Allah in the Quran, Chapter 88

 

Section XI: DIFFERENT SUBJECTS

Chapter 88

THE QURAN IS A MESSAGE(?)

 

001 Perhaps. But as no god ever would deliver a book as full of errors or worse as this one, then from whom is the message in case? There only are 3 possibilities left:

  1. The dark forces - and much in the Quran fits a devil better than it firs a good and benevolent god.
  2. A mental illness (modern medical science suspects Muhammad had TLE - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy - a mental illness which can give the kind of fits and religious illusions Muhammad is said to have had).
  3. Or a cold human brain - f.x. Muhammad's.

###### 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?

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 are that kind of men normally? - and how true and reliable are their never proved claims and tales?

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

###002 4/82b: “Had it (the Quran*) been from other than Allah, they would surely therein found much discrepancy.” What a proof!!! The ultimate joke and irony! In addition to all the mistakes, internal and external contradictions, etc. (roughly at least unbelievable 3000 (!!!) everything included), there is so much discrepancy in the Quran, that Islam has a special rule how to solve such problems - the so called rule of abrogation: If there is discrepancy between two (or more) places in the Quran, the youngest one normally is the correct one - the omniscient Allah so often (300 times or more according to "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran") had to change his mind or got new information which forced him to change his words, that one needs a special rule how to behave in such cases (this is one of the reasons why it is essential for Islam to know the age of the surahs and verses, or at least which is older than which - to know which is valid and which is abrogated). And there is so much discrepancy between the Quran and modern knowledge that it is clear that either Islam has a lot of good explaining to do, or the Quran is not made by an omniscient god. (Islam has a lot of explanations, but most of those are not about explaining the mistakes, etc., but about explaining them away, and such "explanations" most often are invalid or highly dubious - use your brain and knowledge when you listen or read, and you will see this is true). The quoted sentence really is an indirect, but strong proof from the Quran itself that the Quran is not sent down from an omniscient god - and a reason why Muslims cannot afford to admit there is one single mistake in the book, no matter how unlikely explanations they have to use to “explain” the mistakes away: If there are mistakes, there is something fundamentally wrong with the religion, because then the Quran is not from a god. That is too difficult to face.

(It should be mentioned that some Muslims denies there is a rule of abrogation (an omniscient god would not need to adjust or further specify his own rules - it spoils the picture of perfection and of omniscience), but anyone can read the Quran and see for him-/herself: Many points are changed, adjusted, extended or given other limits - larger or smaller - in the Quran. We have never counted, but we have read numbers from ca. 100 to more than 500 abrogations depending on how strictly you judge. Actually it is said by some Islamic scholars that only 9/5 – “the Verse of the Sword” – alone abrogates 124 older mild verses).

In addition to the internal discrepancies in the Quran, one has all the mentioned mistakes – they are discrepancies compared to reality. Besides: Even if it had been without the least contradiction, that had meant nothing as a proof - Muhammad had plenty of time to be careful and think his words over as after all this not big book took 23 years (but he was unable to make it perfect). There are more than 300 internal contradictions (see http://www.1000mistakes.com about this) + all external contradictions (contradiction with reality).

##003 13/39b: “- - - with Him (Allah*) is the Mother of the Book (the presumed original book of which the Quran - and the books of all older claimed prophets - is said to be a copy*)“. Mere humans like us think it is unlikely in the extreme that an omnipotent and omniscient god has a book awash with mistakes, contradictions, logically invalid claims, etc. as a revered Mother Book in his Heaven. There also are a lot of problems to explain if it was made by the god a long time ago - not to mention if it is an unmade book that has existed forever, like many Muslims insists:

  1. If the book is that old and existed before and existed before Earth was created, why did the god have to send down claimed imperfect books - Torah, OT, NT? And NB: Science and Islam both have showed they are not falsified, in spite of Muslims claim (like normal for Islam without documentation).
  2. How to explain that in at least one verse it is angels who are speaking? - they were created from light after the world was created.
  3. How to explain that at least in one verse angels were speaking to humans? - humans are much younger than the world.
  4. How to explain that in some verses it is Muhammad that is speaking?
  5. How to explain that angels are speaking in the Quran if the book is older than the first angels?
  6. How to explain that the god sometimes has to change his message – erase it in the Mother Book and write something new? - and did he really get everything right in the book this time? Especially if he is copying the Mother Book, he ought to get it right at once?
  7. How could he change the messages, if it was all written a long time ago - or always existed - in a Mother Book he copied? Erasing something there and writing over?
  8. How come, if the book is eternal, that so many verses are answers or comments to things which happened in Mecca and Medina to Muhammad and during the life of Muhammad? - Muhammad f.x. quarreled with his wives, and Allah sent down surahs to explain that Muhammad as always was right - and like always a little bit too late to avert problem, but relevant to his needs just then? (Remember that if man has freedom of choice, full omniscience and thus also full clairvoyance is impossible - admitted even by Islam, except that they say it must be true all the same because Allah says so in the Quran (!!))
  9. How to explain that it (the Quran) could have been written eons ago, if Allah has given the humans a certain amount of free will? - human acts will upset the texts in chaotic ways. (Predestination and human free will are 100% incompatible and 100% impossible to combine even for gods, as man always can change his mind once more, making it impossible for the god to know for sure what really will happen, until it happens).
  10. Islam says texts had to be changed a little over time, because times changes - therefore new holy books. But the 300 last years have changed more than from Adam till 1700 AD - not to mention till 650 AD. Why are no prophets and no holy book necessary? (Also see 13/38d above). And how was the text in the Mother Book changed to fit new times.
  11. If the “mother book” is eons old, why then is nearly the all talk to Muhammad, a little to a few others, and nothing to the other 124ooo (= 620 at any time for 5ooo years or 12-15 for 160ooo-200ooo. No traces found. Believe it if you can.) prophets (the number according to Hadiths)? The first prophets - when everything was new – after all needed most information and help.
  12. How to explain that most of the stories in the Quran are based on religious legends, fairy tales, etc.? - any god had known they were untrue.
  13. How to explain all the mistakes? – any god had known better.
  14. How to explain all the invalid statements? – any god had known better.
  15. How to explain all the invalid “signs” (treated as proofs)?
  16. How to explain the invalid “proofs”? – any god had known better.
  17. How to explain the directly wrong statements, “signs” and “proofs”. ?
  18. How to explain all the contradictions? – the claim of "no contradictions" is one of the “proofs” for Allah.
  19. How to explain all the cases of invalid logic? - no god would need to use invalid logic.
  20. How to explain the often unclear language in the book, even concerning serious points?
  21. How to explain away science's proofs for that f.x. the Bible is not falsified?
  22. How to explain away f.x. Jesus' acceptance of OT as ok, combined with that the Qumran scrolls then tells that even OT was never falsified?

Also see 13/1d+e+f above and 43/4 and 85/21-22 below.

###004 17/88c: (YA2289): "The proof of the Quran is in its own beauty and nature, and the circumstances in which it was promulgated - - -". This is such a silly sentence that at first we did not take it into this "book". But on the other hand it is one of the very few, if not the only "proof" Islam has got for its religion. A book where the prose is beautiful - - - after being polished for 250 years (from ca. 650 AD till ca. 900 AD) by top scholars. And what is the nature of the book: A bloody, inhuman and to a great part immoral war religion very far from "do unto others like you want others do onto you"- and the book itself flowing over of mistaken facts and other mistakes, of contradictions and cases of invalid logic, unclear language, etc. And the circumstances? Claimed received by a person liking power and later during his bloody reign as the leader of highwaymen and in the end as a warlord - some godly circumstances? And this is the only - or at least one of the very few - "proofs" for that Islam is a genuine religion, not according to us, but as you see according to central and certified Islamic religious literature. Except for the claimed, but invalid "signs" plus some as invalid "proofs" listed in the book. You meet bluffs like this from Muslims and from Islam sometimes, but remember that they are bluffs and without any root in reality (though many Muslims honestly believe what they say - blind belief or little education).

###########The fact that it is so well known that the Quran was polished for some 250 years and only got something like its present form around 900 AD, that it tells something about Islam that even their top scholars use "proofs" like this.

"A proof is one or more proved facts which can give only one conclusion".

"Strong claims need strong proofs.

"A claim without a proof maybe dismissed without a proof".

"Claims are cheap, but only proofs are proofs".

"- - - blind "taqlid", i.e. an unthinking acceptance of religious doctrines or assertions - - - ((A)23/11). How many millions of Muslims are practicing this?

#005 18/1d: “(Allah*) hath allowed therein (in the Quran*) no Crookedness.” In a book that full of mistaken facts and other mistakes, there is a lot of crookedness. Especially the mistakes, the use of invalid “signs”, ”proofs” and as invalid logic, and the partly immoral moral code and laws, the acceptance of dishonesty in words (lies, deceit, broken oaths, etc.) and deeds (thieving/looting, rape, extortion, slave taking, etc), "smells".

BUT THERE IS NO DOUBT THE QURAN ITSELF DECLARES THAT THERE IS NO CROOKEDNESS IN THE BOOK - THE TEXTS ARE TO BE UNDERSTOOD LITERALLY.

#006 18/1e: (A18/1): "The above phrase ("no Crookedness"*) is meant to establish the direct, unambiguous character of the Quran - - -". Do remember this each time Muslims claim that mistakes in the Quran "in reality" are allegories or similar. Also see 18/1d just above.

####Also: As there are lots of obvious crookedness in the Quran, what fact does this establish?

BUT THERE IS NO DOUBT THE QURAN ITSELF DECLARES THAT THERE IS NO CROOKEDNESS IN THE BOOK - THE TEXTS ARE TO BE UNDERSTOOD LITERALLY.

######T

More down to the Earth: Muslims often explains away mistakes, etc. in the Quran with the claim that what is written there is not what is meant - it is a parable or an allegory or something. A book where you have to guess what is literally meant and what is parables - and what the parables in case mean - definitely is not easy.

######That the Quran tells - directly or indirectly, but clearly - that the texts in the Quran is clear, explained by Allah, and to be understood literally, you find f.x. these places: 3/7b, 3/138a, 6/114ca, 11/1b, 15/1d, 17/12h, 18/1d-e, 18/2a, 19/97b, 20/113b+c, 24/34, 24/54j, 26/2a, 27/1b-d, 28/2, 36/69e, 37/117c, 39/28b, 41/3da, 43/2a, 43/3c, 43/29b, 44/2b-c, 44/13d, 44/58b, 54/17a, 54/22b, 54/32a+b, 54/40a, 65/11f, and 75/19 Worth remembering each time a Muslim or Islam tries to "explain" away errors, etc. by claiming the text means something different from what it says. In such cases either the Muslim/Islam lies when he/she claims the text means something different from what it says (the claim often is that it is a parable or something), or the Quran lies when it says that the book uses clear texts where nothing else is indicated.

The listed points are all collected here under 3/7b and 44/58b.

Or perhaps Allah is so clumsy and helpless when he explains things, that he needs help from humans to explain what "he really means"? (Nonsense to say the least about such claims lying under such "explanations".)

WHO CAN EXPLAIN SOMETHING BETTER AND MORE CORRECTLY AND COMPLETELY THAN AN OMNISCIENT GOD?

007 18/1g: (A18/1): "The above phrase ("no Crookedness"*) is meant to establish the direct, unambiguous character of the Quran and to stress its freedom from all obscurities and internal contradictions". A symbolic irony as there are hundreds of obscure points and at least 300 internal contradictions in the Quran - see separate chapters in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" - www.1000mistakes.com .

#### But this statement also have a serious implication: "- - - the direct, unambiguous character - - -" and "- - - its freedom from all obscurities - - -" mean that there are no hidden allegories, parables, metaphor, metonym, etc. in the Quran. This means that Islam's and Muslims' many claims that errors, etc. in the Quran mean something else - are allegories, etc. - are wrong.

####008 18/2b: “(He (Allah*) hath made it) Straight (and Clear) - - -". This is one of the verses you should remember each time a Muslim tries to explain away a clear mistake by "no, this is not literally meant - - -", which is one of the 3 most used last ditch defenses (the two others are: "You cannot understand a text in the Quran alone - you have to see the whole Surah (or the whole Quran)". And: "You cannot really understand the Quran unless you read it in Arab". Both of which are rubbish. (Well, there are 2 more: "You do not know the Quran/what you are talking about", and: "You just are an Israel lover/Muslim hater quoting what you have heard or read".) There are places where you have to know more than the actual verse and the nearest few ones to understand the meaning, but mostly the simple answer is: "If you are not able to see the essence in a meaning or something said, you should stay out of debates" - this Muslim claim simply is a means to make the opponent unsure, because few know the Quran well enough to see that mostly this claim is invalid. And as for reading in Arab to understand it: For one thing the Arab of Muhammad mainly was the language of primitive desert nomads even though it later is linguistically polished - there is no problems for rich modern languages like f.x. English to compete with it in vocabulary. (Also in Japan they had the same haughty self-centered meaning once upon a time: Primitive foreigners impossibly would be able to express what a highly refined language like their could. They stopped claiming it after many enough had learnt foreign languages to see the nonsense in it. And that was really was a refined cultural language, not something from primitive tribes, even though polished afterward. Well, there always will be some words which are special for a language, and which need explanation, but that is it - and this goes for any language and is nothing special for Arab.) But such words will have to be explained anyhow - f.x. when you learn the language - so that makes little difference. The remaining fact is that what one brain can think, another brain of the same quality and similar education can understand, at least with a little explanation. But the claim is difficult to leave for Muslims, because they need it as an "explanation" when they lack real arguments.

And not to forget: Scientists of language tell that Arab only is a medium difficult language to translate.

An ironic point here is that Islam and Muslims themselves frequently quotes words or expressions out of context, and make them sound very different from what they say in the texts - sometimes by added twisting. (F.x. Paul one place tells that humans are unreliable and perhaps also he is not able to tell the full truth always, and then he warns about this human weakness. Muslims twists it to that Paul admits NT are full of lies. One rule about honesty for others and one about dishonesty for themselves.)

009 38/8b: "Has the Message been sent - - -". Yes, was it really sent? - and in case from whom? As no god ever was involved in a message that full of errors, contradictions, etc. there remains: Dark forces, a sick brain (TLE - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy?), or a cold, scheming brain - perhaps Muhammad's.

010 53/4: "It (the surahs*) is no less than inspiration sent down to him (Muhammad*) - - -". May be true, but from whom? - not from a god with all those mistakes. Then may be from a sick brain (f.x. TLE - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy - like modern medical science suspects)? From dark forces? From a cold brain? - few things are as easy as claimed "inspiration" to manipulate. The word "inspiration" also never is used in such connection in the Bible. On the contrary the Bible states that Yahweh used direct contact, visions, or dreams (4. Mos. 12/6-8). One more indication for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god.

##011 69/50a: “But truly (Revelation (of the Quran*)) is a cause of sorrow for the Unbelievers”. True, but for other reasons than the Quran indicates: Because of all the war and blood and terror Islam has represented through the ages - and the answer is NOT that also other religions have caused wars, etc. as that does not make a hate, rape, dishonesty, suppression, robbery and blood religion like Islam one single iota better – and in most other religions it is done in spite of the real religion, not because of. (CSPI informs that it has been calculated that through the times some 270 million non-Muslims have been killed because of Islam. Of these are some 120 millions from Africa (all the many millions of slaves brought out of Africa or died during transport or castration - it seems that most male negro slaves were castrated, and this without any painkiller or medical attention - are not included)). And sorrow because many felt pity for souls going lost in a religion built on a book where something is seriously wrong - so much and so wrong, that the book is not from any god. (May be their own religion(s) also were wrong, but all the mistaken facts, etc., in a book pretending to be from an omniscient god, prove that in Islam there really is something that is wrong - and it makes one doubt very strongly that it really is a divine revelation (and with a reason. Like said all the errors directly prove that it is not from a god).

Actually Islam is the only one of the big religions which directly proves itself wrong – by means of their holy book. Proves that something is seriously wrong with the claimed holy book and thus with the religion.

11 comments. Sub-total = 9928 + 11 = 9939.


>>> 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".