Muhammad in the Quran, Vol. 2: Chapter 45


 

PROSELYTING BY MUHAMMAD

Proselyting of course was essential for Muhammad - to spread his religion was essential. But this also had an obvious extra effect, especially after Muhammad started as a robber baron: More followers meant more armed power. Some samples of his arguments - you will find more in the Quran:

You will see that texts here often are the same as in the chapter about Muhammad seducing people - for the simple reason that these topics are very similar. (The same to a good degree goes for the chapter "Incitement to war" (for the simple reason that Islam in spite of nice slogans is a religion of war)).

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

001 2/4e: "- - - (Muslims*) have the assurance of the Hereafter" If Allah exists. If he is behind the Quran. And if the Quran in addition tells the full truth and only the truth on this point.

002 2/5a: "They (the believers*) are on (true) guidance - - -”. With so many mistaken facts, the guidance at best is partly true.

003 2/10d: "- - - and grievous is the penalty they (non-Muslims*) (incur) - - -." Do they really deserve to be punished for what Allah decided 5 months before they were even born, that they had to do in the future, and without being permitted by Allah to change their destiny? Allah is a hard and unfaith god it seems too often.

004 2/25e: “- - - their (Muslims’*) portion is Gardens, beneath which rivers flow." This is the most frequently used Arabism (see 4/13d below) in the Quran. Water was essential to desert people. Is Islam a religion for desert inhabitants originally?

005 2/25i: "- - - companions pure - - -". These are the famous houris - the beautiful and willing women whom nobody knows where come from. How is Paradise for them? - having to serve and be sex toys for uneducated, self centered, rough and worse warriors for eternity? (The Quran does not mention sex, but it is clearly implicated, and be sure that was what eager young - and not young - primitive warriors were dreaming about during lonesome nights on raids for money and slaves. (Most of Muhammad's many raids were for money and slaves - and extortion afterwards. See separate list about his raids and wars.)) The Quran never mention one word about how they - or the male servants -enjoy life in Paradise. The Quran and Islam do not give a damn about others, only the good Muslims - and mainly the warriors - from Earth. (This part of Muhammad's teaching is borrowed from Persian pagan religion.)

Actually the Muslim Paradise is quite like the Zoroastrian one (Zoroastrians mainly lived in Persia, one of the big trading partners for Arabia. The Arabs knew that religion – hardly as well as the Mosaic or the Christian religions, but at least superficially.) The houris there were named paaris. Also see 19/71 above. (Also the Jewish and Christian - and the Muslim one - Hell may have got some inspiration from the Zoroastrian one.)

006 2/25l: "- - - they (god Muslims*) abide therein (Paradise*) (for ever)". If Allah exists. If he is behind the Quran. And if the Quran in addition tells the full truth and only the truth on everything concerning this point. But beware that 11/108c may indicate that the Quran's paradise is not quite forever. Islam does not know, but claims - as normal without documentation - that it in case means that the good Muslims will be transferred to an even better place. An easy way out of a problem - but not mentioned in the Quran.

007 2/28f: "- - - (Allah*) will again bring you (persons*) to life (after death*) - - -". Muhammad/Allah were many times asked for proofs for thing like this, but were unable to prove neither this nor anything else - nothing of any consequence is proved even by simple witnesses in Islam. Until documented these are just some more cheap words. There are many cheap words in the Quran. Yahweh many times proved his ability to resurrect the dead (f.x. 1. Kings 17/22, 2. Kings 4/35, Mark 5/71, John 11/44, Luke 7/15, Matt. 27/52, Acts 20/10) if the Bible tells the truth, Allah was never able to prove anything.

008 2/39a: “But those who reject Faith (see 2/39d below*) and belie Our (Allah’s*) Signs, they shall be Companions of the Fire - - -”. Just as well or as little documented as what was said about heaven in 2/25 above. Just words anyone can use - obey Baal or Zeus and go to Heaven, and disobey him and go to Hell. Anyone can say anything as long as he can evade demands for proofs. Also see 3/77b below.

009 2/46a: “(Muslims*) bear in mind the certainty that they are to meet their Lord (Allah*), and that they are to return to Him (at the Day of Doom*)”. Muslims want to - and do - believe this. But they only have the words of an often brutal and at least sometimes unreliable robber baron and warlord for it. A statement without a proof - something not valid, and of no value except for politicians and cheaters. No judge had accepted such a statement as a proof in a criminal case. And a possible next life is much more essential than f.x. a petty burglary case in a court. The claim only may be true if Allah exists, if he is a major god and if he speaks through the Quran. At least that he speaks there, is a certainty is wrong.

010 2/48b: (At the Day of Doom no help is possible for your soul), "nor shall intercession be accepted (by Allah*) for her (your soul*) - - -". Wrong - it is clearly said other places that intercession is possible if Allah permits it - and it is clear there that he may permit it in some cases. Also see 2/48c just below.

011 2/83b: "- - - worship none but Allah - - -". A strong contradiction to the Bible, which says "none but Yahweh". This contradiction clearly arises from the fact that Muhammad (wrongly - the main thoughts and ideas are too different in the Quran compared to the Bible, and especially compared to NT and its New Covenance (f.x. Luke 22/20)) claimed Yahweh just was another name for Allah.

012 2/120d: “The Guidance of Allah (the Quran*) – that is the only Guidance”. A book with so many mistakes and contradictions, so much invalid logic, and so much inhumanity is not at all a guidance – more likely a misguidance. Also a contradiction of the Bible.

013 2/125-132: This is too long to quote, but it is clear that according to the Quran Abraham was a devoted Muslim and bowed to Allah in Islam long before Muhammad. These verses thus clearly contradict the verse 6/14 and some others in one of the two possible meanings of that verse. See 6/14 below. Not to mention that it contradicts the OT where Abraham is said to believe in Yahweh.

There also is an extra point here: The so-called Mosaic religion never was a proselyting one. And for nearly 2ooo years Abraham and his descendants never did much proselyting. Islam is a strongly proselyting religion - even by means of strong compulsions and sometimes death warnings and murder to force people stay or become Muslims. This very central difference - a historical fact - is one more proof for that Abraham and his descendants never were Muslims.

014 2/137c: “- - - (Muslims are*) on the right path - - -“. Can a “path” based on a book full of mistakes and dictated by a man of very doubtful moral, and clearly not from a god, really be said to be “the right path”? And as Allah cannot be the same god as Yahweh - too different teachings - this also is a contradiction to the Bible, as Islam is not on the same "path" as the Bible and especially not NT and its new covenant preaches; one is a religion of blood and war and suppression (that Islam is the religion of peace simply is an al-Taqiyya - a lawful lie (something you only find in Islam of the big religions) - read the surahs from Medina and weep), partly based on dishonesty (al-Taqiyya, Kitman, etc.), the other of love and peace.

015 2/137e: "- - - Allah will suffice thee (Muhammad/Muslims*) against them (non-Muslims*) - - -". Only if he exists and in addition is a major god.

016 2/153b: “Seek help with patient Perseverance and Prayer, for Allah is with those who patiently persevere.” Keep struggling and the enemy gives in - non-Muslims should never forget that this is hammered into all Muslims - - - and too often correct, especially when fighting democracies, as democracies have difficulties keeping on struggling for a long time if they are not forced to - there always are fractions who want the struggle or fighting to be terminated.

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

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

017 2/155b: "- - - glad tidings - - -". May be for the many who grew rich from stealing/robbing, enslaving, etc., and for many who believed they had found salvation in this war religion based on a book ripe with mistakes, etc. But definitely not for all the victims for Islam's aggression and brutality - victims Islam even today is not developed and mature enough to feel any sympathy, not to mention empathy, with - and why should they? - as non-Muslims are not completely human, then why should they?

018 2/157c: "- - - they (god Muslims*) are the ones that receive guidance." You do not receive real guidance from a book as full of mistakes, etc. etc. as the Quran. Also see 7/192a and 16/107 below.

019 2/163b: "- - - there is no god but He (Allah*) - - -". One more claim without proofs or documentation - like more or less always in the Quran. Claims are cheap. Besides we are back to the problem with Yahweh, which contradicts this point. The Quran accepts that this originally Jewish god existed (exists?). Reality - the deep and fundamental differences in the teachings - proves they cannot be the same god, in spite of the Quran's many, but never documented claims. And whenever there are divergences between claims and reality, we always believe in reality. Also science has proved that the Quran's never documented claims for explanation for these differences - falsifications of the Bible - are wrong, and Islam has proved the same even more strongly by not finding one single proved falsification among the tens of thousands of relevant manuscripts. If Allah exists, thus there has to be at least two gods. But Allah has never proved his existence - there only is Muhammad's words for him - a man who wanted power and more, and who used his religion as his platform of power - like so many self proclaimed prophets have done and do. And the same man who institutionalized al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), etc. (even though it only was formalized later), personally practiced deception and betrayal, and advised that one should even break ones oaths if that gave a better result. Also see 2/255a, 6/106b and 25/18a below.

020 2/175a: "They are the ones who buy Error in place of Guidance and Torment in place of Forgiveness." Who?? This depends entirely on whether the Quran is true or not. If it is a made up book - and with all its errors it at least is from no god - it is the Muslims, alone or among others.

021 2/185e: "- - - (the Quran is) a guide to mankind - - -". A book with that much errors, that partly immoral moral code, and that harsh a war religion, included the use of dishonesty in words and deeds, is neither a good nor a reliable guide - this even more so as no god ever sent down a book of a quality like the Quran.

022 2/256i: "- - - the most trustworthy hand-hold - - -". Only if Allah exists, if he is a god, if he has sent down the Quran, and if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth about this.

023 2/262a: “Those who spend their substance in the cause of Allah (mainly helping the poor, financing the spreading or consolidation of the religion or – mostly in that time – financing war*) - - - for them their reward is with their Lord (Allah*) - - -.” At least paying back only with words was a very cheap way for Muhammad to finance his wars and the growth of his power. If there then is a god – or a devil – repaying in the next world, the givers got their money’s value in their next life - in an ironical way if he was/is met by a devil. If there was no Allah in the claimed next life, one has to quote Muhammad in Ibn Ishaq in “Life of the Prophet”: “War is betrayal” - - - also behind the lines.

####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.)

024 2/262b: "- - - on them (good Muslims*) shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve (in the presumed next life*)". If Allah exists. If he is a god. If he is behind the stories of the Quran. And if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth on this point. But what if the Quran is a made up book? - - as it is not from any god with all its errors, this is a real possibility

##025 3/9f: "- - - Allah never fails His promise." One more never proved claim which only rests on the word of a man with a rather doubtful moral, who accepted both lies, half-truths and even breaking of oats. But in this case it may be true: There is no proof for that Allah ever gave any promise - only the words of a morally suspect person. If he never gave a promise, he also never failed one. (We may add that there never has been any proved case where Allah was proved to have given or to have kept a promise - and Islam had not given you a chance to forget it if it had ever happened.)

026 3/15g: “(In Paradise Muslim men*) find their eternal home; with Companions pure (+ their wives if they qualify for Paradise*), and the good pleasure of Allah.” Does this sentence tell something about how women are valued and looked upon in Islam? Also see 3/14 just above.

#027 3/15i: "- - - Companions pure (and holy) - - -". The famous houris. There in not a word anywhere in the Quran about how they enjoy being "companions" to rough and uneducated self-centered warriors. Such questions were of no interest to Muhammad or to his Muslims. Empathy hardly exists in the Quran. The same goes for the moral behind f.x. rape and forcing women - and girl children at least down to 9 years old - to sex.

028 3/51c: "- - - a Way that is straight". This standard Quranic expression for the road to the god, hardly ever was used by Jesus - and there was no reason for falsification if he had used it. Jesus talked about "the wide road" leading to Hell, and "the narrow road" leading to Paradise. It is thought provoking that Muhammad talked about the easy road leading to his paradise, whereas Jesus talked about the difficult road.

029 3/52e: “Said the Disciples (of Jesus*): ‘We are Allah’s helpers: we believe in Allah, and do thou (Jesus*) bear witness that we are Muslims". One more of the many texts or quotes in the Quran which could not have been reliably written into the claimed "Mother Book" in Heaven (of which the Quran is claimed to be a copy) eons ago, unless predestination was and is 100% - like the Quran claims many places. If man has free will - even partly only - and can change his mind, full and reliable clairvoyance about the future, not to mention the distant future, is impossible even for a god, in spite of Islam's claims. There are at least 3 reasons - 2 of them unavoidable - for this:

  1. When something is changed, automatically the future is changed.
  2. The laws of chaos will be at work and change things.
  3. The so-called "Butterfly Effect"; "a butterfly flapping its wing in Brazil may cause a storm in China later on" or "a small bump may overturn a big load".

This that Allah predestines everything is an essential point, because besides totally removing the free will of man (in spite of the Quran's claims of such free will, or some Muslims' adjusted "partly free will for man" - to adjust the meanings where the texts in the Quran are wrong, is typical for Islam and its Muslims), it also removes the moral behind Allah's punishing (and rewarding) persons for what they say and do - Allah cannot reward or punish people for things he himself has forced them to say or do, and still expect to be believed when he (or Muhammad?) claims to be a good or benevolent or moral or just god. See 2/51b and 3/24a above.

But also remember that 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.)

030 3/57c: "- - - Allah will pay them (in full) their reward (in the claimed next life*) - - -". If Allah exists. If he is a god. If he is behind what the Quran tells. And if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth only.

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.)

031 3/60a: “The Truth (comes) from Allah alone; - - -”. That the Quran is the truth, is just a claim, not a proved fact. With so many mistaken facts that you find in that book, it can at most be partly true, if this refers to the presumed truths in the Quran. Also see 2/2b above and 13/1g and 40/75 below.

032 3/62c: "- - - there is no god except Allah - - -". See 2/255a above and 6/106b and 25/18a below - and for that case 2/165c above.

033 3/64b: "O People of the Book (here the Bible*)! Come to common terms as between us (Muslims*) and you - - -". Muhammad dearly wanted to get the Jews and the few Christians in and around Medina into his religion.

034 3/64d: “- - - that we (Muslims and Jews/Christians*) worship none but Allah (= Yahweh and Allah are claimed to be the same god*)”. This is not possible as the fundamental differences between the Quran and the Bible/NT are too big and too many – not unless the god is schizophrenic. Mainly only Muslims say this – and they will have to bring strong proofs. (It also is a fact from history that there was no falsification of the Bible after the birth of Jesus - if ever. Also a falsification on the scale Muhammad and Islam claimed/claims would be logistically, economically, psychologically (at least most owners of holy scriptures would refuse to have their scriptures falsified), and it would be impossible to make such a big operation without any historian ever heard about it.

Which raises the question: Are Muhammad and his Arabs really descendants from Abraham (and thus earlier of the same religion)? At least they in case only are maximum quarter breeds, as Ishmael’s mother, Hagar, was a slave from Egypt (1. Mos. 16/1), and also his wife (only one is mentioned) was from Egypt (also according to the Bible, written and unabridged since more than 1000 years before Muhammad – 1. Mos.21/20). Well, worse than that: Modern DNA analysis has showed that the pure Arab does not exist. Arabia is at a crossroad – caravans and merchants have passed through - - - and left babies behind now and then (remember that before Muhammad in Arabia sex and alcohol were “the two delightful things”). And Arab caravans and traders roamed wide – and now and then brought back brides from abroad. And finally the perhaps main reason for the diluted blood: The slaves. Literally millions of slaves – some 2/3 of them women – have through the times been brought to Arabia, both before and after Muhammad. And the women of the harems – do you think they were permitted to demand condoms? It is impossible to say there are not traces of DNA from Abraham in Arabs – perhaps via Jewish slave women? But any scientist will say that the chances for finding much more DNA from Abraham (if he ever existed) in Jews than in Arabs are big, because the Jews mostly have been intermarrying because of the excluding religion. Arabs? Diluted blood and hardly any traces of Abraham - none if the Bible tells the truth when it tells that Ishmael settled near the border of Egypt (1. Mos. 25/18 - and there was no reason for him who wrote 1. Mos. not to tell the truth).

And here we have not even mentioned that Arabia was settled thousands of years before Abraham. Even if he had been a forefather, he had been only one among thousands and tens of thousands of forefathers - a tiny drop of an Arab's blood; not even a milliliter, but only a few micro-liters of the 5 liters of blood in a man. A few micro-liters compared to a deciliter or two of f.x. Negro blood or European blood.

All this on top of that the Arabs never were a coherent tribe from the beginning. They originally were a mixture of people from all around who drifted into the empty area, when the land was settled some thousands of years ago - first the coastal areas, and later the interior.

#### Also modern DNA tells that Arabs are a mixed race and with no common forefather.

Another relevant fact: According to history, there nowhere in the world, and definitely nowhere in the Roman Empire, are found any traces from a religion like Islam, a god like Allah, or a book similar to the Quran older than 610 AD when Muhammad started his mission - not one. (For a comparison there are found some 45ooo scriptures or fragment from or relevant to the Bible + many other traces from Jewish and Christian religion.) Explanation?

035 3/68b: “Without doubt, among men, the nearest of kin to Abraham, are those who follow him - - -“.

  1. You do not get related to a man just because you are a follower.
  2. Is Islam really following Abraham’s real religion? – only the Quran says so, and the Quran has proved that it has lots of mistakes – lots of.
  3. Worse: The Quran has proved exactly nothing of its central parts and claims.

  4. There are lots of discrepancies between the Bible and the Quran concerning Abraham. Science reckons the Bible to be considerably more reliable than the Quran - which is not reckoned to be reliable for anything at all older than Muhammad (you f.x. never see a serious scientist using the Quran as a source for historical facts from before Muhammad),
  5. If Muhammad included himself here: Was he really a descendant of Abraham? – Abraham lived some 2500 years earlier, and how many even today know their forefathers 2500 years back? – people have lied for political or personal reasons throughout both history and pre-history, also about honorable ancestors. Also remember here that according to the Bible - the only "real" source - Ishmael settled in Sinai near the border of Egypt (1. Mos. 25/18), not in Arabia.
  6. Also: According to science "it is practically sure Abraham (and thus Ishmael*) never visited Mecca". How then could the Meccan Muhammad be a descendant of Abraham?
  7. Even if Muhammad had been a descendant of Abraham – then how close after 2500 years? His first forefather in case was Ishmael. Ishmael was half Egyptian (his mother Hagar was a slave maiden from Egypt (1.Mos. 16/1), and Ishmael himself married a woman (only one wife is mentioned) from Egypt (1. Mos. 21/21) and his family settled near the border of Egypt (1. Mos. 25/18) in Sinai. The border of Egypt of that time never was in the middle of Arabia, even though Muslims want Hagar and Ishmael to have settled in Mecca). In addition modern DNA has showed that Arabs far from is a pure race. Arabs originally were a mixture of groups and persons which drifted into the then empty area something like 6ooo years ago (a bit earlier some places along the coasts), and thus was no pure race even from the beginning. Later they were drifting nomads and traders – and brought home wives and slaves and got children with them. Also foreign traders crossed Arabia and made a child now and then – the sexual taboos were far looser before Muhammad. And then there were all the slave women, included f.x. Negro ones (there is a measurable percent of Negro blood in today’s' Arabs) who produced dilution of the blood also in Islamic times. The Arabs simply is a mix of different local and a lot of not local DNA – in addition to the already mentioned fact that already after 2 generations only ¼ of the relationship was with Abraham (if at all) - - - and the 25oo years up to Muhammad meant some 80 - 100 generations diluting of the claimed, but unlikely relationship.

There thus is much reason for doubt.

There also is an extra point here: The so-called Mosaic religion never was a proselyting one. And for nearly 2ooo years Abraham and his descendants never did much proselyting. Islam is a strongly proselyting religion - even by means of strong compulsions and sometimes even death warnings and murder to force people stay or become Muslims. This very central difference - a historical fact - is one more proof for that Abraham and his descendants (f.x. Moses) never were Muslims.

036 3/68f: "- - - Allah is the Protector of those who have faith". If Allah exists. If he is a god. If he is behind what is told in the Quran. And if the Quran in addition tells the full truth and only the truth about this.

037 3/79a: "It is not (possible) that a man, to whom is given the Book, and Wisdom, and the Prophetic Office, should say to people: 'Be my worshippers rather than Allah's - - -". This is correct only if the person really is a prophet - many things have been said by false prophets. In this case this is an invalid defense for Muhammad, as he did not have the gift of making prophesies, and thus was no real prophet - perhaps a messenger for something or somebody, but a prophet unable to make prophesies is no prophet. There also are so many points which are wrong or worse (lies, contradictions, etc.) in the Quran, that it is not from any god, not to mention an omniscient one. But see 3/79b+c just below.

##038 3/81a: "Behold, Allah took the Covenant of the Prophets, saying:' - - - then comes to you a Messenger (Muhammad*) confirming what is with you (= the scriptures the prophets had and their teachings*); you must believe in him and rendering him help'". There is nothing like this in the entire Bible. From where is this story? Besides: How could the prophets help Muhammad? - they were all dead hundreds of years before Muhammad was even born - many of them a thousand years and more before.

039 3/81l: "Allah said: 'Do ye (all the old prophets*) agree, and take this Covenant (including believing in and helping Muhammad*) as binding on you?' They said: 'We agree'". There is nothing even remotely similar to this in the Bible.

040 3/81m: "Allah said: 'Do ye (all the old prophets*) agree, and take this Covenant (including believing in and helping Muhammad*) as binding on you?' They said: 'We agree'". He said: 'Then bear witness (about Muhammad*) - - -". They cannot have been very reliable, as exactly none of the known prophets ever mentioned him - included not Abraham, not Moses, and not Jesus to mention 3 of the main prophets according to the Quran (and yes, we know about the cherry-picked, wrong claims concerning 5. Mos. 18/15 and 18/18, and about the helper Jesus promised his disciples (the Holy Spirit) which Islam claims meant Muhammad 500+ years after the last disciple was dead, but those are claims made up after cherry-picking and twisting of texts. Claims made up from dire need simply - to find "confirmation" was and is more essential than to find out what is true or not in the Quran.)

041 3/85b: "- - - in the Hereafter he (the non-Muslim*) will be in the ranks of those who have lost (all spiritual good)". This only can be true if the Quran is reliable, and if Allah in addition exists and is a major god + in the god the non-Muslim believe in - f.x. Yahweh - does not exist.

042 3/95b: "Allah speaketh the Truth - - -". Not if it is not Allah who speaks - and no god ever told the Quran with all its errors, etc.

043 3/95e: "- - - the religion of Abraham - - -". Islam claims to be the religion of Abraham - - - but have never documented anything. And to say the least of it: It is contradicting the Bible, which talks about another god; Yahweh. And we remind you that both science and even stronger Islam have proved that the Bible is not falsified. In some 13ooo manuscripts and fragments from the Bible + some 32ooo other relevant old documents from before 610 AD not one proved falsification is found, not even by Islam. Also see 3/93a above.

A curious fact: From the Bible one has found some 45ooo relevant scriptures and fragments older than 610 AD, whereas from the Quran not one single that old, even though according to the Quran and Islam the Quran was wider spread (the entire world) than the Bible. Explanation?

There also is an extra point here: The so-called Mosaic religion never was a proselyting one. And for nearly 2ooo years Abraham and his descendants never did much proselyting. Islam is a strongly proselyting religion - even by means of strong compulsions and sometimes even death warnings and murder to force people stay or become Muslims. This very central difference - a historical fact - is one more proof for that Abraham and his descendants (f.x. Moses) never were Muslims.

044 3/101f: "Whoever holds firmly to Allah will be showed a way that is straight". If Allah exists. If he in addition is a god. If he is behind what is told in the Quran. And if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth.

###But is there any symbolism in that Muhammad talked about the straight - the easy - way, whereas Jesus talked about the narrow - the difficult - road? Populism vs. realism?

045 3/106-108: Bad people will go to Hell, good Muslims will go to Paradise, this is what the book states here - without any documentation - and continues: “These are the Signs of Allah”. Well, it is a statement hanging in thin air, not to say vacuum - typically for the Quran; not proved and impossible to prove. Believe it if you are primitive and naïve enough - especially if you remember the fact that all and everything is based only on the words of a somewhat “special” warlord, rapist and dictator who liked power and women - and ask questions if you are not entirely naïve. Also see 3/77b above.

046 3/114a: "- - - they (Jews and Christians*) believe in Allah". No comment necessary.(Even in the cases where they have used the name Allah instead of God or Yahweh (it has been done some times through history), they definitely have not believed in the Islamic Allah).

047 3/131a: "Fear the Fire, which is prepared for those who reject Faith - - -". See 3/77b above.

048 3/136e: "- - - how excellent a recompense (Paradise*) is for those who work (and strive) (good Muslims*)!" If Allah exists. If he is behind what Muhammad told. And if what Muhammad told in the Quran is the full and only truth about this. One should also remember that the Islamic Paradise mainly offers bodily satisfaction and luxury - not very inventive for an omniscient god (in the Bible it is told the Christians will become like angels - f.x. Matt. 22/30). But an excellent attraction for warriors.

049 3/150a: "- - - Allah is your Protector- - -". Once more: If he exists. If he really is a god. If he is behind what is told in the Quran. And if the Quran in addition tells the full and only truth on this point.

050 3/150b: "- - - and He (Allah*) is the best of helpers". There has not been one single case of documented help from Allah to anyone in the entire history - be sure Islam had told about it if such a proved case had existed.

051 4/135e: "- - - Allah can best protect - - -". If he if he is a god, if he sent down the Quran, and if Muhammad told the truth and only the truth about this when reciting(?) it.

052 4/174b: “- - - there hath come to you (mankind*) a convincing proof (the Quran*) - - -“. With that many mistakes, contradictions, etc., and so much wrong logic, etc., etc. the Quran is not very convincing, and its “proofs”/”signs” are no more convincing - see 2/39b above.

The one who is finding "a convincing (and valid*) proof" in a book like the Quran, has no training in critical thinking or in the laws of logic.

053 4/175d: "- - - guide them (Muslims*) to Himself (Allah*) - - -". A guide like the Quran can guide no-one to something good - too much is wrong in the book.

054 5/8f: "- - - fear Allah. For Allah is well acquainted with all that ye do". The carrot and the stick: Be good and be obedient and Allah will like you, be bad or disobedient and Allah will punish you. Efficient if the religion is a true one. Efficient for Muhammad and later leaders for keeping the people in line also if Islam is a made up religion. You meet similar sentences many places in the Quran.

055 5/16b: "(A book - the Quran which*) leadeth them (Muslims*) out of darkness - - -". Is there any of the big and medium religions which to a greater extent than Islam represents the dark sides of the darkest Middle Age? - into which the Quran not only leads, but condemns its followers.

056 5/18j: "- - - unto Him (Allah*) is the final goal (of all)". Contradicted by the Bible, which says that the final goal is unto Allah. 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 5/35c: “Do your duty to Allah, seek the means of approach unto Him, and strive with might and mind (= make war*) in His Cause: that ye may prosper”. You prosper if you do like this. Islam after fighting non-religious knowledge for a few centuries (winning from ca 1100 AD - or actually 1095 AD in the eastern and central Muslim area and ca. 1198 in the western) found that there was no prosperity in thinking and researching and studying - except just studying and repeating the religion and related subjects - to fight and steal/rob/suppress/enslave on the other hand was good. The result was stagnation after some time, and not prosperity.

058 5/99a: “The Messenger’s (Muhammad’s*) duty is but to proclaim (the Message) - - -.” This verse is abrogated – made invalid - by at least these verses: 2/191, 2/193, 3/38, 3/85, 3/148, 4/90, 5/33, 5/72, 8/12, 8/38, 8/38-39 (the warning), 8/39, 8/60, 9/3, 9/5, 9/14, 9/23, 9/29, 9/33, 9/73, 9/123, 25/36, 25/52, 33/61, 33/73, 35/36, 47/4, 66/9. This includes many bloody threats, but also verses advising or permitting political, social, economical, etc. compulsion (with the sword in the background if you protest) – we mention a few here: 3/28, 3/85, 3/148, 4/81, 5/72, 5/73, 9/23, 14/7, 15/3, 33/73, 35/36. They are all quoted under 2/256 in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran". (At least 28 abrogations). This verse is dishonest to use as it is dead.

059 6/19i: "- - - He (Allah*) is the One God - - -". For one thing: The Quran is not more reliable than that its claims have to be proved - and the Quran never is able to prove anything central to the religion. For another thing: The Bible talks about Yahweh (and other books about other gods). As Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - too fundamentally too different teachings - there either has to be more than one god, or at least one of the two (not to mention claims about other gods) cannot exist. (And a small point here: Yahweh has proved his existences and his power according to both the Bible and to the Quran - Allah has proved absolutely nothing.)

060 6/102a: "There is no god but He (Allah*) - - -". Well, not mentioning other claimed gods in different religions, there still remains Yahweh. The basics of Islam and the basics especially of NT are so different that they cannot be the same god, no matter what wishful thinking and not documented claims the Quran or Muslims put forth. (One possibility: The two may really be one god, if the god is strongly schizophrenic.) If there is one, but just one god, that means that only Allah or only Yahweh can exist. And Allah only is to be found in a book with hundreds and more mistakes, told by a man with very suspect moral and liking power, using Allah - real or made up - as his platform of power; Self-centered. Selfish? Well, of course Allah is to be found in the old pagan Arab religion, then obeying(?) the name al-Lah - "the god". Whereas there after all is a chance for that Yahweh exists - there f.x. were so many witnesses to Jesus' miracles, death and resurrection, that one may wonder.

061 7/43f: "- - - indeed it was the truth, that (the Quran*) the Prophets of our Lord (Allah*) brought unto us (Muslims*)". The Quran tells there have been many, many prophets through the time - Hadiths mention 124ooo (= 620 at any time for 5ooo years or 12-15 for 160ooo-200ooo. No traces found. Believe it if you can.) - who all preached the religion Islam based on the teachings of the Quran - or really a teaching which was a copy of the "mother book" in Heaven like the Quran. But a book with that many mistakes at best only can be partly the truth.

062 7/65e: (Hud said:) "You (the Ad tribe*) have no other god but Him (Allah*)." As mentioned; according to Muhammad Allah throughout all times have been the one and main god to all people. He only have been overwhelmed and his teachings falsified by humans believing in pagan gods. Also see 6/106b above.

########It is a strange claim that an omnipotent, predestined god is not stronger than claimed made up gods - they outcompeted him all over the world.

It also is strange that there is not one single trace found from a god like Allah, a religion like Islam, a book like the Quran, or from prophets/messengers teaching a religion like Islam anywhere in the world from before 610 AD when Muhammad started his preaching - not in architecture, not in archeology, not in history, not in literature, not in folklore or legends, yes, not even in fairy tales.

063 7/158h: "- - - there is no god but He (Allah*) - - -". Strongly contradicted by the Bible, which talks about Yahweh. And strongly questioned by the fact that the Quran - the only source for the claim that Allah exists - is so full of mistakes, contradictions, etc., that it is from no 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.

064 7/190b: "- - - Allah is exalted high above (anything*) - - -". Often claimed, never proved. There only are the words of Muhammad for this claim - and judge for yourself how reliable a man Muhammad was with his al-Taqiyyas (lawful lies), Kitmans (lawful half-truths), broken promises/words/oaths according to the Quran (2/225, 3/54 (if Allah can cheat, cheating is ok), 5/89, 16/91, 66/2), and his "War is deceit", etc.

065 7/203h: "- - - this (the Quran*) is (nothing but) lights from your (Muslims') Lord (Allah*) - - -". A book with so many errors, etc. is not from a god.

066 8/2c: "- - - put (all) their trust in their Lord (Allah*) - - -". A bit risky, as the Quran with all its errors, contradictions, etc. is not from a god, and thus Allah most likely do not exist - or he may be the pagan al-Lah/Allah Muhammad dressed up and changed name of to only Allah. Well, there even is a theory saying that he just is a dressed up something from the dark forces.

067 8/10d: "- - - Allah is Exalted in Power - - -". See 8/10b above.

068 8/28b: "- - - it is with Allah with whom lays your highest reward". If the Quran tells the truth - which it all too often does not. And if Allah exists and is a benevolent god.

069 9/100d: "- - - for them (good Muslims*) hath He (Allah*) prepared Gardens under which rivers flow (= Paradise*) - - -". Claimed MANY times, never documented. Not true unless Allah exists and is a powerful god - and not unless the Quran in addition has told the full truth and only the truth about this.

070 9/112e: "- - - glad tidings - - -". A book with so much war and blood and apartheid and suppression and rape and incitement to dislike and distaste and hate and lying and much more, is no "glad tiding". This even more so if the book is a made up one - and at least it is not from a god; no god makes that many errors, etc. And we refrain from mentioning the case "what if there is a true religion somewhere which Muslims have been prohibited to look for?" - what kind of (perhaps) next life then for Muslims?

071 9/116f: "Except for Him (Allah*) ye have no protector nor helper". Wrong according to the Quran - the book tells that angels may be protectors, that Muslims are the protectors of each other (and non-Muslims of each others), and that Muhammad even may protect, or at least intercede for, the ones he wants, even at the Day of Doom - one of the reasons for being friendly and obedient to him?

072 10/4b: "The promise of Allah is true - - -". With so much wrong in the Quran, this never proved claim is unsure. There also never has been documented one single case of Allah fulfilling a promise - unproved claims, yes, proofs no.

073 10/25b: "He (Allah*) doth guide whom He pleaseth to a Way that is straight (= direction Heaven*)". It is Allah who decides ("whom He pleaseth"), not you (in Hadiths it even is made clear that Allah decides whether you are to end in Hell or Heaven before you are born, and there is nothing you can do about that decision). A bit different from NT to say the least of it: Yahweh wants everybody to Paradise - you have to be a sinner by your own merit and from real free will, and not honestly regretting your sins, to be closed out. The same god? Hardly. Or Nyet!

074 10/25d: "- - - a Way that is straight". It there a symbolism in that Muhammad slaloms, the way to his Paradise is claimed to be "straight" = the easy way, whereas Jesus talked about the narrow road = more difficult? The populist versus the reality?

075 10/26a: "To those who do right is a goodly (reward) - - -" - especially if you have gone on raid or to war for Muhammad - or his successors. Because battles give more merit than anything in Heaven in the "religion of peace".

076 10/25d: "- - - a Way that is straight". It there a symbolism in that Muhammad slaloms, the way to his Paradise is claimed to be "straight" = the easy way, whereas Jesus talked about the narrow road = more difficult? The populist versus the reality?

077 10/26a: "To those who do right is a goodly (reward) - - -" - especially if you have gone on raid or to war for Muhammad - or his successors. Because battles give more merit than anything in Heaven in the "religion of peace".

078 10/35c: “It is (only*) Allah who gives guidance towards the Truth.” But this is contradicted by the fact that he is not reliable – he also can lead you astray, proved by many point in the Quran, f.x. by his acceptance of the use of dishonesty in words and deeds as working tools. It actually collides with all the verses that tell Allah leads to Heaven whom he wants, and leads astray whom he wants. Or maybe the book only talks about those he wants to guide to Paradise? In NT Yahweh wishes everybody to reach Paradise - in the Quran Allah picks the ones he wishes.

Besides: Is this just an undocumented claim, or a proved fact - hardly anything of any consequence in the Quran is proved - f.x. not even the existence of Allah?

And not to forget: He cannot lead anybody to the Truth by means of a book full of wrong facts and other errors, like the Quran.

079 10/35f: "Is then He (Allah*) who (claims he*) gives guidance to (the claimed*) Truth more worthy to be followed, or he (other gods*) who finds not guidance (himself) unless he is guided?" The answer will depend entirely on whether Allah is a made up bluff or not. In addition there is the question of f.x. Yahweh, who has proved his existence if the old books tell the truth. There also may be other religions whose followers will vouch as strongly for their gods, as Muslims do for Allah - perhaps with as much reason. Exactly nothing is ever proved about Allah, and not once in 1400+ years has there been an action of any kind provably from him.

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

#####080 10/35i: "How judge ye?" We judge that religion and a possible eternal life is too serious a matter to accept that mistakes, contradictions, lies, etc., etc. can be used when trying to find out if a god/gods exist(s), and in case which one(s) is/are true and which not. Only complete honesty can lead to a correct answer in such a question - and the Quran/Islam most likely is the most dishonest of all big religions - the only one who on top of all not only accepts, but advocates dishonesty on central points "if necessary" to win a discussion - not to find the truth, but to win a discussion or a new believer, or to defend or promote Islam.

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

#081 10/37a: “This Quran is not such as can be produced by other than Allah - - -”. Very wrong. Many a good writer can write stories as good as, and better than, the collection of surahs in the Quran. In spite of what Islam says, the Quran is not good literature. The same stories are repeated again and again. They frequently are not well told. There are no new stories or ideas – only stories and ideas borrowed from others. Honestly large parts of the book are rather dull reading. And the fabled high quality Muhammad’s Arab language? - what Muslims seldom mention, is that it took some 250 years to perfect the language - it was not until around 900 AD that it had got something like today’s language. It also existed in much more than one text. For one thing even Muhammad (according to Hadith) said it was sent down in 7 varieties which all were true ones - even if details were different. For another thing some of the old, original texts existed in the Muslim world for a long time after the “official” one was finished around 650 AD ( at some time there were at least 14 canonized + about as many accepted, though not canonized, varieties – 2 are used today: Hafs and Warsh + 4 a little used some places but most uneducated Muslims does not even know this). For still another thing the texts may have been slightly changed through the time - at least very old Qurans found in Yemen in 1972, had “small, but significant differences” from the modern edition. The dominating Quran today (Hafs after Asim), is the edition that was the official one in Egypt when printed in 1924, according to what we have read. The version after Warsh is used in parts of Africa . Also see Preface in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" (list of the earlier 14 canonized ones).

####A challenge to all real knowers of good literature: Please read the Quran with this claim in your mind. Are you able to do so with an open mind without laughing? (No serious knower of quality literature will call the Quran good literature. In addition to all the other points not good in the Quran, good literature demands that the facts given shall be correct, no contradictions, correct logic, etc., etc.)

The claim in this verse Muhammad could tell his uneducated and to a large degree an-alphabetic followers. People versed in quality literature today just will smile hearing such a claim if they know the Quran - it is not high quality even if you do not mind all which is wrong in the book. The one exception may be the Arab language in the book, as this as mentioned was polished by top scholars for some 250 years.

But in that connection we would like to quote an old American film critic some decades ago. He was shown a high quality film favoring narcotics. The question was if he did not think the film work was good?

"Well", he answered, "I always have meant that a work which was not worth doing, also was not worth doing good". (And on top there are even college students able to write better literature than in the Quran - and that is no overstatement.

082 10/44b: "Verily, Allah will not deal unjustly with man in aught - - -". Perhaps. But some of the moral rules and some of the laws said to be from him, are pretty unjust and/or immoral - some even worse. Actually 1 or 2 of the laws in sharia - Allah's laws - may be the most unjust and immoral in any somewhat civilized culture in this whole world.

083 10/45g: "- - - assuredly those will be lost who denied the meeting with Allah - - -". Strongly contradicted by the Bible, which do not even mention Allah. According to the Bible what is wrong is to deny Yahweh and/or to accept any other god than him - which of course also has to include the undocumented claimed god Allah, a dressed up pagan god originally named al-Lah. 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.

084 10/55e: “Is it not (the case) that Allah’s promise (the Quran*) is assuredly true?” There has not been one single proved case in the entire history and prehistory of that a promise proved coming from Allah, has been proved to be true. Lots of claims, not one proved case - - - and the best proof for this is the silence from Islam about such a case.

085 10/55e: “Is it not (the case) that Allah’s promise (the Quran*) is assuredly true?” There has not been one single proved case in the entire history and prehistory of that a promise proved coming from Allah, has been proved to be true. Lots of claims, not one proved case - - - and the best proof for this is the silence from Islam about such a case.

086 10/94g: “- - - be nowise of those in doubt (about Islam*).” Wrong. With all the mistakes etc. in the Quran, it is sheer naivety not to be in doubt, and at least check the facts.

087 10/109d: "- - - He (Allah*) is the Best to decide." Only if he exists and if the Quran is from a god - and if Allah in addition is a god (and Allah f.x. not from the dark forces - - - if he as questioned exists).

088 11/23a: "But those who believe (in the Quran*) - - - they will be the Companions of (Paradise*) - - -". May be true - but only if the Quran is a message from a god, and in addition tells the full truth and only the truth. Also see 11!22b above.

089 11/2f: “Verily, I (Muhammad) am (sent) unto you (people*) from Him (Allah*) - - -“. No person bringing a tale where so much is wrong, is from a god. And no person bringing a "moral" code with so much immorality (f.x. lying, stealing, raping, enslaving, suppressing, apartheid, killing, murdering, incitements to dislike and hate) is from a good or benevolent god.

090 11/11a: "Not so (go wrong*) those who (good Muslims*) show patience and constancy, and work righteousness; for them is forgiveness (of sins) and a great reward". This is the ideal for Muslims according to the Quran - but remember that war and suppression are among the top duties, and that the Islamic moral is such that the ultimate idol is the stealing/robbing, extorting, enslaving, womanizing, raping, distaste and war mongering, murdering man Muhammad - a man who on top of all had so little respect for the truth that he more or less institutionalized al-Taqiyya (lawful lie) and Kitman (lawful half-truth - or perhaps an as correct definition is that you can tell lies, but make mental reservations inside you, and thus do not sin), Hilah (lawful pretending/circumventing), and according to the Quran advised deception, betrayal and even breaking your oaths (and can you break oaths, you also can break weaker promises and words) if that gave a better result. (The Quran also contains a few (100+ ?) obvious lies he made - f.x. that miracles would make no-one believe, a claim any intelligent man knows is untrue.)

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

091 11/14g: "- - - there is no god but He (Allah*)!" This is one more never proved claim from the Quran. But even if we omit all claimed gods from all other religions, there still remains Yahweh, the old Jewish and Christian god which the Quran admits exists, even though it wrongly mixes him up with Allah. And the teachings of these two gods are fundamentally so different, that in spite of Islam’s never proved claim, those two cannot be the same god (unless he is mentally much ill). Remember here that science long since has proved that the Quran's claims that the Bible is falsified, is wrong (that is to say, it is difficult to prove it 100% before some 500 BC (but f.x. NT is much younger), because there are too few that old manuscripts - but even then it was a written religion, and written religions are difficult to change much. If Muslims stand by their claims, they will have to prove it - it is their claims, and it is therefore they who have to prove it. (But Islam never is able to prove fundamental claims)). Also see 6/106b above.

But there is one interesting proof about OT: The Quran indirectly, but very clearly, confirms that it cannot have been falsified until after the year 33 AD: Jesus according to the Quran was a good Muslim. He read and he did teach from the old Jewish books in the synagogues. This he could not have done if he was a good Muslim and the scriptures were falsified. This even more so as Islam claims that all the old prophets - which include Jesus - received a copy of the claimed correct texts from Heaven. There are so enormous differences between the old Jewish texts (the Jewish Bible roughly is OT in the Bible), that there is no chance a top prophet like Jesus would not notice. And neither the Bible nor the Quran mentions that he anywhere stopped reading/teaching for such reasons or ever made the slightest remark about falsified texts of that kind. It happened he criticized the additional scriptures of the Pharisees, etc., but never a word about the old scriptures being falsified.

The only possible conclusion: The Quran here proves that OT was not falsified until after 33 AD.

But we know from a large number of scriptures and fragments, that nothing in the Bible has been falsified then or later. The best proof for this, is that if even one proved falsification had been found, Islam had told the entire world. It never did. (There are many claims, but from different Muslims tying to prove that the Quran is the truth, but guess if there had been a difference if a proved case had been found!) It has till now never happened.

There also is an extra point here: The so-called Mosaic religion never was a proselyting one. And for nearly 2ooo years Abraham and his descendants never did much proselyting (not until Jesus, who ordered it before he left). Islam is a strongly proselyting religion - even by means of strong compulsions and sometimes even death warnings and murder to force people stay or become Muslims. This very central difference - a historical fact - is one more proof for that Abraham and his descendants (f.x. Moses) never were Muslims. This on top of that neither science nor Islam has found traces from a god like Allah, a religion like Islam, a book like the Quran, or prophets preaching Islam before 610 AD, when Muhammad started his proselyting, and on top of the fact that Abraham did not have camels, and thus could not go back and forth between Canaan/Sinai and Mecca like the Quran tells. These are facts from history. Also as far back as history goes, it tells that the Jews had the god Yahweh and the Mosaic religion, not the very different Allah and Islam or similar.

There also are the strong historical facts that also at the time of Jesus, the Jews' god very clearly was Yahweh, and that no god like the Islamic Allah, no book similar to the Quran, no religion similar to Islam, existed in the entire Roman Empire or anywhere else known to history until after 610 AD.

*092 12/40g: “(Islam*) is the right religion - - -”. Can a religion based on a book with so many mistakes, and with not a single valid proof for anything essential, really be a “right religion”? Simply no. Especially not when all the book rests only on the words of a man with very doubtful moral – thieving/robbing, womanizing, raping, enslaving, murdering, lying – even not respecting his own oaths - etc., and the book on top of all clearly is not from any god, with all those errors.

There is no god behind a book of a quality like the Quran. Thus it is no real religion - and thus also not "the right religion".

093 12/111a: “This (the Quran*) is - - - instruction for men endued with understanding (flattery*).” It may be so – many Muslim thinkers and learned men were and are intelligent men. But to what avail? – when you give even the most intelligent persons wrong information from the start or babyhood, their conclusions inevitably become just mistakes and errors, no matter how intelligent they are. To quote late Henrik Ibsen in “Peer Gynt”: “Naar utgangspunktet er som galest, blir resultatet tidt originalest” – which means something like ”when the facts you use are really wrong, the result frequently becomes very ’original’”. Also: "Correct facts multiplied by one student give a better answer than false facts multiplied by a number of wise men".

###094 13/1g: “(the Quran*) is the Truth“. That the Quran is the truth, is just a claim, not a proved fact.

  1. There are many mistaken "facts" which science, history, geography, archaeology, literature, art, etc., prove are wrong. (At least unbelievable 1700+ !!! places with mistaken facts, and perhaps 3000+ errors all together).
  2. There are “more than 100 divergences (mistakes*) from the rules and structure of normal Arab language”, according to Ali Dashi “Twenty-three years”.
  3. There are verses where it clearly is Muhammad who is speaking, in stark contradiction to all statements that the book is made by Allah or has existed from eternity (though some of the places - f.x. 6/114a in Yusuf Ali or 27/91a in Pikthall or Dawood - the mistakes are camouflaged by dishonest translators inserting the word “Say”, according to Ibn Warraq.)
  4. The Quran states that the Quran is in pure Arab language. But according to al-Suyuti there are at least 107 foreign words used in the book, and Arthur Jeffery (specialist in Arab and in non-Arabic words in the Quran) says ca. 275 words from Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek, and also from Syria, Ethiopia, and Persia. Even the word Quran is said to be from Syria. (The Arabs later found an excuse for those mistakes: Al-Tha’alibi tells that the Arab started to use those words and made them Arabic. An easy but dishonest explanation.)
  5. They used an alphabet without vowels, and to make it even worse, when writing the Quran/surahs in the old time, they did not even use the small points newer Arab uses to specify different letters, and also not the writing signs like f.x. the comma. Because of this it often is difficult or impossible to know which word is meant. To use an English example: If you only have the consonants “h” and “s” and put in vowels, the result may be “house” or “hose” or “his” or “has”. Because of this there are thousands of possibilities for mistakes - or different meanings. Muslims tell the Quran was finished not later than 656 AD, but that is not true - only the simplified version using the old unfinished alphabet was used then, was finished by Caliph Uthman not later than 656 AD, and lots of versions were written as the language and the alphabet were completed. Not until round 900 AD was the Quran really finished, and by then there existed numbers of versions. Muslims under the very learned Ibn Mohair (died 935 AD) finally canonized 14 versions and accepted 10 more = 24 versions accepted by Islam (see Preface of "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran"). Over the centuries many fell out of use. Today there are mainly two - one dominant (Hafs) and one much used in parts of Africa (Warsh) + 4 which are used in smaller regions also in Africa. After all that, how can anybody pretend that the Quran of today is sent down from Allah letter-by-letter and comma-by-comma? – the comma did not even exist!
  6. The language in the original Quran was so little exact, that there frequently is necessary to insert explanations.
  7. And how then can anyone pretend that the language in the Quran of today is perfect and correct language word for word and meaning for meaning just as dictated by Allah, when one knows that they spent 250 years “de-coding” the original texts and polishing the language?
  8. And even more so: How can anyone pretend with a straight face that the Quran(s) of today is the one and perfect one from Allah, when the clergy/religious leaders and the educated elite at least, know that there were at least 14 + 10 “correct” versions earlier (to camouflage that they were different versions, Muslims call them “ways of reading” – you meet the word even today, because even today there are “different ways of reading”) - versions that over the centuries by an arbitrary process was reduced to 3 and then to 1-2. (The one dominating today, most likely dominates because it happened to be used when Egypt printed Qurans in 1924, according to Ibn Warraq).
  9. Of the 14 and more versions which existed, how can one be sure that the most correct versions were the ones which finally came to dominate? - or that those versions (Hafs and Warsh) had all interpretations of the primitive writings correct (especially as they are not quite similar)?
  10. There are lots of places in the Quran where the logic is wrong – mainly because Muhammad draws conclusions or make statements without first proving that it really is Allah who made this and this. F.x. the sun and the moon and night and day may be good proofs for Allah, but ONLY if it first is proved that it really is Allah who made them and runs them. Muhammad never really proves anything essential. Never. He just claims or states. The results are invalid claims with invalid logic, not real “signs” or “proofs”. Valueless. Or even worse, as the use of such arguments proves to the entire world that he has no real and true facts/arguments. Still even worse: The use of bluffs is a hallmark of cheats and deceivers.
  11. ##########Muhammad lies something like 100 places or more in the Quran (see our booklet no.2: "Muhammad lying in the Quran"). This really tells something about his and the Quran's - and Islam's - reliability.

  12. "Proofs". The facts in the 2 points just above are even more essential here in this point - in points where he indicates or even uses the word “proof”. The problem is the same, and the only possible conclusion is the same: Valueless demagogy that proves that he had no real and true facts/arguments. Even worse: The use of invalid arguments is the hallmark of cheats and deceivers.

There is little reason to believe the Quran ever was perfect and without mistakes, and even less reason to believe that the Quran of today is so (it simply is not). This even if you omit all the mistakes we know about. At very best the book only is partly true. Also see 13/39a+b, 43/4, 85/21-22 below.

095 13/16k: "He (Allah*) is the One, the Supreme and Irresistible." Similar often claimed, never proved - and like so much in the Quran it is claims any priest in any religion can make free of charge on behalf of his god(s) as long as no proofs are required - words are that cheap.

096 13/18a: "For those who respond to their lord (Allah*) are (all) good things". Ever so often claimed in the Quran, but never proved.

097 13/19c: “- - - that (the Quran*) which hath been revealed unto thee from thy Lord (Allah*) - - -”. No god reveals a book with that much wrong contents. Also see 13/1f above.

098 13/23–24a: “Gardens of perpetual bliss: they (Muslims*) shall enter there, as well as the righteous among their fathers, their spouses, and their offspring - - - how excellent is the final Home.” Primitive people may think in 2-4 generations like here, but nowhere in the Quran is told how family life a la Earth is to be arranged for 40 or a hundred generations - are f.x. all staying together in one mix?. Neither is there anywhere said anything about how the ones who died as babies or children or retarded will fare in Paradise – will they stay babies or children or retarded for ever to your pleasure (the Quran has a tendency to see things only from the points of view of the main persons: The adult men and warriors) or will they grow up or will they be resurrected as young adults or how? - and what about their families? - and what f.x. about the mentally retarded?

No matter – these may be problems possible to solve for a god. But the Muslim Paradise still is just a copy of life for rich people in this world, as seen through the eyes of poor and primitive male desert dwellers and polygamists. Is this all an omniscient and omnipotent god has to offer?

099 13/31p: "- - - for, verily, Allah will not fail In His promise". Quite likely not - if he exists, if the Quran is from him, and if the book tells the full truth and only the truth about him and everything else. But there is not reported one single case where it is proved that Allah kept or even given a promise. Guess if such a case had showed up in Muslim propaganda if it had ever happened!

100 14/27b: “- - - with the Word (the Quran*) that stands firm - - -.” Can words with that many mistakes and bent logic, etc. like in the Quran stand firm on other platforms than cheating, brain washing, pressure and wish for power? Plainly no.

101 16/1b: "(Inevitable) commeth (to pass) the Command of Allah - - -". It is inevitable only if:

  1. If Allah exists - but with all which is wrong in the Quran also this may be wrong (Muhammad after all just took over a pagan god, al-Lah, and claimed he was not pagan.
  2. If Allah in case he exists and is a major god, is correctly described in the Quran - again; with all which is wrong in the Quran, there might be mistakes also here, especially as all the mistakes makes it clear that the book and hence the description is not made by a god, and perhaps even more so as Allah was a peaceful god as long as Muhammad was in Mecca, but became a war god when Muhammad started to gain power and needed warriors in Medina. The change in the god in 622 - 624 AD is very striking, but never mentioned by Muslims or Islam. As the surahs from Mecca - some 85-90 - and the ones from Medina - some 22-28 (there are some one does not know the age of, though one believe one knows from which period) are mixed helter-skelter in the Quran, it is a bit difficult for readers who do not know the book well, to see this. But if you first read the surahs from Mecca, and then the ones from Medina separately, it is very easy to see this change from a peaceful to a war religion. And the point here is: An eternal god cannot change that much in just 1-2 years from Muhammad's arrival in Medina. At least one of the descriptions has to be wrong. Which of the descriptions - if any - is correct? Mecca and peaceful? - or Medina and dishonesty and blood, stealing and terror?
  3. If the Quran's claims about total predestination are correct (but in that case man has no free will, no matter what the Quran says about this - there are some of the immaterial laws which are impossible to break even for omnipotent gods), then something is very wrong in the Quran.

102 16/47a: "For thy (Muslims'*) Lord (Allah*) is indeed full of kindness and mercy". Please read the surahs from Medina (you find the numbers in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" - http://www.1000mistakes.com) and some of his (?) sharia laws, and see if you agree. Also See 1/1a and 1/1e above.

103 16/51c: "- - - fear Me (Allah*) and Me alone". There is no reason to fear him unless he exists. If he exists and is behind the Quran, he is no god - too much is wrong in that book for a god to have ever been involved - but he may belong to the dark forces and simply cheated Muhammad - - - or created by Muhammad. In this case he may be dangerous - at least in a perhaps next life.

104 16/102g: “- - - revelations from thy Lord (Allah*) in Truth (a claim, not a proved fact*)- - -”. It also is not the truth that the Quran is from a god - too much is wrong in that book.

105 16/125b: "Invite (all) to the Way of thy Lord (Allah*) with wisdom and beautiful preaching (etc.)- - -". But not one word is said here about honesty, refraining from al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), etc. Strictly speaking al-Taqiyya and Kitman is advised to use "if necessary" in cases of defending or forwarding the religion. (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.)

106 16/125d: “Invite (all) to the Way of thy Lord (Allah*) with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious - - -.” Little by little – or not so little – Muhammad’s tone changed from shortly after this (this is one of the very last surahs from Mecca – if not the last full one, as it was told only months before Muhammad fled to Yathrib/Medina). This verse is contradicted and often “killed” by at least these verses: 2/191, 2/193, 3/28, 3/85, 3/148, 4/81, 4/90, 5/33, 5/72, 5/73, 8/12, 8/38-39 (the warning), 8/39, 8/60, 9/3, 9/5, 9/14, 9/23, 9/29, 9/33, 9/73, 9/123, 25/36, 25/52, 33/61, 33/73, 35/36, 47/4, 66/9. This includes many advising or permitting political, social, economical, etc. compulsion (with the sword in the background if you protest) – we mention a few here: 3/28, 3/85, 3/148, 4/81, 5/72, 5/73, 9/23, 14/7, 15/3, 33/73, 35/36. They are all quoted under 2/256. (At least 29 contradictions).

107 18/39b: "There is no power but with Allah". This may be correct if Allah exists - no proof or unmistakable indication for this has ever been seen - if he is behind the Quran, and if the Quran in addition is truthful. Besides: If there are other gods - f.x. Yahweh - it is not true. (Very much is wrong in the Quran - perhaps also this claim).

108 18/44b: "- - - the (only) protection comes from Allah - - -". Contradicted by the Bible, which says that Yahweh is a good protector - and does not know about Allah, etc. 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.

109 21/50c: “And this (the Quran*) is a blessed message which We (Allah*) have sent down”. How many ways is it possible to ask the question: Can it be true that an omniscient god has sent down a book with such a number of mistaken facts, contradictions, cases of invalid logic and other wrongs - f.x. linguistic and perhaps religious mistakes? Not to mention: How likely is it that a book of such a miserable quality, at least concerning wrong facts, contradictions, invalid proofs and logic plus partly immoral moral and ethical codes, and as medium a quality as literature, can have a prominent place as the revered Mother Book in the home of an omniscient and omnipotent god? It simply is impossible. Similar claims in 21/50 – 36/17 – 38/1 – 38/7 – 42/52 – 56/81

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

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

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

#####110 24/1c: “(This is*) A surah which We (Allah*) have sent down and which We have ordained: in it have We sent down clear Signs; in order that ye may receive admonition.”

"The Massage of the Quran", comment to 24/1 (A24/1): I.e., “the injunctions whereof We (Allah*) have made self-evident by virtue of their wording”: thus Abd Allah ibn ‘Abbas explains the expression 'faradnaha' in this context. - - - The same explanation, also on the authority of ibn ‘Abbas, is advanced by Tabari. It would seem that the special stress on Allah’s having laid down this surah “in plain terms” (the norm, but here stressed extra*) is connected with the gravity of the injunctions spelt out in this sequence: in other words, it implies a solemn warning against any attempt at widening or re-defining those injunctions by means of deductions, interferences or any other considerations unconnected with the plain wording of the Quran". Any comment necessary?

### Also remember that the wording of the Quran was polished by the best brains of Islam for some 250 years (until ca. 900 AD) before it got its present wording, and that there existed more than 20 accepted versions - 14 of them canonized - of the book before the two present versions became dominant.

### “- - - the injunctions whereof We (Allah*) have made self-evident by virtue of their wording”. What about telling this sentence to Socrates or Pascal or a plain teacher of logic? - they had not been finished laughing - or weeping - until after next Christmas or Hajj. Add the fact that the wording in the Quran took some 250 years (from ca. 650 AD to ca. 900 AD) to polish, and they hardly had survived the laughing. And this is the kind of arguments and "proofs" Islam relies on!

A. Occam's Broom (the same Occam as the one with the razor): "The intellectual dishonest trick of ignoring facts that refute your argument in the hope that your audience won't notice". (New Scientist 21.Sept. 2013.) This trick is frequently used by Muhammad, by Islam, and by Muslims arguing for the Quran's texts and for Islam - just use your ears and/or eyes, and brain, and you will find lots and lots of samples, f.x. in some of Muhammad's lies in the Quran. (Here Islam ignore the fact that Allah never proved he was able to create anything.)

B. "'Surely' (etc.*) and rhetorical questions - whenever you encounter these in a text, stop and think. The author usually wants you to skate over them as if the claim is so obvious as to be beyond doubt, or the answer self-evident. The opposite is often the case." (Graham Lawton.) Also this trick is very often used in the Quran, by Islam, and by Muslims. The question here is very a rhetorical one.

C. Science: "You need a Muslim's belief to be able to believe that the quality of the texts in the Quran proves a divine origin".

#### BUT ANOTHER AND MOST SERIOUS FACT IS THAT THE QURAN ITSELF AND THE MOST FOREMOST MUSLIM SCHOLARS THROUGH THE TIMES HERE EXPLAIN THAT THE TEXTS IN THE QURAN ARE THE PINNACLE OF CLEARNESS AND EXACTNESS AND EASINESS TO UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY - SO CLEAR AND EXACT AND EASY TO UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, THAT ONLY A GOD COULD HAVE MADE THEM, AND THUS THAT THE WORDINGS PROVE BY SELF EVIDENCE THAT THE TEXTS ARE FROM A GOD. THESE WORDS FROM ALLAH AND FROM TOP MUSLIM SCHOLARS KILL ALL CLAIMS CLAIMING THAT CLEVER HUMANS CAN EXPLAIN BETTER THAN ALLAH WHAT "HE REALLY MENT", WHEN ISLAM AND MUSLIMS TRY TO EXPLAIN AWAY WRONG FACTS, OTHER ERRORS, AND OTHER WEAK POINTS IN THE QURAN. WHAT HUMAN CAN CLEARER, EXACTLIER, MORE CORRECT, AND EASIER TO UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY THAN THE LITERAL EXPLANATIONS FROM AN OMNISCIENT GOD, AND AN OMNISCIENT GOD SAYING THAT HIS WORDS ARE THE MAXIMUM QUALITY AND RELIABILITY POSSIBLE?

This documents that either Islam and Muslims are lying when they try to explain away wrong facts, errors, and other weak points in the Quran by claiming that Allah really means something different from what the wordings say (by f.x. claiming the words are an allegory or something), and that "we clever humans are able to explain better, and explain what the god "really" meant. Or they state that Allah lied when he said things like here.

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

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

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

111 24/46e: "- - - Allah guides whom He wills to a Way that is straight". But the black point is that he also denies Paradise for whom he will - something he decides already 5 months before you are born according to Hadiths, and you have no chance to change his mind according to the Quran - even if you try to do your very best to be a good Muslim, Allah will block the road to Paradise for you a little before you are qualified if you are destined for Hell - all this according to Hadiths. (Islam may try to disprove this if they are able to.)

This also differ greatly from the Bible: Allah guides whom he wants - Yahweh guides absolutely everybody who wants strongly enough to qualify (free will for man is real in the Bible, and everybody can choose) according to that book.

112 25/1a: "Blessed is He (Allah*) who sent down the Criterion (the Quran*) - - -". No god sent down a book with this many mistakes, contradictions, cases of invalid logic, unclear language, etc., not to mention reveres it in his own "home" as the "mother book" (13/39, 43/4, 85/21-22). Besides Islam does not know for sure if "the Criterion" means the Quran (but he is not claimed to have sent down much more).

You meet the word Criterion a few times in the Quran. Nobody is quite sure what is meant. One likely guess is that it means "the difference between right and wrong", but it is a guess, not more.

113 27/3d: "- - - (full) assurance for the Hereafter". Only if Allah exists and is a god, and the Quran in addition tells the full truth and only the truth.

114 27/6d: “(Allah is*) Wise and All-Knowing”. If that is right, he has not composed the Quran - far too many mistakes, too much unclear language, etc. Or to be blunter: The composer of the Quran is someone who is far from all-knowing.

115 28/13a: "- - - the promise of Allah is true - - -". If you ask the entire Islam even today to show you one single proved case of a promise given by Allah which has been fulfilled by Allah throughout the times, they will not be able to answer you. No such case exists. Lots of claims, some co-incidences, not one proved case.

116 28/46e: "Yet (art thou (Muhammad*) sent) as a Mercy from thy Lord (Allah*) - - -". Muhammad with his Quran full of errors and mistakes was from no god - and no mercy to even his own people.

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

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

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

117 28/52b: “(Jews and Christians*) – they do believe in this (Revelation) - - -“. Flatly wrong. And flatly dishonest. A few became Muslims according to Islam, but the overwhelming majority had to flee, was made slaves, or was killed/murdered/executed because they refused to believe in Muhammad’s tales. Cfr. f.x. what happened in and around Medina and Khaybar in the years after this surah was told (in 621 AD or later). Contradicted by reality and history. And: One more place where an intelligent man like Muhammad knew he was lying, because this he knew. (Well, this is from 621 AD. Perhaps this early Muhammad believed it was a bluff and not a lie. But over a few years it became a lie by omission, because he did not correct it when he at least later learnt it was not true. Worse: He sporadically even then used claims like this.

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

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

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

###118 28/53c: “They (Jews and Christians*) say: ‘We believe therein, for it is the Truth from our Lord - - -“. Well, this is what Muhammad claimed. The reality as clearly told in Islamic written sources about what you find in 28/52a above - and like in 28/52a also here Muhammad had to know he was lying, because this he knew was untrue. It may have been true for a few, but only for a few in case. Also see 28/48a and 28/48b. A few Jews and Christians may or may not have become Muslims - there only are Muslim sources for the claims - but the majority clearly said no, even in the face of persecution and murder. Generally speaking a dishonesty, ########and as Muhammad here was speaking about Jews and Christians generally, he knew this was a lie (and he later had this fact strongly confirmed, but did not correct his words - at least a known lie by omission in this case and a plainly known lie later years).

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

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

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

#####119 28/87c: "- - - and invite (men (women are of little essence in Islam*)) to thy (Muslim's*) Lord (Allah*) - - -". Muhammad is ordered to proselyte. Proselyting is every Muslim's duty. Remember that Muhammad - and Islam - advices the use of f.x. al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), Hilah (the lawful circumventing/pretending) "if necessary" to defend or to promote Islam. To cheat proselytes to make them believe in Islam thus is fully ok if such means are "necessary" to make them believe.

But how reliable is a claimed religion which accepts the use of and partly is built on dishonesty?

120 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.

121 30/30e: "- - - (Islam*) is the standard Religion - - -”. The Quran claims that it is the original and natural - and standard - religion on Earth. We think we had better not comment on this - except that not even Islam has found any trace of a religion like Islam, a god like Allah, a book like the Quran, or a messenger for a religion like Islam older than 610 AD. To be polite: It is a bluff.

Also see 30/30d just above.

122 31/22d: “- - - the most trustworthy hand-hold (the Quran and Allah*) - - -“. But a book with so many mistakes, etc. - and even some shining lies (like that miracles will not make a lot of people believe) – is not trustworthy. May be also this is wrong. Also see 31/22a above.

123 32/23e: (YA3656): "Moses had, revealed to him, a Law, a sharia (!*), which was to guide his people in all practical affairs of their life. Jesus, after him, was also inspired by Allah (by Yahweh according to the Bible*): but his Injil or Gospel contained only general principles and not a Code (here in the meaning Law) or sharia. The Prophet (Muhammad*) was the next one to have a sharia - - -". Some of Jesus’ orders were specific. And as Muhammad belonged to another religion than Moses, Jesus, etc., this claim also is irrelevant.

How in case to explain the enormous differences between the Laws of Moses/Jesus' words and the laws of Muhammad if they were from the same god? Falsification of the Bible is not an explanation, because if OT had been falsified at the time of Jesus, he had warned against it, which he did not, not even according to the Quran. And we know from the Qumran scrolls that the books making up OT at the time of Jesus, had the same texts like today. It is for Islam to explain this.

There also is an extra point here: The so-called Mosaic religion never was a proselyting one. And for nearly 2ooo years Abraham and his descendants never did much proselyting (not until Jesus, who ordered it before he left - and remember here that the Quran (21/91) confirms that Jesus was for all peoples, (and in 19/19 that he was holy, which Muhammad definitely was not)). Islam is a strongly proselyting religion - even by means of strong compulsions and sometimes even death warnings and murder to force people stay or become Muslims. This very central difference - a historical fact - is one more proof for that Abraham and his descendants (f.x. Moses and the Jewish prophets) never were Muslims. This on top of that neither science nor Islam has found traces from a god like Allah, a religion like Islam, a book like the Quran, or prophets preaching Islam before 610 AD, when Muhammad started his proselyting, and this on top of the fact that Abraham like mentioned did not have camels, and thus could not go back and forth between Canaan/Sinai and Mecca like the Quran claims. These are facts from history. Also as far back as history goes, it tells that the Jews had the god Yahweh and the Mosaic religion, not the very different Allah and Islam or similar.

##### And not least: We know from as far back as written history goes, and from archeology, etc. even further back, the Mosaic religion was the religion of the Jews, that NT was the religion of Christians - and not least that there nowhere or any time before 610 AD is found even traces from a god like the Muslim Allah, a religion like Islam, a book like the Quran, or messengers preaching Islam.

124 33/6c: "The Prophet (Muhammad*) is closer to the Believers than their own selves - - -". His followers hardly were aware of it, but this is an extremely strong demand on them.

125 33/29h: "- - - a great reward (Paradise*)". If Allah exists. If Allah is behind the Quran. If the Quran in addition tells the full truth and only the truth. Also see 10/9f and 13/1g above and 40/75 below.

126 33/66c: "Would that we (non-Muslims*) had obeyed Allah and obeyed the Messenger (Muhammad*)". In a religion it really should be enough to obey the god - which should have been what counted. But one also had to obey Muhammad. A bit thought provoking when you know this is a mannerism followed by many false prophets. Jesus instead said "follow me" - yet another indication for that Jesus and Muhammad did not belong to the same religion.

127 42/15k: "- - - to Him (Allah*) is (our) final goal (at the Day of Doom)". Often claimed, never documented. And contradicted by the Bible.

128 42/24g: "And Allah - - - proves the Truth by His Words". Muhammad's literal meaning here is that the words of the Quran is of such a quality, that only a god can have uttered them. Muslims and Islam claim the same today - and are as wrong as Muhammad: The linguistics are ok because it was polished by Islam's best brains for some 250 years before the final prototypes were ready around 900 AD, but on most of the other points the Quran really is of miserable quality, included unbelievably many wrong facts, other errors, contradictions, etc., and no god ever was involved in a book - not to mention a claimed holy book - of that quality.

Besides: That the Quran is the truth, is just a claim, not a proved fact. It also is proved at least partly wrong.

And not least: Nobody uses this kind of arguments and "proof" if they have valid arguments and/or proofs. It simply is fast talk. At very best a so-called circular proof: The words are claimed to be the truth, and then the claimed truth proves the words which proves the truth which proves the words - - -. Circular proofs are by definition invalid.

Another point: THE QURAN HERE TELLS THAT THE LANGUAGE IN THE BOOK IS SO PERFECT THAT ONLY A GOD CAN HAVE SPOKEN THEM. HOW CAN THEN MERE HUMANS CLAIM THAT ALLAH WAS UNABLE TO EXPRESS HIMSELF CORRECTLY, AND IN MANY CASES MEANT SOMETHING DIFFERENT FROM WHAT HE REALLY SAID, AND THAT WISE HUMANS HAVE TO EXPLAIN HIS "REAL" MEANINGS? THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST USED "EXPLANATIONS" FOR EXPLAINING AWAY ERRORS IN THE QURAN: THE PERFECT GOD ALLAH DID NOT MEAN WHAT HIS PERFECT TEXTS SAY, BUT SOMETHING DIFFERENT - A PARABLE OR SOMETHING, IN SPITE OF THAT THE QURAN CLEARLY TELLS THAT TO LOOK FOR HIDDEN MEANINGS, ONLY IS FOR THE SICK OF HEART - AND A GOOD MUSLIMS HAVE TO EXPLAIN WHAT HE "REALLY" MEANT. (THIS IN SPITE OF THAT THE QURAN ALSO TELLS THAT IF THERE ARE HIDDEN MEANINGS ALL THE SAME, ONLY ALLAH CAN UNDERSTAND THEM).

And: Science says: "You have to have a Muslim's belief to be able to believe that the Quran's texts are of such a quality that the quality proves the book is from a god".

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

###129 42/24j: “And Allah - - - proves the Truth by His Words.” Muhammad was asked many times to prove his - or presumably Allah’s - words, but he never did, and seemed never to be able to, this even more so, as f.x. some of his “explanations” for why he never could prove anything, an intelligent man like him knew were lies (f.x. that real miracles would make no-one believe anyhow). The words of the Quran prove not a thing, among other reasons because:

  1. Far too many mistakes pretending to be facts. (Swindle?)
  2. Far too many loose statements pretending to be facts. (Swindle?)
  3. Far too many invalid “signs” pretending to be documentation. (Swindle?)
  4. Far too many invalid or even wrong "proofs" pretending to be documentation. (Swindle?)
  5. Some obvious lies – f.x. that miracles would make no-one believe, or that Muhammad wanted no payment (in spite of what Muslims claim, Muhammad was well off when he died - estates in Medina, Khaybar, and Fadang, and more - even though he had spent fortunes for bribes for followers/power, and lots of women also cost something). (Swindle.)
  6. Muhammad was unable to present anything but fast-talk when asked for proofs. (Swindle?)
  7. Lots of invalid use of logic. (Swindle?)
  8. Lots of contradictions (– proves of lies?)
  9. Lots of unclear language - at least 500+ confirmed by Muslim scholars. (Not from a god.)
  10. Lots of fast talk. (Suspicious.)
  11. At least some lies. (VERY revealing.)
  12. The Quran has few real details, it jumps back and forth in its story, and it has unclear tales and explanations on many points. According to science these normally are indications for a cheat or deceiver. They mention one more such an indication - that cheats and deceivers have a tendency to talk with a higher pitch when spinning tales. For natural reasons it is impossible to find out if Muhammad did so.

These all are hallmarks of a crook and a cheat and a deceiver.

####What does this mean for the religion?

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

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

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

####130 43/4b: “- - - it (the Quran*) is in the Mother of Book, in Our (Allah’s*) presence, high (in dignity) - - -”. This is one of the places in the Quran where Muhammad claims the Quran is taken from (is a copy of) "the Mother Book" (= "the Mother of the Quran") in Allah’s own home/Heaven. But no book containing hundreds of mistakes, hundreds of contradictions, hundreds of loose claims and statements, lots of invalid logic, lots of invalid “signs” and lots of invalid “proofs” easy for anybody with good and wide education too see through, hundreds of places with unclear language, etc., is copied from a revered Mother Book, high in dignity and esteem, in the perfect Heaven, the home of and by a perfect, omnipotent and omniscient god, not to mention revered by him and by his angels. See also 13/39,43/4, 85/21-22.

By the way: Would an omniscient god revere a book with so helpless and unclear texts that mere humans hundreds and more places would have to explain what the texts "really" means? - not to mention "explain" that wrong facts and other errors "are not errors, but hidden meanings - and the same for the contradictions"?

Nonsense.

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

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

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

###131 43/23b: (A43/23): “Rezi (one of the foremost Muslim scholars through the times*) says: ‘Had there been in the Quran nothing but these verses (43/20-24*), they would have sufficed to show the falsity of the principle postulating blind, unquestioning (by a Muslim) adoption of (another person’s) religious opinions (“ibtal al-qawl bi’t-raqlid”) - - -‘”.

If he had indicated Islam and the fathers and/or the imams, it hardly would be possible to say this more accurate. Islam is to a very large degree based on indoctrination, social and judicial pressure, and glorification of blind belief + even physical threats if you ask "wrong" questions, air a "wrong" fact, or leave the religion. "I believe because my father told his father said the Quran is the truth, and then it must be the truth". Very few Muslims have tried to find out: "What can be true and what not in this book? - and can there then be a god behind it?" Instead the "logic" is: "The Quran is the truth - because so my father and my mullah tell me. How can I then explain away the wrong facts, other errors, contradictions, etc., so that it looks like the Truth?"

132 43/71-73: What an empty paradise - all is about earth-like luxury (+ lots of sex for the men), etc. What a difference to Yahweh's Paradise where you "are like the angels" (Luke 20/36, not to mention: "For the Kingdom of God/Yahweh is not a matter of eating and drinking (or sex*) - - -", (Rom.14/17). And also not to mention: "When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven" (Mark 12/25)). The same god? - impossible with so different Paradises (in addition to all the other differences). The differences of the paradises is one of the absolute proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same line of anything of any essence.

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

###133 44/54a: “- - - and We (Allah*) shall join them to Companions with beautiful, big, and lustrous eyes.” Women as payment for "good deeds" like lying, deceiving, stealing, suppressing, torturing, killing. Some moral code and some view on women - slaves/things to use for gifts or payment. Not in the Bible. One of the really strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - their paradises are utterly different. If they had been the same god, their Paradise had been one and the same. See f.x. Luke 20/36, not to mention: "For the Kingdom of God/Yahweh is not a matter of eating and drinking (or sex*) - - -", (Rom.14/17). And also not to mention: "When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven" (Mark 12/25).

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

134 44/55: "There (in Paradise*) they (the resurrected dead*) can call for every kind of fruit - - -". Another most strong proofs for that Yahweh's and Allah's Paradises are not the same one. In Yahweh's the resurrected persons "become like angels" (f.x. Luke 20/36, not to mention: "For the Kingdom of God/Yahweh is not a matter of eating and drinking (or sex*) - - -", (Rom.14/17). And also not to mention: "When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven" (Mark 12/25)), in the Quran they are resurrected in body, though as young adults - and need food and drink and plenty of women (there is little talk of the women's life in Paradise - Islam is a religion mainly for men (also this is very different from Yahweh's and Jesus' Paradise)).

135 44/58b: “Verily, We (Allah*) have made this (Quran) easy - - -". No god ever made a book as full of wrong facts, other errors, contradictions, unclear language, etc.

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

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

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

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

WHO CAN EXPLAIN SOMETHING BETTER AND MORE CORRECTLY AND COMPLETELY THAN AN OMNISCIENT GOD? AND WHO KNOWS BETTER THAN THE GOD HIMSELF WHAT HE "REALLY" MEANS?

And: TO CLAIM THAT THE QURAN TELLS SOMETHING DIFFERENT FROM WHAT THE TEXTS REALLY SAY, IS TO FALSIFY THE BOOK.

  1. Add to this that 3/7b tells that "those in whose heart is perversity follow the part thereof (of the Quran*) that is allegorical" and that "no one knows the hidden meaning (of the allegories*) except Allah".
  2. Add that 3/138a tells that the Quran "is a plain statement to men - - -". = in a language clear and easy to understand - not in a language where you have to guess where and how to guess the "real" meaning.
  3. ##### Add that 6/114ca says:"- - - He (Allah*) it is Who hath sent unto you (Muslims*) the Book (the Quran*) explained in detail - - -". If Allah has explained everything in detail, who can then explain it better - or explain that the clumsy Allah meant something different from what he said? But that is one of Islam's and Muslims' standard "explanations" for "explaining" away errors and difficult points in the Quran: As what the text says is impossible, horrible, or something, Allah cannot have meant what he said, but must have told a parable, allegory, metaphor, or something, without indicating so, "but we intelligent humans can explain it better and tell you what Allah 'really' must have meant!!".
  4. Add that 11/1b tells that "- - - (the Quran is*) a Book with verses of basic or fundamental (of established (literal*) meaning), further explained in detail (by Allah*)". = the texts in the Quran are clear words of established (= literal) meaning from Allah.
  5. Add that 15/1b declares that it is "a Quran that makes things clear" - not one which hide basic and other facts or rules behind words of allegories, which are difficult to see if are allegories or plain speech, and on top of all a guesswork to extract the correct(?) meaning from.
  6. Add that 17/12h says: “- - - all things have We (Allah*) explained in detail”. There is no doubt that the Quran means everything is correctly explained = the texts in the book are to be understood literally.

  7. Add that 18/1d+e state that“(Allah*) hath allowed therein (in the Quran*) no Crookedness.” = The language is clear and literal without any tricks of hidden meanings.

  8. Add that 18/2a states that Allah has made it - the Quran and its language - "Straight (and Clear)".
  9. Add that 19/97b tells that "- - - We (Allah*) made the (Quran) easy - - -". = clear language - clear Arab - is used.
  10. Add that 20/113b+c tells that in the Quran is "explained therein in detail some of the warnings - - -". In detail = in a language clear and easy to understand - not in a language where you have to guess where and how to guess the "real" meaning. Islam in 20/113c explains that (YA2638): #####"The Quran is in clear Arabic, so that even an unlearned people like the Arabs might understand and profit by its warning".
  11. Add that 24/34b says the Quran is "verses making things clear". Especially for people like Muhammad's followers - little or no education - to make things clear needs a clear and literal and easy to understand language = in a language clear and easy to understand - not in a language where you have to guess where and how to guess the "real" meaning. AGAIN: THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT THE QURAN ITSELF STATES THAT ITS TEXTS ARE CLEAR AND LITERAL AND NOT TO BE MISUNDERSTOOD - THE TEXTS ARE TO BE UNDERSTOOD WORD BY WORD AND AS SAID: LITERALLY. ONE OF THE MANY VERSES TO REMEMBER WHEN MUSLIMS TRY TO EXPLAIN AWAY ERRORS AND PROBLEMS BY CLAIMING THAT THE MEANING IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT FROM WHAT THE TEXTS REALLY SAYS, BY CLAIMING THAT IT IS A METAPHOR, AN ALLEGORY, A PARABLE OR SOMETHING (ONE OF ISLAM'S AND MUSLIMS' STANDARD WAYS OF FLEEING FROM MISTAKES AND DIFFICULT POINTS).
  12. Add that 24/54j says: "- - - preach the clear (message)". It is very clear that the Quran means its message is clear and easy = to be understood literally. Only when the message has an obvious and easy to understand meaning, it is clear.

  13. Add that 26/2a says the same as 24/34b above.
  14. Add that 27/1b-d says the same as 24/34b above.
  15. Add that 28/2 confirms that "These are the verses of the Book that makes (things) clear" - no hiding of meanings, etc.
  16. Add that 36/69b clearly says that the book is "a Quran making things clear" = in a language clear and easy to understand - not in a language where you have to guess where and how to guess the "real" meaning.
  17. Add that 37/117c says that the Quran is "- - - the Book which helps to make things clear". Comment like 24/34 above.
  18. Add that 39/28b says: “(It is) a Quran in Arabic, without any crookedness - - -”. This means that the texts should be understood just like they are written - no crookedness in the meaning. This is one of the points worth remembering each time Muslims or Islam tries to "explain" away errors, etc. by claiming the texts means something different from what it says.

  19. Add that 41/3da as clearly states that the Quran is "A Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail (by Allah*) - - -". Is it then possible for humans to explain it better - or differently - from a god's explanation?
  20. Add that 43/2a declares that the Quran is "the Book that makes things clear - - -" = in a language clear and easy to understand - not in a language where you have to guess where and how to guess the "real" meaning. Which also must mean the language is not hiding other meanings and it is intended that everything shall be meant like it is said and thus easy to understand, plus it explains things in ways clear to see.
  21. Add that 43/3c tells: "We (Allah*) have made it a Quran in Arabic, that ye may be able to understand - - -". It is clear that Allah has done everything to make the Quran plain and easy to understand - he even made the Quran in the local language and in texts they would be able to understand. - not to mention when it is written in the local language to make it impossible not to understand exactly what was said and meant. And who can make a text easier to understand correctly than an omniscient god?
  22. Add that 44/2b-c declares: “By the Book (the Quran*) that makes things clear - - -.” Which also must mean the language is not hiding other meanings, and it is intended that everything shall be meant like it is said and easy to understand, plus it explains things in ways clear to see, if nothing else is clearly indicated.
  23. Add that 43/29b says: “- - - a Messenger (Muhammad*) making things clear.” Also Muhammad used clear speech.
  24. Add that 44/13d says: "- - - a Messenger (Muhammad*) explaining things clearly - - -". Also Muhammad explained things clearly - not by hidden meaning, difficult to see allegories, etc. And what normal human being could and can explain things more correctly than Muhammad? - especially if he just was quoting the words of an omniscient god?
  25. Add that 44/58b states that "Verily, We (Allah*) have made this (Quran) easy (and also in Arab*) - - -". = in a language clear and easy to understand - not in a language where you have to guess where and how to guess the "real" meaning.
  26. Add that 54/17a declares that "We (Allah*) have indeed made the Quran easy to understand - - -". To guess what is clear texts and what are not - and what the parables "really" means - definitely is not necessary (except a few places where the book tells that this is an (easily understood) parable, or explains the real meaning).

  27. Add that 54/22b says: “And We (Allah*) have indeed made the Quran easy to understand - - -.” Anyone wanting to try to “explain” away difficult points like mistakes or invalid logic or contradictions by calling them allegories, parables, etc. should read this sentence. It even is written 4 times just in chapter 54, and thus a solidly cemented and nailed truth: The Quran is to be understood literally - hidden meanings are only for Allah to understand (3/7c), and such search only is for the ones “in whose hearts is perversity - - -.”
  28. Add that 54/32a+b tells: “And We (Allah*) have indeed made the Quran easy to understand - - -.” Anyone wanting to try to “explain” away difficult points like mistakes or invalid logic or contradictions by calling them allegories etc. should read this sentence (and there are at least 31 points in the Quran saying similar = the Quran really means that its texts are to be understood literally where nothing else is indicated). It even is written 4 times only in this chapter, and thus a solidly cemented and nailed truth: The Quran is to be understood literally - hidden meanings are only for Allah (3/7c), and such search only is for the ones “in whose hearts is perversity - - -.”
  29. Add that 54/40 states: “And We (Allah*) have indeed made the Quran easy to understand - - -.” Comments like 54/17/a, 54/22b, and 54/32a+b above.
  30. Add to this that Allah in 55/2 tells that it is he who has taught the Quran. And who is better to teach and to teach correctly and clearly than a god? Every Muslim telling that a human may give a better explanation of one or more points, tells that Allah has a limited brain and is wrong in his explanations - or that the Quran is lying.
  31. Add that 65/11f says: “- - - the Signs of Allah (are*) containing clear explanations - - -”. No comments necessary. Except: What human can explain something more clearly and correctly than an omniscient god?
  32. Add that 75/19 tells that "- - - it is for Us (Allah*) to explain it (Islam*) (and make it clear) - - -". #### Is it possible for humans to explain or make things more clear than a god is able to do in his claimed holy book, sent down directly from him according to the Quran?

Also see the chapter "Literal language in the Quran - according to the Quran" in "1000+ Comments on the Quran".

All this means that Muslims claiming that some texts in the book are not easy and clear and correctly explained by Allah (f.x. 6/114da, 41/3da, 75/19 - not to mention 3/7b), but are allegories, metaphors, parables, etc. (a standard Muslim way to "explain" away errors and difficult points) in the Quran, tell that the Quran and Muhammad are wrong or lying all these places, each time they claim that this and this is not clear speech, but hidden meanings/parables.

WHO CAN MAKE A TEXT MORE STRAIGHT AND CLEAR, AND WHO IS BETTER TO EXPLAIN CORRECTLY AND IN DETAIL, SO THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT HE MEANS, THAN AN OMNISCIENT GOD? AND WHO KNOWS BETTER THAN THE GOD HIMSELF WHAT HE "REALLY" MEANS?

All the same one of the standard ways of "explaining away" errors and other bad points in the Quran, is to claim that Allah did not mean what he said, but something else - a parable, a metaphor, an allegory - and that the clever Muslims easily can help him and explain what he "really" meant. But this as said means that they indirectly, but clearly states that Muhammad lied in the Quran each time he said the texts there were easy and clear.

Should we thank them for confirming that Allah and Muhammad lie in the Quran?

AGAIN: "A proof is one or more proved facts which can give only one conclusion". Here it is ever so easy to prove that these are quotes from the Quran (Abdullah Yusuf Ali's translation). And again there only is one possible conclusion to make: Either the claims that the texts in the Quran are easy and literal and explained in detail by Allah where nothing else is indicated, are wrong, or the many claims from Islam and Muslims claiming that the texts very many places do not mean what it say, but has a different and more or less hidden meaning (claims to "explain away" errors, contradictions, difficult points, etc.) are wrong.

######Conclusion: Either the Muslims claiming that there are lots of places in the Quran where the texts mean something else than what it really is saying - claiming it is allegories, etc. - are lying, or Muhammad and Allah each time when stating that the quranic texts are easy and clear and literal where nothing else is clearly indicated, were lying in the Quran.

Should we thank them for confirming that Allah lies in the Quran?

Some samples of what the Quran says about its making:

  1. 2/5: "They (Muslims*) are on (true) guidance, from their Lord (Allah*) - - -". = Allah made the Quran.
  2. 2/23: "- - - We (Allah*) have revealed from time to time - - -". = Allah made the Quran.
  3. 2/29: "- - - He (Allah*) hath perfect knowledge". = What he makes is perfect - and what he tells, is told in a perfect way.
  4. 2/32: "- - - it is Thou (Allah*) who hath perfect knowledge and wisdom". = What he makes is perfect, and what he tells of course is told in a perfect way.
  5. 2/41: "- - - what I (Allah*) reveal - - -". = the Quran is from Allah.
  6. 2/93: "- - - what Allah hath sent down - - -". = The Quran is from Allah.
  7. 2/115: "For Allah is - - - All-Knowing". = Allah knows everything - also how to tell exactly what he means.
  8. 2/129: "- - - for Thou (Allah*) art - - - the Wise". = He is perfect in his wisdom - included in how to tell exactly what he means.
  9. 2/176: "- - - Allah sent down the Book in truth - - -". = there is no doubt that the Quran is from Allah.
  10. 2/209: "- - - Allah is - - - Wise". = He knows what he does - including how to instruct his followers.
  11. 2/220: "He (Allah*) is - - - Wise". See 2/209 just above.
  12. 2/257: "And Allah - - - knoweth all things". = He has perfect knowledge - also about how to tell things so that they are easily understood, like he tells the Quran is.
  13. 2/260: "He (Allah*) is - - - Wise". See 2/209 above.
  14. 2/261: "- - - He (Allah*) knoweth all things". = No doubt he also knows perfectly how to use the correct words to say exactly what he means.
  15. 2/268: "- - - He (Allah*) knoweth all things". See 2/257 above.
  16. 2/282: "And Allah is well acquainted with all things". = he knows everything, included how best to make people understand what he wants to tell them.
  17. 2/285: "- - - (that which*) hath been revealed - - - from (Allah*) - - -". The Quran is from Allah.

These are quotes from just one surah. There are many, many more saying the same: The Quran is from Allah, Allah knows everything, and he is perfectly wise, so that he knows everything also about how to express himself in ways not possible to misunderstand - or not to understand.

And we add some more from scattered around the Quran:

  1. 3/7a: "- - - the Book (the Quran*): in it are verses basic and fundamental (of established meaning); they are the foundation of the Book - - -". Very clear: The texts are meant like they are written.
  2. 3/7b: "- - - others (other verses) are allegorical. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the parts that is allegorical - - -". (We guess that the verses clearly told are allegories or similar, but then explained the meaning of, so that they are not allegories any more, are not included here.) A very clear message to all those who try to explain away by claiming they are allegories, etc.: The texts are to be understood literally, and only perverse people look for hidden allegories.
  3. 3/7c: "- - - but no one knows the hidden meanings (the meaning of hidden allegories*) except Allah". Another clear message to the ones making up "allegories", etc.: The hidden allegories in the Quran only Allah can understand. This means that if you make up claimed hidden "allegories" you are able to "understand" and "explain" - even better than Allah - these are not from the Quran and Allah (because those only Allah can understand), but false ones from you. And false ones from you have no value - on the contrary: You have made them up to make people believe differently from what the Quran and Allah really says. Infidelity simply - or perhaps you serve Iblis by changing the meaning of Allah's clear words?
  4. 3/184: "- - - the Book of Enlightenment (the Quran*)". When Allah without reservation names a book every Muslim is obliged to read "the Book of Enlightenment", it means that it will enlighten everybody. This means that there are no really hidden meanings - allegories - readers shall seek for behind the literal texts, because most people are not able to find and explain allegories, at least not so that they are sure their explanations are correct - and this even more so if the hidden allegories are of a kind only Allah can understand (see 3/7 above).
  5. 4/87: "And whose word can be truer than Allah's?" The ones claiming that this and this is an allegory, even when this is not said in the Quran, and that the meaning thus is something different from what Allah himself says in the book, at the same time tell that their words are truer than the Quran's and Allah's.
  6. 11/2a: "- - - a Book, with verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning) - - -". Identical to 3/7a above. That Allah repeats this, means that he strengthen this piece of information.
  7. 11/2b: "- - - a Book, with verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning), further explained in details - - -". If Allah has explained thing in detail, who is then able to give truer explanations? - f.x. by claiming that Allah's words in the Quran do not tell his true meaning, and that your meaning is truer than his words when you "explain" what you claim are hidden allegories?
  8. 11/2c: "- - - a Book, with verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning), further explained in details - from One Who is Wise and Well-Acquainted (with all things)". When you change Allah's words in the Quran by claiming they are allegories in spite of that Allah himself says they are "of established meaning" = to be understood literary, is then the reason that you are wiser and better acquainted with all things than Allah?
  9. 15/1: "- - - a Quran that makes things clear". This contradicts all claims about hidden allegories, necessary to be "explained" by intelligent and wise humans - hidden allegories are not clear speech.
  10. 18/2: "(He (Allah*) hath made it (his words in the Quran*) Straight (and clear) - - -". A sentence not possible to misunderstand: Allah's words in the Quran are straight and clear, and his meanings not hidden behind hidden allegories, etc.
  11. 20/113: "Thus have We (Allah*) sent down - an Arabic Quran - and explained therein some of the warnings - - -". Who are you who believe you can explain the details better - or even change Allah's words and claim them to mean something else than he says, by claiming they are allegories or something - than the omniscient god Allah?

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

Also see the chapter "Literal language in the Quran - according to the Quran" in "1000+ Comments on the Quran".

All this means that Muslims claiming that some texts in the book are not easy and clear and correctly explained by Allah (f.x. 6/114da, 41/3da, 75/19 - not to mention 3/7b), but are allegories, metaphors, parables, etc. (a standard Muslim way to "explain" away errors and difficult points) in the Quran, tell that the Quran and Muhammad are wrong or lying all these places, each time they claim that this and this is not clear speech, but hidden meanings/parables.

WHO CAN MAKE A TEXT MORE STRAIGHT AND CLEAR, AND WHO IS BETTER TO EXPLAIN CORRECTLY AND IN DETAIL, SO THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT HE MEANS, THAN AN OMNISCIENT GOD? AND WHO KNOWS BETTER THAN THE GOD HIMSELF WHAT HE "REALLY" MEANS?

All the same one of the standard ways of "explaining away" errors and other bad points in the Quran, is to claim that Allah did not mean what he said, but something else - a parable, a metaphor, an allegory - and that the clever Muslims easily can help him and explain what he "really" meant. But this as said means that they indirectly, but clearly states that Muhammad lied in the Quran each time he said the texts there were easy and clear.

Should we thank them for confirming that Allah and Muhammad lie in the Quran?

AGAIN: "A proof is one or more proved facts which can give only one conclusion". Here it is ever so easy to prove that these are quotes from the Quran (Abdullah Yusuf Ali's translation). And again there only is one possible conclusion to make: Either the claims that the texts in the Quran are easy and literal and explained in detail by Allah where nothing else is indicated, are wrong, or the many claims from Islam and Muslims claiming that the texts very many places do not mean what it say, but has a different and more or less hidden meaning (claims to "explain away" errors, contradictions, difficult points, etc.) are wrong.

Some other quotes about proofs and invalid or made up proofs:

  1. "Strong claims need strong proofs.
  2. "A claim without a proof may be dismissed without a proof".
  3. "Claims are cheap, but only proofs are proofs".
  4. "The use of invalid proofs normally proves that something is fishy".
  5. "The cheat or deceiver naturally must rely on claims pretending to be facts or proofs".
  6. "A made up "proof" makes the man very suspect".
  7. "A strong belief is not a proof - not necessarily even a truth"
  8. .
  9. "Wrong claims and invalid "proofs" are working tools of the cheat".
  10. "A student with correct facts gets a more correct answer than 20 professors with wrong facts". (Invalid, "signs", claims, "proofs", etc. of course are wrong facts.)
  11. And we may add from Peer Gynt in his original language: "Naar utgangspunktet er som galest, blir resultatet tidt originalest" - freely translated: "When you conclude from wrong claims/wrong facts/invalid "proofs"/etc., you get wrong conclusions".

######Either the Muslims claiming that there are lots of places in the Quran where the texts mean something else than what it really is saying - claiming it is allegories, etc. - are lying, or Muhammad and Allah each time when stating that the quranic texts are easy and clear and literal where nothing else is clearly indicated, were lying in the Quran.

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

The unavoidable conclusion is:

Either the claims from Muslims about all the unclear points/mistakes in the Quran they have to explain, and indirectly that Allah is clumsy and no good at expressing himself, or that he is lying when he says that he has full and perfect knowledge about everything (included how to use exact and right words and expressions), are wrong.

Or Allah is clumsy and backward - or lying in the Quran about his knowledge and wisdom - and they are right in what they claim: That Allah needs help from clever humans to express himself correctly.

136 45/11a: “This (the Quran*) is (true) Guidance - - -”. A book with perhaps 3ooo mistakes, invalid statements, contradictions, etc., etc., is no true guidance. See 13/1g and 40/75 above. And the fact that Muhammad knew about at least a few point he had to knew were lies, makes at least parts of this dishonest.

137 45/28c: "This Day shall ye (people/sects*) be recompensed for all that ye did!" This may well be - but by whom? As the Quran is form no god, and there never has been a real proof for Allah, he is highly unlikely to be anything but the old pagan god al-Lah in a new suit, and thus no existing god. Then who will recompense people for good and bad deeds, prayers for forgiving, etc.? One may hope for a good and benevolent god, but what then about all the Muslims who have lived according to the Quran's harsh war religion laws?

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

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

Similar goes for forgiving in Islam - it will change Allah's Plan "which nobody and nothing can change" according to the Quran.

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

138 46/10f: "- - - truly - - -". Definitely not a proved truth - only a not proved claim. See f.x. 2/2b and 45/3a above.

When used in the Quran words like "true", "truth", "truly", "sure" "surety", "surely", "verity", "verily", etc. are claims, not proved facts. Also see 2/2b, 67/9c - a strong one - and as for contradictions to the Bible also 40/20b. Also the latter half of the comments to 41/39a is very relevant. These and similar words cannot be taken at face value unless they are proved.

A. Occam's Broom (the same Occam as the one with the razor): "The intellectual dishonest trick of ignoring facts that refute your argument in the hope that your audience won't notice". (New Scientist 21.Sept. 2013.) This trick is frequently used by Muhammad, by Islam, and by Muslims arguing for the Quran's texts and for Islam - just use your ears and/or eyes, and brain, and you will find lots and lots of samples, f.x. in some of Muhammad's lies in the Quran.

B. "'Surely' (etc.*) and rhetorical questions - whenever you encounter these in a text, stop and think. The author usually wants you to skate over them as if the claim is so obvious as to be beyond doubt, or the answer self-evident. The opposite is often the case." (Graham Lawton.) Also this trick is very often used in the Quran, by Islam, and by Muslims.

Try to count such cases in the Quran - they are MANY. Especially the never proved claim "the Truth" and similar are very often used. Samples: "Without doubt", "certain", "verily", "clear", "right", "fact", "wrong", "sign", "proof" (even modern Muslims disuse this word often), "term appointed", "predestined", "If Allah wanted - - -", "non-Muslims are bad, Muslims are good", "error", "wisdom", and more.

#######Like said these two rhetorical ways of dishonesty are used very many places in the Quran - we have not counted, but hundreds. Each of them may be a hidden lie - is a lie if the orator knows his point is a claim or bluff or worse, and not a proved or provable fact. And according to the Quran what is said in the Quran, is said by Allah.

Who needs such tricks? - the cheat and deceiver, the swindler and the charlatan.

139 46/31g: "He (Allah*) will forgive you (people*) your faults - - -". Only 2 can forgive: The victim and a god. Is Allah a god - if he exists? There only is a claim from a man with dubious moral, but a liking for power, wealth for bribes, and for women, which tells this.

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

140 48/5a: "- - - He (Allah*) may admit men and women who believe, to Gardens - - -". Only if he exists and is a god, none of which Muhammad was able to prove.

141 48/5c: "- - - Gardens beneath which rivers flow - - -". The Quran's and Islam's Paradise. See 10/9f above. Also an Arabism.

142 52/17-24: A description of life in Muhammad's Paradise: Good food, good drinks, lazy life, houris/lots of sex (for men), your children around you (how is that possible as there will be hundred generations?), luxury, servants, etc., etc., like a royal life in the dreams of poor, naive, and primitive warriors - - - and universes away from Yahweh's Paradise, where you "will become like the angels (Mark 12/25). Yahweh and Allah the same god? - no chance!! One of the at least 200% proofs.

#143 53/62: "- - - adore (Him (Allah*))!" Why adore the "hero" in a clearly made up - by dark forces or human(s) - book? A claimed "hero" who has never before or later manifested himself in any way at all! Cervantes was out from prison when he wrote Don Quixote - in a book of a measurably better literary quality than the Quran. But Don Quixote does not exist even though a doubtful person wrote a book about him.

Even if things are said or written, that does not mean that it is true - and especially not when the narrator is an unreliable person of doubtful moral even according to the realities in central Islamic relevant literature.

144 55/2: “It is He (Allah*) Who has taught the Quran.” No omniscient god ever was involved in a book of a quality like the Quran. See 13/1g, 40/75, and others.

145 55/56a: "In them (the gardens of Paradise*) will be (Maidens), restraining their glances, whom no man or Jinn before has touched". A nice Paradise for primitive men - women do not count much in the Quran - but totally different from Yahweh's Paradise - only this verse proves so formidable difference to Yahweh's Paradise, that this alone proves that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. (see f. x. Luke 20/36, not to mention: "For the Kingdom of God/Yahweh is not a matter of eating and drinking (or sex*) - - -", (Rom.14/17). And also not to mention: "When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven" (Mark 12/25)) that this alone proves Yahweh and Allah cannot be the same god - and then there are all the other differences in addition.

If Yahweh and Allah had been the same god, their Paradise had been one and the same.

146 56/15-16: “(They (the pious Muslims*) will be) on Thrones encrusted (with gold and precious stones), reclining on them, facing each other”. This means long double rows of thrones – millions or perhaps a few billions of thrones in double rows facing each other. More, if also the women and children and all the houris shall recline on thrones. Also there has to be some space between the rows, as there have to be places for resting on carpets as mentioned in other verses, and for the fruit trees and the water.

But endless double rows of thrones does not sound like our idea of a perfect paradise, no matter how many houris for free use and good food and drinks, as the nearly only pastime is some polite and not intellectually demanding conversation - the only alternative mentioned. See also quote 56/25-26 below.

147 56/15-23: A description of Allah's Paradise. Does anyone see any difference between this and a poor, naive, uneducated warrior's dream of a royal life included a suitable harem, and this? Very - VERY - different from Yahweh's Paradise in the Bible, where you "become like the angels" (f. x. Luke 20/36, not to mention: "For the Kingdom of God/Yahweh is not a matter of eating and drinking (or sex*) - - -", (Rom.14/17). And also not to mention: "When the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven" (Mark 12/25)). Another point: In Yahweh's Paradise there is no houris and even no married couples any more - no sex. And being like an angel, you need no food - a sharp contrast to Muhammad's description of delicious things to eat and drink. Yahweh the same god as Allah? You are free to believe it if you are logically blind.

148 56/35-37a: “We (Allah*) have created (their Companions (houris*)) of special creation. And made them virgin-pure (and undefiled) – beloved (by nature), equal in age (for good Muslim men in Paradise*) - - -.” Houris are a bit special kind of women, but the “fact” that they are given to the men arriving in Paradise as repayment for good (?) deeds, tells miles and square miles about Islam’s view of women. The servile nature of the houris – the ideal women – in the descriptions, also tells volumes about Islam’s point of view on how women shall behave.

The houris simply were sex slaves and courtesans, an idea extremely far from the Bible's, Yahweh's, and Jesus' Paradise (they are "borrowed from the Zoroastrian paradise, where they were named paaris). A very strong proof for that Yahweh and Allah were not the same god - and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same religion. (The idea of houris is "borrowed" from Persian old religion, where they were named paaris.)

149 56/95d: "- - - the very truth and certainty - - -". Our experience is that the cheater, etc. are the ones without true facts, but who strongest insists on that certainly he is telling the very truth (others often have real facts or proofs to show for themselves).

150 57/8a: "What cause have ye (non-Muslims*) why ye should not believe in Allah?". Well to mention a few of the reasons:

  1. Not one single claim is proved in Islam - not even the existence of the claimed god, the former pagan god al-Lah.
  2. All the mistaken facts and other mistakes prove 110% and more that the Quran is not from any god - no omniscient god makes such and so many mistakes (which is why Muslims cannot afford to see the mistakes no matter how obvious they are).
  3. All the contradictions have the same 110% effect.

  4. All the invalid logic also has the same 110% effect - so only on these 3 points you have 330% proofs that the Quran is not from a god.
  5. The language many places are unclear or with 2 or more possible ways of understanding a point. No god would use unclear language in his holy book.
  6. A lot of points in the book were difficult or impossible to understand from people not from that region - Arabisms. No universal god would make his holy book in ways not possible for all to understand unless they were known in a small region of Earth. Humans might make such mistakes, but not an omniscient god.
  7. The horrible and immoral parts of the Quran's moral code may indicate that the real maker of the Quran belongs to some dark forces. Who wants to believe in a religion perhaps made up by f.x. a devil impersonating Gabriel? What at least is sure, is that points like that are not from any good and benevolent god.
  8. The immoral and unethical parts of the ethical code, means a not good and benevolent god.
  9. The parts of sharia which are unjust and/or immoral gives the same thoughts as the sentence above.
  10. The Quran contains not a few cases of boasting or bluffs. Who needs to use bluffs? - the cheat and deceiver, not an omnipotent god.
  11. #####The Quran contains some places where Muhammad is lying. How true is a religion which needs lies? And who needs to use lies? - the cheat and deceiver.
  12. All the points in the Quran where it is used wrong science - science believed in at the time of Muhammad - indicates very clearly that the Quran is made by humans living at the time of Muhammad - perhaps by Muhammad himself.
  13. Islam is a war religion - the claim "the religion of peace" is an al-Taqiyya (a lawful lie) - and who believes a "good and benevolent" god runs a religion of dishonesty, stealing, apartheid, rape, suppression, and war?
  14. The Quran accepts the use of dishonesty. How much then is dishonest points in the book?
  15. The Quran is entirely based on the words of a man with a very doubtful moral - lying, breaking even of oaths, deceiving, stealing, raping, and a lot more - and a man wanting power and riches (for "gifts" to buy more followers and to keep some of the ones he had - clear from central Islamic books) - and not to mention women (one knows the name of 36 women he had more or less regular sex with (see the chapters about Muhammad under www.1000mistakes.com - and those are the ones one knows the names of).

Well, these at least were a few reasons why not to believe in Allah and in Muhammad's religion - at least not until at least something is proved.

151 57/9g: "- - - He (Allah*) may lead you (by means of the Quran*) from the depths of Darkness into the light". No book with that much wrong and with such a large part of its moral code immoral and brutal, can lead anyone into real light - especially as f.x. all the mistakes prove that the texts are not from any god.

152 57/12j: "This (Paradise*) is indeed the highest Achievement". This may well be true, but only if the Quran's Paradise exists, and only if the good Muslims end there. As the Quran with all its errors, etc. is not from any god, these are very open questions.

153 57/29d: "For Allah is the Lord of Grace abounding". One more of the never proved claims in the Quran. As for claims it might have been possible to accept that some of them simply were tales telling how things were/are, but only if at least some of them were proved true so that the reliability was confirmed here and there. But when nothing is proved or documented - nothing at all of the central claims - things feel wrong, and this even more so as to rely on tales and fast talk and evade or being unable to prove anything, are hallmarks of cheats, deceivers and swindlers.

#####154 61/9f: “- - - the Religion of Truth - - -”. See 13/1g and 40/75. It is also worth to remember that normal people of today - and earlier times – would be reluctant with trusting or believing in a man with a CV like Islam tells Muhammad had: Robbery, extortion, women, lies, broken oaths, incitement to hate, incitement to suppression of all opponents, assassination of opponents, murder of opponents, mass murder, rape, betrayal, (30 opponents from Khaybar invited to debate under promise of safe return - but 29 murdered on the slightest excuse, the last one managed to flee), incitement to war - and lust for women and for power. We have met Muslims excusing him with that he was a hard man living in a hard time, and that he was no worse than other warlords. May be so, but he definitely was no better either, and he pretended (?) to represent a good and benevolent god. And as for the truth - the Quran at best is partly true, as proved by all the errors, etc. in the book.

That the Quran is the truth, is just a claim, not a proved fact - actually all the errors, etc. in it prove the claim wrong. Besides: Islam is the only one of the big religions accepting the use of dishonesty in many cases - yes, even advices you to use it "if necessary" to defend or promote the religion.

For errors, etc. - included at least some lies - see "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran", Book A. How much in the Quran are truth and how much is not? There normally is a difference between propaganda and reality.

And not least: Islam is the only one of the big religions which by means of all the mistakes, contradictions, etc. proves that no god is behind its claimed holy book, and thus no god behind the religion - and thus that things are seriously wrong with the religion: A religion without a god behind it, is a made up and pagan religion.

(For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is "The Religion of Honesty.)

###155 63/1e: “- - - thou (Muhammad*) art indeed His (Allah’s*) Messenger - - -.” Well, the Quran says so – but very much of what is said in the Quran obviously is wrong. And can a man claiming to be bringing rather ok and moral messages for 13 years, and then highly immoral and inhuman messages for 10 years (Islam changed much in and after 622 AD and the flight to Medina) to man – and using the messages as his platform of power – really be the messenger of a timeless and benevolent god? Does an eternal and omniscient god change his mind and his religion that much in some months? If not, Muhammad was no real messenger.

156 64/9j: "- - - that (Paradise*) will be a Supreme Achievement". Certainly - if this is not one of the many, many mistakes in the Quran - or one of the sporadic lies in the book.

157 65/5e: "- - - if anyone fears Allah, He will remove his (not her - Islam is a man's religion*) ills from him, and will enlarge his reward". Only possible - possible - is Allah exists and is a god. (Allah may exist and even be a god and not do this all the same, if not the Quran has told the full truth and only the truth about him.)

158 68/34e: "- - - (in Paradise Muslims are*) in the Presence of their Lord (Allah)". This is the only pleasure in Muhammad's Paradise which is not a bodily one - perhaps in addition to peace and quiet and the closeness of the family. Everything else is for the body: Good food, good things to drink, good clothes, good houses, pleasant weather, etc. Oh, there may be a little vainglory, too: Sitting on glorious thrones in long rows - miles and miles and miles of them (but some of the royal superiority complex gets bleached when everybody else - by the millions - are kings, too, all without underlings, except their wives and houris (and the women do not even have such underlings - but so what, as Islam is a men's and warriors' religion?)

And as for presence to Allah: If normally good Muslims ends up in the lower heaven out of 7, and Hadiths tells there are may be 100 years travel between each heaven, the "presence" is not very close - yes, not even Muhammad and the 7th heaven is very close.

####159 69/52d: (YA5674): "- - - Allah has given us (man*) his absolute Truth (a claim, not a proved fact*) through his Revelations - - -". This is the reason why Muslims and Islam can admit no mistake in the Quran, no matter how obvious it is - a mistake will prove that things are wrong in Allah's "absolute Truth". And this also is why the myriad of mistaken facts and other errors in the Quran proves 110% and more that something is seriously wrong with the Quran and that it is not from a god - no omniscient god makes mistakes.

A cold fact here: No book as full of errors, contradictions, etc. as the Quran, is the truth - and no such book is from any god (no omniscient god makes mistakes, contradiction, uses invalid logic, uses helpless or unclear language/explanations, etc.)

160 77/41d: "- - - (cool) shades and springs (of water)". The Arab desert dweller's dream of a paradise - far from f.x. the Inuit's or Samoyed's or for that case the North Europeans' or the original inhabitants of Tierra del Fuego's dream about nice sunshine and not too much rain and water. All the "Arabisms" make Allah seem to be a god for desert Arabs mainly.

Also remember that the many and deep differences between Yahweh’s Paradise and the one of Allah, are one of the strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god.

161 77/41-44: The paradise of the Quran and of Islam modeled after the poor, naive desert dweller's dream about en emperor's luxury once more. See 10/9f above.

Also remember that the many and deep differences between Yahweh’s Paradise and the one of Allah, are one of the strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god.

162 77/43a: "Eat ye (Muslims in Paradise*) to your heart's content - - -". As said before: The Muslim Paradise is just a luxury version of how poor, ignorant, and naive primitive warriors in a dry land could dream a kings holiday was like. What kind of primitive god could not do better than this? - and it on top of all in reality(!?) only is a man's paradise. (In Scandinavia one could say "a man's paradise in double meaning" because sex not based on love often is called "paring" or "parring" - so "paring" in "paradise" is a paradise for men - - - for a time. (Sex is not named in the Muslim paradise in the Quran, but all the same very central).

Also remember that the many and deep differences between Yahweh’s Paradise and the one of Allah, are one of the strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god.

163 84/8-9: "Soon will his (Muslim's*) account be taken by an easy reckoning, and he will turn to his people, rejoicing!" Only if Allah exists, and if the Quran has told the full truth and only the truth. (If f.x. the Bible has told the truth, few Muslims will rejoice - and it is very clear from all its errors, etc. that the Quran at least has not told neither only nor the full truth).

164 84/25d: "- - - a Reward that will never fail". If Allah exists, if he is a major god, and if the Quran tells the full truth and only the truth about this.

165 85/22b:** "- - - a Tablet Preserved - - -". The claimed "Mother of the Book" (= mother of the Quran) in Allah's personal heaven. This in case says that the Quran is an exact copy of the claimed (but like always in the Quran never proved) "Mother of the Book". But some Muslims refer to the Quran itself "as Allah has promised it shall not be changed in any way". They then omit the fact that there existed many versions of the Quran - at one time at least 14 canonized + 10 accepted versions (see "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" - http://www.100mistakes.com ), and there still are two of them in use + 4 a little used. They also the problems with the language in the old Arab texts, which permits many different ways of understanding the texts. And they omit f.x. the old Qurans found in Yemen in 1972 which "had small, but significant differences from the present Qurans".

###### Verses 85/21-22 directly say that the Quran is in "the Mother of the Book" = its texts are identical to the ones in the claimed "Mother of the Book"(but just these verses do not say that there may not be more text in "the Mother of the Book", though such texts can vary only in minor details from the Quran, if the Quran shall continue to be "reliable").

Sub-total Chapter 45 = 165 + 4.155 = 4.320.


>>> Go to Next Chapter

>>> Go to Previous Chapter

This work was upload with assistance of M. A. Khan, editor of islam-watch.org and the author of "Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism, and Slavery".