Muhammad in the Quran, Vol. 2: Chapter 28


 

JIHAD ("HOLY" WAR) AND GHAZWA ("HOLY" BATTLE)

 

JIHAD ("HOLY" WAR)

As practical all raids and wars Muhammad and his followers - and successors - were involved in, were named Jihad - "holy war", even though most of Muhammad's warfare were raids for stealing/robbing and taking captives/extortion, and later to force his new religion on people ("become Muslims and fight us and die, and see your women and children taken slaves") - we put all comments about war here.

Originally Islam was rather peaceful, but after Muhammad and his followers fled to Yatrib - later renamed Medina (= "the town of the prophet"), and he stared as a highwayman and robber baron, Islam in the course of months or 1-2 years was transformed to a pure war religion, included distaste for all non-Muslims, superiority complex also compared to all non-Muslims, apartheid based on religion, dishonesty in words (al-Taqiyya, deceit, betrayal, disuse of words/promises/oaths (2/225, 3/54, 5/89, 16/91, 66/2), etc., and deeds (stealing/looting, extortion, slave taking, etc.) - a transition Muslims and Islam NEVER mention. But in spite of that most of Muhammad's at least 82 armed incidences were raids for riches, extortion, slaves, and women, more or less everything was named Jihad - "holy war" - and Ghazwa - "holy" battle. (Even the 3 battles with Mecca were defense battles in a war of aggression started and kept alive by Muhammad's raids for riches.)

You frequently meet the argument that Christianity was no better. But there is one fundamental difference: The NT on which Christianity is built, is totally negative to war, to dishonesty, to stealing, to rape, to hurting others, to killing. In the Quran, the surahs from Medina (which are the dominant ones according to Islam's rules for abrogation, because they are the youngest) dishonesty in words and deeds are parts of the religion. In addition to go on raids and to war is a holy duty - and stealing, extortion, rape, slave taking, etc. is the "lawful and good" payment to the warriors - 20% or more to Muhammad. In short words: Christians made war in spite of what the religion told them, whereas Muslims and Islam made war because of the religion and its demands and orders. Thus in Christianity you may blame Christians for making war, but not for the religion for wanting it (on the contrary, NT is very pacifistic). Whereas Islam and Muslims made raids and wars BECAUSE of the orders and demands the Quran gives - - - + the right to steal/loot, rape, extort, and take slaves.

Often the wars in OT are mentioned as arguments. But also here is a basic difference: Those wars firstly mainly were in order to make a country for the Jews, and later for to defend that country. In the Quran the repeated ORDER and demand is to fight all non-Muslims until they either become Muslims or "pay Jizya (extra and frequently heavy tax*) with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued". In OT the wars were for national purposes, in the Quran they were and are and will forever be for the religion, and because of the religion (+ loot, women, and power).

In a time like today with terrorism an everyday fact, we also may point to that terrorism will never come to a real end as long as the Quran with all its glorification of terror, blood, war, suppression, etc., and it’s impossible to mistake orders for such deeds are part of a religion. There will always be religious fanatics, blind believer, war romantics, ruffians, etc. who will follow the words of the book and Muhammad's example (read the Islamic history, and you will see that Muhammad behaved just like the terror organizations do today, with robbing, rape (Muhammad personally raped at least 2-3 women), suppression, terror, murder and mass murder - and he is the great and shining idol and moral star for most or all believing Muslims).

And this for a religion based on a book so full of wrong facts, other errors, contradictions, etc. and even some clear lies, that the book itself proves it is not from any god.

Also see our separate book on the Quran and war.

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

###001 2/191a: “And slay them (the non-Muslims*) wherever ye catch them - - -”. A straight, no-nonsense order - not to be misunderstood. Very good words for terrorists.

002 2/191d: “- - - tumult and oppression is worse than slaughter; - - -” - but only oppression of Muslims (non-Muslims should and shall be oppressed and subdued - - - by Muslims). It is better to kill the non-Muslims than to live suppressed by them - even the Quran clearly states that in Muslim states the non-Muslim of course have to accept suppression, lack of power of all kinds, and to pay extra and often heavy head tax - jizya. But then the Quran as clearly states that Muslims are better beings than non-Muslims. (See separate chapter in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran").

There also is the question of who defines what is suppression.

####003 2/216a: “Fighting is prescribed for you (Muslims*) - - -.” A more direct verbal incitement is difficult to find, unless it is accompanied by threats and/or promises of wealth, power/status and women – in this and/or the next life - - - like it is in the Quran.

According to the Quran fighting for Muhammad (Allah?) was and is and will forever be the best of religious deeds.

004 2/218b: “- - - those (Muslims*) who suffered exile and fought (and strove and struggled) in the path of Allah - they have the hope of the Mercy of Allah: - - -”. Many of the first Muslims in Mecca had to flee from the town and had a rough time. But general meaning: Fight for Allah and be likely to go to Paradise (and if you are killed for Allah, you are sure to go there). That is to say: If Allah exists:

There exists a letter dated 27. Dec. 1998, where it is admitted rather reluctantly that there are no proofs for Allah, and that it is not possible to prove him. Actually that is part of a wider fact: It is not possible for humans to prove a god. This only a god can do (by doing something supernatural). And this is very clear: Neither Allah nor Muhammad produced one single proof for Allah, in spite of many requests. (But Jesus did give many proofs for Yahweh and for himself according to both the Quran and the Bible - if at least one of them speaks the truth.)

957 2/191h: "- - - if they (non-Muslims*) fight you (Muslims*), slay them." Incompatible with especially NT - and one more proof for that Jesus did not represent the same god as Muhammad.

###005 2/244a: “Then fight in the cause of Allah - - -". An order not possible to misunderstand - from the good idol Muhammad leading the claimed "religion of peace". One more point not found in the Bible and the religion of Yahweh (there were fights in OT, but for establishing and later defending the country, NOT for promoting the religion). One of the many 100%+ proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god and Jesus and Muhammad far from in the same religion.

006 3/13ba: "- - - fight in the cause of Allah - - -". Any comments necessary? - the best of religious deeds.

007 3/121b: "- - - to post the Faithful at their stations for battle - - -". This refers to the battle of Uhud and is a clear time anomaly - no-one reading copies of the claimed "Mother Book" in the older times, would understand a reference like this, until after the battle had taken place. See 4/13d below.

008 3/121c: "- - - to post the Faithful at their stations for battle - - -". Try to find something like this in NT! - it does not exist. Jesus a prophet like Muhammad (claimed to be)? - believe it if you are able to.

009 3/121b: "- - - to post the Faithful at their stations for battle - - -". This refers to the battle of Uhud and is a clear time anomaly - no-one reading copies of the claimed "Mother Book" in the older times, would understand a reference like this, until after the battle had taken place. See 4/13d below.

010 3/121c: "- - - to post the Faithful at their stations for battle - - -". Try to find something like this in NT! - it does not exist. Jesus a prophet like Muhammad (claimed to be)? - believe it if you are able to.

011 3/122a: “Remember two of your parties (from the clan Banu Salamah of the tribe Al-Aws, and from the clan Harithah of the tribe Khazraj*) mediated cowardice (just before the battle of Uhud in 625 AD they wanted to leave*); but Allah was their protector, and in Allah should the Faithful (ever) put their trust”. A mighty example and pep-talk forever after. (That these parts after all did not desert Muhammad before the battle, might have meant the difference between a battle the Muslims in reality lost, but at a price which made Mecca withdraw, and a military catastrophe avoided.)

012 3/123a: “Allah helped you at Badr - - -”. This was a battle against the Meccans which the Muslims won, in spite of being outnumbered 3 : 1 (according to Muslim sources - there are no others). Muhammad told they won because Allah had sent down (3ooo) angels who fought together with the Muslims (a rather primitive way to do things for an omnipotent god). Pep talk - he helped you then, we believe, and it is likely he will help you in other battles, too. But: Why does an omnipotent god have to bring his followers to war to strengthen his position? If it was Muhammad who wanted more power and more riches to use for bribes and more power - and women - the logic is easy to understand, but an omniscient and omnipotent god - - -?

013 3/124b: “Is it not enough for you (Muslims in battle*) that Allah should help you with three thousand angles (specially) sent down?” Pep talk to warriors referring to the battle of Badr, which Muhammad claimed was won because Allah sent down 3ooo angels who fought together with the Muslims - Allah helps you in battle with angle warriors. Morals counts in battle, and battle was essential for Muhammad at this time, though in 625 AD he might also think about defense against Mecca - they might again attack to stop his robbing their caravans, etc. But except for real defense: Why does an omnipotent god have to bring his followers to war to strengthen his position? If it was Muhammad who wanted more power and more riches to use for bribes and more power - and women - the logic is easy to understand, but an omniscient god - - -?

014 3/125c: "- - - if you (Muslims*) remain firm - - -". Time and again and again the Quran tells that if the Muslims just persevere, the "enemy" grows tired in the end and the Muslims win. Far too often this has proved correct, a fact all non-Muslims growing tired should remember. This especially the democracies, as they have problems when a fight lasts for a long time - there always are many voices wanting out of the struggle, as they see the short-time gain but not the long-time loss possible.

015 3/125e: “- - - your (Muslims'*) Lord (Allah) would help you with five thousand angles (specially) sent down?” Pep talk and war propaganda. See 3/124a-c above.

016 3/142c: "- - - (in His (Allah's*) Cause - - -". As the Quran with all its errors is not from any god, it is a very open question if the raids and wars were and are in Allah's cause.

###017 3/145b: “Nor can a soul die except by Allah’s leave, the term being fixed as by writing”. Wage war - you die when your term comes and not before, no matter what you are doing. The for Muhammad most essential side of predestination? It is easy by means of statistics to show the claim is wrong, but right or wrong does not matter much in cases of blind belief. But one thing is clear: Any man as intelligent as Muhammad did know this was a lie.

018 3/148d: “For Allah loveth those who do good (in this case: To wage war for Allah and Muhammad*)”. To do battle for Allah - to steal and burn and kill and murder and destroy and rape for the good and benevolent deity - is a good thing which Allah loves. (Actually that it shall be made in the name of the god, makes it even more disgusting.) Did anyone say that modern terrorists have to twist the words of the Quran to find incitements to their deeds? And also: Muhammad got cheap warriors and gained wealth and power - in wars and robberies that really were illegal according to the Quran, as they in reality were wars of aggression, not really of defense. And they gave him the possibility to rape at least two women - Rayhana bint Amr and Safijja bint Huayay.

The real truth is that the ones who today live like Muhammad and his followers did, are f.x. IS/ISIL, Al Shabab, and LRA (terrorist organization in the Central African Republic which till now (2014) f.x. has kidnapped some 60ooo children - the boys for child soldiers, the girls for sex slavery).

019 3/152c: “Allah did indeed fulfill His promise to you when ye with His permission were about to annihilate your enemy - until you flinched and fell to disputing about the order, and disobeyed it- - -”. This refers to the battle of Uhud - the second battle between the forces of Muhammad and Mecca - 5 km from Medina. In this battle the Meccans had greater forces, but it is a military truth that it is easier to defend than to attack - compare f.x. to Napoleon vs. Wellington’s inferior forces at Waterloo until Blücher and his Germans arrived, or Malta in 1565 - some 40ooo Muslim warriors vs. a little better than 1ooo defenders (+ some 8ooo locals taking some parts in the fighting), where the attackers had to withdraw after many weeks of battle (from May 18. to September 8.), and partly because of this lost the hegemony in the Mediterranean Sea. Or for that case Malta during WW2: Small British forces plus the locals vs. nominally hugely superior Italian and some German forces - but Malta never fell.

At Uhud Muhammad’s forces seemed to be winning. But the archers did want to get their parts of the spoils, and left their defending positions - - - and the battle turned. Politely said it ended in a draw (Muhammad in reality lost the battle), and Muhammad lost lots of men. It got no further serious consequences, though, as Mecca did not come back until much later, and then Medina and Muhammad were prepared (the Battle of the Trench, which Muhammad won - the last real battle with Mecca. Well, actually it was no real battle, just a siege, from which the Meccans had to withdraw in the end).

But in this case the lesson seemed to be: Allah kept his word as long as the warriors obeyed Muhammad - and Allah. When they stopped doing that, things went wrong. Or at least it was explained like this. Lesson: Allah keeps his words and Allah helps in battle, as long as you obey his - or really the religious (often the same as the political) leaders' orders. Terrorists and warriors: Obey Allah and your leaders = at that time Muhammad.

020 3/152g: "- - - until He (Allah*) brought you in sight (of the booty) which ye covet". In Islam stealing in what they call jihad - holy war - is no sin and part of the payment to the warriors. In NT (and most other normal moral codes) stealing is an absolute "no". Strong contradiction of Islam's moral code on this point.

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

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

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

####021 3/154e: “Even if you had remained in your homes, those for whom death was decreed would certainly have gone forth to the place of their death (anyhow*).” This is the "manifest" of predestination. And: This also is one of the points in the Quran where Muhammad knew he was lying. It is so obviously wrong, that an intelligent man like him knew this was not true. But he was a clever manipulator (“is it not more worth that I live among you, and spend the booty on the people not sure in their belief to make them stay in Islam?” f.x.) and he understood people. Lies like this worked because his followers were primitive and in addition wanted to believe. And for primitive, uneducated souls really believing mish-mash like this (it is easy to prove by statistics that it is untrue, if one are un-intelligent enough not to see at once that it is a lie) it was a mighty incitement – fighting in battles was not dangerous, because Allah had decided when you were to die, and at that time you would die whether you were in a battle or sleeping in your bed. It is worth noticing that even today this is the official point of view of Islam. To quote footnote 3/119 to this surah in “The Message of the Quran” (translated from the Swedish 2006 edition - not found in the English 2008 edition):

“(The) incorrect, heathen belief that humans by acting in special ways can avoid death (even for a time*)”.

Unbelievable!!

Today it like said is easy to prove by statistics that it is very wrong - but Muhammad did not know about statistics (and a god had not even needed statistics to know it was stupidity). On the other hand this claim is so contra all logic, that this like said is one of the points where Muhammad knew he was lying - he was too intelligent to believe in this. Actually Islam today back-pedals very much concerning predestination telling f.x. that the Quran does not mean real predestination (but not explaining what they claim it means). But in some cases the book is so clear, that it is impossible to explain it away.) f.x. many places connected to statements that when your time is out, you will die anyhow, and therefore you can as well go to war.

Also see 3/154g just below.

####Besides: Is it ironic to see a religion built on a book so full of errors, contradictions, wrong facts, etc., that it is clear there is no god behind it, naming others heathens?

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

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

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

##022 3/157b: “And if ye are slain, or die, in the way of Allah, forgiveness and mercy from Allah are far better than all they could amass”. Nearly no matter how bad a man (nothing is said about women) you have been, to be killed for Allah, is the sure way to go to Paradise. A mighty - and cheap - way to get warriors.

The old Vikings “knew” that if they were killed in battle, they went to Valhalla - that made them ferocious warriors. In Islam the sure way to Paradise with its lazy luxury life and plenty of women, had and has the same effect.

There are two questions, though: Who decides which wars are wanted by Allah? - if you look at history, it seems that a lot of the wars Muslims have fought, in reality were for wealth and power, but mostly they all the same have been declared Holy Wars, a few times even by both sides when both parts were Muslims. And: What if the Quran is invented or not telling the full truth? - all the mistakes and contradictions, etc. in the book make one wonder (or stronger). At least no god makes such a quality book. If the Quran is not from a god, this promise of Paradise also is not true.

In the wars between Sunni and Shi’ia and in power struggles among leaders, a lot of warriors have been cheated - both parts in a war between Muslims cannot be fighting for Allah and the “right” belief, but all warriors on both sides often were told they fought against enemies of Allah. If at least one part was right, the warriors from the opposite part had a rude awakening in Hell, even if they were told and believed they were fighting enemies of Allah. Not to mention when all was a struggle for power among leaders, and Allah did not agree at all that any of them were fighting for him - they only were sinning by killing fellow Muslims “without a good reason”, which is a grave sin worthy of Hell.

And even worse: If the Quran is made up or does not tell the truth on this point, no comment is necessary. Especially not if there exists another, true religion somewhere - a religion Muslims are prohibited to look for. Where will the Muslims end in case if there is a next life?

The same if Allah was/is from the dark forces.

Another point is that to forgive - or for that case to punish or reward or fulfill prayers - means for Allah to change his Plan considering the sinner/person, something which according to the Quran is something nobody and nothing can make him do. See 2/187d above.

##023 3/157c: “And if ye are slain, or die, in the way of Allah, forgiveness and mercy from Allah are far better than all they could amass”. This only may - may - be true if Allah exist and is a god, and if the non-Muslims on top of this believe in a non-existing god - if their god (f.x. Yahweh) exists, he may be able to outdo Allah. (Especially if Allah in reality is a dressed-up and made up pagan god only - and he was a pagan Arab god before Muhammad took him over and renamed him slightly).

Another point is that to forgive - or for that case to punish or reward or fulfill prayers - means for Allah to change his Plan considering the sinner/person, something which according to the Quran nobody and nothing can make him do. See 2/187d above.

##024 3/158a: “And if ye die, or are slain, lo! It is unto Allah that ye are brought together”. Be killed in war for Allah, and go to paradise - good “knowledge” for a warrior or terrorist. Whoever said the Quran has to be disused to justify terrorism, hardly ever read the Quran - or uses an al-Taqiyya (a lawful lie - this "convenient" Islamic only phenomenon). See also 3/157b above.

##025 3/158b: “And if ye die, or are slain, lo! It is unto Allah that ye are brought together”. This only can be true if Allah exists, if he in addition is a god, if he runs a religion like told in the Quran - and if the Quran has told the full and only truth about this.

026 3/166c: "- - - when the two armies met - - -". It is likely this refers to the Battle of Uhud, a battle the Muslims in reality lost (but Mecca withdrew and then waited too long with following up the expensive victory).

027 3/166cc: "- - - in order that He (Allah*) might test the Believers - - -" Also the defeat at Uhud was claimed to be according to Allah's Plan - to test the warriors. But why - WHY - does an omniscient, predestining god need to test anyone when he knows everything before??!! There is no logic in it! Whereas if you think a cunning warlord uses such a story as an explanation and a whip to strengthen and renew the will to fight in his depressed, but believing and naive warriors - well, then there suddenly is logic in the tale.

It takes a lot of naivety to be able to believe that an omniscient and predestining god needs to test his followers to know what they are worth.

028 3/167c: "- - - fight in the way of Allah - - -". That the raids and wars were and partly are made in the name of the god, make them even more detestable, especially as most of them were raids and wars of aggression - mainly for riches, slaves and power - and for spreading Islam by means of the sword directly and indirectly.

029 3/167d: "- - - fight in the way of Allah - - -". Verses like this - and there are many of them in the Quran - are more or less the antithesis to NT. Yahweh and Allah the same god? You only need two letters for the answer "no".

030 3/167e: “The Message of the Quran” has this remark to this verse (no. 3/128 to this surah): “Only war in self defense – in the widest meaning of the word – can be reckoned to be a fight for the cause of Allah”. But as “the widest meaning of the word" is very wide, each and every war where one part is Muslim and the other not – and most where both parts are Muslims – are in “self defense” or for other reasons are just wars and always are declared jihad, this simply is hypocrisy. Practically all Muslim wars, included wars of aggression, and there have been plenty of those through the history, have been declared “jihad” – at least we have not been able to find many exceptions from this rule. Actually for centuries all the four law schools in Islam agreed on that the fact that the opposite part in a conflict were Pagans, was good enough reason for to attack them and to declare the attack/war for jihad (holy war). It was not until in the 1920s or 1930s that some Muslim scholars started to question this “law” – and it still only is questioned and only by parts of the Muslims, though nowadays these questions normally makes the Muslim parts, included terrorists, blame the other part so as to give the claim of jihad at least a demagogue’s made up reality of being a just war. Very convenient for anyone who needs warriors/soldiers – and a convenient incitement to war: All wars against “infidels” are “jihad” – with permission to rape and steal and suppress and murder - - - and guarantee for your going to Paradise if you are killed - just like the old Vikings. The good and benevolent Allah likes killers, thieves/robbers, rapists, apartheid, etc., etc. - at least when the dishonesty, atrocities and inhumanities are done in his honor.

####A fact to remember here is that it just takes a little dishonesty and demagogy to find an "explanation" for why even a not provoked attack - f.x. for stealing/robbing, slave taking and extortion - "in reality" is self defense. Of the some 82 armed "incidences" under Muhammad, only 3 - the battles of Badr, Uhud and Medina ("the Trench") really were battles of defense, and even these 3 were caused by provocations from Muhammad and his Muslims (their banditry towards caravans and villages). Nearly all the others were raids to steal and take prisoners for slavery or extortion + for raping girls and women if such ones were present.

**031 3/169a: “Think not of those who are slain in Allah’s way as dead. Nay, they live - - - in the presence of their Lord (Allah*)”. What better can a warrior ask for? - and thinking like that, they made - and make - cheap soldiers for Muslim leaders. But what if Muhammad made it all up? - at least no god made the Quran with that many mistakes, etc. So where will all the Muslims in reality end if there is a next life?

032 3/170a: "They (killed Muslim warriors*) rejoice (in Paradise*) in the Bounty provided by Allah*. If Allah exists. If Allah is behind what is told in the Quran. And if the Quran tells the full and only truth on this point. Also see 3/170b and 10/9f below.

033 3/170b: “They (the ones killed in war*) rejoice in the Bounty of Allah (an Earth-like luxury life + plenty of women – how that life is for the women, is of no consequence* - not worth even one question in the entire Quran and all the Hadiths or anywhere else in Islamic literature we have seen) - - - (and*) the (martyrs) glory in the fact that on them is no fear, nor have they (cause to) grieve.” Psychologically a very good way for a leader to tackle and to prepare his followers for the fact that some warriors were going to die in the wars. There were little cause for sorrow and little cause for blaming the leader. But to be able to believe in this, take lots of naivety, blind belief and wishful thinking - just naivety is not enough.

##034 3/170c: The family and others left behind by dead warriors, have no reason to grieve - their dear one - the warrior - is in Paradise. Yes - if it really was a war for Allah, and not for power or riches for some leader. And if the Quran speaks the truth on this point at least. And if Allah is an existing god. And f.x. if children without fathers find the situation attractive.

035 3/171a: “They (the “martyrs”*) glory in the grace and the Bounty (silver and brocade and women*) from Allah - - -”. The ultimate pep talk: Your son or husband or father is dead and you will never see him again, and he will never help you if you need - but he is in heaven according to a book with hundreds of mistakes, and told by a man with a very dubious morality.

036 3/171b: "- - - (in their (the claimed martyrs'*) bliss) - - -". This only may be true if Islam is a true religion with a real god, and if the Quran in addition has told everything correctly.

912 3/171d "- - - the fact that Allah suffereth not the reward of the Faithful to be lost - - -". Once again: If Allah exists, if he in case is a major god - - - and if the Quran tells the full and only truth without mistakes about this. And no matter: This sentence is a claim, not a fact.

###037 3/174a: “And they returned (from war) with Grace and Bounty from Allah: no harm ever touched them - - -”. A fairy tale picture of war and easy riches. A good pep talk for recruiting new warriors if the men are uneducated and naïve. Glorifying war and spoils of war attracts new warriors. The larger the “army” the better chance of success and power for leaders.

But never a word about the catastrophes for the victims and for the destroyed lives and cultures, etc. Compassion and empathy nearly do not exist in the Quran - and definitely not concerning non-Muslims.

#####It is worth noticing that Muhammad and his followers behaved like Muslim gangs are doing today (2013 AD) in northeast Africa: Raiding - in this case especially people fleeing north from war and poverty - the weak ones. Muslims stealing what meager possessions they have, murdering, raping, gang raping, torture, extortion, slave taking, slave selling (yes, it goes on even today). This was the life of the semi-saint Muhammad the last 9-10 years of his life - Muslims were involved in some 82 armed incidences during that time, nearly all of them raids for stealing riches, for rape, extortion, and slaves. Muhammad personally led some 26 of them and personally raped at least two women (Rayhana bint Amr and Safiyya bint Huayay). #####Some morally perfect idol!

#####It also is very telling that as far as we know, Islam is doing little or nothing to stop those gangsters of today - and how can they? Those gangsters are behaving just like Muhammad did, and everything Muhammad did was perfect, "lawful and good".

Added 2014: IS/ISIL - the "Islamic State" is behaving according to Muhammad's demands and rules. An attractive future for the world? - remember that the Quran demands that the Muslims shall conquer and suppress the rest of the world.

038 3/174c: "- - - they (Muslims at war*) followed the good pleasure of Allah - - -". That his followers wage war is the good pleasure of Allah. "The Religion of Peace"? - a god of peace? If you are sufficient naive or indoctrinated you may be able to believe this.

039 3/174d: "- - - they (Muslims at war*) followed the good pleasure of Allah - - -". The good pleasure of Allah here refers to going to war. You do not find anything even remotely similar to this in NT. And even in the more warlike OT, war was not for the pleasure of the god, but to make room for the Jews, and later for to defend their nation(s).

040 3/179a: (A136): “Allah will not leave the believers in the state (f.x. of being the losers*) in which ye are now - - -.” (After the in reality lost battle of Uhud – though Mecca did not follow up the victory in time). Is this the right meaning of Arab “ma antum alayhi” (exact meaning: “that upon which you are”)? Or does it mean “the (economic, etc.*) condition in which you are”? (Rezi and others). Text not clear.

041 3/195e: “- - - those who have - - - fought or been slain – verily, I (Allah*) will blot out from them their iniquities, and admit them into Gardens - - -.” Guess if this contradicts the NT and f.x. its "turn the other cheek" or "you shall not kill"!! Yahweh and Allah the same god? Just this quotation alone proves they are not - and then there are all the other proofs in addition.

042 4/72+73b: As mentioned in 4/72+73a just above these two verses are pep-talk for war. You NEVER find such pep talk in NT - NEVER. One more of the many points which alone proves that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same religion - and then there are all the other proofs in addition.

*043 4/74a: “Let those fight in the cause of Allah who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter”. If you are willing to exchange your life here on Earth for a future life in Paradise, you should be permitted to - and qualified to - wage war for Allah. (Only let us hope you are not cheated. If something is wrong in the Quran - and at least a huge number of facts and much of the logic are wrong, etc. - you may be in for quite a surprise if there is a next life. Not to mention what a rude awakening you will have if Islam is a dreamed-up religion, and there is another religion which is true. Or if Allah is from the dark forces. But in the meantime Muslim leaders have a cheap source for power, warriors and terrorists).

044 4/74d: “To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah - whether he is slain or gets victory - soon shall we give him a reward of great (value) (= Paradise*)”. What can be a better reward - - - if it is true? And what can be a cheaper way for leaders to get warriors, than promises of payment in the next life? - especially if the religion is made up (and remember that this is likely, as the Quran with all its mistakes is from no god) and the Quran's paradise thus does not exist.

But if Yahweh and Jesus rule the perhaps next life, good Muslims will not find that the gate to Heaven opens automatically. And likely the same if other gods rule - the Quran is a bit too immoral and too inhuman for most religions.

045 4/74e: “To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah - whether he is slain or gets victory - soon shall we give him a reward of great (value) (= Paradise*)". Guess if this is a contradiction to NT!!! Yahweh and Allah the same god? You NEVER find things like this in NT - NEVER - and not even in OT (there they fought for establishing and later defending their country). One more of the many points which alone proves that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and definitely also that Jesus and Muhammad do not belong to the same religion - and then there are all the other proofs in addition.

046 4/75c: “And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah and those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)? Men, women and children (crying for help and rescue*) - - -.” Muhammad’s version of the glorious hero on the white horse - and "forgetting" to add "- and power and riches for Muhammad". Another inciting dream "pushed" by good psychology - claimed help to women and children is a good motif.

047 4/75d: "- - - rise for us (the weak ones*) from Thee (Allah*) one who will protect, and raise us from Thee one who will help!" Guess if the warlord Muhammad here is telling that the warlord Muhammad is sent from the god, and that the weak ones are praying for help from the great warrior on the white horse - the warlord Muhammad - to help them!! Have you heard dictators glorifying themselves and glorifying war of aggression before?!

###048 4/84a: “Then fight in Allah’s cause - - -.” One more verse which contradicts and abrogates many of the peaceful verses from mainly Mecca and early Medina (this is from 626 AD and the harsher religion Islam had developed into). At least 10 contradictions and as many abrogations. Remember that when the Quran talks about fight, it normally always means armed combat (as opposed to NT where it refers to intellectual conflict).

###049 4/84b: “Then fight in Allah’s cause - - -”. The religion of peace? - from a good and benevolent god? All the same: The greatest religious deed according to the Quran.

###050 4/84b: “Then fight in Allah’s cause - - -”. The religion of peace? - from a good and benevolent god? All the same: The greatest religious deed according to the Quran.

##051 4/95b: “Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive in the cause of Allah with their goods and their person. Allah hath granted a grad higher to those who strive with their goods and their persons”. Clear words: Go to war or terrorism and end in a better part of Paradise - there are at least 4 or 6 different qualities of Gardens there + the higher heavens according to the Quran. Incitement “de luxe”.

052 4/95d: "- - - strive in the cause of Allah - - -". In the Quran this expression normally means to wage war on claimed behalf of Allah and Muhammad and later leaders.

053 4/95f: "Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive (fight*) with their goods and persons than those who sit (at home)". Strongly contradicted by especially in NT - in NT physical fighting is not accepted at all. One more proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

#054 4/95g: “Unto all (in Faith (= all Muslims*)) hath Allah promised good: but those who strive hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by special reward -.” Are any comments necessary? - except f.x. compare this to NT. The Quran is war and murder. Compare it to the pacifistic and anti-war NT or f.x. Buddhism!

What a nice verse for a terrorist!

But what if the Quran is a made up book? - by man or dark forces? (With all its mistakes, etc. it is not from any god). Where will Muslims end if there is a next life?

#055 4/95h: “Unto all (in Faith (= all Muslims*)) hath Allah promised good: but those who strive hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by special reward -". But what is such a promise worth unless Allah exists and is a powerful god?

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

#056 4/95i: “Unto all (in Faith (= all Muslims*)) hath Allah promised good: but those who strive hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by special reward -". Strongly contradicted by especially in NT - in NT physical fighting is not accepted at all. One more proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - and one of those many proofs which each alone proves this. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

057 4/95+96a: “- - - those who strive hath Allah distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward – Ranks specially bestowed by Him (Allah*), and Forgiveness (for anything if you are killed in battle*) and Mercy.” No doubt who is the best Muslim and what is the best deed in Islam – the warrior and the war are most pleasing to Allah. (To call Islam “The religion of peace” is an insult to the intelligence of everybody who has read the surahs from Medina with an open mind.)

As for forgiveness see 2/187d above.

058 4/95+96b: “- - - those who strive hath Allah distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward – Ranks specially bestowed by Him (Allah*), and Forgiveness (for anything if you are killed in battle*) and Mercy.” The total and 180 degree difference from NT - in NT physical fighting is not accepted at all. One more proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - and one of those many proofs which each alone proves this.

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

059 5/12g: “- - - and loan to Allah a beautiful loan - - -.” This normally is “Quran-speak” for “risk or lose your life in battle for Muhammad and Allah”. In just this case it is claimed to be said to the Jews of old times, which gave it double value: A good pep-talk and “documenting” that messengers wanting war was nothing new. But these words are never used in the Bible.

060 5/33a: “The punishment for those who wage war against Allah and his Messenger (Muhammad*) - - - is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from the opposite sides, or exile from the land.” Remember that this surah is from 632 AD, and that practically all raids and wars were wars of aggression from Islam/the Muslims, mostly raids for riches – even the battles of Badr, Uhud and Medina/the Trench were battle in a war of aggression started and kept alive by Muhammad – so mostly the victims who “fought war against Allah and his Messenger” were fighting in desperate and sheer self defense to defend themselves against the on-slaughter of Islam - - - and to defend themselves obviously was a great sin. Muslims attacked for gaining loot, land, slaves, power - - - and force Islam on their neighbors. Arabia mainly was made Islamic by the sword. In spite of Islam’s peaceful words some places, the local Arabs normally only got two choices: Become Muslims or fight/die. A clear contradiction – and abrogation of - 2/256: "Let there be no compulsion in religion". And what about "Islam is the Religion of Peace"? Or: "Islam is the Religion of Honesty"?

061 5/35f: “- - - strive with might and main (see 5/35a-b just above*) in His (Allah’s*) cause: that you may prosper.” Fight for Allah (and Muhammad) – then you may get a prosperous life. The alternative - death - was glorious. The alternative war cripple is never - not once - mentioned in the Quran. Only the "two glorious fates": Rich from stealing/loot or dead and in Paradise. 20-30-40 years as a cripple dependant on others or as a beggar because you were too much hurt to work - may be in pain - such alternatives are never mentioned. The same for what about your children and your family if you are crippled or killed - not mentioned.

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

####062 5/35g: “- - - strive with might and main (see 5/35a-b just above*) in His (Allah’s*) cause - - -”. For us this is one of the most detestable points in the entire Quran and Islam: Fight and steal and rob and mutilate and rape and enslave and hate and murder and suppress in the name of your god - a claimed good and benevolent god.

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

063 5/54e: “- - - fighting in the way of Allah - - -”. Unlike when you fight for Jesus and Yahweh - and many other gods - with your brain and words and good deeds, for your fights for Muhammad and Allah you fight with weapons and wage war and terror, and is paid by loot and rape and slaves - the laudable thing to do according to the Quran. Or - ?

064 8/5b: “Just as thy Lord (Allah*) ordered thee out of your house in truth (to make war against the Quraysh – battle of Badr 624 AD*) - - -.” The Muslims went out to raid a military weak caravan - - - and met a small army instead, “according to Allah’s will”. Allah likes warriors – and he needs war to promote his power and religion, even if he is omnipotent. Well, remembering his claimed omnipotence, this is a strange "fact".

065 8/5f: "- - - even though a party among the Believers disliked it (to go to war*)". Not all Muslims liked - or like - to wage war. A fact that should be remembered - most Muslims (at least 70% as an average for the entire world according to science) are just like any other human being. The rest is everything from slightly understanding and sympathetic to fighting "the others", to terrorists and every stage in between, and perhaps only 0.5% (this number is from a Muslim source on Internet, but sounds reasonable) are fanatics. But 0.5% of 1.2 billion make 6 million - or say 4 million if you subtract the children - and the real problem is that it is difficult to impossible to know who is who. All the same: Given the situation there may be a little reason for being somewhat careful and to use your brain in contact especially with unknown Muslims. But there is no reason to judge each and every one you meet as bad or dangerous - mostly they are not.

(We may add that Muslims on the net often say that 1% of Muslims are "activists" or potentially such ones.)

066 8/5+6: “- - - even though a party of the Believers disliked it (to do battle against the Quraysh at Badr 624 AD*). Disputing with thee (Muhammad*) concerning the truth after it was made manifest - - -“. See 8/5d just above. In this case (Badr) some Muslims refused to take part in the battle against the seemingly much stronger small army and fled before it started “even after it had been made clear that it was Allah’s will that they should do battle against the Quraysh” according to “The Message of the Quran”. War seems to be a pleasure for Allah, and necessary to augment his power and promote his religion, even though he is said to be omnipotent. Or maybe it only is to test his followers and find out their quality – even though he is omniscient and predestining and knows everything before. The unsolvable contradiction made by the claims: Allah decides everything vs. man has free will, are also put to a test? But at least it is clear that Allah wants war.

067 8/7a: “Allah promised you one of the two (enemy) parties - - -". The Muslim spies had reported a rich caravan to plunder. There is no documentation even in the Quran for that Allah had promised it to them. And the army from Mecca they did not even know about, until they met it at Badr - absolutely not promised them.

068 8/9ba: "I (Allah*) will assist you (Muslims*) with a thousand angels (doing battle*), ranks on ranks". But why do angels have to take part in battles if Allah is omnipotent? Yes, why do Muslims have to fight battles for him and die or become invalids? He just can say "Be, and it is", according to the Quran. Something is seriously wrong.

By the way: How do angels do battle?

069 8/9c: (YA1184): “I (Allah*) will assist you with a thousand of angels (f.x. in battle)” But Islam itself questions if the numbers are exact or figurative. Unclear. Another question: If Allah is omnipotent and just can say “be, and it is” to quote the Quran, why then does he have to send angels? He just can decide the outcome of any battle. And actually: Why did he need any battle at all? - he just could decide how he wanted the world. (The propaganda tells it is to test his followers - but why does an omniscient and predestining god need to test anyone at all?)

070 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". This is told by Muslims (comment A8/15 translated from Swedish) to be an Arab expression meaning : #####"Kill absolutely every one of them". (Only to smite off their fingertips, would make them unable as good archers afterwards). A good and benevolent religion full of mercy.*) - - -.” “The god of Peace heading the Religion of Peace”? To call this religion “the Religion of Peace” is an insult to the intelligence of the world – and the reason why the world does not laugh at the claim, is lack of knowledge about the Quran.

That is to say: If they knew what the Quran demands against non-Muslims, few would laugh.

071 8/13a: "This (kill them*) because they contended against Allah and His Messenger - - -". How much Allah and how much Muhammad?

072 8/13b: "This (kill them*) because they contended against Allah and His Messenger - - -". When you know practically all Muhammad's armed conflicts were initiated by Muhammad (for robbing and to take captives), there is not a little irony in this.

073 8/16a: “If any (Muslim warrior*) do turn his back to the (the enemy*) on such a day (during battle) - - - he draws on himself the wrath of Allah, and his abode is Hell - - - “. Fight for Allah and Muhammad or end in Hell. One verse is the carrot, this one the whip. War is a central part of the life and the religion - - - "the Religion of Peace"!!! (This claim is a joke for anyone who really has read the Quran).

074 8/17b: (The fights are acts of Allah) "in order that He might test the Believers - - -". But why - why - should Allah need to test his Muslims if he is omniscient and knows everything on beforehand? - not to mention if he on top is omnipotent and decides everything before it happens? There is no logic in this. But if the real story was that Muhammad needed an "explanation" for why a mighty god wanted them to fight - in reality for Muhammad - then this sentence suddenly is easy to understand; it is unbelievable what you can make people believe if they are naive or uneducated or both, not to mention if they want to belief from f.x. religious reasons or to have an excuses to steal and enslave and rape women and to become rich.

075 8/17b: (The fights are acts of Allah) "in order that He might test the Believers - - -". But why - why - should Allah need to test his Muslims if he is omniscient and knows everything on beforehand? - not to mention if he on top is omnipotent and decides everything before it happens? There is no logic in this. But if the real story was that Muhammad needed an "explanation" for why a mighty god wanted them to fight - in reality for Muhammad - then this sentence suddenly is easy to understand; it is unbelievable what you can make people believe if they are naive or uneducated or both, not to mention if they want to belief from f.x. religious reasons or to have an excuses to steal and enslave and rape women and to become rich.

076 8/19d: “Not the least good will your (the enemy’s) forces be to you even if they were multiplied: for verily (though it definitely is no proved verity/truth*) Allah is with those who believe”. Perhaps discouraging the enemy, but surely encouraging his own warriors. “Gott mit uns”, like the Nazi and earlier Germans said. Just this one is as old as the oldest religion - and still valid for everyone who believes it, and the uneducated, naïve early followers did believe - - - as do many Muslims even today.

077 8/24c: “Oh ye who believe! Give your response to Allah and His Prophet (Muhammad*), when He calleth you to that which will give you life - - -.” To follow the call for war, will give you a beautiful next life – - - and Muhammad a cheap and committed warrior.

###078 8/39a: “And fight with them (the Unbelievers who will not convert to Islam*) on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere”. Comments should be unnecessary. #########Fight war till Islam dominates everywhere. An order and an incitement.

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

REMEMBER THAT THIS + THAT ALL NON-MUSLIMS SHALL BE SUPPRESSED AND PAY EXTRA TAX - JIZYA - "WITH WILLING SUBMISSION, AND FEEL THEMSELVES SUBDUED" (9/29), STILL IS THE OFFICIAL GOAL AND POLICY OF THE QURAN AND OF ISLAM, AND THAT DECEIT, TERROR AND WAR CLEARLY ARE OK MEANS TO THAT GOAL IN SPITE OF 2/256 (FROM BEFORE MUHAMMAD GAINED ENOUGH POWER) - THE WISH OR RECOMMENDATION "LET THERE BE NO COMPULSION IN RELIGION" - AS THAT VERSE WAS ABROGATED (MADE INVALID) RATHER QUICKLY BY ORDERS TO FIGHT NON-MUSLIMS WHO DID NOT CONVERT TO ISLAM.

AS BAD: SIMILAR MEANINGS ARE EVEN TODAY AIRED BY LOTS OF IMAMS, MULLAHS AND OTHER MUSLIMS.

#079 8/39b: “- - - there (everywhere shall*) prevail justice and faith in Allah all together and everywhere - - -”. There shall be the rule of law - but the Muslim rule of law, where f.x. a non-Muslim cannot witness against a Muslim. But to be fair, the Quran several places tells that judges shall judge correctly, so if there is no special reason, if the judge is not against non-Muslims, if he is not corrupt, etc., there was a reasonable chance to get a fair decision - fair according to Muslim laws. At least as long as your opponent was not a Muslim, or worse, a powerful Muslim. In that case the law was/is not fair.

But Islam should - and shall - be the dominant religion.

###080 8/40a: “If they (the enemy*) refuse (to stop fighting – and remember that for hundreds of years the Muslims mostly were the aggressors*), be sure that Allah is your Protector - - -.” Allah helps you in any fight against “infidels”- real defense or "defense in the widest meaning of the word" = attack or raids for wealth and slaves and power and for expanding Islam.

################The fact that Islam needs to add "in the widest meaning of the word" to the word "defense", documents that they know it often is not real defense.

081 8/41a: “And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah (/Muhammad*) - - -.” These 20% - 100% if the victim gave in without a fight - in reality were for Muhammad to use. Did he "demand no payment for what he did" like he claims some places in the Quran?

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

082 8/54d: "- - - We (the god*) drowned the People of Pharaoh, for they were all oppressors - - -". What then about Muslims, as the Quran and its rules and orders about oppressing all other people are not from a god? (No god makes a book of a quality like the Quran - it would be heresy and an insult to any god to blame him for a book where so much is wrong.)

##################For the Quran it is the official goal and policy that all non-Muslims shall be subdued and oppressed.

###083 8/57a: “If you gain the upper hand over them in war, disperse, with them those who follow them, that they may remember.” Many a Muslim warrior and warlord followed this order thoroughly – they certainly were remembered many places - - - except by all those who were dead. Sind (now approximately Pakistan), India, Armenia, Greeks in Turkey to mention a few - and not to forget Africa, included the slave hunters - tens of millions to the Muslim areas north of Sahara and in Asia (15 millions arrived alive according to Encyclopedia Britannica - the lowest number we have found (to all the Americas 14 mill. and a much lower death rate during transport, also this number according to E. B - the death rates during transports to Asia and Mediterranean Africa and especially the ones marching through Sahara, are so high that we are reluctant to believe it and therefore do not quote them)), plus the millions of slaves in Muslim areas south of Sahara. (The American and other western slave traders seldom hunted for slaves themselves. They bought from local slave hunters - a large percentage of them Muslims.)

###084 8/57a: “If you gain the upper hand over them in war, disperse, with them those who follow them, that they may remember.” Many a Muslim warrior and warlord followed this order thoroughly – they certainly were remembered many places - - - except by all those who were dead. Sind (now approximately Pakistan), India, Armenia, Greeks in Turkey to mention a few - and not to forget Africa, included the slave hunters - tens of millions to the Muslim areas north of Sahara and in Asia (15 millions arrived alive according to Encyclopedia Britannica - the lowest number we have found (to all the Americas 14 mill. and a much lower death rate during transport, also this number according to E. B - the death rates during transports to Asia and Mediterranean Africa and especially the ones marching through Sahara, are so high that we are reluctant to believe it and therefore do not quote them)), plus the millions of slaves in Muslim areas south of Sahara. (The American and other slave traders seldom hunted for slaves themselves. They bought from local slave hunters - a large percentage of them Muslims.)

085 8/54d: "- - - We (the god*) drowned the People of Pharaoh, for they were all oppressors - - -". What then about Muslims, as the Quran and its rules and orders about oppressing all other people are not from a god? (No god makes a book of a quality like the Quran - it would be heresy and an insult to any god to blame him for a book where so much is wrong.)

##################For the Quran it is the official goal and policy that all non-Muslims shall be subdued and oppressed.

###086 8/57a: “If you gain the upper hand over them in war, disperse, with them those who follow them, that they may remember.” Many a Muslim warrior and warlord followed this order thoroughly – they certainly were remembered many places - - - except by all those who were dead. Sind (now approximately Pakistan), India, Armenia, Greeks in Turkey to mention a few - and not to forget Africa, included the slave hunters - tens of millions to the Muslim areas north of Sahara and in Asia (15 millions arrived alive according to Encyclopedia Britannica - the lowest number we have found (to all the Americas 14 mill. and a much lower death rate during transport, also this number according to E. B - the death rates during transports to Asia and Mediterranean Africa and especially the ones marching through Sahara, are so high that we are reluctant to believe it and therefore do not quote them)), plus the millions of slaves in Muslim areas south of Sahara. (The American and other western slave traders seldom hunted for slaves themselves. They bought from local slave hunters - a large percentage of them Muslims.)

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

We may add the ####modern Muslim point of view ###########of today (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".

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

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

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

And most thought provoking: Everybody living according to normal moral codes based on something like "do to others like you want others do to you", has GOT to break the moral code of the Quran, because this one quite often is different or very different from "do to others like you want others do to you". Thus everybody living according to normal moral codes unavoidably become "enemies of Allah", according to the definition above in this point.

Please compare the Quran's moral code to "do to others like you want others do to you". You must belong to a very special culture to be able to believe the Quran's moral code is even halfway there.

###089 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 for slaves or wanted to keep for extorting money for from their families - or women and girls for "personal use").

No doubt at all: A morally and ethically superior prophet, 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.)

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.

090 8/67aa: The day after the Battle of Badr, Omar according to al-Tabari tells he came to Muhammad and Abu Bakr. Both sat weeping, and Muhammad told "he had received a message from Allah". In this message Allah shall have told he should punish his men for taking prisoners of war instead of killing them in the battle fields. The message Muhammad claimed to have received (verse 8/67) said (Yusuf Ali's translation*): "It is not fitting for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he hath thoroughly subdued (at least one translation says "slaughtered"*) the lindy look for the temporal goods of this world; but Allah looketh to the Hereafter; and Allah is Exalted in might, Wise".

However, Muhammad continued, Allah also had said that this had been his words if it was not because an order he had given earlier (Quoted(?) in 8/68): "Had it not been for a previous ordainment from Allah, a severe penalty would have reached you for the (ransom) ye took (instead of killing the opponents/captives*)".

An extra point here is that Muhammad had given orders that captives from his own clan, the Banu Hashim, should not be killed ("One law for me, another for you".)

A clear order: Opponents shall be killed, not taken prisoners. Do you wonder why some Muslims - f.x. IS (the claimed "Islamic State") - are as bloody and inhuman as they are?

091 8/67-68: The day after the Battle of Badr, Omar according to al-Tabari tells he came to Muhammad and Abu Bakr. Both sat weeping, and Muhammad told "he had received a message from Allah". In this message Allah shall have told he should punish his men for taking prisoners of war instead of killing them in the battle fields. The message Muhammad claimed to have received (verse 8/67) said (Yusuf Ali's translation*): "It is not fitting for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he hath thoroughly subdued (at least one translation says "slaughtered"*) the land. Ye look for the temporal goods of this world; but Allah looketh to the Hereafter; and Allah is Exalted in might, Wise".

However, Muhammad continued, Allah also had said that this had been his words if it was not because an order he had given earlier (Quoted(?) in 8/68): "Had it not been for a previous ordainment from Allah, a severe penalty would have reached you for the (ransom) ye took (instead of killing the opponents/captives*)".

An extra point here is that Muhammad had given orders that captives from his own clan, the Banu Hashim, should not be killed ("One law for me, another for you".)

A clear order: Opponents shall be killed, not taken prisoners. Do you wonder why some Muslims - f.x. IS (the claimed "Islamic State") - are as bloody and inhuman as they are?

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

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

This is one of the most disgusting and revealing sentences in the Quran.

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

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

######092 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 (according to science it took Persia 100+ years to return to the level it had before the Arabs attacked) - 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" more or less. 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.

########To us this is perhaps the most disgusting and revealing sentence in the entire Quran and the entire Islam - and even more so because it is done in the name of their god.

Also: Combine this quote with Islam's slogan: "Islam is the Religion of Peace" and "Allah is good and benevolent" and weep - or laugh.

What lacks now is that Islam starts claiming that "Islam is the Religion of Honesty - no Lying, no Deceiving, no Stealing". (Remember here that looting and robbing both = stealing.)

One more point: In most cases the Muslims were the attackers, and they behaved horribly stole and destroyed, raped and suppressed and killed. But you NEVER hear a Muslim regret or even talk about the horror or catastrophe this was for the victims - fellow human beings. The Muslim warriors were heroes, and that is it!

#####093 8/69c: "- - - lawful and good - - -". If these words and the context it is taken from ("- - - enjoy what (loot, slaves, and women* + destruction and murder) ye took (= stole*) in war (normally of aggression*), lawful and good - - -", were all you knew about the Quran and Islam, this alone would be enough to remove it from the civilized world and transfer it to the dark, harsh, and inhuman Medieval ages or earlier. This even more so as this is not "abrogated" by today's Islam, but on the contrary preached and even practiced today (during armed conflicts and in terrorism) in some Islamic circles and groups.

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

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

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

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

288a 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 inhumanities we see from Arabs and other Muslims?

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

###094 9/5b: “But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and size them, beleaguer them, and lay in wait for them in every stratagem (of war.)”

#######This is “the Verse of the Sword” – the single verse in the Quran that is reckoned to contradict and to abrogate most peaceful verses of all the harsh and inhuman and bloody verses from the Medina period. (There are more "sword verses" in the Quran, but this is the most notorious one.) Muslim scholars say it abrogates 124 verses in the book. We have seen no numbers for how many it contradicts, but hardly fewer (also all abrogations in reality are contradictions – that is why they are deemed abrogations: to make one or more of the contradicting points invalid so that it is possible to live and behave according to the book - - - and to claim there are no contradictions in it as the contradicting point is abrogated, though this last fact Muslims never mention).

There are so many verses that 9/5 contradicts, that we have not found all. But note that all abrogations also were contradictions before one or more of the contradicting verses were abrogated (which is one of the reasons why it is nonsense when some Muslims say abrogations do not exist in the Quran – abrogations mean Allah is not omniscient, but had to try and fail and/or changed his mind every now and then. Without abrogations you have a lot more of serious contradictions in the book, and which is worst of contradictions which make the book impossible to follow in life, or abrogations that at least makes you wind your way through life? (but shows that Allah often was unable to find the best solution with the first try)). You will find more in the chapter about abrogations in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran".

Surah 9, including 9/5, came in 631 AD and according to the Islamic rules for abrogations, this means that it overrides nearly everything in the Quran (as normally the youngest abrogates the older).

Some of the contradictions (many of them also abrogations) follow a little further down.

Even though 9/5 is "the" verse of the sword, there are several sword verses, but 9/5 is the strongest and clearest of them.

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

##########095 9/5d: “- - - and lie in wait for them with any stratagem of war”.

  1. As the Quran overrides any earthly law or agreement, this sentence may nullify the laws of war from Geneva and other non-Muslim ones.
  2. The laws of war on Earth have laboriously been agreed on little by little since the battle of Solferino and before, to make war a little less inhuman. Terrorists accept not one single of the rules, partly because of this verse. The more inhuman the better often. A good religion.
  3. This sentence is a clear “go ahead” for terrorists for absolutely any atrocity - in Europe or anywhere: "- - - with any stratagem of war".

Nice neighbors (but just remember that only a few Muslims are that kind of neighbors - though it may at times be difficult to know who is who, and this is a problem for any non-Muslim).

#################################################################

096 9/5h: "- - - (use*) any stratagem of war - - -". Why do you think terrorists behave like they do, and why they, to say the least of it, do not respect the Geneva Conventions, and not behave like humans, but are depraved and degenerated "inhumans" when in action - - - and heroes to many a Muslim?

The majority of Muslims of today do not want war. But as long as the Quran is the basis for a religion, there will never come an end to distaste/hate arguments, superiority complex, apartheid, terrorism, and murder against/on non-Muslims. The religious moral code, the religious orders, the romanticizing of apartheid and terror and war and also the ideology of Übermench/Untermench (Nazi German for super-humans/sub-humans), will always attract religious extremists, religious fanatics, war romantics, mentally imbalanced, naive souls, etc., and also parts of the human rubble will find an outlet for their animal tendencies through disturbances and terrorism. There will be ups and downs - active and less active periods - but it will never come to an end as long as some-ones believe in the Quran and its teaching. A book so full of wrong facts, other errors, contradictions, invalid logic, unclear language, etc., that the book itself proves with mathematical strength that it is not from any god.

And as organizations like IS/ISIL, Boko Haram, LRA, and others, are copies of how Muhammad run the early Islam, and of how the ideology of the surahs from Medina tells and orders "good" Muslims to behave, such organizations are good samples of how the early Islam was and behaved, and of what we must expect to meet forever in the future, because of the Triad ideology in the Quran. (The Triads were, and partly are, Chinese criminal organizations. They were harsher and bloodier than f.x. the old Chicago Mafia. (Al Capone = a baby Muhammad, but without the religious wrapping?))

########################################################

**097 9/19h: “They (Muslims doing good deeds*) are not comparable in the sight of Allah (with the ones killing/waging raids/war for Muhammad/Allah*)”. Terrorists and others using weapons and murdering for Allah, are the best Muslims.

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

***098 9/20b: “Those who believe, and suffer exile and strive with their might and main (= fight in raids/war*), in Allah’s cause, with their goods (= giving money to war expenses*) and their persons (= fighting personally in raids/war or terrorism - “any stratagem of war”*), have the highest rank in the sight of Allah - - -”.

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

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

***099 9/20c: “Those who believe, and suffer exile and strive with their might and main (= fight in raids/war*), in Allah’s cause, with their goods (= giving money to war expenses*) and their persons (= fighting personally in raids/war or terrorism - “any stratagem of war”*), have the highest rank in the sight of Allah - - -”. It is hardly worth the bother to tell that you find nothing like this in the Bible, not to mention in NT. Yahweh the same god as Allah? Jesus in the same line of prophets as Muhammad? Anyone able to believe such claims either need much more knowledge or a psychiatrist.

***100 9/24a: “If (your closest family or closest relatives*) are dearer to you than Allah, or His Messenger (Muhammad*), or the striving (waging war*) in His (Allah’s*) cause - then wait until Allah brings his Decision (- he will punish you*)”. Islam is a religion of extremes. Nothing - NOTHING - can be permitted to mean more for you than Muhammad - and war for Islam - on this earth, and Allah in the possible next. This is as bad as Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Pol Pot at their most extreme. And friendly contacts - not to mention friendship - with non-Muslims are gigabytes on the way in direction of Hell.

101 9/25e: "- - - the day of Hunayn - - -". In this battle some 10ooo-12ooo Muslim warriors met some 3ooo-4ooo non-Muslims. All the same - perhaps because of over-confidence - the Muslims were on the point of losing the battle before they managed to turn the tide. A good pep talk. The battle-hardened core of Muhammad’s army plus the reality of 3 times as many warriors, finally manage to turn the tide of the battle - but for the morals of the large number of fresh warriors, it of course was better psychology to explain that it was Allah who - as usual - wanted the Muslims to win, and sent down an army of invisible angles fighting together with the Muslims. As said: A good pep talk.

But why does an omnipotent god need to use angels to decide a battle? And how do angels fight in a battle?

102 9/26c: "- - - forces which ye saw not - - -". Muhammad claimed that here like in some other battles Allah sent down large forces of angel warriors to help the Muslims in battles". But why take part in primitive battles, when he - Allah - "just can say 'Be' and it is"? Such claims about the necessity of wars and battles have no meaning when an omniscient god is involved. But if there was no god, but only a charismatic warlord pep-talking to his warriors, then there suddenly is logic in it all.

####103 **9/29a: “Fight those who believe not in Allah - - -.” A most clear order - - - in spite of “no compulsion in religion” (2/256). One of those clear orders which shows reality and belies the glorious words. 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:

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

Also: Combine this quote to Islam's slogan: "Islam is the Religion of Peace" and like above weep - or laugh.

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

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

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

#########104 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%, sometimes even more)) 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 - sometimes so high that the victims had to give in and flee for economical reasons. Comments on how it is to live under such helpless apartheid conditions is not necessary - the Negroes 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 (= tax*) and to Yahweh what is Yahweh's (= belief*)", 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.

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 THE ENTIRE 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 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 built on a "holy" book so full of errors 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!!!

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

105 9/36e: “- - - fight the Pagans all together - - -". Not from the Bible, not to mention from NT. The Quran and especially NT are exactly opposite each other here.

106 9/38b: “O ye who believe! What is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the Cause of Allah (= to go to war*), ye cling heavily to the earth. Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter?” A very rhetoric question it is very difficult for a really pious Muslim not to answer “no” to. And also a question which tells a lot about Islam.

###107 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.

Islam "the Religion of Peace" even today? Do not laugh - weep.

###108 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, DEEDS, 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.

109 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.

110 9/41b: "That (to go to war*) is best for you - - -". See 9/41a just above.

111 9/42a: “If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would (all) without doubt have followed you (Muhammad*) - - -". An indirect, but clear confirming of the fact that many of Muhammad's warriors followed him for the loot, etc. he promised - a fact Muslims deny.

**112 9/44b: “Those who believe in Allah and the Last Day ask for no exemption from striving with their goods and persons (= waging war*)”. Even if you omit the fact that the Bible is about Yahweh, not about Allah, this is in strong contradiction to especially NT. Jesus and Muhammad in the same line of prophets? Believe it if you are able to.

113 9/44d: "- - - striving with their goods and persons". This is Quran-speak for using ones wealth and risking one’s life in war for Allah - or if Allah does not exist, at least for Muhammad.

There is nothing like this in Jesus' words - on the contrary, Jesus accepted no armed fighting. One more of the strong indications for that Jesus and Muhammad were not in the same religion.

114 9/49c: “(Many say*) ‘Grant me exception (from going to war*) and draw me not into trial’. Have they not fallen into trial already?” The Muslims not wanting war are already judged and doomed.

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

115 9/51c: “Nothing can happen to us except what Allah has decreed for us - - -”. Well, Islam tells it is the free will of man that brings on bad incidents in life. This verse contradicts that, to say the least of it. So just go safely to war.

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

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

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

116 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.

***117 9/73b: “Strive (fight*) hard against the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites - - -.” Straight words for your money.

118 9/84a: “Nor do thou ever pray for any of them (those that did not want to go to war*) that dies, nor stand at his grave, for they rejected Allah and (not least?*) His Messenger (Muhammad*), and died in a state of perverse rebellion.” It is perverse not to obey when Islam wants war. If not the carrot of stealing riches, taking slaves and raping women + Heaven should attract the ones reluctant to go to war, then use the whip of heavy social pressure to force them. War is very essential for the Quran. And “is”, not only “was” - “is” for all future.

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

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

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

####119 9/93d: "- - - they (the ones not wanting to go to war*) know not (what they miss)". Comment YA1345: "It is not only a duty, but a precious privilege, to serve a great Cause (Islam*) by personal self-sacrifice (to make war for it*). Those who shirk such an opportunity know not what they miss". This is the point of view of modern Muslim scholars - as mentioned before the comments are recent ones. "The Religion of Peace"? No further comments - and none necessary.

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

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

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

120 9/95a: "They (the ones not wanting to go to war*) will swear to you (Muhammad*) by Allah, when ye return to them, that ye may leave them alone. So leave them alone: for they are an abomination, and Hell is their dwelling-place - a fitting recompense for the (evil) they did". They did the evil of wanting to be excused from going to war, and consequently are an abomination and only deserve Hell. The 180 degree opposite of NT - and adding that in OT the wars were motivated by establishing and defending a national country, whereas in the Quran the wars, etc. are religiously motivated ("holy wars" - every armed incident Muhammad had, he claimed was holy war (Jihad) or holy battle (Ghazwa)) - also OT.

100% and more proof for that Yahweh and Allah were not the same god and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same religion.

121 9/111a: “Allah hath purchased of the Believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the Garden (of Paradise): they fight in His (Allah’s) Cause, and slay and are slain (and go to Paradise afterwards*) - - -.” It may be a good, if de-humanizing (war mostly is) deal - - - if Allah and the Paradise exists. If not the only person gaining anything was Muhammad (and all the mistakes, etc. in the Quran prove absolutely that at least something is seriously wrong).

122 9/111d: “- - - they (warriors/terrorists*) fight in His (Allah’s (or Muhammad’s?*)) cause, and slay and are slain: (and get a 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 on 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"?

123 9/120a: “It was not fitting for the people of Medina and the Bedouin Arabs of the neighborhood, to refuse to follow Allah’s Messenger (to wage war - it refers to the expedition to Tabuk*) - - - “. But it is fitting for Islam to steal and rob and kill end enslave and suppress.

And it was “fitting” to make Muhammad a powerful warlord.

Have you ever heard words like "self-centered" or "selfishness"?

What then about “let there be no compulsion in religion”? - or about religious wars? - not to mention what about honesty and "do unto others like you want others do unto you"? - the basic law behind all real inter-human morality. Not to mention: Can Jesus and Muhammad be in the same line of prophets - (they in case have to preach approximately the same truths, the same basic ideas and the same moral code). No answer necessary - and the same goes for "is Yahweh the same god as Allah"?

#124 22/39a: (NB: 622 or 623 AD): “To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged”. Remark the difference in the wording here on the transition between the rather peaceful Mecca period, and during the bloody and inhuman Medina period afterwards. The same religion? The same god?

####According to Islam this is the first time the theme war for Muslims is mentioned in the Quran (remember the Quran is not ordered chronologically). For 5 years war was not at all mentioned, and the first 12 - 14 years war was not a topic, and then over the short period of some months it became the central topic and sure way to Paradise. What had happened to Allah? - and why had he cheated his followers by not telling about this simple and sure way to Paradise before? Sure even for the greatest sinners. (Though definitely not a sure way to Yahweh's Paradise. The same god? The same religion for Jesus and for Muhammad? Definitely not.)

125 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 and slave taking after many wars and raids, 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 or characterize 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 is the shining moral sample for Islam on how to behave.

Please read the claim once more- do you want to laugh or to weep?

126 29/69a: “And those who strive in Our (Cause) – We (Allah*) will certainly guide them to Our Paths - - -“. With so much wrong in the Quran, it is likely that this is wrong, too. At least it is far from a certainty. Also see 29/6 above.

127 30/9a: "Do they not travel throughout the earth, and see what was the End of those before them?" This is a theme which is repeated many times in the Quran. In and around Arabia there were ruins and deserted buildings and villagers and some towns - and there were tales about former people now gone. Muhammad claimed they all were result if Allah's punishments for sins. Science disagrees, as there are many other possible explanations. Islam will have to prove their never documented claims if they want to make science believe what they say. It seems like Muhammad is bluffing.

128 33/9b: "- - - when there came down on you (Muslims*) hosts (to overwhelm you) - - -". In the 3 battles between Muslims and Mecca, the Muslims each time were outnumbered. But it is a military fact that attack is more difficult and dangerous than defense, and the will to fight - plus the trench and the weather in the last case - decided the outcome: Muslims won at Badr, lost at Uhud, but for a price which made Mecca wait too long before following up the narrow victory, and a draw at Medina, which in reality won the war for Muhammad.

129 33/13a: "Ye man of Yathrib! Ye cannot stand (the attack)! Therefore go back!" There was some pessimism before the siege and some wanted out of the war. But it may also refer to the battle of Uhud, where some 300 left Muhammad before the battle. Or it may refer to some raid or something - it was common that the ones not wanting to go to war, tried to find an excuse for staying at home.

130 33/15b: "- - - they (Muslims*) had already a covenant with Allah not to turn their back (in war/battle) - - -". Quite a covenant for any dictator to push his warriors - would have been a dream for any such one - - - and Muhammad had it! Not to mention: Compare this to NT!!!

##131 33/15c: "- - - they (Muslims*) had already a covenant with Allah not to turn their back (in war/battle) - - -". Also quite a theme for a covenant with/from the claimed good and benevolent god of "the religion of peace". Try to compare this with: "You shall not kill (or sometimes translated 'murder')" (The 10 Commandments, 2. Mos. 20/13), not to mention "Turn the other cheek" in the time of the New Covenant (Luke.22/20).

A mystery: Why did an omnipotent god need humans to fight for him? His omnipotence makes this meaningless. But everything suddenly gets meanings if it was Muhammad and not Allah who needed the warriors.

There also is another fact which often strikes us when the Quran claims that Yahweh and Allah are the same god: The Mosaic religion had a rather strict god - Yahweh could be harsh and strict and bloody. But his harshness and his tendencies to be bloody had a limited purpose: To make the Jews a believing people and to create space for a homeland for them. When this was done - at least after a fashion - - - and when there for the first time in history came a period of peace and international open connections - the Pax Romana (27 BC to 180 AD) - long enough for a peaceful religion to set strong enough roots to survive later harsh times in this normally unruly part of the world, he let the more peaceful and human sides of his religion take over. All this for suddenly changing his mind around 622 AD when Muhammad started to need warriors and moral explanation for his raids of thieving, enslaving and murder, and not only return to the harsher version of his religion from OT, but taking it far into Odin's and Thor's Valhalla (gods and the Paradise of the Vikings) and blood and war, or Djingis Khan's pure religion of war - or actually even further. We repeat: NOT when Muhammad stared the new religion in 610, but when he started to need warriors in 622-623!!

And a thought which strikes us is: This god must have a "jumbled up" "top floor" to change his mind frequently and much:

If Muhammad and the Quran are correct on this point, the god drifted from a rather benevolent, but strict religion (OT) with some harsh spots, towards a religion (NT) dominated of mildness and love. (Before you fire your machine-guns: Remember we are talking about how the book tells the religion should be, not how it in reality was practiced or disused some times and places).

Then suddenly in 622 AD in the space of a few months, the god not only returns to his stricter and obsolete OT-ideas, but creates a new and full-fledged apartheid, hate, dishonesty, and war religion (that Islam is "the religion of peace" is pure al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) and propaganda - just read the Quran and the Hadiths and see for yourself, only remember that when nice words are contradicted by harsh demands and deeds and rules, it is the demands and deeds and rules which are telling the truth, not the nice, but cheap words). And not least: Read what imams, mullahs, and other scholars tell Muslims - not the rest of the world, but Muslims - about the glorious duty of fighting wars.

And our thoughts continue: This god is a master of mental slalom - or he is undecided. Or is the reason inability to make up his mind?

To our knowledge there never before - or after - was a religion which drifted from benevolent, but strict, to peace and love, for them to change once more, and now to the very opposite: A religion of discrimination, superiority complex, and a pure and war religion - from politeness and from a small feeling that the word "hate" is just a little too strong, we omit that word here.

To our knowledge there also never in history was another religion which change so completely - here from relatively peaceful to a full war religion - in such a short time: Just some months, maximum 2 years (in the period 622 - 624 AD).

Did Allah find peace too boring and changed his mind ones more to get more action and blood and human misery?

Or was it Muhammad who suddenly wanted warriors for his raids?

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

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

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

###132 33/16c: “Running away will not profit you (Muslim warriors*), if ye are running away from death or slaughter, and even if (ye do escape), no more than a brief (respite) will ye be allowed to enjoy”. Well, this proves two things: It is not possible to escape predestination - no matter what Islam tries to tell you today that "it is not real predestination" (with full predestination man has no free will, and it is immoral by Allah to punish for sins or reward for good deeds) - and that in spite of the Quran, you at least can change your destination with “a brief respite“. A respite that at least has to be for some hours or days - if not there had been newly-dead frightened warriors laying around the nearest tens and more kilometers from some battlefields (because of their predestined hour or minute of death) - dead for no obvious reasons after fleeing from battle.

This in addition to that modern statistical science long since has proved this verse nonsense. This even more so as even if they had got "no more than a brief (respite)", the laws of chaos then had changed the future - and Allah's precognition was gone.

But Muhammad got many and terrific, but naïve warriors - - - and was so intelligent that he had to know he was lying.

And this goes for each and every time he said things like this.

 

Another fact is that even if a man died at the same time whether he tilled his garden of fought in a battle, the very fact that he died another place, would change the future. And if he died a little later if he fled from a battle, the time factor would add to that change. Both are scientific facts the Quran "overlooks".

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

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

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

133 33/18e: "- - - (some bad men*) come not to fight except for a little while". Not good followers of Allah.

Compare this to NT. Definitely not the same god - and Jesus and Muhammad even more surely not in the same line of prophets (even if Muhammad had been a real prophet).

"The Religion of Peace"? A god of peace?

##134 33/19b: "- - - covetous of goods". Stealing/robbing - and raping, enslaving and suppressing - were heavy motifs for many of the warriors. And Islam never debates the economic, cultural and human catastrophes "the religion of peace" under a good and benevolent god and a semi-saintly self proclaimed prophet inflicted on millions. They only talk about the glorious warriors, stolen riches, lots of slaves and slave women, and power. Where is the ethics, the moral, the empathy? If you read Muslim religious literature, you will see that the fundamental mentality and ideology are the same today.

"Do unto others like you want others do unto you"?

When did you f.x. hear a Muslim apologize for the slaves taken from and the girls and women raped in - and valuables stolen from or humans killed in - Africa through the centuries, so as to make Muslims rich?

#####135 33/19d: "Such men (who do not want to fight*) have no faith - - -.” What does it tell about Muhammad and Islam - and Allah - that they stated that unless you were a willing warrior, you were no good Muslim? Some contrast to propaganda about "Islam is the Religion of Peace"!! But then Muslims and Islam seldom claim that "Islam is the Religion of Honesty".

###136 33/21a: “Ye (Muslims*) have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the final Day - - -“. Wrong. Thieving/robbing, dishonesty, womanizing, raping, lying, betraying, extorting, torture, suppressing, murdering, hate mongering, war mongering, mass murder, raids for robbing and killing, and wars of aggression – that is no “beautiful pattern” according to any human moral or ethical philosophy, except in some war religions, included Islam - and perhaps in Satanism. It tells volumes about Islam that this man is their greatest hero and shining idol. The claim is strongly contradicted by the realities in his teachings and his life, based on Islamic historical sources.

But it is worth remembering that Islam uses the same glorious words about Muhammad and all his deeds and "undeeds" today, like the ones Muhammad here used about himself. It tells something about Islam and about some Muslims - especially about the leaders and the scholars who really know the Quran and Muhammad.

Worse: There is no doubt that it is IS/ISIL, Boko Haram, LRA, and other such ones who are living in accordance with Muhammad's and the Quran's demands and moral, etc. codes - not the moderate Muslims.

**137 33/26d: “And those of the People of the Book (the Jews of the Qurayza tribe - see above*) who had aided them - Allah did take them down from their strongholds and cast terror in their hearts. (So that) some ye (the Muslims/Muhammad) slew, and some ye made prisoners.” Very simple and “lawful and good” - to quote another verse - mass murdering, enslavement, rape, and robbery. The same happened to most of the ones who earlier had been chased away from Medina, but not fled far enough - the ones who had stopped in Khaybar had men killed and the women and children raped and enslaved. Allah is good and benevolent and gave the Arabs much loot and many slaves to rape and use in other ways. Muslims - not even today - never reflected over that to steal and rape and enslave and murder you had to ruin and destroy the lives of other humans. This fact is never mentioned by "the religion of peace", never reflected on, never compared to ethics or moral or sympathy or empathy in any Islamic media or publication we have met or heard about.

Well, on thinking it over we are wrong - it is compared to the Quran's moral code: The Quran clearly says "it is lawful and good". This tells a lot about the religion.

A good and loving god and a peaceful religion - and this was far from the only pogrom in Muslim countries through the times. But it is typical that Allah sanctified the attack only afterwards. (Perhaps except Khaybar - if Muhammad told the truth). ALSO SEE 33/26c.

138 33/27a: (Continued from 33/26 above): "And He (Allah*) made you heirs of their land, their houses, their goods, and of land ye had not frequented (before) - - -". Muhammad "on the war-path" stole everything - in this case also their homes and land - - - in addition to making the women and children slaves and murdering the men (some 700 men and youths).

Muhammad was very different from Jesus. Very. And living in a totally different religion.

But Muslims and Islam became rich. Attraction for potential new warriors.

139 33/27b: “And He (Allah*) made you (Muslims*) heirs of their (Jews'*) land, their houses, and their goods, and of a land which ye had not frequented (before). And Allah has power over all things”. Some rich spoils of war can justify much, and quiet many a man’s conscience - especially when a god sanctifies it. Could such things happen today or in the future? - we do not mention names like Darfur or Indonesia or East Timor or the Turks against Christian underlings around 1900 AD - f.x. in Armenia and Smyrna. It is accepted in the Quran as "lawful and good" and the Quran cannot be changed - a fact those forget who talk about liberalizing Islam. If Islam gains the upper hand, things like this may happen again, as it is part of the Quran's unchangeable and partly immoral moral code.

And like Muhammad did against the Jews in and around Medina - stealing even their farms and houses (mad Muslims "heirs" of it) - Islam frequently did other places later = one more incitement for warriors to go to war and perhaps "inherit" a farm or something.

Muhammad was very different from Jesus. Very. And living in a totally different religion.

###140 33/51g: "- - - Allah is All-Knowing - - -". How can it then be possible he does not know that to have all your possessions stolen is a catastrophe for anybody, that to be made a slave is destroying for the life of any human? - and how can it be possible that he does not know that to be raped is destroying for the life of a woman - not to mention a child?. Or does he know, but does not care as long as his warriors and terrorists get money and pleasure and power?

######These rules are not only unethical and immoral, but downright disgusting - especially the point that it should be done in the name of a god (during/after "holy" war - jihad).

"Do to others like you want others do to you".

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

141 37/97a: YA 4093: "The argument - - - was so sound that it could not be met by argument. In such cases Evil resorts to violence, or secret plotting." IS THIS THE REASON WHY MUHAMMAD DID AND ISLAM/MUSLIMS SO EASILY AND SO OFTEN RESORTS TO SECRET PLOTTING AND VIOLENCE?

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

142 41/41b: "And indeed it (the Quran*) is a Book of exalted power". This really needs proofs - especially because of all the errors, etc. in the book, and the fact that it is not from any god - too much is wrong.

Well, like f.x. communism, Nazism, and a number of war religions, etc., the Quran had and still has an explosive power. But it is the power of an ideology combined with ruthlessness - a combination which many times through history has given strong results (also f.x. in the Mafia, the Cosa Nostra, the Chinese Triads, etc. - ######have you ever noticed the similarity between many points in the Quran's moral code, and the corresponding points in the moral codes of such organizations?)). But the supernatural power from a god is only possible if a real god is involved - and no god, not to mention an omniscient one, was ever involved in a book of a quality like the Quran with all its mistaken facts, other errors, contradictions, unclear language, cases of invalid logic, etc., etc. (And no good and benevolent god has ever even touched the bad parts of the Quran's and Islam's moral code.)

##########143 42/45e: (A42/47 - English 2008 edition A4246): "Thus the above sentence implies that every kind of evildoing (zulm), ####and particularly the oppression of others, results in a spiritual injury to, and ultimately the self-destruction of, its perpetrators and/or their followers". ######Read the Quran's moral code, laws, and rules concerning points of view on and treatment of non-Muslims - includes suppression and oppression of them. Also compare this to the one basic moral code: "Do onto others like you want others do onto you" - and weep. This sentence tells a lot about why many Muslim societies are like they are - and may be about why Islam and Muslims are widely disliked. (As for the latter also Islam's/Muslims' haughtiness and Islam's aggressive ideology count a lot.)

What does this sentence tell about Islam and about its Muslims? - because this also goes for them.

§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§

###144 47/4c: This is a really serious one: “Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; at length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them) - - -.” BUT OUR SOURCES TELL THAT THE WORDS “(in fight)” IS NOT WRITTEN IN THE ARAB TEXT – IT IS ADDED BY THE TRANSLATOR (and by more than one). Muslims primarily shall read the Quran in Arab, and there in case our sources are correct the text is: “Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers, smite at their necks - - -“. It in case simply is a permanent order to be aggressive.

The real religion of peace. Not to mention a real god of peace.

Al-Taqiyya is the name for "lawful lies" in Islam, and are advised to be used "if necessary" to defend or promote the religion.

######The world should never forget that Islam in Medina was turned into a religion of hate, superiority claims, apartheid, suppression, blood and war, and that this is the Quran and Islam also today, as the surahs from Medina according to Islam's rules for abrogation (making points in the Quran invalid) supersedes the ones from Mecca, because the ones from Medina are younger. Neither should the world ever forget that the Quran and Islam accept the use of dishonesty as a working tool, if that gives a better result - even advice to use it in some cases "if necessary" (to defend or promote Islam). ########Most Muslims are ok persons, but one should never forget neither the demands for war and suppression and nor the moral code in the Quran.

§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§

145 47/4i: "- - - but (He (Allah*) lets you fight) in order to test you - - -". Why - why does an omniscient and omnipotent god need to test his followers - he knows everything and predestines everything!? There is no logic in this sentence, unless it in reality is Muhammad who wants warriors and needs an "explanation".

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

#####146 47/4n: (A47/4): "In other words, when "those who are bent on denying the truth (the Quran with all its mistakes, etc.*)', deprive the Muslims of their social and political liberty and thus make it impossible for them to live in accordance with the principle of their faith, a just war (jihad) becomes allowable and, more than that, a duty". In this connection it is very thought provoking that according to the Quran the principle of Islam includes that Muslims shall rule and everyone else suppressed and without political power or influence - and "paying jizya - extra tax - "with willing submission". This is the official and final goal for Islam according to the Quran. Think this over.

Also denial of burka, restrictions on other Muslim cultural customs, denial to accept points in Islam's moral code, etc., etc. may be seen as a reason for war and terror, at least by strong believers and by extremists. And we all have seen and heard what such ones may do.

#######For people or religions suppressed under Islam there are no similar rules.

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

147 47/21a: “- - - it were best for them (the ones not strong in belief*) if they were true to Allah (= war).” That also is best also for you. But what did following the Quran mean? As it is not from a god, it does not mean being true to any god. True to dark forces? - or to men? - or to the robber baron and later warlord Muhammad?

**148 48/15a: “Those who lagged behind (did not take active part in the battle or raid*) - - -". Those reluctant to take part in raids and war, though in just this case it may refer to the ones who did not want to come along on the pilgrimage which ended in the treaty of Hudaybiyah, but most of what the Quran says, have general implications. (Texts in the Quran often are not very clear, in spite of what Muslims and Islam claim).

One should remember this fact that now like then far from all Muslims want strife and war, etc. Very far from all Muslims are bad people.

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

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

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

##149 48/15c: (A48/14): “- - - when ye (Muslims*) (are free to) march and take plunder (in war) - - -.” Or: “As soon as you (O Muslims!) are about to set forth on a war that promises booty - - -.” For some strange (?) reasons in none of our different translations are used the literal meaning of the Arab text (translated from Swedish): “- - - leave on a raid to take plunder - - -.” May be sometimes the varieties in the understanding of the Quranic texts are because one does not want to tell what really is said in the book. According to Islamic information or disinformation all Muhammad’s some 82 raids (we have the names of some 60 of the raids) were in self defense, and then it may as well be wise for “the Religion of Peace” to “mend” the text a little and make it more tasteful and "correct"? - instead of translating the Quran correctly and have to admit that Muhammad made "raids to take plunder" - not very holy jihads.

#####"The Religion of Peace"??? #####"The Religion of Honesty"??? - #########remember that stealing and not only lying is dishonesty.

##150 48/15d: (A48/14): “- - - when ye (Muslims*) (are free to) march and take plunder (in war) - - -.” Or: “As soon as you (O Muslims!) are about to set forth on a war that promises booty - - -.” Try to find things like this in NT! One more at least 100% proof for that Yahweh and Allah were not the same god - and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same line of anything of any consequence.

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

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

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

151 48/17i: “- - - and he (see first part of 48/17a-c above*) who turns back (from doing battle*) (Allah) will punish him with a grievous Penalty.” No more comments necessary. But try to find things like this in NT! One more at least 100% proof for that Yahweh and Allah were not the same god - and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same line of anything of any consequence.

152 48/20f: (A48/23 – in 2008 edition A22): “Allah has promised you many gains that ye shall acquire - - -.” Booty. A good and cheap way to get warriors. But does it here only talk about “gold and slaves and a few rapes” in this life (may be Khaybar in this case), or also riches in the next life like among others Ibn Abbas thought?

The price paid by the victims NEVER - then or now - interested neither Allah, nor Islam, nor the Muslims, nor Muhammad. What does this tell about them? - and about Islam?

153 57/11b: “Who is he that will loan to Allah a beautiful loan (this expression in the Quran normally means to risk or give your life (in war)*)? For (Allah) will increase it manifold to his credit, and he will have (besides) a liberal reward.” Paradise for being killed in raid for riches or in war (see 57/11a above). Compare this to especially NT. One of the minimum 200% proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - and Jesus and Muhammad morally antipodes.

###154 59/4a: "That (see 59/2a, 59/2d, 59/3a above) is because they resisted Allah and his Messenger (Muhammad) - - -". This is very interesting information, because practically all Muhammad's armed conflicts were because of aggression from the Muslims - even Badr, Uhud, and The Trench were defense battles in a war of aggression started and kept alive by Muhammad and his raids against caravans, etc. Also in this case it seems that Banu al-Nadir had not helped an enemy, but they had not helped Muhammad, and they were negative to him and Muhammad found an excuse to attack (NB: Most Muslims honestly believe Banu al-Nadir helped some enemy, because that is what they are told). Thus what Muhammad really is saying here, is that it is prohibited to defend yourself from his/Islam's aggression and raids for money and slaves, or other aggression.

######Beware of a crucial word her: "resisted". Not "attacked", but "resisted".

"The Religion of Peace"!! And "The Religion of Honesty".

At least: Clearly a god of war.

**155 61/4b: “Truly Allah loves those who fight in His Cause in battle array as if they were a solid cemented structure”. The ones who say the Quran is as good as the Bible, not to mention NT, have never read the Quran - which we can say even if we are not very Christian.

  1. A god loving mass slaughter and murderers!!!
  2. If that is a good god, I do hope I never meet a bad one.
  3. And this is the icon and ideal of Islam!
  4. Will you like to live in a Muslim society in a world ruled by such a religion?
  5. And remember: War and hate is only one part of Islam.

But this is a mighty incitement and war propaganda mixed with romancing of war – and everyone at this time knew about spoils of war and slaves and free women to rape, etc.

But Allah never gave even one valid proof for that he was a god and loved war and warriors.

In religions there normally is a percentage of fanatics and extremism. In Islam these are channelled into war and terrorism. In a way as bad: In all cultures and countries there are low quality men - riff-raff - with a liking for "easy money" - f.x. by stealing - and for physical suppression, rape, dishonesty, fighting, etc. In Islam also the riff-raff is channelled into "holy warriors" - - - with very obvious and natural results.

156 61/11c: “That ye (people*) believe in Allah and His Messenger, and that ye strive (your utmost) in the cause of Allah, with your property and your persons: that will be best for you, if ye but knew!” Strongly contradicted by the Bible. The Quran simply is the anti-thesis of the teaching of Jesus and NT. One of the 200% proof for that Jesus and Muhammad had nothing of any essence in common - in spite of a couple of verses from NT Muslims like to quote (they claim that you cannot draw any conclusions from just one or a few verses in the Quran - you have to look at the complete book - but they themselves cherry-pick the few words in the Bible, and damn be the picture the complete book gives - - - this even if they have to twist the cherry-picked words they find to be able to use them (f.x. the word "brother" in the speech by Moses (5. Mos. 18/2+15+18+21 - well, Muslims never quote but 18/15+18 and then twist the word "brother")). Not to mention how strongly it proves that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

157 61/11h: "- - - that (to fight for Allah/Muhammad*) will be best for you, if ye but knew!” Only the Quran tells the full truth and the whole truth and with nothing wrong in that book - - - according to the Quran. Especially if Allah is part of the dark forces it may not be the best. Not to mention if there is a second life and there is a good and benevolent real god "over there" - one Muhammad prohibited his followers from looking for.

158 61/12a: “(If you go to war and/or are killed for Muhammad*) He (Allah*) will forgive you your sins, and admit you to Gardens beneath which rivers flow, and to beautiful mansions in Gardens of eternity - - -.” There once was a cheap book named “All this and Heaven too”. It is similar here: All the rape and stealing and slaves you can manage – and for those good, benevolent deeds for your as benevolent god: The Paradise with more luxury and more women. Nice and attractive for naïve, poor and virile – not to say virulent – uncivilized young and not young men.

As for forgiving from Allah: See 2/187d above.

#159 61/12j: "- - - that (Allah's paradise*) is the Supreme Achievement". One more solid proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, not to mention that Jesus and Muhammad are fundamentally too different to have deep similarities on central points.

160 61/13b: “(And in war you will get*) help from Allah and a speedy victory.” See 61/12a above – and in addition you will not have to fight much, for the victory will be easy. Yes, "the religion of Peace". Not to mention "the god of Peace"?

161 64/17a: “If you loan to Allah, a beautiful loan - - -". In the Quran this expression normally incites you to fight in raids/war for Allah/Muhammad and risk your life for him/them - the best of all religious deeds according to the Quran.

162 64/17b: “If you loan to Allah, a beautiful loan, He will double it to your (credit), and he will grant you Forgiveness - - -“. Very similar thinking to the worst medieval excesses made by the Roman Catholic Church once upon a time. But good slogans for recruiting warriors – and money.

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

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

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

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

##### Another dark fact: As the Quran teaches a harsh religion of suppression and blood, there ALWAYS will pop up extreme Muslims who want to use force and terror, dishonesty and murder to satisfy the demands and idols and live like Muhammad and according to his words and terrorism, no matter where in the world they live. Naive or wishful thinkers, fanatic Muslims, ruffians who find an outlet for their violent desires, etc., etc. This will never come to an end. The West and the rest of the world just have to accept this fact and prepare for it. Unless information eradicates Islam over centuries or millenniums.

A "taste of that cake":

 

MUSLIM TERRORIST GROUPS BY SEPTEMBER 2014.

(This list is from the net. We have not checked how active all of these terrorist groups are. On the other hand the list is not complete + it does not include minor groups or individuals behaving like the listed groups. Beware that only the harshest and bloodiest may compete with Muhammad in the Medina period - he was hard and bloody and quite inhuman. There also is no doubt that it is these groups and not the peaceful majority of Muslims who are living according to Muhammad's idols and the Quran's moral code, demands and orders. The Quran after all teaches a religion of dishonesty, stealing/looting, suppression, slave taking, rape, apartheid, inferiority/superiority, hate, and blood.

  • 01 Abdullah Assam Brigades
  • 02 Abu Nidal Organization
  • 03 Abu Sayyaf
  • 04 Aden-Abyan Islamic Army
  • 05 Al-Aqsa Foundation
  • 06 Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades
  • 07 Al-Badr
  • 08 Al Ghurabaa
  • 09 Al-Haramain Foundation
  • 10 Al-Itihaad-Islamiyya
  • 11 Al-Mourabitoun
  • 12 Al-Nusra Front
  • 13 Al-Queda
  • 14 Al-Queda in Islamic Maghreb
  • 15 Al-Shabaab
  • 16 Al-Umar-Mujahideen
  • 17 Ansar al-Islam
  • 18 Ansar al-Sharia (Libya)
  • 19 Ansar al-Sharia (Tunisia)
  • 20 Ansar Bait al-Maqdis
  • 21 Ansar Dine
  • 22 Ansaru
  • 23 Armed Islamic Group of Algeria
  • 24 Army of Islam
  • 25 Boko Haram
  • 26 Caucasus Emirate
  • 27 Deendar Anjuman
  • 28 Dukhtaran-e-Millat
  • 29 East Turkestan Islamic Movement
  • 30 East Turkestan Liberation Organization
  • 31 Egyptian Islamic Jihad
  • 32 El Kaide Terör Örgütü Türkiye Yapsılanması
  • 33 Gama'a al-Islamiyya
  • 34 Great Eastern Islamic Raiders' Front
  • 35 Hamas
  • 36 Haqqani Network
  • 37 Harakat ulMujahideed/Alami
  • 38 Harkat al-Jihad al-Islami in Bangladesh
  • 39 Harkat ul-Jihad al-Islami
  • 40 Harkat ul-Mujahideen
  • 41 Hezb-e Islami Gulbuddin
  • 42 Hezbollah
  • 43 Hezbollah al-Hejaz
  • 44 Hezbollah (External Security Organisation)
  • 45 Hezbollah (Militaty wing)
  • 46 Hizb ul-Tahir
  • 47 Hizbul Mujahideen
  • 48 Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development
  • 49 Houthis
  • 50 Indian Mujahideen
  • 51 IS/ISIL ##(behaving like a minor brother of Muhammad and his followers)
  • 52 Islamic Jihad - Jamaat Mujahideen
  • 53 Islamic Jihad Union
  • 54 Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
  • 55 Islamic State - IS (before: "- of Iraq and the Levant - ISIL)
  • 56 Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades
  • 57 Jamaat Alsar al-Sunna
  • 58 Jamaat e-Mohammed
  • 59 Jamaat ul-Furquan
  • 60 Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh
  • 61 Jamiat al-Islah al-Idzhtimai
  • 62 Jamiat-e Islami
  • 63 Jamiat ul-Ansar
  • 64 Jemaah Ansharut Tauhid
  • 65 Jemaah Islamiyah
  • 66 Jund al-Sham
  • 67 Jundallah
  • 68 Kata'ib Hezbollah
  • 69 Khuddam ul-Islam
  • 70 Lashkar-e-Jhangvi
  • 71 Lashkar-e-Taiba
  • 72 Libyan Fighting Group
  • 73 LRA (in Central African Republic)
  • 74 Moroccan Islamic Combattant Group
  • 75 Mujahideen Shura Council in the Environs of Jerusalem
  • 76 Muslim Brotherhood
  • 77 Osbat al-Ansar
  • 78 Palestine Liberation Front
  • 79 Palestine Liberation Organization - PLO
  • 80 Palestinian Islamic Jihad
  • 81 People's Mujahedeen of Iran
  • 82 Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine
  • 83 Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command
  • 84 Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan
  • 85 Society of the Revival of Islamic Heritage
  • 86 Stitching Al Aqsa
  • 87 Students Islamic Movement of India
  • 88 Supreme Military Majlis ul-Shura of the United Mujahideen Forces of Caucasus
  • 89 Takfir wal-Hijra
  • 90 Taliban
  • 91 Tehreek-e-Nafaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi
  • 92 Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan
  • 93 The Saved Sect
  • 94 Vanguards of Conquest
  • 95 World Uygur Youth Congress
  •  
    One main and most serious point is that it is Muslims like these who live like Muhammad did in Medina, and like the Quran permits, glorifies, and even demands and orders - and with Muhammad as the glorious idol (in nearly double meaning) - terrorism, suppression, etc. will never come to an end. There will always and forever be religious fanatics, wishful thinkers, religious romantics, war romantics, etc. who "follow the leader, and not least ruffians who find an outlet for their bullish and brutal tendencies through following all the superiority, hate and blood verses in the Quran. Stealing/looting, extortion, raping, and slave taking also always and forever will be a "lawful and good" extra attraction - or for some the only attractions.
    ######## The world should be aware of this.
    #######And all this because of a book so full of wrong facts, other errors, contradictions, invalid logic, unclear language, etc. that there is no god behind it. No omniscient god makes mistakes by the hundreds, contradictions, etc. and more. And no good and benevolent god have rules, moral and ethical codes, and demands which at least to a very measurable part better fits the dark forces.


    As for forgiving from Allah: See 2/187d above.

    #####163 73/20e: (A73/12 - English 2008 edition 73/13): "- - - there is no doubt that jihad was first sanctioned during the Medina period - - -". This confirms that Muhammad/Allah and Islam did not think about or talk about or insist on or glorify war until after Muhammad started needing warriors for his raids for riches and later also for conquests, in and after 622 AD. Was this very fundamental change in the religion at this time a coincidence? And why did not the omniscient god Allah know before 622 AD - and Muhammad's need for warriors - that fighting was a good thing, a duty for all fit Muslim men, and a sure way to Paradise for even the worst sinner?

    164 73/20f: "- - - fighting in Allah's cause - - -". One of the at least 200% proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. Even in the centuries when the Jews fought wars - mainly (not exclusively, but mainly) from Joshua around 1195 BC and some centuries on - it was to establish and later defend a country for the Jews, NOT for the sake of the god. And to try to compare it with NT, is a waste of time. "Islam, the Religion of Peace" - is it a slogan based on al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) or an unintended black joke? (Why do Islam and Muslims so seldom claim that "Islam is the Religion of Honesty"?)

    **************************************************************************************

    GHAZWA - "HOLY" BATTLE

    The word "Ghazw" or "Ghazwa" mostly are translated with "Holy Battle", but originally it meant a raid for riches and slave taking - and this was the reality behind most of Muhammad's Ghazwas, too. They simply were raids for riches, extortion, rape, and slave taking. The word is not used in the Quran, but you meet it in the Hadiths.

    Sub-total Chapter 28 = 164 + 2.946 = 3.110.


    >>> 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".