claims about Allah?

021 8/35d: "Taste ye (the pagans of Mecca before Muhammad took over*) the Penalty because ye blasphemed". If Allah is a made up god, blasphemy was/is impossible - there is no way of blaspheming a non-existent god. There are so many errors in the Quran, that those alone prove the book is not from any god. Thus it is extremely unlikely that Allah exists, and even more so that he in case is correctly described in the Quran. See 3/77b above.

022 8/35e: "- - - blasphemed". The pagan Arabs' belief only were blasphemy against Allah if Allah exists (unlikely as the Quran with all its mistakes, etc. is not from a god - and his existence never proved) and their beliefs in addition were wrong (likely, but also never proved).

023 9/74d: "- - - they (hypocrites*) uttered blasphemy (disbelief in Muhammad, Allah, and the Quran*), and they did it after accepting Islam - - -". One of the greatest sins in Islam is for a Muslim to disbelieve in anything in the book, not to mention leaving the religion - there is in principle death penalty for leaving Islam, and this still to a degree is practiced some places.

024 9/74e: "- - - they (hypocrites*) uttered blasphemy (disbelief in Muhammad and the Quran*), and they did it after accepting Islam - - -". It is not possible to utter blasphemy by disbelieving in Allah or Muhammad, unless Allah really exists and in addition is a god (not f.x. something from the dark forces - Muhammad would not have a chance to see the difference f.x. between a dressed up devil and the angel Gabriel).

025 10/70c: "- - - blasphemies". It is not possible to blaspheme against Allah unless he for one thing exists, and for another is a god (if he is from the dark forces, like f.x. the partly immoral moral code in the Quran, and its acceptance of dishonesty, its partly unjust laws, its drive for hate- and war-mongering, etc. may indicate, we think blasphemy also is not possible - who can blaspheme dark forces? - and how to do it?).

026 11/9b: "- - - blasphemy". To express doubt about Allah only is blasphemy if he exists and is a major god - and there only are the words of a man with dubious moral and character for both, and words provably full of wrong facts and other errors. (And how should it be possible to blaspheme if he happens to belong to the dark forces, which f.x. the Quran's moral rules, laws, acceptance of dishonesty and thieving, rules for war, etc. may indicate?)

027 14/28a: "- - - those who have changed the favor of Allah into blasphemy - - -". Non-Muslims or persons who have left Islam.

028 14/28b: "- - - blasphemy - - -". Nothing here is blasphemy unless Allah really exists and is a god. (How do you f.x. blaspheme him if he belongs to the dark forces?)

029 21/36e: "- - - they (non-Muslims*) blaspheme - - -". This only could be the case if Allah existed and was a god. (You hardly blaspheme f.x. something from the dark forces.)

030 21/112e: “- - - against the blasphemies you utter!” Is it blasphemy to doubt what is told about Allah, when there are weighty reasons for doubt? (- all the mistakes, contradictions, etc. in the Quran). Unless Allah exists - which Islam will have to prove - there is no blasphemy in doubting his existence.

031 21/112f: "- - - against the blasphemies ye utter". It is no blasphemies unless the Quran tells the full truth - not necessarily only the truth, but at least the full truth. And not least: Not unless Allah really exists - there only is the word of one man for that. A man believing in al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), Hilah (the lawful pretending/circumventing), breaking of words/promises/oaths (according to the Quran), and deceit ("War is deceit" - and "everything" was jihad). And a man wanting power and riches for bribes to get more power - - - and lots of women.

And not least a man wanting and demanding "taqlid" (blind acceptance of the fathers' religion), at least to the degree that he reused most of the old Arab pagan religion's rituals and its most holy place and building - and demanding that later generations should live in "taqlid" concerning his own, new religion.

All the errors in the Quran alone make it correct to say that the book is proved to not be from a god. Then there in addition are special points like the at least few lies from Muhammad in the book, and cases like f.x. Jesus + the Qumran scrolls, which prove that also OT in the Bible is not falsified.

##032 39/4f: (YA4246): "It is blasphemy to say that Allah begot a son. If that were true, He should have had a wife - - -". This argument is nonsense in this case. For one thing Islam claims that Allah is the same god as Yahweh, a claim which was never proved - perhaps because the Quran shows that the two are far too different to be one and the same. Besides it is known that in the really old times Yahweh had a female companion - his Amat (source New Scientist and others). Even if this is not widely known, it is unlikely that a learned man like Abdullah Yusuf Ali did not know it. And what is 110% sure he knew, is that according to the Quran, if the god wished something "He just could say 'Be' and it was" - the god just could say "Be a son" and Jesus was. This simply is one of the many places where Muslims find the answer they want, by omitting facts which make their wanted answer invalid and often even impossible.

033 39/8e: "- - - blasphemy - - -". It is not blasphemy do doubt Allah's existence if he does not exist, or if he exists, but is not a major god. Yes, it hardly is blasphemy even if he is a top god, as there are no clear indications - not to mention proofs - for his existence.

034 39/32e: "- - - blasphemers - - -". Blasphemy in connection to Islam only is possible if Allah exists and is a god, both of which only are claims in a book full of mistakes, and told by a man of doubtful moral and reliability (believing in al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), etc., cheating and even in broken oaths if that gave a better result (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? - by Allah or by Muhammad) - and liking power and riches for bribes for more power - and women).

035 40/42a: "- - - blaspheme against Allah - - -". This only is possible if Allah exists and is a god. (It will take a lot to blaspheme if he exists and belongs to the dark forces.)

036 43:15c: "- - - blasphemous - - -". It only is possible to blaspheme against Allah if he exists, and if he is a god, none of which is proved.

037 43/33c: "- - - blasphemes against (Allah) - - -". It is not possible to blaspheme against Allah unless he exists and in addition is a god, none of which is proved.

37 comments. Sub-total = 6298 + 37 = 6335.


>>> 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".