Allah in the Quran, Chapter 91

 

Chapter 91

ALLAH'S SERVANTS

 

001 The expression Allah's/His servants may have different meanings in addition to traditional servants:

  1. All humans.
  2. All Muslims.
  3. All good Muslims.
  4. All claimed prophets/messengers through the times.
  5. In some cases it may mean the angels or all sentient beings, included the angels.
  6. In some cases it even may include the jinns.
  7. Connected to stories about f.x. Moses it also may mean the Jews.

  8. Then there is the question if Iblis/the Devil is Allah's service (f.x. 2/34f).
  9. In some cases special groups - f.x. the Assyrians.
  10. And used in singular it means Muhammad, if nothing else is indicated (we only include a couple of samples of this version - there are many).

The Quranic texts are not always very clear, as you see.

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

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

002 2/23c: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Servant - - -". Here Muhammad.

003 2/23d: "- - - Our (Allah's*) Servant - - -". No omniscient god brings a book that full of errors, etc., not to mention revere it in his "home" as a "mother book" like the Quran claims (13/39, 43/4, 85/21-22) - Muhammad thus is no servant of an omniscient god. Perhaps servant of someone or something, included of himself, but not of any omniscient god.

#########004 2/34f: (YA49): “Not so Iblis (the later Devil*).” But the Arab text actually says: “They (the angles*) bowed down, except Iblis.” This in case means that Iblis was an angel, whereas the Quran several other places tell he was a jinn (made from fire, whereas angles were made from light). Clear text?

Another point Islam has been unable to agree on: Is Iblis on his own or is he a servant of Allah and part of his Plan? (If he is, Allah is quite a "good and benevolent god".)

005 2/90f: "- - - His (Allah's*) servants (here included Muhammad*) - - -". Hardly. See 63/5a below. (Servant here is synonymous to messenger).

006 2/186a: "When My servants ask thee - - -" = When Allah's followers (Muslims) ask thee, Muhammad - - -.

007 3/15l: "- - - in Allah's sight are (all) His servants”. We are once more back to the old and fundamental problem: Only if Allah exists, if he is a god, if he is behind the Quran, and only if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth.

008 3/15 + 17: “His (Allah’s*) servants (Muslims*) - - - who show patience, firmness, and self-control - - -”. They are claimed to be good people, at least according to Islam's somewhat special moral code, and Muhammad claims Allah will help them in the end. May be he will - if he exists and is a major god.

009 3/20j: "- - - in Allah's sight are (all) His servants". If they - here likely all humans - are in his sight, why then did he have to test them? Also see 2/233h above and 35/38b below.

010 3/20k: "- - - in Allah's sight are (all) His servants". This only can be true if Allah exists and in addition is a god.

011 4/117b: "- - - they (the Pagans*) call but upon Satan the persistent rebel". But if it is true that Satan/Iblis really is a servant or partner to Allah - Iblis running Allah's Hell or a Hell which is part of Allah's Plan (like many Muslim scholars believe, as Iblis could not have his Hell without ok from Allah if Allah is omnipotent) - is Iblis/Satan then a rebel? Not to mention if Allah just is a dressed up Satan?

012 6/61b: "He (Allah*) is - - - (watching) from above over His servants (Muslims*)- - -." Allah looks after you. But also remember: Allah sees what you do, so remember your discipline; be good and obedient! - and obedience on Earth in reality meant - and means - Muhammad and his successors."

013 7/32a: "- - - which He (Allah*) hath produced for His servants (people*) - - - for sustenance - - -". Allah has produced everything according to the Quran. Also see 7/29d above.

##014 8/51: “Allah is never unjust to his servants (Muslims or perhaps all humans*)”. Wrong. A star example: A woman is to be strictly punished for illegal sex after being raped, if she cannot produce 4 male eye witnesses to the rape. This is one of the most inhuman, immoral and unjust laws which exists on this Earth – at least in civilized or semi-civilized cultures.

015 10/107d: "- - - He (Allah*) causeth it (a benefit*) to reach whomsoever of His servants (here likely all humans*) He pleaseth". As the servants of the claimed god Allah go by the made up book the Quran, they clearly are on wrong tracks and in a doubtful religion. What then if f.x. Yahweh - a god even the Quran admits exists, even though it wrongly mixes him up with Allah - opposes the delivery of a benefit? Also see 10/107a above.

016 14/11b: "- - - Allah doth grant His grace to such of His servants (here likely all humans*) as He pleases". This and similar sentences normally in the Quran is an "explanation" for why good persons often had a bad life and the other way round - Allah's unfathomable wisdom. But just here it can be an answer to those who found an Arab prophet strange - Muhammad used it about himself quite a few times.

017 14/31a: "- - - my (Allah's*) servants who have believed, that they may establish regular prayers - - -". This seems to be about persons who have left Islam - a wish that they shall return (this was in 621-622 AD before Muhammad was able to use force).

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

Another fact: Today it is easy by means of statistical methods to check if prayers have any effect. (Let f.x. 1ooo persons each pray for one among 1ooo unknown persons sick or in other ways in need. compare the result after some time with a similar group of 1ooo who has not been prayed for, and see if there is a difference. If there is a positive difference, this would be a strong indication or perhaps even a proof for something - a proof Islam strongly and dearly needs, as they have not any proof for even a single of its central claims. But it has not even tried to make such a test. Why?)

018 15/31: "Not so Iblis - - -". Iblis refused to accept that man was superior to himself. May be to the anger of Allah - but maybe not. As Allah is omnipotent, nothing can happen without his permission. Therefore Iblis could not do this without Allah's permission, Muslim scholars say - and they continue that this must be the result of a decision made by Allah, because he wanted a Hell, and that this scene was something predetermined - an agreement between Allah and Iblis. In short: Allah wanted or needed a Hell - perhaps for punishing not obedient men and jinns and perhaps others - and set up this scene together with his servant Iblis.

But if Allah set up such a sadistic and horrible Hell, it tells something about him.

And why did he need the theatre - the farce - this scene is?

019 15/40: "- - - except Thy (Allah's*) servants - - -". Iblis did not get permission to hurt good Muslims. (An irony if Iblis in reality is behind the Quran, which is one of the theories for whom really made the Quran, as it is not from any god with all its errors). On the other hand: The prohibition in case does not have to be a true one.

#020 15/41b: "This (way of My (Allah's*) sincere servants) is indeed a Way that leads straight to Me." This is one of the very many never proved claims in the Quran. It is an especially sincere and sinister one if the theory that Iblis/the Devil is the real maker of the Quran, is the true one - and the indicators pointing in that direction are a bit too many for comfort. (Though happily the theory that the book is man-made, is more likely. With all its errors and weaknesses it is not from any god).

021 15/42b: "Over My (Allah's*) servants (man/Muslims*) no authority shalt thou (Iblis/the Devil*) have, except such as put themselves in the wrong - - -". But how can anyone "put themselves in the wrong" if the Quran tells the truth when it many places claims that Allah decides everything? Muslims will tell you about man's free will, but if Allah decides everything, man has not free will - and if man had free will, Allah cannot be entirely omniscient (because f.x. after Allah says "now I know the future" man always can change his mind once more if he has free will - - - which means Allah's knowledge is wrong). Islam has given in finding an answer to this impossibility - only lamely says that it has to be true as it is said so in the Quran(!!) They forget that some of the immaterial laws are absolute even for omnipotent gods (an easy example we have mentioned before: One mathematical 1 + one mathematical 1 can give only one answer even for gods - the mathematical 2). There are things which are impossible also for omnipotent gods - f.x. to combine Allah's total predestination many times stated in the Quran, with full or partly free will for man. Or the other way around. Something is seriously wrong here.

022 17/5b: “- - - We (Allah*) sent against you (the Jews*) Our servants (attackers from Assyria) given to terrible warfare - - -”. Israel was attacked some times during the time of OT (local enemies many times, and Assyria and Babylonia are best known), but for natural reasons no Muslim was involved (1000 years and more too early).

According to the Bible also the god involved was Yahweh, not Allah.

023 17/30d: "For He (Allah*) doth know - - - all His servants (likely all humans*)". See 2/233h above.

024 17/53a: "- - - My (Allah's*) servants - - -". = Muslims.

025 17/65a: "- - - My (Allah's*) servants - - -". Good Muslims.

026 17/96b: "- - - He (Allah*) is well acquainted with His servants (all humans?*), and He sees (all things)". See 2/233h above.

027 18/65a: "- - - one of Our (Allah's*) servants (unclear what it means just here - a human? - a Muslim?*) - - -". This man is not named in the Quran, but according to Muslim tradition his name was al-Khidr (al-Khidr means "the green one"). He is a wise man from old Arab folk tales. Why did a god have to reuse old folk tales and fairy tales?

028 18/102a: "Do the unbelievers think that they can take My (Allah's*) servants (here likely saints or something*) as protectors beside Me?" This is an attack on the Catholic belief in saints, and it may well be it is correct - the idea of saints is not found in the Bible.

029 25/58d: "- - - and enough is He (Allah*) to be acquainted with the faults of His servants (Muslims/humans*) - - -". = Allah knows everything. See 2/233h above.

030 38/83: "- - - thy (Allah's*) Servants - - -". Here: All good Muslims.

031 39/7c: "- - - His (Allah's*) servants - - -". In the Quran and its "very clear, easy to understand, and not possible to misunderstand", this expression may mean one of three things: All humanity, all (good) Muslims, all claimed prophets/messengers from Allah. You each time have to guess from the context what is meant - in this case most likely "all humanity".

032 39/10a: "- - - My (Allah's*) servants who believe - - -". Muslims.

033 39/16c: "- - - His (Allah's*) Servants - - -". This expression may in the Quran and its "clear and easy to understand language" mean 1): All humans. 2): All Muslims (sometimes only all good Muslims). 3): The claimed prophets/messengers of Allah. In this case it is likely it means all humans or all Muslims.

034 39/17e: "- - - My (Allah's*) Servants - - -". This expression may in the Quran and its "clear and easy to understand language" mean 1): All humans. 2): All Muslims (sometimes only all good Muslims). 3): The claimed prophets/messengers of Allah. In this case it is likely it means all humans or all Muslims.

035 39/46e: "- - - Thy (Allah's*) Servants - - -". In the Quran this expression may mean all humanity, all Muslims (or all good Muslims), or (all) claimed prophets/messengers for Allah. The clear and not to be misunderstood language in the Quran! In this case it seems to mean all humanity.

036 40/15e: "- - - His (Allah's*) servants - - -". This expression can have at least 3-4 different meanings in the claimed clear and easy to understand language of the Quran. Here it seems to mean Muslims simply.

037 40/31e: "- - - His (Allah's) Servants". This is an expression with several meanings in the Quran - all humanity, all Muslims or all good Muslims, or all claimed prophets/messengers for Allah (the famous clear(?) language in the Quran). Here one may guess it means all humanity, but it may mean all Muslims.

#038 42/27b: "- - - His (Allah's*) Servants - - -". The Quran itself and Muslims and Islam claim that the language in the Quran is so clear - easy to understand, impossible to misunderstand, and distinct - that it very clearness is a proof for that it is made by a god. All the same there f.x. are lots and lots and lots of words and expressions which can have more than one meaning. This is one of them. If nothing else is indicated, this expression may mean:

  1. All humans.
  2. All Muslims.
  3. All good Muslims.
  4. All claimed prophets/messengers through the times.
  5. In some cases it may mean the angels or all sentient beings, included the angels.
  6. In some cases it even may include the jinns.
  7. And used in singular it means Muhammad, if nothing else is indicated.

If clearness proves a god, what then does unclearness prove?

039 44/18a: "Restore to me (Moses*) the servants of Allah (here intended to mean the Jews)". Here are two things different from the same story in the Bible (2. Mos. Ch. 5 + 6 + first part of 7):

  1. According to the Bible, Moses asked for his people - "let my people go" - not for a religious group (this even though the official reason was to celebrate their god).
  2. According to the Bible, the involved god was Yahweh, not Allah - a claimed god and religion there are found no traces from in Egypt until some 2ooo tears later, when the country was conquered by Muhammad's successors (in partly horrible ways)

040 44/23a: "(Allah said*) March forth with My servants (the Jews*) by night - - -". Naive and wanting on logic: What had to happen if the Jews had left stealthily and against the will of the mighty pharaoh like indicated here? An angry army had been hot on their heels the very next morning. And a marching army can march 2 - 3 times as fast as a large group of civilians strolling along together with their children and animals. They would be overtaken in hours.

041 50/29a: "- - - I (Allah*) do not the least injustice to My Servants - - -". Wrong:

  1. There is no correspondence between the sins a normal human makes, and the sadistic and never-ending punishment in Hell. It thus is injustice to send (most) people to hell.
  2. There is a lot of immoral and injustice in the Quran's moral code, in its sharia laws, and in its demands for and rules for waging war.

042 50/29b: "- - - My (Allah's*) Servants". Here: Likely all humans.

The Quran itself and Muslims and Islam claim that the language in the Quran is so clear - easy to understand, impossible to misunderstand, and distinct - that it very clearness is a proof for that it is made by a god. All the same there f.x. are lots and lots and lots of words and expressions which can have more than one meaning. This is one of them. If nothing else is indicated, this expression may mean:

  1. All humans.
  2. All Muslims.
  3. All good Muslims.
  4. All claimed prophets/messengers through the times.
  5. In some cases it may mean the angels or all sentient beings, included the angels.
  6. In some cases it even may include the jinns.
  7. Connected to stories about f.x. Moses it also may mean the Jews.

  8. Then there is the question if Iblis/the Devil is Allah's service (f.x. 2/34f).
  9. In some cases special groups - f.x. the Assyrians.
  10. And used in singular it means Muhammad, if nothing else is indicated (we only include a couple of samples of this version - there are many).

If clearness proves a god, what then does unclearness prove?

42 comments. Sub-total = 9980 + 42 = 10.022.


>>> 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".