Muhammad in the Quran, Vol. 4: Chapter 90


 

INCITEMENTS TO WAR


(Also see Chapter 27, and separate book.)

Islam and its Muslims frequently claim that "Islam is the Religion of Peace". This very plainly and clearly is not true (but then Muslims are not only permitted to lie when it comes to defending or promoting Islam; they are advised to do so "if necessary" to get the upper hand. Well, Islam was quite peaceful during the first 13 years - the Mecca period. Muhammad did not get many followers - after those 13 years he maximum had something like 100, and simply did not have the power to be anything but peaceful.

This changed completely shortly after Muhammad fled to Medina in 622 AD. He started as a robber baron, and when people saw they could become well off and even rich by following him, suddenly he started to get many followers. And not least: Islam changed from rather peaceful to a pure religion of war, apartheid, suppression, and dishonesty (lying was and is permitted within wide limits - even advised "if necessary" when promoting or defending Islam - and stealing and extorting fully ok if it was done in the name of Allah (and so was and is f.x. stealing, extortion, rape, suppression, murder, etc.)).

You will never meet a Muslim willing to explain why Islam was so totally changed in a few months - from rather peaceful, to apartheid, suppression, and war. Was it the eternal, omniscient god who changed his mind about how his religion should be? - or was it something else? (This fundamental change is one of the many proofs for that something is wrong with the Quran and its religion: Islam Mecca and Islam Medina are very different - in many points totally different. Really 2 different religions. 2 different religions from 1 god?

We further have to admit that we never met a Muslim interested in the horror or the destroyed lives and cultures of the victims. Muslim warriors became rich and were heroes, and there it stops. "Untermench" (Nazi-German for "sub-humans) and their terror and fate never count or interest them.

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

001 2/190a: "Fight in the cause of Allah - - -". A clear order. And a convenient order for Muhammad (and for his successors), as this here on Earth in reality meant "fight for Muhammad when he wants".

002 2/190c: "Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you - - -". This is one of the fundamentals behind the sharia laws concerning war - except that soon it was not necessary that "they" were fighting the Muslims - most Muslim wars and raids were wars of aggression (mainly for riches, slaves, power and spreading Islam). Later all the 4 main "law schools" agreed on that the fact that the other part was non-Muslim, was enough reason for declaring jihad - holy war - against them. This point of view was not even questioned in Islam until around 1930, and then because of influence from western thinking.

003 2/190d: "Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you - - -". This is nice on the paper and in propaganda. The reality is that practically all Muhammad's raids and wars were wars of aggression - included Badr, Uhud, and The Trench (battles of defense in a war of aggression started and kept alive by Muhammad's raiding of caravans, villages, etc.). As far as we have been able to find out, this was the general picture all the way up through the history, until Europe became too strong for them. In addition: All the 4 law schools in Islam agreed on that the fact that an opponent - or not even an opponent, but a land Muslims wanted to conquer - was Pagan, was reason enough to declare Jihad = Holy War of Defense (theoretically Jihad only can be a war of defense, but the way Islam or at least a large percentage of Muslims define "defense", this restriction is just a joke - though convenient to use in debates and propaganda).

###004 2/191a: “And slay them (the non-Muslims*) wherever ye catch them - - -”. A straight, no-nonsense order - not to be misunderstood. Very good words for terrorists.

005 2/191c: “- - - and turn them (the ones that fights you - it is not said who are the initial attackers*) out from where they have turned you out - - -”. A sentence ordering revenge or to retake what is lost to the enemy before - it may be a dilemma for f.x. Greece, Balkan, Sicily, South Italy included Rome, Spain, and other places, which for centuries were under Islam. And a good verse for f.x. terrorists (but also for others). That Muslims retake land they have once conquered seems to be right and just - no matter that they, themselves, once took it from someone else. But that Hindus in India wants to rule themselves their now “small” country - remember that India once (until 1947) was what now is Pakistan, India and Bangladesh - instead of being ruled and misruled by Muslims, is very bad; hate the Hindus. And most of the Middle East, included Egypt and Turkey once were partly Christian. But when Christians for a hundred years once more dominated parts of the area, Christians were the worst people ever. Hate them and kill them. And the Buddhists in Indonesia: When they do better than “we” - hate them and kill them (pogroms in Indonesia especially against Chinese did cost more than 200ooo lives last century - may be as many as 650ooo - the mass murders in East Timor when they pulled free not included). And when the Christians in East Timor had had too much of Muslim suppression and demanded to become free: Murder tens of thousands (estimated 102.800 included dead from hunger and "over-death" from illness according to Wikipedia) of them - it is lawful and just. And when Muslims in Indonesia do not kill in East Timor, they bomb Hindus and Christians in Bali and other places. Not to mention the not too secret, though distant dreams of retaking Spain and Southeast Europe “because it used to be Muslim land, and we should turn out the ones who took it from us” - oh, yes, We have heard it. (But strangely we have heard this about Spain, but not about Balkan which also once was under Islam.)

As for East Timor that history is rather thought provoking. Indonesia is a quite civilized country, and all the same they behaved like that - and similar against their own Chinese who had been Indonesians for generations. Worse: Some of it was done by the regular army or could have been stopped by the army (the same goes for the Pakistani inhumanities in Bangladesh in that war). That means we cannot expect agitated Muslims or Muslim regular armies to behave much better other places even today - this after all just was a few decades ago.

And it hardly is strange that to re-conquer is a dream, as the official goal for Islam is to dominate the entire world, and to suppress and tax all non-Muslims. Just read the Quran and see - it is said there. And it is said in modern literature for Muslims - though not in Muslim literature meant for non-Muslims.

006 2/191d: “- - - tumult and oppression is worse than slaughter; - - -” - but only oppression of Muslims (non-Muslims should and shall be oppressed and subdued - - - by Muslims). It is better to kill the non-Muslims than to live suppressed by them - even the Quran clearly states that in Muslim states the non-Muslim of course have to accept suppression, lack of power of all kinds, and to pay extra and often heavy head tax - jizya. But then the Quran as clearly states that Muslims are better beings than non-Muslims. (See separate chapter in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran").

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

007 2/191h: "- - - if they (non-Muslims*) fight you (Muslims*), slay them." Incompatible with especially NT - and one more proof for that Jesus did not represent the same god as Muhammad.

*008 2/191i: “- - - such is the reward (to be killed*) for those who suppress faith (Islam*)”. Honest words - and sugar for terrorists, especially as the terrorists themselves decide who are suppressors “in the widest meaning of the word”. Anyone who tells you the Quran has to be disused to incite to hate, war and terrorism - tell them to read the book just once (but without religious or political blindness). Strictly speaking: It is the ones who do not want war - included terrorism - who are wrong according to the Quran.

If non-Muslims dominate Muslim area - hate them and kill them, so Muslims can dominate and suppress and tax the survivors fair and just. The Muslim way of fair play?

##009 2/193a: "And fight them (non-Muslims*) until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah". More clear words for your money.

But the clear order other places in the Quran, is that the Muslims shall suppress everybody else “- - - Until they (non-Muslims) pay jizya with willing submission (“an yadin”) and feel themselves subdued”. Comments necessary?

###010 2/193d: "And fight them (non-Muslims*) until - - - there prevail - - - faith in Allah." This is one of the essences in verse 193. Worth remembering and to beware of. Especially as the exact and correct translation according to A: "The Message of the Quran" is: "- - - and religion belongs to Allah (alone)"(!!)

The best of all religious deeds according to the Quran, is to fight in raids and wars for Muhammad/Allah - and like here in addition force Islam on non-Muslims (or kill them if they resists) must be an added bonus.

011 2/193f: "- - - (fight*) those (non-Muslims*) who practice oppression". Oppression cannot be accepted according to the Quran - - - except that Muslims shall oppress all non-Muslims, also this according to the Quran.

012 2/216e: “- - - But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you (to fight in war*), and that you love a thing (peace*) that is bad for you.” No comments except a question: Did you ever meet a person telling that Islam is a peaceful religion? - "the Religion of Peace"? Or Allah a god of peace? Did you in case ask him if Islam also is "the Religion of Honesty"?

013 2/245b: “Who is he that will loan Allah a beautiful loan, which Allah will double unto his credit and multiply many times?” In the Quran the expression “loan Allah a beautiful loan” as said just above normally means to risk your life – or lose it – in war, but sometimes it also may mean to give money to Muhammad, mainly for war purposes. In both cases no repayment is promised in this world – only in the next. A most cheap way in this world for Muhammad to finance his wars and get willing warriors – especially if the religion is made up and Allah does not exist or if there is a god, but a different one from the god you meet in the Quran, and who consequently is not bound by Muhammad’s words. (What will then be the result for Muslims?)

014 2/246f: "- - - fight in the cause of Allah". Even though this is (pretended to be) said to the Jews, it is one of the points behind the laws for war in the sharia laws, and behind even modern time glorification of war in Islam. And good for Allah(?) and for Muhammad.

015 2/246g: “How could we refuse to fight in the cause of Allah.” The Quran pretends Jews are saying this to one of their prophets (here Samuel), but it really is included as a pep talk to Muslims inspiring them to war. The text is somewhat(!) changed compared the one in the Bible, from where the story comes (1. Sam., chapter 8) - these words simply are not from the Bible.

016 2/249f: “How oft, by Allah’s will, hath a small force vanquished a big one? Allah is with those who steadfastly persevere.” This contradicts the Bible. According to the Bible the Jews had no "small force". They had their full army on a hill, facing the Philistine army on a neighboring hill with a valley in between (1. Sam. 17/3). This situation remained for many (40) days (1. Sam. 17/1) before the youth David happened to be sent with food to his 3 brothers in Saul's army (1. Sam. 17/17-18) and there killed the giant Goliath, who had been calling on the Jews for a duel man-to-man to decide the war (in the old times it did happen that one or a few from each army were elected to fight it out as proxies for the whole armies - much less bloodshed). A bit different from the story in the Quran.

Also it is very likely Muhammad has mixed up Saul's/Talus’s war with Gideon's - no god had done that.

017 2/249g: "- - - persevere ". A word non-Muslims should never forget is imprinted and imprinted on Muslims - and it works, especially as democracies are weak when it comes to prolonged managements (there always are shortsighted persons who want an end to struggling).

018 2/250c: "- - - help us (Jews*) against those who reject faith". Do you see the parallel Muhammad here makes to his own warlike intentions? You will find many such parallels in the Quran - Muhammad needed "proofs" for that his situation and what he did, was normal for prophets, and thus that he really was a prophet like he claimed.

But something is wrong here: The so-called Mosaic religion never was a proselyting one and did not fight wars of religion.

019 3/17b: "- - - spend (in the way of Allah) - - -". Which means help the poor, help Islam, and give money to religious wars (nearly everything is religious war for parts of Islam) - those are the main causes.

020 3/127a: "- - - He (Allah*) might cut off a fringe of the Unbelievers to expose them to infamy, and then they should be turned back, frustrated in their purpose". Pep-talk for war/fighting.

021 3/145h: "And swiftly shall We (Allah*) reward those who (serve Us with) gratitude". If he 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 and only truth on this point.

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 threat.)

022 3/146c: “And Allah loves those who are firm and steadfast (in battle*)”. Another mighty incitement to primitive warriors – and terrorists - with strong belief.

But Mr. Bush (American president when this originally was written) and others should have remembered this about being steadfast.

023 3/147c: “- - - and help us against those that resist Faith”. Allah will help if you fight for Islam - or for Islamic leaders telling they defend Ummah and Islam. This is from 625 AD – the Medina period. It could have been meant as defensive help, but then one would have used “from”, not “against”. This verse contradicts (and abrogates) at least these verses (here are 88 out of the 124 Muslim scholars say are abrogated by 9/5): 2/109, 2/190, 2/256, 2/272, 3/20, 4/62, 4/81, 4/90, 5/3, 5/28, 5/48, 5/99, 6/60, 6/66, 6/70, 6/104, 6/107, 6/112, 6/158, 7/87, 7/188, 7/193, 7/199, 8/61, 9/68, 10/41, 10/99, 10/102, 10/108, 11/12, 11/121, 13/40, 15/3, 15/94, 16/35, 16/82, 16/125, 16/126, 16/127, 17/54, 18/29, 18/56, 19/39, 20/130, 21/107, 21/112, 22/49, 22/68, 23/54, 23/96, 24/54, 26/216, 27/92, 28/50, 28/55, 29/18, 29/46, 32/30, 34/25, 34/28, 35/23, 35/24a, 36/17, 39/41, 41/34, 42/6, 42/15, 42/48, 43/83, 43/89, 44/59, 45/14, 46/9, 46/135a, 46/135b, 46/135b, 50/39, 50/45, 51/50-51a, 51/54, 52/45, 52/47, 53/29, 67/26, 73/10, 73/11, 79/45, 86/17, 88/22, 109/6. They are all quoted under 9/5 in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran". (At least 88 contradictions).

Psychologically a mighty incitement and a strength for upping the fighting spirit, especially with uneducated, primitive warriors or fanatics.

BUT YOU DO NOT FIND THIS KIND OF PROPHETS IN THE BIBLE. THERE WERE A FEW WHO WERE IMPLICATED IN WARS, BUT THAT WAS FOR MAKEING OR DEFENDING THE COUNTRY, N O T FOR THE GOD OR THE RELIGION.

024 3/148a: “And Allah gave them (the warriors) a reward in this world (and will consequently give it to you if you fight bravely*) and the excellent reward of the Hereafter”. 80% of the spoils of war - included slaves and women - were for the warriors and their leaders (the remaining 20% were for Allah/Muhammad/the religious leaders - which soon also became political leaders). Women made slaves were fun, because to rape female slaves was and is your right and no sin. In addition: To do battle for Islam was - and is - a “heavy” application for Paradise, and a sure way to get there no matter what kind of life you have led, if you are killed in battle for Islam (which soon also meant - and means - an easy way for the leaders to recruit warriors). But it is a strange fact that leaders never become suicide bombers.(The Quran tells that suicide is a sin deserving Hell (is this told - or "explained" away to the suicide bombers?) + perhaps the leaders do not like to die yet? - or have they read 4/29 which forbids to kill or destroy yourself?)

025 3/148b: "- - - and the excellent reward of the Hereafter”. Well, we are back to the old fact: 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 and only truth on this point.

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 threat.)

026 3/148d: “For Allah loveth those who do good (in this case: To wage war for Allah and Muhammad*)”. To do battle for Allah - to steal and burn and kill and murder and destroy and rape for the good and benevolent deity - is a good thing which Allah loves. (Actually that it shall be made in the name of the god, makes it even more disgusting.) Did anyone say that modern terrorists have to twist the words of the Quran to find incitements to their deeds? And also: Muhammad got cheap warriors and gained wealth and power - in wars and robberies that really were illegal according to the Quran, as they in reality were wars of aggression, not really of defense. And they gave him the possibility to rape at least two women - Rayhana bint Amr and Safijja bint Huayay.

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

027 3/151a: “Soon shall We (Allah*) cast terror into the heart of the unbelievers - - -.” Of course. One more good pep-talk. And a bit different from "turn the other cheek" in the Bible.

##028 3/157c: “And if ye are slain, or die, in the way of Allah, forgiveness and mercy from Allah are far better than all they could amass”. This only may - may - be true if Allah exist and is a god, and if the non-Muslims on top of this believe in a non-existing god - if their god (f.x. Yahweh) exists, he may be able to outdo Allah. (Especially if Allah in reality is a dressed-up and made up pagan god only - and he was a pagan Arab god before Muhammad took him over and renamed him slightly).

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

##029 3/158a: “And if ye die, or are slain, lo! It is unto Allah that ye are brought together”. Be killed in war for Allah, and go to paradise - good “knowledge” for a warrior or terrorist. Whoever said the Quran has to be disused to justify terrorism, hardly ever read the Quran - or uses an al-Taqiyya (a lawful lie - this "convenient" Islamic only phenomenon). See also 3/157b above.

##030 3/158b: “And if ye die, or are slain, lo! It is unto Allah that ye are brought together”. This only can be true if Allah exists, if he in addition is a god, if he runs a religion like told in the Quran - and if the Quran has told the full and only truth about this.

031 3/167c: "- - - fight in the way of Allah - - -". That the raids and wars were and partly are made in the name of the god, make them even more detestable, especially as most of them were raids and wars of aggression - mainly for riches, slaves and power - and for spreading Islam by means of the sword directly and indirectly.

**032 3/169a: “Think not of those who are slain in Allah’s way as dead. Nay, they live - - - in the presence of their Lord (Allah*)”. What better can a warrior ask for? - and thinking like that, they made - and make - cheap soldiers for Muslim leaders. But what if Muhammad made it all up? - at least no god made the Quran with that many mistakes, etc. So where will all the Muslims in reality end if there is a next life?

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

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

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

036 3/171d "- - - the fact that Allah suffereth not the reward of the Faithful to be lost - - -". Once again: If Allah exists, if he in case is a major god - - - and if the Quran tells the full and only truth without mistakes about this. And no matter: This sentence is a claim, not a fact.

037 3/172b: "- - - those who answered the call of Allah (for fighting*) and the Messenger (Muhammad*), even after being wounded - - -". This is one of the few places in the Quran where the 3. alternative; to be wounded is mentioned - normally only "the two glorious" alternatives victory and death (= Paradise according to the Quran) are mentioned. And here it is not mentioned as a possible outcome of a fight, but mentioned only to glorify the ones who fight on even if they are wounded. "The Religion of Peace"!??

In traditional war it is something like 10 times as likely to be wounded as to be killed - and the chance for becoming a cripple afterwards at least as big as for to be killed.

038 3/173a: “Men said to them: ’A great army is gathering against you’: - - - but it (only) increased their Faith - - -”. Pep talk. Real Muslims are not frightened - and Allah will help. Pep talk incites the warriors to keep fighting, and to wage war. This was of course necessary for Muhammad to gain personal security, power and riches. Like for many warlords at that time.

039 3/173c: "- - - it (the possibility of battle*) (only) increased their (good Muslims'*) Faith - - -". The religion of peace? The same god as in NT? No comment to any of the two questions. It would be a waste of time.

###040 3/174a: “And they returned (from war) with Grace and Bounty from Allah: no harm ever touched them - - -”. A fairy tale picture of war and easy riches. A good pep talk for recruiting new warriors if the men are uneducated and naïve. Glorifying war and spoils of war attracts new warriors. The larger the “army” the better chance of success and power for leaders.

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

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

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

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

041 3/174b: "- - - Bounty from Allah - - -". That the raids and wars with its stealing, raping, suppression, extortion and blood shall be in the name of the god, makes the whole "business" - the Quran's rules for waging war - even more disgusting. And are robbed goods, rape and slave taking in accordance with the moral and ethical codes in NT? - the claimed same god? Read the NT and check for yourself.

But notify how often "bounty", etc. is mentioned in connection to propaganda for war in the Quran - the permission to steal and extort from and to enslave the victims was one of the central arguments for alluring Muslim men to go on raids and to war. (And is the "bounty" really from a god when you have to go out and steal and rob and risk your life and health for it - and destroy other people's lives. Words and propaganda are cheap and incitements and temptation sometimes slick - and all such words even may be dishonest and untrue.)

042 3/174c: "- - - they (Muslims at war*) followed the good pleasure of Allah - - -". That his followers wage war is the good pleasure of Allah. "The Religion of Peace"? - a god of peace? If you are sufficient naive or indoctrinated you may be able to believe this.

043 3/174d: "- - - they (Muslims at war*) followed the good pleasure of Allah - - -". The good pleasure of Allah here refers to going to war. You do not find anything even remotely similar to this in NT. And even in the more warlike OT, war was not for the pleasure of the god, but to make room for the Jews, and later for to defend their nation(s).

044 4/66b: "(To go to war and*) sacrifice their (Muslims'*) lives - - - would have gone farthest to strengthen their (faith)". A paradox if Islam claims to be "the religion of peace". But according to the Quran no doubt the greatest religious deed is to go on raids or to war for Muhammad/Allah. They in reality mainly were for stealing riches and taking prisoners - girls and women for rape and slaves and sometimes for extortion, men for extortion or slavery. Later also for spreading Islam - directly or indirectly by means of the sword. (Suppression and often hard taxation, etc. backed by the sword, which you only could get out of by becoming a Muslim.)

*045 4/67a: “And We (Allah*) should then have given them (the ones reluctant to give their lives, see 4/66a) from Our Presence a great reward (if they went to war*)”. One of the many incitements to war for a claimed good and peaceful god or religion or prophet. Sometimes we feel that the ugly West may be after all have a better moral philosophy and ethics - sometimes to say the least of it. And may be a more human god, even though it is politically correct to dismiss and slander him.

One of the strong proofs for that Jesus and Muhammad neither were in the same religion, nor in the same line of prophets (in addition to that it is impossible to be in the same line of prophets if they do not represent the same god).

##046 4/71b: “O ye who believe! Take your precautions, and either go forth (in war*) in parties or go forth all together”. Be strong when you attack. "The religion of peace"? On the contrary - Islam is a typical religion of war. The only reason why this Islamic slogan is not dead long time ago, is that non-Muslims do not know the Quran well enough to laugh from that claim. (But beware that many Muslims also do not know the book well enough or are too indoctrinated, and are unable to see the hypocrisy - or al-Taqiyya (lawful lie) - in the claim. They simply and honestly believe it!)

047 4/72+73b: As mentioned in 4/72+73a just above these two verses are pep-talk for war. You NEVER find such pep talk in NT - NEVER. One more of the many points which alone proves that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same religion - and then there are all the other proofs in addition.

*048 4/74a: “Let those fight in the cause of Allah who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter”. If you are willing to exchange your life here on Earth for a future life in Paradise, you should be permitted to - and qualified to - wage war for Allah. (Only let us hope you are not cheated. If something is wrong in the Quran - and at least a huge number of facts and much of the logic are wrong, etc. - you may be in for quite a surprise if there is a next life. Not to mention what a rude awakening you will have if Islam is a dreamed-up religion, and there is another religion which is true. Or if Allah is from the dark forces. But in the meantime Muslim leaders have a cheap source for power, warriors and terrorists).

049 4/74d: “To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah - whether he is slain or gets victory - soon shall we give him a reward of great (value) (= Paradise*)”. What can be a better reward - - - if it is true? And what can be a cheaper way for leaders to get warriors, than promises of payment in the next life? - especially if the religion is made up (and remember that this is likely, as the Quran with all its mistakes is from no god) and the Quran's paradise thus does not exist.

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

050 4/74e: “To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah - whether he is slain or gets victory - soon shall we give him a reward of great (value) (= Paradise*)". Guess if this is a contradiction to NT!!! Yahweh and Allah the same god? You NEVER find things like this in NT - NEVER - and not even in OT (there they fought for establishing and later defending their country). One more of the many points which alone proves that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and definitely also that Jesus and Muhammad do not belong to the same religion - and then there are all the other proofs in addition.

051 4/75c: “And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah and those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)? Men, women and children (crying for help and rescue*) - - -.” Muhammad’s version of the glorious hero on the white horse - and "forgetting" to add "- and power and riches for Muhammad". Another inciting dream "pushed" by good psychology - claimed help to women and children is a good motif.

052 4/75d: "- - - rise for us (the weak ones*) from Thee (Allah*) one who will protect, and raise us from Thee one who will help!" Guess if the warlord Muhammad here is telling that the warlord Muhammad is sent from the god, and that the weak ones are praying for help from the great warrior on the white horse - the warlord Muhammad - to help them!! Have you heard dictators glorifying themselves and glorifying war of aggression before?!

###053 4/76c: “Those who believe (Muslims*) fight in the cause of Allah, and those who reject Faith (non-Muslims*) fight in the cause of Evil: so fight ye against the friends of Satan - - -.” To say the least of it: The words are not to be misunderstood: Fight the non-Muslims, because they are the friends of Satan. Though we personally – and as far as we know also others – just wonder: Some great force or religion which teaches stealing, destruction, rape, enslavement, suppression, murder, hate, war – is that a good, benevolent something or not? – or is it a devil? – perhaps a devil in disguise?

054 4/76i: “- - - fight ye against the friends of Satan - - -“. Of course you want to do that – and of course all non-Muslims are friends of Satan. Hate mongering. There is more like this in the Quran.

###055 4/84a: “Then fight in Allah’s cause - - -.” One more verse which contradicts and abrogates many of the peaceful verses from mainly Mecca and early Medina (this is from 626 AD and the harsher religion Islam had developed into). At least 10 contradictions and as many abrogations. Remember that when the Quran talks about fight, it normally always means armed combat (as opposed to NT where it refers to intellectual conflict).

056 4/84d: "- - - rouse the Believers (to armed combat*)". May be this is what some imams, mullahs and others are doing? Well, drop "may be".

###057 4/89d: “But if they (the ones not believing strongly enough in the Quran and in Muhammad*) turn renegades (= leave Islam*), size them and slay them: and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their rank”. Two quotes from the New Testament: “Love your enemies”, “You shall not kill”. The ones believing Allah and Yahweh is the same god, have to study psychology.

Jesus and Muhammad definitely were not in the same religion or serving the same god. This even more so as no dead person can change to the "right" religion in older age - in "the 11.th hour".

058 4/94e: "- - - with Allah are profits and spoils abundant". Fight wars for Allah and get profits and spoils aplenty! Stealing/robbing, raping, enslaving, was an essential part of raids and wars for many of the warriors - and leaders. Compare this to NT and the New Covenant, and not even weeping can express the abyss between the religions. The same god?

And not to forget:  Here it is no doubt neither about that it is permitted to steal in the name of Allah, nor about that the Quran uses this as an attraction - then and now and forever.

##059 4/95b: “Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive in the cause of Allah with their goods and their person. Allah hath granted a grad higher to those who strive with their goods and their persons”. Clear words: Go to war or terrorism and end in a better part of Paradise - there are at least 4 or 6 different qualities of Gardens there + the higher heavens according to the Quran. Incitement “de luxe”.

060 4/95d: "- - - strive in the cause of Allah - - -". In the Quran this expression normally means to wage war on claimed behalf of Allah and Muhammad and later leaders.

061 4/95f: "Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive (fight*) with their goods and persons than those who sit (at home)". Strongly contradicted by especially in NT - in NT physical fighting is not accepted at all. One more proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

#062 4/95g: “Unto all (in Faith (= all Muslims*)) hath Allah promised good: but those who strive hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by special reward -.” Are any comments necessary? - except f.x. compare this to NT. The Quran is war and murder. Compare it to the pacifistic and anti-war NT or f.x. Buddhism!

What a nice verse for a terrorist!

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

#063 4/95h: “Unto all (in Faith (= all Muslims*)) hath Allah promised good: but those who strive hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by special reward -". But what is such a promise worth unless Allah exists and is a powerful god?

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

#064 4/95i: “Unto all (in Faith (= all Muslims*)) hath Allah promised good: but those who strive hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by special reward -". Strongly contradicted by especially in NT - in NT physical fighting is not accepted at all. One more proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - and one of those many proofs which each alone proves this. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

065 4/95+96a: “- - - those who strive hath Allah distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward – Ranks specially bestowed by Him (Allah*), and Forgiveness (for anything if you are killed in battle*) and Mercy.” No doubt who is the best Muslim and what is the best deed in Islam – the warrior and the war are most pleasing to Allah. (To call Islam “The religion of peace” is an insult to the intelligence of everybody who has read the surahs from Medina with an open mind.)

As for forgiveness see 2/187d above.

066 4/95+96b: “- - - those who strive hath Allah distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward – Ranks specially bestowed by Him (Allah*), and Forgiveness (for anything if you are killed in battle*) and Mercy.” The total and 180 degree difference from NT - in NT physical fighting is not accepted at all. One more proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - and one of those many proofs which each alone proves this.

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

067 4/100f: "- - - his (dead Muslim warrior*) reward becomes due and sure with Allah - - -". This only is possible if Allah exists and if he really is a god - there only are the words of a not reliable man seeking power for both.

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 threat.) And there is a similar problem for prayers.

068 4/101c: "- - - for the unbelievers are unto you open enemies." An unmistakable message - no good basis for building trust between religions, or for integration of Muslims in non-Islamic cultures. Hate mongering simply.

069 4/104a: "And slacken not in following up the enemy - - -". The religion of peace (!!). (Compare it to NT: Forgive your enemy.) And: Fighting non-Muslims - in the beginning mostly for stealing/robbing, raping, taking prisoners for extortion or slavery, later also for spreading Islam - was and is the greatest of religious deeds, according to the Quran.

070 4/125a: "Who can do better in religion than one who submits his whole self to Allah - - -". Anybody if Allah does not exist - and there are at least 3 very good indications for that he is fiction: 1) Muhammad was never able to prove anything. 2) Allah has never in 1400 years given the slightest clear indication for his existence. 3) And the Quran is not from a god - no god would ever be connected to a book of that quality.

Not to mention if he exists, but is from the dark forces.

071 5/12g: “- - - and loan to Allah a beautiful loan - - -.” This normally is “Quran-speak” for “risk or lose your life in battle for Muhammad and Allah”. In just this case it is claimed to be said to the Jews of old times, which gave it double value: A good pep-talk and “documenting” that messengers wanting war was nothing new. But these words are never used in the Bible.

072 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.

073 5/35d: “- - - strive with might and main (normally in the Quran this means “fight in war”*) in His (Allah’s*) cause.” A clear order. Islam "the religion of peace" like Muslims often claim? Or Allah a god of peace?

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

####074 5/35g: “- - - strive with might and main (see 5/35a-b just above*) in His (Allah’s*) cause - - -”. For us this is one of the most detestable points in the entire Quran and Islam: Fight and steal and rob and mutilate and rape and enslave and hate and murder and suppress in the name of your god - a claimed good and benevolent god.

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

075 5/54e: “- - - fighting in the way of Allah - - -”. Unlike when you fight for Jesus and Yahweh - and many other gods - with your brain and words and good deeds, for your fights for Muhammad and Allah you fight with weapons and wage war and terror, and is paid by loot and rape and slaves - the laudable thing to do according to the Quran. Or - ?

####076 8/1c: “They (the warriors*) ask thee (Muhammad*) concerning (things taken as) spoils of war (riches and slaves and sometimes land*). Say: (Such) spoils are at the disposal of Allah and the Prophet (Muhammad*)”. This is one of the rules Muhammad or the omniscient Allah had to change later (and not much later) - in the end Muhammad only got 20%, except if the victims gave in without a fight (then Muhammad still got 100%). (Islam has another explanation - all belongs to Allah, but 80% may be given to the warriors and to their leaders. But when a "may be" becomes a rule, it is not a "may be" any more). You meet Muslims saying Allah/the Quran never changed anything, but here is one point which was changed shortly afterward. Often Muslims explains changes with that the rules really were not changed, only made stricter or clarified (why should that be necessary for an omniscient god?), but also that are changes. Here is an absolute rule which later had to be changed - the warriors demanded their share of the spoils. Besides: How primitive or greedy has a person to be in order to see a good and benevolent god in a god who permits lies, stealing/robbing, rape, enslaving, suppression, murder, etc. in his name? Incompatible with NT.

####But there is another and very - extremely - serious point here: When raids and stealing/looting and slave-taking expeditions and whatever are planned and executed just for that purpose: To be able to see this as anything but plain and dishonest thievery or robbing, you have be a very special person or belong to a very special culture.

####It happens that Muslims ask about why on Earth they are disliked just because they are Muslims? #####Parts of the Quran's moral code explain a large percent of that question - it is too far from normal moral codes. (But Muslims are so used to it, that they are unable to see its excesses, dishonesty and inhumanity, and honestly believe it is a perfect and most honorable code.)

####077 8/1d: “(The spoils of war*) “are at the disposal of Allah and the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -.” All that was stolen and looted and robbed in raids and war, included slaves and prisoners for extorting money (this early – 624 AD – it mainly was raids to steal/rob/extort) belonged to Allah – represented by his envoy on earth: Muhammad. But his officers and warriors were too greedy to accept this – they wanted a share of the riches, too. So a bit later in the surah – a few “revelations” later (?) there came a contra order – and abrogation:

  1. ***8/41: “And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah - - -.” Muhammad had to give the warriors their share – except that he saved everything for himself in the cases where the victims gave in without fighting – then the warriors had done nothing and could not demand a share. Muhammad needed riches. Though it is likely it is true he was not much interested in much luxury, he needed riches for bribes/"gifts" and for waging war to get more power and more riches, included slaves – war cost money even if he paid his warriors with religion and religious promises, then all the same food and equipment cost money – and he needed riches for “gift” to attract more warriors/followers/believers and to keep some of the lukewarm-warm ones - - - and some for social use (help to the poor). Muslims try to explain away this contradiction and abrogation by saying that it all belongs to Allah/the leader, but 80% is given to the warriors/robbers. But the moment it becomes a right for the robbers in raids and warriors in war, the rank and file’s share no longer belongs to the leader.

But remember that also stealing is dishonesty, no matter if you name it loot, spoils of war, or whatever.

078 8/9ba: "I (Allah*) will assist you (Muslims*) with a thousand angels (doing battle*), ranks on ranks". But why do angels have to take part in battles if Allah is omnipotent? Yes, why do Muslims have to fight battles for him and die or become invalids? He just can say "Be, and it is", according to the Quran. Something is seriously wrong.

By the way: How do angels do battle?

079 8/9c: (YA1184): “I (Allah*) will assist you with a thousand of angels (f.x. in battle)” But Islam itself questions if the numbers are exact or figurative. Unclear. Another question: If Allah is omnipotent and just can say “be, and it is” to quote the Quran, why then does he have to send angels? He just can decide the outcome of any battle. And actually: Why did he need any battle at all? - he just could decide how he wanted the world. (The propaganda tells it is to test his followers - but why does an omniscient and predestining god need to test anyone at all?)

080 8/12b: “I (Allah*) will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their fingertips off them". This is told by Muslims (comment A8/15 translated from Swedish) to be an Arab expression meaning : #####"Kill absolutely every one of them". (Only to smite off their fingertips, would make them unable as good archers afterwards). A good and benevolent religion full of mercy.*) - - -.” “The god of Peace heading the Religion of Peace”? To call this religion “the Religion of Peace” is an insult to the intelligence of the world – and the reason why the world does not laugh at the claim, is lack of knowledge about the Quran.

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

081 8/13a: "This (kill them*) because they contended against Allah and His Messenger - - -". How much Allah and how much Muhammad?

082 8/13b: "This (kill them*) because they contended against Allah and His Messenger - - -". When you know practically all Muhammad's armed conflicts were initiated by Muhammad (for robbing and to take captives), there is not a little irony in this.

083 8/15a: “When ye who believe meet the Unbelievers in hostile arrays, never turn your backs to them”. Fleeing warriors were of no value to Muhammad and other leaders.

084 8/16a: “If any (Muslim warrior*) do turn his back to the (the enemy*) on such a day (during battle) - - - he draws on himself the wrath of Allah, and his abode is Hell - - - “. Fight for Allah and Muhammad or end in Hell. One verse is the carrot, this one the whip. War is a central part of the life and the religion - - - "the Religion of Peace"!!! (This claim is a joke for anyone who really has read the Quran).

085 8/17b: (The fights are acts of Allah) "in order that He might test the Believers - - -". But why - why - should Allah need to test his Muslims if he is omniscient and knows everything on beforehand? - not to mention if he on top is omnipotent and decides everything before it happens? There is no logic in this. But if the real story was that Muhammad needed an "explanation" for why a mighty god wanted them to fight - in reality for Muhammad - then this sentence suddenly is easy to understand; it is unbelievable what you can make people believe if they are naive or uneducated or both, not to mention if they want to belief from f.x. religious reasons or to have an excuses to steal and enslave and rape women and to become rich.

086 8/17ba: (The fights are acts of Allah) "in order that He might test the Believers - - -". Incompatible with especially NT. Yahweh and Allah the same god? Jesus and Muhammad - if he had been a real prophet - in the same line of prophets? We do not bother to give the answers.

Besides: Why does an omniscient and predestining god need to test anyone, and what can he learn from it if he knows everything already? The logic in this frequently repeated claim is hopeless.

087 8/19d: “Not the least good will your (the enemy’s) forces be to you even if they were multiplied: for verily (though it definitely is no proved verity/truth*) Allah is with those who believe”. Perhaps discouraging the enemy, but surely encouraging his own warriors. “Gott mit uns”, like the Nazi and earlier Germans said. Just this one is as old as the oldest religion - and still valid for everyone who believes it, and the uneducated, naïve early followers did believe - - - as do many Muslims even today.

088 8/24c: “Oh ye who believe! Give your response to Allah and His Prophet (Muhammad*), when He calleth you to that which will give you life - - -.” To follow the call for war, will give you a beautiful next life – - - and Muhammad a cheap and committed warrior.

###089 8/39a: “And fight with them (the Unbelievers who will not convert to Islam*) on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere”. Comments should be unnecessary. #########Fight war till Islam dominates everywhere. An order and an incitement.

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

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

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

#090 8/39b: “- - - there (everywhere shall*) prevail justice and faith in Allah all together and everywhere - - -”. There shall be the rule of law - but the Muslim rule of law, where f.x. a non-Muslim cannot witness against a Muslim. But to be fair, the Quran several places tells that judges shall judge correctly, so if there is no special reason, if the judge is not against non-Muslims, if he is not corrupt, etc., there was a reasonable chance to get a fair decision - fair according to Muslim laws. At least as long as your opponent was not a Muslim, or worse, a powerful Muslim. In that case the law was/is not fair.

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

###091 8/40a: “If they (the enemy*) refuse (to stop fighting – and remember that for hundreds of years the Muslims mostly were the aggressors*), be sure that Allah is your Protector - - -.” Allah helps you in any fight against “infidels”- real defense or "defense in the widest meaning of the word" = attack or raids for wealth and slaves and power and for expanding Islam.

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

092 8/41a: “And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah (/Muhammad*) - - -.” These 20% - 100% if the victim gave in without a fight - in reality were for Muhammad to use. Did he "demand no payment for what he did" like he claims some places in the Quran?

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

093 8/41d: “And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah (/Muhammad*) - - -.” Which means that 80% is for the warriors and leaders in the war – an economical incentive which for many a poor man counted much more than the religion – war and terror = good business. Many became well-to-do, many became rich, and some became very rich – and were dream models for new generations of robber warriors and robber barons. But Muslims and Islam never mentions the cost in destruction and destroyed lives which were the price millions had to pay for this unjust prosperity of the robbers and destroyers. It frequently took the (surviving) locals 100-200 years and more just to regain their standard of life, not to mention freedom. The warriors of the good and benevolent god of “the Religion of Peace” frequently mass murdered and massacred and enslaved “en gross” – and stole everything. Jerusalem f.x. got a hunger catastrophe after being occupied in 638 AD - the Muslims stole everything, included the food.

#094 8/60a: “Against them (the unbelievers*) make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, included steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies (and Muhammad’s enemies*) - - -.” Inside information from “the Religion of Peace”.

We may add the ####modern Muslim point of view of today (YA1226): "It is your duty to be ready against all, for the sacred Cause under whose banner you are fighting". (YA1227): "Be always ready to put your resources (wealth and life*) into your Cause. You will not do so in vain. Allah's reward will come in various forms. He knows all, and His reward will always be more generous than you can possibly deserve". (YA1228) "It (fighting for Islam*) should be a joyful duty not for itself, but to establish the reign of peace and righteousness (remember here that words like this is used in accordance with the Quran's partly immoral moral code*) and Allah's Law". There are more like this. Also today Islam really is "the Religion of Peace".

##095 8/60c: (A8/64 - 2008 English edition 8/65): "- - - the enemies of Allah - - -". Definition according to A8/64: #######"(The enemies of Allah are*) everyone who deliberately opposes and seeks to undermine the moral laws laid down by Allah" - and those people automatically are "an enemy of those who believe (Muslims*) in Him (Allah*)". The definition of "the enemies of Allah" is very interesting because of the Quran's too often very primitive, medieval or even pre-medieval, and at too many point immoral moral code based on a Nazi-like apartheid suppressive ("Übermench" rule, "Untermench" suppressed) war ideology, and because of the extremely immoral moral underlying and expressed in some of the Sharia laws (f.x. "a woman is to be seriously punished for unlawful sex if she is raped, but cannot bring 4 male witnesses to the act" or: "a man who correctly accuses a woman for unlawful sex is unjust unto Allah, if he cannot bring 4 witnesses" - even though an omniscient Allah knows he is speaking the truth). The definition is given is these words: Allah's enemy is "everyone who deliberately opposes and seeks to undermine the moral laws laid down by Allah (= Muhammad's quoted words in the Quran*) - - -". Oppose f.x. the "lawful and good" military (nearly always Muslim) aggressions and raids, stealing/robbing, raping, extortion, enslaving, betraying ("war is betrayal"), murdering, etc., etc. during "holy wars" - and practically everything is called jihad (holy war) - or opposing the incitements for going to war on the slightest religious reason or alibi ("self defense in the widest meaning of the word" - the ideology that makes every disagreement a cause for jihad) and you are an enemy of Allah.

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

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

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

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

096 8/60d: "- - - and others beside (other enemies of Allah or of you*), whom ye may not know - - -". YA (comment YA 1226): "There are always lurking enemies whom you may not know, but whom Allah knows. It is your duty to be ready against all, for the sacred Cause under whose banner you are fighting". There always are non-Muslims wanting to attack you, so always beware and be prepared for war with the untrustworthy unbelievers (NB: "the untrustworthy unbelievers", not "the untrustworthy of the unbelievers"). And remember: These comments are not written around 650 AD, but in modern times - they represent today's thinking of (many of) today's influential Muslims.

NB: ALSO REMEMBER THAT FEW IF ANY CULTURES ARE SO PRONE TO MAKE UP AND SO FILLED WITH CONSPIRACY THEORIES AND RESULTING MADE UP "KNOWLEDGE", AS THE MUSLIM ONES. THIS MAY BE A REASON WHY ISLAM AND MUSLIMS "SEE" "ENEMIES" AND "ATTACKS" ALL AROUND, AND CLAIM AND SOMETIMES HONESTLY BELIEVE THEY "HAVE THE RIGHT AND DUTY" TO "DEFEND" Themselves OR THE RELIGION = F.X. BY LAUNCHING TERROR ATTACKS (REMEMBER THAT WAR IS A PRIVILEGE AND A DUTY IN ISLAM) AGAINST WHOMEVER THEY THINK IS AN EASY TARGET.

097 8/60e: “Whatever (money, time or your life*) ye shall spend in the Cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly”. Resources counts – for you to go to Paradise, for Muhammad (and Allah) to be able to make war. And warriors like you count – for you to gain loot or be sure to go to Paradise, for Muhammad (and Allah? – an omnipotent god really should not need war and mass murder and inhumanities? – especially not a good god,) to be able to make war and gain riches for f.x. “oiling” (bribes), and power and followers for his religion and platform of power.)

098 8/65c: “O Prophet! (Allah says*) Rouse the Believers to the fight.” Some words for a presumably good and peaceful god. And some task for a god and perfect kind man representing and the great idol of a religion insisted to be a good, human and peaceful one - "the Religion of Peace"(!).

99 8/66b: “- - - but (even so (even if Allah has lightened the fight for you - by sending angle warriors?*)) if there are a hundred of you, they will vanquish two hundred, and if a thousand, they will vanquish two thousand, with the leave of Allah - - -”. Another pep talk, and somewhat more realistic than 8/65e above. Besides: If you lose, know that is was not the enemy who was too strong for you, but Allah in his unfathomable wisdom who wanted it like that. (And Allah always has a good reason leading to a final victory).

But why cannot an omnipotent god just decide how he wants things to be and make it like that? Why does a presumably good and kind and loving and benevolent and omnipotent god have to let humans live through so much blood and murder and hate and rape and misery? Something in the Quran just does not add up.

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

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

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

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

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

######100 8/69a: “ "But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, #######lawful and good - - -”. This is one more of the moral and ethical pinnacles in the Quran: Wage war, and then it is “lawful and good” to steal and rob and plunder and extort - and rape the women and girl children and take slaves. It actually is connected to 8/68a above, but like so often in the Quran specific episodes, etc, is given general meaning.

During war/raids and after conquests Muslims can steal ANYTHING they like, included raping women and girl children (history also clearly indicates that homosexuality was part of life for a percentage of Muslims) and - at least according to the Quran - take what slaves they want, and non-Muslim victims can say and do nothing about it. Yes, in principle Muslims can do this against non-Muslims any time they want, as long as they see to it that there are no Muslim witnesses - according to the rules non-Muslims cannot witness against Muslims.

But of course this made it easy and cheap for Muhammad and his successors to get warriors. That such behavior is a catastrophe for any and all victims - and in some cases set back the civilization may be some hundred years like in Persia/Iran (according to science it took Persia 100+ years to return to the level it had before the Arabs attacked) - does not count, as non-Muslim “Untermench” ("sub-humans" in Nazi German) do not count.

This even more so as for fanatics nearly every situation they do not like, can be defined as war against Islam “in the widest meaning of the word” - not to mention that according to Islam’s definition all areas not dominated by Islam are “land of war”. Really a morally and ethical superior religion - compare f.x. to the silly and invalid "Do unto others like you want others do against you", which many religions and culture have as their "constitution" more or less. And really a peaceful one.

And honestly the word “good” in ”lawful and good” classifies Muhammad, the Quran and Islam. Laws can be twisted and remade and it is no problem for an absolute dictator to make what laws he wants and thus make things “lawful(?)” – quotation marks used on purpose. But the word “good” is an absolute – flexible “borders”, but fundamentally an absolute. Allah’s/Muhammad’s real rules for behavior against all outsiders is way outside “good”, and the hypocrisy in the using of abrogated verses in the Quran to make outsiders believe something else, makes this aspect of the religion and its hypocrisy even more disgusting.

This quote also tells a lot about the person Muhammad.

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

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

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

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

#####101 8/69c: "- - - lawful and good - - -". If these words and the context it is taken from ("- - - enjoy what (loot, slaves, and women* + destruction and murder) ye took (= stole*) in war (normally of aggression*), lawful and good - - -", were all you knew about the Quran and Islam, this alone would be enough to remove it from the civilized world and transfer it to the dark, harsh, and inhuman Medieval ages or earlier. This even more so as this is not "abrogated" by today's Islam, but on the contrary preached and even practiced today (during armed conflicts and in terrorism) in some Islamic circles and groups.

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

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

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

101a 8/69ca: We have met the question: There are certain kinds of men who are the "normal" perpetrators when women - and children - are raped. Self-centered, low on compassion for others for others, and often low quality - from "the rubble". It is the same kind of humans who often are the ones stealing from or robbing others. Now the Quran has favoured this kind of men and behaviour - go to war and suppress and kill, and be paid by stealing and raping - for 1400 years. Can this have influenced the DNA of Arabs and other Muslims? - the ones who rape often and the ones who get more wives and concubines because they are rich (f.x. from stolen valuables), gets more babies. ######Kan this be a little piece of the explanation for the inhumanities we see from Arabs and other Muslims?

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

##########102 8/74b: "Those who believe, and adopt exile, and fight for the Faith (today potentially ca. 0.5% according to Muslims (some say 1%) on Internet = ca. 6 mill. - or some 4 million excluded the children (future fighters/terrorists*) - say some 3-4 million youths and adults are actual or potential terrorists today (double if you say 1%) - in the cause of Allah. Then there are those who give (them) asylum and aid (potentially some 10 - 15% = 120 - 180 million included the 0.5% and children) and aid ((often money) some 30% according to science at least "understand why" the activists are active = some 360 million included children - children are included for the simple reason that we only have the total numbers of Muslims) - these are (all) in very truth the Believers - - -". Next time you meet a Muslim or someone else claiming terrorists and other Muslim warriors disuse the Quran to do their bloody work, show them this verse. #########The terrorists are not disusing the Quran - they are obeying it.

Tell the world how many Muslims there really are who "understand" the activists and how many potential terrorists there really are. But again: Remember that 70% of the Muslims are very ok. Be perhaps a little careful in given situations, but do not judge all and any Muslim to be a bad person - most of them are not, not even many of the 30%.

But there of course remains the problem: Who is who of them?

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

103 8/75b: "- - - fight for the Faith - - -". A clear order. But this is not from the Bible. There is fighting in the OT, but for the nation. In NT fighting hardly is accepted at all. Yahweh and Allah the same god? Jesus and Muhammad in the same line of prophets? 2 imbecile questions. Incompatible with the Bible.

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

###104 9/5b: “But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and size them, beleaguer them, and lay in wait for them in every stratagem (of war.)”

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

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

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

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

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

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

##########105 9/5d: “- - - and lie in wait for them with any stratagem of war”.

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

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

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

106 9/5h: "- - - (use*) any stratagem of war - - -". Why do you think terrorists behave like they do, and why they, to say the least of it, do not respect the Geneva Conventions, and not behave like humans, but are depraved and degenerated "inhumans" when in action - - - and heroes to many a Muslim?

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

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

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

107 9/12a: “But if they (the leaders in Mecca*) violate their oath after their covenant - - - fight ye the chiefs of the Unfaithful - - -”. Well, for once Muhammad has a valid reason according to the laws of war: A broken covenant may be a reason for resumed war. This is shortly after taking Mecca, and he does not quite trust the old rulers (but the covenant was not broken, and there was no more war over Mecca then). On the other hand the whole verse is bloody ironic, as Muhammad himself in the Quran states - and practices - that one should break even ones oaths if that gives a better result, and then if necessary pay Allah an expiation to be forgiven. And one more irony: Muhammad broke the peace treaty with the Meccans when he took Mecca. It was for 10 years (and made in 628 AD), but he broke it after 2 years.

108 9/12c: "- - - fight ye (Muslims*) the chiefs of Unfaith - - -". A clear order from "the Religion of Peace".

109 9/13c: “Will ye (Muslims*) not fight people who violated their oaths (like Muhammad did himself*), plotted to expel the Messenger - - -". It should not be necessary to tell that this contradict at least NT very much. Jesus and Muhammad in the same line of prophets? Simply no. We may add that in addition to Jesus' military pacifism contra Muhammad's dedicated war religion, and Jesus' line of total honesty, contra Muhammad's stealing/robbing, etc. and contra Muhammad's al-Taqiyya (lawful lie) and Kitman (lawful half-truths), etc. - though this was named and formalized later - there also is the difference in the view on keeping your word/promise/oath: here is not a little irony here, as Muhammad himself did not respect his own oaths very much - oaths could be broken if it paid better to do so, and then if necessary - if the case was serious - one could pay expiation afterwards and everything was and is good and fine. Compare this to f.x. Matt 5/33-37: You shall not even swear, but be fully truthful and keep and stay by your word. Jesus and Muhammad in the same line of prophets? A fantasy

IT ALSO IS WORTH NOTING THAT IF NON-MUSLIMS BROKE THEIR OATH, IT COULD BE REASON FOR PUNISHMENT AND WAR, WHEREAS ACCORDING TO SEVERAL PLACES IN THE QURAN, MUSLIMS WERE PERMITTED TO DISUSE OATHS - PAY EXPIATION AFTERWARDS IF NECESSARY.

110 9/14a: "Fight them - - -". A more direct order is not possible to get - - - and from the leader of the claimed "religion of peace".

111 9/14c: “Fight them (the not good Muslims*), and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame - - -.” A very clear order and piece of "information. But this at least contradicts – and abrogates:

2/256: “Let there be no compulsion in Religion.”

**112 9/14e: “Fight them (the “unbelievers”*), and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame, help you (to victory) over them - - -”. When you fight non-Muslims, you are doing the work of the good and benevolent god Allah.

Some religion: Hating, fighting, stealing, plundering, raping, enslavement, and murdering are the work of the god.

And remember: The “ethics” in the Quran was for then, for now and forever - for us and for our children and our descendants for all future.

“What a wonderful world!” to quote Louis Armstrong.

But why does an omnipotent god need humans for doing the killing and suppression?

*113 9/14g: “(Allah will*) help you (to victory) over them, heal the breasts of the Believers”. Only possible if he exists and is something powerful - good or bad.

114 9/16b: “Or think that ye (Muslims*) that ye shall be abandoned (by Allah and not be rewarded for going to war*), as though Allah did not know those among you who strive with might and main (for the religion*)- - -.” But is the implicit claim here true? It only can be if Allah really exists and is a god, and if the Quran in addition has described him correctly - in a book full of mistakes, etc.

115 9/16h: "- - - strive with might and main - - -" = fight with everything you have got included your wealth and your life. Compare this to Jesus' religion of love and peace. Yahweh and Allah the same god? Jesus and Muhammad in the same line of prophets? - no answers necessary.

116 9/19a: “Do ye make the giving of drink to pilgrims, or the maintenance of the Sacred Mosque, equal to (the pious service of) those who believe in Allah and the Last Day and strive with their might and mind (wages war - see 9/16 just above*) in the cause of Allah?”

Of course the active warriors – or terrorists - are the best. f.x. the warriors in Darfur and terrorists anywhere think they are doing a pious service by killing and murdering - - and gang raping like in Darfur and other places where it is more like normal wars, not hit and run - and of course stealing and robbing for “lawful and good” reward also in this world.

Yes, a good and human and benevolent religion.

And some future for non-Muslims - one place in the Quran, the warriors are reminded that there are places with rich spoils of war not taken yet. In the West? – or other places? It does not matter – this verse tells once more that the warriors are the best Muslims - - - and that spoils of war are tempting.

***117 9/20b: “Those who believe, and suffer exile and strive with their might and main (= fight in raids/war*), in Allah’s cause, with their goods (= giving money to war expenses*) and their persons (= fighting personally in raids/war or terrorism - “any stratagem of war”*), have the highest rank in the sight of Allah - - -”.

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

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

***118 9/20c: “Those who believe, and suffer exile and strive with their might and main (= fight in raids/war*), in Allah’s cause, with their goods (= giving money to war expenses*) and their persons (= fighting personally in raids/war or terrorism - “any stratagem of war”*), have the highest rank in the sight of Allah - - -”. It is hardly worth the bother to tell that you find nothing like this in the Bible, not to mention in NT. Yahweh the same god as Allah? Jesus in the same line of prophets as Muhammad? Anyone able to believe such claims either need much more knowledge or a psychiatrist.

*119 9/20g: “- - - they (terrorists/warriors*) are the people who will achieve (salvation)”. At least the Quran is honest about some things - just like Hitler was in “Mein Kamp” - - - and few did believe Hitler until it was too late.

And not least: It is repeating one of the main incitements to war for Muhammad/Allah.

120 9/25b: “Assuredly Allah did help you in many battlefields - - -.” – and consequently he can be expected to do the same in future battlefields. A good pep talk - but the claimed help never proved.

####121 **9/29a: “Fight those who believe not in Allah - - -.” A most clear order - - - in spite of “no compulsion in religion” (2/256). One of those clear orders which shows reality and belies the glorious words. Like said before: Whenever there is discrepancy between reality and propaganda, we believe in the reality.

Compare this sentence with the 3 samples below and weep - or laugh:

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

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

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

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

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

#########122 9/29c: “Fight those who believe not in Allah - - - until they pay jizya (extra tax - sometimes heavy (and there may be land tax in addition - often 50%, sometimes even more)) with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.” A clear and unmistakable order. The softest word possible: Discrimination or apartheid. There are a number of stronger ones. And the jizya frequently was high - sometimes so high that the victims had to give in and flee for economical reasons. Comments on how it is to live under such helpless apartheid conditions is not necessary - the Negroes in South Africa or the Southern States in USA in earlier times could tell you - even though they at least did not have to pay an extra tax on top of all.

Also see other chapters (in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran") - f.x. “Muslims are better than other people”, like 25/44 or 68/35+36, and “Age Golden Age of Coexistence".

THE CLAIM THAT ISLAM IS THE RELIGION OF PEACE, IS SERIOUSLY WRONG.

One more fundamental point: There NEVER was anything like this in the Bible - see f.x. Jesus' words: "Give to Caesar (meaning the emperor*) what is Caesar's (= tax*) and to Yahweh what is Yahweh's (= belief*)", and also the Bible's damning words about "serving Mammon (money*)". Allah's and Muhammad's greed for riches is one more of the really strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and Jesus and Muhammad far from in the same religion.

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

BUT THE MAIN POINT MAY BE THAT THIS IS THE MAIN AND CENTRAL POLITICAL MESSAGE AND ORDER TO THE ENTIRE ISLAM AND ALL MUSLIMS THEN AND FOREVER - A FACT NON-MUSLIMS SHOULD BE AWARE OF AND N E V E R FORGET. THE OFFICIAL GOAL AND ORDER FOR ISLAM IS TO CONQUER EVERYTHING AND SUPPRESS ALL NON-MUSLIMS TO BECOME SLAVES OR SEMI SLAVES UNDER ISLAM, (and pagans worse off than Jews and Christians.)

This sentence must be seen in connection to 9/33j below.

This is the promised future for non-Muslims under Islam. A religion built on a "holy" book so full of errors that the book itself proves there is no god behind it. Perhaps the dark forces, but not any god.

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

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

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

123 9/29j: "- - - (fight the non-Muslims*) (even if they are) of the People of the Book - - - ". Not to mention the Pagans. An order impossible to misunderstand - from the claimed "good an benevolent god" of "the (claimed*) religion of Peace".

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

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

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

###124 9/33j: "- - - to proclaim it (Islam*) over all religion - - -". This is a sentence to beware of, because this is the official goal for Islam even today and for all foreseeable future: Dominate and suppress all others.

To become the religion of the world in a way is a legitimate goal for any religion. But it is not legitimate to use dishonesty or lies to do so. This even more so as the need to use such means, is a strong indication for that something is wrong with the religion. The necessity to force unbelievers to believe, also is a reason for thoughts.

We repeat that this is the official goal for Islam - a goal one should strive and fight for with more or less any means, included dishonesty and terror. A fact nobody should ever forget - - - especially as the Quran is so full of wrong facts and other errors, and thus is not from any god (and Islam consequently thus not from any god).

This sentence also must be seen in connection to 9/29c above.

And it is symptomatic that parallel to this, Islam claims that non-Muslims treat them badly when informing about realities in and connected to Islam, because "according to ethics and rules of modern era interference in anyone's religion is serious crime which cannot be tolerated".

Even correct information about Islam is "serious crime which cannot be tolerated" from "people having destructive minds" and "dirty minds", and they are "criminally minded people". On the background of burning and demolition of churches, etc., and on Muslims' discrimination, mistreatment, and even murder of non-Muslims which Islam does little to stop, words like these receive negative reactions instead of sympathy - who likes obvious hypocrisy?

"The permission to inform about and debate all and everything is the heart blood of democracy. Prohibition of debating what the rulers do not like people to be informed about, is the heart blood of despotism". NB: This quote is not from a Muslim source.

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

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

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

125 9/36e: “- - - fight the Pagans all together - - -". Not from the Bible, not to mention from NT. The Quran and especially NT are exactly opposite each other here.

126 9/38b: “O ye who believe! What is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the Cause of Allah (= to go to war*), ye cling heavily to the earth. Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter?” A very rhetoric question it is very difficult for a really pious Muslim not to answer “no” to. And also a question which tells a lot about Islam.

###127 NB: 9/38d: In connection to verse 9/38 we quote from comment YA1299: "When a call (for war*) is made on behalf of a great cause (Islam*), the fortunate ones are those who have the privilege of responding to the call. The unfortunate ones are those who are so engrossed in their parochial affairs that they turn a deaf ear to the appeal. They are suffering from a spiritual disease". ####These comments are from our times, so you see that even now Muslim scholars mean that if you do not want to go to war whenever the religion calls, you are mentally ill. Further comments necessary?

And YA1300: "The choice is between two courses: will you choose a noble adventure (war*) and the glorious privilege of following your spiritual leader (to war*), or grovel in the earth for some small worldly gain or for fear of worldly loss (f.x. your life or health*)?" "The Religion of Peace" anno nowadays.

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

###128 9/39a: “Unless ye (Muslims*) go forth (in war/battle for Islam/Muhammad*), He (Allah*) will punish you with a grievous penalty (normally in the Quran a synonym for Hell*) - - -”. An order not possible to misunderstand for a pious - or fanatic - Muslim.

Yes, a religion built on peace, goodness and heavenly moral and ethics.

THIS IS THE ORDER ALSO TODAY - JUST LISTEN TO SOME IMAMS, ETC. - see 9/38d.

THIS VERSE TELLS HORRIBLY MUCH ABOUT ISLAM AS IT IS TAUGHT IN THE QURAN.

VERSES LIKE THIS - THERE ARE MANY - AND QUOTES LIKE IN 9/38d TELL CHILLING FACTS ABOUT HOW ISLAM IS TAUGHT IN MADRASAS (RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS), MOSQUES, AND ISLAMIC MEDIA ALSO TODAY. WHEN THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NICE WORDS AND CLAIMS (F.X. "ISLAM IS THE RELIGION OF PEACE") AND REALITY GIVEN IN TEACHING, IDEOLOGY, DEMANDS, DEEDS, AND ORDERS, WE ALWAYS BELIEVE IN THE REALITY.

One of the really strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - not to mention that Jesus and Muhammad were not in the same religion.

Islam "the Religion of Peace"? Do not laugh - it is impolite.

129 9/41a: “Go ye forth (whether equipped) lightly or heavily, and strive and struggle (= fight*), with your goods and your person (money and life*), in the Cause of Allah. That is best for you, if you but knew”. Any comment necessary? The benevolent "Religion of Peace"?

Islam "the Religion of Peace"? Do not laugh - it is impolite.

130 9/41b: "That (to go to war*) is best for you - - -". See 9/41a just above.

131 9/42a: “If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would (all) without doubt have followed you (Muhammad*) - - -". An indirect, but clear confirming of the fact that many of Muhammad's warriors followed him for the loot, etc. he promised - a fact Muslims deny.

132 9/42b: “If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would (all) without doubt have followed you – (but it was not, and they did not) - - -.” You surely are of better quality?! (This verse refers to the military expedition to Tabuk).

**133 9/44a: “Those who believe in Allah and the Last Day ask for no exemption from striving with their goods and persons (= waging war*)”.

If you are a real Muslim, you do not refrain from going to war.

**134 9/44b: “Those who believe in Allah and the Last Day ask for no exemption from striving with their goods and persons (= waging war*)”. Even if you omit the fact that the Bible is about Yahweh, not about Allah, this is in strong contradiction to especially NT. Jesus and Muhammad in the same line of prophets? Believe it if you are able to.

135 9/44d: "- - - striving with their goods and persons". This is Quran-speak for using ones wealth and risking one’s life in war for Allah - or if Allah does not exist, at least for Muhammad.

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

136 9/44e: “And Allah knoweth well those (the Muslims going to war for Allah/Muhammad*) who do their duty”. It is not possible to deny - like most Muslims and many politically correct others try to do today - that war (against “unbelievers”) is a duty for Muslims. It is impossible to say it more directly than the Quran does here. And also that Allah knows the ones who goes to war - and the ones who do not. Ominous for the ones who do not. Also see 2/233h above. "The Religion of Peace"? - do not laugh, it is impolite.

##137 9/45a: “Only those ask thee (Muhammad*) for exemption (from doing battle*) who believe not in Allah and the Last day”. Terrorists and fanatical mullahs/imams are right and do right according to the Quran, because the Quran is pretty clear on what it means. And the ones only claiming there are verses which can be disused by terrorists to defend their activity are pretty naive and without knowledge about the book. "The Religion of Peace"? This claim is an insult to anyone who has read the surahs from Medina with an open mind.

138 9/47e: This verse mainly is a pep-talk to the warriors about the bad quality of the ones who did not want to go to war. Strongly contradicted by the Bible, and especially by NT. Jesus and Muhammad belonging to the same line of prophets? Impossible is the only possible word, because we do not know a stronger one. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

139 9/49c: “(Many say*) ‘Grant me exception (from going to war*) and draw me not into trial’. Have they not fallen into trial already?” The Muslims not wanting war are already judged and doomed.

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

140 9/51b: “Nothing will happen to us except what Allah has decreed for us - - -”. Predestination: To do battle is not more deadly than sleeping in your bed, as Allah already has decided your hour of death. Naïve and uneducated people and religious fanatics may really believe this - in those cases it is one terrific piece of pep talk for not being afraid of doing battle.

141 9/51c: “Nothing can happen to us except what Allah has decreed for us - - -”. Well, Islam tells it is the free will of man that brings on bad incidents in life. This verse contradicts that, to say the least of it. So just go safely to war.

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

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

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

142 9/52a: “Can you see for us (Muslims*) (any fate) other than the two glorious things – (martyrdom or victory)?” Definitely yes: We can see the war cripple. We can see the families destroyed because the husband/father is dead – or a cripple. We can on the other hand see men building their country instead of destroying neighboring countries - or at least leaving their neighbors in peace, so that the neighbors can build their countries. And we are able to see the price of war: Brutalized humans and destruction – a war never builds anything, it destroys. And we also can see the second possibility the Quran never mentions, except as minor set-backs: Defeat. It may give some of the victors a chance to steal and suppress and become rich – but for a terrible price for others. But this price the Quran never mentions and never cares about - it is as said paid by others, by non-Muslims, and thus completely non-interesting.

***Islam seems to represent such a backward culture, that its believing members were and to a large degree are unable to see - or care for - what catastrophes and destroyed lives they inflict on others, as long as they themselves become rich and perhaps powerful. No price is too high for a good life and riches - - - as long as others have to pay for it.

Well, to inflict the religion on others also counts and counted for some of them. A religion built on a book so full of mistakes, contradictions and other errors, that it is not from any god.

Islam "the Religion of Peace"? Do not laugh - it is impolite.

143 9/56-57: Not everybody wanted to go to war - a pep-talk against these ones. (#######But when judging Muslims, remember that large numbers of them do not want war - just like you and me they only want a life in peace and quiet and a reasonably standard of living, together with their loved ones. They are humans just like everybody else. Of course it may be difficult to know who of the Muslims are humans and who are more or less inhumanized by the hate and war and apartheid/superiority complex religion, but none should be judged bad only because he/she is a Muslim.)

144 9/61b: "Among them (non-Muslims*) are men who molest the Prophet (Muhammad*) - - -". See 9/61a just above. This also is one of the things it would be impossible for even a god to know for sure eons earlier if man has free will. Then who made the Quran and/or how reliable is it? Also see 9/45c above.

145 9/63a "Know they (non-Muslims*) that for those who oppose Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad*), is the Fire of Hell - - -". Nobody knows this. Most Muslims believe it, but no-one knows it, as there only is the word of a man with very special moral and ethics for it. But also see 9/62a above.

###146 9/81c: "Those who were left behind - - -" Not all wanted to go to war, and when there was a call to arms for the expedition to Tabuk in Oct. 630 AD, some of these did not go. No god could know this for sure long times before if man had free will - not even the expedition could be sure, as it was based on a rumor only. See 9/45c above. ###Also remember this when judging Muslims - very far from all are bad.

As for the last point: The fact that some Muslims are militants and the added facts about the use of dishonesty and deceiving (al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), Hilah (the lawful pretending/circumventing), the lawful use of deception and betrayal, the lawful disuse/breaking of words/promises/oaths (2/225, 5/89, 16/91, 66/2 - and the star case 3/54 (if Allah can cheat, cheating is ok - but how much cheating is it then in the Quran? - by Allah or by Muhammad), etc. - dishonest means even promoted to use for defending or promoting of Islam, and permitted in many other wide cases (f.x. to cheat women or save your money) - merit that you are a bit careful with a Muslim until you know him/her well, ##########but remember that most of them have just the same wishes and dreams for life as everybody else; a reasonably good life, safety and peace, a good family and friends, etc.

147 9/83-84: The ones not willing to do battle are to be socially despised. No comments necessary, except that there is at least one grotesque example of this social punishment, not to say terrorizing, in Hadiths. Incompatible to NT.

148 9/84a: “Nor do thou ever pray for any of them (those that did not want to go to war*) that dies, nor stand at his grave, for they rejected Allah and (not least?*) His Messenger (Muhammad*), and died in a state of perverse rebellion.” It is perverse not to obey when Islam wants war. If not the carrot of stealing riches, taking slaves and raping women + Heaven should attract the ones reluctant to go to war, then use the whip of heavy social pressure to force them. War is very essential for the Quran. And “is”, not only “was” - “is” for all future.

**149 9/85b: “Allah’s plan is to punish them (the ones not wanting to go to war*) with these things in this world, and that their souls may perish in their (very) denial of Allah”. Refusing war means:

  1. Social contempt.
  2. To most likely end in hell.
  3. To deny Allah.

150 9/86a: “When a surah comes down (to Muhammad*), enjoining them to believe in Allah and strive and struggle (= make war*) with His Messenger (Muhammad*) - - - (some do not want to go to war - they prefer to stay with the women, not a nice reputation for an Arab in 631 AD, not to mention for a Bedouin warrior*)”. ###But after all not every Muslim liked – or likes – war.

151 9/87c: "- - - they (doubters staying behind in war*) understand not". Well, maybe that was exactly what they did - understood that something was seriously wrong.

152 9/88a: “But the Messenger (Muhammad*), and all those who believe with him, strive and struggle with their wealth and their persons (= wage war*): for them are (all) good things (like spoils of war, slaves, women to rape, etc.*): and it is they who will prosper”.

To say the least of it: Incitement to wage war for Muhammad/Islam. But NB: This claim was never proved - it just is words. Except that many grew rich from stealing, extortion, slave taking, etc. in this world.

153 9/89a: “Allah hath prepared for them (his warriors/terrorists) Gardens under which rivers flow, to dwell therein: that is the supreme felicity”.

Once more - to say the least of it: Incitement to wage war for Muhammad - and for Allah if he exists. On the other hand: How will "life" in such a boring paradise be in the long run - no mental activity at all?

Of course points like this also influence the moral code of Islam.

154 9/91h: Verse 9/91 in short says that only those with heavy reasons for staying at home when Allah - Muhammad - wants a raid or a war, were to be excused for not joining the raid or war party.

155 9/93a: “The ground (of complaint (for not wanting war*)) is against such as claim an exemption while they are rich - - -”. If you can afford to go to war - or if someone, included the leaders (see 9/92) can help you - then it is a valid reason for complaint and contempt against you if you do not want to go to war.

A stark contrast to NT: “Thou shallt not Kill”. Yahweh and Allah the same god? - an unnecessary question, as the answer is obvious.

##156 9/93b: "They (the ones not wanting to go to war, but without a "good" reason*) prefer to stay with the (women) - - -". An expression of contempt in many cultures and - as far as we have been able to find out - in all war cultures. (Unnecessary to say: Islam was/is one of the more extreme war cultures, as the war part of it is religiously motivated and very strong and central in the religion.)

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

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

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

####157 9/93d: "- - - they (the ones not wanting to go to war*) know not (what they miss)". Comment YA1345: "It is not only a duty, but a precious privilege, to serve a great Cause (Islam*) by personal self-sacrifice (to make war for it*). Those who shirk such an opportunity know not what they miss". This is the point of view of modern Muslim scholars - as mentioned before the comments are recent ones. "The Religion of Peace"? No further comments - and none necessary.

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

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

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

158 9/94a: Do not believe the excuses from the ones not wanting to go to war - the real reason is that they are bad Muslims.

A good Muslim goes to war whenever his leaders call. Yahweh and Allah the same god? No answer is necessary.

159 9/95a: "They (the ones not wanting to go to war*) will swear to you (Muhammad*) by Allah, when ye return to them, that ye may leave them alone. So leave them alone: for they are an abomination, and Hell is their dwelling-place - a fitting recompense for the (evil) they did". They did the evil of wanting to be excused from going to war, and consequently are an abomination and only deserve Hell. The 180 degree opposite of NT - and adding that in OT the wars were motivated by establishing and defending a national country, whereas in the Quran the wars, etc. are religiously motivated ("holy wars" - every armed incident Muhammad had, he claimed was holy war (Jihad) or holy battle (Ghazwa)) - also OT.

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

#160 9/95c: “So leave them (the ones not wanting to wage war*): for they are an abomination, and Hell is their dwelling-place - a fitting recompense for the (evil) they did”. Not to hate and kill and steal and rob and rape and enslave and murder is an abomination and evil, which ends you in Hell. Your not wanting to go to war will make the raise of power for Muhammad and Islam go slower.

To wage war is the absolute duty for any fit Muslim who can afford it. No misunderstanding possible.

Brave future world.

Do you still believe that Allah is the same god as the Yahweh in NT?

But it is a weighty incitement to naive, uneducated primitives.

But it is worth remembering that not all Muslims wanted/want war.

**161 9/96: “- - - Allah is not pleased with those who disobey (and refuse to go on raids or to war*)”. The good, kind, wise god - leading a "Religion of Peace"?. The question is especially relevant as most of Muhammad's raids were for riches, captives, slaves, and extortion. And another fact: Here on Earth the sentence simply meant and means that Allah is not pleased with those who did/do not obey Muhammad and his successors.

162 9/111a: “Allah hath purchased of the Believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the Garden (of Paradise): they fight in His (Allah’s) Cause, and slay and are slain (and go to Paradise afterwards*) - - -.” It may be a good, if de-humanizing (war mostly is) deal - - - if Allah and the Paradise exists. If not the only person gaining anything was Muhammad (and all the mistakes, etc. in the Quran prove absolutely that at least something is seriously wrong).

163 9/111d: “- - - they (warriors/terrorists*) fight in His (Allah’s (or Muhammad’s?*)) cause, and slay and are slain: (and get a great reward in Paradise*)”. Can anyone really read the Quran - even a Muslim - and afterwards believe the Quran represents a good, peaceful, benevolent god? One is reminded of the blood orgies of the Mayas and Incas, except that Islam mostly kills on the spot - like the Assyrians. And "the Religion of Peace"?? - it is up to you if you will laugh or weep from that slogan. May be there are reasons why they seldom claim Islam is "the Religion of Honesty"?

**164 9/111f: “- - - they fight in His (Allah’s*) cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran - - -”. As for the Gospels: This is not even is wrong - it is nonsense, and can only be made up by someone not knowing the Gospels - - - or is lying. There is nothing like this in the Gospels - this even if Islam pretends the text refers to a Gospel that has disappeared (there are references to the word “sword“, but not as part of war or incitement to war - not to mention the pacifistic picture the total NT give). There is a theoretical possibility for that there existed an older Gospel, but this fairy tale or nightmare is not taken from that one either. Because if it ever existed, we know the contents of it, as three of the present Gospels in case used that one as their main source (the other possibility is that two of those Gospels used the oldest one as their source - in that case there is no reason to believe there ever was older Gospel, but it is to be hoped there was, because that gives an even older written source for the Bible - and makes it even more reliable according to all rules for study of history and for such science. By the way: No serious student or professor of history use the Quran as a source for happenings older than 610 AD - which tells volumes about how they evaluate the reliability of this book presumably sent down by an omniscient god).

But the real reason why it is not the slightest doubt that this is made up, is that the sentence so totally and 180 degrees oppose the very teachings of the NT - and the entire NT. Incompatible. Incompatible also with the Law (of Moses), as the Jews never fought for a god. Yahweh and Allah the same god? No answer necessary.

Actually this is a serious case: This was in 931 AD. At that time Muhammad knew ever so well that this was said neither in the Laws (of Moses) nor in the Gospels. It is one of those cases where Muhammad knew he was lying in the Quran.

165 9/118a: "- - - the three who were left behind - - -". This refers to 3 men (Ka'b ibn Malik, Mararah ibn at-Rabi, Hilal ibn Umayah) who did not want to take part in the big expedition towards Tabuk (it came to nothing), and who chose to be honest about it. They had to live through serious psychological terror and punishment when Muhammad returned. They were uneducated and naive and did not understand what was done to them, but any somewhat educated person today recognizes the cruel method Muhammad used for punishment, for preventing similar things to happen in the future, and for giving people other things to talk about than no loot from the unsuccessful war expedition. You find the story in Hadiths - f.x. Al-Bukhari.

166 9/120a: “It was not fitting for the people of Medina and the Bedouin Arabs of the neighborhood, to refuse to follow Allah’s Messenger (to wage war - it refers to the expedition to Tabuk*) - - - “. But it is fitting for Islam to steal and rob and kill end enslave and suppress.

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

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

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

167 9/120m: “- - - (suffered*) in the Cause of Allah, or trod paths to raise the ire (not in self defense*!!!) of the Unbelievers, or received any injury whatever from an enemy. For Allah suffered not the reward to be lost to those who do good - “. To wage war, with all the destruction and suffering that means, is to do good things in the eyes of Allah and Islam/the Quran. And those of Muhammad.

Make your own comments. Think your own thoughts.

Allah = Yahweh? Only if the god is schizophrenic.

168 9/121a: "Nor could they (Muslims*) spend anything (for the Cause (of Allah/Muhammad*)) - small or great - nor cut across a valley, but the deed is inscribed to their credit - - -". Words are easy when one neither has to pay them or prove them. And when you read the Quran you may notice that everything is built on never proved claims and promises only.

169 9/121b: "- - - Allah may requite their (warriors') deeds with the best (possible reward)." A nice reward if Islam is a true religion. A very cheap way for Muhammad to attract and pay warriors if the religion is a made up one. And here it is very thought provoking that the Quran is not from a god - no god makes that many mistakes, not to mention reveres them in a "mother book" in his heaven. (And no benevolent god has a moral code and war code like in the Quran).

#170 9/123c: “Fight the Unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know Allah is with those who fear Him (= the Muslims*)”. If "I" do not like what you do - or if "I" use a little conspiracy theories, like Muslims and especially the ones in the Middle East often do, and think you are up to bad things, you surely are girding "me" about, and it is "my" right according to the Holy Quran to kill you.

***171 9/73b: “Strive (fight*) hard against the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites - - -.” Straight words for your money.

172 16/41c: (A/42 – in 2008 edition 43): “To those who leave their homes in the cause of Allah (normally = goes to war for Muhammad/Allah*) - - - We (Allah*) will surely give a goodly home in this world; but truly the reward in the hereafter will be greater. If they only realize (this)!” This concerns the strained situation before Muhammad fled Mecca. Some followers fled to Africa, some preferred to risk staying in Mecca – flight was or seemed too dangerous for them. And then there were the non-Muslims. The last sentence in this verse concerns one of the two latter parts – but which? Baghawi, Zamakhshari, Razi and others mean the Quran here talks about the non-Muslims. Ibn Kathir and others mean it here is meant the Muslims who preferred to stay on in Mecca. Just pick your choice, because nobody knows what is right. A clear text not possible to misunderstand in the Quran?

173 16/110a: “But verily thy Lord - to those who leave their homes after trials and persecutions - and thereafter strive for the Faith and patiently persevere - thy Lord, after all this is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” Comments; see 22/78. We may add that this one is written shortly before the Muslims had to flee from Mecca - perhaps even after the first ones had fled to East Africa (Ethiopia). The Muslims are told that Allah will be good to the ones who have to flee for Allah. Good for moral.

174 29/6b: “And if any strive for (with might and main), they do so for their own souls - - -“. If you f.x. go to war or take part in raids, you gain merit with Allah. ("The Religion of Peace"?)

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

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

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

###175 33/16c: “Running away will not profit you (Muslim warriors*), if ye are running away from death or slaughter, and even if (ye do escape), no more than a brief (respite) will ye be allowed to enjoy”. Well, this proves two things: It is not possible to escape predestination - no matter what Islam tries to tell you today that "it is not real predestination" (with full predestination man has no free will, and it is immoral by Allah to punish for sins or reward for good deeds) - and that in spite of the Quran, you at least can change your destination with “a brief respite“. A respite that at least has to be for some hours or days - if not there had been newly-dead frightened warriors laying around the nearest tens and more kilometers from some battlefields (because of their predestined hour or minute of death) - dead for no obvious reasons after fleeing from battle.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

##176 33/19b: "- - - covetous of goods". Stealing/robbing - and raping, enslaving and suppressing - were heavy motifs for many of the warriors. And Islam never debates the economic, cultural and human catastrophes "the religion of peace" under a good and benevolent god and a semi-saintly self proclaimed prophet inflicted on millions. They only talk about the glorious warriors, stolen riches, lots of slaves and slave women, and power. Where is the ethics, the moral, the empathy? If you read Muslim religious literature, you will see that the fundamental mentality and ideology are the same today.

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

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

#####177 33/19d: "Such men (who do not want to fight*) have no faith - - -.” What does it tell about Muhammad and Islam - and Allah - that they stated that unless you were a willing warrior, you were no good Muslim? Some contrast to propaganda about "Islam is the Religion of Peace"!! But then Muslims and Islam seldom claim that "Islam is the Religion of Honesty".

###178 33/21a: “Ye (Muslims*) have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the final Day - - -“. Wrong. Thieving/robbing, dishonesty, womanizing, raping, lying, betraying, extorting, torture, suppressing, murdering, hate mongering, war mongering, mass murder, raids for robbing and killing, and wars of aggression – that is no “beautiful pattern” according to any human moral or ethical philosophy, except in some war religions, included Islam - and perhaps in Satanism. It tells volumes about Islam that this man is their greatest hero and shining idol. The claim is strongly contradicted by the realities in his teachings and his life, based on Islamic historical sources.

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

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

179 33/22a: When the really believing Muslims in Medina saw the attacking force in 627 AD (Battle of the Trench) “it only added to their faith and their zeal in obedience”. Tales of heroism induces lust for heroism – a psychologically right story. If it is true, is another question.

180 33/22h: "- - - their zeal in obedience". Glorify obedience and it induces willingness to obedience in naive minds - a psychologically good phrase if Muhammad wanted obedience. Leaders often do - and dictators more than others.

**181 33/26d: “And those of the People of the Book (the Jews of the Qurayza tribe - see above*) who had aided them - Allah did take them down from their strongholds and cast terror in their hearts. (So that) some ye (the Muslims/Muhammad) slew, and some ye made prisoners.” Very simple and “lawful and good” - to quote another verse - mass murdering, enslavement, rape, and robbery. The same happened to most of the ones who earlier had been chased away from Medina, but not fled far enough - the ones who had stopped in Khaybar had men killed and the women and children raped and enslaved. Allah is good and benevolent and gave the Arabs much loot and many slaves to rape and use in other ways. Muslims - not even today - never reflected over that to steal and rape and enslave and murder you had to ruin and destroy the lives of other humans. This fact is never mentioned by "the religion of peace", never reflected on, never compared to ethics or moral or sympathy or empathy in any Islamic media or publication we have met or heard about.

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

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

182 33/27a: (Continued from 33/26 above): "And He (Allah*) made you heirs of their land, their houses, their goods, and of land ye had not frequented (before) - - -". Muhammad "on the war-path" stole everything - in this case also their homes and land - - - in addition to making the women and children slaves and murdering the men (some 700 men and youths).

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

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

183 33/27b: “And He (Allah*) made you (Muslims*) heirs of their (Jews'*) land, their houses, and their goods, and of a land which ye had not frequented (before). And Allah has power over all things”. Some rich spoils of war can justify much, and quiet many a man’s conscience - especially when a god sanctifies it. Could such things happen today or in the future? - we do not mention names like Darfur or Indonesia or East Timor or the Turks against Christian underlings around 1900 AD - f.x. in Armenia and Smyrna. It is accepted in the Quran as "lawful and good" and the Quran cannot be changed - a fact those forget who talk about liberalizing Islam. If Islam gains the upper hand, things like this may happen again, as it is part of the Quran's unchangeable and partly immoral moral code.

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

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

###184 33/61-62: “They (non-Muslims, hypocrites, etc.*) shall have a curse on them: whenever they are found, they shall be sized and slain (without mercy) (‘no compulsion in religion’ 2/256*). (Such was) the praxis (approved) of Allah among those who lived aforetime (f.x. Jews and Christians*). Muhammad claimed that Allah was just another name for Yahweh – but try to find an order telling that all non-Christians shall be murdered “without mercy” in NT and in the new covenant (f.x. Luke 22/20 in NT) - a covenant Muslims never mention - and NT is what Christianity is built on . Oh, we know very well that persons from Christian countries have done bad things, but that was in spite of their religion – and they were not really Christians deep down – and not in accordance with, or even because of the religion, like the case often is with the “religion of peace” (Muslim-speak for camouflaging the “religion of war”) Islam.

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

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

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

###185 33/62a: “(Such was) the practice (kill non-believers without mercy*) (approved) of Allah among those who lived aforetime: no change wilt thou find in the practice (approved) of Allah.” Muhammad here refers to the Mosaic and the Christian religions (and he wrongly sets Allah = Yahweh) when he talks about “those who lived aforetime”. But even though OT is hard against many non-Jews, the war and the killing was to get room for living for the Jews, not wanton murdering just because they were not Jews or for plunder and slaves. And in NT: Try to find a single place saying that non-believers shall be murdered just because they have another religion – such an order simply does not exist. (There are 1-2 places in the OT where Yahweh disliked that the Jews did not kill many enough of the enemies, but because the survivors represented future problems, not because they refused to change religion.) The Quran here actually is a 180 degree contradiction to the very core of the teachings of Jesus.

Any god had been lying if he said this, but Muhammad did not know the Bible well, so may be – just may be – he thought from wishful thinking that he spoke the truth, but no matter he was too intelligent not to know he had no reliable source for the claim. ###Correction: This surah is from 625-629 AD = Muhammad now knew more than enough from the old Jewish scriptures and knew he was lying. In any case it was a good statement for a warlord trying to secure and enlarge his platform of power; Self-centered. Selfish? (This surah like said is believed to be from 625 – 629 AD – before he had gained absolute control by conquering Mecca.)

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

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

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

186 37/97a: YA 4093: "The argument - - - was so sound that it could not be met by argument. In such cases Evil resorts to violence, or secret plotting." IS THIS THE REASON WHY MUHAMMAD DID AND ISLAM/MUSLIMS SO EASILY AND SO OFTEN RESORTS TO SECRET PLOTTING AND VIOLENCE?

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

###187 47/4c: This is a really serious one: “Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; at length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them) - - -.” BUT OUR SOURCES TELL THAT THE WORDS “(in fight)” IS NOT WRITTEN IN THE ARAB TEXT – IT IS ADDED BY THE TRANSLATOR (and by more than one). Muslims primarily shall read the Quran in Arab, and there in case our sources are correct the text is: “Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers, smite at their necks - - -“. It in case simply is a permanent order to be aggressive.

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

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

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

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

188 47/4i: "- - - but (He (Allah*) lets you fight) in order to test you - - -". Why - why does an omniscient and omnipotent god need to test his followers - he knows everything and predestines everything!? There is no logic in this sentence, unless it in reality is Muhammad who wants warriors and needs an "explanation".

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

#####189 47/4n: (A47/4): "In other words, when "those who are bent on denying the truth (the Quran with all its mistakes, etc.*)', deprive the Muslims of their social and political liberty and thus make it impossible for them to live in accordance with the principle of their faith, a just war (jihad) becomes allowable and, more than that, a duty". In this connection it is very thought provoking that according to the Quran the principle of Islam includes that Muslims shall rule and everyone else suppressed and without political power or influence - and "paying jizya - extra tax - "with willing submission". This is the official and final goal for Islam according to the Quran. Think this over.

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

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

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

**190 48/15a: “Those who lagged behind (did not take active part in the battle or raid*) - - -". Those reluctant to take part in raids and war, though in just this case it may refer to the ones who did not want to come along on the pilgrimage which ended in the treaty of Hudaybiyah, but most of what the Quran says, have general implications. (Texts in the Quran often are not very clear, in spite of what Muslims and Islam claim).

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

**191 48/15b: “Those who lagged behind (did not take active part in the battle or fight*) (will say), when ye (the “real” warriors*) (are free to) march and take booty (in war) - - -”. The stealing and robbing and taking of slaves and raping of girls and women, are for the active warriors only - a huge incentive for poor, uneducated ruffians. Is it partly the same effect we saw in Darfur and f.x. in Bangladesh and East Timor? - easy to find warriors, and most inhuman behavior. May such things will happen other places if Islam grows strong enough and fanatics - or the "right" kind of mullahs or imams - take over the leadership? There are tendencies in London, and many of the 9/11 terrorists came from Hamburg - not to mention the unrest in many cities in France in 2006, and for that case in some a little liberal countries in (North) Africa where fanatics want to take over power (one exception may - just may - be Turkey, which has been secular since Ataturk in the 1920s. There may be a chance. Strangely enough also Bangladesh and Malaysia have a small chance to become human democracies - and perhaps Jordan and a couple of the emirates benevolent dictatorships. But the rest of the entire Muslim world either is in the grip of fanatics or is drifting that way at present - towards what some call Muslim radicalism, others Muslim conservatism - likely the most correct expression - and even others Islamism, but which all just are different names for fanatics). (This was written before the unrest in Muslim countries started in 2011).

What had the world looked like today if the Muslim world had not petrified into stony fundamentalism and stagnated? - if the Muslim world who had developed the industrial revolution and superior weapons and ways of fighting instead of the West? You can bet against very heavy odds that the world now had been ruled by imams, and without any realistic chance of ever becoming a free world.

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

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

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

##192 48/15c: (A48/14): “- - - when ye (Muslims*) (are free to) march and take plunder (in war) - - -.” Or: “As soon as you (O Muslims!) are about to set forth on a war that promises booty - - -.” For some strange (?) reasons in none of our different translations are used the literal meaning of the Arab text (translated from Swedish): “- - - leave on a raid to take plunder - - -.” May be sometimes the varieties in the understanding of the Quranic texts are because one does not want to tell what really is said in the book. According to Islamic information or disinformation all Muhammad’s some 82 raids (we have the names of some 60 of the raids) were in self defense, and then it may as well be wise for “the Religion of Peace” to “mend” the text a little and make it more tasteful and "correct"? - instead of translating the Quran correctly and have to admit that Muhammad made "raids to take plunder" - not very holy jihads.

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

At least: Clearly a god of war.

##193 48/15d: (A48/14): “- - - when ye (Muslims*) (are free to) march and take plunder (in war) - - -.” Or: “As soon as you (O Muslims!) are about to set forth on a war that promises booty - - -.” Try to find things like this in NT! One more at least 100% proof for that Yahweh and Allah were not the same god - and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same line of anything of any consequence.

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

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

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

**194 48/16b: “Say (Muhammad*) to the desert Arabs (but most of the Quran is valid for all people and all times according to Islam*) who lagged behind: ‘Ye shall be summoned (to fight) against a people given to vehement war: then shall ye fight, or they shall submit. Then if ye show obedience (fight*), Allah will grant you a goodly reward (rich spoils of holy(?) war and Paradise*) - - -”. A huge carrot to make fighting attractive - but what peaceful religion goes far out to make war attractive?

***195 48/16f: "Then if ye (in this case desert Arabs reluctant to take part in raids*) show obedience, Allah will grant you a goodly reward - - -". Obedience to whom? - here on Earth in reality to Muhammad, and for a reward costing Muhammad exactly nothing but some words free of charge. The dream position for a Hitler, a Stalin, a Mao, a Papa Doc, a Kim Il Sung, any dictator wanting absolute and total power and obedience. Religion disused is the ultimate platform of power.

And what goodly reward? The never proved promise about a place in Paradise and permission to steal, rape, extort, and take slaves. The tragedies this meant for other humans NEVER - then or today - is mentioned. ###Islam is an extremely self-centered and selfish religion. This is even more sinister as the religion highly likely is a made up pagan one, as no god would deliver a "holy" book of a quality like the Quran.

***196 48/16h: “- - - but if ye (see first part of 48/16a above*) turn back (refuse to fight*) as ye did before, He (Allah*) will punish you with a grievous Penalty”. Very clear words from Muhammad and then Islam: Do battle or end in Hell. Some nice "Religion of Peace"! Try to find things like this in NT! One more at least 100% proof for that Yahweh and Allah were not the same god - and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same line of anything of any consequence.

###Also the big differences between the Bible's and the Quran's hells are more than big and fundamental enough to prove that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - if they had been, also their hells had been identical.

197 48/17b: "No blame is there on the blind, nor is there blame on the lame, nor one ill (if he joins not the war) - - -". The underlying, but clear meaning: But there is blame on every fit man who does not want to go on raids/war. There is not an adult Muslim not knowing about points like this in the Quran. All the same they vehemently and with straight faces claim that Islam is "the Religion of Peace"(!!!)

No comment - and none necessary.

Except: Try to find things like this in NT! One more at least 100% proof for that Yahweh and Allah were not the same god - and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same line of anything of any consequence.

###198 48/17c: “- - - but he (the Muslim*) that obeys Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad, and goes to war when called*) - (Allah) will admit him to Gardens beneath which rivers flow - - -”. The great War God (Allah) and his representative and High Commander on Earth (Muhammad) will admit any dead warrior (aka robber, murderer, rapist, etc., “lawful and good” according to the Quran) to their warriors’ paradise with riches and women. Also see 48/16a and 48/16b above + 10/9f above.

199 48/17i: “- - - and he (see first part of 48/17a-c above*) who turns back (from doing battle*) (Allah) will punish him with a grievous Penalty.” No more comments necessary. But try to find things like this in NT! One more at least 100% proof for that Yahweh and Allah were not the same god - and Jesus and Muhammad not in the same line of anything of any consequence.

200 48/18e: "- - - speedy Victory - - -". Like so often in the Quran's claimed clear language, it is unclear what here is meant. Some Muslim scholars think it refers to the treaty of Hudaybiyah. The majority believe it refers to the conquest of Khaybar. But it may also refer to the conquest of Mecca in 630 AD some of them believe, even though this surah is from 628 AD, the year of the treaty of Hudaybiyah (this sentence may have been added later - it happened material was included into a surah afterwards).

####201 48/19a: "And many gains will they (Muslims*) acquire (besides) - - -". Well, a good number of Muslims became rich or at least well off from plunder, extortion, slave taking, etc. But we have never till this day met a single Muslim - not to mention a Muslim religious or profane leader or Islam itself - reflecting on what price others had to pay for that. You meet boasting about riches and power, but never a thought about the victims. And as it was "lawful and good" according to Muhammad, none of them will ever do or think so - not among the religious Muslims at least. That is ethics and moral in Islam.

As said the price paid by the victims NEVER interested neither Allah, nor Islam, nor the Muslims, nor Muhammad. Not even Islam or the Muslims of today. What does this tell about them? - and about Islam?

202 48/20b: "Allah has promised you (Muslims*) many gains that ye shall acquire (from plunder*) - - -". See 48/19a above.

We may add that Shakir here has: "- - - many acquisitions which you will take" and Dawood: "- - - (Allah*) has promised you rich booty - - -". There is no doubt what kind of gains Allah/Muhammad here promises Muslim warriors.

Attractive for primitive or greedy warriors and potential warriors.

203 48/20f: (A48/23 – in 2008 edition A22): “Allah has promised you many gains that ye shall acquire - - -.” Booty. A good and cheap way to get warriors. But does it here only talk about “gold and slaves and a few rapes” in this life (may be Khaybar in this case), or also riches in the next life like among others Ibn Abbas thought?

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

204 49/13c: "Verily the most honored of you (Muslims*) in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you". But other parts of the Quran makes it clear that the most righteous are the ones most willing to go to war for "Allah and his Messenger Muhammad".

205 49/14d: "- - - if ye (desert Arabs) obey Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -". A nice small condition - especially as here on Earth that meant: "If ye obey me, Muhammad". (Also on this point there is a great difference between Jesus and Muhammad. Jesus said "Follow me", Muhammad said "Obey me")

206 56/7+10b: “(At the Day of Doom) ye shall be sorted out in three classes - - - And those Foremost (in Faith) will be the Foremost (in the Hereafter).” The best Muslims – and that of course include the fiercest fighters – will go to the best places in Heaven, and also nearest to Allah. Of the rest the ones sorted to the right will go to the lower quality parts of Heaven, whereas the ones sorted to the left will go to Hell. (A small curiosity here: In the old Arabia right was reckoned to be the “good” side and left the “bad” side. Is it a coincidence that the omniscient god for the entire world sorted the dead ones according to customs and rules in after all tiny Arabia on Earth?)

207 57/11a: “Who is he that will loan to Allah a beautiful loan (this expression in the Quran normally means to risk or give your life (in war)*)? For (Allah) will increase it manifold to his credit, and he will have (besides) a liberal reward.” A good promise for attracting or pepping up warriors – or perhaps for attracting resources for waging war. A good deal for the warriors and for the givers of resources if the words are true. But if Muhammad is the cold and scheming manipulator going all out for power no matter what the cost will be to others, like he looks like in history, and not the saint religion has made him, the only one that really gained from this, was Muhammad himself plus his co-operators and later his successors. The sobering fact here is that history all too often is more clear-eyed than religion, especially compared to religions built only on blind faith mixed with obvious mistakes and worse like Islam. Besides: Be killed in war and the god will reward you. This may remind one of the Old Norse religion or of Genghis Khan’s religion - but it DEFINITELY is no confirmation of the Bible, and especially not NT. And is this a good god?

208 57/11d: "- - - Allah will increase at manifold his (the warriors*) credit - - -". If you go on raids or to war for Allah/Muhammad, Allah will repay you many times up in your claimed next life, especially if you are killed in action. A cheap way to pay the warriors in this life - "fight on credit for Muhammad". And especially cheap if Allah does not exist, not to mention if there "at the other side" really is a good and benevolent god, not liking persons who has lived according to a harsh and partly immoral, unethical and unjust war religion.

**209 61/4b: “Truly Allah loves those who fight in His Cause in battle array as if they were a solid cemented structure”. The ones who say the Quran is as good as the Bible, not to mention NT, have never read the Quran - which we can say even if we are not very Christian.

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

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

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

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

210 61/11c: “That ye (people*) believe in Allah and His Messenger, and that ye strive (your utmost) in the cause of Allah, with your property and your persons: that will be best for you, if ye but knew!” Strongly contradicted by the Bible. The Quran simply is the anti-thesis of the teaching of Jesus and NT. One of the 200% proof for that Jesus and Muhammad had nothing of any essence in common - in spite of a couple of verses from NT Muslims like to quote (they claim that you cannot draw any conclusions from just one or a few verses in the Quran - you have to look at the complete book - but they themselves cherry-pick the few words in the Bible, and damn be the picture the complete book gives - - - this even if they have to twist the cherry-picked words they find to be able to use them (f.x. the word "brother" in the speech by Moses (5. Mos. 18/2+15+18+21 - well, Muslims never quote but 18/15+18 and then twist the word "brother")). Not to mention how strongly it proves that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

211 61/11h: "- - - that (to fight for Allah/Muhammad*) will be best for you, if ye but knew!” Only the Quran tells the full truth and the whole truth and with nothing wrong in that book - - - according to the Quran. Especially if Allah is part of the dark forces it may not be the best. Not to mention if there is a second life and there is a good and benevolent real god "over there" - one Muhammad prohibited his followers from looking for.

212 61/12a: “(If you go to war and/or are killed for Muhammad*) He (Allah*) will forgive you your sins, and admit you to Gardens beneath which rivers flow, and to beautiful mansions in Gardens of eternity - - -.” There once was a cheap book named “All this and Heaven too”. It is similar here: All the rape and stealing and slaves you can manage – and for those good, benevolent deeds for your as benevolent god: The Paradise with more luxury and more women. Nice and attractive for naïve, poor and virile – not to say virulent – uncivilized young and not young men.

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

#213 61/12j: "- - - that (Allah's paradise*) is the Supreme Achievement". One more solid proof for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, not to mention that Jesus and Muhammad are fundamentally too different to have deep similarities on central points.

214 61/13b: “(And in war you will get*) help from Allah and a speedy victory.” See 61/12a above – and in addition you will not have to fight much, for the victory will be easy. Yes, "the religion of Peace". Not to mention "the god of Peace"?

215 64/17b: “If you loan to Allah, a beautiful loan, He will double it to your (credit), and he will grant you Forgiveness - - -“. Very similar thinking to the worst medieval excesses made by the Roman Catholic Church once upon a time. But good slogans for recruiting warriors – and money.

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

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

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

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

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

A "taste of that cake":

MUSLIM TERRORIST GROUPS BY SEPTEMBER 2014.

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

  • 01 Abdullah Assam Brigades
  • 02 Abu Nidal Organization
  • 03 Abu Sayyaf
  • 04 Aden-Abyan Islamic Army
  • 05 Al-Aqsa Foundation
  • 06 Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades
  • 07 Al-Badr
  • 08 Al Ghurabaa
  • 09 Al-Haramain Foundation
  • 10 Al-Itihaad-Islamiyya
  • 11 Al-Mourabitoun
  • 12 Al-Nusra Front
  • 13 Al-Queda
  • 14 Al-Queda in Islamic Maghreb
  • 15 Al-Shabaab
  • 16 Al-Umar-Mujahideen
  • 17 Ansar al-Islam
  • 18 Ansar al-Sharia (Libya)
  • 19 Ansar al-Sharia (Tunisia)
  • 20 Ansar Bait al-Maqdis
  • 21 Ansar Dine
  • 22 Ansaru
  • 23 Armed Islamic Group of Algeria
  • 24 Army of Islam
  • 25 Boko Haram
  • 26 Caucasus Emirate
  • 27 Deendar Anjuman
  • 28 Dukhtaran-e-Millat
  • 29 East Turkestan Islamic Movement
  • 30 East Turkestan Liberation Organization
  • 31 Egyptian Islamic Jihad
  • 32 El Kaide Terör Örgütü Türkiye Yapsılanması
  • 33 Gama'a al-Islamiyya
  • 34 Great Eastern Islamic Raiders' Front
  • 35 Hamas
  • 36 Haqqani Network
  • 37 Harakat ulMujahideed/Alami
  • 38 Harkat al-Jihad al-Islami in Bangladesh
  • 39 Harkat ul-Jihad al-Islami
  • 40 Harkat ul-Mujahideen
  • 41 Hezb-e Islami Gulbuddin
  • 42 Hezbollah
  • 43 Hezbollah al-Hejaz
  • 44 Hezbollah (External Security Organisation)
  • 45 Hezbollah (Militaty wing)
  • 46 Hizb ul-Tahir
  • 47 Hizbul Mujahideen
  • 48 Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development
  • 49 Houthis
  • 50 Indian Mujahideen
  • 51 IS/ISIL ##(behaving like a minor brother of Muhammad and his followers)
  • 52 Islamic Jihad - Jamaat Mujahideen
  • 53 Islamic Jihad Union
  • 54 Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
  • 55 Islamic State - IS (before: "- of Iraq and the Levant - ISIL)
  • 56 Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades
  • 57 Jamaat Alsar al-Sunna
  • 58 Jamaat e-Mohammed
  • 59 Jamaat ul-Furquan
  • 60 Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh
  • 61 Jamiat al-Islah al-Idzhtimai
  • 62 Jamiat-e Islami
  • 63 Jamiat ul-Ansar
  • 64 Jemaah Ansharut Tauhid
  • 65 Jemaah Islamiyah
  • 66 Jund al-Sham
  • 67 Jundallah
  • 68 Kata'ib Hezbollah
  • 69 Khuddam ul-Islam
  • 70 Lashkar-e-Jhangvi
  • 71 Lashkar-e-Taiba
  • 72 Libyan Fighting Group
  • 73 LRA (in Central African Republic)
  • 74 Moroccan Islamic Combattant Group
  • 75 Mujahideen Shura Council in the Environs of Jerusalem
  • 76 Muslim Brotherhood
  • 77 Osbat al-Ansar
  • 78 Palestine Liberation Front
  • 79 Palestine Liberation Organization - PLO
  • 80 Palestinian Islamic Jihad
  • 81 People's Mujahedeen of Iran
  • 82 Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine
  • 83 Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command
  • 84 Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan
  • 85 Society of the Revival of Islamic Heritage
  • 86 Stitching Al Aqsa
  • 87 Students Islamic Movement of India
  • 88 Supreme Military Majlis ul-Shura of the United Mujahideen Forces of Caucasus
  • 89 Takfir wal-Hijra
  • 90 Taliban
  • 91 Tehreek-e-Nafaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi
  • 92 Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan
  • 93 The Saved Sect
  • 94 Vanguards of Conquest
  • 95 World Uygur Youth Congress

One main and most serious point is that it is Muslims like these who live like Muhammad did in Medina, and like the Quran permits, glorifies, and even demands and orders - and with Muhammad as the glorious idol (in nearly double meaning) - terrorism, suppression, etc. will never come to an end. There will always and forever be religious fanatics, wishful thinkers, religious romantics, war romantics, etc. who "follow the leader, and not least ruffians who find an outlet for their bullish and brutal tendencies through following all the superiority, hate and blood verses in the Quran. Stealing/looting, extortion, raping, and slave taking also always and forever will be a "lawful and good" extra attraction - or for some the only attractions.

###### The world should be aware of this.

#######And all this because of a book so full of wrong facts, other errors, contradictions, invalid logic, unclear language, etc. that there is no god behind it. No omniscient god makes mistakes by the hundreds, contradictions, etc. and more. And no good and benevolent god have rules, moral and ethical codes, and demands which at least to a very measurable part better fits the dark forces.

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

216 66/9b: “O Prophet! (Muhammad*) Strive (normally in the Quran = armed fighting*) hard against the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them.” Muhammad is the example for all Muslims. Muslims will excuse Muhammad with that this is about war – but is that any excuse, when practically all raids and wars were initiated by the Muslims, and most of them for to rob and steal and extort - and rape and take salves? This verse abrogates (and contradicts) at least these verses (here are 88 out of the 124 Muslim scholars say are abrogated by 9/5 - most of them also is abrogated by 66/9): 2/109, 2/190, 2/256, 2/272, 3/20, 4/62, 4/81, 4/90, 5/3, 5/28, 5/48, 5/99, 6/60, 6/66, 6/70, 6/104, 6/107, 6/112, 6/158, 7/87, 7/188, 7/193, 7/199, 8/61, 9/68, 10/41, 10/99, 10/102, 10/108, 11/12, 11/121, 13/40, 15/3, 15/94, 16/35, 16/82, 16/125, 16/126, 16/127, 17/54, 18/29, 18/56, 19/39, 20/130, 21/107, 21/112, 22/49, 22/68, 23/54, 23/96, 24/54, 26/216, 27/92, 28/50, 28/55, 29/18, 29/46, 32/30, 34/25, 34/28, 35/23, 35/24a, 36/17, 39/41, 41/34, 42/6, 42/15, 42/48, 43/83, 43/89, 44/59, 45/14, 46/9, 46/135a, 46/135b, 46/135b, 50/39, 50/45, 51/50-51, 51/54, 52/45, 52/47, 53/29, 67/26, 73/10, 73/11, 79/45, 86/17, 88/22, 109/6. They are all quoted under 9/5. (At least 88 abrogations).

"The Religion of Peace"(??).

##217 66/9d: “O Prophet (Muhammad*)! Strive hard against the Unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be firm against them. Their abode is Hell - - -.” A clear order and a clear explanation why they are sub-human, and thus deserve to die. “Untermench” (sub-humans) always are ok to kill – they deserve it. It also is the right of the “Übermench” (super-humans) to do so – and in the Quran no doubt the Muslims are the “Übermench”. (Quite like the Nazi philosophy - except that according to the Nazis, Arabs were "Untermench". (Übermench = super humans, Untermench = sub humans.)

This quote also is one of the proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god, and Jesus and Muhammad far from in the same religion - Jesus f.x. never ordered his followers to (armed) fight.

###Also the big differences between the Bible's and the Quran's hells are more than big and fundamental enough to prove that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - if they had been, also their hells had been identical.

Sub-total Chapter 90 = 217 + 9.851 = 10.068.


>>> 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".