Muhammad in the Quran, Vol. 1: Chapter 1
15 Dec. 2015
Section I: UNBELIEVABLE
LAUGHABLE STUFFS ABOUT MUHAMMAD IN THE QURAN
All these are (some of) Muhammad's words.
Quite a number of the verses in the Quran are so wrong or "special" or with so hopeless logic or so far out - or horrible - that it is laughable or a reason for weeping. (Well, you do not laugh from the horrible ones, but combine it with claims like "Islam is the Religion of Pease" or "Allah is a good and benevolent god", and you may laugh from the irony.)
We list some, but if you read the Quran, you will find many more. F.x. many of the scientific and historical errors, many of the contradictions, and some of the explanations are laughable. The same for most of the claims about the Quran and Muhammad being the truth - compare it to all the errors in the Quran, and you will find many a good laugh. All the claims about that Allah being omniscient are as laughable when you compare them to all the errors and contradictions in his(?) book. If you further compare claims like Allah is a good and benevolent god, with the harsh parts of the Sharia laws or with the harsh parts of the Quran's moral code or rules for how to treat opponents, victims, or slaves - or the book's rules for terror and war with similar rules in more advanced - and many less advanced - religions or cultures, you get reason for more laughing (or weeping) - there are quite a number of not intended irony and black jokes. Not to mention the laughter or weeping if you compare it to the basic of all moral rules in civilized (and many less civilized) cultures: "Do to others like you want others do to you" - already 2500 years ago in the then primitive India Buddha said something similar - - - but the Quran not.
And as laughable are the claims that Muhammad was a good and forgiving and saintly - and reliable - man. Compare it to what even central Islamic books tell about what he said, demanded, advised, and did and you will have reasons for sardonic laughter - - - or weeping.
If you in addition want to laugh from the fact that Islam is based only on a book so full of mistakes, contradictions, etc. that no god was involved in it, and a book dictated by a man with doubtful moral and accepting the use of dishonesty, but liking respect, power, and riches for bribes - and women. If you want to laugh also from this, it is up to you. And the same if you want to laugh from facts like that Muslims are unable even to see these facts, because their fathers have told them that "the Quran is the Truth". Or from that Muslims are able to believe that "only we are able to read what the Quran 'really' says".
¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤
*001 2/22d: “- - - and the heavens (plural and wrong – see 2/22c just above*) your canopy - - -”. The heaven/sky is no canopy. The “heaven” we see at daytime, really is an illusion caused by bending and splitting of the sunlight, and the “smooth” heaven we see at night, also is an illusion, caused by that we are unable to see the third dimension at those distances, and get the impression that the stars all are at the same distance from us. Any god had known this, but Mohammad not. Also see 67/3a+b and 67/5a+b+d below. Muslims tend to explain the heavens (plural and wrong) with vague claims about space and stars and galaxies - but each time they then “forget” to explain f.x. how the stars are fastened to the lowermost of the 7 heavens the Quran tells exists. And they forget that the moon (and the sun?) is among the heavens – beyond the stars! They also sometimes tell that the 7 heavens = 7 layers in the atmosphere and the 7 earths 7 layers in the Earth. No comments - but think about stars like Aldebaran - a giant star - fixed to a layer in our atmosphere below our moon. Or "people" living on these earths like the Quran claims, inside the Earth. A joke - or at least two.
002 2/25f: “- - - their (Muslims’*) portion is Gardens, beneath which rivers flow. Every time they are fed with fruits therefrom, they say: ‘Why, this is what we were fed before’, for they are given things in similitude - - -”. The fruits and food in the Muslim heaven are the same as in this life – just plenty and only the best. As said: An Earth-like paradise. Plus plenty of water and women – heavenly for people - men - from a desert. But what about people from other parts of the world with other kinds of climate and other kinds of fruits? - many fruits used by the Arabs would be unknown to them, and the other way around. Also see 2/25d above. An extra tit-bit: Of the 4 rivers in Paradise, 2 continue on Earth according to Hadiths - the Nile and the Euphrates(!!!)
*003 2/29f: “- - - He (Allah*) gave order and perfection to the seven firmaments - - -”. Firmament is another word for the heaven we see, though mostly used for the night sky. The Quran many places tells about the seven heavens or firmaments or tracts (the word “heavens” or similar is used in plural in the Quran at least 199 times) - there is no doubt that according to the Quran there are 7 (material) heavens. (Islam also “knows” who inhabit the different heavens - f.x. Jesus in the 2. heaven, Joseph in 4., Aaron in 5., Moses in 6., and Abraham - and Muhammad - in the 7. heaven, and Allah above the 7. heaven, to mention some. This is not said in the Quran, though).
There also is no doubt that the Quran believes the heavens are material - if not it was not possible to build it or to fix the stars to the lowermost heaven, like the Quran states several places. And also the physical resurrected good Muslims need something physical to walk on and have their estates and thrones on in their heaven. No god had believed this - but Muhammad did, as this was what one believed in the Middle East at the time of Muhammad. The seven heavens are taken from old Greek astronomy and Persian astronomy, which also believed in 7 heavens. Any god, but not Muhammad, would have known it was very wrong. Islam has several “explanations” concerning this very obvious mistake, but we have never seen or heard any Muslim mention even the possibility that Muhammad’s picture about astronomy could be explained by his believing in Greek or Persian astronomy.
Muslims also sometimes explains that 7 in old Arab was a synonym for “many” (and 70 for “very many“), and that the Quran consequently does not mean 7 but many. But honestly “many” is at least as wrong as “7” (and 7 heavens as said was the astronomy of that time).
But no rocket has till now collided with the heavens! Not even the ones which have gone past the moon.
004 2/63a: "- - - We (Allah*) raised above you (the towering height of) Mount (Sinai) - - -." But what the Arab original text really says, is: "- - - We (Allah*) raised the mountain above you - - -" - i. e. it was held over them like a roof or a cloud (in 7/171 they were afraid it could fall down on them). There is nothing like this in the Bible. (The story in reality is from a legend). It tells something that the translated text is modified, and in a way which makes it less unbelievable to educated westerners used to critical thinking - but it is a dishonest translation.
But that Allah held the mountain over the Jews and shook it (like 7/171 adds) belongs in a collection of "sailors' stories", and is a good competitor to f.x. the stories about Baron von Münchausen - super-overstated fun stories. We had a good laugh from it. (This story is repeated in 2/93 and in 7/171 and thus must have been a heavy - in double meaning - argument. A local fairy tale used as a heavy argument in a holy book from a universal and timeless god is in itself quite funny.)
005 2/65-66: “We (Allah*) said to them ’Be ye apes, despised and rejected’. So We made it an example to their own time and to their posterity, and a lesson for those who fear Allah”. That humans are changed into apes is an extraordinary statement. An extraordinary statement needs an extraordinary proof. The Quran here offers no proof at all - like normal.
If you know something about psychology and are not too prone to believe in sorcery, you may have small fun from this story - it is taken from Arab folklore.
006 2/93a: "- - - We (Allah*) raised above you (the Jews*) - - - Mount (Sinai) - - -". Not in the Bible. And as it means Allah lifted the mountain over them - in 7/171 they were afraid it could fall down on them - it also hardly is true (scientifically it is nonsense). Similar is told in 2/63a above and in 7/171 below.
We repeat from 2/63: But that Allah held the mountain over the Jews and shook it (like 7/171 adds) belongs in a collection of "sailors' stories", and is a good competitor to f.x. the stories about Baron von Munchausen - super-overstated fun stories. We had a good laugh from it. (This story also is told in 2/63 and in 7/171 and thus must have been a heavy - in double meaning - argument. A local fairy tale used as a heavy argument in a holy book from a universal and timeless god, is in itself quite funny.)
007 2/193e: "- - - and there prevail justice - - -". Take a look at the Quran's moral code and the sharia laws. Some of it is ok, but some is from bad to worse, and some is downright horrible and has nothing to do with justice or moral. Compare parts of it to "do onto others like you want others shall do onto you", and you have only two options: To weep or to laugh.
008 2/209e: "- - - Allah is - - - Wise". Not if he made the Quran - too much is wrong.
Another fact: If Allah delivered the Quran and all its mistaken facts and other errors, all its internal and external contradictions, all its invalid logic, etc. there is a good reason to laugh - and laugh loudly - from claims like this.
009 2/260g: "- - - Allah is - - - Wise - - -". Not if he made the Quran.
Another fact: If Allah delivered the Quran and all its mistaken facts and other errors, all its internal and external contradictions, all its invalid logic, etc. there is a good reason to laugh - and laugh loudly - from claims like this.
010 3/6d: "(Allah is*) - - - the Wise". Not if he made the Quran.
Another fact: If Allah delivered the Quran and all its mistaken facts and other errors, all its internal and external contradictions, all its invalid logic, etc. there is a good reason to laugh - and laugh loudly - from claims like this.
011 3/18h: "(Allah is*) - - - the Wise". Not if he made the Quran.
012 3/32c: "- - - His (Allah's*) Prophet - - -". No omniscient god can be behind a man telling so much wrong facts and other mistakes - and no good and benevolent god would be behind a teaching demanding such a partly immoral moral code (compare it to the gold standard: "Do onto others what you want others do onto you, and weep - or laugh) and so much hate and blood and apartheid and dishonesty.
##013 3/81e: "I (Allah*) give you (the prophets*) a Book - - -". As mentioned other places the prophets all got a copy of the claimed "Mother of the Book" according to the Quran. The Quran claims that all societies to all times and all places have been sent prophets teaching Islam (but neither science nor Islam has found the tiniest traces of such prophets or teaching) - Hadiths mention 124ooo through the times, and even this may just be a symbolic number. And as you see here they as mentioned each got a book which was a copy of the claimed "mother book" in Heaven, similar to the copy Muhammad claimed he got - the Quran. The claimed "mother book" either is made by the god or have existed since eternity according to Muslims - and is revered by Allah and his angels. You of course are permitted to believe this, but the normal reaction when you meet this claim after having read the Quran and all its mistakes, contradictions, invalid logic, helpless language (helpless in bringing clear messages not to be misunderstood), etc., is disbelief or a hearty laughter - no god would revere a quality like the Quran.
#####As all the claimed books, included the Bible and the Quran, were copies of the same book, all the books should be very similar. One of the very many never proved claims in the Quran - a claim which is proved wrong on at least two points: 1. Out of claimed at least 124ooo copies (according to Hadiths) + likely copies of these, not one single fragment or quote is ever found. This at least - at least - is a very strong circumstantial proof for that the claim is wrong, this even more so as there are found tens of thousands of quotes, copies, and fragments from the Bible from the same period of time. 2. The Bible provably was never falsified. This again proves that the Bible and the Quran never was even similar books.
We may also mention that in the entire two books - Bible and Quran - there only is a short part of a sentence - 6 words - which is identical (the words "the righteous will inherit the land" in Psalm 37/29), + that the Bible has more than 4 times as much text. Quite a thorough "falsification".
And: Homo Sapience - modern man - have been around for something like 195ooo years (and other groups of humans from much earlier - f.x. the Neanderthals and the Denisovans 400ooo years, Homo Habilis 2.4 million, Homo Erectus 1.5 million years), but man learnt how to read and write only a very few thousand years ago. What did claimed prophets or messengers for Allah do with their books before man learnt how to read? Ask what alphabet they were written in for them, when you have stopped laughing.
014 3/161b: “No prophet could (ever) be false to his trust.” There is another and much more serious fact here: Through the times most – not to say (nearly?) all – self-proclaimed prophets whom a god has not backed up, have been false prophets. Most of the false prophets have been (and are) men, and in religion they have found a way to money, esteem, and power – and women - the 4 normal reasons for impostors. Some are mentally special or ill – Muhammad is among those if he had TLE (see the chapter “What is TLE – Temporal Lobe Epilepsy” in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran"). Some really believe they are prophets, others just are cheats – if Muhammad had TLE, he may honestly have believed he had some connection to a god, but it also is very clear from the Quran that he at least sometimes knew he was cheating/lying; some of the arguments he used in the book, any intelligent person knows are lies (f.x. that miracles would not make doubters believe), and Muhammad was an intelligent man. And some of the self proclaimed “prophets” simply were/are cold and calculating – sometimes even psychopathic - - - and when one looks at Muhammad’s cold-blooded treatment of victims and opponents (he f.x. had a lot of them murdered), his total disregard for the life and well-being of everybody who stood between him and power and riches (to use for bribing greedy warriors and chiefs to come to or stay on in his religion and his army), and his clever psychological (every clever salesman knows much about human nature and psychology) manipulation of his uneducated, naïve early followers, it is easy to believe Muhammad belonged to these – may be combined with the effect of the possible TLE or something.
And it is here worth noticing that the other possible explanation for this sentence in the Quran, is that it is a defense against the accusations for making up the whole or parts of the book. Interesting here is that in (A3/123), Swedish 2006 edition both accusations are debated, and it is confirmed that Muhammad really was accused for not dealing fair when sharing the booty (this also is mentioned in other sources), whereas in the slightly more "correct" (or corrected) English 2008 edition this is omitted. One only tells that to accuse Muhammad for making up the Quran is "contrary to reason" - which is an invalid (not to use stronger words) argument when you for one thing know there have been literally thousands of false prophets throughout the history, for another thing know how many mistaken fact and other errors there are in the Quran, and for a third know that many of the mistakes are from wrong science of different kinds one believed in in Arabia at the time of Muhammad, and not to forget Muhammad's point of view about honesty when dishonesty might give a better result - not even his own oaths did he respect in such cases. Also see 3/161a above.
To anyone knowing the reality of all too many self proclaimed "prophets" - and Muhammad had absolutely nothing to show for himself (except perhaps a brain illness) other than his own words and proclamations - the quote above gives an excellent reason for a good laugh.
##015 4/71b: “O ye who believe! Take your precautions, and either go forth (in war*) in parties or go forth all together”. Be strong when you attack. "The religion of peace"? On the contrary - Islam is a typical religion of war. The only reason why this Islamic slogan is not dead long time ago, is that non-Muslims do not know the Quran well enough to laugh from that claim. (But beware that many Muslims also do not know the book well enough or are too indoctrinated, and are unable to see the hypocrisy - or al-Taqiyya (lawful lie) - in the claim. They simply and honestly believe it!) "The religion of peace"? On this and many similar points in the Surahs from Medina you are permitted to laugh.
016 5/15e: “- - - revealing to you (Jews and Christians*) much of that ye used to hide in the Book (the Bible*) - - -“. To believe in the theory that the Bible is falsified, one has to know very little about how to make identical falsifications of tens of thousands of copies of many different manuscripts, where on top of all the different falsifications have to be synchronized in all the different manuscripts, so that the different manuscripts do not tell widely different facts. And not least: All references to and from the different papers must have been synchronized – try to do that even today with 100ooo papers spread over large areas and without using mass communications, or even a post office.
With 13ooo relevant papers or scraps of papers still existing today, there must have been at least 100ooo and many more in the old times, spread all over – papers are destroyed or rot or disappear over the centuries - all identically falsified or falsified so that each corresponded to all the others, because at that time nobody knew which papers would survive until today!!! And then we have not even included the some 32ooo other manuscripts with quotes from the Bible which also have survived till today. All together at least half a million papers had to be falsified - on 3 continents - from 2 religions + sects - in a time nearly without communications. And all had to be falsified in exactly the same ways and no point where falsification was necessary could be forgotten - and EVERY relevant paper had to be found and falsified (if not they could be found in the future). And not least: The falsifications all had to be so cleverly done that it is impossible for modern technology of today to find any traces of it.
It is up to you if you will weep or laugh - the two only normal reactions to a claim like this, if it was not because it was so serious.
Judge for yourself after you also have read all under 2/75, 3/24, 5/13 and 5/14.
But a plot like this could not be used in a novel - nobody would believe in it.
017 5/16a: "- - - to ways of peace and safety - - -". Read the surahs from Medina with all its hate and blood and war, and laugh - or weep.
##018 5/110f: “I (Allah*) taught thee (Jesus*) - - - the Gospel”. Wrong. But do not laugh - it is impolite: The Gospels did not exist until some 25 - 30 years after Jesus died (the oldest Gospel). They simply could not exist until after Jesus' death as a Gospel is the story of Jesus' birth, life, teaching, death and resurrection, and thus could not be told until after all this had happened. See 3/3g-k and 3/48 above.
019 6/18c: "- - - He (Allah*) is the Wise - - -". Not if the Quran with all its wrongs is representative for his knowledge and intelligence. Like it or not, but if Allah made the Quran, this claim is an unintended joke.
A fact: If Allah delivered the Quran and all its mistaken facts and other errors, all its internal and external contradictions, all its invalid logic, etc. there is a good reason to laugh - and laugh loudly - from claims like this.
020 6/73l: "- - - He (Allah*) is the Wise - - -". Not if the Quran represents his wisdom - too much is wrong there.
021 6/153e: "- - - thus doth He (Allah*) command you, that you may be righteous". Is it righteous ("just and good") to steal or rob in the name of Allah? - is it righteous ("just and good") to enslave in the name of Allah? - is it righteous ("just and good") to extort in the name of Allah? - is it righteous ("just and good") to attack peaceful people in the name of Allah? - is it righteous ("just and good") to rape captive or slave women in the name of Allah? - is it righteous ("just and good") to rape captive or slave children in the name of Allah? - is it righteous to punish a raped woman because she cannot produce 4 men - men - who have seen the very act, to prove it was a rape? (one of the most disgusting and unjust laws in this complete world)! - is it righteous ("just and good") to lie, or cheat or break your word or your oath (al-Taqiyya, Kitman, Hilah, deceit, "break your oath if that gives a better result" (Muhammad))? - is it righteous ("just and good") to murder opponents because they do not agree with you? - is it righteous ("just and good") to kill persons because they do not believe in Islam or wants to leave it - a religion based on a book full of wrong facts and other mistakes, contradictions, wrong logic, etc., dictated by a man believing in al-Taqiyya, in Kitman, and in breaking his words and his oats even - is it "lawful and good"? The horrible truth is that many Muslims will answer "yes" to some or all of these questions. These rules of moral and justice - or rather immoral and injustice - have been so strongly imprinted on them since they were babies, that they are unable to see the horror and the places of inhuman injustice in their code of so-called moral - and moral philosophy which could have mended the terrible cultural rules does not exist in Islam - and the as disgusting injustice in some of their laws. They really believe those are the best of rules, and that everybody not living by them are second rate "Untermench" - In parts of Pakistan imams/mullahs have seriously debated if non-Muslims have half the value or less compared to Muslims. No Comments - except "do not laugh - it is impolite". But also see 6/108d above and 23/24b (A23/11) and 26/74c below.
But even if many Muslims honestly believe the Quran's moral code is just and righteous - because they are too used to it to be able to see immoral, injustice and often horror it accepts or even advocates - this claim in the Quran is wrong - sometimes horribly wrong.
022 6/161e: "- - - (Islam is*) a religion of right - - -." No comment except: Study the moral code and the judicial code of the Quran and laugh at this statement, but weep at the reality.
023 7/101e: "Thus doth Allah seal up the hearts of those who reject Faith (Islam*)". One more 100% proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. Read f.x. Luke 15/8-10 and 15/11-31 plus Matt. 18/12-14 and 20/8-13 and get a good laugh - or weep - over the claim that Allah = Yahweh.
024 7/171: “When We (Allah*) shook the Mount (Mt. Sinai*) over them (Moses' Jews*) as if it had been a canopy, and they (the Jews*) thought it was going to fall on them - - -”. This needs strong proof from Islam, especially as it in reality is from a fable taken from the old Jewish book “Abodah Sarah”. The picture is clear: The god lifted the mountain, held it over the Jews like a canopy and shook it. All the same you meet Muslims who "forget" about the canopy and the danger that it could fall on the Jews, and claim this was an earthquake(!). "It is the one not wanting to see, who is most blind" or "The blind man you can explain things, but the man not wanting to see also denies facts" - choose what quote you like.
But that Allah held the mountain over the Jews and shook it, and perhaps could drop it on them, could belong in a collection of sailors' stories, and is a good competitor to f.x. the stories about Baron von Münchausen - super-overstated fun stories. We had a good laugh from it. (This story is told also in 2/63 and in 2/93 and thus must have been a heavy - in double meaning - argument. A local fairy tale used as a heavy argument in a holy book from a universal and timeless god is in itself quite funny.)
025 7/172d: "- - - made them (people*) testify concerning themselves". Another interesting claim: (A7/138 - in English 2008 edition A7/139) tells that "According to the Quran, the ability to perceive the existence of the Supreme Power (= god*) is inborn in human nature (fitrah); and it is this instinctive cognition - which may or may not be subsequently blurred by self-indulgence or adverse environmental influence - that makes every sane human being "bear witness about himself" before Allah". This is nowhere said in the book, but there are many ways to use or disuse indistinct and unclear tests. Also science has never found any trace of such inborn, instinctive knowledge. (They have found that a minor percent of humans have an inborn longing for something strong to lead them - a god - but nothing like an inborn, instinctive knowledge, and only in a minority. Actually man has very few real instincts, and very little inborn knowledge - almost everything has to be learnt.)
But when one meets claims like this from Islam and Muslims, one should remember that they frequently use claimed instinctive knowledge or understanding and similar expressions as arguments for why Islam is the correct religion and for why one should believe in Muhammad and his religion. As they have exactly no proof or documentation for the religion, they have to do two things: Glorify Muhammad so that he sounds as trustworthy as possible, and resort to unclear and not documented claims like "instinctive knowledge" about Allah or at least about divinity. But do remember that Muhammad himself proved what kind of man he was - forget the glorifying, cheap words. and look for his deeds, demands, lies, rules, moral code, etc. - and the second is mysticism and neither religion nor knowledge or facts.
If you have little knowledge about humans and human psychology, just read and reflect on this. If you have good knowledge about it, you get a hearty laugh here.
In reality this only is mysticism - actually bordering dishonesty, as science more or less has proved such an instinctive "ability to perceive the Supreme Power" does not exist. But neither Muhammad nor Islam had/has anything better to offer for a "proof".
026 8/10e: "- - - Allah is - - - Wise." Not if the Quran is the average of his wisdom".
026a 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.
But is this really “The god of Peace" heading "the Religion of Peace”? To call this religion like it emerges from the Quran, for “the Religion of Peace” really is an insult to the word and to the world – and the reason why the world does not laugh at the claim, really is lack of knowledge. (That is to say: If they knew what the Quran demands against non-Muslims, few would laugh.) But also see 8/12d below.
####027 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 brother 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 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. And similar for deceit and betrayal.):
- To save your or others' health or life.
- To get out of a tight spot or a dangerous situation.
- To make peace in a family.
- When it will give a better result than honesty or honoring one’s oath.
- 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.)
- To deceive opponents/enemies.
- To betray enemies.
- To secure one’s money (very clear from Hadiths).
- To defend Islam. (Advised if necessary to succeed.)
- 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 that 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.
Also: Combine this to Islam's slogan: "Islam is the Religion of Truth", and have a good laugh.
028 8/49d: "Allah is - - - wise". Not if he made the Quran.
#029 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.)
Also: Combine this quote with Islam's slogan: "Islam is the Religion of Peace" and weep - or laugh.
030 8/63b: "- - - He (Allah*) is - - - Wise". Not if he made the Quran - too much is wrong.
###031 8/67a: “It is not fitting for a Prophet (Muhammad*) that he should have prisoners of war until he hath thoroughly subdued the land”. One of the moral and ethical real pinnacles in Islam. It takes an effort - and resources - to take care of prisoners. This Muhammad did not like - and voila! - Allah ordered him to kill all prisoners (of course with the exception of the ones one wanted as slaves or wanted to keep for extorting money for from their families - or women and girls for "personal use" for himself or the warriors).
No doubt at all: A morally and ethically superior god and religion, and with lots of empathy - not to forget the perfect and good and kind and good-hearted Muhammad who was free from sins. (Actually there never were philosophers thinking on morality and ethics in Islam like f.x. in the old Greece or later in the West. Muhammad just picked from the contemporary traditions - in some cases he picked good ideas, in other cases he chose rather inhuman ideals, and that was it, as it never later has been permitted to think about whether his rules are good - or the best - or not.)
This quote also tells a lot about the person Muhammad.
Does anybody wonder why Muslim warriors and terrorists sometimes murder prisoners - guilty or not? There also is no doubt that it is the ruthless, harsh and bloody Muslims who are living according to Muhammad's rules and good(?) example.
Also: Combine this quote with Islam's slogan: "Islam is the Religion of Peace" and weep - or laugh.
032 8/67e: "- - - He (Allah*) is - - - Wise". Not if he made the Quran - too much is wrong.
######033 8/69a: “ "But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, #######lawful and good - - -”. This is one more of the moral and ethical pinnacles in the Quran: Wage war, and then it is “lawful and good” to steal and rob and plunder and extort - and rape the women and girl children and take slaves. It actually is connected to 8/68a above, but like so often in the Quran specific episodes, etc, is given general meaning.
During war/raids and after conquests Muslims can steal ANYTHING they like, included raping women and girl children (history also clearly indicates that homosexuality was part of life for a percentage of Muslims) and - at least according to the Quran - take what slaves they want, and non-Muslim victims can say and do nothing about it. Yes, in principle Muslims can do this against non-Muslims any time they want, as long as they see to it that there are no Muslim witnesses - according to the rules non-Muslims cannot witness against Muslims.
But of course this made it easy and cheap for Muhammad and his successors to get warriors. That such behavior is a catastrophe for any and all victims - and in some cases set back the civilization may be some hundred years like in Persia/Iran - does not count, as non-Muslim “Untermench” ("sub-humans" in Nazi German) do not count.
This even more so as for fanatics nearly every situation they do not like, can be defined as war against Islam “in the widest meaning of the word” - not to mention that according to Islam’s definition all areas not dominated by Islam are “land of war”. Really a morally and ethical superior religion - compare f.x. to the silly and invalid "Do unto others like you want others do against you", which many religions and culture have as their "constitution". And really a peaceful one.
And honestly the word “good” in ”lawful and good” classifies Muhammad, the Quran and Islam. Laws can be twisted and remade and it is no problem for an absolute dictator to make what laws he wants and thus make things “lawful(?)” – quotation marks used on purpose. But the word “good” is an absolute – flexible “borders”, but fundamentally an absolute. Allah’s/Muhammad’s real rules for behavior against all outsiders is way outside “good”, and the hypocrisy in the using of abrogated verses in the Quran to make outsiders believe something else, makes this aspect of the religion and its hypocrisy even more disgusting.
This quote also tells a lot about the person Muhammad.
Also: Combine this quote with Islam's slogan: "Islam is the Religion of Peace" and "Allah is good and benevolent" and weep - or laugh.
034 8/69ca: We have met the question: There are certain kinds of men who are the "normal" perpetrators when women - and children - are raped. Self-centered, low on compassion for others for others, and often low quality - from "the rubble". It is the same kind of humans who often are the ones stealing from or robbing others. Now the Quran has favoured this kind of men and behaviour - go to war and suppress and kill, and be paid by stealing and raping - for 1400 years. Can this have influenced the DNA of Arabs and other Muslims? - the ones who rape often and the ones who get more wives and concubines because they are rich (f.x. from stolen valuables), gets more babies. ######Kan this be a little piece of the explanation for the inhuanities we see from Arabs and other Muslims?
035 8/70c: “O Prophet! Say to those who are captives in your hands: ‘If Allah findeth any good in your hearts, He will give you something better than what has been taken from you, and He will forgive you - - -.” It also is a bit ironic that Muhammad had attacked and stolen and raped and murdered and enslaved - - - but it was his victims who needed forgiving. Muhammad the hypocrite. Some religion.
The hypocrite side of Allah is visible not a few times in the Quran. Worth a sardonic laugh.
As for forgiving from Allah: See 2/187d above.
036 9/8a: "With (fair words from) their (pagans*) mouths they entice you, but their hearts are averse from you; most of them are rebellious and wicked". A clear message: Do not trust pagans (one of the pieces necessary for producing an "enemy picture" of "the others".)
BUT DO YOU SEE THE IRONY? THESE WORDS ARE FROM THE ONLY BIG GOD(?) AND THE ONLY BIG RELIGION WHICH ACCEPTS - YES, FOR DEFENDING OR PROMOTING THE RELIGION EVEN ADVICES - THE USE OF DISHONESTY, DECEIT, BETRAYAL, AND EVEN THE BREAKING OF OATHS, AS LEGITIMATE AND OK TOOLS OF WORK! Laugh or weep as you like.
037 9/12f: "- - - for their (non-Muslims*) oaths are nothing to them - - -". Strange words from a man who practiced himself and impressed on his followers that it is better to break an oath if that gave a better result, and who lived by his slogan "war is betrayal" or "war is deceit" + that the use of dishonesty was and is an ok working tool in wide cases for Muhammad and for Islam and its Muslims. (F.x. 2/225a and 5/89a+b above, and 16/91e and 66/2a below, + al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth, Hilah (the lawful pretending/circumventing), etc.)
Also: Combine this to Islam's acceptance of the use of dishonesty as a working tool - included the disuse of oaths (2/225, 3/54 (if Allah can cheat, cheating is ok), 5/89, 16/91, 66/2) - and have a good laugh.
038 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, 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? And not to forget: Combine this quote with Muhammad's, the Quran's, and Islam's acceptance and more of the use of dishonesty as a working tool, and laugh a sardonic laugh - or weep.
039 9/15b: "- - - Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise". Not if all the mistakes, etc. in the Quran represents his claimed wisdom.
040 9/19c: "- - - (the pious service of) those who - - - strive with might and main (= go to raids/war*) in the cause of Allah". The word "pious" here tells much more and a much truer story about Muhammad, the Quran, and Islam and their basic ethics and moral, than cheap slogans like "the religion of peace". When reality collides with words of propaganda, we always believe in the reality. Islam is a pure war religion. (This reality also is easy to see if you read the surahs chronologically and see the development of Islam during the years of Muhammad, and the bloody war religion it became in Medina.)
Also: Combine this quote with Islam's slogan: "Islam is the Religion of Peace" and weep - or laugh.
##041 9/19i: “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 murdering for Allah, are the best Muslims. See 9/19h above.
Combine this quote with Islam's slogan: "Islam is the Religion of Peace" and weep - or laugh.
042 9/28j: "- - - Allah is All-Knowing - - -". Just another example of never proved claims in the Quran - you will find more than we refer. Also see 2/233h above.
043 9/28k: "- - - Allah is - - - All-Wise". Not if the Quran is an example of his knowledge or his wisdom - too much is wrong in that book.
####044 ##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 the reality and belies the glorious words about a "Religion of Peace". Like 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 - or laugh:
- 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) makes the Quran and the religion sound much more friendly and tolerant.
- 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 all the Quran that is in accordance with the teachings of Jesus – one of the very few. And it is totally “murdered” by abrogations.
- 29/46: “And dispute ye not with the People of the Book - - -. “ No comments – but read 9/29 once more.
Also: Combine this quote with Islam's slogan: "Islam is the Religion of Peace" and weep - or laugh like above.
NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!
#########045 9/29c: “Fight those who believe not in Allah - - - until they pay jizya (extra tax - sometimes heavy (and there may be land tax in addition - often 50%)) with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.” A clear and unmistakable order. The softest word possible: Discrimination or apartheid. There are a number of stronger ones. And the jizya frequently was high. Comments on how it is to live under such helpless apartheid conditions is not necessary - the Negros$$ in South Africa or the Southern States in USA in earlier times could tell you - even though they at least did not have to pay an extra tax on top of all.
Also see other chapters (in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran") - f.x. “Muslims are better than other people”, like 25/44 or 68/35+36, and “Age Golden Age of Coexistence".
THE CLAIM THAT ISLAM IS THE RELIGION OF PEACE, IS SERIOUSLY WRONG.
One more fundamental point: There NEVER was anything like this in the Bible - see f.x. Jesus' words: "Give to Caesar (meaning the emperor*) what is Caesar's and to Yahweh what is Yahweh's", and also the Bible's damning words about "serving Mammon (money*)". Allah's and Muhammad's greed for riches is one more of the really strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and Jesus and Muhammad far from in the same religion.
Also: Combine this quote with Islam's slogan: "Islam is the Religion of Peace" and weep - or laugh.
NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!!
BUT THE MAIN POINT MAY BE THAT THIS IS THE MAIN AND CENTRAL POLITICAL MESSAGE AND ORDER TO ALL ISLAM AND ALL MUSLIMS THEN AND FOREVER - A FACT NON-MUSLIMS SHOULD BE AWARE OF AND N E V E R FORGET. THE OFFICIAL GOAL AND ORDER FOR ISLAM IS TO CONQUER EVERYTHING AND SUPPRESS ALL NON-MUSLIMS TO BECOME SLAVES OR SEMI SLAVES UNDER ISLAM, (and pagans even worse off than Jews and Christians.)
This sentence must be seen in connection to 9/33j below.
This is the promised future for non-Muslims under Islam. A religion so full of errors etc. that the book itself proves there is no god behind it. Perhaps the dark forces, but not any god.
NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!! NB!!!
046a 9/29d: “Fight those who believe not in Allah - - - until they pay jizya (extra tax - sometimes heavy) with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.” One of the elements in the sharia laws.
Combine this with Islam's slogan: "Islam is the Religion of Peace" and weep - or laugh.
###047 9/29h: (Islam is) ”the religion of Truth”. It is not 100% - an understatement - the truth as there are far to mistakes, etc. in the Quran. That the Quran is the truth, is just a claim, not a proved fact. The difficult additional question is: With that many mistaken facts - are there also mistakes in the religious claims? And in addition there are the facts of “al-Taqiyya” (the lawful lie) and Kitman (the lawful half-truth) and broken oaths and deceit - how much in a religion using such means is true? Much simply is proved wrong +: With all those errors, etc. it least it is not made by an omniscient god. And like it or not: It also is clear that Muhammad lied at least some places in the Quran - f.x. when he told nobody would believe even if they witnessed miracles - - - after he had told about the sorcerers of the pharaoh, who all fast became strongly believing Muslims because of small miracles made by Moses.
####One may wonder why one so seldom meets the slogan "Islam is the Religion of Honesty" from Islam and from Muslims. But it is as well, because it would not be possible to claim both that Islam is the religion of truth and that Islam is the religion of honesty, without being dishonest. Yes, it is not even possible to claim that Islam is the religion of honesty without being dishonest - remember, al-Taqiyya, Kitman, Hilah, the accepted use of deceit and betrayal, and not least the accepted disuse of even oaths.
####One also may wonder how it is possible for Muslims to believe that a man who introduced and practiced such rules for the use of dishonesty, never deceived them a little to gain and keep power. F.x. by claiming that the religion nobody had heard about before, but which was his platform of power, was the original and eternal religion, and "the religion of Truth".
Also: Combine this to Muhammad's, the Quran's, and Islam's rules for the use of dishonesty - al-Taqiyya, Kitman, Hilah, deceit, disuse of words/promises/oaths - and have a hearty laugh.
###048 NB: 9/38d: In connection to verse 9/38 we quote from comment YA1299: "When a call (for war*) is made on behalf of a great cause (Islam*), the fortunate ones are those who have the privilege of responding to the call. The unfortunate ones are those who are so engrossed in their parochial affairs that they turn a deaf ear to the appeal. They are suffering from a spiritual disease". These comments are from our times, so you see that even now Muslim scholars mean that if you do not want to go to war whenever the religion calls, you are mentally ill. Further comments necessary?
And YA1300: "The choice is between two courses: will you choose a noble adventure (war*) and the glorious privilege of following your spiritual leader (to war), or grovel in the earth for some small worldly gain or for fear of worldly loss (f.x. your life or health*)?" "The Religion of Peace" anno nowadays - this claim is as wrong today as it always was.
Islam "the Religion of Peace" even today? Do not laugh - it is impolite.
###049 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 moral and ethics.
THIS IS THE ORDER ALSO TODAY - JUST LISTEN TO SOME IMAMS, ETC. - see 9/38d.
THIS VERSE TELLS HORRIBLY MUCH ABOUT ISLAM AS IT IS TAUGHT IN THE QURAN.
VERSES LIKE THIS - THERE ARE MANY - AND QUOTES LIKE IN 9/38d TELL CHILLING FACTS ABOUT HOW ISLAM IS TAUGHT IN MADRASAS (RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS), MOSQUES, AND ISLAMIC MEDIA ALSO TODAY. WHEN THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NICE WORDS AND CLAIMS (F.X. "ISLAM IS THE RELIGION OF PEACE") AND REALITY GIVEN IN TEACHING, IDEOLOGY, DEMANDS, AND ORDERS, WE ALWAYS BELIEVE IN THE REALITY.
One of the really strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - not to mention that Jesus and Muhammad were not in the same religion.
Islam "the Religion of Peace"? Do not laugh - it is impolite.
050 9/40i: "- - - Allah is - - - Wise". Not if the Quran represents his wisdom.
051 9/41a: “Go ye forth (whether equipped) lightly or heavily, and strive and struggle (= fight*), with your goods and your person (money and life*), in the Cause of Allah. That is best for you, if you but knew”. Any comment necessary? The benevolent "Religion of Peace"?
Islam "the Religion of Peace"? Do not laugh - it is impolite.
052 9/44e: “And Allah knoweth well those (the Muslims going to war for Allah/Muhammad*) who do their duty”. It is not possible to deny - like most Muslims and many politically correct others 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"? - do not laugh, it is impolite.
053 9/52a: “Can you see for us (Muslims*) (any fate) other than the two glorious things – (martyrdom or victory)?” Definitely yes: We can see the war cripple. We can see the families destroyed because the husband/father is dead – or a cripple. We can on the other hand see men building their country instead of destroying neighboring countries - or at least leaving their neighbors in peace, so that the neighbors can build their countries. And we are able to see the price of war: Brutalized humans and destruction – a war never builds anything, it destroys. And we also can see the second possibility the Quran never mentions, except as minor set-backs: Defeat. It may give some of the victors a chance to steal and suppress and become rich – but for a terrible price for others. But this price the Quran never mentions and never cares about - it is as said paid by others, by non-Muslims, and thus completely non-interesting.
###Islam seems to represent such a backward culture, that its believing members were and to a large degree are unable to see - or care for - what catastrophes and destroyed lives they inflict on others, as long as they themselves become rich and perhaps powerful. No price is too high for a good life and riches - - - as long as others have to pay for it.
Well, to inflict the religion on others also counts and counted for some of them. A religion built on a book so full of mistakes, contradictions and other errors, that it is not from any god.
Islam "the Religion of Peace"? Do not laugh - it is impolite.
####054 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? Not even nonsense.
Islam "the Religion of Peace"? Do not laugh - it is impolite.
055 9/71k: "- - - Allah is - - - Wise". See 9/60c above.
056 9/82a: "Let them (the ones not wanting war*) laugh a little: Much will they weep - - -". See 3/77b above.
057 9/97h: "- - - Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise". Two examples of the many never proved claims in the Quran. Read using your brain and your knowledge, not only your eyes, and you will find a lot of them. And actually: He is not if he made the Quran.
If Allah made the Quran and all its errors, etc., you may laugh heartily from claims like this.
058 9/106b: "- - - Allah is All-Knowing, Wise". Not if he made the Quran - too much is wrong. Also see 2/233h.
059 9/110b: "And Allah is All-Knowing, Wise". See 2/233e and 9/60 above.
060 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"?? - it is up to you if you will laugh or weep from that slogan. May be there are reasons why they seldom claim Islam is "the Religion of Honesty"?
#061 10/1c: “- - - the Book (the Quran*) of Wisdom.” With that many mistaken facts, it is not a book of wisdom - and when there are many mistakes you see, how many others are there? - it is difficult to trust the rest of the text, too.
Take a look at all the errors, contradictions, cases of invalid logic, etc. from the Quran listed in www.1000mistakes.com, Book A, and you get a good laugh from the quoted claim.
##062 10/6e: “- - - heavens - - -”. This and word is used in plural something like 200 times in the Quran. (The words “heavens”, “seven heavens“,” firmaments”, “seven tracts“, and “seven firmaments” are used altogether at least 199 times in plural - there is no doubt that the Quran believes in 7 heavens). The plural of the word refers to what was correct astronomy in the Middle East at the time of Muhammad: That the stars, the planets, the sun and the moon were fixed to 7 invisible, but strong heavens formed like hemispheres (actually the Greeks knew the Earth was a sphere, so then the heavens there had to be spheres) over the Earth. The Arabs and many others got this picture of the "universe (see 51/47c)" from Greek and from Persian astronomy. Muslims today of course know it is wrong, and are “explaining” the 7 heavens away in different ways - from vague thoughts about space, to telling that it means something else as - they say - in old Arabia the number 7 also could mean “many” (as if that is more correct in this case than 7), and to referring to 7 layers in the atmosphere (without explaining how the stars in that case were fixed to the lowermost of the heavens, or explaining how resurrected material humans can walk around up there, which the Quran tells), etc. Strangely till now none of our group have met a single Muslim mentioning that 7 heavens were the correct local astronomy at the time of Muhammad - may be they prefer not to mention that, because the logical next question then is: A god knew there were no 7 heavens, Muhammad believed there were. Then who made the Quran?
You will find this reference to the 7 non-existing heavens at least in these verses: 2/22 – 29 - 107 - 144 – 164 – 255 - 2 – 284 – 3/5 – 29 – 83 – 3/109 - 128 – 132 – 180 – 189 – 190 – 191 – 4/126 – 131 x 2 – 132 – 170 – 171 – 5/17 – 40 – 97 – 120 – 6/1 – 3 – 12 – 14 – 73 – 75 – 79 – 101 – 7/54 – 158 – 185 – 187 – 9/36 – 116 – 10/3 – 6 – 18 – 55 – 66 – 68 – 10/1 – 3 – 11/7 - 107 – 108 – 123 – 12/101 – 105 – 13/2 – 15 - 16 – 18 – 14/2 – 10 – 19 – 24 – 32 – 48 – 15/16 – 85 – 16/3 – 49 – 52 – 73 - 77 – 17/95 – 99 – 102 – 18/14 – 26 – 51 – 19/65 – 93 – 20/4 – 6 – 21/4 – 16 – 19 – 22 – 30 – 32 – 104 – 22/18 – 56 – 64 – 23/71 – 24/6 – 35 – 41 – 42 – 25/2 – 6 – 59 – 26/24 – 27/25 – 60 – 65 – 87 – 29/44 – 52 - 61 - 30/8 – 18 – 22 – 27 – 66 – 31/10 -16 – 20 – 25 – 32/4 – 5 – 33/72 – 34/1 – 3 – 22 – 24 – 35/1 – 38 – 40 - 41 – 44 – 36/81 – 37/5 – 38/10 – 39/5 – 38 – 46 – 63 – 67 – 68 – 40/37 – 57 – 42/4 – 5 – 11 – 12 - 42 – 49 – 53 – 43/9 – 82 – 85 – 44/7 – 38 – 45/3 – 13 – 22 – 27 – 36 – 37 – 46/3 – 4 – 33 – 49/16 – 50/38 – 52/36 – 53/26 – 31 – 55/29 – 33 – 57/1 – 2 – 4 – 5 - 10 – 58/7 – 59/1 – 24 – 61/1 – 62/1 – 63/7- 64/1 – 3 - 4 – 78/19 – 37 – 85/9.
As for the 7 heavens: Any astronomer and any astronaut or cosmonaut laughs from this claim.
#063 10/9b: “Those who believe, and work righteousness (included fighting in wars, stealing, raping, and killing*) – their Lord (Allah*) will guide them because of their Faith: beneath them will flow rivers in Gardens of bliss.” The paradise of a primitive warrior from the hot desert - most boring in the long run to say the least of it. Has an omniscient, omnipotent god nothing better to offer? A curiosum: According to Hadiths 2 of "our" rivers - the Nile and the Euphrates - start in Heaven/Paradise. Funny?
##064 10/37a: “This Quran is not such as can be produced by other than Allah - - -”. Very wrong. Many a good writer can write stories as good as, and better than the collection of surahs in the Quran. In spite of what Islam says, the Quran is not good literature. The same stories are repeated again and again. They frequently are not well told. There are no new stories or ideas – only stories and ideas borrowed from others. Honestly large parts of the book are rather dull reading. And the fabled high quality Muhammad’s Arab language? - what Muslims seldom mention, is that it took some 250 years to perfect the language - it was not until around 900 AD that it had got something like today’s language. It also existed in much more than one text. For one thing even Muhammad (according to Hadith) said it was sent down in 7 varieties which all were true ones - even if details were different. For another thing some of the old, original texts existed in the Muslim world for a long time after the “official” one was finished around 650 AD ( at some time there were at least 14 canonized + 6 good ones and 4 accepted ones = 24 varieties accepted by Islam – 2 are used today, Asim after Hafs and Nafi after Warsh, and 4 more a little used, but most uneducated Muslims do not even know this). For still another thing the texts may have been slightly changed through the time - at least very old Qurans found in Yemen in 1972, had “small, but significant differences” from the modern edition. The dominating Quran today (Hafs), is the edition that was the official one in Egypt when Egypt first printed in 1924, according to what we have read. The version after Warsh is used in parts of Africa . Also see Preface in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" (list of the earlier 14 canonized ones).
####A challenge to all real knowers of good literature: Please read the Quran with this claim in your mind. Are you able to do so with an open mind without laughing? (No serious knower of quality literature will call the Quran good literature. In addition to all the other points not good in the Quran, good literature demands that the facts given shall be correct, no contradictions, correct logic, etc., etc.)
The claim in this verse Muhammad could tell his uneducated and to a large degree an-alphabetic followers. People versed in quality literature today just will smile hearing such a claim if they know the Quran - it is not high quality even if you do not mind all which is wrong in the book. The one exception may be the Arab language in the book, as this like mentioned was polished by top scholars for some 250 years.
But in that connection we would like to quote an old American film critic some decades ago. He was shown a high quality film favoring narcotics. The question was if he did not think the film work was good?
"Well", he answered, "I always have meant that a work which was not worth doing, also was not worth doing good".
##065 10/37b: From comment A10/60: "- - - the wisdom inherent in the Quran precludes any possibility of its having been composed by a human being - - -". ####This is an example of the kind of arguments Muslims sometimes resort to in lack of real facts and proofs. A normal word for such "arguments" is "bluff". On the background of all the mistaken facts and other errors in the Quran, there are some other words one could use to characterize this sentence and its claim, but in a serious work you do not use that kind of words.
####A challenge to all well educated persons and scientists used to think things over themselves: Please read the Quran with this claim in your mind. Are you able to do so with an open mind without laughing?
"The fact that a claim is told or even repeated, does not necessarily mean it is true".
"Repeat a lie frequently enough, and people starts believing it". (Joseph Goebbels).
#####But the damning point: If perfection proves a divine origin, what then so hundreds and more of mistakes, contradictions, invalid logic, helpless language (except the prose), helpless style, etc. prove?
##066 10/39c: “- - - (the Quran*) whose knowledge they cannot compass, - - -”. For the uneducated, often an-alphabetic members of Muhammad’s early followers, that might be true, except for the question: Who has most knowledge – the one without knowledge, or the one with much wrong knowledge?. But the claim is in no case true today - and we see that a lot of the “facts” Muhammad used, are wrong - something any god had known and not used it. A god also had made none of all the other errors in the book.
###The fact is that today there are very good reasons to laugh from this quote. "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" has listed to the tune of 3ooo - three thousand - mistakes, etc. in that book, included 17oo+ points with wrong facts. It would take some planning to include more wrong knowledge even if one wanted to.
Some proof! And a good reason for a laugh from neutral but well educated persons.
*067 10/82a: “And Allah by His Words (the Quran*) prove and establish His Truth, - - -”. Wrong. The words of the Quran proves nothing about Allah, until it first is proved that it really was made by Allah, and that Allah really has made and done what the Quran says. It is at best partly the truth only - too many mistakes, contradictions, etc. For similar claims see 2/22 – 3/70 – 5/48 – 6/57 – 7/181 – 8/6 – 10/33 – 10/82 – 11/20 – 13/17 – 23/70 – 34/53 – 47/3 – 54/55.
It is not even proved that Allah said what Muhammad claimed he said. Nor is it proved that any of the many versions of the Quran repeats Muhammad's exact words - and in case which version, if any.
Compare this "proof" for Allah's and the Quran’s truth and reliability, with all the errors and worse - included even a few(?) lies - listed in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" and have a good laugh.
068 11/17f: "- - - the Book of Moses before it (before the Quran*) - - -". Comment YA1512: "- - - the Holy Quran which is compared to the original Revelation given to Moses - - -". The Quran and Islam claims that all prophets of the old got a book similar to the Quran (not necessarily identical in all details, but similar - and the difference cannot have been big, as they and the Quran all were copies of the "Mother Book" mentioned in 13/39, 43/4 and 85/21-21, and revered by the god in his Heaven). There are not many knowledgeable non-Muslims who would get the idea that Moses got something similar to the Quran. Islam needs strong proofs here. The same goes for all the other Jewish prophets, included Jesus. We have not heard about one non-Muslim who knows both those books, who believe in such a claim. (Most of them do not even laugh when this is mentioned - it is too far out even for laughing.)
069 11/64a: “This she-camel of Allah - - -“. This refers to an old Arab legend Muhammad used in the Quran: A camel came out from a solid cliff and became a prophet. Worth a laugh - believe it if you want. There is nothing similar in the Bible.
###070 12/1b: (A12/2) “These are the Symbols (or Verses (already 2 meanings in the text*)) of the Perspicuous (Arab: “mubin”) Book.” But the word “mubin” may refer either to the noun’s quality (then “mubin” literally means something which is clear, obvious, manifest, etc.) or to its function (then “mubin” literally means something that is making something clear or obvious or -“. Most Islamic scholars mean it refers to Joseph’s ability to give interpretations of dreams. “The book makes the story it tells clear”. There is no small distinction between those two meanings. Muslims will tell you both meanings are included. But the language is unclear here like many places in the Quran.
Pure Arab also is the language spoken in Heaven, according to some Islamic literature. This without consideration for that the Arab of Muhammad was a language mainly for primitive nomadic tribes - Heaven hardly was that primitive. When the language change, f.x. the meaning of words change or new words are added, do Arab get messages from Heaven about this? Or does Heaven follow language changes in Arabia? (Some Muslim sects - notably the Ammaddiyya - even have “proved” Arab also is the original language on Earth, believe it or not.)
As we have said before: Do not laugh - it is impolite.
###PS: All the words modern Arab has got from the West the last century - f.x. technical words - are they sent via Heaven, or do Heaven receive them from Arabia?
071 12/2b: “We (Allah*) has sent it down as an Arabic Quran - - -.” It is not pure and perfect Arab like it often is claimed - nothing like if a god had made it, and not to mention like if it is the language of Heaven; in that case there should have been no grammatical mistakes and no words imported from Arabia's neighbors on Earth (not to mention the situation today) - there are lots of grammatical errors and imported words, according to language experts. Besides: Did Heaven have a grammar before the Arabs finally made one in the years between 650 and 900 AD? (Irony aside and to be fair: Just this claim that Arab is the language used in Heaven, hardly is a mainstream claim.)
But we are unable to see the glorious thing with using Arab for his holy book, if Allah intended to reach the entire world - f.x. Latin or Greek or Persian had reached far more people. But the really big drawback is that around 650 AD Arab only had a rudimentary alphabet, consisting mainly of the consonants - the rest had to be guessed by the reader. Which even today means there are some hundred places in the book where one does not know the meaning for sure. When a Muslim next time use the standard claim that the Quran of today is "exactly Muhammad's words to the last comma", do not laugh - it is impolite. (The comma did not even exist in Arab at that time).
072 12/6d: "For thy (Muhammad's? people's?*) Lord (Allah*) is full of knowledge and wisdom". Perhaps wisdom, but little knowledge if the Quran is representative. Compare this quote to all errors, etc, from the Quran in "www.1000mistakes.com" and you will laugh a little - or more.
##073 13/3g: "- - - and fruits of every kind He (Allah*) made in pairs. Two and two". This one we originally were reluctant to comment on - the mistake was so obvious, that we had to have overlooked something. We had not. Muslims try to explain away this big mistake, by guessing (!) that Muhammad must have meant that the plants and trees came in two sexes - which only partly is right as most do not - in most cases you find male and female parts on the same plant/tree and there are no "pairs, two and two". Besides Muhammad is not speaking about plants or trees, but about the fruits. On top of this the Quran itself states that its words are to be understood literally, and only the bad people look for hidden meanings in the book. (See f.x. 3/7 or 11/1b above.) But there literally are not pairs among most trees - most have both the male and the female parts and thus there is only one kind of each type of tree.
This claim had made a good laugh for any god - he had known better. Who made the Quran?
074 13/15c: “- - - so (prostrate themselves for Allah*) do their (the living beings’*) shadows in the mornings and evenings”. Animism - normally to be found in primitive religions and in fairy tales. Who has seen all kinds of animals, included worms and slugs and mosquitoes and horses and elephants turn towards Mecca and prostrate themselves 5 times a day? - or even once a day? And shadows are just lack of sunlight – and they for natural reasons are long and flat in the mornings and the evenings. Islam will have to prove that this result of the Earth’s spin in the sunshine makes the lack of sunlight some places have enough brain to consciously decide to prostrate “themselves” for a god (if it is not a willed act, it has no religious meaning). If no proofs are produced, this clearly is a fairy tale on an intellectual level fit for small children. Also see 16/48b+c below.
Worth a laugh or is the claim too far out even for that?
075 13/36d: “Those to whom We (Allah*) have given the Book rejoice at what hath been revealed unto thee (Muhammad*) - - -". Clearly wrong if he was talking about the Jews and the few Christians in the area. That Muhammad did murder and enslave or chase away most of the many Jews in the area, tells another and more sinister story than glossy claims.
If Muhammad's later treatment of them had not been so inhuman and horrible (suppression, extortion, robbing, enslaving, raping, murder and mass murder), this claim had merited a sardonic laughter.
076 15/17a: “- - - We (Allah*) have guarded them (the Zodiacal Signs*) from every evil spirit accursed: - - -” According to the Quran, the stars – included the Zodiacal signs – are fastened to the lowermost of 7 heavens (material ones – they have to be if the stars can be fastened to one of them). But jinns/bad spirits wanted to spy on the heavens, and had to be chased away by stars used as shooting stars. And then the Zodiacal signs were guarded at the same time. According to science this is utter nonsense to at least the fifth power. Laughable. Any god had known – even baby ones – but Muhammad not. Then who made the Quran with all its mistaken facts, etc.?
###077 15/17b: “- - - We (Allah*) have guarded them (the Zodiacal Signs*) from every evil spirit accursed: - - -”. When you know a little about astronomy, this is such a nice claim that we like to look at it. Incredible that anyone with a measurable IQ is able to believe such a text.
##078 15/18b: “But any (jinn/bad spirit*) that gains a hearing by stealth (by spying on the heavens*), is pursued by a flaming fire, bright (to see).” According to the Quran, the stars are fastened to the lowest of 7 material heavens (see 15/17a above and 37/6-7 and 41/12 below). The stars are lights and decoration, but are also used for shooting stars for weapons to chase away jinns and bad spirits. (YA comment 1954: "A shooting star appears to be meant".) Muhammad did not know that the mass of a star is somewhere in the range of 1 shooting star x 10 to the 20. or more power and utterly impossible to use as a shooting star in our atmosphere – for the reason of its glaring light, for the reason of heat, for the reason of irradiation, for the reason of gravity, for the reason of sheer size, etc. As said in 15/17a above: Scientific nonsense and insanity to at least the 5. power. No god uttered this fairy tale stuff – but Muhammad did not know any better. Then who made the Quran?
*079 16/15b: “And He (Allah*) has set upon the earth mountains standing firm, lest it should shake with you; - - -”. What the Quran here really means, is that the flat Earth can start wobbling and even perhaps tip over and drop you off, if the mountains do not keep the flat Earth stable. Modern Muslims normally claim the book talks about earthquakes - but mountains do not stabilize earthquakes, too - on the contrary sometimes - so also this "explanation" is wrong. You may also meet the claim that the Quran means the 10 - 60 km thick crust of the Earth can start wobbling on the liquid magma underneath, if mountains do not stabilize it (do not laugh - it is impolite).
080 16/30e: "(The Quran contains*) All that is good". Please read the Quran, and especially the some 22 - 24 surahs from Medina, and weep - or laugh.
081 16/65a: “And Allah sends down rain from the skies - - -". The Quran even one place tells that Allah breaks the clouds to pieces (to make the raindrops - the exact opposite process of what really happens). But is it Allah or some other god - or nature - that sends it down? See 11/7a above. The Quran's claim here is wrong unless Islam proves the opposite - laughably wrong.
082 17/40a: "Has then your Lord (O Pagans!) preferred for you sons, and taken for Himself (al-Lah/Allah*) daughters - - -?" The angels and the central goddesses al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat, were reckoned to be the daughters of al-Lah/Allah (by Muhammad only named Allah) in the old Arabia. In a strictly masculine society Muhammad obviously thought it was a heavy and killing argument that as all men wanted sons and not daughters, it was unthinkable that a god should want daughters! Any god had known that in many cultures the religion you would meet "mother" goddesses and there this argument was laughable or at least invalid, and used universal arguments instead - at least if he wanted the religion to be universal.
#083 18/13a: “We (Allah*) relate to thee (Muhammad/Muslims*) their (the 7 sleepers) story in truth: - - -”. No omniscient god related a story like this claiming it to be true, neither to Muhammad, nor to anybody else.
##Actually this is quite a joke: A well known and made up fairy tale is the truth and a proof for Allah and his power!
084 (A18/84 – in 2008 edition A18/85): “Until, when he (Dhu'l Quarnayn/Alexander the Great*) reached the setting of the sun , he found it set in a spring of murky water". The sun simply does not set on Earth - neither in water or on land. And the sun sets in no "spring of murky water" in any of those two places.
085 18/86b: (A84 – in 2008 edition A85): “Until, when he (Dhu'l Quarnayn/Alexander the Great*) reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a spring of murky water”. In this case A. Yusuf Ali – like mostly – has a correct translation. The Arab word “ayn” normally means a spring. Muslims has a tendency to claim that “many philologists” also tell it can mean “abundance of water”, “a large body of water” or similar. This even though if he had seen even a murky Pacific Ocean, it only had been a tea-spoon compared to the real size of the sun - far, far too small. Not to mention that the real sun is far, far too hot close up. Then they - “forgetting” the word “murky” (there existed no murky ocean and hardly any murky really big lake in the area) - happily go on to explain that he must have seen the reflecting of the sun in the sea or ocean, a sight Alexander had seen hundreds of times before and never had mistaken for what he was looking for according to the Quran. When religious people have to choose between truth, reality and religious “Truth”, both truth and reality can walk west singing a song. Here the text is clear – but Muslims make up other meanings to flee from an obvious mistake in the Quran. It is not the only place in the book.
##086 18/86d: “- - - when he (Alexander) reached the setting of the sun - - -”. Anyone who knows two millimeters about geography and astronomy knows this is wrong and ridiculous to the extreme: The sun does not set on Earth – and absolutely not in a pond of dirty water. Also see 18/86a and 18/86c just above and just below.
###087 18/86e: “- - - he (Alexander the Great*) found it (the sun*) set in a spring of murky water”. This statement - or fairy tale - deserves a series of exclamation marks - anyone who has finished primary school, knows among other these facts:
- The sun is too big to settle anywhere on Earth.
- Not to mention that it is far too big to settle in a pond - murky or not.
- And that if the sun ever came within a million kilometers or miles from the Earth, there would be no spring or pond any more.
Muhammad did not know the size or temperature of the sun – (he even seems to believe it was a flat disk that could be folded up) - but an omniscient god had known. Who made the Quran?
Muslims try to “explain” it by f.x. telling that what he saw was the reflex of a sunset in a spring. Think of the great warrior king Alexander - riding west and west and west with his men, day after day and week after week to find the place where the sun set. Then one day he hits upon one more pond - even one with dirty water. When he stands so that that dirty spring is in the straight line between him and the sun, he sees the red and yellow mirror image of the sunset in the muddy surface - a sight he has seen time and again and again before on the surfaces of ponds and springs and rivers and lakes and seas - and he hails his men: “Now we have reached our goal!! Here is where the sun sets!! Now let’s go back and tell about our great discovery“.
Believe it whoever wants.
But whoever believes it needs to see a professor of history - or a psychologist to mend his brain. (Also see 18/86a and 18/86b above.)
Besides: We know from history that Alexander never went west. The farthest west he ever came, was Macedonia in the north and Egypt in the south.
Some Muslims also tries to explain that Dhu'l-Quarnayn was not Alexander the Great. For this see 18/83 in the "complete" list of mistakes. (Our "Book A")
088 18/88a: "But whoever believes (= is a good Muslim - only Muslims believe according to the Quran*) - - - he shall have a goodly reward - - -". Here the polytheist war king Alexander the Great is claimed to be a good Muslim who wants to reward other good Muslims nearly 1000 years before the first known Muslim, Muhammad. Believe it if you want. Anyone who knows history may have a good laugh.
p>089 18/89a: "Then followed he (Alexander the Great*) (another) way". Alexander came quite far east - as everyone who has seen the great film about him knows. But he never came to the place where the sun rises - see 18/90 just below. Anyone who knows history or geography or astronomy may have a good laugh.
090 18/90b: “- - - he (Alexander*) came to the rising of the sun - - -”. A historical and a geographical, not to mention an astronomical anomaly and impossibility.
091 18/98c: “This is a mercy from my Lord (Allah*)”. Wrong. Alexander the Great was no Muslim, but a polytheist. Contradicting historical facts - the claim represents a good laugh for people knowing history. There are a bit too many such cases, too, in the Quran.
092 19/4c: "(Zakariyya prayed*): O my Lord (here indicated Allah*)!" Zakariyya was a Jewish priest, and not only a priest, but a priest in the Temple in Jerusalem, in a period when religion was very strong in Israel. We also are at a time from which we have written documents (f.x. Josephus Flavius just few a years later), so the strength of the Jewish religious society is no guesswork - it is written facts. Not one single Jewish priest would ever get the idea of praying to the Arab pagan god al-Lah/Allah (whom Muhammad later renamed to only Allah). And if he did, he hardly would survive many days. And as we now have entered times with written history, there also is not the slightest doubt that the Jewish god was Yahweh, not Allah. And we know for sure that the Jewish religion, its ceremonies, and its basic thoughts at this time were in accordance with OT, and very far from what Muslim later outlined in the Quran.
A Jewish priest in the very Temple of Jerusalem praying to the pagan god of a neighboring country!!? Anyone knowing history will have a good laugh here.
093 19/11c: "- - - he (Zachariah*) told them (the people around*) by signs to celebrate Allah's praises - - -". Both the Quran and the Bible tell Zachariah was a Jewish priest, and the Bible in addition tells that he got his message in the Temple (Luke 1/9-11), and you can be both 100% and 1000% sure of that a Jewish priest performing a sermon in the Temple in Jerusalem in the year 1 or 2 BC (or actually ca. 6 - 7 BC as the international chronology is some 4-6 years wrong, and this message happened ca. 15 months before Jesus was born) did not ask ANYONE praise the pagan god al-Lah from a neighboring country - he on top of the impossibilities had been killed immediately. Jewish priest in the very Temple of Jerusalem praying to the pagan god of a neighboring country!!? Anyone knowing history will have a good laugh here.
Muslims will try to explain the name with that Allah just is the Arab name for Yahweh/God, but that clearly is not true, as the teachings are too different - especially between NT including its New Covenant and the Quran - and remember: If Muslims try to explain away the differences with their never documented claims about falsifications in the Bible, science has long since proved this untrue, and Islam has proved it even stronger by being unable to find any falsified relevant old scripture at all (if Muslims still insists, they will have to produce proofs, not just loose claims, which is all they have produced until this day).
####094 ¨ 19/28a: “(Mary*) O sister of Aaron!” This is another contradiction to the Bible + at the same time the most famous mistake in the Quran. The likely reason is that in Arab the names Mary (the mother of Jesus) and Miriam (the sister of Moses and Aaron) both are written Maryam. Muhammad was not well versed in the Bible, and thought it was the same woman, even though some 1200 years separated them. The Hadith tells that Muhammad was told by his followers that he was wrong, and tried to explain away the mistake, but without real success. Muslims today tend to “explain” the blunder by saying it was an age-old way of paying respect to a woman to connect her to a person of high standard - and similar “explanations” - but the “explanations” generally are not accepted by science, even not by all Muslim scientists - this may be partly because Muhammad also has made the father of Moses, Imran, the father of Mary another place in the Quran. (This last fact is by some Muslims “explained” with that they are two different Imrans. But also this is not accepted by the science, as it is clear that it in both cases it is the same man it is talked about - the founder of “Imran’s house” or Imran’s tribe. It also would be much of a coincidence that for one thing Mary just was an honorable descendant of Moses' parents, and that the name of her father should happen to be Imran. Well, unlikely explanations sometimes happen to be correct, but there are too many unlikely "explanations" in the Quran). Some Muslims say it is an allegory, but it clearly is not told like an allegory – to call stories that turns out to be wrong, allegories also is a standard Muslim way of explaining away difficult points when other “explanations” fail. And remember: Both the Quran and Islam strains that the Quran is to be understood literally if nothing else is said. Allegories, etc., also have points very easy to see, or are explained (which is not the case here) if Muhammad intended to make a point of something. A clear mistake according to science. This is even more clear as Hadith tells Mohammad himself was unaware he had made a mistake, and is told to try unsuccessfully to explain it away when he was corrected by his nearest co-workers
Also see 19/28 in “Mistaken facts in the Quran” in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran". Contradicting historical(?) facts – it is not even denied by Islam that there was a long time between Moses and Jesus (and thus between Miriam and Mary).
##095 19/30-33a: The newly born baby Jesus is continuing talking and discussing in his cradle. Also this is “borrowed” from apocryphal (made up) Child Gospels - in this case as far as we know via “The Arab Child Gospel” - called “The first Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus Christ” – an apocryphal scripture from 2. century. There is not a single chance that a wonder like this had been omitted from the Bible, as it would have strengthened Jesus’ position quite a lot. This even more so as there are not many tales about Jesus as a child, and this story would have made that part of his life less blank. Once more a fairy tale used like a true story by Allah or Muhammad. Even a book like “The Message of the Quran” is not able to defend this as a true story, but it only offers speculations and presumptions to explain away the impossibility.
####"The Message of the Quran" (A19/24 – in 2008 edition A19/23): As baby Jesus impossibly could be a prophet, there has to be other explanations, according to the Muslim scholars. Like said: ONE MORE PLACE WHERE MUSLIM SCHOLARS AGREE THAT SOMETHING MUST BE WRONG IN THE QURAN.
A very clearly not true story - a clear mistake. These parts of the story about the birth of Jesus are so far out/silly, that they are not even really worth a laugh.
We have never met a Muslim explaining why the Quran often took its stories from well known, but made up legends and fairy tales, and then explained the differences from the Bible by insisting that the Bible is faked. And the use of old stories clearly is the reason why the old Arabs chided Muhammad for "just telling old tales" - and they were right, as he simply copied old stories.
Not much is said about the childhood of Jesus neither in the Bible nor in the Quran. In the Bible his childhood mostly seems to have been a normal childhood with a few exceptions, but in the Quran he was very early prepared for being or becoming a prophet by studying the Gospel (which did not exist at that time - and could not exist).
*096 21/31c: “And We (Allah*) have set on the earth mountains standing firm, lest it should shake with them - - -”. Experts on Islam and the Quran say this refers to that the disk which is the Earth (in the Quran the Earth is flat, but perhaps a round disk) might shake and become unstable, and because of this may slip away or tip around and drop everything - included humanity - off the Earth.
We refer to some Muslim scholars: Jalalan, (p. 437), Baydawi (p. 686), Tabari (p.589), and Zamakhshari (part 4, p. 381): They all tell that “if it was not for these unshakable (!!*) mountains, the earth would slip away.”(!!!*)
###*And Jalalan, Baydawi, and Zamakhshari all say that “- - - He (Allah*) placed unshakable mountains (not more so than that they shake during earthquakes*) on Earth lest it tilts with people.” This obviously is what the Quran really meant, and this even more obviously was the meaning Muhammad told his followers, as it is what the learned Muslim scholars were sure was the truth.
But this “truth” is so ridiculous, that let us go on to the alternative explanation – the one that is in vogue in Islam now that they know the original “truth” was wrong: That the mountains hinder earth-quakes.
That is not correct. Well, it is so far from the truth, that it is not even wrong - it is sometimes the opposite of the truth:
- According to f.x. heavyweights like “New Scientist” and “Nature” mountains sometimes can CAUSE earthquakes because of their considerable weight and pressure on the underground. Yes, even variations in the amount of water (= weight) in big mountain lakes or glaciers sometimes causes minor and medium earthquakes. The same goes for heavy snow-falls in the mountains sometimes – snow in the mountains and rain lower down is a normal phenomenon = imbalance in weight. (There f.x. are more earthquakes in the north in winter than in summer).
- *It is well known today that mountains are made because of tectonic activity (this always causes earthquakes - though sometimes too feeble for human so feel) or volcanic activity which often causes earthquakes. This means that mountains in reality are made by earthquakes (or actually by the same mechanisms which make most earthquakes), it does not hinder such quakes. Any god had known this, but Muhammad not - this is new knowledge to humans. Then who composed the Quran?
- Also volcanism is closely connected to earth quakes. Volcanism also in many cases is connected to tectonic activity - there thus are connections between the two mechanisms for mountain building - and for earthquakes. Tectonic activity makes it easier for lava to break through to the surface - as seen f.x. in "the Ring of Fire" around the Pacific.
Also see 15/19 – 16/15 – 31/10b – 41/10
*097 21/31d: “- - - and We (Allah) have made therein (in the mountains*) broad highways (between the mountains) - - -”. We honestly did not know Allah - or any other god - built highways. And here we could make a cheap joke (tell your congress-men (or similar) to ask Allah build your roads, instead of spending all that tax money on it). But we refrain from it.
Well, it would be possible for Muhammad to say - true or not true - that Allah showed the first travelers where to travel. But in no case Allah built the roads - or highways. Unless Islam really proves he did - but Islam never proves, they only tell or state or claim, even though they demand proofs from everyone else. Or they say it is said so in the Quran, and that proves it. But a book with that many mistakes has little value as a proof - and besides it is logically impossible to use the Quran to prove the Quran, as circular proofs are without value.
*098 21/31e: “- - - and We (Allah) have made therein (in the mountains*) broad highways (between the mountains) - - -”. This is so ridiculous that we do not remind you that Allah cannot do such things unless he exists and is something supernatural.
099 21/32a: “And We (Allah*) have made the heavens (plural and wrong*) as a canopy - - -”. Wrong. The heaven as we see it, is not made as a canopy - it is not even material. The heaven as we see it, is just an illusion made from bending of light by day, and from our inability to see the correct 3 dimensions at those distances by night. And that there are 7 (material) heavens is a joke.
##100 21/32c: “And We (Allah*) have made the heavens (plural and wrong*) as a canopy well guarded - - -”. Muhammad was unable to see the difference between stars and shooting stars. In the Quran it is told that the shooting stars (mistaken for being ordinary stars) are “arrows” used to chase away bad spirits or jinns (beings “borrowed” from old Arab pagan religion and folklore and unknown to any other “prophet” than Muhammad (there were djinnies also in Jewish folklore, but not in the Bible)) wanting to spy on Heaven. Any child today knows the difference between a real star and a shooting star, and also what would happen on and to the Earth if shooting stars were real stars. Even a baby dwarf god had known this - but Muhammad not, as it is modern knowledge. The pertinent or impertinent question is: Who then composed the Quran?
Also: Oxford Student's Dictionary of English: "Canopy - a cover that hangs or spreads above something". Empty space is no cover = there is no canopy up there.
##101 21/32c: “And We (Allah*) have made the heavens (plural and wrong*) as a canopy well guarded - - -”. Muhammad was unable to see the difference between stars and shooting stars. In the Quran it is told that the shooting stars (mistaken for being ordinary stars) are “arrows” used to chase away bad spirits or jinns (beings “borrowed” from old Arab pagan religion and folklore and unknown to any other “prophet” than Muhammad) wanting to spy on Heaven. Any child today knows the difference between a real star and a shooting star, and also what would happen on and to the Earth if shooting stars were real stars. Even a baby dwarf god had known this - but Muhammad not, as it is modern knowledge. The pertinent or impertinent question is: Who then composed the Quran?
102 21/52-71: Abraham delivered from Nimrod's fire. This story is taken from "Midrash Rabbah" and not from the Bible. And another point: Abraham and Nimrod did not live at the same time (if they ever lived). Muhammad had a strong tendency to mix persons from different times (f.x. Haman and Ramses II - some 800 years wrong. Or Mary and Miriam - some 1200 years wrong.) You do not find this story about Abram (later renamed Abraham) and the gods in the Bible - the only other source about Abraham - and this part 1000 years or more older than the Quran, and a book where one of the heroes had benefited from a tale like this, so no-one would dream of taking it out if it was true.
Who then was Nimrod? Nimrod according to the Bible was the son of Cush, who was the son of Ham, who was one of the three sons of Noah, who - if he ever lived - lived some 5ooo-6ooo years ago. If Abraham ever lived, he lived some 3800-4ooo years ago. This means there were some 2ooo years between Nimrod and Abraham.
It takes a lot of missing knowledge to mix two persons living some 2ooo years apart. No omniscient god makes that kind of a mistake.
103 21/80a: “It was We (Allah*) Who taught him (King David*) the making of coats of mail”. This is piece of extra interesting information (also in 34/11): The Quran tells that Allah taught David how to make coats of mail (also named chain mail or ring mail). Soldiers and warriors have used mail - f.x. scaled mail - for thousands of years, but coats of mail were not invented until around 300 BC, according to Wikipedia - some 600 - 700 years after David - and then by the Celts, who were not very close to Allah. Any god had known this, but Muhammad not. Then who made the Quran?
104 22/5-6: "- - - thou (people*) seest the earth barren and lifeless, but when We (Allah*) poor down rain on it (it is not proved it is Allah who does this*), it is stirred (to life) - - - (and) This is so because Allah is the Reality: it is He who gives life to the dead." This is not even a joke: Allah waters the seeds, and the fact that seeds grow when they get water and the other necessities are present, is indicated to prove that Allah is the reality and that he has power over the death. To say the least of it: A too naive argument.
105 22/18b: “- - - to Allah bow down in worship all things that are in the heavens (plural and wrong*) and on earth – the sun, the moon, the stars, the hills, the trees and the animals - - -. A lot of animism + personification (anthropomorphism) even of inanimate things. Not bad. “The Message of the Quran” (remark A22/22) even stresses that it is “conscious subduction under the will of Allah”. Not bad at all – especially for inanimate matter.
We did not know that the sun - or the moon or hills or trees - had consciousness. And honestly it takes something for the sun or any big star to prostrate themselves for Allah. But do not laugh - of curse it must be true when it is said so by Allah in the Quran. (?)
But who has seen a hill prostrating itself for Allah? - not to mention 5 times a day?
At least animism - like many places in the Quran.
106 22/23e: "- - - Gardens, beneath which rivers flow - - -". There are 4 rivers in Paradise. 2 of these are the Nile and the Euphrates, which both starts in Paradise according to Muhammad - believe it or not.
Also remember that the many and deep differences between Yahweh's and Allah's paradises are one of the strong proofs for that the two are not the same god - if they had been, their paradises had been one and the same.
##107 24/1c: “(This is*) A surah which We (Allah*) have sent down and which We have ordained: in it have We sent down clear Signs; in order that ye may receive admonition.”
"The Massage of the Quran", comment to 24/1 (A24/1): I.e., #############“the injunctions whereof We (Allah*) have made self-evident by virtue of their wording”: thus Abd Allah ibn ‘Abbas explains the expression 'faradnaha' in this context. - - - The same explanation, also on the authority of ibn ‘Abbas, is advanced by Tabari. It would seem that the special stress on Allah’s having laid down this surah “in plain terms” (the norm, but here stressed extra*) is connected with the gravity of the injunctions spelt out in this sequence: in other words, it implies a solemn warning against any attempt at widening or re-defining those injunctions by means of deductions, interferences or any other considerations unconnected with the plain wording of the Quran". Any comment necessary?
###Also remember that the wording of the Quran was polished by the best brains of Islam for some 250 years (until ca. 900 AD), before it got its present wording, and that there existed more than 20 accepted versions - 14 of them canonized - of the book before the two present versions became dominant.
###“- - - the injunctions whereof We (Allah*) have made self-evident by virtue of their wording”. What about telling this sentence to Socrates or Pascal or a plain teacher of logic? - they had not been finished laughing - or weeping - until after next Christmas. Add the fact that the wording in the Quran took some 250 years (from ca. 650 AD to ca. 900 AD) to polish, and they hardly had survived the laughing. And this is the kind of arguments and "proofs" Islam relies on!
108 24/45b: “Allah has created every animal (also man is an animal*) from (not in, but from*) water - - -.” To say it with small letters and no laughing: No comments. But this is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5, 35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”. (Also see verse 6/2 in the chapters about the 1000+ mistakes in the Quran.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 28 other verses. And here minimum 28 contradictions.) Simply and obviously wrong.
Some Muslims try to say that science has proved this verse (+ two others - 21/30 and 24/54) as science has shown that life started in water. But there is an enormous difference between “from” water and “in” water. No place in the Quran there is even a whisper about that life was created in water, only from. We also mention that in the Quran nothing is said about how the plants were created, even though the plants are the basis for all life on Earth. Perhaps from water like the animals? Wrong simply.
109 26/130: (A26/58) "- - - a Quranic prohibition, valid for all times, of all unnecessary cruelty in war, coupled with the positive, clearly-implied injunction to subordinate every act of war - as well as the decision to wage war as such - to moral considerations and restraints". Anyone knowing something about Muslim war history and also of treatment of prisoners of war and of suppressed people after many wars, are able to comment on this kind of claims from present-day Muslim scholars, but we do not like to use so impolite words as the ones necessary to correct these claims, perhaps except the word hypocrisy.
We may add that few of the modern terrorist organizations are as bloody and ruthless as Muhammad and the early Islam was, and Muhammad still it the shining moral sample for Islam on how to behave.
Please read the claim once more- do you want to laugh or to weep?
#####110 26/196b: “Without doubt it (the Quran*) is (announced) in the revealed Books (the Torah, the Bible*) of former peoples.” There is very much doubt about that, as the basic elements of the teachings are too different – especially compared to NT and “the new covenant” which is the fundamental one for Christianity. It is plainly wrong - it is absolutely sure that the Quran is not announced in the Bible or in any relevant Jewish scriptures. Also see the chapter about "Muhammad in the Bible" in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran", and 26/193-196b above.
Flatly stated: It is incorrect that the Quran is revealed in the Bible (not even Muslims claim this today - and if you run across the claim, their references are not to "documentation" about the Quran revealed in the Bible, but to claimed references to Muhammad there (they only are possible to see if you cherry-pick words and add wishful thinking and a huge dash of al-Taqiyya and/or Kitman - lawful lies and lawful half-truths)). Even this often met claim that Muhammad is foretold in the Bible, as you understand is wrong. And like said the basic thoughts are too different between the Bible and the Quran: Both books cannot come from the same god. This is especially easy to see if you compare the Quran to NT.
Some Muslim scholars say it is the basic ideas of the Quran which is foretold in the Bible. Please read the Bible and especially NT, and the Quran and compare - and weep (you will not be tempted to laugh - except a black laugh).
Actually there only is one single - and short (only 6 words are identical) - sentence which is the same in the Bible and the Quran, just this sentence from just the Psalms - Psalm 37, verse 29: "- - - the righteous will inherit the land - - -". This is the only identical text in the two books.
111 27/44c: “- - - she (the Queen of Sabah*) thought it (the floor*) was a lake of water (though it was slabs of glass) - - -“.
- They did not have the technology to make that quality of glass ca. 1000 BC.
- They did not have the technology to make big slabs – and they had to be really big not to notice at once the cracks between the slabs - of glass ca. 1000 BC. Even today it is difficult, as it needs months of very exact and slow cooling for big slabs not to crack. (Cfr. the making of large astronomical telescopes).
Contradicted by historical and technical facts. Simply nonsense. If you know something about glass and about its history, you get a good laugh here.
112 27/44d: The Queen of Sheba/Saba is shown a floor of glass and becomes a Muslim. Where are the logic and the psychology behind such a reaction? If you know something about psychology and about human ways of reacting, you will get a good laugh here, too.
113 28/9b: "- - - we (Pharaoh and one of his wives*) may adopt him (Moses*) as a son." How likely is it that a mighty pharaoh would even think about adopting a slave baby as a son without a good reason? (Also Ramses II's father, Seti I, who may be the pharaoh involved here, was one of the really mighty pharaohs - and he had children, so there was no cause for adopting more). One thing is for the daughter of a pharaoh to do so, if she or her husband f.x. was sterile. Quite another thing it was for a Pharaoh - with lots of children - to do so.
*114 28/38a: “Pharaoh said: ‘O Chiefs! No god do I know for you but myself - - -”. This is one of the really good ones, because Egypt at the time of Ramses II had a good number of gods, included some central ones with a strong clerical organization. It is typical for many “explanations” of mistakes in the Quran that Muslims “explain” some aspects of it, but are then unable not to “collide” with other information in the book - f.x. explaining the heavens as the modern universe (see 51/47c) without telling how the stars then could be fastened to the lowest heaven (37/6-7, 41/12)). But at the time of Muhammad the old gods were reduced - Egypt was partly Christian (the forefathers of the present-day Copts). A real god had not made this blunder, but Muhammad could not know. Then who composed the Quran?
Islam tries to explain this away with that it is not meant literally - only that Ramses II was the top. But in this case - like so often - it is very clear what the Quran says. And also remember that the Quran - and most Muslims - say that the Quran is to be meant literally where nothing else is said - - - and to call something an allegory or say it is figuratively meant, we think is the for Islam the most used means of explaining away of things/mistakes in the Quran which has no explanation.
There also is the fact that Haman was a leader under Xerxes (Hebrew: Ahasuerus) (486 - 465 BC) of Persia some 800 years later. Islam tries to explain the mistake away by claiming that what was said was not Haman, but Ha-Amon (##a mistake in the Quran in case) - the title of the high priest of the Egyptian central god Amon - see 28/6c above. This claimed explanation if impossible if Ramses II was the only god in Egypt.
115 28/38c: “(Pharaoh said*) “O Haman (minister for Xerxes some 800 hundred years later and hundreds of miles/km further east – in Persia - and not an Egyptian name either*)! - Light me a (kiln to bake bricks) out of clay - - -". Egypt at that time did not use burnt bricks, but bricks made of a mixture of clay and straw (this actually is mentioned in the Bible in 2. Mos.5/7-15) dried in the sun. It even would be meaningless to burn this kind of bricks, because the straw would be burnt to ashes. Egypt had the technology for burning clay - they had pottery. But sundried bricks were much cheaper, and good enough for most purposes in that very dry climate.
Another point is that for their big buildings the Egyptians used natural stones, not bricks.
Any god had known all these facts, Muhammad obviously not. Who made the Quran?
116 34/11ba: (A34/13): “Make thou (David*) coats of mail, balancing well the rings of the chain armor, and work ye righteousness, for be sure I (Allah*) see (clearly) all that ye do.” This is a quite traditional translation. But Muhammad Asad strongly argues for another interpretation, and it runs like this in the 2008 edition: “Do good deeds lavishly, without stint, and give deep thoughts to their steady flow. And (thus should you all, O believers,) do righteous deeds: for, verily (it definitely is no proved verity/truth*), I see all that you do!” We can well understand if you refuse to believe that written words can be so unclear that one and the same verse can give so different interpretation. But the quotes are exact, and both books are freely available in English (Abdullah Yusuf Ali: “The Holy Quran” and Muhammad Asad: “The Message of the Quran”, certified by Al-Azhar al-Sharif Islamic Research Academy, Cairo). But remember the problem of the translation of the Quran from old Arab scripture with only some of the letters written, and the rest you have to guess, to modern Arab. As we have said before: When you meet Muslims claiming that the clear language in the Quran is a proof for that it is sent down from a god, or similar claims – or that it is an exact copy of the words of Allah or Muhammad – then do not laugh, as it is impolite - - - and if they have little education in the religious field, they may even believe what they say. We repeat: And these variants of course also are in the Arab text, as the relevant word(s) there has/have more than one meaning. Allah (?) really uses a clear language.
117 35/2e: “(Allah is*) Full of Wisdom.” If the Quran is representative for his knowledge and wisdom – so many mistakes, contradictions, etc. etc. - this is a laughable claim.
*118 36/38c: The normal translation of 36/38a – see 36/38a above - (Arab: “li-mustaqarrin laha”) is (translated from Swedish): “And the sun runs to its place of rest” which is way out wrong astronomy. But as the old Arab written language far from was exact, Muhammad Ali’s transcription is a possible, if less likely one – as is “(to) the end point for the course which it follows” or - inserting other vowels among the written consonants (in old Arab only the consonants were written) and getting the expression “la mustaqrra laha” – “it runs its course without resting” (Abd Allah ibn Mas’ud/Zamakhshari). Or “The sun runs its course to a certain extent, then it stops” (Baydawi: “The Lights of Revelation” p.585). No matter which translation you choose here it is wrong. Also see 36/38d just below.
Next time you meet a Muslim seriously telling you how exact the Quran always is, do not laugh – it is impolite.
##119 36/40c: “- - - nor can the Night outstrip (be longer than*) the Day - - -”. Wrong. At high latitudes the night always are longer than the days in winter. A little past the Arctic Circles (a little past (towards equator) because of refraction – bending of light in the atmosphere) the night even lasts 24 hours a day for a shorter or longer time each year – for how long depends on the latitude. The Quran has a strong tendency to pick natural phenomena and tell they prove or are signs for Allah, without first proving that Allah really is the reason for them. For one thing such “proofs” are entirely invalid as they only rests on unproved claims. For another: It each time comes to our minds that (trying) to use invalid statements and “proofs” is a hallmark for cheats and swindlers. And for an ironic third: Sometimes the “proofs” even turns out to be really laughingly wrong - in a book claiming to come from an omniscient god. And not least: If you need to use made up arguments, this means you have no real arguments.
There is another possible meaning of "not outstrip": that the night cannot "walk past" the day. With this meaning the sentence is correct - though it is an open question at high latitudes with midnight sun in summer and "eternal" night in winter.
120 36/40d: “- - - each (night and day*) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law).” Wrong. Night and day are constants - they just seem to move because Earth revolves in the sunshine. Any physicist will laugh from this – night has a fixed position determined by the sun, and only seems to move because of the spin of the Earth. It has not the faintest similarity to an orbit compared to Earth. Any god had known - even a tiny, baby one in a hidden corner.
It is a nice extra touch that they swim along in orbits “according to Law”.
###121 37/6a: “We (Allah*) have indeed decked the lower heaven (in) stars - - -". On more of Muhammad's high-jacking of natural phenomena to glorify his god - in this case like in some others with the bad luck that his "proof" is totally wrong - there exists no lower heaven, not to mention a lower heaven decked with stars.
This is one of the Quran's better ones.
###122 37/6b: “We (Allah*) have indeed decked the lower heaven (in) stars - - -”. The Quran tells this in some varieties some places in the book: The stars are fastened to the lowest of the 7 heavens (which also means that the heavens have to be made from something material - if not it was not possible to fasten the stars there). The stars also are lower than the moon, as other places in the Quran tell that the moon are in between the heavens - in addition to that it here is said the stars are fastened to the lowest heaven (37/6, 41/12), and as also the moon was fasten to a heaven according to the astronomy of that time, in addition to that the Quran tells it is between the heavens, it has to be higher than the lowest heaven. The mistake actually is borrowed from Greek and/or Persian astronomy at the time of Muhammad (a fact mistake - any baby god had known better. Muslims generally try to evade questions about this - or give you a lot of diffuse words (and never tell it is from local, wrong astronomy)). We have hardly ever seen a reasonable – not correct, but at least logically reasonable - explanation of this mistake, except the standard one when something is so wrong that even “explanations” are not possible: It is “figurative”, "allegorical” - or something similar - explanations or stories.
###123 37/6c: “We (Allah*) have indeed decked the lower heaven with - - - stars - - -”. The nature has produced billions of stars - of which man with his naked eyes is able to see 6ooo-7ooo. But in no way he used them to deck a non-existing lower heaven (below the moon according to the astronomy of that time and place - and to the Quran - as the moon is "between the heavens") - and neither do nature use the stars as weapons (shooting stars) to chase away evil spirits or jinns like in the Quran, next verse (37/7). Also if the stars - suns - were below the moon, Earth had been pretty hot (in addition to all other nonsense this verse would imply if it had been true, compared to the reality). Is this a proof for that nature knows what it is doing, whereas Muhammad was bluffing? Remember in case that bluffing is a kind of lie.
Actually it is not 100% correct to say that Muhammad told everything about the heavens according to the astronomy of that time. If we remember our Greek astronomy (which was the going one until long after Muhammad) correctly, it was like this:
- The outer layer or ceiling: The stars.
- The 7. Heaven Saturn.
- The 6. Heaven Jupiter.
- The 5. heaven Mars.
- The 4. Heaven The Sun.
- The 3. Heaven Venus.
- The 2. Heaven Mercury.
- The 1. Heaven The Moon.
The outer layer some "astronomers" reckoned to be the 8. heaven. We stress that you may find old "charts" with a different design or with a somewhat different sequence of the heavenly bodies. But as far as we have found, Islam is the only one with the stars fixed to the 1. Heaven. And the Moon claimed to be between the heavens(!)
All the same: The Quran here is scientifically wrong, but had "correct" belief at the time of Muhammad. Who made the Quran?
###124 37/6+7: “We (Allah*) have decked the lower heaven with beauty (in) the stars - (For beauty) and for guard against all obstinate rebellious evil spirits.” See first 37/6 just above. Then: The Quran does not know the difference between a star and a shooting star, and tells that the stars are used for shooting stars for chasing away evil spirits that wants to spy or listen to what is said in Heaven. The shooting stars are used as weapons in such cases. It should not be necessary to say that this is wrong at least to the 25th – 30th order = the difference between the mass of a star and of a shooting star - literally trillions and more times bigger than shooting stars, and trillions of times as far off. Also see verse 8 below. That the lowest heaven is guarded, belongs only in fairy tales. Any god had known - then who made the Quran?
125 37/7: "(The stars are*) (For beauty) and for guard against all obstinate rebellious evil spirits - - -". Wrong. Other places in the Quran make it clear that the guard means that Allah also uses the stars as shooting stars - weapons to chase away jinns and bad spirits wanting to spy on what is said in Heaven. The difference between a real star of zillions of tonnes, and shooting star of milligrams or a little more, is such that comments really should be unnecessary. And bad spirits spying on heavens which are not there? - the only thing which exists in the height where shooting stars happens, is rarefied air. We simply are back in the fairy tales. Also see 37/8 just below.
126 37/8: "(Stars used as shooting stars are used as weapons against jinns and bad spirits*) (So) they should not strain their ears in the direction of the Exalted Assembly (Allah's assembly*) - - -". If anyone is able to believe jinns and bad spirits are cruising or hiding in the heights where the shooting stars happen, to listen to what is said in the 7 heavens which do not exist (in those heights there only is rarefied air) they are fully permitted to believe so. No other comment should be necessary.
Well, we may add that this quote sounds like from a fairy tale. Perhaps with a reason?
127 37/9: "Repulsed - - -". The jinns and the bad spirits are chased away by the stars Allah uses for shooting star. If these verses were unknown, one might guess the writer was the slightly romantic Dane Mr. H. C. Andersen - it would fit his style. (If there is anyone who does not know him: He was a Danish most famous writer of fairy tales.)
128 37/10: "Except such (jinns and bad spirits*) as snatch away something (secrets from Heaven*) by stealth, and they are pursued by a flaming fire, of piercing brightness (stars used as shooting stars by Allah as weapons to chase away jinns and bad spirits)". If anyone is able to believe jinns, etc. are cruising around or hiding high up in the stratosphere trying to steal secrets from the heavens which do not exist - at least not in the heights where shooting stars happen, they are permitted to do so. Any more comments should be unnecessary - except also see 37/7 and 37/8 above. Wrong unless Islam proves differently.
129 37/142b: (YA4122): YA do not believe the story of Jonah happened at sea: "The Tigris river, mentioned by some of our (Muslims'*) Commentators, is more likely, and it contains some fishes of extraordinary size". This is meaningless - if you meet bad weather on a river, there never are really bad "seas" and there never is a long way to the shore and safety. And in no river in the world there exists fish big enough to swallow a man whole. (But the Bible tells it happened on a ship from Joppa bound for Tarshis (Jonah 1/3) = in the Mediterranean Sea).
###This is one of the very many samples of Islam finding a "good" explanation to an aspect of a point in the Quran, but forgetting that other aspects make the "explanation" impossible or - like here - even laughable: It is not possible for wind to make waves on a river big enough to be dangerous for a ship - and if there was danger, there just are yards and meters to the shore and safety. Sometimes we get the impression that many Muslim scholars never learnt the use of logic or of critical thinking.
130 41/12b: “So He (Allah*) created them (heaven(s)*) as seven firmaments (wrong - there only is one*) in two days - - - Such is the Decree of (Him) the Exalted in Might“. Just look up, and you see the firmament - it may be especially impressive at night. Nature at its most colossal, even though it looks petite from Earth. Did any god make it? Was that god in case Allah? There are few reasons to believe so, and definitely no proofs. And what is 100% sure: It was not made in two days - it all started 13.7 billion years ago according to science, and may be the first stars became visible not much later (300.ooo years?) - - - and the creation is still not completed.
The number 7 also is laughably wrong. There are no 7 - material - heavens.
Allah decreed this in the Quran - a most unlucky choice for a “proof, as it is wrong.”
Sometimes our impression is that Muhammad/the Quran behave like some second rate politicians: They steal arguments and claims, then run in front of people and say they are leading them - in this case leading them to stolen riches, slaves and power. Muhammad/the Quran find good phenomena and tell that Allah has made them. Only statements, only claims, and only words any “prophet” for any god can use just as cheaply - and sometimes like here 120% wrong. Impressive profs - but for what?
Also see 11/7a above.
####131 41/12e: “And We (Allah*) adorned the lower heaven with lights (= stars*) - - -”. This is one of the points Muslims are very reluctant to try to explain, as it is obviously and impossibly wrong - and impossible to “explain” away in any believable manner. We know from old astronomy that the moon and the planets were fastened to different heavens, and that means that the stars have to be between us and the moon (the Quran another place also says that the moon is between the heavens) - at less than some 384ooo km distance - as the stars were fastened to the lowest heaven (37/6-7, 41/12). In addition to all the other impossibilities, humans would not be even crisps in a millisecond. Once more: Any existing god knew this, Muhammad not. Contradicted by almost anything – except like said: Not by fairy tales. Is Allah non-existing? Or who composed the Quran?
132 41/12f: “- - - and (provided it) (the lowest heaven*) with guard”. We know from other places in the Quran, that this “guard” is stars mistaken for shooting stars used against bad spirits and jinns wanting to spy on the heavens. The only place such “information” fits today, is in fairy tales. Who composed the Quran? Contradiction: See 42/12a above.
#133 41/42b: "No falsehood can approach it (the Quran*) from before or behind it - - -". For one who really knows the Quran - and knows normal moral, ethical, and judicial codes - this stands out like an unintended, black joke.
##134 44/58c: “Verily, We (Allah*) have made this (Quran) easy, in thy (Muhammad’s or Arabs') tongue - - -". Perhaps because of this some Muslims claim that the claimed "Mother of Books" in Heaven is written in Arab - because if not the Quran cannot be an exact copy, like Islam claims. (The Ammaddiyya Muslims even have "proved" that the language in Paradise is Arabic(!!). Do not laugh - it is impolite.)
####135 44/58d: “Verily, We (Allah*) have made this (Quran) easy, in thy (Muhammad’s or Arabs') tongue - - -". Just for the reason of understanding, no god had chosen Arab for the only acceptable language for his holy book. For one thing it was the language of after all primitive nomads mainly, and thus with a limited vocabulary, for another it was a relatively small language, spoken by relatively few, for the third it is not an easy language - far from as difficult and special as Muslims often like to claim, but not an easy one - and not least: It had no complete alphabet (the Arab alphabet was not complete until around 900 AD), so that even today much of the text is guesswork to read and often with several possible meanings of the same sentences, and they have had to make a special rule for how to understand all the points with double or multiple meanings: "It just is different ways of reading (the correct word - "varieties" - is taboo in this connection in Islam*), and all of them are correct (this even if the meaning varies wildly from one interpretation to another*)". Do not laugh when Muslims boast about how exact and unmistakable the Quran is - some of them really believe what they say.
136 45/9b: "- - - he (the non-Muslim*) takes them (the claimed signs for Allah*) in jest - - -". Wrong: He takes them for what they are - unproved claims invalid as neither signs, nor indications, nor proofs for anything at all, as long as it is not proved it really is Allah who makes the claimed signs. Words simply are too cheap propaganda if there is nothing behind them.
###Another fact is that some of the claims in the Quran are so far out or so wrong, that there is a good reason for laughing.
#137 51/49a: “And of everything We (Allah*) have created pairs - - -”. Very wrong. This only goes for multi-cellular beings, and not even for all of them – among primitive animals and even up to reptiles and fish you find some kinds that propagate - or may do so under special conditions - asexually, and thus do not make pairs. Uni-cellular beings are not in pairs, and there are by far many more of them both in species and in total numbers. The same goes for a large part of the plants (both sexes on the same plant and thus no pairs). Any god had known – Muhammad not. Who made the Quran?
#138 51/49b: “And of everything We (Allah*) have created pairs; that ye (people/Muslims*) may receive instruction”. Laugh or weep? - instruction from a god on basis of wrong information - see 51/49a just above!!?
139 54/5a: “(The Quran is - but also see 54/4 just above*) Mature wisdom - - -”. Hardly. See 13/1g, 40/75, and others. Knowing all(?) that is wrong in the Quran, the temptation to laugh is marked - but impolite.
140 57/19d: “- - - they (Muslims) are sincere (Lovers of Truth) - - -”. See 13/1g and 40/75. Also remember al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), "war is deceit" - and everything is war/jihad, "break even your oaths if that gives a better result". Remember it and laugh. Or weep.
They may be sincere lovers of the Quran, but partly because much in the Quran is not true, and partly because Islam is the only one of the big religions which accepts and sometimes even promotes the use of dishonesty, they definitely are not necessarily lovers of the truth.
141 58/16b: "They (non-Muslims*) have made their oaths a screen - - -". But is this worse than when Muhammad in the Quran advices his followers - and practices himself (f.x. in the episode with the riding camels) - to break ones oaths, if this gives a more satisfying result? In reality as ironic as 58/14d above. If you put this point beside 2/225, 5/89, 16/91, or 66/2, you may get a hearty, ironic laugh.
142 59/23f: "- - - (Allah is*) the Source of Peace (and Perfection) - - -". Just read the some 22 - 24 surahs from Medina, and you see the unintended black joke hidden in this claim - and the in double meaning literally bloody irony in this al-Taqiyya (lawful lie - a specialty you only find in Islam of the big religions).
143 60/10f: "He (Allah*) judges (with justice) - - -". See the Quran's partly immoral moral code and its partly unjust Sharia laws and weep - or laugh.
144 64/11c: "- - - (Allah) guides - - -". If he guides according to the Quran, he is no good guide - too much is wrong and parts of the moral code are horrible (compare it to "do to others like you want others do to you" and weep - or laugh at Islam's claim of being the pinnacle of good moral).
145 65/8c: "And We (Allah*) imposed on them (some non-Muslims*) an exemplary Punishment". In and around Arabia there were ruins or deserted houses, villages, etc., and also in the local folklore there were tales about disappeared tribes, etc. Muhammad claimed they had all been killed by Allah because of sins against him. Modern science figuratively laughs from those claims - there are much more likely reasons in a harsh and warlike area.
###146 67/5a: “And We (Allah*) have (from of old), adorned the lowest (37/6-7, 41/12) heaven with Lamps (Stars*)- - -”. The Quran’s picture of cosmos is taken from Greek and/or Persian astronomy, and as any secondary school child not blinded by religious indoctrination can see; it is much wrong - laughably wrong. For one thing the heavens have to be made from something material to make possible fixing the stars to one of them. Besides: From Greek etc. astronomy we know that the planets, stars, sun and moon were fixed to 7-8 different heavens(actually 7 heavens + the stars, sometimes said to be the 8. one). As the stars according to the Quran is fixed to the lowest, they have to be lower than the than the moon. But what happens if you try to place say Betelgeuse or even Helios - our sun - below Luna - our moon?
Further: Our rockets cannot go too high - they will collide with the material heavens. Muhammad said the Quran is perfect and without mistakes or flaws. The Quran says the Quran is perfect and without mistakes or flaws. Islam says the Quran is perfect and without mistakes or flaws. Muslims say the Quran is perfect and without mistakes or flaws. All of them say the Quran is perfect and without mistakes or flaws because Allah sent down a book he had made or which had existed forever - a book which is the revered “Mother Book” (13/39b, 43/4b+c, 85/21-22) in the heaven of Allah - and an omniscient god can neither make mistakes nor revere texts containing lots of mistakes, contradictions, flaws and hallmarks of cheats and deceivers. Also see 67/3 above and 67/5b+c just below.
BUT WHAT DO ALL THOSE WORDS HELP WHEN THE MISTAKES, CONTRADICTIONS, AND THE FLAWS ARE THERE ANYHOW? #####AND WHEN ISLAM TELLS THAT THE TOTAL LACK OF ANY MISTAKE IN THE QURAN PROVES IT IS FROM ALLAH, WHAT THEN DOES MEGA BLUNDERS LIKE THIS PROVE?
##147 67/5b: “- - - and We (Allah*) have made such (lamps (stars*) as) missiles to drive away the Evil Ones - - -”. Well, well. Any secondary school child able to see that the entry from the same verse 67/5a were wrong, would laugh from this: Stars fastened to the lowest heaven and then doubling as shooting stars to drive this away! Today it is clear such "information" only belongs in fairy tales, and hardly even there as even children know better. Also see 67/3 and 67/5a. Who made the Quran?
148 71/15-16a: “- - - Allah has created the seven (material - see the Mega Mistakes in our Book A*) heavens, one above the other - - -.” It is not possible to be more wrong. Who above 3. grade primary school needs a comment here? 7 (material) heavens and the moon in between them somewhere (and remember the stars are fixed to the lowest heaven (37/6-7, 41/12), so they are below the moon! We do not bother to comment this. But also see 67/5d above.
149 71/15-16b: “- - - Allah has created the seven (material- see the Mega Mistakes*) heavens, one above the other, and made the moon a light in their midst - - -.” The moon is in between them somewhere (and remember the stars are fixed to the lowest heaven, so they are below the moon!)!! We do not bother to comment this - except that the moon is not behind and beyond the stars. If the Moon (Luna) had been beyond even the nearest star, we hardly had been able to see it even in a space telescope. Not to mention what had happened if a star had been between us and Luna where it is now!
150 71/16a: “And made the moon a lamp in their (the heavens’) midst - - -.” The moon is not in the midst of the 7 heavens (= somewhere among the stars or actually above them, as the stars are fastened to the lowest heaven (37/6-7, 41/12)) of Muhammad. Any even baby god had known, Muhammad not. Who made the Quran?
*151 72/8b: “And we (jinns*) pried into the secrets of heaven, but we found it filled with stern guides and flaming fires.” The Quran tells that Allah uses the stars like shooting stars – flaming fire – to chase away bad spirits and jinns wanting to spy on heaven. No comments should be necessary to this nonsense. Any god had known the difference between a shooting star, and a real star - even a devil had known. Then who made the Quran?
152 72/9d: "- - - any (jinn*) who listens (spies*) now will find a flaming fire (shooting star*) watching him in ambush". See 72/8b above.
153 77/16b: "Did We (Allah*) not destroy the men of the old (for their evil)?". In and around Arabia there were ruins and empty settlements, and there also were tales about old, disappeared tribes. Muhammad claimed they all were killed by Allah because of sins against him. Science has a number of other possible explanations in a warlike, arid area.
A naive curiosum (2012 AD): A short time ago the authorities in Pakistan debated to make some old ruins accessible for tourists. Locals instead proposed to put up placards warning people that such were the result of sinning against Allah(!).
154 86/14: "It (the Quran*) is not a thing for amusement". Some of the mistakes and some other points really are unintended jokes. But remembering all the blood and misery Islam has cost and will cost in the future, for Muslims and non-Muslims, the wish to laugh disappears.
*155 92/3: “By (the mystery of) the creation of male and female - - -”. No mystery for us, no mystery for a god - a large mystery for Muhammad. (According to Hadiths he thought that if the woman climaxed first, it became a girl, but if the man climaxed first, it became a boy – and boys of course were best. Scientific nonsense - laughable nonsense.) Who made the Quran? Also see 18/37 – 32/8 – 35/11 – 40/67 – 75/37 – 77/20.
###Another point showing the stupidity of this belief: If the belief had been true, more or less all children made by raping the woman, had been boys. ########A rape normally is a horror to the woman or child, not a pleasure, and thus she hardly ever climax - a fact NEVER mentioned neither by the Quran, nor by Islam or by its Muslims.
Sub-total Chapter 1 = 155.
>>> Go to Next Chapter
>>> Go to Introduction
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".