Muhammad in the Quran, Vol. 3: Chapter 49


 

MUHAMMAD - GUIDE OR ENFORCER?

Islam claims that Muhammad just was a guide. As long as he had little or no power, this may be true. But when he got power and military strength after fleeing to Medina in 632 AD he soon became an enforcer. Some points:

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

001 6/48a: "We (Allah*) send the Messengers only to give good news and to warn." In that case Muhammad was no messenger from Allah - he was too much of a thief/robber/enslaver and of a bloody robber baron/warlord/murderer and more. And later an enforcer: "Become Muslim or fight us and die"- that was the choice much of Arabia (and others) got. "- - - only to give good news - - -"? Not even wrong, but much stronger than wrong. (But this was in 621 AD before he started to become powerful and either became morally destroyed or could show his true moral and personality. Absolute power often works like that.

002 6/104f: “- - - I (Muhammad*) am not (here) to watch over your doings.” One year later Muhammad started to watch everybody’s’ doing, too – and strictly so little by little. 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 in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran". (At least 29 contradictions).

003 6/107c: “- - - but We (Allah*) made thee (Muhammad*) not one to watch over their (“infidels’) doing - - -.” 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).

004 6/107d: "- - - nor art thou (Muhammad*) set over them (non-Muslims*) to dispose of their affairs". Similar to 6/107c just above.

005 6/112e: “- - - so (Muhammad*) leave them (opponents*) and their inventions (gods*) alone.” This verse is abrogated – made invalid - and contradicted 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).

006 6/112f: “- - - so (Muhammad*) leave them (opponents*) and their inventions (gods*) alone.” This also has another meaning: Do not mingle with or listen to what the non-Muslims say - they just make up things (an easy claim for Muhammad to make).

007 7/2f: "- - - and teach the Believers". Can you teach anyone what is right from a book where much is wrong? - and can you teach s right religion from a book where there is no god behind (no god had made so many errors, etc.)?

######008 7/188da: “I (Muhammad*) am but a warner, and a bringer of glad tidings - - -". = I, Muhammad, have no supernatural powers. (This is in exact accordance with Islam's repeated statements that "the only miracle connected to Muhammad, is the delivery of the Quran" - - - if a book that full of wrong facts, etc. etc. is a miracle.)

009 7/188e: “I (Muhammad*) am but a warner, and a bringer of glad tidings – to those who have faith.” A warner and a warrior. 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).

010 10/2d: "- - - he (Muhammad*) should warn mankind - - -". The problem is that even though he started as a warner, after he gained power after 622 AD he also became an enforcer.

011 11/12e: “But thou (Muhammad*) art only there to warn”. And then some more – at least after 622 AD: 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, 1/3, 33/73, 35/36. They are all quoted under 2/256. (At least 29 contradictions).

(2 abrogations.)

*012 14/1f: “- - - in order that thou (Muhammad – by means of the Quran*) mightest lead mankind out of the depths of darkness and into light - - -“. No book with that many mistakes and that doubtful moral can lead anyone into light. The same goes for any religion so suppressing, inhuman and so full of Nazi-like ideology (before you protest, beware that these are not our words, but f.x. C. G. Young's), discrimination, blood and war, and “all power to Muhammad/the leader”.

Not to mention that no religion based on a book so full of wrong facts, etc. that it clearly is from no god.

013 15/3b: “Leave them (the disbelievers*) alone, to enjoy (the good things of this life) and to please themselves - - -.” This was in 621 AD. It did not take long before Allah needed to change and contradict his word, when he started to change his rather peaceful religion to one of inhumanity and blood (luckily many Muslims do not live according to those parts if the Quran). This verse is contradicted – made invalid - and often “killed” (abrogated) 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).

014 17/54d: “We (Allah*) have not sent thee (Muhammad*) to be a disposer of their (“infidels’”*) affairs for them”. Allah or Muhammad started to change his mind about this one year later – in 622 AD – when Muhammad started to gain enough military power to decide “their” religion for them. (In spite of what Islam likes to tell, Islam to a large degree was introduced by the sword – and by the wish for taking part in the looting/robbing/stealing, raping and slave taking – in Arabia). 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).

015 17/59i: "We (Allah*) only send the Signs by way of terror (and warning from evil). This perhaps was what Muhammad did with all his raids - mainly for looting and extortion, but later also for spreading Islam (continued by his successors). ###Terror and evil brought the message across many places.

016 20/130: “Therefore (Muhammad/Muslims*) be patient with what they (“infidels”) say - - -.” That was Muhammad’s tone in Mecca 615 AD or before – and until his flight to Medina in 622 AD. It changed quite a lot from 622 AD and onwards and contradicted quite a lot of the mild words from the Mecca period. 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).

017 21/5c: "- - - he (Muhammad*) forged it (the Quran*)!" Also this is a real possibility - perhaps the most likely one. The many cases where Allah(?) supported his personal needs and his hunting for power and for that chase for women (f.x. Zaid's wife) may point to this - there are so many "prophets" through the times who have used similar methods like Muhammad, though the military power of the united Arab tribes gave him/his successors more success than the others - with a partly (but only partly) exception for Indonesia, Islam’s expansion was built on war and then suppression (or worse) afterwards of the ones who refused to become Muslims.

018 24/11b: The background for this verse was that Muhammad's wife Aisha - his child wife - in one occasion spent several hours alone in the wilderness together with a young man, and there were a lot of rumors because of this. According to our point of view it is highly unlikely that anything happened between them, but the only "proof" for that it was so, was that Muhammad some weeks later claimed he received verses from Allah saying she was not guilty - hardly a strong proof as it came from a man with Muhammad's morality and reliability. An extra point here is that this child - around 626 AD - was Muhammad's favorite wife, and he could hardly keep her if her reputation was tarnished, so he had a strong motif for getting (?) such verses. This was one of the not few times Allah(?) was a nice helper for Muhammad. But remember that when Muslims say Aisha was proved not guilty, it is not true - neither the Quran nor Muhammad is reliable witnesses/proofs. It is likely she/they told the truth, but nothing was ever proved. Also see 24/11-16 below. It also is very clear from Hadiths that Muhammad himself suspected her - his behavior the first weeks clearly shows that. So when he scolds others for suspecting immoral things had happened, it was double moral form his side. Not a very sympathetic side of human nature.

Another point: The Quran claims it is a copy of the "mother book" in Heaven - revered by Allah and made before the Earth was created. How come that this insignificant episode in the then distant future could be noted down in such a book some billion years before it happened? - especially so if man has free will, so Allah could know nothing for sure? And how much did the 124ooo (= 620 at any time for 5ooo years or 12-15 for 160ooo-200ooo. No traces found. Believe it if you can), according to Hadiths, earlier prophets understand from these verses in their copies of the "mother book"/Quran?

#019 24/11e: "- - - to every man (women count less in Islam*) among them (who gossiped*) (will come the punishment) of the sin that he earned - - -". What about Muhammad in this case? - to our knowledge he did not only gossip in this case, but he also definitely did not protect or defend her (Aisha*) until after some weeks, something which surely added to the gossip.

He simply was no better himself.

Did he wait that long to see if she stopped menstruating? (If she was old enough to menstruate - Muhammad practiced pedophilia.)

A point is that much of what Muhammad said about opponents, was slander, gossip, and basis for more slander and gossip even up to this date.

020 24/11f: "- - - him who took on himself the lead among them (the gossipers*) - - -". It was said that one of Muhammad's opponents, 'Abdullah ibn Ubayy, was extra active spreading the suspicion. Perhaps he saw that things had to be wrong, though not necessarily in just this case?

021 24/11-16: This refers to the incident with Aisha - Muhammad’s child wife - and a young man alone together some hours in the desert. The slander afterwards was not an obvious lie like Muhammad later liked to claim. That it was not obvious - something also his own initial reaction clearly demonstrated - was and is so obvious that it is clear an intelligent man like Muhammad knew he was not telling the truth when he said it the lie was obvious. (A clear proof for this: He used many days to decide to believe her.) Also they were not really proved innocent - there only were some convenient verses in the Quran some weeks later, and the Quran far from is reliable. (But there is a fair chance that the two told the truth). Also see 24/11b above.

Muhammad in this case definitely did not behave like a gentleman, and it is very likely that his behavior did "put wood to the fire" and provoke more and/or stronger slander. Not the right man to blame others for bad conduct. And especially Muhammad's own initial reaction proves for one thing that it was not obvious that the slander was untrue, and for another his reaction then also proves that he lied - and knew he lied - when he far too late claimed it was obvious that the slander was untrue. At least the word "obvious" was a lie.

The story also tells not a little about the person Muhammad.

022 24/12a: "Why did not the Believers - men and women - when ye heard of the affair - - -". A time anomaly. How could this history be referred in the Quran - a copy of the age-old and older "Mother of the Book" unless Allah's predestination really is 100% and total?

023 24/12b: "Why did not the Believers - men and women - when ye heard of the affair (see 24/11a and 24/11-16 above) - - - say, 'This (charge) is an obvious lie'?" Because 1): It was not obvious it was a lie. 2): Muhammad himself needed a long time to decide what to believe - why then blame the others? - and what conclusions could others draw from his suspicion and silence?

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

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

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

###### 024 24/12d: "This (charge) is an obvious lie". It might have been a lie, but it was not an obvious lie, something Muhammad's own reaction very clearly prove - ##### so clearly that an intelligent person like Muhammad understood he was lying when he used the word "obvious" - and it is not the only time he lies in the Quran. He also was intelligent enough to know that as it far from was an obvious lie, he here was slandering those he talked to.

But like you see here, Allah solved the day for him.

Another point: How did this episode end up in "the Mother of the Book", made billions of years ago and revered by Allah in his Heaven? - the claimed book the Quran is claimed to be an exact copy of?

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

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

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

025 24/13b: "Why did they (the ones talking about Aishah*) not bring four witnesses - - -?" For the very obvious reason that no witnesses existed, because the two had been alone - this is a rhetoric and hypocritical question where Muhammad knew the answer very well on beforehand. A dishonest way of argumenting, and a dishonest way to move the focus away from Aishah to others. Psychologically may be a wise sentence - but dishonest. This question was nonsense from the moment it was asked.

The request also is a bit ironic, as Muhammad never proved anything himself - claims and invalid "signs" and as invalid "proofs", but never a valid proof for anything central in his new religion.

####026 24/13c: "Why did they (see 24/13f just above*) not bring the (4*) witnesses, such men, in the sight of Allah (stand forth) themselves as liars". This is one of the really black spots on Islam, and one of the 100% proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god: The lack of witnesses does not only make the ones speaking suspect, but it is a proof for that they are liars - if they speak the truth or not, does not matter. If they do not have the witnesses, it is a proof for that they are lying. If this was lying for men, this was bad enough. But it is a valid proof for Allah!!: "- - - in the sight of Allah, (stand forth) themselves as liars!". #####This in spite of that if they spoke the truth, an omnipotent god would know they spoke the truth!. #####And all the same, without the witnesses they were liars to Allah!

This tells volumes about Allah, about Islam, and about Muhammad.

BUT THERE ALSO IS ANOTHER VERY ESSENTIAL POINT HERE: ACCORDING TO ALLAH THE ONES WHO CANNOT PROVE THEIR WORDS, ARE LIARS. THIS FOR ONE THING CONFIRMS THAT TO ALLAH PROOFS ARE VERY ESSENTIAL, AND FOR ANOTHER THING IT TELLS SOMETHING REALLY ESSENTIAL ABOUT MUHAMMAD, AS HE NEVER WAS ABLE TO GIVE A VALID PROOF FOR ANY OF HIS CENTRAL RELIGIOUS CLAIMS. THIS MEANS THAT IF THIS VERSE IS TRUE, MUHAMMAD WAS A LIAR.

027 24/13d: "Why did they (see 24/13b just above*) not bring the (4*) witnesses, such men, in the sight of Allah (stand forth) themselves as liars". Part of the basis under the sharia laws.

028 24/15b: "- - - ye (people in Muhammad's Medina*) - - - said out of your mouths things of which ye had no knowledge - - -". How could this end up in the claimed "Mother Book" (of which the Quran is a copy according to Muhammad) billions of years before it was said or happened? One more of the many texts or quotes in the Quran which could not have been reliably written into the claimed "Mother Book" (13/39b, 43/4b+c, 85/21-22) 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 you look, you will find more cases than we mention - we only mention some of the obvious ones). If man has free will - even partly only (an expression some Muslims use to flee from the problem full predestination contra free will for man (and also contra that there is no meaning in praying to Allah for help, if everything already is predestined in accordance with a plan "nobody and nothing can change" - a problem which Muslims seldom mention), and an expression no Muslim we have met has ever defined) - and can change his mind, full and reliable clairvoyance about the future, not to mention the distant future, is impossible even for a god, as the man always could/can change his mind or his words once more, 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, if even a tiny part is made different.
  3. If a man f.x. dies in his fields instead of in a battlefield, the future in the world will be different.

  4. 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 like the Quran claims and states many places, 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 (Muhammad?) claims to be a good or benevolent or moral or just god. Also see 2/51b and 3/24a above.

And as mentioned above, full predestination also makes prayers to Allah meaningless, as everything already is predestined according to Allah's Plan - a Plan which no prayer ("nobody and nothing") can change.

Also see 3/154e, 6/149a, 7/34a, and 14/22b above.

###029 24/15c: "- - - it (this refers to the hours his child wife Aishah spent alone in the desert with a young man, and the - probably wrong - slander this caused*) was most serious in the sight of Allah". Slander may be a serious, but not a most serious sin - that word you have to reserve for robbery, rape, dishonesty, slave taking, torture, terrorism, murder, mass murder, betrayal, false oaths, etc., etc. - and if you are religious; for the gravest sins against the god(s) like f.x. making up competing gods and/or disusing a god/gods for personal gains like riches for keeping or for use (f.x. for bribes), respect and power.

If on the other hand Allah was a made up platform of power for Muhammad and his co-workers, well, then it might have been most serious for him (Muhammad) as it touched Muhammad, at least if there exists a real god somewhere. F.x. if Muhammad started off originally wanted to serve the old Jewish and Christian god he had heard about, but somewhere stumbled out from "the narrow road" of Yahweh and on to "the straight and easy road". #####(This is one of the possible explanations, especially as science tends to think that Muhammad believed in something when he started his mission, but over time became more "relaxed" and scheming and like so many a leader was morally destroyed by his success and power.

But honestly: What has the family problems of Muhammad to do in a claimed holy book for all times and for the entire world, not to mention: How is it possible for a god to revere texts like this? (Remember that the Quran is an exact copy of "the Mother of the Book" which according to the Quran is revered by Allah and his angels in Heaven.) ###Yes, how is it possible that this episode is described in a "mother book" billions of years before it happened, unless predestination is total, free will exactly zero point zero zero, and we all just are puppet-on-strings? ##########And where is then the justice in rewards and punishments? - and where is the effect of f.x. forgiving or prayers?

But Allah(?) definitely solved a case for Muhammad here - like in some other cases.

030 24/16a: "And why did ye (see 24/11b above*) not, when ye heard it, say - - -". Among other reasons because it was very clear from Muhammad's reactions according to Hadiths that initially he did not trust her (Aishah), and neither did he defend her. Muhammad's double morality here is not very sympathetic.

031 24/54e: “- - - if ye (people*) turn away (from Muhammad*), he is only responsible for the duty placed on him, and ye for that place on you.” Contradicted and abrogated at least by 9/5 in reality: 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).

####032 26/115b: "I (Noah/Muhammad*) am sent only to warn in public". Parallel to Muhammad - these were his words this early. (Many of the stories are parallels to Muhammad's at the time it was told - legitimating that his situation was normal for prophets, and thus that he was a normal prophet.) Reality changed later when he became powerful - then force and terror entered the picture".

033 27/92c: “I (Muhammad’) am only a Warner”. That was in 615 – 616 AD. From 622 on he fast became a strongman, warlord and dictator – and his scriptures made contradictions and abrogations. Much was abrogated and contradicted when Muhammad grew military strong after 622 AD and the religion was changed to one of war and robbery and conquest.” This verse is contradicted and often “killed” (abrogated) 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).

034 28/46f: "- - - (you Muhammad are*) to give a warning - - -". As soon as Muhammad had enough brute power, he started giving much more than a warning".

035 29/18c: “- - - the duty of the messenger is only to preach publicly (and clearly).” Well, as Muhammad grew more powerful, so did his wish for controlling the locals’ and later the Arabs’ lives and religious ideas - - - force and punishment became means to a goal. With the necessary changes in the religion, and contradictions and necessary abrogations compared to the more peaceful 12 years in Mecca. 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. (At least 28 abrogations).

036 29/50h: "- - - I (Muhammad*) am indeed a clear Warner". This surah is from 621 - 624 AD. It was around or shortly after this time he started to also indeed become an enforcer.

037 32/30c: “So turn away from them and wait - - -.” As said just above: When Muhammad grew more powerful, there was little waiting. The rest of the Arabian peninsula mainly was turned Muslim by the sword – and some by “gifts” and promises of looted riches – all of which demanded changes in the religion (or was it the other way around, initiated by a god who found his original religion was not good enough – or too little blood and human tragedy?) which caused contradictions between the old and the new version of Islam – and also abrogations naturally. 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 - www.1000mistakes.com . (At least 28 abrogations).

038 33/5b: "- - - that (name adopted sons after their real fathers*) is juster in the sight of Allah". This may be correct, and also zoologically there is no reason for not marrying the widowed or divorced wife of your adopted son. But Muhammad's motif for this change of the old law was highly doubtful. He wanted the wife of his adopted son Zaid, but according to old Arab laws, an adopted son was a real son, and it was prohibited for a man to marry his (former) daughter-in-law. Muhammad thus had to have his god change those laws. This story does not smell good even among Muslims, and neither does Muhammad's lame "explanation" for what happened.

039 33/28c: “O Prophet (Muhammad*)! Say to thy Consorts - - -". Allah frequently took part in the private life of Muhammad - via a book may be made before the universe was made (13.7 billion years ago) and in any case revered by Allah and his angels as the "Mother of the Book" (13/39, 43/4, 85/21-22). Believe it if you want - if it is true, it is a 1000% (one thousand %) proof for that no living being ever had a trace of free will throughout the billions of years, or that physicians are wrong about things like chaos and entropy - some of the most basic elements of physics.

040 33/28-29: “O Prophet (Muhammad*)! Say to thy Consorts: ‘If it be that ye desire the life of this World, and its glitter – then come! I will provide for your enjoyment and set you free in a handsome manner. But if ye seek Allah and His Messenger, and the Home of the Hereafter, verily (it definitely is no proved verity/truth*), Allah has prepared for the well-doers amongst you a great reward”. Muhammad had his women problems – and Allah (?) helped him – this is not the only time. Look at this text, take into account the intense religious fervor of Medina at that time, the impression and one-mindedness that is the normal effect on people in intense, one-sided religious hotspots – Islam is just not the only one through history or resent history - plus the naivety that follows lack of education and one-sided propaganda, plus the fact that the women knew what they had, but had every reason to fear the future if they were alone in a society with small possibilities for earning their own living, and in a society where they would forever be stamped for leaving “the Prophet” if they were “set free” - - - there is no doubt that Muhammad knew his psychology and people. He used one of the age-old strategies the powerful and resourceful through ages has used, and uses, to manipulate his surroundings – included his women. And at places in the Quran he is backed up by his god – is that really a task for a god? – and is it something that belongs in a “Mother Book” revered by the omniscient and omnipotent god in his Heaven? (And if man – and women – has free will, so that the future is not locked – how could these details be written in the book billions of years before it happened? – that could only be done if man and animals all are puppets on a string totally without a free will.)

Muhammad was intelligent and manipulating.

And to the degree this story could be a model for others, this was how life were and is for Muslim women for all future, for Muhammad was and is the great idol and moral ideal.

Read 33/28-29 through 33/33 together to get a picture of his – and very many other dominant religious persons in strong and dark religious societies – technique. One of the much used – and proved efficient – ways of manipulating dependant persons. Even the use of the god is very normal.

041 33/28-33a: This about Muhammad's wives and rules to make them stay quiet and satisfied - double punishment and double reward, etc., and other places in the Quran forbidden to remarry, ordered to talk from behind a curtain, his daughter Fatima promised a top position in Heaven, etc. contradicts the Bible in that such rules were not given to any of the Biblical prophets. The same god would give at least somewhat similar rules to all his representatives - which he did to all the Biblical prophets, but not to Muhammad. Muhammad even had permission to rape women (f.x. Rayhana bint Amr and Safiyya bint Huayay), an absolutely NO for all other prophets. Very clear indications for that Muhammad did not belong to the same line of prophets as the Biblical prophets, and did not get his claimed revelations from the same god. Too different rules.

042 33/28-33b: One question: Do private stuff like this belong in a holy book? - or as part of a religion? Not to mention: Does a god revere stuff like this?

043 33/30b: “O Consorts of the Prophet! If any of you were guilty of evident unseemly conduct, the Punishment would be doubled for her, and that is easy for Allah”. For comments see 33/28-29 above – and also note that the god is easy to use, for Muhammad like for many self centered human manipulators in societies where religion is a dominant presence.

Read 33/28-29 through 33/33 + 33/50 and 33/51 together to get a picture of his – and very many other dominant religious persons in strong and dark religious societies – technique. One of the much used – and proved efficient – ways of manipulating dependant persons. Even the use of the god is typical for many such persons. All this formally is about Muhammad’s private intimate life, but as what he said and did was and is the correct ethical and moral code in Islam – and hence the norm for all women concerning this aspect of life - we include it also in the chapter about women’s life under Islam.

This strong warning also means that Muhammad did not trust his women too much - his reaction to Aisha's "adventure" proves the same.

But: Do this kind of stuff belong in a "holy book"? - and in case why do only Muhammad but no other claimed prophet get special service?

044 33/31a: “But if any of you (Muhammad's many women*) is devout in the service of Allah and His Messenger (also to solve such problems he glues himself to his platform of power – the god*), and works righteousness – to her shall We (Allah*) grant her reward twice: and We have prepared for her a generous sustenance.”

We repeat: Read 33/28-29 through 33/33 + 33/50 and 33/51 together to get a picture of his – and very many other dominant religious persons in strong and dark religious societies – technique. One of the much used – and proved efficient – ways of manipulating dependant persons. Even the use of the god is typical for such persons. All this formally is about Muhammad’s private intimate life, but all what he said and did was and is the correct ethical and moral code in Islam – and hence the norm for all women concerning this aspect of life - for everybody and for all times.

33/30+31 together make a case of "the stick and the carrot" - presumable from Allah. But does private details from the claimed prophet's wives' and other women's private life belong in a holy book delivered by a god?

Do this kind of stuff belong in a "holy book"? - and in case why do only Muhammad but no other claimed prophet get special service?

045 33/31f: "- - - We (Allah*) have prepared for her (any of Muhammad's wives and other women*) a generous Sustenance (in Paradise*)". Also for the wives of Muhammad parts of the reward were promises of a nice next life - - - if Allah and his paradise exist. And if not Muhammad had his pleasure and obedience for cheap money.

But do this kind of stuff belong in a "holy book"? - and in case why do only Muhammad but no other claimed prophet get special service?

046 33/32b: “O Consorts of the Prophet! If any of you were guilty of evident unseemly conduct, the Punishment would be doubled for her, and that is easy for Allah”. For comments see 33/28-29 above – and also note that the god is easy to use, for Muhammad like for many self centered human manipulators in societies where religion is a dominant presence.

Read 33/28-29 through 33/33 + 33/50 and 33/51 together to get a picture of his – and very many other dominant religious persons in strong and dark religious societies – technique. One of the much used – and proved efficient – ways of manipulating dependant persons. Even the use of the god is typical for many such persons. All this formally is about Muhammad’s private intimate life, but as what he said and did was and is the correct ethical and moral code in Islam – and hence the norm for all women concerning this aspect of life - we include it also in the chapter about women’s life under Islam.

This strong warning also means that Muhammad did not trust his women too much - his reaction to Aisha's "adventure" proves the same.

######But again: Do this kind of stuff belong in a "holy book"? - and in case why do only Muhammad but no other claimed prophet get this special service? And does this kind of stuff belong in a book a god would revere?

##047 33/32d: “O Consorts of the Prophet! Ye are not like any of the (other) women: if ye do fear (Allah), be not too complaisant of speech lest one in whose heart is disease should be moved with desire: but speak ye a speech (that is) just".

Once more: Read 33/28-29 through 33/33 + 33/50 and 33/51 together to get a picture of his – and very many other dominant religious persons in strong and dark religious societies – technique. One of the much used – and proved efficient – ways of manipulating dependant persons. Even the use of the god, is typical for such persons. All this formally is about Muhammad’s private intimate life, but as what he said and did was and is the correct ethical and moral code in Islam – it is the norm for all women concerning this aspect of life. Here Muhammad puts extra pressure on his women to make sure they "behave".

Another question: Does Muhammad's private sex life and problems with all his women - married and not married - belong in a timeless holy "Mother Book" revered by the god and his angels in Heaven? And how come it could be reliably written in that book before the world was created, if Muhammad or his women or anybody else had free will and could change their minds and thus history?

048 33/33a: “And (consorts of Muhammad*) stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance; and establish regular Prayer, and give regular Charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger (!!*). And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, ye Members of the Family, and to make you pure and spotless.” Yes, this is how the omnipotent, mighty god speaks to solve Muhammad's daily family life according to the revered "Mother Book" in his own home in his Heaven (of which the Quran is a copy, according to Islam).

As said before: Read 33/28-29 through 33/33 + 33/50 and 33/51 together to get a picture of his – and very many other dominant religious persons in strong and dark religious societies – technique. One of the much used – and proved efficient – ways of manipulating dependant persons. Even the use of the god, is typical for such persons. All this formally is about Muhammad’s private intimate life, but as what he said and did was and is the correct ethical and moral code in Islam – it is the norm for all women concerning this aspect of life. Allah orders Muhammad's wives to be good girls - a nice help for Muhammad. But is it a job for a god? - and is it text worthy a "Mother Book" that an omniscient god reveres - reveres - in his Heaven?

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 in case will change Allah's Plan "which nobody and nothing can change" according to the Quran.

049 33/37a: This verse does not at all belong in any holy book - this is solving of Muhammad's family affairs. (Muhammad fell in love - or in desire - with the wife of his adopted son, Zaid. According to old Arab law an adopted son was a son, and a father-in-law could not marry his daughter-in-law. But Allah changed the law for Muhammad, there was a divorce - what could Zaid say against his mighty "father"? (Muslims claim the marriage with Zaid was not a good one - that be as it may, it anyhow was a betrayal of Zaid, and even most Muslims do not feel entirely well about this marriage) - - - and Muhammad had himself yet another wife. Also see 33/37 just below.

050 33/37c: "- - - one who had received the grace of Allah and thy (Muhammad's*) favor - - -". This refers to Muhammad's adopted son Zaid bin Harithah. Muhammad became interested in his wife, and with some help from Allah (?) he got her.

Zaid originally was adopted by Muhammad, and his name was Zaid bin Muhammad - in accordance with local laws. When Muhammad fell for Zaid's wife, Zainab, Muhammad created artificial distance between Zaid and himself, partly by decreeing that adoption was not permitted, and thus his adoption of Zaid not valid (Muslims after this story can take children into their family, but not formally adopt them),and partly by decreeing that it was wrong not to use the name of the natural father, as the official father (bin = son of, bint = daughter of). All this because according to the local laws it was prohibited and a grave sin for a man to marry the wife of his son - adopted or real. Not bad for a god to change laws to settle family problems and satisfy lust for Muhammad.

051 33/37d: "- - - one who had received the grace of Allah and thy (Muhammad's*) favor - - -". This refers to Zaid - Muhammad's adopted son. A time anomaly.

052 33/37g: "- - - We (Allah*) joined her (Zaid's wife Zainab*) in marriage to thee (Muhammad*): in order that (in future) there may be no difficulty to the Believers in (the matter of) marrying with the wives of their adopted sons (after divorce - widows not mentioned*)". This is perhaps the thinnest excuse we have ever heard for a serious selfish deed.

  1. For one thing: Is this a situation which happens so often that it merits a dramatic demonstration?
  2. For another: Many a doubter would be willing to bet that if Muhammad had not been "hot" on this woman, this old Arab law - forbidden to marry your adopted son's former wife - had existed today.
  3. For a third and the main point: A verse from Allah had had JUST the same effect.

Hypocrisy. It is not the only time in the Quran where it is possible to place Muhammad among the hypocrites.

###053 33/37i: "And Allah's command must be fulfilled". In this case pure hypocrisy. And this may be a main reason for many Muslims' bad feeling about this story (Zaid's wife taken over by Muhammad) even today - the hypocrisy is too obvious.

054 33/38a: "There can be no difficulty to the Prophet in what Allah has indicated him to do (here: To marry Zaid's wife Zainab)". Anyone able to believe Muhammad married her because it was a duty, are permitted to do so - but it will tell a lot about their brain. Also see 33/37i just above.

Hypocrisy.

055 33/38d: "- - - what Allah has indicated to him (Muhammad*) as a duty (to marry Zaynab*) - - -". More too easy to see hypocrisy. Distasteful. See 33/37g+i above.

056 33/38e: "It was the practice (approved) of by Allah amongst (earlier prophets*) - - -" (- - - to obey Allah). The same comment as to 33/38d just above.

Another fact: None of the Biblical prophets had a big harem. Most had just one wife, if any at all. (Remember here that in the Bible f.x. David and Solomon are not reckoned to be prophets, only kings.) ####Also none of the Biblical prophets raped women like Muhammad did.)

###057 33/50d: "- - - We (Allah*) have made lawful for you (Muhammad and Muslims*) - - - those whom thy right hand possesses (= your slaves/captives*) out of the spoils of war - - -". This plainly tells that Muslims are permitted to rape any female captive of war, like Muhammad did against at least 2-3 women (and remember all wars in reality are named jihad, so Muslims cannot explain that it only is for jihads, as more or less everything was jihad - and honestly it is quite a god who says: "When you fight for me - or at least your leaders claim that you are - you are permitted to rape any female child (at least if she is 9 years or older - Muhammad's start of sex with Aisha), girl, woman or married not pregnant woman you come across if you just can call her your captive. But just look at armed conflicts the last couple of generations included Bangladesh and Eritrea - that is just what even regular Muslim armies have practiced - with inhuman examples in Bangladesh, where the hundreds of thousands of or more rape victims even were fellow Muslims (We have read that in Bangladesh there after that war was born some 200ooo illegitimate children from the rapes. This in case means a few million cases of rape of fellow Muslim girls and women. (Though some said that "only" 200ooo girls/women were raped.) On average each Pakistanis soldier in case made several rapes. (The same we were told when we visited the national monument for this war in Bangladesh, though some like said told "only" 200ooo raped girls and women, not 200ooo children.)) This sentence tells more about reality in the Islamic moral code and about the benevolence of Allah, than all the nice claims about such things in the Quran combined - acts and rules showing reality always are more reliable than nice claims. And honestly: To do it in the name of their god makes the deeds even more disgusting, and tells a lot about the real Allah - - - if he exists.

Another point:

  1. To steal and rob is dishonesty, even though the Quran - like f.x. the Mafia - permits it, and even glorified it as it attracted warriors and gave Muhammad riches
  2. .
  3. To steal humans (for slavery) is dishonesty to at least the second or third power. Firstly they stole their freedom, which is very valuable to most humans. Secondly they stole their future. Thirdly they stole the economic value they had as workers.
  4. And they often stole children’s' and women's sexual "services" (= raped them), the privacy which definitely has a deep value for most humans. To what power and inhumanity is this?
  5. And not to forget: There - then and now - also is all the verbal dishonesty, the lies.

All this #### was and is "lawful and good". A "Religion of Honesty"? ##### What is the claim "the Religion of Truth" worth, when the use of dishonesty of all kinds are so accepted as "lawful and good" working tools, that even the slogan "the Religion of Truth" may be a lie?

If the Quran simply belongs among the apocryphal books, many things are easy to understand, and it at least belongs in that line and tradition, even if it is further "out" than most of the others. Muhammad also fits the picture of the leader of an apocryphal sect, admittedly more immoral and bloody than most of the others.

Also see 30/40h and 30/47b above.

##### Christianity abhors dishonesty. Buddhism abhors dishonesty. Hinduism abhors dishonesty. Judaism abhors dishonesty. Nearly all religions abhor dishonesty. Of all religions we have come across, there only are two who have dishonesty, deceit, and betrayal as an integrated part of the religion: Islam and a small primitive pagan religion on New Guinea.

#####058 33/50e: "- - - We (Allah*) have made lawful (for sex/rape) for you (Muhammad and Muslims*) - - - those whom thy right hand possesses (= your slaves*) out of the spoils of war (captives from raids and war) - - -". Women and girl children you took captive during raids and war: Just go on raping them (actually this also to a degree happened to male boys, youths, and young men, too). "Do unto others like you want others do unto you".

Why do you think rape is so frequent when Muslims are engaged in raids, wars, etc.?

#####There are other moral rules in Islam which are worse and more immoral, but this is the one we find most repulsive - this one and the one permitting sex with/rape of children. Also see 8/69 telling this is "lawful and good". Disgusting is to use small letters. (Much of 33/50 is just for Muhammad - he raped at least Rayhana bint Amr and Safiyya bint Huayay), but rape of slaves and captives and sex with children were for any man - understood by the Muslims from f.x. 8/69.)

If the Quran simply belongs among the apocryphal books, many things are easy to understand, and it at least belongs in that line and tradition, even if it is further "out" than most of the others. Muhammad also fits the picture of the leader of an apocryphal sect, admittedly more immoral and bloody than most of the others. He f.x. has points and ideas common with Djingis Khan and the Zulu king Shaka (or Chaka).

Also see 30/40h and 30/47b above.

Muhammad f.x. has points and ideas common with Djingis Khan and the Zulu king Shaka (or Chaka).

059 33/50f: "(Muhammad may have for a wife*) any believing woman who dedicates her soul to the Prophet (Muhammad') - - -". The literally correct translation according to M. Azad (A33/59 - A33/60 in the English 2008 edition): "if she offered herself as a gift (Arab: "in wahabat nafsaha") to the Prophet (Muhammad*)". Here is an interesting piece of information: Most Muslim commentators take this to mean "without demanding or expecting a dower". The dower was and is an integrated part of the Muslim formalities of a wedding. Here it seems that also here Muhammad got special treatment from Allah: Cheap wives. This in addition to that he could take a prisoner of war, make her slave, marry her and "give" her freedom - except from her new husband, Muhammad - as a dower. Muhammad did this at least with Safiyya bint Huayay (after first having raped her) - a very cheap wife, as the dower cost him nothing.

Muhammad was pretty different from Jesus, also on this point. Definitely not from the same religion.

Besides: Does Muhammad's private sex life and sex violations (he "lawfully and good" raped at least Rayhana bint Amr and Safiyya bint Huayay + had years of pedophilic sex with Aisha) belong in a claimed holy book for all times and the entire world? - or as part of a religion? And would a god revere such texts in his Heaven?

If the Quran simply belongs among the apocryphal books, many things are easy to understand, and it at least belongs in that line and tradition, even if it is further "out" than most of the others. Muhammad also fits the picture of the leader of an apocryphal sect, admittedly more immoral and bloody than most of the others.

Also see 30/40h and 30/47b above.

060 33/50i: "- - - this (the permission for a nearly unlimited number of women - he had at least 36 (not some 11 like Muslims often mention - those only were his long-time wives) is only for thee (Muhammad*) - - -". Special rules for self proclaimed prophets far from are unheard of in fringe sects and religions - like Islam was at that time. Normally they have turned out in the end to be false prophets.

But does Muhammad's personal sex life belong in a claimed "holy book"? And would a god revere such texts in his heaven?

061 33/50-52: Some serious questions: These verses - 33/50-52 - are about how many women Muhammad was permitted to have and to have sex with - nearly any woman and more or less as many as he wanted for marriage plus any not pregnant captive or slave girl or woman. And like some other founders of sects and religions there were special rules for this and that for himself. Does this really belong in a holy book - a book which is a copy of the claimed "mother book" which is revered by the god and his angels in Heaven (13/39b, 43/4, 85/21-22)? And how does this compare with the real prophets in the Bible - the ones he claims to be in the same line of? (Remember that in the Bible men like David and Solomon are not reckoned among the prophets, but among the kings.) And finally: How does rape/forced sex with captive or slave women compare with NT's view of rules for sex?

### Allah and his angels revering pornographic texts in his Heaven? Some god.

Yahweh and Allah the same god? Perhaps - if he is strongly schizophrenic.

Jesus and Muhammad in the same religion and moral code? You bet!

#062 33//51b: "Thou (Muhammad*) mayest defer (the turn of (for sex*)) any of them (Muhammad's women - wives and slaves*) that thou pleasest, and thou mayest receive any (of his women for sex*) thou pleasest: and there is no blame on thee if thou invite one whose (turn (for sex with Muhammad*)) thou hadst set aside". Honestly what has this to do in a claimed holy book for all times and all places, a book which is claimed to be a copy of the claimed "Mother Book" in Heaven - a "Mother Book" all the may be 124ooo (= 620 at any time for 5ooo years or 12-15 for 160ooo-200ooo. No traces found. Believe it if you can.) or more claimed earlier prophets got their copies of (but a claimed "Mother Book" not giving the same rights to the 124ooo claimed earlier prophets who Muhammad claimed were in the same line of prophets as himself), and a "Mother Book" claimed revered by the god and his angels in Heaven. What kind of god reveres texts like this - a sex freak?

The ones saying there are serious similarities between the person Jesus and the person Muhammad, knows very little about what he/she is talking about.

Normally in the old times one found stuff like this only in pornography (Greek = tales about whores). Does it belong in a "holy" book? - and did Allah and his angels really revere stuff like this?

063 33/51c: “Thou (Muhammad*) mayst defer (the turn (of having sex*) of) any of them that thou pleasest, and thou mayst receive any thou pleasest (for your bed/sex*): and there is no blame on thee if thou invite one whose (turn) thou hast set aside.” It is the man’s wish and pleasure which counts, and here this fact is confirmed by the almighty god in his "Mother Book" of which the Quran is claimed to be a copy – though written only to Muhammad and nothing similar is said in that book to any of the thousands of former prophets (124ooo ?) or to ordinary men. But as Muhammad is the great idol, this like everything he (or Allah?) said and did was and is the correct thing to do if nothing special is said that prohibits it.

Once more: Read 33/28-29 through 33/33 + 33/50 and 33/51 together to get a picture of his – and very many other dominant religious persons in strong and dark religious societies – technique. One of the much used – and proved efficient – ways of manipulating dependant persons. Even the use or disuse of the god is typical for such persons. All this formally is about Muhammad’s private intimate life, but as what he said and did was and is the correct ethical and moral code in Islam – it is the norm for all women concerning this aspect of life.

One more and serious point: Islam states that "the Mother of the Book" - of which the Quran is claimed to be an exact copy - is revered by Allah and his angels in Heaven. Is it likely that an omniscient god reveres texts like this?

064 33/51d: (A33/61 - A33/62 in the English 2008 edition): "Thus, the Prophet (Muhammad*) was told (by Allah*) that he need not observe a strict "rotation" in the conjugal attentions due to his wives - - -". Really some stuff for a "holy" book - and for 124ooo earlier prophets who had gotten copies of the claimed "Mother Book". Not to mention an interesting text in the "Mother Book" from which the Quran is copied, for Allah to revere in his Heaven.

####But is this the kind of stuff an omniscient god and his angels would revere in their Heaven?

The ones saying there are serious similarities between the person Jesus and the person Muhammad, knows very little about what he/she is talking about.

Normally in the old times one found stuff like this only in pornography (Greek = writings about whores).

Yahweh and Allah the same god? Perhaps - if he is strongly schizophrenic. Jesus and Muhammad in the same religion and moral code? Once more: You bet!

065 34/46d: "- - - he (Muhammad*) is no less than a warner to you (people*) - - -". When this was dictated around 620 AD Muhammad did not have the power to be more than a "warner". This changed as he and his successors gained power - they also became enforcers. Much of Arabia and the rest of the Islamic area became Muslim by means of the sword or by means of other kinds of pressure backed by the sword.

###066 34/47b: “No reward do I (Muhammad*) ask of you - - -“. - - - except absolute power and plenty of women. Yes, and 20% of all stolen/looted valuables and slaves – 100% if there is no fight – and poor-tax (on average ca. 2.5% of everything you own each and every year, but up to 10%) as I need money for bribes, for strengthening my religion and platform of power, and for war and myself and my large family (NB: There is reason to believe that he did not take from the so-called "poor-tax" (the 2.5%) for personal use*), and some for the poor.

067 36/17a: “And our (Muhammad’s*) duty to proclaim the clear message.” Once more something from Mecca (ca. 615 – 616 AD), that was “killed” by “The verse of the Sword (9/5) and a number of others when later Muhammad also became – or decided that he also was – an enforcer. 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).

068 36/17b: “And our (Muhammad’s*) duty to proclaim the clear message.” Once more something from Mecca (ca. 615 – 616 AD), that was “killed” by “The verse of the Sword (9/5) and a number of others when later Muhammad also became – or decided that he also was – an enforcer. 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. (At least 28 abrogations).

069 37/173: “- - - And that Our (Allah’s) forces – they surely must conquer.” This is in a tale about messengers, and seems to talk about mental and intellectual fighting. At this time (615 - 617 AD) Muhammad also had not started using weapons as a means – he was not powerful enough, and his religion preached peace. But you bet it has been uses as a pep-talk to warriors through the centuries.

070 37/174: "So turn thou (Muslims/Muhammad*) away from them for a little while - - -". This was around 616 AD. Half a dozen years later Muhammad little by little stopped turning away from those who did not want him. This verse is abrogated – made invalid - and contradicted 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. (At least 28 abrogations).

071 37/178: Identical to 37/174 above.

072 38/70b: "Only this has been revealed to me (Muhammad*): that I am going to give (peaceful*) warning plainly and publicly". This was around 614-615 AD. Later things changed: This verse is abrogated – made invalid - and contradicted 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. (At least 28 abrogations).

073 39/39b: "O my (Allah's or Muhammad's*) people ("infidel" Arabs in Mecca ca.616-617 AD*)! Do whatever ye can (against Muhammad's teaching*)- - -". There was a 180 degree change of this point of view half a dozen years later - Allah changed his mind? This verse is abrogated – made invalid - and contradicted 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. (At least 28 abrogations).

074 39/41k: “Nor art thou (Muhammad*) set over them (“infidels”) to dispose of their affairs.” But 5 – 7 years later, when Muhammad started to gain power from 622 AD on, that changed – he became an overseer, enforcer and robber baron – and later a warlord - - - and rules/religion had to change. Or was it the other way around – that it was Allah who changed his mind and wanted more inhumanity, immoral action, and blood? Anyhow the result was contradictions and abrogations compared to the old. 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).

075 41/5c: "- - - so do thou (non-Muslim Arabs*) (what you wilt) - - -". The plain story later on: This verse is abrogated – made invalid - and contradicted 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. (At least 28 abrogations).

076 42/6d: “- - - thou (Muhammad*) art not the disposer of their affairs.” No, not around 614 – 618 AD. But after 622 AD he became quite a lot, included an enforcer – and verses like this were both contradicted and abrogated. 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).

077 42/15g: "- - - on us (Muhammad/Muslims*) (is the responsibility for) our deeds, and on you (non-Muslims*) for your deeds." This was in 616 - 618 AD. A few years later when Muhammad started to grow powerful, he also started to "take care of" non-Muslims' "deeds", too, by forcing them to become Muslims: "Become Muslims, or fight us and die!" Much of Arabia was made Muslim by the sword (and many by the lust for the plunder and slaves they could gain by joining Muhammad) - in spite of what many Muslims today often like to claim.

#### 078 42/45e: (A42/47 - English 2008 edition A4246): "Thus the above sentence implies that every kind of evildoing (zulm), ####and particularly the oppression of others, results in a spiritual injury to, and ultimately the self-destruction of, its perpetrators and/or their followers". ### Read the Quran's moral code, laws, and rules concerning points of view on and treatment of non-Muslims - includes suppression and oppression of them. Also compare this to the one basic moral code: "Do onto others like you want others do onto you" - and weep. This sentence tells a lot about why many Muslim societies are like they are - and may be about why Islam and Muslims are widely disliked. (As for the latter also Islam's/Muslims' haughtiness and Islam's aggressive ideology count a lot.)

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

079 42/48b: “Thy (Muhammad’s) duty is but to convey (the Message (the Quran* - or the peaceful parts that existed in 614 – 618 AD*))”. From some years later on, Islam found some of their duties to be more brutal enforcers, so among other verses this one and a lot more were contradicted and abrogated. 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).

080 43/83a: “So leave them (“infidels”*) to babble and play (with their vanities) - - -.” Comments like 42/48 just above. And: 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).

Also compare this to "the lost sheep", etc. in the Bible! Not the same god - and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same religion by far.

081 46/9k: “- - - I (Muhammad*) am but a Warner, open and clear.” Yes, in 620 AD he only was a self proclaimed warner. Things changed and verses were really abrogated when he got more power a few years later. Comments like for 46/135 below. 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).

082 46/35c: “(Muhammad*) - - - be in no haste about the (unbelievers) - - -.” When he gained power he got more haste – f.x. the reluctant Arabs (and a lot of others) who were not won by gifts and free plundering/enslaving, were won by the sword – in stark contradiction to what Muslims like to tell. Become Muslim or fight and die! 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).

083 48/8d: "- - - a Warner - - -". But this was in 628, and Muhammad was not only a warner anymore. He also had started as an enforcer. "Let there be no compulsion in religion" became obsolete.

084 64/12d: "- - - the duty of Our (Allah's*) Messenger (Muhammad*) is but to proclaim (the Message) clearly and openly". You bet that this verse was abrogated and killed when he - and his successors - became military strong enough to force Islam on the "infidels"!!! - especially on the pagans, but there also are many ugly stories of treatment of Jews and Christians - "Let there be no compulsion in religion" also is an abrogated verse, except in al-Taqiyya-dominated propaganda (well, some of the lay Muslims may perhaps honestly believe it, but not one single Muslim scholar - among them the verses which abrogate this one - 2/256 - are too well known (f. x. 9/5, but there are some 30 different verses which each and every of them abrogate 2/256 - all the same all Muslims use it as a flagship for how tolerant Islam is).

085 66/1c: "Why holdest thou (Muhammad*) to be forbidden what Allah has made lawful to thee?" It is unclear exactly what this refers to, except that it seems to have to do with "disturbance"/jealousy in his harem, which made him swear something he later regretted (and found an excuse for breaking his oath: It was something Allah had made lawful.) But it was a private family problem - does that belong in a holy book? And how com it is possible to find this in "the Mother of the Book" in Heaven and written at least billions of years ago, of which the Quran is a copy?

The most likely explanation is that it has to do with Muhammad's falling for his daughter-in-law (according to old Arab rules), Zaynab.

###Do family/woman problems for the leader belong in a holy book for the entire world and all times? And as the Quran is claimed to be an exact copy of "the Mother of the Book" in Heaven: How come it could be written there billions of years before it happened if man has even the slightest degree of free will? Not to mention: Is it possible for an omniscient god to revere texts like these? - the Quran states it is revered by Allah and by his angels.

086 66/1d: "- - - that which Allah has made lawful to thee (Muhammad*) - - -". This only is possible if Allah exists and is powerful enough to make laws.

But Muhammad was in quite a lucky position, having a god which fixed even his personal problems, and made special divine laws for him, included plenty of women. Lucky him.

######087 68/4b: “And thou (Muhammad*) (standest) on an exalted standard of character - - -”. Well:

Seen in the Quran and the Hadiths:

  1. Lots of mistaken facts, and other mistakes. Not typical for an omniscient god, but sometimes for cheaters, deceivers and swindlers.
  2. Lots of invalid arguments - hallmarks for cheaters and deceivers.
  3. Lots of "signs" - all invalid as proofs for Allah or for Muhammad's connection to a god.
  4. A number of "proofs" - all invalid as proofs for Allah or for Muhammad's connection to a god. A few of the "proofs" even are scientifically wrong. Hallmarks for cheats, swindlers, and deceivers.
  5. A man gluing himself to his god and his religion – his platform of power; Self-centered. Selfish?
  6. A self proclaimed prophet who in reality was no prophet – he had not the gift of prophesying. Muhammad did not even pretend or claim to have that gift, he just “borrowed” the distinguished and imposing title. (A few things he said, came true, but less than the probability of sheer chance should predict – and they were not given as prophesies.) A messenger, ok – for someone or something or for himself – an apostle for the same, ok. But a person who does not have the gift of prophesying, is not a real prophet - Muhammad just “borrowed” an imposing title. Islam also claims that messenger is a more distinguished title prophet – but that title just means “one who is not implicated, but just brings messages from one or more to one or more others” - a messenger boy. He does not even have to understand what things really are about. Besides: Why did Muhammad borrow the title “prophet” if the title “messenger” had been more distinguished? – simply because a prophet is something more: Messages like a messenger + prophesies - - - if it is a real prophet. Also beware that the original title for prophets was "a seer" - one who saw the unseen or the future (f.x. Amos 7/12, 1. Chr.26/28, 29/29, 2. Chr.16/7, 16/10, 19/2, 29/25, Micah 3/7, 1. Sam. 9/9, 9/11, 9/18, 9/19). It is very clear that Muhammad was unable to see the unseen - - - but "prophet" was a very tempting title.(Muhammad also used the title prophet relatively seldom in the Quran - perhaps he did not want to invite to questions.)
  7. A messenger being the chief of highwaymen from Yathrib/Medina - even in holy months.
  8. A messenger also living from extortion - (money for men kidnapped from f.x. caravans or raided villages and towns).
  9. A messenger whose due was 100% of the robbed things if the victim gave in without a fight (albeit not all for personal use).
  10. A messenger permitting to take “spoils of war” - and 20% for him (albeit not all for himself).
  11. A messenger permitting to take slaves - and 20% for him (albeit not all for personal use).
  12. A messenger who received ca. 2.5% (from 0% to 10 %) of what you owned each and every year (if you were not too poor) – for the poor, but also for war and for “gifts” (bribes) to keep or attract followers, etc.
  13. A messenger using betrayal (f.x. promise of safe return of a 30 strong delegation from Khaybar broken and 29 of them murdered, and his slogans "war is betrayal" and "war is deceit").
  14. A messenger accepting and using dishonesty as working tools - what about his reliability?
  15. A messenger lying even in the claimed holy Quran - what about his reliability?
  16. a messenger accepting even disuse of words/promises/oaths (2/225, 5/89, 16/91, 66/2 - and the stare case 3/54 (if Allah can cheat, cheating is ok - but how much cheating is it then in the Quran?)
  17. A messenger with special agreement with the god for having many women.
  18. A messenger teaching hate against and suppression of non-followers.
  19. A messenger teaching and inciting war against non-followers.
  20. A messenger personally raping female prisoners/slaves.
  21. A messenger liking a sizable harem.
  22. A messenger who married a 6 year old girl and started sex with her when she was 9 (and he 52).
  23. A messenger who married a rich widow 15 years his senior, but his other wives 20 to 36 years younger than him - the child Aisha even more.
  24. A messenger who had the child Aishah as his favorite wife for the rest of his life.

  25. A messenger and his men - all with permission from their god to rape any female prisoner or slave who was not pregnant. It was “god and lawful”.
  26. A messenger who initiated assassinations of opponents.
  27. A messenger who initiated murders on opponents.
  28. A messenger who initiated mass murder.
  29. A messenger teaching suppression of women and non-followers.
  30. A messenger with lust for power (easy to see from f.x. Hadith, but even more so from f.x. the way he glues himself to his platform of power, his god, also in the Quran).
  31. A messenger with a huge appetite for women - one knows the name of 36 he had sex with. 11 long time wives, 16 short time wives (never mentioned by Muslims), 2 concubines, and 7 one does not know if he was married to or not (never mentioned by Muslims). He also was a rapist - he raped at least Rayhana bint Amr and Safiyya bint Huayay, and also Marieh had no free choice. We do not know if he raped other captives or slaves.

And not least: All this is from Muslim sources - what Islam itself tells about him, though in more glossy words. There is no excuse for becoming angry, because it is 100% true according to Islam itself.

Yes, many will call this “an exalted standard of character”. But not many of those would be non-Muslims. And how many of the Muslims can say it and feel honest?

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

If Muhammad was an excellent idol for good Muslims, we hope never to meet a bad Muslim.

088 79/45b: “Thou (Muhammad*) art but a Warner - - -.” Wrong - he only stayed like that until he grew powerful enough to do more than warning – f.x. enforcing and empire-building. And it is a question who changed his mind around 622 AD – Allah or Muhammad? And who changed the religion – Allah or Muhammad? That change demanded that the religion from the 12 years in Mecca had to be both contradicted and abrogated on many a point. 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).

089 88/22b: “Thou (Muhammad*) art not to manage (men’s) (religious*) affairs - - -.” One more verse that was abrogated of the more powerful Muhammad – or Allah – later. 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. (At least 28 abrogations).

090 110/2: "And thou dost see the People enter Allah's Religion in crowds - - -". The book forgets(?) to mention that in 632 when this surah was made, Muhammad no longer was only a preacher, but also an enforcer - and one who offered riches: Become Muslim and get rich from plunder and have women or girls to rape, or fight us and die - to be a bit blunt. Much of the present Muslim area - included most of Arabia - were won by "money and sword" directly or indirectly.

Sub-total Chapter 49 = 90 + 4.629 = 4719.


>>> 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".