Humans, Other Beings in/Relevant to the Quran, Part 2

 

11.  ABRAHAM

According to the Bible he was the forefather of the Jews via his son Isaac and his grandson Jacob. Abraham is the first and greatest of the 3 Jewish patriarchs (the others are his son Jacob and his grandson Isaac). He according to the Bible was born in Ur of the Chaldeans in what now is south Iraq, but left together with his father Terah (Azar in the Quran) for Canaan, but settled down in the place Haran in what is now north Iraq (1. Mos. 11/31). Later, however, Abraham (at this time still named Abram according to the Bible) together with his nephew Lot, son of Abraham's brother Haran (1. Mos. 11/27) (Lut in the Quran) went on to Canaan - now approximately Israel. According to the Bible Abraham settled partly in Canaan and partly in Sinai.

Muhammad and the Quran claim that Abraham also was the forefather of the Arabs via his grandson out of wedlock Ishmael. This in spite of that the Bible tells that Ishmael's "descendants settled in the area from Havilah to Shur, near the border of Egypt, as you go toward Asshur" (1. Mos. 25/18) - which means somewhat east of where the Suez Canal now runs. And also in spite of that modern DNA shows that the Arabs have no specific forefather - they are the mixed result of the mixture of immigrants who drifted into the Arab peninsula when the peninsula was settled. (First the coastal areas and later - after the dromedary was domesticated - also the interior. Beware that the camel was not used further north until much later. It is extremely unlikely Abraham had camels. Camels were not introduced in Abraham's part of the Middle East until around 800 BC, which means 1000 - 1200 years after Abraham, when the Assyrians started trade with the south. We may add that the reference to camels in the Books of Moses, by science is reckoned to be one of the proofs for that those books are written long after Moses, who lived roughly 500 years after Abraham.

Muhammad also claimed that Abraham and Ishmael rebuilt the mosque Kabah (according to Muhammad originally built by Adam - living 600+ miles/1ooo+ km to the east as the crow flies (he likely lived in the delta area in what is now south Iraq) and having to cross the entire and forbidding Arab Desert - - - without the help of camels (not domesticated yet), and Adam according to Islam built the Kabah similar to a model which exists in Heaven). Believe all this - or some of it - if you are able to.

It is not known how many people and animals belonged to Abraham's group, but 1. Mos. 14/14 tells he had 318 trained men "born in his household" = at least 1ooo included women and children. As also big children and youths and for that case women could be shepherds: at least 600 shepherds. As 1 shepherd can look after at least 50-100 animals = at least some 30ooo-60ooo animals. Sheep, goats, cows, donkeys and horses (camels were unknown there until the Assyrians started trade with south Arabia some 1ooo-1200 years later.) The Quran claims Abraham took all these people and animals 750 miles/1200 km to the waterless and grassless valley of Mecca, and lived there for some time, before he returned the same way. Believe it if you are able to.

The Bible gives a reasonably good description of Abraham's travels. According to those he never came even near Arabia, not to mention Mecca. Also modern relevant science in its careful words says that "it highly unlikely Abraham ever visited Mecca". The Bible further mentions the few things Abraham built: They only were a few altars. If he had ever built a big temple/mosque, it is unlikely in the extreme that it had not been mentioned also in the Bible. And there are 2 more relevant facts here: For one thing shepherds or nomads (which is what Abraham was) do not have the knowhow or technology of building huge stone buildings, and for another no sane person spends years (it would take years for Abraham and Ishmael to build the Kabah - it took up to 30 years for large forces of skilled architects, stone workers, etc., working round the year - and LOTS of money - to build one of the big churches in Europe) to build a mosque far too big for his after all small family 500+ miles/800+ km of forbidding desert from where he lived - - - and without camels for travelling back and forth). Once more: Believe the claim if you are able to.

Abraham (1. Mos. 25/2) also had the sons Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, and Shuah, but these are not mentioned in the Quran.

Abraham in the Quran is second prophet only to Muhammad (in the Bible he is not counted among the prophets, even though he likely was - he is counted as the main patriarch of the Jews). He also is one of the 5 special prophets in Islam: Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad). Well, there also were Hud, Salih, and Shu'ayb.

A time line:

  • Adam (and Eve) - unclear when, but likely 4ooo - 5ooo BC (some 4600 BC?) according to religion.
  • Noah - unclear when, likely 3ooo - 4ooo BC. Science has found traces from an extreme flood in the area, a flood which may have been the origin of the story about the Big Flood. This one happened around 3200 BC.
  • Hud - unknown when, but the first of the 3 claimed Arab prophets of the old. Long before Moses.
  • Salih - unknown when. Well before Moses.
  • Abraham and Lot - around 2ooo - 1800 BC according to science.

  • Shu'ayb - 4 generations (some 120 years) after Lot = roughly around 1700 BC. The last one of the 3 claimed Arab prophets of the old.
  • Moses - Exodus according to science was around 1235 BC, which means he was in Midian ca. 1275 to 1235 BC. If he was 80 when Exodus started and lived 40 years more like the Bible says, he lived from ca. 1315 BC to ca. 1195 BC.
  •  

    But a serious problem here is that the information this time line is built on, do not fit the few known facts (another problem is that when you search Internet for facts about Hud/'Ad, Salih/Thamud, Shu'ayb/Madyan/People of the Wood the articles are so dominated by the intention to make the claims in the Quran sound correct, that it is difficult to see what are really facts and what are "adjusted facts" - adjusted by wishful thinking). What seem to be facts, are that if the 'Ad people ever existed, they lived in an area around Ubar in the southeast of the Arab peninsula (somewhere near where Saudi Arabia, Oman, and Yemen meet today). When is unclear, but before the Thamud. We have found no reliable mentioning of them in reliable history.

    The Thamud is said to have lived in al-Hirj, a mountainous area very roughly halfway between Damascus and Mecca. A people named Thamud are mentioned in historical sources, but the very oldest one is connected to the Assyrian king Sargon II and dated to ca. 715 BC - far later than Moses. This people disappeared from historical sources around 600-400 BC. Islam wants their disappearance to have been connected to volcanic eruptions, but we have been unable to find confirmation for volcanic activity in that area around 600-400 BC. Volcanic action in Arabia mainly came to an end some 400ooo years ago.

    Then finally there are the last of the 3 specific Arab claimed prophets, Shu’ayb. He in the Quran is connected to Madyan and to "the People of the Wood". This is somewhat complicated. For one thing it is unclear if "the Madyanites" and "the People of the Wood" were the same or two different people. For another it is unclear where the Bible's Midian was situated. Originally we like many others believed the Bible's Midian and the Quran's Madyan were the same place - in the north-west of the Arab peninsula. But further studies have made us drop this. There are two possible explanations for the Bible's Midian: Moses' Midian may have been to the east of Egypt or to the south of that country - it is not specified in the Bible whether Moses went east or south. If he went south (= along the Nile valley where it was easy to find a living), his Midian was in Sudan. If he went east, it was somewhere east of Egypt. And then the question is: Was the Bible's Midian just the name of a place somewhere, or did it refer to the land of the Midianites (Midian was the 4. of Abraham's 6 sons with his second wife, Keturah - 1. Mos. 25/2). If it was just a geographical name it may have been anywhere - f.x. in Madyan in Arabia. But if it referred to "the land of the Midianites" it was on the Sinai peninsula. If Moses found a Midian to the East of Egypt, this last explanation is the likely one for 2 reasons: For one thing this Midian was on his way east and much closer than Madyan in Arabia, and for another: The Midianites were related to the Jews and a natural place for a fleeing Jew to settle. And what is absolutely sure is that as the Thamud according to history seems to have existed from perhaps 800 to around 600-400 BC, and the Madyanites/Midianites of the Quran lived later according to that book, it is totally impossible that Shu'ayb could be identical to Moses' father-in-law, Jethro, like many Muslims claim - Jethro lived around 1300 - 1350 BC.

    But if the Bible is correct when it tells that Moses met Yahweh and the burning bush at Mt. Horeb, which with a few exceptions the relevant scientists mean is another name for Mt. Sinai, Moses' Midian must have been in Sinai.

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

    *001 2/29f: “- - - He gave order and perfection to the seven firmaments - - -”. Firmament is another word for the heaven we see, though mostly used for the night sky. The Quran many places tells about the seven heavens or firmaments or tracts (the word “heavens” or similar is used in plural in the Quran at least 199 times) - there is no doubt that according to the Quran there are 7 (material) heavens. (Islam also “knows” who inhabit the different heavens - f.x. Jesus in the 2. heaven, Joseph in 4., Aaron in 5., Moses in 6., and Abraham - and Muhammad - in the 7. heaven, and Allah above the 7. heaven, to mention some. This is not said in the Quran, though).

    002 2/39c: “- - - Signs - - -“ also written “Sign”, “His Signs”, “Our (Allah’s*) Signs” or “My (Allah’s*) Signs” or other variations. In “Quran-speak” it means an indication or a proof for Allah’s existence and/or the Quran’s connection to a god (and thus Muhammad's connection to a god). In reality it proves absolutely nothing, as without exception they only are lose statements or as loose claims just hanging in empty air, all built on nothing, because it never is proved or documented that Allah really said or did or created what the Quran in each case claims he said or did or created, and then uses as a “sign”. Or they rest on other claims which are not proved. According to all human thinking, all judicial laws, and also according to the even more strict laws of logic, such “proofs” flatly and simply are invalid and without any value.

    After all a valid proof is: “One or more proved facts which can give only one logical conclusion”, and in the Quran all “signs” without exception build on claimed “facts” which neither the book nor Islam proves – or are able to prove (well, there may be a few exception in the “signs” taken from the Bible, but they in case prove Yahweh, not Allah – we know that Muslims and the Quran like to say that those two just are different names for the same god, but that is not true unless the god is strongly ill mentally (schizophrenic), as the teachings fundamentally are too different (more about this other places in this book and in “1000+ Mistakes in the Quran”.)).

    The same goes for claimed "proofs" in the Quran - extra ironic in those few cases where the claimed proofs are not only invalid, but wrong.

    In addition there is the fact that any priest in any religion can claim exactly the same for his god(s) as Muslims claim for Allah, in absolutely all cases where the words “sign(s)” or "proof(s)" in the Quran are not borrowed from the Bible, as long as no real proof or no real documentation is demanded brought forth – words are that cheap. “Baal makes the sun rise in the east. Allah cannot make it rise in the west. Then Baal is the real god and Allah a fake one.” Infantile “proofs”? - but this is the kind of level you find on the “signs” and “proofs” in the Quran (This example is taken from the Quran – Abraham is proving his god Allah, but of course with Allah as the hero. Totally invalid as a proof).

    003 2/47a: "O Children of Israel! Call to mind the (special) favor which I bestowed upon you, and that I preferred you to all others (for My Message (this seems not to be in the original Arab text, but added by the translator - may be to reduce the value of the message*))." This refers to the Covenant Yahweh made with Abraham and later renewed with the Jews several times - the last time mentioned in the relevant books around 33 AD by Jesus ("the New Covenant" - f.x. Luke 22/20). This has at least one serious implication which Muslims NEVER mention when they scold the Jews for haughtily, etc. believing they will be saved, or at least have a special relationship to Yahweh: This old covenant has never been terminated (though Muslims like to say the opposite), and it is the old covenant Jews rely on, not their relationship to Abraham. Broken and disused and renewed, but never terminated: It has been disused and maltreated, but Yahweh never has ended it. Religious Jews and Israel therefore acted because of the covenant and because they saw a lot of mistakes in the Quran, not because of haughtiness, stupidity, etc. And as you see even the Quran accepts that Israel/the Jews have a special standing onto Yahweh - superstition or not.

    005 2/47b: "- - - Children of Israel! - - -". A time anomaly: The first "children of Israel" were the 12 sons of Jacob, who lived - if he ever lived - around 1800 - 1700 BC. Earlier readers - f.x. Abraham if he knew how to red - would not understand this reference in his claimed Quran. See 4/13d below.

    005 2/85a: "After this (the covenant - the first one was with Abraham around 2ooo-1800 BC, and Muhammad claimed Abraham was the forefather of the Arabs (wrong according to modern DNA, as the Arabs are a hodge-podge of different races originally)) it is ye (Jews*) - - - who slay among yourselves - - -. How can this be in the claimed "Mother Book" written may be billions of years before, and thus copied in the Quran? See 2/51b above.

    006 2/124a: "And remember that Abraham was tried by his Lord - - -." This refers to Abraham being ordered to sacrifice his son. The Bible tells it was Isaac - "his only son" (Ishmael and his Egyptian mother Hagar had been sent away from the home of Abraham, and Isaac was the only one Abraham had left) - whereas Islam claims it was Ishmael. As the Bible makes it clear that Hagar and Ishmael settled near the border of Egypt, Ishmael also was far off when this happened - highly unlikely that Abraham traveled all the way to fetch him for a sacrifice (Islam claims Hagar and Ishmael settled in Mecca - even further off).

    007 2/124b: "- - - Abraham - - -". A time anomaly. The Quran claims that all prophets and messengers for Allah all over the world and to all times received a copy each of the claimed "Mother Book" in heaven. As also the Quran is claimed to be such a copy, all the other copies must have been similar to the Quran - if not they could not be a copy of the same claimed timeless book. Now Homo Sapiens - modern man - goes back 160ooo-200ooo (195ooo?) years - and there were people long before that. Abraham lived - if he ever lived - some 1800-2ooo BC. No claimed prophet/messenger/reader of the claimed parallel to the Quran living before Abraham, would understand anything about what a reference to Abraham meant. But no omniscient god would give meaningless references without explaining what they meant.

    008 2/124c: (Allah said): "I will make you (Abraham*) an Imam (priest) to the Nations". What the Bible says (1.Mos. 22/18): "- - - and through your offspring all nations will be blessed - - -". One should here add 1.Mos. 21/12: (Yahweh said to Abraham): "- - - it is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned". The quote from the Quran is a contradiction to the Bible.

    009 2/124d: (Abraham begged Allah): "And also (Imams) from my offspring!" There is nothing like this in the Bible. Contradiction.

    010 2/124e: (Abraham begged Allah): "And also (Imams) from my offspring!" How can this be in the claimed "Mother Book" written may be billions of years before? See 2/51b above. Impossible if man has even a little bit of free will.

    011 2/125d: “- - - the Station of Abraham (Maqam-e-Ibrahim*)- - -“. This in reality is a mark in a stone in Mecca. The Quran indicates and Islam says that it is a mark from Abraham’s feet when he made the Kabah. Let the fact that Abraham never was in Mecca (unless Islam proves it – see 2/127a below) alone: No – absolutely no – worker building a house ever stood at one and the same place long enough to make a mark in a natural stone visible 1400 years later. It has never happened any time or any place in the world. This flatly is a fairy tale and strongly contradicted both by reality and by the intelligence of any human able to think for him-/herself. Now, Islam tells the mark (actually 2 - one for each foot) is a result of a miracle, as they claim the stone turned so soft that Abraham's feet sank into it. (They also claim that the stone is from Jannah - the gardens of Heaven). Believe it if you want to.

    Well, Islam has till now not even proved that Abraham even ever visited Mecca, a place that was very prohibiting for him and his big flocks of animals - "a barren desert" to quote Muslims, and his claimed first trip even was before the Zamzam well even was found, and thus there was no water at all according to Islam - laying behind forbidding desert lands through which he had to lead all his sheep, goats, cows, etc. and find food and water for them - and he had many as he was a rich man. (Islam claims that later visits only were by camels - but as there was no first visit, there also was no second one. Besides Abraham did not have camels - they were not introduced in his part of the Middle East until around 800 BC, when the Assyrians started trade with the south.) And on top of all a place very far from where he lived and a place without any attractions for a big owner of cattle, etc. Believe it whoever wants - but go to a doctor if you believe this and the rest of that story (big stone mosque built by 2 nomads, Ishmael bringing a big stone - far too big to lift (builders normally are more practical minded) - for his father to stand on, and a stone shining so strongly that Allah had to switch off its light according to Hadiths) without reasonable proofs.

    Just for the records: Science tells that "it is practically sure Abraham never visited Mecca". That he on top should have built a big mosque there - even a so big one that when the rich Mecca around 600 AD remade it, they could not afford to make it as big as the old foundations showed, according to Hadiths - is reckoned by science to be a fairy tale.

    Added 5. Apr. 2013 AD: Quoted from the Scandinavian newspaper Aftenposten published today, where professor emeritus (in physics) Redvald Skullerud says: "(It is claimed that Abraham*) used camels for transport some 1200 years before the camel was introduced as a transport animal in the area, when the Assyrians started trade with South Arabia". As you see it is an accepted scientific fact that even though the dromedary was domesticated and somewhat used in South Arabia (Oman?), it was not introduced further north until a long time - 1ooo+ years - after Abraham, and then as a transport animal. To use it as a riding animal came even later. And without the camel, it would be impossible for Abraham to go back and forth between Canaan and the dry desert valley where Mecca later came - crossing rough and forbidding big deserts. Abraham's claimed connection to Mecca is an impossibility.

    If somebody thinks it unlikely that it took so long time for the use of camels to spread to Sinai, we may add that it took another some 1ooo-1100 hundred years for the use to spread on to Sahara, where the Carthaginians started to use them around 300 AD. This in spite of that between Sinai and Sahara there mainly only is the Nile Valley.

    ##012 2/125e: "We (Allah*) covenanted with Abraham and Ishmael - - -". The Bible is contradicting: (1.Mos.17/21) Yahweh says: "But my covenant I will make with Isaac". And many years later to Isaac's son Jacob (and now Ishmael is totally out of the picture) similar words like the ones which were said to Abraham 2 generations earlier (1.Mos. 28/14): "All peoples on earth will be blessed through you and your offspring". There is no doubt according to the Bible with which branch of Abraham's descendants the god covenanted. Even if the Arabs really were descendants of Ishmael, they had belonged to the wrong branch of the family - they were not the offspring of Jacob, and not even of Isaac. And it is likely this might be the reality - at the time when the Torah was written, there was no reason for the writers to place Ishmael and his descendants at the border of Egypt (1.Mos. 25/18) if he really lived in Arabia - Muhammad and his competing religion still were 1000 years into the unknown future when it was written. But for Muhammad the situation was different: It is quite common for emerging sects and religions to "high-jack" parts of a mother religion - it gives "weight" and tradition to the new sect/religion. For Muhammad it would pay to "take over" a known name like Ishmael. It obviously also would pay for him to take over the claimed center of the religious word - even a made up claim works if people believe in it.

    Another fact: Modern DNA-analysis has shown that the Arabs are no coherent tribe. They are a mixture of many nations - not strange when first being settled by people from all around, and then lying at a crossroad with travelers passing thought, and where sex and alcohol were "the two delightful things" until Muhammad took over. And also Arab tradesmen brought brides and slaves back home even long before Muhammad, not to mention all the slave women who were brought home after the robberies made the Arabs rich enough to afford more/many women - likely in the millions only from black Africa. The "Arab Blood" is strongly diluted and mixed up, and even was never a homogenous tribe originally.

    What the Bible really says about Ishmael in relevant connections is:

    (1. Mos. 16/7): The pregnant Hagar fled from Abraham and Sarah (then named Sarai - not mentioned in the Quran), and "The angel of the Lord found Hagar near a spring in the desert; it was the spring that is beside the road to Shur". Shur was a desert area east of the Gulf of Suez in Egypt. Shur extended southwards past the northern end of the Red Sea, "opposite Egypt" = roughly east of where the Suez Canal now runs and a little down the east side of the Red Sea. 1): Hagar may have headed towards her home country Egypt. 2): Abraham had to be far west - and very far from Arabia/Mecca - for her to find that road, as that road run inland from the Mediterranean Sea (far inland but in that region).

    (1. Mos. 20/1): "Now Abraham moved - - - into the region of Negev and lived between Kadesh and Shur. Kadesh was a town West of the southern end of the Dead sea, between the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean Sea, and a bit more than halfway to the Mediterranean Sea. The desert of Shur was west of Kadesh direction Egypt and near the Gulf of Suez in Egypt and southwards past the northern end of the Red Sea. (You will meet Muslims claiming Kadesh was in or near Mecca, and others claiming it was near Petra in Jordan - necessary to be able to move the Paran desert area to the Faran Mountain and the Faran Wilderness on the Arab peninsula, rename it Paran like the Muslims have done, and claim this Paran/Faran is the Paran of the Bible? (- even though there is no doubt where the Paran of the Bible was - there is a little too much of this kind of dishonesty in Islam.)) But to tell Abraham settled between Shur, near Egypt, and Jordan or Mecca is not even comical - Muslims often are very clever at finding solutions they want to find, but forgetting or "forgetting" details - or big things - making the claimed solution wrong or invalid.) The point here is that Abraham now was living in Negev in the west, not so very far from the Mediterranean Sea area, and in the region where the road to Shur and on to Egypt crossed. The Bible tells when Abraham made major moves, and it does not mention that Abraham left this region until after Isaac was born and after Hagar and Ishmael (who must have been something like 14 - 16 years by then - he was born when Abraham was 86 years (1. Mos. 16/16) and circumcised when Abraham was 99 and Ishmael 13 years old (1. Mos. 17/24-25), and this was a bit later) had left Abraham's camp. Which indicates that Hagar and Ishmael left his camp in this area - something which may correspond well with that they took the road to Shur and on to the border of her homeland, Egypt, and settled there like the Bible tells: 1. Mos. 25/18: ""His (Ishmael's*) descendants settled in the area from Havilah to Shur, near the border of Egypt". The desert of Shur is well known, but this Havilah (there is another connected to the Garden of Eden) is not clearly located, but is believed to have been in the southern part of Palestine. (We may add that Muslim sources we find on Internet - f.x. www.jamaat.net/compl/arabsinthebible.html - admits that "the wilderness of Paran" = Faran in Arabic. A similarity of the names have become a certainty for that the Arab Faran = Abraham's Faran for Islam. Proofs often come easy for Muslims.)

    (1. Mos. 21/12-13): "But God/Yahweh said to him (Abraham*), 'Do not be so distressed about the boy (Ishmael*) and your maidservant (Hagar - Ishmael's mother*). Listen to what Sarah (Abraham's wife*) tells you, because it is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned. I will make the son of your maidservant into a nation also, because he is your offspring".

    (1. Mos. 21/14): "She (Hagar) went on her way and wandered in the desert of Beersheba", which meant that she had to leave Abraham somewhere in what is now the south of Israel (Beersheba itself is some 70 miles (ca. 115 km) south of Tel Aviv) in a part of the Negev desert bordering or part the Paran area bordering Sinai - Sinai as you most likely know is a peninsula to the southwest of Israel, bordering Egypt (the Arabian peninsula is to the southeast and with the Acaba Bay between it and the Sinai peninsula).

    (1. Mos.21/15): "When the water in the skin was gone, she put the boy under one of the bushes". It would not be possible for Hagar to walk to Mecca - hundreds of miles through hot desert - with the only water she had was one water skin. (Besides there was no sane reason for her to walk that way - this even more so as she was not from Arabia, and had absolutely no known connection to that area, but was from Egypt = in the west.)

    (1. Mos. 21/18): "- - - I (Yahweh*) will make him into a great nation". See further down.

    (1. Mos. 21/21): "While he (Ishmael*) lived in the desert of Paran, his mother (Hagar*) got a wife for him from Egypt". Muslims dearly wants Paran to mean Faran in Arabia (the name really was Faran, but has become Paran because Muslims wanted it to be a reference from the Bible), but Paran Desert was an area south of Canaan - and south of Beersheba - bordering North Sinai and reaching towards Elath. The name of the area today is el-Tih. The Desert of Paran also contained the Mountain of Paran mentioned in 5. Mos. 33/2. As Paran bordered Canaan, Moses sent his 12 spies into Canaan from here (from in or near the town of Kadesh) - if he had sent them from Paran/Faran in Arabia, they first would have had to cross hundreds of miles - and kilometers - of forbidding desert to reach Canaan. And how far would Hagar have had to travel to find a wife from Egypt to him? (It is typical for Muslim argumentation to produce claims where details - or not details - are omitted to get the (made up) argument they want - you meet this technique a bit too often. (Occam's Brush.) It is one of the problems we meet when studying Islamic literature - all information has to be checked, because you never know what is true and what is f.x. an al-Taqiyya (lawful lie), a Kitman (lawful half-truth), or even just wishful thinking helped by invalid logic (Muslims often jumps from "this may be a possibility" or even weaker to "it is like this") to make things fit the Quran. It may seem like many Muslims in addition are little trained in the use of the laws of logic and in critical thinking.)) (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.)

    But the Muslims' high-jacking of Paran has one good effect: They have placed lots of pictures from Paran/Faran in Arabia on Internet. Paran/Faran itself is a mountain, and the wilderness is lying near and mainly north of Mecca, and Abraham would have had to cross the large desert now called the Paran Wilderness by Muslims to reach Mecca - and live in it, as Mecca used to be similar to this at that time. Open some of the pages and look at the pictures: How tempted would Abraham be to go into hundreds of miles of this with all his cattle? And how tempted to build a temple in Mecca when living in or near Canaan, and having to go back and forth through that rough wilderness each time he wanted a prayer or sermon? - - - without even having a camel (1ooo+ years too early). Exactly not at all. (This in addition to that it is well known where the real Paran from the Bible was).

    (1. Mos. 25/16): "These (the 12 sons of Ishmael*) are the names of the 12 tribal rulers - - -" = the great nation mentioned in 1. Mos.21/18 - Muslims never mention this verse. (But there is a large difference between a promise to make them a great nation and a covenant. Also remember that a great nation at that time was something different from today - f.x. Abraham with his 318 men beat the combined forces of 4 kings in battle near Dan (1. Mos. 14/14-15))

    (1. Mos. 25/18): "His (Ishmael's*) descendants settled in the area from Havilah to Shur (see above*), near the border of Egypt, as you go toward Asshur (= eastwards*)". One more verse Muslims never - never - mention.

    (1. Mos. 25/18): "And they (the sons of Ishmael) lived in hostility toward all their brothers". Also this a verse Muslims never mention - perhaps because they want it to have been a good relationship so that there still could be a brotherhood when Moses made his speech in 5. Mos. 500 - 700 years later, and when Muhammad came some 2500 years later - - - if the Arabs are descendants from among many, many others Ishmael.

    There are two ways to understand this sentence: They lived in hostility towards each other, or they lived in hostility towards the sons of their uncle Isaac. As it is said in 1. Mos. 21/18 that they - the 12 tribes descending from Ishmael - became a great nation, the second meaning is the likely one. May be partly for this reason, the descendants of Ishmael are never in the Bible reckoned by the Jews to be relatives, or at least very, very distant such ones.

    All this points to that Hagar and Ishmael left the camp of Abraham in west Negev, took the road towards Shur, direction Egypt and settled near the border of Egypt, likely north the desert Shur - i.e. between Shur and the Mediterranean Sea somewhere - - - pretty far from Arabia and Mecca, and in nearly exactly the opposite direction.

    There also is another point to include: The camel likely was domesticated at the time of Abraham. But it did not come into wide use until around 1ooo-900 BC, and it seems that it even then only was used for working and carrying, not or very little for riding. Science even knows that it was not introduced in the area where Abraham lived until around 800 BC = 1000+ years after Abraham. (F.x. the first time one knows camels were used in a battle, was in a battle between the kings Croesus of Lydia and Cyrus the Great in 547 BC, where Cyrus used PACKING camels (for want of riding ones) to frighten Croesus' horses, who were not used to camels.) If Abraham had no camels, the valley of later Mecca, some 750 miles/1200 km or whatever depending on where he started, was a long walk - and as long return. Each time.

    One final and partly different point: As mentioned costal Arabia was settled around 5ooo BC (or earlier). The interior was settled 2ooo-3ooo or more later. By 1800 BC the peninsula had a reasonably big population. Even if Ishmael took all his 12 sons and moved to Arabia, how big percent of the total population of Arabia would they make up? In other words: How big percent of the forefathers of the Arabs of today, or at the time of Muhammad, did Ishmael represent? - a small number behind a lot of zeroes behind a comma. Even in the unlikely case that Ishmael had settled in Arabia and not near Egypt, Arabs 2400 years later (Muhammad) or 3800 years later (today) were/are not the descendants of Ishmael, but the descendants of all the people living in Arabia in the old times, of which Ishmael in case had made up only a miniscule part of a percent (for the Jews the picture is a bit different, because of the restrictions on marrying outside the group - a restriction often broken, but all the same relatively effective). This in addition to all later mixing with people from the outside, included hundreds of thousands (likely a some millions) slave girls imported to a miserable life in the harems of Arabs before and after Muhammad.

    Also see 2/127a below.

    Added 5. Apr. 2013 AD: Quoted from the Scandinavian newspaper Aftenposten published today, where professor emeritus (in physics) Redvald Skullerud says: "(It is claimed that Abraham*) used camels for transport some 1200 years before the camel was introduced as a transport animal in the area when the Assyrians started trade with South Arabia". As you see it is an accepted scientific fact that even though the dromedary was domesticated and somewhat used in South Arabia, it was not introduced further north until a long time - 1ooo+ years - after Abraham, and then as a transport animal. To use it as a riding animal came even later. And without the camel, it would be impossible for Abraham to go back and forth between Canaan and the dry desert valley where Mecca later came - crossing rough and forbidding big deserts. Abraham's claimed connection to Mecca is an impossibility.

    We may add that Muslim sources we find on Internet - f.x. www.jamaat.net/compl/arabsinthebible.html - admits that "the wilderness of Paran" = Faran in Arabic = only a change of name to make it sound like the real Paran.

    013 2/125g: "- - - the House - - -". Kabah mosque in Mecca. The Quran claims one place the foundation was made by Abraham and Ishmael, another place that the original building was made by the two, (but on foundations made by Adam according to . There are too many reasons why this is not true - see 2/127a below.

    014 2/125i: “- - - We covenanted with Abraham and Ishmael, that they should sanctify my House (Kabah in Mecca*)”. Not mentioned in the Bible - and as the Bible tells even about the altar, the grave, etc. Abraham built, it is highly unlikely they forgot to mention a huge temple. Besides: Abraham and Ishmael had nothing to do with the building of the Kabah - see 2/127a below.

    015 2/125j: "- - - Abraham - - -". See 2/124a+c above and 4/13d below.

    016 2/125l: "- - - they should sanctify my House (Kabah in Mecca*) - - -." The Quran claims Abraham was in what was to become Mecca because he had left Hagar and Ishmael there years before - two claims never documented (and wrong according to the Bible), but which according to A: "The Message of the Quran" used to be an old Arab tradition (do an omniscient god have to listen to legends?). This is contradicting the Bible (1.Mos. 21/14): "She (Hagar*) went on her way and wandered in the desert of Beersheba". Beersheba was and is in the south part of Palestine - far from Arabia and Mecca.

    What is more: According to the Bible (1. Mos. 25/18) Hagar - who was from Egypt - and her son settled near Egypt, not Arabia: "- - - his descendants settled in the area from Havila to Shur, near the border of Egypt, as you go toward Asshur" (1.Mos. 25/18).

    Islam never mentions the last part of this, and explains Beersheba away with claiming that all desert south of Beersheba used to be called "the wilderness of Beersheba" and the Paran desert they explain away with that there was a mountain in near Mecca named Paran - or originally Faran - and what is the difference between "desert" and "mountain" - or between "Paran" and "Faran"? - voila: As Faran is near Mecca, Paran has been in Arabia, it must have happened in Arabia!! (It normally is called the wilderness or the desert of Paran by Muslims today - and on Internet you find a lot of claims for that this was the Biblical Paran. Take a look at them and see how likely it is that Abraham would take his large flocks of sheep, etc. through long distances of such landscape to reach an empty desert valley with no known water (the Zamzam was not discovered until a little later according to the Quran.))

    The problem is that Arabia and Arabs are mentioned at least 15 times in OT (see 2/42d above) - so the makers of the OT clearly knew the difference between Beersheba and Arabia - and Egypt - and especially when so large distances were involved. Also they knew what a desert was, and the difference between a desert and a mountain. The Mormons claim Jesus visited USA - they have yet to prove it. Muslims claim Abraham visited Mecca - they have yet to prove it. But of course such claims make good anchors to "solid religious ground" as long as they can evade questions for proofs.

    Also see 2/125e above and 2/127a below.

    017 2/125-132: This is too long to quote, but it is clear that according to the Quran Abraham was a devote Muslim and bowed to Allah in Islam long before Muhammad. These verses thus clearly contradict the verse 6/14 and some others in one of the two possible meanings of that verse. See 6/14 below. Not to mention that it contradicts the OT where Abraham is said to believe in Yahweh.

    018 2/126a: “- - - Abraham said: ‘Make this (Mecca*) a City Of Peace - - -.” Wrong. Abraham never was in Mecca, unless Islam produces solid proofs for it. See 2/125d above and 2/217a below.

    019 2/126b: “- - - Abraham said: ‘Make this (Mecca*) a City Of Peace - - -.” This is not from the Bible, the only known source for information about Abraham. And as the Quran also is not from a god - too much is wrong in the book - from where did Muhammad get these pieces of information? The only sources possible are legends, fairy tales, or fantasy.

    020 2/126c: “- - - Abraham said: ‘Make this (Mecca*) a City Of Peace - - -.” This is quite a contradiction, both with reality, as at the time of Muhammad 2500 years later, Mecca was not a really old city, and with the Quran. The Quran tells that Hagar run around in this empty desert valley where Mecca once in the r future became situated, finding neither people nor water after being left by Abraham when Abraham already was some 101 years old. And here Abraham all the same talks about "this City" Mecca!

    021 2/126e: "- - - make this (Mecca*) a City of Peace - - -". This is a special time anomaly (see 4/13d below), as not even Abraham could understand what this referred to - Mecca is much younger than Abraham, and the city did not exist at his time. A clear mistake (notice that he said "this" not "what will come here" or something similar).

    ##022 2/127a: “And remember that Abraham and Ishmael raised the foundations of the House (Kabah*) (with this prayer): - - - “. Abraham never built the foundation of Kabah (and a contradiction; other verses say he built the building, not only the foundation of it) - and there are several reasons for this:

    1. He was born in Ur in Chaldea (if he really existed) in what is now south Iraq. Together with his father, (Terah according to the Bible (1. Mos. 11/26-32), Azar in the Quran (6/74)), he later travelled northwest up along the Euphrates valley to Haran in what is now north Iraq. Years later he continued south-southwest to Canaan and the town Sikem in what is now Israel (Sikem is north of Jerusalem. It is now named Nablus). That is to say he travelled along the so-called Fertile Crescent - the natural route when you travel with flocks of animals. The alternative was to take a shortcut through the Arab desert, but few of his numerous sheep and goats and cows would survive such a trip. He never visited Mecca on his way from Ur to Sikem. (Besides this was too early in the story - Ishmael was not born yet, and he is a part of the building of the Kabah according to the Quran).
    2. Abraham then settled in the western part of Canaan (now approximately Israel), whereas his nephew Lot settled in the Jordan valley and in the Arabah Valley south of the Dead Sea further east. Later Abraham moved south to Negev in Sinai. Negev today is most known for its desert, but not all was desert. All this is according to the Bible, but the Quran has no conflicting information, except that his father had another name, and that he quarreled with his father about Allah, which is not told in the Bible (on the contrary - they lived together for decades). The point is that between Canaan and Mecca and also between West Negev and Mecca are hundreds and hundreds of miles or kilometers of the tough and dry and hot Arab desert. Abraham was rich and had huge flocks of animals. He could not take those huge flocks of sheep, etc., through Lot's area and then through that desert, and especially so when there was no reason for doing it.
    3. Abraham lived hundreds of miles from Mecca - and had to cross harsh terrain to get to and from (see 2/125d above). Nobody builds a big temple for himself and his family at a place they can never or nearly never visit.
    4. Abraham was a nomad. Nomads do not have the know-how and technology to build large stone buildings.
    5. Hadiths tell than when Mecca restored the Kabah some years before Muhammad took over, they rebuilt it smaller than Abraham's(?) foundations. Which means that the nomad Abraham and his son built so big, that it was too big and too expensive for the full city of Mecca to rebuild in the same size. A nomad and his son building that big a temple for himself and his small family, even though he lived hundreds of miles away and at the very best hardly ever could visit the place? Of course you are free to believe it if you want.
    6. Abraham and Lot split up for practical reasons - Lot moved east whereas Abraham moved west (1. Mos. 13/11-12). Arabia and the place which was to become Mecca many generations later was to the east - much further east and south than even Lot settled.
    7.  

      (1. Mos. 14/6): "- - - in the Hill country of Seir, as far as El Paran near the desert". Seir was the hilly country east of the southern end of the Dead Sea. To the west of this was the Arabah Valley (running from Elath to the Dead Sea), and west across that valley you met the Paran Desert - quite a long way from Mecca.

    8. Abraham simply was not involved in the building of Kabah, and it is highly unlikely he ever visited Mecca or even the Arab peninsula. It looks like a fairy tale made up to give weight to Kabah and to Islam. And not least to give weight to Muhammad, who 2500 years later could tell he was direct descendant from Abraham - without the slightest written paper from all those years. 2500 years of mostly an-alphabetic nomads without any written history. Believe it if you want – and if you know who were all your forefathers the year 500 BC (= ca. 2500 years ago), as after 2500 years you have, and Muhammad had a large number of them (something like 80 generations give you quite a number of forfeiters, not only one - Abraham - like Muhammad claimed).

       

      Also Abraham did not have camels. The camel was not introduced that far north until the Assyrians started trade to the south around 800 BC. Without camels the claimed long treks through the rough deserts were impossible.

      It also is worth adding that Muslims say - like normal without one single proof - that Mecca was where Abraham’s (or actually Sarah’s) slave, Hagar, and his and her child Ismail (Ishmael) were sent away from Abraham’s camp, that the two lived there, and that Abraham frequently visited them later. There is no source of information for this. The OT says they lived in Negev, which is weeks by camel (which they did not have) from Mecca - and much, much longer for large flocks of sheep, goats, and cattle (American cowboys driving flocks of cattle to the railway, made 10-12 miles – 16-20 km - a day. The nomads in the south hardly moved any faster - - - if they could find water). In addition to the long time it would take, many animals hardly would survive the long trek through the harsh Arab desert with little food and hardly any water. And there was in addition no reason for him and his family to take such a dangerous and meaningless trip with their animals to a barren and dry valley. And as he never visited Mecca, he could not have left Hagar and Ismail there (this even more so as the Bible mention that Ishmael lived near the border of Egypt and got his wife from Egypt (see below) - - - and science and Islam both have proved that the Bible is not falsified (Islam has delivered a very strong proof by being unable to find even one clear falsification among all the tens of thousands of relevant old manuscripts) - the easy way out for Muslims when the Bible mentions things they do not like). If Islam wants to insist that he ever visited Mecca, they have to produce strong proofs, as it is extremely unlikely - and “special statements demand special proofs”. It is highly likely this just is a story made up or “borrowed” from f.x. Arab folklore to give the teachings of Muhammad credence.

    9. One more fact: The Bible – a book which Islam insists is correct every time there is some text they like, but which may be the truth other times, too - says (1. Mos. 21/21): “While he (Ishmael*) was living in the Desert of Paran, his mother got a wife for him from Egypt”. Except for religious Muslims who strongly wishes this to be a reference to Paran or Faran near Mecca, all serious scientists say that this was Paran in or bordering Sinai - - - which also made it easier for his mother (who was from Egypt) to find him a wife from Egypt even though that made his children ¾ Egyptian and only ¼ descendants of Abraham’s stock (there is mentioned only one wife for Ishmael). Also remember that the old Egyptians were not Arabs, even if modern Egyptians often are called Arabs - where is the pure Arab blood of Ishmael's descendant?
    10. Further (1. Mos. 25/18): “His (Ishmael’s) descendants settled in the area from Havilah to Shur, near the border of Egypt, as you go toward Asshur”. The border of Egypt means near the Red Sea or north of the Red Sea up to the Gulf of Suez. Just where scientists place Paran - it run from there and towards Elath. (It is a bit ironic that Islam say the Bible has the name correct, (but claim it is meaning Faran in Arabia), but all the rest of the information about place, wife from (neighboring) Egypt, etc. wrong. Though if you go looking, you will find that according to Islam, the Bible never has a mistake and is reliable when what it says fits Islam. Only when it tells things or facts that contradicts Islam, the Bible is falsified - or like here one simply omits the contradicting facts - - - which one safely can do, as hardly any Muslim knows the Bible well enough to see the cherry-picking of information, unless he has higher religious education). And NB: This was written 1000 or more years before Muhammad, and thus with no reason to place Ishmael far from Arabia if it was not the truth.
    11.   There also is another fact: The Bible reports on what Abraham built: He built an altar at Shechem (1. Mos. 12/6-7), an altar at Betel (1. Mos. 12/8), and an altar at Mamre, near Hebron (1. Mos. 13/18) - altars simply were a regular heap of natural, not artificially formed stones - - - and that is it. This is all the Bible tells he built (except for Sarah's grave, but that was not a building, but a cave (1. Mos. 23/19)). Then the Quran claims he suddenly built a huge temple (mosque), a big stone building which for one thing is far outside the know-how of a nomad to build, and for another thing is situated far away from all places Abraham ever was (as far as we can find the nearest he ever was Mecca, was Hebron, a good number of miles (multiply wit 1.6 to get km) south of Bethlehem. And not least: The building of this big temple is not at all mentioned in the Bible, even if it had to take a number of years to build it - Solomon with his enormous resources and his army of highly qualified builders (though no jinns, etc. like the Quran claims) used 7 years to build his temple (1. Kings 6/38), and a big church in medieval Europe could take up to 30 years. These years of building the Kabah is not in any way mentioned in the Bible - neither the building, nor the years it took, nor when it was done. Actually the time and resources it took also is not mentioned in the Quran - it just is indicated (though not directly said) that the Kabah was built during one or a few short visits to Mecca, and nothing about the skill and resources needed and the time it takes for building such a big temple/mosque. No comments - and none necessary.

     

    Besides:To go all the way to Mecca as mentioned was too forbidding for a man with large flocks of animal – and there never was a reason to go there for Abraham. On the contrary: Little food for his animals, no water in Mecca before the Zamzam was found later (?) – and Ishmael living “near the border of Egypt”. Abraham never was in Mecca and consequently never built the Kabah – the big temple that he anyhow did not have the know-how to build, and worse; could not use, because he lived the better part of 1000 km away (this even more so as he could not travel "as the crow flees", but had to go as the cow grazes). And one he did not need as it was far too big for his small family - 2 sons included Ishmael, one wife and some workers. This claim, too, is a clear contradiction to the Bible.

    Also remember that science clearly says: "It is practically sure that Abraham never visited Mecca" (and the claim that he built the Kabah, they do not even bother to comment on). And: The ones writing OT some 9oo-1400 or may be a bit more before Muhammad started his preaching - even if they had falsified the scriptures, they had no reason to falsify Abraham out of Arabia as Muhammad and his religion was unknown to them. And: Abraham as said had his pastures in the west whereas Lot had chosen the eastern area (1. Mos. 13/11-12) - i.e. according to the agreement between them, Lot's pastures were around and south of the Dead Sea towards Acaba, whereas Abraham grazed his cattle in the western parts of Canaan and later in Negev, both nearer the Mediterranean Sea. Which means that to visit Mecca, Abraham had to move all his cattle from the Mediterranean region and all the way through Lot's area down to Ababa, and then through the forbidding desert to Mecca - a place in or near the Faran Wilderness, a wilderness which now Muslims now have renamed Paran (Muslim sources on Internet admits that the real Arab name was Faran - but you f.x. meet Muslims claiming that Faran just is the Arab name, and that it is named Paran by others - - - a well chosen "explanation" as Muslims saw the name Paran in the Bible, and said: This sounds very like Faran - it must mean Faran. And then they started to tell that Paran, yes, that was in Arabia near Mecca! And foreigners not knowing the real name, used - and use - the new Arab name Paran as they did not and do not know it is wrong - very few non-Arabs know that the correct name of that wilderness is Faran). Just take a look at the pictures from Faran/Paran, Arabia (they today use only the name Paran to be able to claim that Ishmael was there according to the Bible) and see how tempting this area was for a nomad with lots and lots of animals - Abraham was rich. No rich nomad in his right mind would even think of moving hundreds and hundreds of miles - and more in kilometers - from good pastures in the west to dry desert - Mecca did not even have a well, because this according to the Quran was before the Zamzam well was found.

    The scientists are right: Abraham never was in Mecca - and to comment on the claim that he built the Kabah is not even worth to bother about.

    And see 2/125e above.

    Added 5. Apr. 2013 AD: Quoted from the Scandinavian newspaper Aftenposten published today, where professor emeritus (in physics) Redvald Skullerud says: "(It is claimed that Abraham*) used camels for transport some 1200 years before the camel was introduced as a transport animal in the area when the Assyrians started trade with South Arabia". As you see it is an accepted scientific fact that even though the dromedary was domesticated and somewhat used in South Arabia, it was not introduced further north until a long time - 1ooo+ years - after Abraham, and then as a transport animal. To use it as a riding animal came even later. And without the camel, it would be impossible for Abraham to go back and forth between Canaan and the dry desert valley where Mecca later came - crossing rough and forbidding big deserts. Abraham's claimed connection to Mecca is an impossibility.

    023 2/127d: "- - - Abraham and Ishmael raised the foundation of the House (Kabah mosque in Mecca*) - - -". This is never mentioned in the Bible, which it should have been if Yahweh and Allah had been the same god, and if the Kabah was so central and holy for this god like described in the Quran.

    024 2/128b: "Make of us (Abraham and Ishmael*) Muslims - - -". This was some 2500 years before Muhammad and 2500 years before the first time Muslims appeared. In addition science has found not one single trace of a religion similar to Islam (if you omit Jews and Christians who are some percents similar) anywhere in the world older than 610 AD when Muhammad started his preaching. Worse: Also Islam has been unable to find traces from such a religion. It should be unnecessary to mention that this claim also contradicts the Bible.

    025 2/129c: “Our Lord (Allah*)! Send amongst them (Muslims/Arabs*) a Messenger of their own (Abraham said*) - - -". You find nothing like this in the Bible (the nearest may be 5. Mos. 18/15 and 18/18 - Moses making a speech to his followers about among other things their future) - but it is "gefundenes Fressen" for followers of Muhammad - an indication for something. But from where is this indication? As the Quran is not from a god, the most likely source is Muhammad's brain, but the possibility that it came from dark forces or human helpers/advisers cannot be totally omitted. It also is clear from the Bible that Moses was speaking of a Jew, not of an Arab or anyone else from the outside. You have to cherry-pick words and omit much to be able even to claim that perhaps Muhammad is meant - a strange thing to do from a religion claiming you cannot do the same or even use clear statements from the Quran separately, but you have to use also the context to the surah or the entire book, to understand texts correctly.

    026 2/130a: “- - - the religion of Abraham (= Islam*) - - -.” (Falsification?*) The Quran often claims that Islam = the religion of Abraham. But it always was an only is a claim – no proof, no documentation - not even a try to explain, except the undocumented and not proved claim that everyone who say something else are lying, and that other scriptures which science deems more reliable (not proved 100% for each separately, but far more likely to be true - and 100% seen all together) are falsifications, even though science has shown that they are not falsified – may be are not everything true in the Bible, too, but science has clearly shown it is not falsified. Actually when you see all the tens of thousands of manuscripts together (some 300 copies or fragments of the Gospels, some 13ooo copies or fragments from the Bible, some 32ooo manuscripts with quotations from the Bible - all from before 610 AD) - each and every saying the same except for normal variations for hand-written documents, and not one of them with marks from "doctoring" the text, the proof is more than 100% - especially when you remember that also Islam, in spite of 1400 years of more or less intensive search for proofs, has found exactly nothing - they even are so hard up that they use apocryphal - known false - scriptures for arguments! - like if we had used Hadiths Islam and others know are false ones.) If Islam claims something, they will have to produce proofs, not only claims which are not even based on a likely theory about how all the thousands of different manuscript shall have had so many chapters and verses falsified in exactly the same way – spread over the entire world one knew at that time. All which Islam offers, is a stubborn claim – not even a theory about how it should be possible to falsify everything, or about why all the thousands of old manuscripts that science knows, show it is not falsified. Not to mention how to make Jews and Christians make just the same falsifications - f.x. about foretelling about Jesus. For comparison: Islam's claims about falsifications of the Bible are not proved even 0,01%. They only are claims. Claims with 0.00% proof - nothing at all.

    No proof of falsification. No documentation of falsification even though there exist thousands of documents. Only a stubborn claim based on nothing but a book with lots of mistakes, dictated by a man with questionable moral and a lust for power and riches for bribes and women, to say the least of it.

    Actually the very best proof for that there are no falsifications in the Bible is produced not by science, but by Islam: The fact that they have been unable to find even one falsification in accordance with their claims in all those tens of thousands of relevant manuscripts - is a 110% proof for that there is not one falsification in all those papers. If there had been, Islam had found them - and yodeled loudly about it. Also see 2/75b above and 3/24d and 3/77a below.

    Not to forget that it is strongly proved that the old manuscripts have not been tampered with.

    027 2/132b: "- - - Jacob - - -". The last of the 3 main Jewish patriarchs. He was the grandson of Abraham - - - and not a single reader of the claimed copies of the timeless "Mother Book" could understand a reference to him until well after he was born. Parallel to 2/124a+c above. Also see 4/13d below.

    028 2/132f: (Both Abraham and Jacob said before they died):"Die not except in the Faith of Islam". To say the least of it: Strongly contradicted by the Bible. 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. And one may add: This is one of the kinds of stealing from "mother" and other religions which is quite normal in emerging sects and "daughter" religions - can this have been the case here?

    029 2/132g: (Both Abraham and Jacob said before they died):"Die not except in the Faith of Islam". What then if Islam is a made up religion? - as the Quran is full of errors, it at least is from no god, so this is a real possibility. F.x. where will the believers in a brutal war religion believing in dishonesty, end if that religion is a made up one (f.x. by a cold or sick brain wanting power and riches for bribes and women), if there instead is a real and benevolent god at "the other side"?

    030 2/133c: "- - - (the god) of Abraham, Ishmael and Isaac - - -". This was said when Jacob died according to the Quran (you do not find this in the Bible). At that time Ishmael's descendants already were 3/4 Egyptian (both Ishmael's mother and wife were from Egypt (1.Mos. 20/21)) and they were living in hostility to the descendants of Isaac and Jacob (1.Mos. 25/18). They also were outside the covenant line through Isaac (1.Mos. 20/12). If you know a little about people, how likely is it that Ishmael was mentioned here?. (But Muhammad needed "quotes" like this to connect his new religion to an old one.)

    031 2/133f: "- - - Isaac - - -". A time anomaly. Isaac was the second son of Abraham and the son through whom the covenant with Yahweh should pass, according to the Bible (1. Mos. 21/12). He also was the second of the 3 main Jewish patriarchs. If he ever lived, he lived around 1900 - 1700 BC. And we are back to the old fact that as the claimed "Mother Book" in Heaven of which the Quran is claimed to be a copy, was made before man was created or even to have existed since eternity and never created, the many copies claimed by the Quran to be sent down to thousands of claimed prophets and messengers for Allah through all times have to be similar to the Quran, as they are copies of the same everlasting book. But no reader of such a Quran could understand references to Isaac - and to many others in the Quran - until after Isaac at least was born - - - and Homo Sapiens had existed perhaps 160ooo - 200ooo years before that and according to the Quran had been sent prophets, etc. with such books all the time and all places - and in addition there were all the older races of humans. There is no meaning in sending down claimed holy books full of references the readers could not understand (this on top of the fact that except for the last few millennia even prophets could not read). Also see 4/13d below.

    032 2/135d: “- - - the Religion of Abraham - - -". There is nowhere any indication for that Abraham's religion was Islam. There only are Muhammad's claims. (According to the Bible - the only known perhaps reliable source - his god was Yahweh, not Allah.)

    033 2/135e: “- - - the Religion of Abraham, the True (religion*) - - -“. According to the Quran, Abraham was a Muslim. But looking at all the other mistakes and twisted logic and stories in the Quran and at the (not falsified) texts in the Bible, Islam will have to produce real proofs for that that was true. Also see 2/130a and 2/132d above.

    034 2/135h: (Abraham) "joined not gods with Allah". According to the Bible Abraham's god was Yahweh. (Islam likes to claim - but like always never prove - that Yahweh = Allah, but the basics of those two teachings are fundamentally so different that this is impossible, unless the god is mentally ill). Also see 2/132a above and 2/255a below.

    035 2/135i: (Abraham) "joined not gods with Allah". Neither do Jews nor Christians. They only have one god, Yahweh. If Muhammad - and Muslims - does/do not understand the Trinity (Muhammad here was completely lost, mixing Mary into it), that is his/their problem - Christians understand it and know there only is one god, Yahweh (even though less than 10% of the Christians know this name, and only call him God.) Also see 2/255a, 6/106b and 25/18a below.

    036 2/136c: "- - - the revelation given to us (Muhammad*), and to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes (the 12 Jewish tribes*) and that given to Moses and Jesus, and given to (all) the Prophets (Hadiths mention the number 124ooo prophets during all times and all places!) - - -". The Quran as you see claims that all prophets to all times each has got their copy of the Quran - or to be more correct a copy of the same revered "mother book" in Heaven which the Quran is a copy of according to Islam. It must have been informative for the claimed Inuit prophets in North Canada to read about the blessed shade from the sun and the fruits and camels everyone knew, or for one in the really old England to read about the blessed rain.

    Science has found exactly not one trace from neither the claimed prophets, nor the claimed Islamic religion, nor from any of the claimed books, nor from a claimed god like Muhammad's version of the old pagan god Allah - not even a reference. Whereas from the Bible there are more than 40ooo manuscripts, fragments or quotations older than 610 AD - manuscripts only referring to but not quoting the Bible, not included. Worse: Also Islam has found not one proved falsification strengthening their claims - a 110% proof for that there are no falsifications, because if there had been, Islam had found them and screamed and bellowed about them

    And prophets before man learnt how to read, what did they use the books for, and in what language and alphabet were the books written?

    Believe this Islamic claim whoever wants.

    037 2/140a: "Or do you say that Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob and the tribes were Jews - - -". As the word "Jew" did not exist at that time (it derives from the name of one of the sons of Jacob and the tribe he founded, the Judah tribe), technically the Quran may be right in this "leading - or rhetoric - question" . But using the wider and quite normal definition of the word: Jews = people belonging to the Jewish religion, there is little doubt that according to the Bible they all were Jews - even Ishmael (but he is outside Yahweh's line, as that one goes via Isaac (his brother) and Jacob (1. Mos. 21/12)), if he lived and believed like his father (like Islam claims he did). It must in case be a bitter truth for Arabs to know they are claiming (as usual no proofs) to be descendants from a Jew(!) (But in its rhetoric way the Quran here contradicts the Bible). For the record: The name "Christians" is even much younger than the word "Jew" - it of course derives from "Christos", the Greek version of "Messiah" = the anointed one. It was coined some decades into "our time". See 2/140b just below.

    038 2/140b: "Or do you say that Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes were Jews or Christians?" Well, no-one say they were Christians - Christianity is a softer religion than the Mosaic (Jewish) one and did not arrive until with Jesus. If we presume that Jesus really was from Yahweh, which both the Bible and the Quran claims (except that the Quran calls the god Allah and claims Allah = Yahweh), one may wonder why the god choose to soften his teaching just then. One possible explanation is that Islam is right on this one point: When times changes there can be adjustments in the one god's teachings to inch it closer to what the god really wants. May be Yahweh saw that the widespread and long "Roman Peace" (more than 200 years) - Pax Romana - finally gave a more peaceful and benevolent "edition" of his religion a chance to take hold and survive - grow strong enough to survive in spite of the rougher times which would come. But if this is the explanation, it is highly unlikely and illogical that he later should want to return to a harsh, selfish, and bloody war religion like Islam - far more inhuman, dark and bloody than also the Mosaic one even in the harshest parts of OT.

    039 2/149c: “- - - that (the new qiblah) is indeed the truth from thy Lord”. Wrong. With so many mistakes in the Quran, it is an open question if this is the truth or not - at best it is partly the truth. It is worth mentioning that Muslims states that the direction towards Kabah was Abraham’s qiblah. We have been unable to find out why they say so - there is no reliable source telling that Abraham even had a qiblah, not to mention that it in case was direction Mecca, a place he hardly had ever heard about (it was only during the last few generations before Muhammad that Mecca had grown to a reasonable wealthy town of some size).

    040 2/158c: (A128) “Behold! Safa and Marwah are among the symbols of Allah. So if those who visit the House (Kabah*) in the Season or at other times should encompass them around, it is no sin in them”. These two hillocks were religious symbols also in pagan times before Islam, and Hadiths (f.x. Al-Bukhari) explains this verse with that many Muslims thought that if they followed the old rituals and visited them, they paid tribute to the old gods, but that Muhammad then in this verse told them that it was no sin – on the contrary it is to pay respect to Allah. The ritual simply is to hasten between (not necessarily around) them 7 times symbolizing Hagar’s claimed search for water after Abraham had left her and their son Ishmael (Islam claims it was here it happened - utterly improbable in reality - see 2/127a above).But the question is: Is this ritual obligatory or a “supererogatory act of piety”? (Zamakhshari and Razi). The text on this point is unclear. Today it is reckoned to be an integrate part of the pilgrimage, but the text as said is unclear. And it is thought provoking that this ritual like the others in Mecca simply is taken over from the old pagan earlier religion - nothing created for or by Islam and Allah, just primitive rituals, some superficial symbolism, nothing spiritual - nothing worthy a claimed omniscient and omnipotent god. Nothing created by a spiritual god. And what does the taking over more or less completely the rituals of a pagan religion indicate?

    041 2/253a: "- - - to one of them Allah spoke - - -". It here refers to Moses, but it is a clear contradiction to the Bible that the god spoke to no more than one Biblical person directly - he also spoke directly to others, f.x. Jesus (but Jesus has to be reduced so as not to compete with Muhammad), to Abraham, and some of the Jewish prophets, f.x. Samuel (1. Sam. 3/4-14).

    042 2/258a: This verse is not from the Bible, and there also is nothing similar in that book. (From where did Muhammad get this information, as the Quran with all its errors is not from a god and thus the only source for information about Abraham was the Bible, legends, fairy tales and fantasy?)

    043 2/258c: "My (Abraham's*) Lord (here claimed to be Allah*) is He who giveth life and death." Variations of this interesting claim you meet several places in the Quran - interesting because Allah and Muhammad never were able to prove anything like this, whereas if the old books tell the truth Yahweh proved it at least 9 times in the Bible (1. Kings 17/22, 2. Kings 4/35, Mark 5/41, John 11/44, Luke 7/15, Matt. 27/52, Acts 9/40, Acts 20/10 + Jesus) and at least one or two times in the Quran - if the books are reliable on this point. As for Jesus: As it is clear - if at least one of the books tell the truth about this - that the old Jewish god really had power over death, there is no real reason why Jesus could not be killed and resurrected, except that then he clearly was something Muhammad was not, and with connections Muhammad had not, and Muhammad thus impossibly could be the greatest of the prophets. Jesus, therefore, had to be "played down" to make him smaller than the claims about Muhammad.

    044 2/258d: “But it is Allah that causeth the sun to rise from the east - - -”. Abraham is said to use this as a (also for other reasons totally invalid) proof for Allah. But for one thing it is not the sun which rises, but the Earth which turns. For another thing this is a totally natural process whish in no way is proved made by a god - not to mention by Allah. But any priest of Baal - or others - could say as much: 'Baal makes the sun rise in the east. Allah cannot make it rise in the west - which means Baal is proved to be the real god and Allah a fake one!'. Both claims are equally cheap, equally stupid - and totally invalid as proofs + logically total nonsense, as long as it is not proved the god really was/is behind the phenomenon. Did a god use such "proofs"?

    Another pressing question is this: What on Earth is the quality of the brains and the knowledge of the followers you can dupe with so hopelessly naive and invalid arguments like this?

    045 2/258f: "- - - faith". = Islam - only Islam is faith in the Quran. Another point: This is from a story about Abraham - anyone who believes that Islam existed at the time of Abraham (ca. 2ooo - 1800 BC - and some 2500 years before Muhammad), are free to do so. The same goes for those who want to believe that Abraham's religion was Islam. But they should check their naivety quotient.

    046 2/260c: "Show me (Abraham*) how thou (Allah*) givest life to the dead". An interesting sentence, as Allah never - never - showed neither this nor anything else - Yahweh proved it if the old books tell the truth, but never Allah (except in borrowed legends).

    047 2/260d: "Show me (Abraham*) how thou (Allah*) givest life to the dead". How can this be in the claimed "Mother of the Book" (= Mother of the Quran) written may be billions of years before? Impossible. See 2/51b above.

    048 2/260e: (A2/257): “Take four birds; tame them to turn to thee (Abraham*); put a portion of them on every hill, and call to them - - -.” But the Arab expression “surhunna ilayka” simply means “make them incline towards thee”. And then the meaning really is: “- (tame them and) place them (separately and alive) on every hill, and call to them - - -.” And that is a very different story. Clear (fairy) tale? Besides - from where did Muhammad get this story? It is not in the Bible - the only source for knowledge about Abraham as the Quran is not from a god, and thus not a source about things like this.

    049 3/33a: "Allah did choose - - - the family of Abraham - - - above all people". Arabs claim - as normal without any proofs - to be the descendants of Ishmael, the illegitimate son of Abraham (in spite of that according to the Bible Ishmael's descendants settled on the border of Egypt (1. Mos. 25/18) - not in Arabia - and became a powerful people there "with twelve tribal rulers" (1.Mos. 25/16)), and they (the Arabs) claims they thus are descendants of Abraham. Is this the reason why Arabs through the first centuries claimed to be better than other Muslims, and thus caused lots of and lasting strife in Islam? Also see 2/125a and 2/127a above.

    050 3/64d: “- - - that we (Muslims and Jews/Christians*) worship none but Allah (= Yahweh and Allah are claimed to be the same god*)”. This is not possible as the fundamental differences between the Quran and the Bible/NT are too big and too many – not unless the god is schizophrenic. Mainly only Muslims say this – and they will have to bring strong proofs to be believed.

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

    And here we have not even mentioned that Arabia was settled thousands of years before Abraham, and by a mix of people who drifted in from all around. Even if he had been a forefather, he had been only one among thousands and tens of thousands of forefathers - a tiny drop of an Arab's blood; not even a milliliter, but only a few micro-liters of the 5 liters of blood in a man. A few micro-liters compared with a deciliter or two of f.x. Negro blood or European blood (though likely much more Negro than European blood - far, far more slaves from Africa - and at very best nearly zero from Abraham).

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

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

    051 3/65c: "Why dispute ye (Jews and Christians*) about Abraham, when the Law and the Gospel were not revealed till after him?" Well, according to the Quran Abraham had a book, and that must have been the Quran, as the Quran according to Islam (and the Quran) is a copy of the eternal "mother book" in Heaven and copies of that book were given to the old prophets according to the Quran. And then Abraham's copy - and Jesus' copy - must have been identical or at least nearly identical to the present Quran. All this according to Islam. As also Jesus "original" teaching was Islam, according to both the Quran, to Muhammad, and to Islam, the Gospels must have been pieces from Jesus' copy of the Quran, which later was falsified, still according to Islam - even though falsification of the Bible is proved wrong by both science and Islam, as none of them has been able to prove even one falsification from the tens of thousands of relevant old manuscripts. Believe it that wants - but you have to want to believe it to be able to do so.

    052 3/65d: "Why dispute ye (Jews and Christians*) about Abraham, when the Law and the Gospel were not revealed till after him?" There is no reason why one cannot dispute about Abraham even if He lived - if he was a real person - some 1800 - 2ooo years before Chris and "the Law" arrived around 1230 - 1235 BC, and the first known Gospel around 60 AD. One f.x. can dispute about the Quran's use (or disuse?) of him, the big differences between what is told about him in the Bible and in the Quran, and not least: As the Bible is the only known source about Abraham, and as the Quran with all its mistakes is not from a god, so the information about Abraham cannot have come from a god - where did Muhammad get his information(?) about Abraham from? There in reality are just three remaining possible such sources: Dark forces - and then it may easily be wrong. Legends and fairy tales - and then it may even more easily be wrong. And fantasy - in which case it is nearly sure to be wrong.

    053 3/66a: "Ye (Jews and Christians*) are those who fell to disputing (even) in matters of which ye had some knowledge!" Muhammad here refers to the fact that there were different ways of understanding words and verses in the Bible, which caused debates among Jews and among Christians. When they were able to dispute even things Muhammad claimed should be clear to them, he claims that means they are not qualified to debate things they know nothing about.

    In clear language his claim is that as Abraham (previous verse) lived such a long time ago, the Jews (and Christians) in reality had no correct information about Abraham, and thus that what he himself told about Abraham, were the correct stories, as he - he claimed - got those stories from Allah.

    But as it is clear to anything but strong wishful thinking backed by naivety, that no god ever was involved in the making of the Quran - too much is wrong - there emerge two questions: From where did Muhammad get his stories? And may be the Bible all the same is more reliable than those stories if they have no good, reliable source? (This even more so at it is clear that the source for many of Muhammad's stories are legends, apocryphal - made up - stories, and even fairy tales (f.x. Luqman - surah 31 - is a person from Arab fairy tales).

    054 3/66b: "- - - knowledge - - -". In this case knowledge about Abraham. Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it normally refers only to religious knowledge - and normally only to knowledge about Islam/the Quran - and not to other kinds of knowledge. Muslim area had an enlightened period where real knowledge flowered from around 820 AD to around 1100 AD, but it was in spite of Islam, not because of Islam. All knowledge not relevant for Islam became "foreign knowledge" and was actively opposed and even persecuted by words and prison and even executions of "the sinners". The result was that science in the central and eastern Muslim area "died" around 1100 AD (the final end was made by the book "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" in 1095 AD written by "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad" according to Muslims, al-Ghazali. In the far west it lingered on for around 100 more years - the year 1198 and the death of the last great philosopher in Muslim dominated Spain, Ibn Rushd (Averroes), is often mentioned here). Also see 26/83a below.

    055 3/67a: “Abraham was not a Jew nor yet a Christian - - -“. He definitely was no Christian, as he lived – if he ever lived - some 1800 – 2000 years too early. But it may be correct to call the forefather of all Jews a Jew. (We know the word did not exist at that time, but it is normal to use the word also for the people who later got the name Jews. The word "Jew" is made from "Judah" - the name of one of the sons (no. 4 according to the Bible - 1. Mos. 29/35) of the Jewish patriarch Jacob - grandson of Abraham. His tribe much later settled south of and round Jerusalem, and when the nation was split after the death of Solomon, they became the main tribe in the country of Judah - hence Judes or Jews - whereas the parts further north became the country of Israel, which originally was a name the patriarch Jacob got from Yahweh, according to the Bible (1. Mos. 32/28).)

    056 3/67b: "- - - Faith - - -". = Islam - only Islam is faith in the Quran. Here this indicates that Abraham was a good and true Muslim - which contradicts the Bible not a little, because there he was a follower of Yahweh. (Islam likes to claim Yahweh just was another name for the same god, but their teachings were too different for that, unless if the god was mentally very ill - schizophrenic.

    057 3/67c: “Abraham - - - bowed his will to Allah’s (which is Islam) - - -.” Abraham here is claimed to be a good Muslim - hardly so in the main source about Abraham, the Bible (and remember; both science and Islam have proved that the Bible is not falsified, in spite of Islam's never documented claims). Clear contradiction to the Bible. (There are MANY contradictions to the Bible in the Quran - we only mention some of them).

    The claim also seems to contradict reality, as neither science, nor Islam has ever found even one trace from a god like Allah, a religion like Islam, or a book like the Quran, older than 610 AD - not anywhere in the world.

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

    058 3/67d: "- - - he (Abraham*) joined no gods with Allah". Well, according to the Bible Abraham's god was not Allah but Yahweh.

    059 3/68b: “Without doubt, among men, the nearest of kin to Abraham, are those who follow him - - -“.

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

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

    There thus is much reason for doubt.

    060 3/68c: "- - - those who follow him (Abraham*) - - -". Here the intended claim is that Muslims are followers of Abraham. This in spite of that not even Islam has found even one reliable trace of Islam older than 610 AD (when Muhammad started his religious work). Abraham, if he ever lived he lived some 2500 years before that.

    061 3/81m: "Allah said: 'Do ye (all the old prophets*) agree, and take this Covenant (including believing in and helping Muhammad*) as binding on you?' They said: 'We agree'". He said: 'Then bear witness (about Muhammad*) - - -". They cannot have been very reliable, as exactly none of the known prophets ever mentioned him - included not Abraham, not Moses, and not Jesus to mention 3 of the main prophets according to the Quran (and yes, we know about the cherry-picked, wrong claims concerning 5. Mos. 18/15 and 18/18, and about the helper Jesus promised his disciples (the Holy Spirit) which Islam claims meant Muhammad 500+ years after the last disciple was dead).

    062 3/84b: "- - - what (the Quran) has been revealed to us (Muslims*) and what was revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob and the (12 Jewish*) tribes- - -". One more of the claims that it was the Quran which was given to each and every of the old prophets (see 3/81e above). One more claim showed wrong by science and by Islam by being unable to find the slightest trace of Islam or something similar older than 610 AD. (Islam's claim that the Mosaic - Jewish - religion and culture was a falsified version of Islam does not hold water.)

    063 3/95e: "- - - the religion of Abraham - - -". Islam claims to be the religion of Abraham - - - but have never documented anything. And to say the least of it: It is contradicting the Bible, which talks about another god; Yahweh. And we remind you that both science and even stronger Islam have proved that the Bible is not falsified. In some 13ooo manuscripts and fragments from the Bible + some 32ooo other relevant old documents from before 610 AD not one proved falsification is found, not even by Islam. Also see 3/93a above.

    064 3/95g: "- - - (Abraham was*) sane in faith - - -". Faith in the Quran means Islam. So what is said here is that Abraham was a good Muslim (the same is said many other places in the Quran - but contradicted by the Bible, which tells Abraham's god was Yahweh, not Allah). Believe it whoever wants. But see 3/93a and 3/95d above.

    IT ALSO IS WORTH MENTIONING THAT ABRAHMAM F.X. NEVER WENT TO WAR FOR A RELIGIOUS REASON, NEITHER ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE, NOR ACCORDING TO THE QURAN. HE CANNOT HAVE BEEN A GOOD MUSLIM.

    *065 3/96b: “The first House (of worship) appointed for man was that at Bakkah (another name for Mecca). Wrong. Even if we should accept that Abraham “made the foundations” of the Kabah in Mecca, he lived (if he is not fiction) around 2000-1800 BC. At that time the first temples, etc. in f.x. Egypt and Mesopotamia were old. Today it is possible to find the real age of many things. It is symptomatic that as far as we know, Islam has not tried to see if it is possible to find the real age of the oldest parts of the Kabah. Wagging tongues insinuates that may be the reason is that they are afraid it is younger than 3800 years. - what if it turns out it is built around 100 BC - or AD - f.x? - or even later?

    Islam also has one problem concerning measuring the age of the Kabah: They will have to use qualified western experts. If they use Muslim experts - who may be well qualified to do it - and find that it f.x. is 5630 years old, not one single soul will believe them unconditionally, because of "al-Taqiyya" - the lawful lie - which Muslims not only are permitted to use, but are advised to use "if necessary", when it comes to promoting or defending Islam. But non-Muslims are not permitted to visit Kabah. We may also add that it is further said that Abraham built on the even older ruins of a temple made by Adam - of course Adam like Abraham went all the way to the desert proto-Mecca and built a big temple he never could visit from his home a thousand kilometers off (Adam - and his Paradise - real of fiction, mostly are believed to have been placed somewhere in the rich wetlands in what is now South Iraq), but then Adam's temple was destroyed at the time of Noah - but as often before Muslims only claim, seldom/never prove, so believe it who wants.

    (We may add that some Muslims have corrected this verse to that the Quran is talking about the first house of worship for a monotheistic god, but that is not what the Quran says. Besides: If the Quran or the Hadiths is correct and there have been prophets to all times and every people – 124ooo the Hadith says – Islam will have a tough time to prove that not one single all those prophets or their followers in the very early time before Abraham, have never built even a small house for worship.” Also see 2/127a above.

    One extra small detail: The foundations/temple the Quran claims Abraham built for his small family in Mecca - at the time of Abraham a desert and an empty valley - was so big that when the rich Mecca rebuilt it around 600 AD they could not afford to rebuild to the same size according to Hadiths. Any comments necessary?

    By the way: The oldest known temple - building for revering one or more gods - is in Turkey, not in Arabia, and definitely not for Allah. Gobekli Tepe was built around 9ooo BC - some 7ooo years before Abraham and perhaps 5ooo years before Noah. Actually before even the costal Arabia was settled some 7ooo BC or a little earlier

    And not least: The Kabah temple was built as a temple for the pagan god al-Lah (or Hubal), not for the monotheistic claimed god Allah.

    And a small thought: Did not even one of the other 124ooo prophets of the old build a temple for Allah? Not one trace from such a temple was ever found. Only Adam - a man with absolutely no experience of any kind of work and no helper (except Eve) - and Abraham - a Bedouin able to build stone altars and tents. But both did very well - building far too big temples for their need hundreds of miles and more in km away from home - across forbidding terrain. Well, Abraham surely had horses - not camels, but at least horses - but Adam had to walk on foot all the way, and back home the many years it took to build a big temple, and each time he wanted to visit this temple later, say 3 weeks walk each way carrying all the food and water he needed through the desert. Abraham surely could do it in half that time - if his horses found food and water.

    Believe that Adam and/or Abraham built the Kabah if you are able to.

    (To specify a little concerning the settlement of humans in Arabia: Modern humans may have entered the coastal area, river areas, etc. as early as 75ooo-50ooo years ago. The Neolithic period started around 6500 BC with a likely expansion of the population because of some agriculture, expansion of the use of domesticated animals, and trade. The interior of Arabia except for some oasis, etc. were settled much later and not until well after the camel was domesticated and more widely used. It is unclear where and when it was domesticated, but likely in south of the peninsula (Oman?) something like 2ooo BC (the number varies some), but it did not come into wide use until the 9. or 10. century BC.)

    066 3/97c: “In it (Kabah in Mecca*) are Signs manifest; (for example), the Station of Abraham - - -“. For one thing Abraham never was in Mecca (see 2/127a above) and never built Kabah or its foundations. But there is a stone there, with a mark in it. Islam calls it the Station of Abraham and tells that the mark is from Abraham’s feet when he was building the Kabah. Which worker building a house has ever in the entire history and far before, been standing so long on the same hard natural stone, that his feet made a mark in that stone lasting for millennia? (Well, some say that by a miracle the stone became soft - an easy explanation and way out. According to Hadiths Muhammad was known for mostly choosing the easiest solutions and ways out).

    This is the kind of "sure" proofs the Quran tells about - and which many of the Muslims even believe in.

    067 3/146b: “How many of the Prophets fought (in Allah’s way), and with them fought large bands of godly men? But they never lost heart if they met with disaster in Allah’s way, nor did they weaken (in will) nor give in. And Allah loves those who are firm and steadfast.” A pep-talk to warriors of all times - never give in, never give up, retreat if you have to, but go on and you will win like the prophets, because Allah will help - - - and sooner or later the lover of religious warriors, Allah, will give you Paradise. Like in the Old Norse religion and other war religions.

    As for prophets, Islam maintains that they have existed to all times and all places - Hadith mention the number 124ooo, but even that is just a symbol for uncountable many. (Using the religious time-scale = some 5ooo years up to Muhammad, gives 2 new prophets each and every month for those 5ooo years. Using the scientific time-scale = perhaps 195ooo years for Homo Sapiens, gives one new prophet every 18 months approximately. Believe it if you are able to.). This is not true, because it is not possible to find a single trace of monotheistic prophets (except the few in the Bible) anywhere or any time in any form - history, literature, art, architecture, archeology, or even in folk tales. It is not possible that so many prophets should leave not a single trace - especially the warring ones should leave traces, even if they had no success with spreading the religion.

    And not many of the prophets we know about from other sources - mainly the Bible - did actually wage war. This picture becomes even more loop-sided when you remember the Bible mentions there were a number of prophets not named by name, and hardly any of these were leaders of wars - in that case they had been more central and named. (NB: The Bible does not reckon f.x. Saul and David - and not even Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob, not to mention Ishmael - primarily as prophets. Leaders, but the title prophet hardly is used - for a central person like Abraham in all the Bible the title prophet is mentioned only a couple of times. Saul, David, Ishmael and a number of others are not reckoned to be prophets at all in the Bible.) The fact that Biblical prophets normally did not wage war, compared to Muhammad's war religion, also is one of the clear indications for that Muhammad was not in the Biblical line of prophets. The same goes for the difference in proselyting.

    068 4/23b: "Prohibited for you (Muslims*) (for marriage) are - - - your - - - sisters - - -". Abraham - the highest idol in Islam except Muhammad - was married to his half-sister Sarah (1. Mos. 20/12). Muslims never mention this.

    069 4/49a: "- - - those (Jews*) who claim sanctity for themselves - - -". The Jews claimed to be "the god's chosen people", much to the irritation of Muhammad. Muhammad used to claim they claimed this special status because they were descendants of Abraham, even though he well knew about the real background; the Jews' covenant with Yahweh. Perhaps "descendants from Abraham" were easier to ridicule than a covenant with a god? Muhammad also did his best to claim the Jews' covenant with the god was terminated, but this is nowhere said by Yahweh according to the old books.

    070 4/54a: "- - - the people of Abraham - - -". The people at the time of Abraham or Abraham's descendants? Unclear.

    071 4/54d: "- - - and conferred upon them ("the people of Abraham"*) a great kingdom". This kingdom is Paradise. - Or may be the kingdom of David and Solomon if the answer of 4/54a just above is "Abraham's descendants"? The Quran often is unclear.

    072 4/103b: "- - - set up regular prayers: for such prayers are enjoined on believers on stated times". The 5 fixed prayers is one of the pillars of Islam. If Yahweh had meant the number and times of prayers were of any essence to him, he had enjoined it on the Jews and Christians. But such rules are not mentioned anywhere in the Bible. Because they are so essential in the Quran, but completely of no interest to Yahweh - he says pray when you want or need - this is one of the real strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. (And a curiosa here: If Allah has no connection to the old Jewish god Yahweh, Abraham and Ishmael and the others are not part of Islam. Well, this in case is no surprise - there are more indications for the same.)

    As for prayers in Islam also see 4/43h and 4/64g above.

    073 4/125f: "- - - the way of Abraham the true of faith - - -". If the Quran is not a made up book. But there are every indication for that there is no connection between Abraham/Ishmael and Arabia, and no connection between Abraham and Islam. It at least is clear that the Quran with all its errors is not from a god.

    Also science says that "there is no indication for that Abraham ever visited Arabia".

    074 4/125g: "For Allah did take Abraham for a friend". Often claimed in the Quran, never proved anywhere - and according to the Bible it was Yahweh who was Abraham's friend - - - if Abraham ever existed.

    075 4/152c: "- - - make no distinction between any of the Messengers". Now, Muslims tell that "messenger" is something more distinguished than "prophet", even though messenger only means an errand-boy, whereas prophet is a distinguished title which demands special gifts and abilities. A prophet in reality is something quite a lot more than a messenger-boy, but when Muslims try to tell the opposite, the reason may be that they react to the vague feeling that Muhammad in reality does not merit the title "prophet" (which he in reality does not, as he did not have the gift of prophesying), but all the same want him to have a glorious title. May be there were similar reasons for why Muhammad often used the title "messenger" instead of "prophet" in the Quran.

    But that aside: Muslims at least distinguish 4 "prophets" above all the others: 1. Muhammad, 2. Abraham, 3. Moses + 4.Jesus. (1. Muhammad in reality was not a real prophet as mentioned. 2. Abraham in the Bible behaved - and is mostly reckoned to have been - a patriarch, more than a prophet, though there one or two places (f.x. 1.Mos. 20/7) in the Bible is said he was a prophet. 3. Moses also is not mainly a prophet in the Bible, but more clearly was one. 4. On the other hand Jesus no doubt was a prophet, but is played down in the Quran for the obvious reason that if not, he could easily outshine Muhammad, because both the Bible and the Quran make it clear Jesus was tightly connected to something supernatural: His birth, his life, his miracles, his foretelling and in the Bible his death, resurrection and disappearance alive to Heaven, in the Quran his being taken up to Heaven (alive) by the god. The special case Jesus, and Muhammad's strong wish to be the greatest, may be the reason why the Quran some places stresses that no prophet is different from the others - and the danger that he should outshine Muhammad, highly likely is the reason why Jesus is played so much down in the Quran and the Hadiths (f.x. ending in 2. Heaven vs. Muhammad in seventh and close to the god).

    076 4/163e: "- - - We (Allah*) sent it (messages by inspiration*) to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob and the (12 Jewish*) Tribes, to Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and to Solomon - - -". As Muhammad claimed he received his verses from Allah by inspiration, it was essential to "prove" that this was a normal way for prophets to receive information from the god. And NB: He used these claimed Muslim prophets as proofs for that "inspiration" was a normal way of communication. The word "inspiration" is not used anywhere in the Bible in such connections. Also it is nowhere in the Bible mentioned that Ishmael had a close enough connection to Yahweh to be a prophet.

    077 5/2h: "- - - Sacred House (Kabah mosque in Mecca*) - - -". The Bible never mentions a sacred place in Arabia, not even in connection to Moses who may be - may be - visited the Arabian Peninsula according to the Quran (Midian/Madyan (if the Bible's Midian was not in Sudan - well, highly likely Midian was in Sinai, as Mt Sinai and also Mt. Horeb (likely another name for Mt. Sinai (today Jabal Musa (34 degrees east, 28.5 degrees north. Roughly 70 km north northwest from Sharm-el-Sheik (Sharm el Shaykh) far south in central Sinai. Also the Islam confirms that it was here Moses met his god and got the mission to take the Jews out from Egypt. This is far from Madyan in Arabia) is mentioned)). (That Abraham visited Arabia - and Mecca - just is wishful thinking or psychological strategy on behalf of Muhammad. The Bible gives the routes Abraham travelled, and he never was even close to that peninsula. We also may mention that the Bible tells about what Abraham built, and he never built anything but a few altars made from not chiseled natural stone - not even a small chapel anywhere. Even the grave of his wife Sarah was a cave, not something built. You find all this in 1. Mos. f.x. 12/7, 12/8, 12/18. These are facts Muslims never mention, even though at least their scholars know it - it is not possible to go hunting in the Bible for tit-bits they can cherry-pick, without also seeing the information which tells that the Quran is wrong on many points.)

    ############Another strong fact: Not one person mentioned in the entire Bible, included Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Solomon, and Jesus, uttered even one word about wanting to visit Mecca or Kabah or even mentioning any of them. Strange if Yahweh and Allah were the same god, and Mecca/Kabah his most holy place on Earth.

    As for science, they in their careful language tell from: "There is no reason to believe that Abraham ever visited Mecca", to: "It is highly unlikely Abraham ever was in Mecca

    #078 5/2j: "- - - Sacred House - - -". The mosque Kabah in Mecca is one of the really strong proofs for that Yahweh and Allah is not the same god. There is not one chance that a god had not mentioned his most sacred place and the duties and benefits connected to it, to his strongly believing followers relatively nearby - f.x. Abraham and Moses or a powerful king like David, who could have tried to conquer the area to get it into his country.

    079 5/3h: "This day have I (Allah*) perfected your (Muslims'*) religion for you - - -". This sentence always fascinates us - was the religion not perfect earlier? And how could the religion be perfected - made better - without changing the claimed quotes which are claimed to be the unchangeable and timeless basis for Islam? How could f.x. Abraham be a perfect Muslim - or a Muslim at all - if the religion was not perfected until this day in 632 AD? Etc., etc.

    080 From 5/7b: There is no rational or scientific reason for believing in the claim that the Arabs are descendants of Ishmael and Abraham - on the contrary: What knowledge which exists, makes the claim highly unlikely, and even if there should be a connection, it in case is an extremely diluted one. Also modern DNA science documents this.

    ###081 5/13a: "- - - We (the god*) cursed them (Jews*) - - -". Some Muslims claim this means the god lifted the covenant with the Jews. But this is not what is said - it is easily possible to become angry with someone without retracting serious agreements because of that. There is no indication for that Allah here - or any other place in the Quran or the Bible - terminated the covenant. On the contrary it is very clear that in spite of disagreements, the covenant lived on - the Bible even reports it was renewed several times. This covenant is till this day the reason why the Jews believe they are Yahweh's special people - not that they are the descendants from Abraham, like Muhammad liked to claim. Because the covenant nowhere is reported terminated, it at least formally still is valid - if the books tell the truth. Besides; the essential point here is what Yahweh said and did - and he is not reported terminating the covenant - not even in the Quran. (Also remember: In spite of the Quran's strong claims, Yahweh and Allah is not the same god. And not less: As the Quran and all its mistakes are not from any god, it may not be true that Allah - if he at all exists - cursed them. Not to mention: As Muhammad believed in the use of dishonesty as a working tool, this even may have been a made up propaganda claim.)

    #082 5/23b: “- - - two (of Moses’ Jews*) on whom Allah hath - - -“. Note how often the Quran is vague on details - f.x. names. Muhammad simply did not know, and thus he simply found a name (perhaps from Arab legends?) - like for the father of Abraham (Azar instead of Terah) or the first Jewish king (Talut instead of Saul), or he used vague words like here. In just this case the Bible simply tells that Joshua ben Nun and Caleb ben Jephunneh (4. Mos. 14/6) - both later leaders - wanted the Jews to enter Canaan at once. (There is no doubt which is the best piece of literature of the Bible and the Quran also in this case).

    According to the Bible, what happened was that the spies became frightened from what they met in Canaan. Only Caleb ben Jephunneh and Joshua ben Nun advised to attack (Joshua became the leader after Moses died.)

    083 5/31: The raven and Cain (for burying Abel). This tale is not from the Bible, but is to be found in "The Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziah" and also in "The Targum of Jerusalem" also called "pseudo-Jonathan". You also find it in Mishna Sanhedrin. All these 3 are made up Jewish tales. Muhammad "borrowed" from many places. Would a god need to borrow from made up tales?

    084 5/75d: "They (Mary and Jesus*) had both to eat their (daily) food." This is intended to be a proof for that they just were ordinary humans - even lowly angels f.x. visiting Abraham did not eat food. (Funny; Muslims in Paradise have to eat - one of their few pass-times and one of their few things to look forward to in the claimed next life - f.x. absolutely no intellectual activity). But on Earth Jesus was born as a physical normal human who needed food. The "proof" thus is of no value. As for Mary: Here Muhammad tries to prove she was not part of the Trinity, as she was a human. Not even the most imbecile Christian ever said she was part of that. We simply are back to the fact that Muhammad did not understand these central parts of Christianity: No-one ever indicated that Mary was part of the Trinity or divine - some say she was holy, but in the meaning "better than ordinary people", not in the meaning "divine", and some do not even say that. As for Jesus; no matter whether one believes he was divine or not, no-one ever indicated that his life here on Earth was in something other than a normal human body. Muhammad is breaking in open doors. Any god had known this - and that Mary was no part of the Trinity (the Trinity = Yahweh, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit). Who made the Quran?

    085 5/78c: "- - - David - - -". The greatest of the Jewish kings. When it comes to the old names in the Bible - Noah, Abraham, Moses, etc. science are unsure if they really have lived. Also for David there is no sure proof for his existence as far as we know, but we are now so near the first written sources, that we understand most scientists believe he is a historical person. He in case lived around and after 1000 BC. In just this case, however, he is a time anomaly - see 4/13d above.

    086 6/8c: “They (people*) say: ‘Why is not an angel sent down to him?’ If We (Allah*) did send down an angel, the matter would be settled at once, and no respite would be granted them”. This question – a proof f.x. by means of an angel – arose frequently. Muhammad’s often used “explanation” was this: Allah will not send down an angel until The Last Day (the Day of Doom). That means that if he sends down angles, that day becomes the Last Day (“the matter will be settled at once, and no respite would be granted them”), and in that case the unbelievers would lose their chance to become believers (“- - - no respite would be granted them”.) This “explanation” is nonsense even according to the Quran. That book tells that the angel Gabriel visited Muhammad often, it tells that angels come down to fetch the souls of the dead, it tells that angels come down to fetch your soul when you fall asleep and to return it when you wakes up, it tells that angels surround you to note down your good and bad deeds – not to mention the thousands of angels Allah sends down to do battles together with Muslims time and again. And angels visiting f.x. Abraham, Lot, and Mary.

    087 6/61c: "- - - He (Allah*) sets guardians over you." Here is a contradiction. Guardians mean angels, and other places in the Quran makes it clear it is more than one who looks after you at the same time - and all the time. But f.x. 6/8 says: "If We did send down an angel, the matter would be settled at once, and no respite would be granted them" = your life would come to an end or it would be the Day of Doom according to Islam. 6/61 says guardians (= angels, plural) take care of you. And for that case it is several places in the Quran said that the angel Gabriel is sent down to Muhammad. And Abraham, Lot, Mary, inhabitants in Sodom and Gomorrah saw angels, not to forget all the angels sent down to take part in battles according to the Quran. But 6/8 says no angel can be sent down because then everything will be over. A clear contradiction.

    088 6/74c: "Lo, said Abraham to his father Azar". Contradiction to the Bible: There his father's name is Terah. (But to be fair one must mention that Talmud - Jewish scriptures - sometimes calls him Zarah, and that also the name Athar has been used in a history book from around 300 AD (Eusebius Pamphili)).

    089 6/74d: "Lo, said Abraham to his father Azar: 'Takest thou Idols for gods? For I see thee and thy people in manifest error". This is not from the Bible. In the Bible there is not even a hint about that Terah/Azar or his people had other gods than Yahweh. There also is not one hint about a disagreement between Abram (his original name according to the Bible - the name Abraham he got from Yahweh much later (not mentioned in the Quran - Muhammad hardly knew this)) and his father or between Abram and his people. Also there is no hint about religious disagreement and there further is no other reason to believe that another god than Yahweh was involved - though this early they may have used f.x. the old name El for him. From where did Muhammad get this story? No god was involved in a book with so much wrong like the Quran, and but for a god there is no other source about Abram/Abraham than the Bible. Oh, well, there are the dark forces, there are the legends and fairy tales, and there is the fantasy (though Muhammad seems not to have had a very creative fantasy - he normally "borrowed" stories from where he found them and just twisted them so as to make them fit his new religion).

    090 6/74f: "Lo, said Abraham to his father Azar: 'Takest thou Idols for gods? For I see thee and thy people in manifest error". One more of the many texts or quotes in the Quran which could not have been reliably written into the claimed "Mother Book" (13/39b, 43/4b+c, 85/21-22) in Heaven (of which the Quran is claimed to be a copy) eons ago, unless predestination was and is 100% like the Quran claims many places (if you look, you will find more cases than we mention - we only mention some of the obvious ones). If man has free will - even partly only (an expression some Muslims use to flee from the problem of full predestination contra free will for man (and also contra that there is no meaning in praying to Allah for help, if everything already is predestined in accordance with a Plan "nobody and nothing can change" - a problem which Muslims seldom mention), and an expression no Muslim we have met has ever defined) - and can change his mind, full and reliable clairvoyance about the future, not to mention the distant future, is impossible even for a god, as the man always could/can change his mind or his words once more, in spite of Islam's claims. There are at least 5 reasons - at least 3 of them unavoidable - for this:

    1. When something is changed, automatically the future is changed.
    2. The laws of chaos will be at work and change things, if even a tiny part is made different. And multiply even a tiny change with some billion people through the centuries, and many and also big things will be changed.
    3. The displacement of a happening - f.x. the death of a warrior in battle - of only one yard or one minute may or even will change the future forever (that yard or minute f.x. may mean that the warrior killed - or not killed - an opponent). The laws of chaos and the "Butterfly Effect" and the "Domino Effect" kick in.

    4. The so-called "Butterfly Effect"; "a butterfly flapping its wing in Brazil may cause a storm in China later on" or "a small bump may overturn a big load". This effect may kick in.
    5. The so-called "Domino Effect": Any change will cause this and this to change, which will cause this and this to change, which will cause this and this to change - - - and so on forever. Also each cause may cause one or more or many changes. And: The Butterfly Effect only may happen, whereas the Domino Effect is unavoidable and inexorable - a main reason why if you in a battle is killed 5 meters from or 5 minutes later than where and when Allah has predestined - not to mention if you die when tilling your fields 50 miles off - unavoidably the entire future of the world is changed. Perhaps not much changed, but like said; multiply it with many billion people through the centuries, and the world is totally changed. And full clairvoyance of course totally impossible - except in occultism, mysticism, made up legends, and in fairy tales.

     

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

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

    091 6/74-83: These stories about Abram/Abraham are not from the Bible. There also is no mentioning about religious disagreement between Abram/Abraham and his father in the Bible.

    092 6/75a: "So also did We (the god*) show Abraham the power and the laws of the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth - - -". This is not from the Bible.

    093 6/76a: "- - - he (Abram/Abraham*) said: 'This (a star*) is my Lord'". Not from the Bible.

    094 6/76b: "- - - he (Abram/Abraham*) said: 'This (a star*) is my Lord'". See 6/74d above.

    095 6/76c: "- - - he (Abraham*) - - -". A time anomaly - see 4/13d above.

    096 6/77a: "- - - he (Abram/Abraham*) said: 'This (the moon*) is my Lord'". Not from the Bible.

    097 6/77b: "- - - he (Abram/Abraham*) said: 'This (the moon*) is my Lord'". See 6/74d above.

    098 6/77c: "- - - he (Abraham*) - - -". A time anomaly - see 4/13d above.

    099 6/77d: "Unless my (Abram/Abraham*) Lord (Allah according to the Quran*) guide me - - -". As for guide, see 16/107 below.

    100 6/77e: "Unless my (Abram/Abraham*) Lord (Allah according to the Quran*) guide me, I (Abram/Abraham*) shall surely be among those who go astray". Not from the Bible.

    101 6/78a: "- - - he (Abram/Abraham*) said: 'This (the sun*) is my Lord'". Not from the Bible.

    102 6/78b: "- - - he (Abram/Abraham*) said: 'This (the sun*) is my Lord'". See 6/74d above.

    103 6/78c: "- - - he (Abram/Abraham*) said: 'O My People! - - -". See 6/74d above.

    104 6/78d: "- - - he (Abraham*) - - -". A time anomaly - see 4/13d above.

    105 6/78e: "- - - your (Abram's/Abraham's people*) (guilt) of giving partners to Allah". This is not from the Bible. There is no indication for a religious conflict between him and his people. And between him and his father there is no indication of any serious conflict of any kind. According to the Bible (1. Mos.11/31) Abram/Abraham travelled together with his father from Ur in Chaldea in what is now south Iraq to Haran in what is now north Iraq and settled there. Later he left his father in Haran (1. Mos. 12/1), not because of a disagreement with his father, but because Yahweh called him to go to his promised land, Canaan - now roughly Israel.

    106 6/78f: "- - - giving partners to Allah". See 25/18a below.

    107 6/79a: "(Abram/Abraham said:*) 'For me, I have set my face, - - - (etc.')". See 6/74d above.

    108 6/80a: "His (Abram's/Abraham's*) people disputed with him." This is not from the Bible. There is no indication of a dispute, not to mention a religious dispute, here in the Bible (1. Mos. 11/26 - 12/4).

    109 6/80b: (YA 901): "His (Abraham's*) people disputed with him - - -". Quote from the comment: "If spiritual enlightenment goes so far as to take a man (even today Islam says ""a man", not "a person" - women counts little*) beyond his ancestral worship, people will come and worship with him".

    1. "Spiritual enlightenment" may take a person "beyond his ancestral worship". This may happen to Muslims, too, especially as they only believe in what their ancestors worshiped, told to their ancestors again by a man with very dubious morality, a man accepting lies, a man unable to prove even an atom of his claims - and a man who liked power.
    2. The trouble with Islam is that Muhammad did not trust his religion enough to rely on words to convince people. If someone got enough "spiritual enlightened" to want to leave Islam, one should use all kinds of pressure and baits and even murder to make leaving difficult or impossible. (Muhammad himself often used both baits - money/bribes - and pressure, and Muhammad is the shining idol in Islam; "do like him").

     

    110 6/80c: "He (Abram/Abraham*) said: (Come) ye (his people*) to dispute with me, about Allah, when He (himself) hath guided me?" Contradicted by the Bible which says his god was Yahweh. 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.

    111 6/80d: "He (Abram/Abraham*) said: (Come) ye (his people*) to dispute with me, about Allah, when He (himself) hath guided me?" Even omitting the fact that the Bible never mentions Allah (or Muhammad*), this is not from the Bible.

    112 6/80e: "He (Abram/Abraham*) said: (Come) ye (his people*) to dispute with me, about Allah, when He (himself) hath guided me?" See 6/74d above.

    113 6/80g: "- - - guided - - -". Muhammad claimed Abraham was guided by something like the tales of the Quran, but see 16/107 below.

    114 6/80j: "- - - unless my (Abram's/Abraham's*) Lord (here indicated to be Allah*) willeth, (nothing can happen) - - -". Contradicted by the Bible to say the least of it - Yahweh is said to be powerful. 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.

    115 6/80k: "- - - my (Abram's/Abraham's*) Lord (here claimed to be Allah*) comprehended in his knowledge all things". Not if the Quran is a sample of his knowledge and comprehension.

    116 6/81a: "(Abram/Abraham said:*) 'How should I - - - (etc.*)". One more of the many texts or quotes in the Quran which could not have been reliably written into the claimed "Mother Book" (13/39b, 43/4b+c, 85/21-22) in Heaven (of which the Quran is claimed to be a copy) eons ago, unless predestination was and is 100% like the Quran claims many places (if you look, you will find more cases like this than we mention - we only mention some of the obvious ones). If man has free will - even partly only (an expression some Muslims use to flee from the problem full predestination contra free will for man (and also contra that there is no meaning in f.x. praying to Allah for help, if everything already is predestined in accordance with a Plan "nobody and nothing can change" - a problem which Muslims seldom mention), and an expression no Muslim we have met has ever defined) - and can change his mind, full and reliable clairvoyance about the future, not to mention the distant future, is impossible even for a god, as the man always could/can change his mind or his words once more, in spite of Islam's claims. There are at least 5 reasons - at least 3 of them unavoidable - for this:

    1. When something is changed, automatically the future is changed.
    2. The laws of chaos will be at work and change things, if even a tiny part is made different. And multiply even a tiny change with some billion people through the centuries, and many and also big things will be changed.
    3. The displacement of a happening - f.x. the death of a warrior in battle - of only one yard or one minute may or even will change the future forever (that yard or minute f.x. may mean that the warrior killed - or not killed - an opponent). The laws of chaos and the "Butterfly Effect" and the "Domino Effect" kick in.

    4. The so-called "Butterfly Effect"; "a butterfly flapping its wing in Brazil may cause a storm in China later on" or "a small bump may overturn a big load".
    5. The so-called "Domino Effect": Any change will cause this and this to change, which will cause this and this to change, which will cause this and this to change - - - and so on forever. Also each cause may cause one or more or many changes. And: The Butterfly Effect only may happen, whereas the Domino Effect is unavoidable and inexorable - a main reason why if you in a battle is killed 5 meters from or 5 minutes later than where and when Allah has predestined - not to mention if you die when tilling your fields 50 miles off - unavoidably the entire future of the world is changed. Perhaps not much changed, but like said; multiply it with many billion people through the centuries, and the world is totally changed. And full clairvoyance of course totally impossible - except in occultism, mysticism, made up legends, and in fairy tales.

     

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

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

    117 6/82a: "(Abram/Abraham said:*) It is those who believe (in the Quran*) - - - that are (truly) in security - - -". See 6/81a above. As the Quran and its many errors are from no god, belief in that book neither gives nor can give any security.

    Here we include a small, but essential piece of information - essential for some of the claims regarding Abraham, and even more the claims concerning the claims about Abraham, Mecca, and the Kabah mosque. The dromedary was domesticated sometime between around 2ooo BC and 3500 BC - the exact time is not known (the very first proved case of domesticated dromedary/camel in the Middle East is from Qasr Ibrim in Lower Nubia (east Africa) around 740 BC) - and likely in the coastal area of South Arabia. Abraham according to science lived - if he was a real person - around 2ooo-1800 BC (and far from South Arabia). But today - 27. Dec. 2012 - we discovered a small fact we have not been aware of - small, but essential and revealing in this case: THE DROMEARY - THE ARAB CAMEL - DID NOT COME INTO WIDE USE UNTIL AROUND 1OOO-900 BC (around the time of King Solomon)! And f.x. the first time camels are known to be used in battle, was Cyrus the Great who used camels against Croesus of Lydia in 547 BC, AND THEN TRANSPORT DROMEDARIES, NOT RIDING ONES WERE USED, INDICATING THAT EVEN THAT LATE RIDING ONES WERE FEW OR NOT EXISTING. (Horses not used to camels were frightened by them, and this made problems for the cavalry of Croesus.) This means that as late as in 547 BC - some 1300 years after Abraham - riding camels were not widely enough used to be a factor in daily life (if they had been, riding dromedaries had been used by Cyrus instead). Camels are mentioned in the Books of Moses, too, but this is reckoned by science to be one of the proofs for that those books are written long after Moses.

    Science tells that the camel was not introduced in Abraham's area until the Assyrians started trade with South Arabia around 800 BC.

    This means that Abraham did not have camels, and definitely not riding camels. Which makes his claimed trip with his animals to the lonesome, waterless and empty desert valley where Mecca later grew up, physically impossible, his claimed building of the big Kabah hundreds of miles and more in kilometers from home, even more meaningless as he could not go back and forth between his home and his temple, and his claimed visits there later as hopeless a Muslim claim as his first claimed trip.

    THIS MEANS HE NEVER LEFT HAGAR AND ISHMAEL IN THAT VALLEY, THAT HE NEVER BUILT THE KABAH, AND THAT HE NEVER VISITED THE PLACE LATER,TOO. We have said the same before, but without the camel/dromedary Muhammad's claims about Abraham going to that dry desert valley to leave Hagar and Ishmael, and later to build the Kabah, and then to visit the place now and then, move from extremely improbable to physically impossible.

    We also remind you that according to science "there is no indication for that Abraham ever visited Arabia".

    Added 5. Apr. 2013 AD: Quoted from the Scandinavian newspaper Aftenposten published today, where professor emeritus (in physics) Redvald Skullerud says: "(It is claimed that Abraham*) used camels for transport some 1200 years before the camel was introduced as a transport animal in the area when the Assyrians started trade with South Arabia". As you see it is an accepted scientific fact that even though the dromedary was domesticated and somewhat used in South Arabia, it was not introduced further north until a long time - 1ooo+ years - after Abraham, and then as a transport animal. To use it as a riding animal came even later. And without the camel, it would be impossible for Abraham to go back and forth between Canaan and the dry desert valley where Mecca later came - crossing rough and forbidding big deserts. Abraham's claimed connection to Mecca is an impossibility.

    If somebody thinks it unlikely that it took so long time for the use of camels to spread to Sinai, we may add that it took another some 1ooo-1100 hundred years for the use to spread on to Sahara, where the Carthaginians started to use them around 300 AD. This in spite of that between Sinai and Sahara there mainly only is the Nile Valley. And in spite of that domesticated camels existed in East Nubia around 750 BC (likely crossed the Red Sea by boat) - Nubia was part of the Nile valley in south Egypt and northern Sudan.

    118 6/83a: "- - - Abraham - - -". A time anomaly - see 4/13d above.

    119 6/84a: "- - - him (Abram/Abraham*) - - -". A time anomaly. See 4/13d above.

    120 6/89b: "These were the men (the ones mentioned in verses 6/83 through 6/87*) to whom We (Allah*) gave the Book". The Bible does not mention any book connected to f.x. Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Ishmael, let alone something like OT or the Quran which is meant here - this also according to science, as no trace of anything similar to the Quran older than 610 AD (when Muhammad started his mission) has ever been found - compared to some 45ooo relevant scriptures and fragments + other traces older than 610 AD from the Bible).

    Another point is that no god ever made a book of a quality like the Quran with all its mistakes, etc.

    And yet another point is that nomads of those times hardly knew how to read - Adam and Noah even lived before humans learnt to read and write. It is not impossible that Joseph, son of Jacob, learnt how to read and write in Egypt, but but for him it is likely that the first of the central persons in the Bible who knew how to read and write, was Moses, who also learnt it in Egypt.

    121 6/89c: "These were the men (the ones mentioned in verses 6/83 through 6/87*) to whom We (Allah*) gave - - - Prophethood - - -". Not all of this is from the Bible. Of the names mentioned only Jesus, Elias (Elijah), Elisha, and Moses are reckoned to be prophets, though Abraham, Joseph, and Jonah can be reckoned among them. As for Moses it is correct to reckon him among the prophets, but he was a special case. The same goes even more for Jesus. The others are not reckoned among the prophets in the Bible. Abraham is reckoned to be one of the 3 Jewish patriarchs, though it is not incorrect also to name him a prophet.

    122 6/161g: "- - - the Path of Abraham (Islam*) - - -". One thing is that the Bible disagrees and talks about connection to Yahweh, not to Allah. Another thing is that the Quran never documents any connection to Abraham - there only are claims. And a third is that nearly nothing of the central claims in the Quran agrees with what the only other source about Abraham, the Bible, tells.

    123 6/161i: "- - - Faith - - -". = Islam. According to the Quran Abraham and all other good persons in the Bible were good Muslims- like always without any documentation. It should not be necessary to mention that the Bible - and science - disagree.

    124 6/161j: "- - - he (Abraham*) (certainly) joined not gods with Allah". Very naturally if the Bible is correct when it tells that Abraham believed in Yahweh and was not involved with Allah at all.

    125 6/161k: "- - - he (Abraham*) (certainly) joined not gods with Allah". One more of the many texts or quotes in the Quran which could not have been reliably written into the claimed "Mother Book" (13/39b, 43/4b+c, 85/21-22) in Heaven (of which the Quran is claimed to be a copy) eons ago, unless predestination was and is 100% like the Quran claims many places (if you look, you will find more cases than we mention - we only mention some of the obvious ones). If man has free will - even partly only (an expression some Muslims use to flee from the problem full predestination contra free will for man (and also contra that there is no meaning in praying to Allah for help, if everything already is predestined in accordance with a Plan "nobody and nothing can change" - a problem which Muslims seldom mention), and an expression no Muslim we have met has ever defined) - and can change his mind, full and reliable clairvoyance about the future, not to mention the distant future, is impossible even for a god, as the man always could/can change his mind or his words once more, in spite of Islam's claims. There are at least 5 reasons - at least 3 of them unavoidable - for this:

    1. When something is changed, automatically the future is changed.
    2. The laws of chaos will be at work and change things, if even a tiny part is made different. And multiply even a tiny change with some billion people through the centuries, and many and also big things will be changed.
    3. The displacement of a happening - f.x. the death of a warrior in battle - of only one yard or one minute may or even will change the future forever (that yard or minute f.x. may mean that the warrior killed - or not killed - an opponent). The laws of chaos and the "Butterfly Effect" and the "Domino Effect" kick in.

    4. The so-called "Butterfly Effect"; "a butterfly flapping its wing in Brazil may cause a storm in China later on" or "a small bump may overturn a big load".
    5. The so-called "Domino Effect": Any change will cause this and this to change, which will cause this and this to change, which will cause this and this to change - - - and so on forever. Also each cause may cause one or more or many changes. And: The Butterfly Effect only may happen, whereas the Domino Effect is unavoidable and inexorable - a main reason why if you in a battle is killed 5 meters from or 5 minutes later than where and when Allah has predestined - not to mention if you die when tilling your fields 50 miles off - unavoidably the entire future of the world is changed. Perhaps not much changed, but like said; multiply it with many billion people through the centuries, and the world is totally changed. And full clairvoyance of course totally impossible - except in occultism, mysticism, made up legends, and in fairy tales.

     

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

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

    126 7/80d: “- - - he (Lut/Lot*) said to his people (the people in Sodom and Gomorrah*).” Wrong. The local people were not Lot’s people. Both the Bible and the Quran are unanimous: Lot was a stranger to the land and had come from Ur in Chaldea in south Iraq (together with Abraham). It also from both books is clear that he had not mingled enough with the locals to become one of them. (Muslims all the same use that for an explanation).

    127 7/85d: "To the Madyan people we (Allah*) sent Shu'ayb - - -". Shu'ayb is the third of the claimed three Arab prophets of the old according to the Quran - a claimed prophet with whom Muhammad makes yet another parallel to his own position in Mecca: What Muhammad experienced there, was indicated to be what prophets normally experienced - no reason for his few followers to be depressed even if the majority of the people did not accept his teachings. Also Shu'ayb may or may not be from folklore. Islam likes to claim he was identical with the father-in-law of Moses, Jethro (in 2. Mos. 2/18, and 4. Mos. 10/29 also called Hobab). There is no rational reason for believing this. Also YA in his comment to this, YA1054, says: "His identification with Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, has no warrant, and I reject it." The Quran f.x. tells Shu'ayb was 4. generation (= ca. 100 - 120 years) after Abraham, but there were some 500 years between Abraham and Moses (if they ever lived), which in case also makes the claim that Shu’ayb was identical to Jethro impossible.

    128 7/105d: One small "en passent" here as Muslims do not like the timing of the Exodus, and as M. Yusuf Ali makes a comment (in A1073 to this verse) "(The Jews stayed in Egypt*) perhaps two to four centuries. (Renan allows only one century).": The Bible is very clear on how long time the Jews spent in Egypt: 430 Years, and there was no reason for the Jews to falsify this number, in addition to that in spite of Islam's claims no falsification is known in the Bible - mistakes yes, falsifications no (again: Guess if Islam had screamed about it if even one documented case had been found!). But as Ramses II did not drown, Islam needs to use an earlier pharaoh where one does not know how he died - f.x. Thothmes I (ca. 1540 BC) is mentioned. But Jacob - the patriarch who took the Jews to Egypt lived around 1800 BC (if he is not fiction), or to be exact: Abraham lived - if he is not fiction - around 2ooo - 1800 BC. Jacob was his grandson, and as Abraham was old when he got Isaac (the father of Jacob) it is realistic to say Jacob lived around 1800 or perhaps a bit later. Then it is not possible to use earlier pharaohs than Ramses II if the Jews stayed 430 years. A little twist is necessary in case - and voila!: Islam says (the mentioned YA comment 1073): "- - - Israel stayed there perhaps two to four centuries." Problem solved - without any source for the estimate given. May be the 430 years in the Bible is a falsification? (but in case why?) - the standard and easy "explanation" Muhammad always used.

    And there is another point here you never hear Muslims mention: According to the Bible (1. Mos. 46/27) the Jews were 80 - 90 (70 + the wives of Jacob's sons (+ Joseph and his family)) when they settled in Egypt. The same book mentions 2 - 3 places that when they left Egypt, they were 600ooo men = something like 2.ooo.ooo included women and children. It at least theoretically is quite possible for say 80 to become 2.ooo.ooo in 430 years. But it is in no way possible - scientific nonsense - in 200 or 300 years (and 100 years is a joke) , and even 400 may be unlikely - for a geometrical curve like this is, one extra generation makes a big difference. Also this makes an exodus and a pharaoh around 1500 - 1600 BC like Islam likes to claim to get rid of Ramses II, impossible.

    There are some scientists, though, who thinks Exodus happened a little later, under the son of Ramses II, Merneptah. But that in case as said means later and not before - and under another pharaoh we know did not drown.

    129 7/143c: “- - - I (Moses) am the first to believe.” This one is similar to f.x. 6/14, except here it is Moses instead of Muhammad. But it contradicts the Quran's telling that f.x. Adam, Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, Joseph, Hud, Salih, Shu'ayb, and others were believing Muslims before him. And Moses and all the others were making a lie out of Muhammad’s saying that he – Muhammad – was the first. A number of contradictions. (2/127-133, 3/67, 6/14, 6/163, 26/51). Muslims tells that these contradictions are not contradictions, because it is meant the first of a group, a nation, or something – but that is not what the Quran says (= corrupting the text), and it also does not explain all cases.

    Though as neither science nor Islam has been able to find traces from neither a religion like Islam, nor a god like Allah, nor a book like the Quran, older than 610 AD, Muhammad in reality may have been the first believer in Islam - if he really was a believer (scientists analyzing the Quran tend to believe he believed in the start, but became more "relaxed" and more of a dictator and less of a believer over the years - using his religion to gain power, like so many a self proclaimed "prophet".

    *130 9/22b: “They (terrorists/warriors*) will dwell therein (in paradise) forever. Verily in Allah’s presence is a reward, the greatest (of all)”. Warriors/terrorists are in so high esteem in the eyes of Allah, that they will be invited to live in the parts of paradise that has Allah’s presence. (In the Muslim paradise some parts are even better than others - Jesus f.x. only lives in the 2. heaven, whereas Moses was a better prophet and lives in heaven number four, and top prophets like Abraham and Muhammad of course in number seven, closest to Allah, who resides above number seven. In addition some regions of the heavens are better than others - in the heaven for ordinary Muslims, there f.x. are 4 or 6 or perhaps more gardens - Islam does not know for sure - one better than the other (just hope you, your wives and your children do not merit different gardens).

    Compared to 9/21 this may be an even more ultimate pep talk.

    131 9/25d: "- - - the day of Hunayn - - -". This refers to a battle in 630 AD. But a sentence like this would be meaningless to everybody who did not know this - and as the Quran is a copy from the "mother book" in heaven, it is the same book as all the earlier 124ooo (according to Islam) prophets got - which all were copies of the same book. None of all those claimed 124ooo + none of their claimed followers could understand it. And there are MANY such sentences in the Quran. Just read the book and see how much Abraham or Moses or Samuel or David or Isaiah or a prophet in Siberia or Greenland or Canada or Mexico or Peru or Brazil or England or White Russia or Pakistan or China or the Philippines or Australia and many other places in the years long before Muhammad, would have understood of this. Remember that according to the Quran all communities and cultures got prophets who were teaching Islam at some time - and their books were copies of the same "mother book" from which the Quran was copied - still according to the Quran. Surrealistic. (Though some Muslims tries to explain things away with that it just is the core of the "mother book" which was sent to each prophet - the rest was individual. But this is not what is said in the Quran. The claim thus is a corruption of the book.)

    132 9/70a: "People of Noah, and 'Ad, and Thamud; the People of Abraham, the men of Midian, and the Cities overthrown". 6 time anomalies if we include the ones only mentioned in the Quran.

    133 9/70b: Noah and Abraham are names from the Bible. Ad, Thamud and "the men of Midian" are names of tribes in Arab folklore. (Median - really Madyan in case - is not likely to be the same area to which Moses fled after he killed a man in Egypt, according to the Bible, and is a part of Arabia (in the west). But Moses' Midian also may have been in Sudan - one does not know if he fled east or south. But to fulfill the logic: As the Bible mentions Mt. Horeb (likely another name for Mt. Sinai (today Jabal Musa according to Muslims (34 degrees east, 28.5 degrees north. Roughly 70 km north northwest from Sharm-el-Sheik (Sharm el Shaykh) far south in central Sinai. Also the Islam confirms that it was here Moses met his god and got the mission to take the Jews out from Egypt. This is far from Madyan in Arabia)), it is extremely likely Moses' Midian was in Sinai.

    To be more exact: The Sinai Mountain, or really a mountainous area, has several peaks, the highest of which are Dsjabal (Mountain) Kathrina (2880 m) and Dsjabal Musa (Moses' Mountain - 2285 m). The latter one perhaps is what in the Bible is named Mt. Horeb.(But as the Bible is unclear about exactly where Moses received the 10 commandments, and there is a possibility that this and other central happenings took place in the area of Kadesh-Barnea (some 50 miles/80 km south of Beersheva or Be'er Sheva). If that is the case, there is a possibility for that Mt. Horeb was in Madyan, east of Aqaba. But the large majority of relevant scientists believe Moses' Midian was in Sinai. And if Moses' Midian refers to the land of the Midianites, it is sure it was not Madyan in Arabia.

    ##There is a little additional question concerning Midian in the Quran though: Is this a case similar to Abraham's Paran (El Paran - 1. Mos. 14/6)? Near Mecca there is an area named Faran. Islam has more or less renamed this to Paran, and as the names then are similar, they claim this was Abraham's Faran, even though the Bible indicates it was much further west. To claim that Madyan = Midian is very easy as long as one refrains from proving it.

    134 9/70c: "- - - Abraham's people - - -". Here is a list of people and tribes who according to the Quran were destroyed because they did not accept Allah or sinned against him. But the possible sin and punishment of Abraham's people are not mentioned in the Quran. Some Muslim scholars tell it must be the Babylonians who were "Abraham's people" (Ur in Chaldea was not too far off) and the fall of the first Babylonian empire the punishment. But Abraham - if he is not fiction - lived around 1800 - 2000 BC. Babylon fell to Assyria around 1100 BC (and later to the Persians in 538 BC). The time simply is wrong by some 800 years (but then Islam too often does not care too much about the truth or not, as long as one can get a seemingly logical explanation which corresponds to the Quran, and which little educated and/or wishful believers may believe in - you meet this fact a little too often.)

    In the Bible there is nothing about punishment of Abraham's people. It only says that his father Terah left them and went north, heading for Canaan in the northwest, and brought his son Abram (later renamed by Yahweh to Abraham) and his grandson Lot along - which means that in the Bible there also is nothing about religious or any other quarrel between Abram and his father. Also the story about the pagan gods Abram destroyed and the religious quarrel he had with his people according to the Quran, is not from the Bible - the only perhaps reliable source for information about Abram/Abraham.

    135 9/97a: "The Arabs of the desert (at the time of Muhammad*) - - -". This is quite a time anomaly. One thing is the "normal" anomaly - see 4/13d above. Another is that some millennia ago there existed no "Arabs of the desert". They drifted into the desert from different places and became the mixture later called "Arabs" only after the domestication of the camel made life in the desert possible. Before that no reader of a copy of the claimed "Mother Book" - similar to the Quran - would understand one whistle of what the book was talking about when talking about desert Arabs. (The Arab camel - dromedary - was not domesticated until sometime between 35oo and 2ooo BC perhaps in or near what is now Oman, and the use of it spread very slowly).

    It also took a long time from the camel (dromedary) was domesticated till it became an animal much used for riding:

    Here we include a small, but essential piece of information - essential f.x. for some of the claims regarding Abraham, and even more the claims concerning the claims about Abraham, Mecca, and the Kabah mosque. The dromedary was domesticated sometime between around 2ooo BC and 3500 BC - the exact time is not known (the very first proved case of domesticated dromedary/camel in the Middle East is from Qasr Ibrim in Lower Nubia (east Africa) around 740 BC) - and likely in the coastal area of South Arabia. Abraham according to science lived - if he was a real person - around 2ooo-1800 BC (and far from South Arabia). But today - 27. Dec. 2012 - we discovered a small fact we have not been aware of - small, but essential and revealing in this case: THE DROMEARY - THE ARAB CAMEL - DID NOT COME INTO WIDE USE UNTIL AROUND 1OOO-900 BC (around the time of King Solomon)! And f.x. the first time camels are known to be used in battle, was Cyrus the Great who used camels against Croesus of Lydia in 547 BC, AND THEN TRANSPORT DROMEDARIES, NOT RIDING ONES WERE USED. (Horses not used to camels were frightened by them, and this made problems for the cavalry of Croesus.) This means that as late as in 547 BC - some 1300 years after Abraham - riding camels were not widely enough used to be a factor in daily life (if they had been, riding dromedaries had been used instead by Cyrus). Camels are mentioned in the Books of Moses, too, but this is reckoned by science to be one of the proofs for that those books are written long after Moses.

    Science also know that the camel was not introduced in the area where Abraham lived, until the Assyrians started trade with South Arabia until around 800 AC-

    This means that Abraham did not have camels, and definitely not riding camels. This makes his claimed trip with his animals to the lonesome, waterless and empty desert valley where Mecca later grew up, physically impossible, his claimed building of the big Kabah hundreds of miles and more in kilometers from home, even more meaningless as he could not go back and forth between his home and his temple, and his claimed visits there later as hopeless a Muslim claim as his first claimed trip.

    THIS MEANS HE NEVER VISITED MECCA, NEVER LEFT HAGAR AND ISHMAEL IN THAT VALLEY, THAT HE NEVER BUILT THE KABAH, AND THAT HE NEVER VISITED THE PLACE LATER,TOO. We have said the same before, but without the camel/dromedary Muhammad's claims about Abraham going to that dry desert valley to leave Hagar and Ishmael, and later to build the Kabah, and then to visit the place now and then, move from extremely improbable to physically impossible.

    Added 5. Apr. 2013 AD: Quoted from the Scandinavian newspaper Aftenposten published today, where professor emeritus (in physics) Redvald Skullerud says: "(It is claimed that Abraham*) used camels for transport some 1200 years before the camel was introduced as a transport animal in the area when the Assyrians started trade with South Arabia". As you see it is an accepted scientific fact that even though the dromedary was domesticated and somewhat used in South Arabia, it was not introduced further north until a long time - 1ooo+ years - after Abraham, and then as a transport animal. To use it as a riding animal came even later. And without the camel, it would be impossible for Abraham to go back and forth between Canaan and the dry desert valley where Mecca later came - crossing rough and forbidding big deserts. Abraham's claimed connection to Mecca is an impossibility.

    136 9/114a: "And Abraham prayed for his father's forgiveness - - -". This is not from the Bible. There is said nothing about his father's religion or that his father (Terah in the Bible, Azar in the Quran) was a sinner and needed forgiveness in the Bible. There also is no conflict between the two in the Bible.

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

    137 9/114b: "And Abraham prayed for his father's forgiveness - - -". This gives a meaning if Yahweh was Abram/Abraham's god. But what is the idea with prayers in Islam, if it is true like the Quran many places states that Allah predestines everything, and predestines it according to his Plan, which nobody and nothing can change? If nothing can change what he already has predestined, also prayers cannot change anything.

    138 9/114c: "And Abraham prayed for his father's forgiveness only because of a promise he had made to him". The Quran in 9/113 tells it is not proper for a prophet to pray for Pagans. In the Quran Abraham is the 2. most central prophet, and thus of course cannot do anything not proper, so an explanation for his praying for his father has to be found: He prayed because he had promised to do so - - - but how could such a big prophet give so improper a promise?

    139 9/114d: “- - - he (Abraham - said by Islam to be a Muslim*) dissociated himself from him (Abraham’s claimed pagan father*)” Beware that everybody of any positive consequence whom the Quran “borrows” from the Bible, is transformed to be a Muslim in the Quran - anyone, even Jesus and Adam and Noah (the 5. of the most central 5 claimed Muslim prophets in Islam) and Joseph, and Moses and all the prophets - and Abraham.

    Be no friend even with your parents if they are not Muslims! (This is a quite normal demand in extreme religious sects - the leaders want full control.)

    This is one of the rather sad points of the Quran - even a central point: Islam shall mean so much to you, that if even your closest family - children or parents - do not obey you and become Muslims: Leave them and forget them. Fanaticism shall be the norm in Islam. Similar things are said more places in the Quran - Noah should f.x. let his son drown, because the son was no Muslim (which Noah was said to be!!). A nice and benevolent and human religion.

    Only Islam really can be your closest friend. Nothing and nobody else - except Muhammad - counts.

    The irony here is that according to the Bible (1. Mos. 11/31-32) the two stayed together for many, many years. (And any honest scientist will tell you that according to normal rules, the Bible will be reckoned to be more reliable than the Quran.)

    140 9/114e: "- - - he (Abraham*) dissociated himself from his father (and left him*) - - -". This is contradicting the Bible. What the Bible tells about his father, Terah, is found in 1. Mos. 11/25-32. The text which is relevant here is 1. Mos. 11/31-32: "Terah took his son Abram (later renamed to Abraham by Yahweh - a detail not mentioned in the Quran is that his name was not at all Abraham until late in his life: 1. Mos. 17/1-5: "When Abraham was ninety-nine years old, the Lord (Yahweh*) appeared to him and said, - - - 'No longer will you be called Abram, your name will be Abraham'"*), his grandson Lot son of Haran, and his daughter-in-law Sarai (later renamed Sarah*), the wife of his son Abram, and together they set out from Ur of the Chaldeans (in what now is south Iraq*) to go to Canaan (approximately what is now Israel*). But when they came to Haran (in what now is north Iraq*), they settled there. Terah lived 205 years, and died in Haran". Nothing about Abram dissociated himself from his father - on the contrary. Later - in 1. Mos. 12/4-6 - Abram continued to Canaan. Now Abram/Abraham may have been fiction. But if he has lived, any professor - or even student - of history will say that the Bible is a more reliable source than the Quran, as it is written 1ooo years closer to what happened, and was building on strong traditions - and no serious professor believes the Quran is made by a god and thus reliable, a fact that is proved by the fact that no serious professor - or even serious student - ever use the Quran for a source for anything which happened before 610 AD, and only carefully for things which happened after that year.

    141 9/114f: "- - - for Abraham was most tenderhearted, forbearing". A man who uses his wife as a bite for riches and lets her be taken away by men obviously intending her for their harems (1. Mos. 12/13-19 and 20/1-3), a man who sends away his son and the son's mother to survive as best they could in a foreign land, a man who is willing to kill his own and only remaining son, and his only son by then in wedlock (1. Mos. 22/2-12) (He got 6 more later - 1. Mos. 25/1-2 - but these disappeared from the story) - well, such a man is not most tenderhearted. To quote a wise man: "That something is said or written does not necessarily mean that it is true" - a fact we should have mentioned more often when talking about the Quran.

    142 11/69a: “There came Our (Allah’s*) Messengers to Abraham...“ It is clear from the following verses that these messengers were angels. But this is clearly contradicted by:

    1. 12/109: “Nor did we send before thee (humanity, man*) (as Messengers) any but men.”
    2. 16/43: “And before thee (Muhammad*) also the Messengers we sent were but men..."
    3. 21/7: “Before thee (Muhammad*), also, the messengers we sent were but men”.
    4. 25/20: “And the messengers whom We (Allah*) sent before thee were all (men)...”

     

    Well, 3/42 - 6/130 - 11/69 – 11/77 – 11/81– 19/17b – 19/19 – 22/75 all say that not all were men. A nice little contradiction to 12/109 – 16/43 – 21/7 – 25/20 which all says all messengers were men.

    (8 contradictions - actually many more, as each "yes" contradicts each "no").

    143 11/69c: In comment A1565 to this verse A. Yusuf Ali among other things tells about Abraham that "he had triumphed over the persecution of Nimrod". But Nimrod was the great grandson of Noah (1. Mos. 10/6-8), and lived millennia before Abraham. (Look f.x. at the information that after the flood only a few humans were alive. At the time of Abraham the world was populated again, and that takes time). Abraham cannot have been persecuted by Nimrod. (If the story about the flood and the story about Abraham took place in some form or other, science believes there were a couple of millennia or more between them.) Flatly wrong.

    144 11/69-83: The stories about Abraham and partly about Lot/Lut are closer to the Biblical story than normal for Biblical stories in the Quran, but a number of details differ - some of them serious.

    F.x. the Quran claimed Abraham took all his family and huge flocks of animals and travelled from Canaan and/or Sinai and lived in the empty, narrow, waterless desert valley where Mecca later was built until, he left Hagar and his son Ishmael there. And later he returned there to build the big mosque Kabah for his family. But neither the Quran nor one single Muslim mentions that there are some 1200 km of mostly harsh desert - some of it pretty rugged - between Canaan and Sinai where he lived, and Mecca - or that the mentioned desert valley naturally had no food or water for his animals - or how often his family could visit the big mosque 1200 km off. Believe the story if you are able to.

    Also remember that even though the camel likely was domesticated at that time, it hardly was used for riding until a lot later, and that Abraham had no camels. Then it was a long trip - both ways.

    Added 5. Apr. 2013 AD: Quoted from the Scandinavian newspaper Aftenposten published today, where professor emeritus (in physics) Redvald Skullerud says: "(It is claimed that Abraham*) used camels for transport some 1200 years before the camel was introduced as a transport animal in the area when the Assyrians started trade with South Arabia". As you see it is an accepted scientific fact that even though the dromedary was domesticated and somewhat used in South Arabia, it was not introduced further north until a long time - 1ooo+ years - after Abraham, and then as a transport animal. To use it as a riding animal came even later. And without the camel, it would be impossible for Abraham to go back and forth between Canaan and the dry desert valley where Mecca later came - crossing rough and forbidding big deserts. Abraham's claimed connection to Mecca is an impossibility.

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

    145 11/70a: "But when he (Abraham*) saw they (his guests*) went not towards the (meal) - - -". Many places in the world it was a wise custom not to eat when visiting an enemy - the food could be poisoned. Here it is indicated that Abraham feared they could be enemies as they would not eat his food. But the real reason was that they were angels, and it is implicated in the Quran that angels do not eat (contradiction to the Bible - 1. Mos. 18/8 - the 3 visitors ate).

    146 11/70b: "- - - the people of Lut (= Lot in the Bible*)". Here it is meant the people in Sodom and Gomorrah - it is not said here, but according to the Bible - 1. Mos. 19/1 - Lot was in Sodom. (Nobody knows exactly where the two towns lay. Some traditions place them where the Dead Sea is now - an unlikely explanation as the Dead Sea is old. The Quran places them near the shore of that sea - which may be correct - - - if they ever existed. But what is clear both in the Bible and in the Quran in spite of these words, is that those people were NOT the people of Lot. He was the nephew of Abraham and born in Ur in Chaldea in South Iraq. He left Ur as a boy or youth together with his grandfather Terah (Azar in the Quran) and his Uncle Abram - later renamed Abraham - and lived for years in Haran in North Iraq until he and Abram continued to Canaan (now approximately Israel), where they settled in Negev. All this is according to the Bible (1. Mos. 11/31-32 + 12/1-8), but not contradicted by the Quran. They later split because their flocks of animals needed wide areas for grass - Abraham stayed in Canaan (now approximately Israel), whereas Lot moved further east to the valley of Jordan, which may fit well with placing Sodom and Gomorrah near the Dead Sea, as this sea is in the southern end of the Jordan Valley.

    But what remains is that Lot was a stranger to the area and to the towns of Sodom and Gomorrah. It also is very clear both from the Bible and the Quran that he had not become a naturalized member of the local people - it is clear from the story both in the Bible and in the Quran that he was reckoned to be a stranger. But this sentence is necessary to make Lot confirm to the Quran's claims that Allah sent the prophets (in the Quran Lot is a prophet - not in the Bible) "to their own people". (Claims which are contradicted even in the Quran by the Chaldean (Iraq) Abram/Abraham working in Canaan (Israel), the Canaanite Jew and claimed prophet Joseph working in Egypt, the Egyptian Jew Moses working for 40 years in Midian in Sinai(?), by the Israeli prophet Jonah working in Nineveh in Assyria in what is now part of Iraq (this is accepted by the Quran) - - - and by the Chaldean Lot living and perhaps working as a prophet near the Dead Sea).

    147 11/71b: "And his (Abraham's*) wife (Sarah*) laughed - - -". See 11/68c above.

    148 11/71d: "- - - We (Allah*) gave her (Sarah, the wife of Abraham*) the glad tidings of Isaac, and after him, Jacob". This is one of at least two places in the Quran where it can be understood like Muhammad believed that both Isaac and Jacob were the sons of Abraham (Jacob in reality was the son of Isaac), and you will meet persons claiming this is what the Quran says - whereas Muslims in the light of later knowledge denies this. We leave the point there - there are so many wrong points in the Quran, that it is not worth the time to use effort on a point which may be or may be not is wrong.

    149 11/73a: "The grace of Allah and His blessing on you (Abraham and Sarah*) - - -". Contradicted by the Bible, which tells that Abraham's god was Yahweh. 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.

    150 11/73b: "The grace of Allah and His blessing on you (Abraham and Sarah*) - - -". This may have some value if Allah exists and in addition is a god.

    151 11/74: "When the fear had passed from (the mind of) Abraham - - -". A time anomaly. See 4/13d above.

    152 11/75b: "- - - Abraham was - - - given to look to Allah". Contradicted by the Bible, which tells his god was Yahweh, nor Allah. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

    153 11/76b: "O Abraham! Seek not this (= plead not for Sodom and Gomorrah*". Here is another contradiction to the Bible: In the Bible (1. Mos. 18/23-33) Abraham pleads Yahweh to spare the two towns, and makes him promise to do so if he can find only 10 righteous men there. But there were no 10 righteous men and the towns were destroyed".

    154 11/84d: "- - - Shu'ayb - - -". To place the special Arab claimed prophets chronologically, it seems that Islam claims the succession was this (YA1064): Noah (not Arab prophet, though*), Hud, Salih, Abraham (not Arab), (Lot/Lut (not Arab), and Shu'ayb. Shu'ayb is said to be 4 generations after Lot, though we do not find this specified in the Quran, which in case means also he was before Moses around 1375 - 1335 BC. Lot of course was a contemporary of Abraham - his nephew. As Hud and Silah were before Shu'ayb, it is likely, but not sure they also were before Abraham. Abraham lived - if he is not fiction - ca. 1800-2000 BC according to science, which means that Shu'ayb (if not fiction) lived about one century later or a bit more, BC. This makes impossible the Muslim claim that Shu’ayb was identical to the father-in-law of Moses, Jethro. Science tells that if the Exodus ever took place, it happened ca. 1235 BC, and if the Bible is correct Moses then was 80 years, which means he lived from ca.1315 BC to ca. 1195 BC (he became 120 years according to the Bible). There in case are some 300 - 500 years between Shu'ayb and Moses (and Jethro). To make a list:

    1. Adam (and Eve) - unclear when.
    2. Noah - unclear when, likely 2ooo - 4ooo BC. (There was an enormous flood in Mesopotamia around 3600 BC - found in 1929 by the British archeologist C. Leonard Woolley (17/4/1880 - 20/2/1960) - which may explain the tales about the Big Flood. It happened around 3200 BC.)
    3. Hud (the 'Ad people) - unknown when, but the first of the 3 claimed Arab prophets. Long before Moses. (and likely also before Abraham/Lot as Hud was before Shu'ayb).
    4. Salih (the Thamud people) - unknown when. Well before Moses (and likely also before Abraham/Lot as Salih was before Shu'ayb).
    5. Abraham and Lot - around 2ooo - 1800 BC according to science.

    6. Shu'ayb (the Madyan People) - 4 generations (some 120 years) after Lot = roughly around 1700 BC. The last one of the 3 claimed Arab prophets.
    7. Moses - Exodus according to science was around 1235 BC, which means he was in Midian ca. 1275 - 1235 BC.

     

    All prophets told about in the Quran, had experiences like Muhammad's. Hardly a coincidence - it "told" his followers and others that Muhammad's problems were "normal" for prophets, and thus that he was a normal prophet (true or not true).

    But a serious problem here is that the information this time line is built on, does not fit the few known facts (another problem is that when you search Internet for facts about Hud/'Ad, Salih/Thamud, Shu'ayb/Madyan/People of the Wood, the articles are so dominated by the intention to make the claims in the Quran sound correct, that it is difficult to see what are really facts and what are "adjusted facts" - adjusted by wishful thinking). What seem to be facts, are that if the 'Ad people ever existed, they lived in an area named Ubar in the southeast of the Arab peninsula (somewhere near where Saudi Arabia, Oman, and Yemen meet today). When is unclear, but before the Thamud. We have found no reliable mentioning of them in reliable history.

    The Thamud is said to have lived in al-Hirj, a mountainous area very roughly halfway between Damascus and Mecca. A people named Thamud are mentioned in historical sources, but the very oldest one is connected to the Assyrian king Sargon II and dated to ca. 715 BC - far later than Moses. This people disappeared from historical sources around 600-400 BC. Islam wants their disappearance to have been connected to volcanic eruptions, but we have been unable to find confirmation for volcanic activity in that area around 600-400 BC. Volcanism in Arabia mainly came to an end some 400ooo years ago.

    Then finally there is the last of the 3 specific Arab claimed prophets, Shu'ayb. He in the Quran is connected to Madyan and to "the People of the Wood". This is somewhat complicated. For one thing it is unclear if "the Midianites" and "the People of the Wood" were the same or two different people. For another it is unclear where the Bible's Midian was situated. Originally we like many others believed the Bible's Midian and the Quran's Madyan were the same place - in the north-west of the Arab peninsula. But further studies have made us doubt this. There are two possible explanations for the Bible's Midian: Moses' Midian may have been to the east of Egypt or to the south of that country - it is not specified in the Bible whether Moses went east or south. If he went south (= along the Nile valley where it was easy to find a living), his Midian was in Sudan. If he went east, it was somewhere east of Egypt. And then the question is: Was the Bible's Midian just the name of a place somewhere, or did it refer to the land of the Midianites (Midian was the 4. of Abraham's 6 sons with his second wife, Keturah - 1. Mos. 25/2). If it was just a geographical name it may have been anywhere - f.x. in Madyan in Arabia. But if it referred to "the land of the Midianites", it was on the Sinai peninsula. If Moses found a Midian to the East of Egypt, this last explanation is the likely one for 2 reasons: For one thing this Midian was on his way east and much closer than Madyan in Arabia, and for another: The Midianites were related to the Jews and a natural place for a fleeing Jew to settle. And what is absolutely sure is that as the Thamud according to history seems to have existed from perhaps 800 or more BG to around 600-400 BC, and the Madyanites/Midianites of the Quran lived later according to that book, it is totally impossible that Shu'ayb could be identical to Moses' father-in-law, Jethro, like many Muslims claim - Jethro lived around 1350 BC.

    The likely story is that the correct name for the people here is "Madyanites", not "Midianites", and that they were from Madyan - and not the same Midianites/Midian which Moses visited. But it is still unclear if they at the same time were "the People of the Wood".

    One thing which is absolutely sure: As for the Thamuds history tells that they existed from around or somewhat before 800 BC till around 600-400 BC when they disappeared, and as the Quran claims they lived/were destroyed well before Moses (= well before 1235 BC), the time line in the Quran is some 1ooo years wrong on the claimed Arab prophets - or at least on Salih and his Thamud. Worse: As the Quran also places the 3 claimed prophets to times before or shortly after Abraham, who lived(?) some 2ooo-1800 BC, the Quran's time line here is perhaps 1500 years or more wrong.

    155 12/19a: The men from the caravan (the Bible says they were Midianites - 1. Mos. 37/28 and 37/36 - Midianites = descendants from Abraham's 4. son with Keturah - 1. Mos. 25/2 - or people from Midian) found Joseph in the well, and “So they concealed him as a treasure”. But the very next verse contradicts this story. See 12/20 below.

    156 12/31e: "Allah preserve us (some women in Egypt*)!" This tells indirectly, but clearly that the women were Muslim. But Islam was totally unknown in Egypt around 1700-1800 BC (Joseph lived something like a century after Abraham, his great grandfather, who lived around 1800-2000 BC according to science - if they were not both fiction. Or to recon the other way: Exodus was ca. 1335 BC. Then the Jews had lived in Egypt for 430 years according to the Bible (2. Mos. 12/40-41). This happened(?) a few years before the Jews moved to Egypt - if the numbers are correct it must have happened around 1770 BC. In Egypt people (likely except the Jews partly) were polytheists - no trace of monotheism is found at this time. (There was Akn Aton and his sun god, but not just then (pharaoh 1372 - 1355 BC)).

    Muhammad claimed Islam had existed to all times and in all places - obviously wrong.

    157 12/38a: "- - - I (Joseph*) - - - Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob - - -". 4 time anomalies (for everybody reading copies from “the Mother of the Book" = similar to the Quran, before these persons lived).

    158 12/99c: “- - - he (Joseph*) provided a home for his parents - - -“. Not possible, as his mother (Rachel) died already when Benjamin was born – he could provide a home only for his father. (Islam explains or “explains” this with claiming that he reckoned the sister of his mother (Leah - also wife of Jacob) to be his mother, but there is nothing neither in the Quran nor in the Bible saying so. But then it is quite normal for Islam to make claims without facts.) One more small detail here. Abraham first married Leah, and later her sister Rachel. But Muslims cannot be married to 2 sisters at the same time, which Jacob was for a long time. How then could Jacob be a good and devoted Muslim? - the "mother book" in Heaven they claim he, too, got a copy and the laws from, had not changed, and thus also not the law of Allah.

    159 13/38d: “For each period is a book revealed”. Because times are changing, Islam claims that Allah has sent down new books now and then – to Abraham (a nomad some 1900 years BC hardly knew how to read and write), to Moses, to the later Jews, and to Jesus (except that the scriptures in NT only came years after Jesus died) – and finally the Quran.

    160 14/4a: “We (Allah*) sent not a Messenger except (to teach) in the language of his (own) people - - -.” Wrong. Joseph - if he was a messenger had to speak Egyptian, not his native language. If you can call Moses a Messenger, he had to speak Egyptian in Egypt – not Hebrew. And Egyptian in Midian (in Arabia or Sudan) if he did proselyte there (something the Bible does not indicate). And Lot was from Ur in Chaldea (not too far from the Persian Gulf in Iraq), not from Sodom or Gomorrah – and when the Quran says the people of Sodom and Gomorrah were his people, also that is wrong, this even more so as both the Bible and the Quran makes it very clear that not only was he a stranger, but also he was not integrated with the locals. And Jonah (a Hebrew - Jonah 1/9) was not from Nineveh, Assyria, where he had to preach. Also Abraham was a foreigner (from Ur in Chaldea) with a language foreign to the place he settled down (Canaan and Sinai) – if one reckons him to be a messenger.

    There also is a related question: Why did Allah send down the Quran only in Arabic? - according to Hadiths Muhammad said it had been sent down in 7 varieties, which all the same all were correct, even if they varied. But why only in Arab. The thousands of Jews in the area could have benefitted from it in Hebrew. And there were big civilizations nearby: Persia, Egypt, the East Roman Empire - but nothing in Persian, Egyptian, Greek or Latin. This is even more strange as at least Persian, Greek and Latin had complete alphabet (Egypt had pictures), and it had been possible to write Allah's exact meaning, which all too often was impossible in the unfinished Arab alphabet (it lacked vowels and the points modern Arab use to write some of its letters). We have seen claimed that the reason was that Muhammad only knew Arab, and thus could not recite it in other languages. But it had cost an omniscient god exactly nothing to send it down in those languages in other ways. But if it was Muhammad who made up the Quran and knew only Arab well enough, an explanation is very easy to see.

    161 14/9b: "- - - 'Ad, and Thamud - - -". 2 tribes who according to old Arab folklore lived in Arabia in really old times, and whom you meet several times in the Quran. According to Islam they lived around and a little later than the times of Abraham but before Moses. Abraham lived - if he is not fiction - around 1800-2000 BC according to science and Moses around 1300 BC. There exists no real information about them, except maybe one or two small mentionings. The tales in the Quran are from Arab folklore, adjusted to fit Islam by Allah or by someone else. For the ones who do not know the Bible well - we f.x. know that quite a few Hindus read this, as there are problems with Islam in India - we mention that Noah is one of the very early persons in OT - the one who with his family survived the Big Flood (7/64c+d).

    162 14/35b: “Remember Abraham said: ’O my Lord! Make this city (Mecca*) one of peace and security; - - - “. Abraham never visited Mecca. Besides: There was no city at the time of Abraham – this both according to reality and to the Quran. Remember how Hagar run back and forth there without finding people and without finding water. And even the nearby verse 14/37 mentions a valley, but no town. Mecca as a town was only some generations old at the time of Muhammad - some 2500 years after Abraham. Wrong and a contradiction with both the Quran and with reality. Also see 2/127a above and 14/35c just below.

    Also remember that Abraham did not have the camel. The camel as a transport animal was not introduced in Abraham's parts of the world until some 1200 years later - and as a riding animal even later. Without the camel, to go back and forth between Canaan/Sinai where he lived and the dry valley of Mecca - through hundreds of frying hot desert - and with his huge flocks of animals, was not possible.

    163 14/35c: “Remember Abraham said: ’O my Lord! Make this city (Mecca*) one of peace and security; - - - “. Contradicted also by the Bible. The Bible gives Abraham's movements from he arrived in Canaan and till he died (1. Mos. ch.12 - 25). He according to this never was within hundreds of miles (or kilometers) from Mecca - at that time just a dry, somewhat narrow desert valley in the middle of nowhere. 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.

    164 14/37a: "- - - I (Abraham*) have made some of my offspring to dwell in a valley without cultivation - - -". It here is referred to Muhammad’s never documented claim that Ishmael - Abraham's son out of wedlock with the slave girl Hagar - settled in Mecca (which did not exist then, but is situated in a dry, quite narrow desert valley)". This is directly contradicted by the Bible, which clearly states that Ishmael and his descendants settled on the border of Egypt some place north of the Red Sea (1. Mos.25/18: "His (Ishmaels*) descendants settled in the area from Havilah to Shur, near the border of Egypt - - -"). And NB: This was written down at least 1ooo years before there was any reason for the writers not to give correct information. 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.

    But to claim to descend from Abraham gave both Muhammad and his new religion weight. Such things have been done many a time through history.

    165 14/37b: "- - - a valley without cultivation - - -". Remember this when Muslims claim Abraham lived in or near the Valley of Mecca when he sent away Hagar and Ishmael, and that they therefore ended up living in that valley and town (the town/city did not exist then, also according to the Quran - Hagar could not find people at all). This valley was a dry and rather narrow desert valley - according to the Quran not even the Zamzam well existed then. Abraham was a rich nomad with big flocks of all kinds of domesticated animals - so big that according to the Bible Lot and he had to split up because their flocks were so big that the land could not feed and water them when they stayed together (1. Mos. 13/5-9). A man with so big flocks of animals should travel with his everything deep into the desert and settle in a dry desert valley without food or water for his animals - and far from where he lived in Canaan - now ca. central Israel west of Jordan. This on top of everything else we know about Abraham and his travels.

    Believe it who is able to. (Singular with a reason - there cannot be many, except perhaps in religious blindness.)

    And even more: When Lot and Abraham split up, Lot choose the eastern part with Jordan Valley and down along the Dead Sea (where it is likely Sodom and Gomorra lay) - and thus the "neighborhood" of the border of Arabia - whereas Abraham settled in Canaan = further west towards the Mediterranean Sea. To get to Mecca a normal way, he thus had to cross all the territory of Lot with his huge flocks of animals, and march some 750 miles (some 1200 km) away from home, partly through harsh desert, to get to Mecca - a place where nothing existed at that time.

    Any further comments necessary?

    166 14/37ba "- - - the Sacred House - - -". This refers to the Kabah Mosque in Mecca. To take its history according to Islam:

    It was originally built by Adam. Now, science and for that kind religion, believe that if Eden ever existed, it was in the wetlands of what is now South Iraq. All the same Adam went all the way from his green home in or outside Eden, to this dry desert valley some months grueling march to the west, and built a big mosque there - what for we have never heard any Muslim explain.

    But during the Big Flood (7/64c+d) and during the millennia the mosque was destroyed. Some say that Noah repaired it, but that time passed and wore it down. When Ishmael grew old enough to be a helper - it is not said how old - Abraham, therefore, rebuilt the big mosque. No Muslim have ever explained us why he built it so big for just his own after all small family, or why he built it 700-800 miles from where he lived - and thus a place where he and his family never could use it, and in a place where still nearly no-one lived.

    We also points to the fact that neither Adam, nor Noah, nor Abraham had the camel. How did they then travel those long and many miles through the horrible Arabian Desert? No Muslim have ever been able to explain us this - but then most Muslims are not aware of the problem, as "the Religion of the Truth" never tells its followers that Abraham did not have camels. Also: From where did those 3 learn the technology to build big stone constructions? F.x. the largest "buildings" Abraham according to the Bible made, were a few altars. And what about the time used? - to build one of the big stone churches in Europe easily took 20-30 years for highly qualified and sizeable work force. Solomon used 7 years, lots of money, and lots of skilled workers to build his temple. The two amateur stonemasons Abraham and Ishmael on the other hand seems to have built the Kabah in some weeks during one or a few of Abraham's claimed visits to see his son in that desert valley.

    But new millennia took its toll. Some years before Muhammad became a Muslim, the Kabah was rebuilt. But the now rich merchant city could not afford to use the foundations of Abraham - that big he had built his far of and far into the wilderness mosque for his family. The rich Mecca had to build smaller.

    There are times one starts wonder what brainwashing - included religious such - does to a man's brain and his ability to use his brain.

    The very plain story is that neither Adam, nor Noah, nor Abraham, nor any other Biblical person ever was in the Mecca Valley, not to mention built a mosque there. But it is good propaganda as long as anyone believes it. Also see 2/127a above.

    167 14/37c: "- - - Sacred House - - -". The Kabah in Mecca. Muhammad claimed its original foundation was made by Adam, and its next one by Abraham and Ishmael. In addition to all the other improbabilities here which deny this, it today is possible to find out how old the oldest parts of Kabah are. As far as we know, Islam has not tried to find out - their own belief in the Quran is not strong enough to run the risk of finding an age of f.x. 1900 years.

    Besides they have a problem: They will have to use a non-Muslim expert to find out. Because of al-Taqiyya no-one will really believe any Muslim claiming he has found an age of f.x. 3850 years for Abraham's stones (f.x. the one with his claimed foot-marks), and f.x. some 5700(?) for Noah's part if he was involved, not to mention if they found an age compatible with Adam's life.

    168 14/39a: "Praise be to Allah - - -". This is said by Abraham, but the Bible contradicts and says Abraham's god was Yahweh, not Allah. Besides there exists not one trace from a god like Allah or a religion like Islam older than 610 AD anywhere in the world.

    169 14/39b: "Praise be to Allah who granted unto me (Abraham*) in old age Ishmael and Isaac - - -". Contradicted by the Bible, which says Ishmael was a result of Sarah's wish for children in the family (1. Mos. 16/1-4), and Isaac was given by Yahweh (1. Mos. 18/10). 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. Also see 37/103 - a serious one in this connection.

    170 14/39c: "- - - granted unto me (Abraham*) in old age Ishmael and Isaac - - -". 3 time anomalies.

    171 14/40c: "And accept Thou (here indicated Allah*) my (Abraham's*) prayer". What for? If everything is predestined like the Quran states many places, prayer have no effect - nothing can be changed.

    ###172 15/51b: "- - - the guests of Abraham - - -". According to the Quran these were some angels in the shape of men, who later continued to Lot. According to the Bible it was Yahweh and 2 angels - all three in the shape of men. (1. Mos. 18/1, 18/10, 18/13, 18/17, 18/20, 18/22, 18/26, 18/33 - When the word "Lord" is used like here in the Bible, it always means Yahweh. (In NT a few times Jesus.)). The two angels later continued to Lot in Sodom (1. Mos. 19/1).

    173 15/51-60: The angels visiting Abraham - details different from and/or often contradicting the Bible. This story - like a number of others - are with variations told several times in the Quran (as said viewed as literature the Quran is not a good book - f.x. often boring and repeating itself like here).

    Not mentioned just here, is that the Quran claims Abraham built the Kabah mosque in Mecca - not mentioning that it is some 750 miles/1200 km by air and mostly harsh desert between Canaan (and also Sinai) where Abraham lived and Mecca. You are free to believe it.

    174 15/52b: "He (Abraham*) said (when the angels came*):, 'We feel afraid of you'". In the Bible he did not feel so, but gave them food, which they ate (1. Mos. 18/8) - - - which contradicts other places in the Quran which claims that Abraham grew afraid of his guests because they did not eat. (In the old times it might mean they were enemies, in the Quran angels do not eat, as they do not need to - one more indication for that the angels of Yahweh were different from the angels of Allah, and thus were from different heavens, and thus from different gods.)

    175 15/53: "- - - a son (Ishaq*) endowed with wisdom". In the Bible Abraham just was told he would get a son (1. Mos. 18/10). From where did Muhammad get the rest of the information?

    176 15/54b: "Do you give me (Abraham*) the glad tiding that old age has seized me?" Abraham is skeptical to the message because of his age (he was not older, though, than he later got 6 sons with a new wife, Keturah, something the Quran does not mention (1. Mos. 25/1-2)).

    177 15/56b: "- - - such as go astray". The indicated meaning is "such ones who do not believe in Islam". It is up to you if you will believe that Islam existed some 2500 years before Muhammad, at the time of Abraham some 1800-2ooo BC. The earliest traces which are ever found from a god like Allah, a religion like Islam, or a book like the Quran, are younger than 610 AD, when Muhammad started his mission - a fact Islam and Muslims NEVER mention.

    178 15/60a: "Except his (Lot's*) wife - - -". Here is a contradiction to the Bible - there she was not predestined to be destroyed. Another contradiction: According to the Bible Abraham tried to save Sodom and Gomorrah. This you do not find here.

    179 16/43b: “And before thee (Muhammad*) also the Messengers We (Allah*) sent were but men - - -“. This is contradicted by verses in the Quran telling that angels were sent as messengers (beware: the Quran here says Messengers, not Prophets) to at least Abraham, Lot, and Mary, and that Jinns were sent as messengers to Jinns, (only men 12/109 - 21/7 - 25/20).

    1. 3/42: “Behold the angels (plural*) said (when they came to tell Mary she was going to have the baby Jesus*)”.
    2. 6/130: “O ye assembly of Jinns and men! Came there not unto you messengers (from Us, Allah*) from amongst you - - -.” A rhetoric question demanding the answer “yes” – yes, there came Jinn messengers from Allah to the Jinns, and human messenger from Allah to the humans.
    3. 11/69: “There came Our (Allah’s*) Messengers to Abraham - - -“. It is clear from the following verses that these messengers were angels.
    4. 11/77: When Our (Allah's*) messengers came to Lut (Lot*) - - -". The same angels who visited Abraham".
    5. Also the messengers to Mary were angels according to both the Bible and the Quran.

     

    At least 4 contradictions.

    In the Bible also a few female prophets - prophetesses - are mentioned.

    180 16/120b: "Abraham was - - - obedient to Allah - - -". At least this contradicts the Bible, where he was obedient to Yahweh - another god with another religion (if there is just one god and he is one of these two - who is it?)

    181 16/120c: "Abraham was - - - true in Faith - - -". The word "Faith" always means Islam in the Quran. But see 16/120a just above.

    182 16/120d: "- - - he (Abraham*) joined no gods with Allah - - -". If the Bible tells the truth the simple reason for this was that Abraham did not believe in Allah at all - most likely had never heard about him - as his god to whom he according to the same Bible was much devoted to, was Yahweh. Incompatible with the Bible.

    183 16/120f: "- - - (Abraham was*) true in Faith (Islam*) - - -". There is very good reason for doubt when it comes to Abraham believing in Islam some 2500 years before Muhammad. Also the Bible claims he believed in Yahweh.

    184 16/121b: "He (Abraham*) showed his gratitude for the favors of Allah - - -". Contradicted by the Bible, which tells he showed his gratitude for the favor of Yahweh, not Allah. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

    185 16/121c: "- - - Allah, who choose him (Abraham*) - - -". see 16/120b+d above.

    186 16/121d: "- - - Allah - - - guided him (Abraham*) - - -". Even if we omit the likeliness for that Allah was not involved: Can Allah guide anyone at all? - he has never proved so.

    187 16/121e: "- - - guided him (Abraham*) - - -". Muhammad claimed that the claimed and the perhaps real prophets of the old all had got their copy of the claimed "Mother Book" from Heaven - similar to Muhammad's copy, the Quran - as guidance. But no book similar to the Quran is a reliable guidance for anyone - too much is wrong.

    188 16/122b: "- - - he (Abraham*) will be in the ranks of the Righteous". After Muhammad, Abraham is the most central of the prophets in Islam. Moses may be number three. Abraham is mentioned in Hadiths to live in the 7. Heaven (it is not explained how he ended there before the Day of Doom - like the others Muhammad met on his trip through the heavens), where of course also Muhammad will end - and all his women and children if they qualified for that high a heaven. Yes, and plus his houris - we wonder how it was decided which heaven they qualified for.)

    189 16/122c: "- - - (Abraham was*) Righteous - - -". If he is correctly described in the Bible, he mostly was. But beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it is not in accordance with normal codes of moral, but with its own partly immoral one. (The Quran too often is far away from "do onto others like you want others do onto you".)

    190 16/123d: "- - - Abraham the True in Faith - - -". He is described like that - but his faith hardly was Islam. One thing is that it is a contradiction to the Bible, and according to normal rules for evaluating sources, the Bible is more reliable than the Quran. But the main thing is that no trace of Islam has been found older than 610 AD, and Abraham lived - if he lived - ca. 1800 - 2000 BC.

    191 16/123e: "- - - joined gods with Allah." See 6/106b above and 25/18 below.

    192 17/59j: Just for the record: The stories about the 'Ad, Thamud, Midianite (descendants of Abraham’s 4. son with Keturah - 1. Mos. 25/2 - or people from Midian (Madyan? - highly unlikely)?), Rocky Tract, etc. tribes and the prophets Hud, Salih, and Shu'ayb are not from the Bible. That is to say, as mentioned Midianites may be mentioned, as descendants from one of Abraham's 6 sons with Keturah, Midian (1. Mos. 25/1-2), or a person from Midian (likely in Sinai, as Mt. Horeb (likely another name for Mt. Sinai) and Mt. Sinai (today Jabal Musa (34 degrees east, 28.5 degrees north), are mentioned. Roughly 70 km north northwest from Sharm-el-Sheik (Sharm el Shaykh) far south in central Sinai. Also the Islam confirms that it was here Moses met his god and got the mission to take the Jews out from Egypt. This is far from Madyan in Arabia) are mentioned in connection to them.

    To be more exact: The Sinai Mountain, or really a mountainous areas, has several peaks, the highest of which are Dsjabal (Mountain) Kathrina (2880 m) and Dsjabal Musa (Moses' Mountain - 2285 m). The latter one perhaps is what in the Bible is named Mt. Horeb.(But as the Bible is unclear about exactly where Moses received the 10 commandments, and there is a possibility that this and other central happenings took place in the area of Kadesh-Barnea (some 50 miles/80 km south of Beersheva or Be'er Sheva). If that is the case, there is a possibility for that Mt. Horeb was in Madyan, east of Aqaba.

    193 17/95b: "If there were settled, on earth, angels walking about in peace and quiet, We (Allah*) should certainly have sent down from heaven an angel for a messenger". The underlying meaning is that as angels do not live on Earth, Allah could not use angels as messengers for beings living on Earth. But according to the Quran Allah used angels for such jobs - to f.x. Abraham. Lot, Mary and Jesus (remember also that the Holy Spirit = the angel Gabriel according to many Muslims). Muhammad sometimes uses different excuses for why angels cannot come and prove he has supernatural connections or give proofs for the existence of Allah (obvious excuse is the claim that Allah cannot send down angels, because that would mean the Day of Doom had arrived, or that it would give no good results because angels would have to take the shape of men - he does not explain why.

    This is one more of Muhammad's "explanations" for why Allah could not send proofs for his claimed existence and power, or for Muhammad's connection to the claimed god.

    As for Gabriel there is a strange fact in the Quran: He is never named in the surahs from Mecca. Not until after he came to Medina did Muhammad start claiming he got his information(?) and messages(?) from Gabriel. If Muhammad really had got - or even only believed he got - the claimed messages from a central angel, this had been such a strong argument that there is no chance Muhammad had not told about this - and often - during the first difficult 13 years in Mecca. What is the explanation?

    194 19/41a: "- - - Abraham: he was a man of Truth, a prophet." In the Bible Abraham never is treated like a prophet (except he had closeness to Yahweh), he never behaves like a prophet (with the same exception), he never claims to be a prophet, and he is never in the Bible said to be a prophet by anyone who should know. He simply is one of the three patriarchs of Israel - and the Jews had not reduced their own founding father if they really reckoned him to be a prophet.

    195 19/42b: "Why worship that which heareth not and seeth not, and can profit thee nothing?". In the Bible there is no report of any kind of religious strife neither between Abraham and his father, (on the contrary they travelled together and lived together till Abraham set out for Canaan at the age of 75 - 1. Mos. 12/4-5), nor between Abraham and the rest of their people. But Muhammad was pretty one-tracked - see how all his stories are built in the same way: Always conflict Muslim vs. non-Muslim and the Muslim coming out the winner or in Paradise, whereas the bad non-Muslims come out the losers or in Hell. The story of Abraham is pressed into the same stereotypic form: Conflict and triumph. In the Bible it is a much more varied story and a more complicated human person.

    196 19/42-50: The story of Abram (name according to the Bible) - later named Abraham - in the Quran is entirely different from the one in the Bible. Entirely. Also see 19/48-49 below. AND: As the Bible is the only source for information about Abraham, and as it is clear the Quran is not from a god - too much is wrong - from where did Muhammad get this new information about Abraham?

    Two curios: The Quran claims Abraham took his family and all his huge flocks of animals - he was rich - and went from Canaan or Sinai through the hot and forbidding and dry Arab Desert with little or no food for his animals to a narrow, empty, desert valley without water or grass in the middle of absolutely nowhere and without any attractions, and lived there for at least long enough time to leave his son Ishmael and his concubine Hagar there.

    The Quran further claims Abraham later built a big mosque in that dry, empty, narrow, desert valley where Mecca is now, for his small family.

    No Muslim ever mentions that there are some 750 miles - some 1200 km - between where he lived and Mecca, and much of it was harsh, forbidding, glowing desert where his livestock would die on the road - - - and a good Muslim shall visit his mosque at least each Friday. And no Muslim mentions that even though the camel likely was domesticated at the time of Abraham, it is likely it was not used for riding until much later according to Wikipedia.

    Added 5. Apr. 2013 AD: Quoted from the Scandinavian newspaper Aftenposten published today, where professor emeritus (in physics) Redvald Skullerud says: "(It is claimed that Abraham*) used camels for transport some 1200 years before the camel was introduced as a transport animal in the area when the Assyrians started trade with South Arabia (around 800 BC*)". As you see it is an accepted scientific fact that even though the dromedary was domesticated and somewhat used in South Arabia, it was not introduced further north until a long time - 1ooo+ years - after Abraham, and then as a transport animal. To use it as a riding animal came even later. And without the camel, it would be impossible for Abraham to go back and forth between Canaan and the dry desert valley where Mecca later came - crossing rough and forbidding big deserts. Abraham's claimed connection to Mecca is an impossibility.

    197 19/44c: "- - - (Allah) Most Gracious". The underlying claim contradicted by the Bible, which says Abraham's god was Yahweh, not Allah. As there are found no sure traces in any kind of science or even in folklore of fairy tales anywhere in the world for that anyone at any time had heard about the god Allah, it is highly unlikely also Abraham had ever heard about him. Perhaps - perhaps - the pagan god al-Lah or Il, but not the monotheistic Allah. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

    198 19/45b: "I (Abraham*) fear lest a Penalty afflict thee (Abraham's father Terah (Azar in the Quran)*) from (Allah) Most Gracious, so that thou become to Satan a friend". Comment (YA2497): "To entertain a feeling of friendliness, instead of aversion, to Evil, is in itself a degeneration of our nature, a Penalty which Allah imposes on our deliberate rejection of Truth. And the friendliness to Evil also implies the sharing of the outlawry of Evil". If you compare the basis for all real moral among humans, "Do onto others like you want others do onto you", with the Quran's moral code, you find a number of evil points in the Quran's moral and ethical codes. Also Muslims refuse to see the mistakes in the Quran, even the most obvious, and refuse to accept the truth on such points.

    What thoughts are pertinent and close by here?

    199 19/46b: "(The father (of Abraham*) replied: 'Dost thou (Abraham*) hate - - -". See 19/4b above.

    200 19/46d: "- - - I (Abraham's father*) will indeed stone thee: now get away from me for a good long while". This is totally at odds with the underlying story in the Bible, where there is reported no serious conflict between Abraham and his father - religious or other kinds. See 19/42b and 19/42-50 above.

    201 19/47b; "- - - I (Abraham*) will pray to my lord (here indicated Allah*) for thy (his father's*) forgiveness - - -". Why? - if Allah predestines everything long before, and does so according to a Plan which nobody and nothing can change, like the Quran states many places, prayers have no meaning in Islam, as they cannot have any effect. Any effect will change Allah's Plan. A question Muslims never touch.

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

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

    202 19/48-49: "And I (Abram/Abraham*) will turn away from you (all) - - - etc. - - -". Strong contradiction to the Bible where he never left his father until Yahweh much later ordered him to go on to Canaan. On the contrary his father Terah, his nephew Lot whose father died, and he went together until Abraham set out for Canaan at the venerable age of 75 (1. Mos. 12/4-5). Together they went from Ur of the Chaldeans (south Iraq) to Haran (Northwest Iraq) where they lived until Abraham set out for Canaan (1. Mos. 12/4-5).

    203 19/49a: "- - - We (Allah*) bestowed on him (Abraham*) Isaac and Jacob - - -". Many think that this early (614 - 615 AD) Muhammad believed that Isaac and Jacob were the sons of Abraham. Only Isaac was - Jacob was the son of Isaac.

    #204 19/49b: "- - - We (Allah*) bestowed on him (Abraham*) Isaac and Jacob - - -". Abraham got the son Isaac with his wife Sarah. It is strange that in 614 - 615 AD the Quran does not mention his son with Sarah's slave Hagar - Ishmael. Had Muhammad not yet got the Idea of claiming ancestry from Abraham (via Ishmael?) We may also mention that 1. Mos. 25/1-2 and also 1. Chron. 1/32 says that Abraham took another wife/concubine and had 6 sons with her: "The sons born to Keturah, Abraham's concubine: Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak and Shuah". Not mentioned in the Quran. Had Muhammad claimed ancestry via one of these, his claim had been stronger, because little is said about where they ended. But most likely he never knew about these sons of Abraham. (To claim to be descendants via an Ishmael living in Mecca, is hopeless if the stories in the Bible are true - and at the time when they were written down, there was no reason for the Jews not to be honest about this - because the place where it is told in the Bible Abraham left Hagar, is some 750 miles, 1200 km from the dry, empty desert valley where Mecca later came (1. Mos. 20/14), and the place it tells Ishmael settled is even a little further off (1. Mos. 25/18). And the track from those places to the nowhere, empty, narrow desert valley of later Mecca was for large parts through harsh and forbidding hot desert - - - and without any attractions giving the least reason to go there.

    205 21/32d: "- - - they (non-Muslims*) turn away from the Signs (of Allah*) which all these things (point to)!" When someone uses logically invalid arguments - like claiming not proved "signs" are indication or proof for a god - the logical reaction is to be skeptical. After all the use of false and/or invalid arguments is the hallmark of the cheat and the swindler, and Muhammad on top of this believed in al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), etc., in breaking promises and words - even sworn ones - if that gave better results, and in deceit ("War is deceit") - - - and he wanted power and riches for bribes for more power - and women (like many false prophets in and outside the Bible, but few of the real ones in the OT. Here beware that men like David and Solomon are not reckoned among prophets in the Bible. This is one more difference between Muhammad and the Biblical prophets - not one of them had a harem of any size. Even if you include men like Abraham and Jacob, they had maximum 1-2 wives and 1-2 concubines if any at all. Abraham had Sarah, Kethura (1. Mos. 25/1 - but only after Sarah was dead) and Sarah's slave Hagar, Jacob had Leah and Rachel plus the two slaves Bilhah and Zilpath (1. Mos. 35/23-26). Muhammad had 36 we know by name, included his 11 long time wives and 2 concubines/slave women - the 16 short time wives and the 7 where it is unclear if he was married to them or not, and thus if sex was a sin or not - a Muslim is only permitted to have sex with his wives and his slave women - are normally not mentioned by Muslims. That he in addition raped at least two women, Rayhana bint Amr (later concubine) and Safiyya bint Huayay (later wife), after taking them slaves - also normally is not mentioned by Muslims).

    206 21/51b: "- - - Abraham - - -". The man who denounced and quarreled with his father according to the Quran, but lived and travelled together with him for a long time until Abraham set out for Canaan when he was 75 years according to the Bible (1. Mos. 12/4), and without any serious quarrel mentioned in the Bible. The man who according to the Quran took his family and huge flocks of animals some 750 miles or 1200 km from where he normally lived - much of the way through the harsh and rough and hot and dry and forbidding Arab desert - to a dry, forbidding, empty and narrow desert valley and lived there with his animals without water and measurable fodder for the flocks, till it fit to leave his son Ishmael and his concubine Hagar there in the place which many centuries later was to become Mecca. (the Mecca valley is total desert - 4.34 inches/110 mm rain A YEAR, an average temperature for a year 31+ centigrade + an average humidity for a year of miserable some 45% or less = water evaporates fast) Then he returned home the same grueling road - but came back years later to build himself a big mosque - - - still some 1200 km (some 750 miles) of partly horrible conditions away from his home, and in an arid, empty place in the middle of not even nowhere. And without camels for the trip.

    Believe it if you are able to.

    207 21/51c: (A21/55 – in 2008 edition A21/59, but some is omitted): “We (Allah*) bestowed aforetime on Abraham his rectitude of conduct - - -.” But the Arab expression “min qabl” which here is translated to “aforetime”, also may mean “already in young years”. “The Message of the Quran”, 2006 has (translated from Swedish): “Already in his youth We (Allah*) gave Abraham - - -.” Interestingly the ones who have revised the 2008 edition in his name (Muhammad Asad is as far as we know dead – the book originally is from at not later than 1980), has omitted some of his information and changed the text to this: “And, indeed, long before (the time of Moses) We vouchsafed unto Abraham - - -.” Also the information about alternative meanings is omitted in the 2008 edition. To make the text more clear? – or out of honesty?

    208 21/52b: "Behold he (Abraham*) said to his father and his people, 'What are these images, to which ye are (so assiduously) devoted?". There is no indication in the Bible for that Abraham's father or people were pagans. As the Quran is not from a god, and as the Bible is the only source for information about Abraham (if he ever lived), one may wonder from where Muhammad got these stories.

    209 21/52-71: Abraham delivered from Nimrod's fire. This story is taken from "Midrash Rabbah" and not from the Bible. And another point: Abraham and Nimrod did not live at the same time (if they ever lived). Muhammad had a strong tendency to mix persons from different times (f.x. Haman and Ramses II - some 800 years wrong. Or Mary and Miriam - some 1200 years wrong.) You do not find this story about Abram (later renamed Abraham) and the gods in the Bible - the only source about Abraham - and this part 1000 years or more older than the Quran, and a book where one of the heroes had benefited from a tale like this, so no-one would dream of taking it out if it was true.

    Who then was Nimrod? Nimrod according to the Bible was the son of Cush, who was the son of Ham, who was one of the three sons of Noah, who - if he ever lived - lived some 5ooo-6ooo years ago. If Abraham ever lived, he lived some 3800-4ooo years ago. This means there were some 2ooo years between Nimrod and Abraham.

    It takes a lot of missing knowledge to mix two persons living some 1ooo - 2ooo years apart. No omniscient god makes that kind of mistake.

    210 21/53a: "They (Abraham's people*) said, 'We found - - -'". See 21/1d above.

    211 21/53b: "We (Abraham's people*) found our fathers worshipping them". It is as true for Muslims as for anyone else. A man once told a tale. Some ones believed it and told their children by mouth or in writing. The children told their children that this was true, without ever checking if it even could be true. And so on generation after generation. Not one single comma is proved about Islam. It is only that once upon a time some forefathers started believing the tales of a charismatic leader. And this in spite of clear and overwhelming proofs for that something is - or more correctly; many things are - very wrong in his tales, and in spite of knowing very well that he believed in using lies, deceiving and even breaking of oaths, and in spite of knowing he wanted power plus riches for bribes for more power - and women - - - just so like many a self proclaimed prophet through the times. (And in this case it might be thought provoking that many a false prophet went far out for riches and power and women, whereas none of the known real(?) prophets were much interested in such things (NB: Men like David and Solomon in the Bible are not reckoned to be prophets, but mighty kings)).

    We may add that it is typical for blind belief in any religion to believe not because of proofs, but in spite of proofs for being wrong. This in spite of the very obvious fact that a religion which is clearly proved wrong, obviously is on a wrong track and will lead its followers to no paradise if there is a next life. Man is a strange creature sometimes: When strong belief collides with clear and true facts, the clear facts can home whistling a song.

    This verse is not from the Bible - just like so many other "Biblical" tales in the Quran.

    212 21/53-67: The quarrel about religion between Abram/Abraham and his father and the others is not from the Bible. There also in the Torah is no indication for that they were pagans or that there was a quarrel (the relevant verses: 1. Mos. 11/27-32. There is an exception though in Jos. 24/2 which tells about other gods, but not about strife). Besides: As the Quran is not from a god, and as the Bible is the only source of information about Abram/Abraham - from where did Muhammad get these stories?

    213 21/54b: "Indeed ye (Abraham's people*) have been in manifest error - ye and your fathers". Yes, Muslims are if the Quran is a made up book - and no god made a book with so much wrong, not to mention revered it as a "mother book" (13/39, 43/4, 85/21-22) in his own "home".

    214 21/55b: "Have you (Abraham*) brought us (the doubters*) the Truth (via something like the Quran*)?". An easy question to answer: A book with that many mistaken facts, other errors, contradictions, cases of invalid logic, etc. at best is partly true. That the Quran is the truth, is just a claim, not a proved fact. Also see 2/2b above.

    ##215 21/56e: “- - - He (Allah*) Who created them (man*) (from nothing): #####and I (Abraham) am a witness to this (truth)”. Wrong even according to the Quran, as the Quran tells Man - Adam - was created from this and that (see 6/2b above). And on top of that: – man was made from something, though not created, as he developed from earlier primates. This really is an unintended joke: It is told that Allah did something that is not true - ####and Abraham witnesses that it is the truth, and this even if he lived millions of years later! (Some 6 million years or a bit more after the first humanoid, and may be 200ooo after the first Homo Sapiens). Some proof for Allah! Is it possible that Allah himself has sent down this mistaken "proof"? But it does tell something about proofs in the Quran – and from Muslims.

    216 21/57a: "- - - by Allah - - -". Abraham is swearing by Allah - expressions in the Quran starting with "by" normally are oaths. But according to the Bible Abraham's god was Yahweh, and living far from Arabia at this time - He did not come even to Canaan until after he was 75 (1. Mos. 12/4) - he hardly even had heard the name of the old Arab pagan god al-Lah, not to mention Allah. (But perhaps the older names al-Ilah (the moon god of at least south Arabia - it is no coincidence that the crescent moon is the symbol for Allah and for Islam) or Il.)

    We may add that originally Hubal was the moon god in Arabia, and the Kabah was his temple and dedicated to him. But when Muhammad was born, al-Lah - sometimes named Allah - had taken over as Arabia's main god. It is a bit ironic that a building dedicated to an old pagan moon god was and is the most holy place on Earth for a claimed other and claimed omnipotent god - and as ironic is the fact that if Muhammad had been born earlier, Islam's god might have been named Hubal, not Allah (Muhammad simply took over the claimed mightiest of the pagan Arab gods, and earlier Hubal was reckoned to be the most powerful one).

    -----

    We may add that originally Hubal was the moon god in Arabia, and some sources say the Kabah originally was his temple and dedicated to him. But when Muhammad was born, al-Lah - sometimes named Allah - may have taken over as Arabia's main god. It is a bit ironic that a building dedicated to an old Pagan moon god (be it Hubal or al-Lah/Allah - because also Allah had been a moon god and the crescent moon still is his symbol) was and is the most holy place on Earth for a claimed only and claimed omnipotent god - and as ironic is the fact that if Muhammad had been born earlier, Islam's god might have been named Hubal, not Allah (Muhammad simply took over the claimed mightiest of the pagan Arab gods, and earlier Hubal was reckoned to be the most powerful one - and the moon god like al-Lah had been and perhaps still was).

    ########We have not mentioned much about al-Lah/Allah's position in the Kabah before Muhammad. The reason is that it is quite unclear. There are the two gods mentioned as the main god for the Quraysh tribe = the main god in the Kabah: Hubal, the moon god, and al-Lah/Allah - also a moon god, at least in southern parts of Arabia. There are clear indications, but no proofs, for that these two really and simply were two names for the same god - perhaps with Hubal as his "personal" name and al-Lah/Allah his title (al-Lah/Allah means "the god", or in this case "the main god").

    There also are indications for that there were connections between Hubal and the Ba'al known from f.x. the Bible - same god and similar name, but in another variety of religion. If this is true, the Quran and Islam are way beyond the Milky Way when they forward claims like Zachariya prayed to Allah/Hubal/Ba'al, or that Jesus preached about Allah/Hubal/Ba'al, as in those times such connections would be known, even if they are forgotten today, and Ba'al represented the Devil to the Jews of those times.

    -----

    217 21/59a: "They (Abraham's people*) said, 'Who has done - - -'". See 21/55a above.

    218 21/60a: "They (Abraham's people*) said, 'We heard - - -'". See 21/55a above.

    219 21/60c: "- - - Abraham - - -". We should remind you that according to the Bible his name at this time was Abram (which means "Exalted Father" - even though he had no children). He did not get the name Abraham until 99 years old (1. Mos. 17/5) in Canaan - now roughly central Israel. (Abraham means "Father of Many" - he got 8 sons, Ishmael with Hagar (Sarah's slave woman), Isaac with Sarah, and then 6 with his second wife, Keturah (1. Mos.25/1-2), who are not mentioned in the Quran).

    220 21/61a: "They (Abraham's people*) said, 'Then bring him (Abraham*) - - -". See 21/55a above.

    221 21/62a: "They (Abraham's people*) said, 'Art thou (Abraham*) - - -". See 21/55a above.

    222 21/64a: "So they (the people of Abraham*) turned to each other and said: 'Surely - - -". See 21/55a above.

    223 21/64c: (A21/58 – in 2008 edition A62): “Surely we (Abraham’s contemporaries*) are in the wrong”. But because they did wrong not guarding their god pictures or because they suspected Abraham? Islam does not know (this point is left out in the 2008 English edition).

    224 21/65a: "Then they (Abraham's people*) were confounded with shame: - - -". This is not a natural reaction. Pagans at this level know fully well that the images are not gods - the images only are holy symbols. They are praying to the gods they believe are "behind" the symbols - just like no Christian prays to a picture of God/Yahweh, but to the god himself. The natural reaction if they were believers, would not have been shame but anger (because of destroyed holy symbols). This story is naive. And not from the Bible.

    225 21/65b: "Then they (the people of Abraham*) were confounded with shame: (they said), 'Thou (Abraham*) knowest - - -". See 21/55a above.

    226 21/68: "They (Abraham's people*) said, 'Burn him (Abraham*) - - -". Not from the Bible. See 21/55a above.

    227 21/68-69: This is in short the story of Nimrod's Fire (see 21/69b below). It is - like so much in the Quran pretending to be old Jewish history - not from the Bible. The story also is impossible, as Nimrod lived centuries or much more before Abraham - if he ever lived. (Nimrod was the great grandson of Noah and lived(?) something like 1ooo - 2ooo years before Abraham according to science). Muhammad had little knowledge about the Bible, but any god had known this.

    228 21/69a: (A21/61 – in 2008 edition A21/64): “We (Allah*) said, ‘O fire! Be thou cool, and (a means of) safety for Abraham”. But there is nowhere in the Quran actually said that Abraham was thrown into the fire, so even today Islam is at a loss what to believe – some say yes and some no. Clear language?

    229 21/69b: “We (Allah*) said, ‘O fire! Be thou cool, and (a means of) safety for Abraham”. This episode is normally referred to as "Nimrod's (or Nimrud's) Fire". But as Nimrod was the great grandson of Noah and as he lived - if he ever lived - some 1ooo-2ooo years or more before Abraham, this is an impossibility. Then Muslims - not for the first or only time - say: "It was another with the same name", in this case an unknown king. We have found no basis for this claim, and Islam will have to produce proofs. This even more so as this is a typical Muslim way of explaining away problems - and as normal without any proofs.

    230 21/70: "Then they (the people of Abraham*) sought a strategy against him - - -". Not from the Bible. See 21/55a above.

    231 21/71a: "But We (Allah*) delivered him (Abraham*) and (his nephew) Lut (Lot in the Bible*) - - -". Just a reminder: According to the Bible Abraham's god was Yahweh, not Allah.

    232 21/71c: "But We (Allah*) delivered him (Abraham*) and (his nephew) Lut (Lot in the Bible*) to the land (Canaan/Israel*) which We have blessed for the nations". According to the Bible they travelled - together with Abraham's father - from Ur of the Chaldeans where they originally lived, to Haran in North-West Mesopotamia (now roughly Iraq), not to Canaan (1. Mos. 11/31). Only long afterwards did Abraham - Abraham then 75 years and his father 145 years old if the Bible has the numbers correct (his father became 205 - 1. Mos. 11/32) - continue to Canaan, according to the Bible (1. Mos. 12/4-5).

    233 21/72b: "- - - (a grandson) - - -". This seems to be inserted by the translator. In that case in the original Arab text the sentence may easily be understood like Abraham got two sons: Isaac and Jacob. Also beware that according to the Bible "Abraham took another wife (after Sarah's death*), whose name was Keturah. She bore him the sons Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak and Shush". (1. Mos. 25/1-2). This - and these sons - is not mentioned in the Quran.

    234 22/26a: “Behold, We (Allah) gave the site, to Abraham, of the (sacred) House - - -”. Abraham never visited Mecca. See 2/127a. It is a story made up to give Muhammad’s teaching more credence, and make it more interesting among Arabs, though perhaps partly on basis old folk tales. (Islam claims Abraham from long before Muhammad was reckoned to be the forefather of the Arabs via his son Ishmael. But we have seen claims that even this is made up by Muhammad. We have not been able to find out what is the truth here (that Ishmael is one of very many forefathers of the Arabs, is very unlikely as his descendants according to the only perhaps reliable source about this - the Bible - tells his descendants settled down in the area to the east of where the Suez Canal now runs, but not totally impossible), but if Muhammad made up also this, it is one more nail in the casket.

    235 22/26b: “Behold, We (Allah) gave the site, to Abraham, of the (sacred) House - - -”. Mecca lies some 750 miles (some 1200 km) from where Abraham normally lived - much of the distance hot, forbidding and rough Arab Desert. The Quran tells he built a big mosque in an empty, dry narrow desert valley without water or anything, except one well, for himself and his family - in the valley where Mecca grew up many centuries later. The Quran also claims Abraham was a good Muslim - and Muslims shall visit their mosques at least every Friday. 750 miles/1200 km and back through forbidding terrain every Friday? - even just now and then? And he even did not have camels, according to science.

    Here we include a small, but essential piece of information. The dromedary was domesticated sometime between around 2ooo BC and 3500 BC - the exact time is not known (the very first proved case of domesticated dromedary/camel in the Middle East is from Qasr Ibrim in Lower Nubia (east Africa) around 740 BC) - and likely in the coastal area of South Arabia. Abraham according to science lived - if he was a real person - around 2ooo-1800 BC (and far from South Arabia). But today - 27. Dec. 2012 - we discovered a small fact we have not been aware of - small, but essential and revealing in this case: THE DROMEARY - THE ARAB CAMEL - DID NOT COME INTO WIDE USE UNTIL AROUND 1OOO-900 BC (around the time of King Solomon)! And f.x. the first time camels are known to be used in battle, was between Cyrus the Great who used camels against Croesus of Lydia in 547 BC, AND THEN TRANSPORT DROMEDARIES, NOT RIDING ONES WERE USED. (Horses not used to camels were frightened by them, and this made problems for the cavalry of Croesus.) This means that as late as in 547 BC - some 1300 years after Abraham - riding camels were not widely enough used to be a factor in daily life (if they had been, riding dromedaries had been used by Cyrus instead). Camels are mentioned in the Books of Moses, too, but this is reckoned by science to be one of the proofs for that those books are written long after Moses.

    #####Added 5. Apr. 2013 AD: Quoted from the Scandinavian newspaper Aftenposten published today, where professor emeritus (in physics) Redvald Skullerud says: "(It is claimed that Abraham*) used camels for transport some 1200 years before the camel was introduced as a transport animal in the area when the Assyrians started trade with South Arabia (around 800 BC*) (and brought the camel further north*)". As you see it is an accepted scientific fact that even though the dromedary was domesticated and somewhat used in South Arabia, it was not introduced further north until a long time - 1ooo+ years - after Abraham, and then as a transport animal. To use it as a riding animal came even later. And without the camel, it would be impossible for Abraham to go back and forth between Canaan and the dry desert valley where Mecca later came - crossing rough and forbidding big deserts. Abraham's claimed connection to Mecca is an impossibility.

    This means that Abraham did not have camels, and definitely not riding camels. Which makes his claimed trip with his many animals to the lonesome, dry and empty desert valley where Mecca later grew up, physically impossible, his claimed building of the big Kabah hundreds of miles and more in kilometers from home, even more meaningless as he could not go back and forth between his home and his temple, and his claimed visits there later as hopeless a Muslim claim as his first claimed trip.

    THIS MEANS HE NEVER LEFT HAGAR AND ISHMAEL IN THAT VALLEY, THAT HE NEVER BUILT THE KABAH, AND THAT HE NEVER VISITED THE PLACE LATER,TOO. We have said the same before, but without the camel/dromedary Muhammad's claims about Abraham going to that dry desert valley to leave Hagar and Ishmael, and later to build the Kabah and then to visit it frequently, move from extremely improbable to physically impossible.

    Well, believe it if you are able to.

    236 22/27a: (A37): “And proclaim the Pilgrimage among men - - -.” As Allah was speaking about – not to, but about – Abraham in the previous verse, many Muslim scholars think this was said to Abraham. But there is no reason at all to believe Abraham institutionalized pilgrimage to Mecca – neither in the Bible nor in the Quran there is any hint about that - in addition to that he never visited Mecca (see 2/127a above). Therefore many Muslims – f.x. Al-Hasan al-Basri – believe the words were meant for Muhammad. Believe what you like – the text is unclear enough for both meanings. Like all too often in the Quran

    237 22/42e: "- - - 'Ad and Thamud - - -". Two tribes and 2 claimed prophets(?) - Hud and Salih - tribes in the very old time, which Muhammad claimed - but as normal never proved - were exterminated because they sinned against Allah. They are taken from old Arab folklore, and not from the Bible, and may or may not have existed, and if they have existed may or may not have been especially sinful against Allah. There is no documentation showing that if they were exterminated and not just lost their culture and power and were mixed with other people, the extermination was like what the Quran claims.

    They are not mentioned in the Bible, but Thamud is mentioned in connection to the Assyrians around 700 BC and disappeared from history somewhere around 600-400 BC. As the Quran indicates that they were destroyed before Abraham (2ooo-1800 BG), this tells that the Quran's time line on this point is something like 1500 years wrong.

    238 22/44a: "- - - the Madyan People - - -". Similar to the 'Ad and Thamud ones - see 22/42e above - except one knows there lived people in Madyan (not necessarily like described by Muhammad, though). It is highly unlikely that the Bible's Midian and the Quran's Madyan is the same, even if this is what Islam claims - the Bible's Midian instead may have been in Sudan, or most likely on the Sinai Peninsula (f.x. Mt. Horeb and Mt. Sinai are mentioned, and there is no doubt that these mountains were and are in Sinai.

    An extra point here is that Midianites did not necessarily mean men from Midian. They could as well be descendants of Abraham's 4. son with Keturah, Midian (1. Mos. 25/2)

    239 22/78e: "- - - it (Islam*) is the cult of your father Abraham". For one thing it is unlikely Abraham is the forefather of the Arabs - Ishmael and his sons settled near the border of Egypt, according to the Bible (written at a time when there was no reason for the writer to falsify this), not in Arabia (1. Mos. 25/18). Also DNA-analysis indicate that the Arabs in reality is a mixture of people who drifted into the desert from different places and nations when the domestication of the camel made life there possible + the result of being at a crossroad for the caravans + the result of large import of slaves/concubines from Europe, Asia and Africa. What once - impolitely - was called a bastard production. And for another thing there is no reason to believe Islam was Abraham's religion, but strong reason reasons for to believe that the claim is wrong. Islam will have to produce proofs in order to be believed by us.

    240 23/28a: "Praise be to Allah - - -". The Bible disagrees here, and wants it to be Yahweh. More essential: Neither science nor Islam has ever found any trace about Allah older than 610 AD. Noah - if he ever existed - may have lived 3ooo-6ooo BC. (You will find exact years some places - do not believe the rest of what those sources tell you, too. Exact years for Abraham, Isaac, Jacob or anything older in the religions, are bluffs).

    241 25/20b: "- - - men who ate food and walked through the streets - - -". In the Quran this is used like proofs for that certain beings could not be angels. The logic is invalid, as if the god could give angels human bodies, he also could give them bodily functions. (Yahweh and the two angels who visited Abraham near Mamre, ate food according to the Bible - 1. Mos. 18/8).

    242 26/70-86: This is not from the Bible (actually not the rest of section 5, too). From where did Muhammad get this information, as no god gave him the Quran and all its errors and worse?

    243 26/71b: "They (the people of Abraham*) said: 'We worship - - -". See 26/70b above.

    244 26/72-73: "Do they (false gods*) listen to you (Terah in the Bible, Azad in the Quran - father of Abram/Abraham*) when ye call (on them), Or do you good or harm?" But if you ask the same question about Allah, he has not done one single of those things in a provable way during his entire claimed existence - not once - just listen to Islam's silence about this. Besides it is not said in the Bible that Abraham's people were polytheists.

    245 26/74b: “They (Abraham's people*) said: ‘Nay, but we found our fathers - - -". See 26/70b above.

    ###246 26/74c: “They (Abraham's people*) said: ‘Nay, but we found our fathers doing thus (what we do)”.

    (A26/38): “(Zamakhshari): ‘- - - ancient usage and precedence in time are no proof of (a concept’s) soundness”. Razi, for his part, states that (this*) verse represents ‘one of the strongest (Quranic) indications of the immorality (Arab “fasad”*) inherent in (the principle of) "taqlid", i.e. the blind, unquestioning adoption of religious concepts or practices on basis of one’s uncritical faith in no more than the 'authority' of a scholar or a religious leader.”

    1. But the book skips the fact that this also goes for Muslims: If they are strongly indoctrinated, they may react strongly to arguments and facts they do not like – and without thinking over – or being mentally able to think over – even true facts. And also for them it is highly immoral just to accept a religion or something just because their fathers and others believe in it.
    2. But there hardly is a major religion more authoritative and with a clearer demand for blind belief than Islam. Or with stronger and more ruthless indoctrination.

     

    Also see 6/108b and 23/1b above.

    247 26/77-82: This is not from the Bible like so much of the "Biblical" stuff in the Quran. Here are listed a lot of things Abraham claims his god - here meant to be Allah - does. But the Bible disagrees: According to the Bible Abraham's god was Yahweh, not Allah.

    248 26/78a: "- - - (Allah*) Who created me (Abram/Abraham*) - - -". See 6/2b and 7/158i above.

    249 26/78b: "- - - (Allah*) is He Who guides me (Abram/Abraham*) - - -". See 16/107b above.

    250 26/85a: "Make me (Abraham*) one of the inheritors of - - -". Make me qualified for - - -.

    251 26/86: "Forgive my (Abram/Abraham's*) father, for that he is among those astray". Contradicting the Bible - in the Bible there is no conflict between Abram - later Abraham - and his father. There also is no conflict between Abraham and the others.

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

    252 26/161a: “- - - their (the people of Sodom and Gomorrah*) brother Lot - - -“. Wrong. Lot was a stranger to the two towns, and it is very clear both from the Quran and the Bible that he did not mingle well with those locals. He came - together with Abraham - from Ur in Chaldea (in south Iraq). He was no “brother” to them – not even in the figurative meaning of the word. (The word here obviously is used to make Lot and the mentioned people fit the pattern the Quran claims is universal: That the prophets come from the people they are to teach. But here that is incorrect). Also see 11/92 just above and 27/56 – it is very clear Lot was no brother of theirs - also not a naturalized "brother". (“Drive out the followers of Lut (Lot*) from our city - - -“.)

    ###253 28/4e: Time anomaly: If - like Muslims often claim - the Quran was written before man was created or even has existed since eternity, and everything is predestined - this cannot have happened if man has free will - if man has free will, the laws of chaos had disrupted things long time ago. If there is free will - even partly - any predestination which the god does not carefully follow up and adjust the course of, will be spoiled by the laws of chaos. If there is any marked degree of predestination, man has no free will. And if man has free will, predestination, except in special cases, is impossible. The claim that general predestination is possible to combine with even a little free will for man, simply is one of the mistakes or bluffs in the Quran - it is even theoretically impossible (a fact Muslims never can afford to admit, because that means something is seriously wrong with the religion, and it is better to believe in a religion and refuse to see the destroying errors, than to meet the alternative: That the never in any way proved religion is a made up one.) Thus if there exists free will for man, full clairvoyance is impossible even for a god = things which happened after the claimed "Mother of the Book" (of which all prophets during all times received an exact copy = a parallel to the Quran - according to Muhammad) was written, then are time anomalies, not to mention what kind of anomalies it would be to the claimed prophets living before things happened). Anomalies in this case is another word for error - especially if the Quran in reality was made at the time of Muhammad.

    Verse 28/4 is a good sample of things difficult - for f.x. Abraham or Noah - to fully understand from their (claimed by Islam) copies of "the Mother of the Book" (= "the Mother of the Quran") f.x. the tales about later happenings or about Muhammad's adventures in life. Other samples are the handling of Muhammad's family affairs in "the Mother of the Book" and consequently in its copies to all the claimed prophets/messengers.

    There are very many time anomalies in the Quran - we only point the most obvious ones of them. Also see heading over the surahs. But as the Quran claims full predestination, predestination gives all these time anomalies. Yes, even a miniscule piece of free will for man, will destroy full predestination - the laws of chaos guarantees that.

    The only way to explain the time anomalies in the Quran - as full clairvoyance is impossible also for gods im man has even a little bit free will - is that the Quran originally is written after everything had happened. And then they very clearly are errors in any book claiming to be VERY old - - - or the book is not very old in spite of its claims.

    254 28/46g: "- - - (you Muhammad are*) to give a warning to a people to whom no warner had come before thee - - -". According to the Quran, the Arabs had had at least these warners: Abraham (claimed to have been in Mecca), Hud, Salih, Shu’yab, and Moses (some Muslims claim the Quran tells the truth, because none of these had been in Medina. But when you talk about a people, you talk about a people - in this case the Arabs - unless otherwise is specified. If you make the area small enough in cases like this, you may make anything look true.)

    255 29/16a: Abraham delivered from Nimrod's fire. Taken from the story "Midrash Rabbah", not from the Bible - there is nothing similar in the Bible about Abraham, but there is one about Daniel 1000+ years later, which may have inspired this "story". And another point: Abraham and Nimrod did not live at the same time (if they ever lived). Nimrod was the great grandson of Noah (1. Mos. 10/1-8: Noah - Ham - Cush - Nimrod), and if he is not a fiction, he lived 3ooo - 6ooo BC. Whereas Abraham - if he ever lived - lived some 1800 - 2ooo BC. Muhammad had a strong tendency to mix persons from different times (f.x. Haman and Ramses II/Xerxes - some 800 years wrong. Or Mary and Miriam - some 1200 years wrong.)

    256 29/16b: "- - - Abraham - - -" For one thing according to the Bible, his name was Abram - he did not get the name Abraham until he was 99 years old (1. Mos. 17/1-5). In addition here he is a time anomaly.

    257 29/16c: "Serve Allah - - -". Abraham was a good Muslim - some 2500 years before Muhammad. Believe it if you want. But at least it is a clear contradiction to the Bible, which tells that Abraham's god was Yahweh. It also is a clear contradiction to the fact that neither science nor Islam has found even one trace of a god like Allah, a religion like Islam, or a book like the Quran older than 610 AD anywhere in the world.

    258 29/17a: "The things that ye (Abram/Abraham's people*) worship besides Allah have no power - - -". May be right - but the never answered question: Is Allah any better? Nothing is proved and the Quran is full of mistakes, etc.. The only thing which is sure, is that the Quran is not from a god - too much is wrong in the book. Also see 25/18a above.

    259 29/17b: "The things that ye (Abram/Abraham's people*) worship besides Allah have no power - - -". It is not unlikely that Abraham's people had more than one god - actually it is quite likely. But in the Bible there is mentioned no kind of religious strife, neither between Abram/Abraham and his people (1. Mos. 11/27-31), nobetween Abram/Abraham and his father (1. Mos. 11/27-32 and 12/1-5).

    260 29/17c: "- - - besides Allah - - -". According to the Bible Abraham's god was Yahweh, not Allah. (But as Allah - or al-Lah before - seems originally to have been an old moon-god, it is not unlikely that Abram's people had a similar moon-god, but perhaps with another name.)

    261 29/24b: "- - - (Abraham's) people - - - said: "Slay him (Abraham*) - - -". How could this be reliably written into the claimed "Mother Book" in Heaven may be before the universe (see 51/47c) was created, unless predestination is 100%? Impossible.

    262 29/24c: "- - - (Abraham) - - -". According to the Bible his name was Abram. Not until he was 99 years and long after he had come to Canaan (now roughly Israel - he was 75 when he left for Israel (1. Mos.12/4)) - Yahweh changed his name to Abraham, all this according to the Bible (1. Mos. 17/1-5). The name Abram is never mentioned in the Quran.

    263 29/24d: "Slay him (Abram/Abraham*) or burn him". Actually there is said nothing in the Bible about Abram/Abraham having troubles in Ur in Chaldea where he came from (1. Mos. 11/29-31). And actually this tale is "borrowed" from the story "Midrash Rabbah", and as for Nimrod's fire - another point here is: Abraham and Nimrod did not live at the same time (if they ever lived). Nimrod was the great grandchild of Noah and lived (?) 1ooo - 4ooo years before Abraham. Muhammad had a strong tendency to mix persons from different times (f.x. Haman and the time of Ramses II/Xerxes - some 800 years wrong. Or Mary and Miriam - some 1200 years wrong.)

    264 29/24e: "But Allah saved him (Abram/Abraham*) from the Fire (of Nimrod*)." This is not from the Bible - neither fire nor Nimrod is mentioned there in connection to Abraham.

    265 29/26a: "But Lut (Lot*) had faith in Him (Allah*)- - -" - and followed him. Actually the context indicates that here is referred to Abraham, not to Allah, but for Abraham Muslims would not use capital H*. According to the Bible Lot lost his father, Haran (1. Mos. 11/27-28), and Terah (Azar in the Quran) - Abram/Abraham's and Haran's father and Lot's grandfather - later moved north and simply took his son and grandson along.

    266 29/27a: "And We (Allah*) gave (Abraham,) - - -". According to the Bible it was Yahweh who did this - or El, which was the older name for Yahweh, and the name it is likely Abraham knew. El was the main god in some religions in that area in very old times. (The corresponding Arab god was Il, later named al-Ilah (the moon god of at least south Arabia - it is no co-incidence that the crescent moon is the symbol for Allah and for Islam) and then al-Lah - and sometimes the lazier pronunciation Allah, which was the name Muhammad took over.)

    We may add that originally Hubal was the moon god in Arabia, and the Kabah was his temple and dedicated to him. But when Muhammad was born, al-Lah - sometimes named Allah - had taken over as Arabia's main god (he also had been the moon god of at least south Arabia). It is a bit ironic that a building dedicated to an old moon god was and is the most holy place on Earth for a claimed other and claimed omnipotent god - and as ironic is the fact that if Muhammad had been born earlier, Islam's god might have been named Hubal, not Allah (Muhammad simply took over the claimed mightiest of the pagan Arab gods, and earlier Hubal was reckoned to be the most powerful one. There is a possibility, though, for that al-Lah/Allah and Hubal were names for the same god.)

    267 29/27b: "- - - (Abraham) - - - Isaac - - - Jacob - - -". 3 time anomalies.

    268 29/27c: "- - - in the Hereafter (of the company) of the Righteous". = He (Abraham*) ended in Heaven, not in Hell.

    269 29/28a: “- - - Lut (Lot*); behold, he said to his people (the people of Sodom and Gomorrah*) - - -.” Wrong. Those people for one thing were not Lot’s “natural” people, as he was a stranger from very far away (Ur of the Chaldeans in what now is South Iraq, but here living near the Dead Sea), and for another both the Bible and the Quran make it very clear that he also was not a naturalized member of those communities – he was an outsider. (May be the Quran tells they were his people so as to be able to say he was a prophet to his own people, like they falsely claim every prophet was – in spite of Joseph (Egypt), Moses (Sinai(or Sudan ?) 40 years), Abraham (Canaan), Lot (Dead See area), Jonah (Nineveh)).

    270 29/31a: "When Our (Allah's*) Messengers (angels*) came to Abraham - - -". This contradicts verses in the Quran which tell that messengers to humans only were men.

    271 29/31b: "When Our (Allah's*) Messengers (angels*) came to Abraham - - -". Contradicted by the Bible, which tells they were from Yahweh - or to be more exact: The three visitors he got were Yahweh himself (1. Mos. 18/1+10+13+17+20+26+30+31+33) and 2 angels (1. Mos. 18/2 and 19/1). 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.

    272 29/31c: "When Our (Allah's*) Messengers (angels*) came to Abraham with good news (intention of destructing Sodom and Gomorrah*) - - -". But according to the Bible this was not good news to Abraham - he tried to save them (from pity or empathy?) (1. Mos. 18/23-32).

    273 29/32a: "He (Abraham*) said - - -". A time anomaly to every "messenger" and person reading "the Quran"-parallel before Abraham lived.

    274 30/47c: “We did indeed send, before thee (Muhammad*), messengers to their (respective) peoples - - -.” It is generally an accepted fact – among clergy and science alike, that Abraham was a stranger to Canaan, Lot (a prophet according to the Quran) a stranger to Sodom and Gomorrah, Jonah was a stranger to Nineveh, the town to which he was sent. Joseph was a stranger in Egypt, Lot a stranger in Sodom and Gomorrah, Abraham a stranger in Canaan, and Moses a stranger in Sinai when he fled from Egypt. Most prophets worked among their own people, but in contradiction to the Quran, not all.

    275 32/3g: “- - - thou (Muhammad*) mayst admonish a people to whom no warner has come before thee - - -.” But:

    1. 2/125-129: These verses reminds Muslims about that according to the Quran both Abraham and Ishmael lived and worked in Mecca (according to the Quran) – and both were prophets and messengers, still according to the Quran. But according to science: If Abraham has ever lived, he lived some 2000 – 1800 BC – which means centuries before Moses, and millennia before Muhammad - he "admonished" in Mecca before Muhammad (at least according to the Quran), a town which even according the Quran did not exist at the time of Abraham - Hagar found neither water nor people there.
    2. 10/47: “To every people (was sent) a messenger - - -.” Homo Sapiens – also called Modern Man – developed most likely in East Africa some 160ooo – 200ooo years ago, and crossed – and occupied – the land bridge between Africa and Asia (= the Middle East) may be 100ooo years ago. If every people had got Messengers, how come that Sinai/Arabia/etc. had not got one for nearly 100ooo years – not until Moses some 3300 years ago or Abraham perhaps 3800 - 4ooo years ago?
    3. 16/36: “For We (Allah*) assuredly sent amongst every People a Messenger.” See 10/47 just above.
    4. 35/24: “- - - and there never was a people, without a warner having lived among them (in the past).” A very clear contradiction.

     

    Besides there were prophets like Hud, Salih and Shu’ayb who lived (according to the Quran) some generations after Noah, but long before Moses, not to mention Muhammad.

    (Min. 6 contradictions.)

    276 33/7d: "- - - Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus - - -". 4 historical covenants - and anomalies. It also is not correct of Muhammad to compare himself to those 4, as their teachings are so different from Muhammad's, that he clearly does not belong in that line of prophets/messengers or even religion - this in spite of Muhammad's claim (even if things are claimed, they are not necessarily true).

    277 34/44b: “- - - nor sent them (the non-Muslims in/around Mecca or in Arabia – this surah is from late in the Mecca period*) messengers before thee (Muhammad*) as Warners.” Contradictions:

    1. 2/125-129: These verses remind Muslims about that according to the Quran both Abraham and Ishmael lived and worked in Mecca – and both were prophets and messengers, still according to the Quran. But according to science: If Abraham has ever lived, he lived some 2000 – 1800 BC – which means centuries and millennia before Muhammad. There also were Hud and Salih and others working in Arabia before Muhammad according to the Quran.
    2. 10/47: “To every people (was sent) a messenger - - -.” Homo Sapiens – also called Modern Man – developed most likely in East Africa some 160ooo – 200ooo years ago, and crossed – and occupied – the land bridge between Africa and Asia (= the Middle East) not later than 100ooo years ago (the year is debated - there exist scientists who say min. 70ooo years ago). If every people had got Messengers, how come that Sinai/Arabia/etc. had not got one for nearly 100ooo years (or say 60ooo+ years, as something - we do not know what - happened 60ooo - 70ooo (64ooo?) years ago that started Homo Sapiens on the road to civilization) – not until Abraham and Ishmael (according to the Quran) - some 2500 years before Muhammad ago?
    3. 16/36: “For We (Allah*) assuredly sent amongst every People a Messenger.” See 10/47 just above.
    4. 35/24: “- - - and there never was a people, without a warner having lived among them (in the past).” A very clear contradiction.

     

    Besides there were the prophets Hud, Salih and Shu’ayb who, if we have understood it correctly, lived before or some generations after Noah, but before Moses.

    (Min. 6 contradictions.)

    278 37/83b: "- - - among those who followed in his (Noah's*) Way was Abraham". = Like Noah Abraham was a good Muslim, according to this - and many other - verse in the Quran. Like normal Muhammad had not one single proof, but of course you are free to believe it.

    279 37/85: "Behold he (Abram/Abraham*) said to his father and his people, 'What is that which ye worship?'". In the Bible there is no religious conflict here, included not with his father. See 1. Mos. 11/27-32.

    280 37/85-98: This religious quarrel with between Abraham and his father and between Abraham and his neighbors is not from the Bible - like so much else in the Quran. From where did Muhammad get it? (Muslims like to claim he got it from Allah, but as no book so full of errors, etc. is from a god, also this story is not from there).

    281 37/86: "Is it a Falsehood - gods other than Allah - - -". As no god really is proved, it is a possibility all gods are false - though there may be something about Yahweh, as, if the old books tell the truth, he has proved something. But the relevant fact here is that as the Quran with all its mistakes, etc. is not from any god, it is highly likely that also Allah is falsehood. The mathematical chance for that he is a reality, will have to be written with very small numbers and far behind the comma or point. (It is likely Abraham's people had more gods, but no religious quarrel is mentioned in the Bible.)

    282 37/95b: "Worship ye (Abram/Abraham's people*) that which ye have (yourselves) carved?" But what is the difference between worshipping a carved god and a god dreamt up in a book - a mental idol? - and in a book which itself proves it is not from any god.

    283 37/97b: “They (the people of Abraham*) said, 'Build a furnace and - - -". See 37/12b above.

    284 37/97c: “They (the people of Abraham*) said, ‘Build him (Abraham) a furnace, and throw him into the blazing fire!” You are free to believe this happened to Abraham – but beware that the story about Nimrod's fire is “borrowed” from a tale named “Midrash Rabbah” and not from the Bible - see 29/16a above. (Muhammad may also have been inspired by the story about Daniel's friends in the OT (Dan. 3/21-27)). Also see 37/97-98 just below.

    285 37/97-98: Abraham delivered from Nimrod's fire. Taken from the made up old story "Midrash Rabbah" and retold like it was a true history. And another point: Abraham and Nimrod did not live at the same time (if they ever lived). Nimrod was the great grandson of Noah, and lived - if he is not fiction - perhaps a thousand or more years before Abram/Abraham - see 29/16a above. Muhammad had a strong tendency to mix persons from different times (f.x. Ramses II and Haman - some 800 years wrong. Or Mary and Miriam - some 1200 years wrong.) Also see 37/97c just above.

    286 37/98: "(This failing) - - -". According to the Quran - and "Midrash Rabbah" - the fire did not burn Abraham.

    287 37/99b: "I (Abram/Abraham*) will go to my Lord (claimed by the Quran to be Allah*)! He will surely guide me". Hardly a good guide if one relied on a parallel to the Quran, something the Quran claims was the basis for all claimed prophets.

    #288 37/101: "- - - a boy - - -". This is meant to be Ishmael, the son Abraham got with the Egyptian slave woman, Hagar, and whom the Arabs claim are their forefather - even though the Bible tells he and his mother settled near the border of Egypt - 1. Mos. 25/18. (The Quran claims he settled in Mecca - a claim which extremely unlikely can be true).

    ###There also is the fact that Arabia was settled thousands of years before Abraham and Ishmael. Thus there were tens of thousands of forefathers for the Arabs of Muhammad's generation. Thus if all the same some descendants of Ishmael settled in Arabia, they in case meant only a miniscule part of a percent of an Arab's blood at that time, and even less today, mainly because of import of millions of slaves from Africa and other places through the years. That much for Arab's relationship to Abraham and for the pure Arab blood today (the pure Arab blood even never existed - modern DNA shows that the Arabs never was a "pure" race, but are the descendants of people who drifted into the peninsula from neighboring countries all around - - - + from the millions of imported Negros and other slaves.

    289 37/102b: Even if we omit the fact that here it is indicated that Ishmael is the boy, whereas the Bible clearly says it was Isaac (Abraham's son with his wife Sarah), this scene is told in a fundamentally different way in the Bible - more dramatic (1. Mos. 22/2-8).

    290 37/102-103: The testing of Abraham. The name of the boy is not mentioned here, but other places the Quran claims that it was Ishmael. The Bible says it was Isaac.

    If the time sequences given in the Bible are correct, the boy cannot have been Ishmael. See 37/103 just below.

    291 37/103: (YA4101): YA argues that as the Bible says that as the god ordered Abraham to sacrifice his only son (f.x. 1. Mos. 22/2), this must mean that Abraham was ordered to sacrifice Ishmael, and that this happened after Ishmael - the oldest of the two - was born, but before Isaac was born, and Abraham only had one son. But:

    1. The Bible is written quite chronologically (unlike the Quran where there is very little chronology). The test of Abraham comes well after the birth of Isaac and after Hagar and Ishmael was sent away, and Abraham only had Isaac left.
    2. ----------------------------------------------------------
    3. 1. Mos. 12/4: Abraham was 75 when he left Haran for Canaan.
    4. 1. Mos. 16/3-4: After Abraham had lived in Canaan 10 years, Hagar became pregnant. Abraham thus was 76 when Ishmael was born.
    5. 1. Mos. 17/24-25: Abraham was 99 and Ishmael was 13 when they both were circumcised.
    6. 1. Mos. 21/5: Abraham was 100 when Isaac was born (and Ishmael 14).
    7. 1. Mos. 21/8: Isaac then grew and was weaned. Time is not given, but likely 1-2 years (in the old time and some places also today, 2 years often were used, because the child then often were more healthy. They did not know the reason, but mother's milk contains stuff which reduces some bacteria, and also is very wholesome).
    8. 1. Mos. 21/14: Around this time - the time is not more exactly given - Hagar and Ishmael were sent away. Abraham now some 102, Ishmael some 16, and Isaac some 2 years old.
    9. 1. Mos. 21/20-21: Ishmael grew up, became an archer, and his mother found him a wife from Egypt. Time is not given, but some years. An educated guess; say 5 - 7 years till Ishmael was married. If we say 6, Abraham was 108, Ishmael 22 (a normal age for marriage then), and Isaac 8 years.

    10. 1. Mos. 21/22-31: The treaty of Beersheba. Verse 22 starts with: "At that time - - -". This refers to verse 21 just before, and the marriage of Ishmael. The Treaty of Beersheba was made around that time - and Abraham still some 108, Ishmael some 22, and Isaac some 8 years.
    11. 1. Mos. 21/34: After the Treaty of Beersheba was made, "Abraham stayed in the land of the Philistines for a long time". For a man around 108 years old, "a long time" should be one or some years. If we guess 3 years, Abraham now was 111, Ishmael 25, and Isaac 11 years.
    12. 1. Mos. 22/1: "Some time later (some time after verse 21/34 just above*) God tested Abraham". And this test was the demand for the sacrifice of his "only" son. This means that Abraham was something like 111, Ishmael something like 25, and Isaac something like 11 years old when this took place. It also means that both Ishmael and Isaac were born, but that Ishmael had been away for some 8-10 years, lived near Egypt, and it is not mentioned he had visited his father one single time during those years - understandable, but likely a fact.
    13. .  Remember here that both science and Islam have given strong circumstantial and empirical proofs for that the Bible is not falsified.
    14.   ---------------------------------------------------------
    15. After Hagar and Ishmael was sent away, Abraham only had one son left (he got 6 more later - never mentioned in the Quran (1. Mos. 25/2)).
    16. At that time Isaac was his only son born in wedlock - Ishmael was born out of wedlock, even if some Muslims try to "repair" this - according to the books - fact.
    17. . Ishmael had been away for many years with little or no contact with Abraham, and also was no member of Abraham's household.
    18. .  The Bible names the son he is going to sacrifice: Isaac.(1. Mos. 22/2).
    19. .  In the relevant chapter - 1. Mos. Ch. 22 - the god stresses no less than 3 times that it is about his only son, Isaac. He simply stresses that Isaac was the only son who counted (and the only one Abraham really had left) as Abraham's descendants were to be reckoned through Isaac (1. Mos. 21/12) and it was through Isaac and his son Jacob the god's covenant would run.
    20. .  In the Bible - the only perhaps reliable source about Abraham (the Quran is so full of errors, that it definitely is not reliable) - there also are some time sequences. They fit the story like told in the Bible, but not like told in the Quran (the numbers do not add up if the sacrifice happened before Isaac was born, like Islam and Muslims claim).

     

    Muhammad simply wanted to elbow into the old story and take at least parts of it over for his new religion - not uncommon for starters of new sects or religions. Another fact is that as for the test of Abraham which boy it was in reality is of no consequence - and the test was of Abraham, not of the boys (but Muhammad needed "roots" for his religion, and this is one of the few openings he had). Muslims wants the test to be also of the child, but what kind of a god puts children to that kind of a test? And if the god really was devil enough to put a child to such a test, what real value would the result have as a child largely reacts to how he is influenced, not from a mature intellect?

    292 37/104: "O Abraham!". A time anomaly.

    293 37/105a: "Thus indeed do We reward those who do right". How? - by not forcing him to sacrifice his son? Practically nobody throughout history has done so, so where is the reward compared to practically everybody else?

    294 37/107a: "And We (Allah*) ransomed him (Abraham*)- - -". To remind you: According to the Bible, the involved god was Yahweh, not Allah.

    295 37/107b: "And We (Allah*) ransomed him (Abraham*) with a momentous sacrifice - - -". According to the Bible, Abraham found a ram (1. Mos. 22/13) he sacrificed instead of Isaac - a ram hardly is a momentous sacrifice.

    296 37/110a: "Thus indeed do We reward those who do right". How? - by not forcing him to sacrifice his son? Practically nobody throughout history has done so, so where is the reward compared to practically everybody else?

    297 37/111: "For he (Abram/Abraham*) was one of Our (Allah's*) believing servants". It here is told Abram/Abraham was a good Muslim. The Bible disagrees and says Abraham believed in Yahweh. You are free to believe whatever you want. But there are no traces from Muslims until some 2500 years later.

    298 37/112a: "- - - We (Allah*) gave him (Abraham*) the good news of Isaac - - -". Contradicted by the Bible which clearly states he got this message from Yahweh, not from Allah. (Isaac was Abraham's son with his wife Sarah. According to the Bible he was some 13 years younger than Ishmael (1. Mos. 16/15 - 17/1). 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.

    299 37/113b: "We (in the Quran claimed to be Allah*) blessed him (Abram/Abraham*) and Isaac - - -". Abram/Abraham according to the Bible (and the Quran) became the one who started the Jewish people - through Isaac and Isaac's son Jacob. Ishmael and his children settle on the border of Egypt (1. Mos. 25/18) and mainly disappears from the story, except that Muhammad some 2500 years later claims they settled in Mecca and were the forefathers of the in reality mixed up peoples living in Arabia, later named Arabs.

    300 37/114a: “Again (of old) We (Allah*) bestowed Our favor on Moses and Aaron - - -“. “The Message of the Quran” is quick to add that it was not because they were progeny of Abraham, but because of their own quality. What the Quran never mentions, what Islam never mentions, what Muslims never mention, is that Israel’s (belief in a) special contact with Yahweh, is not – repeat not - that they had an ancestor named Abraham some thousands of years ago - though it does not hurt. The reason was and is the covenant that was made between Israel and Yahweh according to OT – and renewed several times through the years. It is good propaganda to bully them for believing Abraham who lived some 4ooo years ago (if he ever lived) is a part-out card to Heaven. But it is pretty dishonest to make this lie, and to never mention the real reason for the Jew’s belief: The covenant – broken and maltreated, but never lifted or ended. It is dishonest to hide this - in the same way as it is pretty dishonest never to mention the “new covenant” made via Jesus in NT – but then Muslims are obliged to use al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) or “Kitman” (the lawful half-truth) if necessary, when it comes to defending or promoting Islam – no matter whether Islam is a false religion or not (for some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty)).

    (Around 1000 BC - Saul was the first king, David the second (1007? - 970 BC?), and then Solomon - till perhaps 927 BC.

    301 37/126: "Allah, your (the Jews'*) Lord and Cherisher, and the Lord and Cherisher of your fathers of the old (like Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, etc*)". No comments - and none necessary.

    302 37/133: "- - - Lut (Lot*) - - -". The Quran is very little orderly or systematic - if Lot ever lived, he lived at the time of Abraham, which means around 1000 years before Elijah. In connection to the Quran and the claimed "Mother Book" also Lot is a time anomaly.

    303 38/4c: "- - - from among themselves - - -". Muhammad stressed that prophets came from the people among whom they should work - that was one of his "alibis" for being a prophet even though he was an Arab. For Jews it was correct - their prophets were Jews. But Jonah was not from Nineveh, Abraham not from Canaan, Lot not from Sodom or Gomorrah, Joseph not from Egypt, Moses not from Midian, to mention some of whom the Quran reckons to be prophets.

    304 38/45b: "- - - Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, possessors of Power and Vision." Visions perhaps, but the Bible never tells any of them had supernatural powers like here is indicated (Abraham is once or twice called a prophet, though, but this was not a central part of his life as told in the Bible).

    305 38/46b: "- - - the company of the Elect and the Good". = Good Muslims. If you believe this about the Jewish patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who here are referred to, it is up to you.

    *306 39/12b: (likely 615-617 AD:) “And I (Muhammad*) am commanded to be the first of those who bow to Allah in Islam.” How is that possible if the Quran is correct and lots of people had been Muslims before him, and bowed to Allah? (Though in reality it is highly likely he was right: That he was the first one ever). Muslims explain that it means the first in a community, but that is not what the Quran says. Besides both Abraham and Ishmael according to what the Quran claims, lived and of course preached in Mecca - at least for some time - and there according to the Quran also were Hud, Salih, and Shu'ayb. Also see 6/14d above.

    (At least 6 contradictions).

    307 41/38b: "- - - those who celebrate His (Allah's*) praise - - -". Here: Angels or good Muslims. Likely here is intended good Muslims, but it is said "in the presence of (Allah*)", which means in Paradise. And as the Day of Doom has not arrived yet, there cannot be humans in Paradise yet. The Quran and Islam meet the same impossibility each time they tell about humans in Paradise: According to the Quran humans stay in their graves until the Day of Doom. Then they are resurrected and some sent to Hell and others to Paradise. #######THIS MEANS THERE CANNOT BE HUMANS IN PARADISE/HEAVEN UNTIL AFTER THE DAY OF DOOM.

    Something to think over f.x. when Muslims tell you about Muhammad's claimed night trip to Paradise/Heaven, where he met Abraham and Moses and many others? Like said before: Islam is good at making stories, but weak on logic and on making different aspects and details in the stories or "explanations" fit together and not "kill" each other. (Another point is that neither Muhammad's trip to Jerusalem, nor to Heaven is likely to be true. These tales overwhelmingly likely are fantasies spun over 17/1, which likely mentions a trip Muhammad made from al-Jirana (9 miles/15 km from Mecca) to Mecca and back.)

    ##308 42/13d: “The same religion (Islam*) has He (Allah*) established for - - - Abraham, Moses, and Jesus”. Neither the Quran, nor Hadith, nor Islam has brought the slightest valid proof for this - only words and claims. And at least when it comes to Jesus, it is wrong. The teachings of Jesus and the ones of Muhammad are fundamentally too different. Of course Muslims say that the Bible is falsified and that scriptures have disappeared – that is the only way out they have. But they have yet to prove the first and to prove that scriptures documenting all the points Islam says are wrong in other religions, have disappeared and none reliable and impossible to misunderstand ones have reappeared among the relevant some 13ooo scriptures + the some 32ooo with references to the Bible which exists. “Strong claims need strong proofs.” This even more so as science by means of all the old scriptures has proved that the Bible is not falsified – a fact that is extra clear for NT. And as central: Islam has proved the same even stronger by being unable to find one single proved falsification among all those scriptures. You bet they had told about it if they had found even one.As for Abraham and Moses being good Muslims, for one thing that is strongly contradicted by the Bible, which tells their god was Yahweh, and for another thing: As mentioned no traces from Islam older than 610 AD has ever or anywhere been found - not even by Islam - - - and Moses lived some 2000 years before, and Abraham some 2500 years before.

    #############There also is another hard fact here concerning Jesus: Jesus lived deep inside the times of written history. We know for sure that there was no religion like Islam and no god like Allah anywhere in the Roman Empire not before Jesus and not until several centuries after him - not until after 610 AD when Muhammad started his mission. This is an indisputable historical fact. This means Jesus was no Muslim. Another historical fact is that also early Christianity is known from such sources, and it had no similarity to Islam - and the same for the Jewish religion. The claim that Jesus was a Muslim and preached Islam thus is proved by written history to be made up claims (claims also never proved true by Islam - like normal for Muhammad's very many claims).

    309 42/17c: "- - - the Balance - - -". The scale to weigh the good and the bad deeds. From the made up "The Testament of Abraham" - which likely has borrowed it from the Zoroastrians.

    310 42/51b: "It is not fitting for a man that Allah should speak to him (directly*)". Contradicted by the Bible, which tells that at least Yahweh on several occasions spoke directly to men f.x. Adam, Abraham, Moses and Samuel and not to forget Jesus. Also see 13/1g and 67/9c - 2 strong ones. 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.

    311 43/13c: "- - - we (humans*) could never have accomplished this (see 43/12d+e*) (by ourselves) - - -". Well, boats and ships were designed and made by men so far back in the past, that we really do not know when the first log was burnt and axed to become a boat. And cattle was tamed by man - not by gods - may be some 15ooo years ago and later (the camel f.x. around 3500 - 2000 BC, one does not know more exactly. But THE DROMEARY - THE ARAB CAMEL - DID NOT COME INTO WIDE USE UNTIL AROUND 1OOO-900 BC (around the time of King Solomon), and even later in North Arabia and further north (when the Assyrians started trade with South Arabia and discovered the value of the camel as a transport animal around 800 BC) - essential information concerning Abraham, who lived around 2000 - 1800 BC, and northwest from Arabia).

    Added 5. Apr. 2013 AD: Quoted from the Scandinavian newspaper Aftenposten published today, where professor emeritus (in physics) Redvald Skullerud says: "(It is claimed that Abraham*) used camels for transport some 1200 years before the camel was introduced as a transport animal in the area when the Assyrians started trade with South Arabia". As you see it is an accepted scientific fact that even though the dromedary was domesticated and somewhat used in South Arabia, it was not introduced further north until a long time - 1ooo+ years - after Abraham, and then as a transport animal. To use it as a riding animal came even later. And without the camel, it would be impossible for Abraham to go back and forth between Canaan and the dry desert valley where Mecca later came - crossing rough and forbidding big deserts. Abraham's claimed connection to Mecca is an impossibility.

    312 43/26-28: Abraham's claimed disagreement with his father and others it not from the Bible - the only perhaps reliable source about Abraham as the Quran clearly is from no god - too many mistakes, etc. (also no serious scientist uses material from the Quran older than 610 AD (or may be a little from the aborted attack on Mecca ca. 570 BC)). We especially mention that in the Bible there is no indication neither for that his father was a pagan, nor for that there was disagreement between them (1. Mos. 11/27-32). From where did Muhammad get this "information", as it was not from a god?

    313 43/27a: "- - - Him (Allah*) who made me (Abraham*) - - -". This interesting claim that Allah created the humans, you meet many places in the Quran. The reason why it is interesting, is that neither Muhammad nor Allah ever was able to prove anything about creation, whereas Yahweh proved his power on that point many times - if either the Quran or the Bible tells the truth about just that (f.x. 1. Kings 17/22, 2. Kings 4/34-35, Matt. 27/52, Mark 5/41, Luke 7/15, John 11/44, Acts 9/40, Acts 20/10, and the Quran 5/110i).

    314 42/17c: "- - - the Balance - - -". The scale to weigh the good and the bad deeds. From the made up "The Testament of Abraham" - which likely has borrowed it from the Zoroastrians.

    315 43/27c: "- - - He (Allah*) will certainly guide me (Abraham*) - - -". Contradicted by the Bible, which says that Abraham's god was Yahweh. Also see 13/1g and 67/9c - 2 strong ones. 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.

    316 43/28: "And he (Abraham*) left it (the words in 43/26-27*) as a Word to endure among those who came after him - - -". Wrong. For one thing there is no indication for that Abraham ever said so - there is not a word about religious disagreement here in the Bible. For another: They definitely did not endure "among those who came after him" - they were known to neither his descendants nor others until Muhammad dictated them, claiming they were old words.

    ***317 46/21a: "Hud". A prophet Muhammad and the Quran claimed once lived in Arabia. There exists no trace from him outside the claims in the Quran. He in case was a self proclaimed prophet with problems similar to Muhammad's and was used by Muhammad to show his own followers that former prophets had been disbelieved, too, and thus that thus Muhammad's situation was normal for prophets. There is a Muslim rumor that there is a chance for that he is the same person as the little known Biblical person Eber. In that case he was the great great grandson of Noah "at a time when the forefathers of the Jews were Arabs living in south Arabia before some of them emigrated to Mesopotamia, where among others Abraham was born (in Ur of the Chaldeans according to the Bible*)". It is a kind of fun when you read about ideology and/or religion and/or nationalism, etc. to see how many - and especially populists - tries to grab honor from wherever they can find it. (The quote here is freely translated from Swedish after A6/47 - comment to verse 6/65).

    It is extra ironic when you know that for one thing the Arabs are not a coherent tribe/people, but a mixture made up from people who drifted into the peninsula from all the lands around, and for another when you know that the interior of Arabia was settled roughly around the times of Abraham's forefathers - people drifted into Arabia then, and did not emigrate from there.

    ######BESIDES: HOW COULD ABRAHAM BE THE FOREFATHER OF THE ARABS IF ARABS WERE HIS FOREFATHERS? (Muslims sometimes are so eager to win points and honor for the religion and for themselves, that they forget to think over the consequences of their claims - like here.)

    Another point is that if the 'Ad was a mighty tribe, Hud could not be identical to Eber - It would be impossible to make up a mighty tribe from a one or maximum a few of Noah's descendants or few servants - the only remaining humans on Earth according to the Quran - in just 3-4 generations. But this kind of claims is typical for Muslims and Islam - you meet it too often: They put forth nice claims about themselves or bad ones about the opponents, without taking all "facts" into consideration. In that way they get fitting "information" or "arguments" which may sound good, but which pulverizes when you check them. When such things are done too often, it gives a bad impression and destroys credibility.

    318 46/21c: "- - - (Hud) one of 'Ad's own brethren - - -". Muhammad claimed prophets were sent to their own people (neither in the Bible, nor in the Quran this is quite correct). Even if this was not quite correct also in the Quran, you will find this claim stressed many places in the Quran - and "facts" some places "adjusted" a little to make them fit this claim (f.x. facts(?) connected to Abraham, Lot, and Moses). This fitted Muhammad's claim that naturally a prophet to Arabs had to be an Arab - like himself. If you read the Quran, you will meet this phenomenon several places.

    319 48/11b: "The desert Arabs who lagged behind - - -". Desert Arabs of any quantity did not exist until after the camel was domesticated a few thousand (4ooo?) years ago, and thus a time anomaly for claimed Muslims reading claimed copies of the claimed "Mother Book" - similar to the Quran - before that.

    There also is another fact here, Even if the camel was domesticated (likely) in the south of the Arab peninsula, it took a thousand years before it spread to the rest of Arabia. And further it did not spread until the Assyrians started trade on Arabia, which means sometime around the reign of King David or King Solomon or perhaps a little later. This among other things means that f.x. Abraham, who lived 800-1ooo years earlier in and around Canaan (now roughly Israel) and in northern Sinai (if he is not a made up person), did not have camels. This again means that the trek to Mecca and the leaving of Hagar and Ishmael there, and Abraham's several trips to Mecca later - f.x. to build the big Kabah, (which no shepherd (which was Abraham's profession) had the technology to build) - were impossible. The camel according to science was not introduced to Abraham's area until around 800 AD when the Assyrians started trade with South Arabia.

    320 48/16d: "- - - the desert Arabs - - -". Desert Arabs did not exist until after the camel was domesticated a few thousand years ago (4ooo - 5ooo? - one does not know exactly). And real desert lives -desert Arabs could not exist until use of the camel became more widespread around 1ooo-900 BC = around the time of King Solomon) years ago, and thus a time anomaly for claimed Muslims reading claimed copies of the claimed "Mother Book" - similar to the Quran - before that. (In this case before Muhammad started his raids for riches in earnest.)

    Added 5. Apr. 2013 AD: Quoted from the Scandinavian newspaper Aftenposten published today, where professor emeritus (in physics) Redvald Skullerud says: "(It is claimed that Abraham*) used camels for transport some 1200 years before the camel was introduced as a transport animal in the area when the Assyrians started trade with South Arabia". (Abraham lived - if he is not made up - around 2ooo-1800 BC.) As you see it is an accepted scientific fact that even though the dromedary was domesticated and somewhat used in South Arabia, it was not introduced further north until a long time - 1ooo+ years - after Abraham, and then as a transport animal. To use it as a riding animal came even later. And without the camel, it would be impossible for Abraham to go back and forth time and again between Canaan and the dry desert valley where Mecca later came - crossing rough and forbidding big deserts. Abraham's claimed connection to Mecca is an impossibility.

    321 51/24a: "- - - the honored guests of Abraham - - -". Some (2 or 3 ?) angels visiting first Abraham and then Lot according to the Quran. According to the Bible it was Yahweh and 2 angels who visited him and the 2 angels afterwards went on to waist Lot (1. Mos. 18/1-33 + 19/1).

    322 51/24b: "- - - the honored guests of Abraham - - -". The Quran does not here clearly tell what kind of beings they were, but other places make it clear they were angels. Worth remembering next time you read in the Quran that Muhammad "explaining" that Allah cannot prove his existence or any connection to Muhammad by sending down angels to prove it, because to send down angels meant that the Day of Doom had arrived.

    We may add that according to the Bible, the guests were Yahweh himself plus two of his angels (1. Mos. Ch. 18, several verses) - the two angels later went on to Lot like the Quran tells.

    323 51/24-37: The story about the visitors to Abraham and to Lot is a lot different from what the Bible tells, even though the main stories are similar, except for that in the Quran the god was not one of the visitors.

    324 51/28b: "(When they (his guests*) did not eat), he (Abraham*) conceived fear of them". In the old times you had better be careful about eating when visiting an enemy - you might be poisoned. Abraham here thought may be that was the reason why they did not eat, and that they might be dangerous.

    325 51/36a: "- - - found not there (Sodom and Gomorrah*) any just (Muslim) persons - - -". This was some 2500 years before Muhammad. You are free to believe there could be Muslims in Sodom and Gomorrah, and that f.x. Lot and for that case Abraham were Muslims. But neither science nor Islam has found any traces of Muslims or Islam older than 610 AD when Muhammad started his preaching - and with the exception of the belief in the quite different god Yahweh also nothing remotely similar to Islam.

    ##326 53/37a: "- - - and (the books? *) of Abraham - - -". There is nowhere in the Bible - the only real source telling about Abraham - mentioned he had books. To explain this Islam simply tells that (YA5111): "No original 'Book of Abraham’s now extant (undocumented claim: There must have been one or more which have disappeared*). But a book called 'The Testament of Abraham' (exists*)". This Yusuf Ali tells without mentioning a syllable about that "The Testament of Abraham" is a well known made up - apocryphal - book, and made millenniums after Abraham. Honesty counts little in Islam when it comes to defend or explain or forward the religion - cfr. f.x. "al-Taqiyya" - the lawful lie - and "Kitman" - the lawful half-truth - both of which are not only permitted to use, but advised to use "if necessary" to defend or forward Islam. But why are lies necessary in Islam? - and how much is lies and how much truth in a religion which accepts and at least partly relies on lies? - and how much is a religion at least partly relying on lies worth?

    Besides: What is the chance for that a shepherd - Abraham - knew how to read, not to mention had a book, 2ooo-1800 BC?

    327 56/11: "These (the best Muslims*) will be those nearest to Allah". Hadiths describes this as the better you are of the top Muslims, the higher heaven you will end in Paradise - Muhammad of course in the highest, no. 7, together with Abraham. Jesus, however, is not much above an average Muslim, it seems, because he only ends in the 2. heaven - the real reason may be that he was the only real competitor for Muhammad, and should be reduced as much as possible.

    328 57/26a: "We (Allah*) sent Noah and Abraham - - -". According to the Bible their god was Yahweh, not Allah - a very different god, especially like you meet him in NT and the new covenant (Luke 22/20) never mentioned by Islam.

    329 60/4a: “There is for you (Muslims*) an excellent example (to follow) in Abraham and those with him, when they said to their people: ‘We are clear of you and of whatever you worship besides Allah: we have rejected you, and there has arisen, between us and you, enmity and hatred forever - unless you believe in Allah and him alone’ - - -”. This is not from the Bible (see 1. Mos. 11/27-32 and 12/15) - there is no indication for a religious quarrel in the Bible, neither between Abram/Abraham and the surrounding people, or between him and his father. From where did Muhammad get this information - or "information"?

    330 60/4b: “There is for you (Muslims*) an excellent example (to follow) in Abraham and those with him, when they said to their people: ‘We are clear of you and of whatever you worship besides Allah: we have rejected you, and there has arisen, between us and you, enmity and hatred forever - unless you believe in Allah and him alone’ - - -”. Remember that Islam tells often and clearly that what is told in one context in the Quran, nearly always has general and universal meaning and value. Words not possible to misunderstand: Non-Muslims are enemies.

    An extra point: To have another religion is enough for the good Muslim (according to Islam and here to the Quran) to feel "enmity and hatred forever". Rather a thought provoking piece of information.

    331 60/4c: "Abraham and those with him - - -". Contradicting the Bible: For one thing his name still was Abram - it was not changed to Abraham until he was 99 years old (1. Mos. 17/5) - but there were not "Abram and those with him", because it was Abram who was with his father and not the other way around - then and for many more years (1. Mos. 11/31-32).

    332 60/4d: "Abraham and those with him - - - (said*): 'We are clear of you - - -'". In the Bible there is no hint about any dispute. See 60/4a above.

    333 60/4g: "- - - but not (= no good example*) when Abraham said to his father: "I will pray for forgiveness for thee - - -". It is normal for leaders of extreme sects to try to cut their followers' connections to people outside the sect, included the nearest family, because knowledge from the outside may tell truths the leaders do not want should reach their often manipulated congregations. Muhammad and Islam was - and is - in good company when doing this.

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

    334 60/4h: "I (Abraham*) will pray for thee (his father*) - - -". There is no trace of such a dispute in the Bible. On the contrary - Abraham lived together with his father (Tera in the Bible) from he was born when Tera was 70 years old (1. Mos. 11/26) till Abram/Abraham was told by Yahweh to continue to Canaan when Abram/Abraham was 75 (1. Mos. 12/1-5).

    335 60/4i: "I (Abraham*) will pray for thee (his father*) - - -". If Abram/Abraham had been a Muslim, what had been the idea of praying? - everything is totally predestined by Allah in his unchangeable Plan, according to the Quran - a plan nobody and nothing can change. Why then prayers, when they can change nothing anyhow?

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

    336 60/4j: "- - - forgiveness - - -". According to the Quran, Abraham's god was Allah. But Allah can forgive nobody and no-one unless he exists and is a god.

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

    337 60/4k: "- - - though I (Abram/Abraham*) have no power (to get) aught on thy (other people's*) behalf from Allah". One more parallel to Muhammad himself. There are many such parallels in the Quran - more or less all real or claimed prophets the book tells about, are such parallels - there is no doubt(?) Muhammad must be a normal parallel!

    338 60/4l: "- - - from Allah". Contradicted by the Bible, which tells Abram's/Abraham's god was Yahweh, not Allah. Also see 13/1g and 67/9c - 2 strong ones. 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.

    #####Also contradicted by science and by Islam: None of them has ever found one trace from a god like Allah, a religion like Islam, or a book like the Quran older than 610 AD, when Muhammad started his mission.

    339 60/4m: "(They (unclear who, but likely Abram/Abraham and his followers*) prayed) - - -". If Abram/Abraham had been a Muslim, what had been the idea of praying? - everything is totally predestined by Allah in his unchangeable Plan, according to the Quran - a plan nobody and nothing can change. Why then prayers, when they can change nothing anyhow?

    As for the value of prayers in Islam, also see 62/9c. And if you combine 62/9c with 67/9c - a strong one - you get something thought-provoking. (And relevant here: Muslims often are taught that a question or problem can have 2 or more true and correct solutions - Islam is forced to teach this, because if not, many of the mistakes and contradictions in the Quran become too obvious. But this ONLY is true if parallel true solutions are possible. In cases where 2 or more possible solutions are mutually excluding each other, maximum 1 of the mutually excluding ones can be true. It should be a bit thought provoking for Muslims, that just this "small" difference in theoretical thinking and teaching, was one of the reasons (there were several of course) for why Europe and the West exploded into the Technical Revolution, while the Muslim area stagnated). Two star examples are: 1) Full predestination is not possible even for an omnipotent god to combine with even the smallest piece of free will for man - the two are mutually excluding. The same for full and unchangeable predestination long time before, combined with any claimed effect of prayers - the two are mutually excluding each other.) Also see 60/4h above.

    340 60/4n: "In Thee (Allah*) we (Abram/Abraham and other Muslims(!!)*) we trust - - -". Anyone trusting Allah is in for a surprise if he does not exist (not to mention if he belong to the dark forces) or is wrongly described among all the errors in the Quran - especially if there is a next life, especially since Islam is a kind of religion few good or benevolent gods will accept.

    Another point is that as mentioned according to the Bible Abraham's god was Yahweh, not Allah (who at that time - if he "existed" that early - likely was the pagan god Il (the earliest known name for Allah). Actually we roughly know the story of Il, later named al-Ilah, later named al-Lah, later named Allah. He through all times until 610 AD when Muhammad took him over, was a pagan, polytheistic god - never until 610 AD and Muhammad he was a monotheistic one.)

    We may add that originally Hubal was the moon god in Arabia, and the Kabah was his temple and dedicated to him. But when Muhammad was born, al-Lah - sometimes named Allah - had taken over as Arabia's main god. It is a bit ironic that a building dedicated to an old moon god was and is the most holy place on Earth for a claimed other and claimed omnipotent god - and as ironic is the fact that if Muhammad had been born earlier, Islam's god might have been named Hubal, not Allah (Muhammad simply took over the claimed mightiest of the pagan Arab gods, and earlier Hubal was reckoned to be the most powerful one). There is a possibility for that Hubal just was another name for al-Lah.

    341 60/4-6: There are marked differences between what the Quran and what the Bible tell about Abram/Abraham. As the Bible is and was the only written real source for information about him, and as the Quran and all its mistakes are from no god who could have had information, one may wonder from where the claims and tales in the Quran about Abraham has originated.

    342 60/6a: “There was indeed for them (Abram/Abraham and his people in 60/4*) an excellent example for you (Muslims*) to follow - - -.” See 60/4a-f and 60/4-6 above. No further comments necessary.

    343 87/18-19: "And this (texts in the Quran) is in the Books of the earliest revelations - the Books of Abraham and Moses." But according to the Quran there always have been revelations from Allah to man. Homo Sapiens - man - developed perhaps 200ooo years ago. And he started in earnest on the road to modern man 60-70ooo (64000?) years ago. Abraham lived - if he ever did - some 3800-4000 years ago and Moses some 3300-3400 years ago - if he ever lived. How can their claimed books (see 87/19a-c below) be the earliest ones - tens and may be hundreds of thousands of years after the first humans, and thus the first prophets according to the Quran? Not to mention; how can Moses have had of the oldest ones, when there according to the Quran were earlier prophets even in Arabia? (Moses talked about them according to the Quran - not according to the Bible - so they had to be earlier).

    *344 87/19a: “The Books of Abraham - - - ”. Abraham had no books according to science – and definitely not in plural. Besides a nomad of 4000 years ago hardly knew how to read. (There exists, though, “The Testament of Abraham” – a much younger and very much made up (apocryphal) scripture named after Abraham only.) As Abraham hardly had any books, the Quranic stuff cannot have been in them. A wrong claim unless Islam for once produces a proof.

    #345 87/19b: (YA6094): "There is a book in Greek, which has been translated by Mr. G.H. Box, called the "Testament of Abraham" (published by the Society for the Promotion of Christian knowledge, London, 1927). It seems to be a Greek translation of a Hebrew original. The Greek text was probably written in the second Christian century, in Egypt (then mainly a Christian country*), but in its present form it probably goes back only to the 9th or 10t century. It was popular among the Christians. Perhaps the Jewish Midrash also refers to a Testament of Abraham".

    What do you think about this book and about Abraham and books when you read this?

    ####And what do you think about Muslim way of "informing" people when we add that this is an apocryphal - made up - book, a fact which is well known, so well that there is no chance a learned man like Muhammad Yusuf Ali did not know about it - - - without mentioning this fact even with a whisper in his comment. He also never mentions the fact that even though Abraham lived (if he ever lived) some 2ooo - 1800 BC, and thus "his" book had to be that old and a very central book as it was from Abraham, is never referred to in any of the old confirmed Jewish scriptures. #####This kind of dishonesty you meet a little too often in Islamic religious literature.

    An informative sample of al-Taqiyya - the Lawful Lie (something you only find in Islam among the big religions - actually the only place we have heard there once was similar rules for dishonesty, was in a small tribal pagan religion on New Guinea once upon a time) - something a Muslim can use in 8-10 wide cases (f.x. to cheat women or to save his money), and which not only are permitted, but should be used "if necessary" to defend or promote Islam". No further comments should be necessary.

    346 101/6-9: The scale - balance - to weigh the good and the bad deeds. This is "borrowed" from "The Testament of Abraham" - one of the apocryphal (made up) scriptures. (Likely "the balance" originally is from religions further east (Zoroastrianism).)

    346 + 54 = 400 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


     

    12.  ABYSSINIANS AND ABYSSINIA

    Around the year 570 AD the Abyssinian army under its leader Abraha or Abrah marched against Mecca. The Quran tells the army was stopped by birds each carrying 3 stones they dropped on the soldiers. A nonsense story if for no other reason than because no bird could carry 3 stones big enough to be really dangerous to men with shields. Science tells the army was victim to a virulent illness, perhaps smallpox - a fate not uncommon to armies in the old times.

    Abyssinia is in East Africa, but the Abyssinians at that time also ruled the southern part of the Arab peninsula. As they used war elephants, the Quran names then "the Companions of the Elephant".

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

    001 105/1: "- - - the Companions of the Elephant- - -". This refers to an attack from Abyssinia in 570 AD (though modern science question if the year is quite correct). The vice king Abraha or Abrah, lost much of his army because of a virulent illness - perhaps smallpox - and had to return home without attacking Mecca. The troops were NOT killed by stones from birds. (Muslims sometimes try to “explain” the clear text and the as clear mistake away by some linguistic gymnastics that includes that the Arab word for stone and the one for writings are not dissimilar, and they think that these words have been mixed up (in a holy book sent down by Allah, and without mistakes - how many more mixed ups?), and then say the meaning is metaphorical (in a book that Allah says shall be understood as it is written), it may not mean stones, but hard physical strikes - but also hard physical strikes is not the same as illness (and how hard physical strikes can birds give?). Muslims frequently have to use far out “explanations” like this to try to camouflage mistakes in the Quran. But if there is a linguistic mistake here according to Muslims – how many more linguistic mistakes are there in the Quran?

    002 105/2a: "Did He (Allah*) not make their (the Abyssinians*) treacherous plan go astray". Was it in reality Allah or nature that sent the illness?

    003 105/2b: "- - - treacherous - - -". An open attack against someone with whom you have no covenant or similar, is not treachery.

    004 105/3: “- - - Han (Allah*) sent against them (the Abyssinians*) Flights of Birds - - -". We quote (YA6272): "The miracle consisted in birds coming in large flights and flinging stones at the army which caused a great pestilence to arise and destroy the whole of Abraham' army". This is scientifically so stupid an explanation that we do not bother to comment on it - everyone with the least knowledge about contagious deceases (included Mr. Abdullah Yusuf Ali) know this is nonsense anyhow. This even more so as no bird could carry 3 stones each, like Hadiths say, too heavy for the soldiers to stop by their shields. If the stones were not heavy, the soldiers had had no problems taking them on their shields. ####But how come that a top Islamic scholar uses an explanation there is no chance he did not know was wrong? And how come that even the educated part of the Muslims are able to accept it?

    THIS IS A KIND OF DISHONESTY YOU MEET ALL TOO OFTEN FROM ISLAM AND ITS MUSLIMS. ALL TOO OFTEN.

    005 105/3+4: “And He (Allah*) sent against them (the Abyssinian army*) Flights of Birds, Striking them with stones of baked clay.” The soldiers were not killed by birds dropping stones. This just was the one of the fairy tales Muhammad came to believe in. Besides the tale is nonsense - in addition to all the other improbabilities in it, there is a limit to the size of bird claws, of beaks, and of ability to lift weight for birds; there is not a bird in Arabia who could lift 3 stones each, like the Hadiths say, too big for a man to meet with his shield - and in addition the biggest birds exist just in small numbers in an area. And this to defend the holy city of pagans, not of Islam (this was some 40 years before Muhammad started his teaching).

    According to science the army was hit by a contagious disease.

    5 + 400 = 405 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


     

    13.  'AD

    An old Arab tribe according to Arab folklore and to the Quran, which borrowed the tales from that folklore. It may or may not have existed, but hardly like described in the Quran. Their claimed prophet - claimed to be preaching Islam - was Hud. If 'Ad ever existed, they - and thus Hud - did exist so early that Moses could talk about them? = 2000+ years before Muhammad. Possible, but unclear. (There is a possibility that 'Ad did exist. They in case started sometime between the 23. and the 10. century. 'Ad is mentioned by the old historian Claudius Ptolemy in his "Geographos" (though not necessarily as confirmed knowledge, and not necessarily the Quran's 'Ad), but Hud not.

    A time line:

  • Adam (and Eve) - unclear when, but according to religion perhaps some 4600 BC.
  • Noah - unclear when, likely 3ooo - 4ooo BC (3200?).
  • Hud/'Ad - unknown when, but the first of the 3 claimed Arab prophets of the old. Well before Abraham. 2500+ BC?
  • Salih/Thamud - unknown when. Before Abraham.
  • Abraham and Lot - around 2ooo - 1800 BC according to science.

  • Shu'ayb - 4 generations (some 120 years) after Lot = roughly around 1700 BC. The last one of the 3 claimed Arab prophets of the old.
  • Moses - Exodus according to science was around 1235 BC, which means he was in Midian ca. 1275 to 1235 BC. If he was 80 when Exodus started and lived 40 years more like the Bible says, he lived from ca. 1315 BC to ca. 1195 BC.
  •  

    If the 'Ad people ever lived, according to the Quran they naturally lived at the same time as and before Hud.

    The claimed Arab prophet Hud and his claimed 'Ad people is the first of the 3 claimed special Arab prophets. The 'Ad people is borrowed from old Arab folklore, and it is unclear if they ever lived - we have not found sure information on them anywhere in history, except that Claudius Ptolemy mentions the claimed capital of 'Ad, Ubar, in his "Geographos".

    One thing which is absolutely sure: As for the Thamuds history tells that they existed from around or somewhat before 800 BC till around 600-400 BC when they disappeared, and as the Quran claims they lived/were destroyed well before Moses (= well before 1235 BC), the time line in the Quran is some 1ooo years wrong on the claimed Arab prophets - or at least on Salih and his Thamud. Worse: As the Quran places the 3 claimed prophets to times before or shortly after Abraham, who lived(?) some 2ooo-1800 BC (Hud and Salih before Abraham and Lot, and Shu'ayb 4 generations after), the Quran's time line here is perhaps 1500 years or more wrong. And the 'Ad were before the Thamud.

    If the Ad people ever lived, they lived in eastern Yemen and western Oman, near where the border of these two countries and the border of Saudi Arabia meet today. (Also: It is likely, but not sure, that it was in this area the Arab camel originally was domesticated.)

    Further: Historians say that 'Ad in case existed from around 1ooo BC or before, and to the 3. century AD. As the Quran places them well before Abraham (2ooo-1800 BC), as the Thamud also were before Abraham, but after 'Ad, this means that 'Ad's demise is some 2500 years or more wrong in the Quran.

    A serious problem here is that the information this time line is built on, thus do not fit the few known facts (another problem is that when you search Internet for facts about Hud/'Ad, Salih/Thamud, Shu'ayb/Madyan/People of the Wood, the articles are so dominated by the intention to make the claims in the Quran sound correct, that it is difficult to see what are really facts and what are "adjusted facts" - adjusted by wishful thinking). What seems to be facts, are that if the 'Ad people ever existed, they like said lived in an area in the southeast of the Arab peninsula (somewhere near where Saudi Arabia, Oman, and Yemen meet today). When is unclear, but before the Thamud and before Abraham. We have found no reliable mentioning of them in reliable history, except the above mentioned one.

    The Thamud is said to have lived in al-Hirj, a mountainous area very roughly halfway between Damascus and Mecca in northwest Arabia. A people named Thamud are mentioned in historical sources, but the very oldest one is connected to the Assyrian king Sargon II and dated to ca. 715 BC - far later than Moses, not to mention Abraham. This people disappeared from historical sources around 600-400 BC. Islam wants their disappearance to have been connected to volcanic eruptions, but we have been unable to find confirmation for volcanic activity in that area around 600-400 BC. (The main volcanic activity in Arabia stopped some 400ooo years ago.)

    Then finally there is the last of the 3 specific Arab claimed prophets, Shu'ayb. He in the Quran is connected to Madyan and to "the People of the Wood". This is somewhat complicated. For one thing it is unclear if "the Midianites" and "the People of the Wood" were the same or two different people. For another it is unclear where the Bible's Midian was situated. Originally we like many others believed the Bible's Midian and the Quran's Madyan were the same place - in the north-west of the Arab peninsula. But further studies have made us doubt this. There are two possible explanations for the Bible's Midian: Moses' Midian may have been to the east of Egypt or to the south of that country - it is not specified in the Bible whether Moses went east or south. If he went south (= along the Nile valley where it was easy to find a living), his Midian was in Sudan. If he went east, it was somewhere east of Egypt. And then the question is: Was the Bible's Midian just the name of a place somewhere, or did it refer to the land of the Midianites (Midian was the 4. of Abraham's 6 sons with his second wife, Keturah - 1. Mos. 25/2). If it was just a geographical name it may have been anywhere - f.x. in Madyan in Arabia. But if it referred to "the land of the Midianites" it was on the Sinai peninsula c--------------------. If Moses found a Midian just to the east of Egypt, this last explanation is the likely one for 2 reasons: For one thing this Midian was on his way east and much closer than Madyan in Arabia, and for another: The Midianites were related to the Jews and a natural place for a fleeing Jew to settle. And what is absolutely sure is that as the Thamud according to history seems to have existed from perhaps 800 or more BC to around 600-400 BC, and the Madyanites/Midianites of the Quran lived later according to that book, it is totally impossible that Shu'ayb could be identical to Moses' father-in-law, Jethro, like many Muslims claim - Jethro lived around 1350 BC.

    The fact that Islam indicates that Shu'ayb and his "People of the Wood" and Madyan lived and were destroied 4 generations after Lot = around 1700 BC, makes it impossible that the Madyan people were the same as Moses' Midian people - Moses were in Midian around 1275-1235 BC according to science = at least 400 years after Allah (according to the Quran) had destroid the Madyan people.

    There is one more fact concerning Moses' Midian: The Bible mentions near Mt. Hebron as the place for the flaming bush. Mt. Hebron likely was one of the peaks in the Mt. Sinai mountainous area. If the mentioning of Mt. Hebron is correct, Moses' Midian thus was in Sinai.

    WARNING: It has been difficult to find reliable info about the 'Ad, because the net is saturated with stuff "adjusted" to fit the Quran. But we believe we have found the correct facts.

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

    ##001 7/65a: "To the 'Ad people, (we (Allah*) sent) Hud - - -". The stories about Ad and Hud you find different places in the Quran are not from the Bible. As far as we have been able to find out, they are from no written sources.

    002 7/65b: "To the 'Ad people, (we (Allah*) sent) Hud - - -". Ad is a tribe from old Arab folklore (it may or may not have existed).

    003 7/65c: "To the 'Ad people, (we (Allah*) sent) Hud - - -". A time anomaly. See 4/13d above.

    004 7/65d: "To the 'Ad people, (we (Allah*) sent) Hud - - -". As for the claimed prophet Hud we have been unable to find out if also he is a person from old Arab legends, or if he "surfaced" with Muhammad's tales. But notice one thing: Muhammad is some places in the Quran said to be the first prophet to the Arabians. The claim that there was a prophet Hud in Arabia (and also a few others) contradicts that claim - one of many contradictions in the Quran. To quote comment (A7/47) (translated from Swedish): "Hud is told to have been the first Arab prophet". Also see 7/73a below.

    005 7/68a: "I (Hud*) am to you ('Ad*) a sincere and trustworthy adviser". Muhammad is once more making a parallel to his own situation - this is exactly his own message to the Arabs. And to his followers: That prophets are distrusted is normal, and thus his own situation in Mecca was normal for a prophet - reassuring for his then few followers in 621 AD to "know".

    006 7/69b: "- - - a message from your ('Ad's) Lord (Allah - see 7/65b above*) through a man of your own people - - -". See 7/68a above.

    007 7/69c: "- - - a message from your ('Ad's) Lord (Allah*) - - -". No god ever sent down something like the Quran - too much is wrong. And neither science nor Islam has ever found traces from such a message/religion anywhere in the world, older than 610 AD.

    008 7/69d: "- - - He (Allah*) made you (the 'Ad tribe) inheritors after the people of Noah - - -". Noah is supposed to have lived in what is now south Iraq, the 'Ad tribe in Arabia. The Quran several places mention that the Arabs had inherited land, houses, etc. from people Allah had exterminated. But 'Ad at least inherited little of such things from the people of Noah - wrong geography.

    009 7/69e: "- - - ('Ad had) a tall stature among the nations". No group of people on the Arab peninsula ever had "a tall stature" among peoples that early (except perhaps locally). They (with the exception of parts of what is now Yemen) always were a backward region compared to neighbors like Egypt and Mesopotamia, not to mention Persia, Greece and the Romans. Only after they united into a warrior nation under and after Muhammad during 622 AD and following years, they had a period of strength and of growing big - mainly as destructors destructing other cultures, and robbing and suppressing them. This period was not long, though, before others - f.x. the Turks - took over. There also was a period of intellectual greatness, but if you go into the story, you will find that few of the leading intellectuals were Arabs. And over a few centuries everything stopped and the area drifted into stagnation, because the religion killed science and thinking - a stagnation which in the end meant the downfall of even the power of warfare and suppression and put the people back among the backward ones, a position which is the fact many places even today, and for the places where it is not the case, the reason for the progress mainly are thoughts, ideas, and impulses from the outside.

    010 7/70b: "They ('Ad*) said: Comest thou (Hud*) to us - - - (etc*)". See 7/60a above.

    ###011 7/70c: "- - - the cult of our (the 'Ad people's*) fathers - - -". This is meant as hidden irony. But the real irony is that Islam only is "the cult of the fathers", as absolutely nothing is proved, and even lots of it is proved wrong + that all the wrong points in the Quran prove 100% and more that no god was involved in the Quran and thus in the religion. Superstition often is mistaken for a religion.

    012 7/70d: "Bring us (the 'Ad people*) what thou (Hud*) threatenest us with - - -". They simply were asking for proofs - a total parallel to requests Muhammad got, and he uses the parallel to show that Allah also that time proved nothing - Muhammad thus was in good company when he was unable to prove anything.

    013 7/74a: "- - - He (Allah*) made you (the Thamud) inheritors (after the 'Ad - Thamud sometimes is called the second 'Ad*) - - -". Yet another not proved claim.

    Besides: 'Ad lived in east Yemen and west Oman. The Thamud lived in Hejas or Hijas in the northwest of Arabia. How could they be the inheritors of the 'Ad? (Well, Islam explains - like always without documentation - that it is correct that the Thamud lived in the northwest, but before that they lived in east Yemen and west Oman, but for some reason or other the whole people moved from that quite rich costal area to the harsh desert in the northwest. Voila! The Quran is saved on this point! But it is a claim, not a documented fact. Claims are cheap, and there are a bit too many undocumented claims in the Quran. Believe it without documentation if you want to.)

    014 9/70a: "People of Noah, and 'Ad, and Thamud; the People of Abraham, the men of Midian, and the Cities overthrown (Sodom and Gomorrah*)". 6 time anomalies if we include the ones only mentioned in the Quran.

    015 11/50a: "- - - the 'Ad People - - -". A powerful tribe in the very old Arabia, according to old Arab folklore - they may have existed (before Moses in case, because the Quran claims he mentioned Hud - not said in the Bible). Muhammad claimed their demise was because they sinned against Allah.

    016 11/50c: "- - - Hud - - -". A claimed prophet in Arabia (to the 'Ad people). You meet him nowhere outside the Quran and linked books. He - like all claimed or documented(?) prophets in the Quran - met with similar problems like Muhammad met when it came to being believed - satisfying at least for Muhammad's followers who then "understood" that Muhammad's problems were normal for prophets, and that Muhammad thus had to be a prophet. His real interest for the story is that he (and a few others perhaps - perhaps - included Moses during his 40 years exile from Egypt before the Exodus), are claimed to have worked as prophets in Arabia, whereas the Quran tells that Muhammad worked for a people - the Arabs - who had had no prophet before.

    ####With the partly exception of Jesus - who was too well known - all prophets or claimed prophets told about in the Quran, are bent into a frame to be parallels to Muhammad. A coincidence?

    11/50ca: "- - - Hud, one of their own brethren". A parallel to Muhammad. He was an Arab and claimed Allah sent prophets/messengers to the different people from their own people - the Arab Muhammad to Arabs, the 'Ad Hud to the 'Ad tribe, etc.

    017 11/50e: "Ye (the 'Ad tribe from before Moses*) have no other god but Him (Allah*)". For one thing neither science nor Islam has found any trace of Islam or Allah before 610 AD, and 'Ad is at least 2ooo years earlier. For another see 6/106b above.

    018 11/53b: "They (the 'Ad people*) said: 'O Hud! - - -". See 11/43c above.

    019 11/54a: "We (the 'Ad people*) say nothing - - -". See 11/43c above.

    020 11/59b: "- - - the 'Ad People; they rejected the Signs of their Lord - - -". See 11/43c above.

    021 11/59d: "- - - (the 'Ad people*) disobeyed His (Allah's*) Prophets - - -". When you are making up stories, it is difficult to remember all details and not stumble or make a slip here and there. According to Islam Hud was the first prophet in Arabia - he clearly was before Moses, because Moses is said to talk about him as an earlier prophet. But when Hud was the first and only (claimed) prophet the 'Ad people ever had, how come that they then disobeyed Allah's prophets (plural)? A small. but revealing mistake - revealing because it often is just this kind of small slips which uncovers the deceiver and the swindler.

    Another question: If the 'Ad tribe ever existed, did they - and thus Hud - exist so early that Moses could talk about them = 2000+ years before Muhammad. From where did Muhammad get information about him? As the Quran and all its mistakes are from no god - no god delivers that kind of quality - Islam's claim that he got it from a god, does not hold water as too much is wrong in the Quran, and there is no known source of information neither about Hud nor about the two other claimed Arab prophets, Shu'yab and Salih.

    022 11/60a: "And they (the 'Ad people*) were pursued by a Curse in this Life - and on the Day of Judgment". Loose claims like this are cheap and cozy propaganda to listen to for believers - especially for the blind ones with a strong wishful way of thinking. The good thing for the preacher is that he never has to prove anything.

    023 11/60b: “Removed (from sight (= killed*)) were ‘Ad (a presumed large and rich Arabian tribe, “borrowed” from Arabian folk tales - it may or may not have existed*) - - -”. Some thousands more killed by the good and benevolent god Allah - for their sins according to the Quran. (Science has additional reasons for why a tribe might disappear in a barren land, ridden by raids and strife and war). Notice that Hud and Muhammad had parallel experiences with being rejected - that is the norm for all prophets and Muhammad in the Quran.

    024 11/68b: "For the Thamud rejected their Lord (Allah*) - - -". According to old Arab folklore and pre-history, the Thamud tribe was the successor of the 'Ad tribe and often called "the second 'Ad", and according to the Quran both tribes were eradicated by Allah because they refused to accept Allah - the one and mighty god which was preached about all the time since Adam and Noah by prophets, at least according to Islam - but never a trace of any kind of monotheism found by science - and neither by Islam - that early. In this - and most other cases in the Quran - the prophets experienced parallel stories to what Muhammad had experienced up to the time of the verses he told, according to what Muhammad told or retold in the Quran - which of course told Muhammad's followers that he was a normal prophet and also that the bad and non-intelligent "infidels" would be punished. There also was a number of scattered ruins of houses, hamlets, and towns (a still famous one is Petra in Jordan) in and around Arabia - Muhammad told they all were empty because the people had sinned against Allah and been punished, though science knows a number of other reasons for empty ruins, especially in warlike desert areas.

    025 13/30b: "- - - a People before whom (long since) have (other) People (gone and) passed away - - -". = The Arabs. Folklore told that tribes like the 'Ad and Thamud had lived there before - and Muhammad claimed they had all been killed by Allah because of sins against him, and that the Arabs had got their places - - - and had to be obedient to Allah - and to Muhammad - not to risk the same fate.

    026 14/9b: "- - - 'Ad, and Thamud - - -". 2 tribes who according to old Arab folklore lived in Arabia in really old times, and whom you meet several times in the Quran. According to Islam they lived around and a little later than the times of Abraham but before Moses. Abraham lived - if he is not fiction - around 1800-2000 BC according to science and Moses around 1300 BC. There exists no real information about them, except maybe one or two small mentionings. The tales in the Quran are from Arab folklore, adjusted to fit Islam by Allah or by someone else. For the ones who do not know the Bible well - we f.x. know that quite a few Hindus read this, as there are problems with Islam in India - we mention that Noah is one of the very early persons in OT - the one who with his family survived the Big Flood (7/64c+d).

    027 14/9d: "To them (Noah, 'Ad, Thamud, etc.*) came messengers - - -". Wrong at least as far as Noah goes. The Quran clearly indicate and the Bible directly says (1. Mos. 7/13) that the god contacted Noah directly.

    028 14/9f: "- - - we ('Ad, Thamud and others*) are really in suspicious (disquieting) doubt about that which ye invite us". As the Quran claims they were invited by means of a copy similar to the Quran to Islam, the reason may well have been that they understood something was seriously wrong.

    029 17/59j: Just for the record: The stories about the 'Ad, Thamud, Midianite (descendants of Abraham’s 4. son with Keturah - 1. Mos. 25/2 - or people from Midian (Madyan?)), Rocky Tract, etc. tribes and the prophets Hud, Salih, and Shu'ayb are not from the Bible. That is to say, Midianites may be mentioned, as descendants from one of Abraham's 6 sons with Keturah, Midian (1. Mos. 24/1-2).

    030 22/42e: "- - - 'Ad and Thamud - - -". Two tribes in the very old time, which Muhammad claimed - but as normal never proved - were exterminated because they sinned against Allah. They are taken from old Arab folklore, and not from the Bible, and may or may not have existed, and if they have existed may or may not have been especially sinful against Allah. There is no documentation showing that if they were exterminated and not just lost their culture and power and were mixed with other people, the extermination was like what the Quran claims.

    They are not mentioned in the Bible.

    031 25/38a: "- - - 'Ad and Thamud - - -". 2 tribes from old Arab folklore. They may or may not have existed. Islam will have to prove what is told about them in the Quran, as there exists no reliable source of information about them (except that each may be is named once, but much later in history (Thamud in connection to Sargon II of Assyria around 715 BC)).

    032 25/38-39b: “- - - also ’Ad and Thamud and the People of the Rass (3 large tribes “borrowed” from Arab folklore, except one does not know who "the People of the Rass" refers to*), and many generations between them - - - and each one We (Allah*) broke to utter annihilation - - -”. It is not easy for Yahweh/God to compete with all this wholesale slaughter, even if Yahweh was a bit bloody until the Jews had found their home and for some time after that.

    033 25/39a: "- - - and each one ('Ad, Thamud, the Rass*) We (Allah*) broke to utter annihilation (for their sins)". There were ruins and there were folk tales about former tribes in and around Arabia. Muhammad claimed they were all from people destroyed because of sins against Allah. Science points to other possibilities in a harsh and warlike area.

    034 26/123a: "The 'Ad people - - -". A tribe from old Arab folklore. It may or may not have existed - some traces may indicate that a tribe with this name once lived, but the rest of what you find about them in the Quran, you only find in the Quran. From where did Muhammad get the stories? As the Quran with all its mistakes is not from a god, the only alternatives are legends, folklore, fairy tales, or fantasy.

    035 26/124a: "- - - Hud - - -" The name of a claimed self proclaimed prophet said to be working among the 'Ad tribe in the very old Arabia. You only find him in the Quran. Like many of the other claimed prophets in Quran, he mirrors Muhammad's life up to the time of Muhammad's life when the story was told, and with doom for non-Muslims. As for where Muhammad got his information about Hud from, see 26/123a above.

    036 26/136b: "They (the 'Ad people*) said - - -". See 26/70b above.

    037 26/139b: "They (the 'Ad people*) rejected him (Hud*) - - -". See 26/70b above.

    038 29/38a: "- - - the 'Ad and the Thamud (people) - - -". Two tribes from old Arab folklore - they may be have existed and maybe not. There may be some traces indicated that they have existed (about 1ooo years later than the Quran indicate), but what is told about them in the Quran, you only find in the Quran. From where is the information?

    039 38/12b: "'Ad". A tribe from Arab folklore - it may or may not have existed.

    040 38/12-13: "- - - Noah - - - 'Ad - - - Pharaoh - - - the Lord of the Stakes - - - Thamud - - - - Lot - - - the People of the Wood - - - such was the Confederates". Islam will have a job proving that these were confederates, as there are perhaps 3ooo years or more between the oldest and the youngest - and spread over a wide geographical area. Especially the time of when the different ones existed, Muhammad seems to have had vague ideas about, and because of that made some funny errors in the Quran.

    041 40/31b: "- - - 'Ad - - - Thamud - - -". 2 tribes from Arab folklore. They may or may not have existed, but even if they should have existed, Muhammad had no sources of information about them except folklore (there is a chance they are mentioned in old Greek scriptures, but those were not translated to Arab at the time of Muhammad), as the Quran is not from a god - except folk tales and fairy tales. Noah is from the Bible, but not 'Ad and Thamud. In any case both are time anomalies.

    042 41/13c: "- - - the 'Ad and the Thamud - - -". 2 tribes from Arab folklore - they may or may not have existed in the far past, but are not mentioned in the Bible - whom Muhammad claimed (as normal without the slightest proof) were killed by Allah because of sins.

    043 41/14a: "- - - the messengers came to them (the 'Ad and the Thamud*) - - -". The Quran claims - as normal without any documentation - that all societies all over the world and to all times have been sent messengers preaching about Allah and Islam. The Hadiths mention the number 124ooo through the times. But with the exception of the Jewish ones and Muhammad, not one of them has left a trace anywhere or in any way. Islam will have to prove their words to be believed.

    044 41/14c: "They (the 'Ad and the Thamud*) said, 'If our Lord - - -'". See 41/4d above.

    045 41/15a: "- - - the 'Ad - - -". See 41/13b+c above.

    046 41/15b: "- - - truth and reason - - -". In this case texts similar to the Quran claimed sent down to Hud, the claimed prophet of the tribe 'Ad from Arab folklore. But anything similar to the Quran at best could be partly the truth and reason - too many mistakes, etc.

    047 41/15e: "Who is superior to us ('Ad*) in strength?" When you read the Quran, you may notice that the people Muhammad claimed Allah had destroyed, normally were claimed to be much superior in strength and riches than the Arabs of Muhammad's time. This made the god more imposing. But really: How impressing is it that a people are strong, when the opponent is a claimed omnipotent god? If a man tramples down a bunch of lilies, it tells little about the man's strength whether the lilies were healthy and strong or undernourished and weak. But naive people not thinking things over, obviously was - and is - impressed by the tales.

    048 41/15g: "- - - Allah - - - was superior to them (the 'Ad*) in strength - - -". The old fact once more: Not unless he existed and was something supernatural.

    049 41/15h: "But they ('Ad*) continued to reject Our (Allah's*) Signs!" Naturally - at least if they were among the many who saw that something was seriously wrong in the new religion.

    050 41/16a: “So We (Allah*) sent against them a furious Wind through days (NB: Plural*) of disaster - - -.” ( 69/7 = 6 nights and 7 days.) But:

    1. 54/19: “For We (Allah*) sent against them (the people of Ad*) a furious wind, on a Day of violent Disaster.” Here it lasted only one day.

     

    051 46/21b: "'Ad". A tribe from old Arab folklore. It may or may not have existed, but if it existed, it is little likely they came to an end the way Muhammad - as normal without the slightest proof - claimed. The Quran claims Hud was their prophet. If they existed, it according to the Quran was sometime between Noah and Moses.

    052 46/21c: "- - - (Hud) one of 'Ad's own brethren - - -". Muhammad claimed prophets were sent to their own people (neither in the Bible, nor in the Quran this is quite correct). Even if this was not quite correct also in the Quran, you will find this claim stressed many places in the Quran - and "facts" some places "adjusted" a little to make them fit this claim (f.x. facts(?) connected to Abraham, Lot, and Moses). This fitted Muhammad's claim that naturally a prophet to Arabs had to be an Arab - like himself. If you read the Quran, you will meet this phenomenon several places.

    053 46/21d: "- - - he (Hud*) warned his people about the winding Sand-tracts - - -". This sentence hangs in the air, because it is not said anything why he warned his people about them and what the danger was. If not the meaning simply is that he warned his people living among the sand-tracts = in the desert. The language in the Quran sometimes/too often is unclear.

    054 46/22b: "They (the 'Ad tribe*) said: 'Hast thou (Hud*) come - - -'". See 46/7d above.

    055 46/22c: "Hast thou (Hud*) come in order to turn us (the people of 'Ad*) aside from our gods?" An exact parallel to questions Muhammad got - "ergo" Muhammad's problems were normal for prophets, and thus Muhammad had to be a normal prophet. Good for his followers to "know". Most stories in the Quran about claimed or real(?) prophets were made parallels to Muhammad's situation, and thus "documented" that his situation was normal for prophets, and that he thus was a normal prophet.

    056 46/24b: "- - - they (the 'Ad tribe*) said: 'This cloud will - - -'". See 46/7d above.

    057 46/26a: "And We (Allah*) had firmly established them (the 'Ad tribe*) in a (prosperity and) power which We have not given to you (ye Quraysh) - - -". When you read the Quran, it is striking that more or less always when Allah destroys a people, it was a more rich and powerful people than Muhammad's contemporary Arabs. It made his already omniscient god and also the impression on Muhammad's Arabs greater - but did an omnipotent god need to become greater?

    058 46/26d: "- - - that which they (the 'Ad tribe*) used to mock at". Islam. If you believe Islam existed perhaps only 3 - 4 generations after Noah (see 46/21a above), it is up to you. But neither science nor Islam has found any reliable traces from Islam older than 610 AD when Muhammad stared his mission.

    059 50/14a: "- - - each one (of them) (the tribes mentioned in 50/12-14*) rejected the Messengers - - -". Except for Noah, Pharaoh and Lot, none of these are mentioned in the Bible - and like so often their stories are parallels to the one of Muhammad at the time when the stories were told or before. This "told" his followers that Muhammad's problems were normal for prophets, and thus that Muhammad was an ordinary - thought extraordinary - prophet. Nice for his followers to "know" and good claims (true or not true) for Muhammad.

    060 51/41a. "- - - the 'Ad (people) - - -". A tribe from old Arab folklore. It may or may not have existed, but their end and the reason for it highly unlikely are like Muhammad tells - at least Islam will have to prove it to be believed by us.

    061 53/50a: "- - - it is He (Allah*) who destroyed the (powerful) ancient 'Ad (people) - - -". See 53/49a above.

    062 53/50b: "- - - the 'Ad (people) - - -". A tribe from old Arab legends. They may or may not have once exists, but it is highly unlikely they disappeared in the way Muhammad told - at least Islam have to bring a few proofs./p>

    063 54/18a: "The 'Ad (people) - - -". A tribe from old Arab folklore. It may or may not have existed, but in case hardly with the demise the Quran claims. If they existed, they likely lived in south Arabia.

    064 54/18c: “The 'Ad (people) rejected (truth (the teachings of the Quran*) - - -.” Those teachings at best only are partly true – too many mistakes, etc. (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.) See 13/1g and 40/75 above.

    065 54/18d: “The Ad (people) rejected (truth (the teachings of the Quran*) - - -.” See the comments to 54/2c above.

    066 54/19: “For We (Allah*) sent against them (the people of 'Ad*) a furious wind, on a Day of violent Disaster.” But other verses contradict; it lasted more than one day:

    1. 41/16: “So We (Allah*) sent against them a furious Wind through days of disaster - - -.”
    2. 69/6-7: “And the ‘Ad – they were destroyed by a furious Wind - - - He (Allah*) made it rage against them seven nights and eight days in succession - - -.”

     

    (2 contradictions).

    067 69/4: "The Thamud and the 'Ad People - - -". 2 tribes from old Arab folklore. They may have existed or they may have not, but if they did it is very little likely their ends came in those ways and for the reasons the Quran claims - as usual without any documentation. If they existed, Muslim scholars mean 'Ad was the oldest and lived in the south of Arabia, whereas the Thamud was a somewhat young tribe who lived in the mountains in the northern part of Arabia - north of Medina.

    068 69/7: “He (Allah*) made it (the storm that destroyed Ad*) rage against them seven nights and eight days in succession - - -.”

    1. 54/19: “For We (Allah*) sent against them (the people of Ad*) a furious wind, on a Day of violent Disaster.” Here it is one day.

     

    069 69/8a: "Then seest thou (people*) any of them (the 'Ad people*) left surviving?" At least at the time of Muhammad - at least 2ooo years later if the 'Ad had ever existed - no survivors were known (if there were, they were mixed up with the Arabs). An easy "proof" for Muhammad.

    070 69/8b: "Then seest thou (people*) any of them (the 'Ad people*) left surviving?" It often is said that Yahweh before the New Covenant (f.x. 22/20) was a harsh god. But count the killings by Allah in the Quran, and you will find Yahweh just was an amateur in the killing business - this even more so as had Muhammad's claim that Yahweh = Allah been correct, Allah had had the "honor" of Yahweh's killings + all his own killings. There also are two more essential differences: Yahweh made the wars to make space for his small nation, Israel - and over a limited time. Allah(?) wants to suppress the entire world. And: Yahweh's wars were things which happened thousands of years ago - the last in the old times was in 70 AD (and Yahweh hardly was involved in that one). Whereas Allah made war in the past, makes war now, and even officially intends to make war in all future until the entire world is suppressed "and pay zakat ("infidel"-tax) with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" to quote the Quran.

    071 89/6a: "- - - the 'Ad (people) - - -". A tribe from old Arab folklore. It may or may not have existed. But if it ever existed, it is highly unlikely it came to an end in the way the Quran describes - unless Islam produces some proofs for once.

    072 89/13: "Therefore did thy (Muslims*) Lord (Allah*) pour on them ('Ad, Thamud, Pharaoh Ramses II, etc.) a scourge - - -". Muhammad claimed that the inhabitants of all ruins in and around Arabia and in all tales about earlier people in Arab folklore + Ramses II and his people, were killed by Allah because they had sinned against him. In case this is true, Allah is a far more bloody and revengeful god than Yahweh - but science has a number of other explanations for their disappearances (in a harsh and warlike land there really are other possible explanations - this even more so as Muhammad as normal never proved anything about his claims on this point, just like on most other points).

    72 + 405 = 477 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


     

    14. ADAM

    The first human according to both the Bible and to the Quran. His wife was Eve according to the Bible - she is not named in the Quran - the Quran frequently is short on details. It is likely they lived - if they are not pure legends - in the green delta area in what is now south Iraq. When they lived (if they are not simply a legend) is unclear - perhaps 4ooo-5000 BC. (We have seen the number 4600 BC. There also are time lines which may indicate around 4ooo BC.)

    According to modern science Adam and Eve never existed - at least not like described in the Bible or in the Quran. Man according to science developed from earlier primates (not from apes like vulgar debate wants it, but from earlier primates) over a period of a few million years. Depending on the definition, etc. you often see that the our first real forparents lived some 5-7 million years ago, and that modern man - Homo Sapiens - emerged maximum some 200ooo years ago ("some 195ooo years ago" is a number you sometimes meet). A LOT older than the Bible and the Quran indicate.

    The most central of our ancestors who surely have had large enough brain capacity to be reckoned to be real humans:

    1. Homo Habilis - from ca. 2.8 million years ago. Likely the first tool maker, and likely where the real expansion of the human brain started. Brain capacity some 640 ccm (cube centimeters) and weight some 1.32 pounds/600 grams.
    2. Homo Erectus - from 1.5 million years ago. Brain capacity 930 - 1029 ccm - not far behind modern man.
    3. Homo Neanderthalis - from ca. 400ooo years ago. Brain capacity 1600 ccm - larger than Homo Sapiens.
    4. Homo Denisovans - from ca. 400ooo years ago. Brain capacity not known.
    5. Homo Sapiens (= modern man) - from 160ooo - 200ooo (195ooo?) years ago. Brain capacity originally 1200+ ccm, growing bigger till some 10ooo years ago, when it started to shrink a little, but it has been growing some the last couple of centuries in the rich countries, surely because of plenty and nourishing food. Today some 1350 ccm.

     

    Brain capacity does not tell the full story, but it definitely is a clear indication. The Neanderthals and the Denisovans were so close to Homo Sapiens, that we know they sometimes got children together - a small percent of our DNA are from Neanderthals and Denisovans according to science.

    At what time did Allah start to send down copies of "the Mother of the Book"? An essential point here also is that the first humans learnt to read and write only some 5200-5300 years ago - what did the claimed prophets and messengers before that, use the books for? - and what alphabet and languages were used? Further: If the copies were sent down verbally only, how much did Noah and Adam and people say 10ooo or 100ooo years go understand of the references in the Quran? - or people in Tierra del Fuego or the Amazonas or Greenland, and many other places say around 500 AD?

    Then there is the question of "the archeological Eve" and the less known "archeological Adam". It seems that the human race once lived through a so-called "bottle-neck" - a time when the race nearly died out. Modern analyses of the mitochondrial DNA indicate that all that DNA originally came from one and the same woman (mitochondrial DNA only is inherited from women, as the male sex cells - the sperm cells - do not contain mitochondria). More than one woman may have survived the bottleneck, but their direct descendants in case for some reason came to an end over some generations in case. This in case happened in Africa. Archeologists named this woman Eve after Eve in the Bible, but they were very far from the same woman.

    Much later there seems to have a similar - and less known - story concerning men - here found out via the Y-chromosome, which only is inherited from and only are carried by men. It is possible this took place somewhere south of the Caspian Sea. This man the archeologists named Adam after Adam in the Bible - but also here they were very far from the same person.

    Thus when Islam or Muslims claim that the archeological Eve or the archeological Adam prove anything concerning the Quran, that is nonsense. In addition to that there only are similar names, there were thousands of miles/km and tens of thousands of years between them - - - and both lived long before the indicated times in the Quran. (The time lines in the Quran are very unclear, but they do not cover 50ooo years or more - likely some 6ooo-7000 years only.)

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

    *001 1/1-7b: “In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful, Praise be to Allah - - - Thee do we (Muhammad and Muslims*) worship and thine aid we seek. Show us the strait way - - -“. The Quran starts with a contradiction. All the places where Muhammad quotes Allah starts with the word “Say”. It is not present here, which means that it is Muhammad or Muslims who are praying - like said above; in a book claimed and presumed to have been made by Allah at least before Adam, since also Adam (who in reality never existed as man developed from earlier primates according to science) was introduced to the book, but perhaps have existed since eternity – which means at least since before the Universe was created some 13.7 billion years ago). And a book which is the revered and unalterable "mother book" in Heaven (13/39, 43/4, 85/21-22) – revered by Allah and his angels in his own “home”. Impossible and a solid internal contradiction.

    Muslims try to explain it with that Allah is omniscient and knows everything, and of course knew this, too – that Muhammad would be praying, and included it in the "mother book" at the beginning of time.

    The problem only is that this is even theoretically impossible if man has free will – and if man has no free will, then for one thing the Quran is lying, and for another thing: How then explain that all the bad and unjust persons in reality are acting according to Allah's wishes, and how justify that a presumably good and benevolent god forces humans to behave in such ways that they end in Hell?

    The combination of that Allah knows everything long before – not to mention that he decides and predestines everything – and free will for man is an absolute impossibility, even for gods. Actually it is a version of “the Time Travel Paradox” and that paradox is long since proved unsolvable.

    An easy way to understand this is:

    1. If Allah is omniscient: The moment Allah says: "Now I know the future", man can do nothing that changes what Allah knows, because that would make Allah’s knowledge wrong. Man has no free will from that moment (and remember that Allah has decided and knows your life since before you were born, and in this special case much longer - he f.x. according to Hadiths decides your future and whether you are to end in Hell or in Heaven when the fetus which is to become you, is 4 months old = 5 months before you even are born) – .
    2. If man has free will: Then it is not possible for Allah to know the future, because a man can always change his mind one more time, after Allah thought that now he knows the future. Then Allah is not omniscient, or at least not fully clairvoyant.
    3. Some Muslims try to explain this away with claiming that man has partly free will - an expression never used in the Quran, and we also never have found an explanation for what it means. But this "explanation" is meaningless, as if a person cannot change his mind about something, then he has no free will in that case, and is just a puppet. Besides as mentioned: The claim that man has free will is never restricted in any way in the Quran. Besides "partly free will" is just as bad for Allah's claimed clairvoyance as full free will - the destruction of Allah's clairvoyance only may - may - take a little more time.

    Actually Islam admits they are unable to explain this – probably largest – contradiction. Their solution simply is to say: We cannot understand or explain it, but is has to be true, as Allah say so in the Quran (!!!) We quote from "The Message of the Quran" - a book certified by Al-Azhar Al-Sharif Islamic Research Academy (Al-Azhar in Cairo is one of the 2-3 foremost Islamic universities in the world),(A6/141 - In the English 2008 edition A6/143): "- - - the real relationship between Allah's knowledge of the future (and, therefore, the ineluctability of what is to happen in the future) on the one side, and man's free will, on the other - two propositions which, on the face of it, seem to contradict one another - is beyond man's comprehension; but since both are postulated by Allah (in the Quran - a book full of mistakes*), both must be true.

    The ultimate defeat for intelligence and knowledge. And the ultimate victory for blind belief, occultism, etc.

    Instead of asking questions, which one ought to do in such a serious case as "what is the right way to the eternal possible next life", one flees from a fact which may tell them they are on the wrong way".

    But as for this explaining away of how the prayer is taken into in the Quran – a copy of the claimed very old "mother book" - there are only these 5 possible solutions:

    1. Allah was praying to himself in the "mother book". Too ridiculous to discuss.
    2. Muhammad was really praying, but outside the text from the "mother book" and then adding it into the Quran. But how much more of the texts in the Quran is then from outside the "mother book" - just added to it?
    3. It really is from the "mother book", but Allah or Gabriel forgot the essential word "say"– but how many more words are then forgotten in the Quran?
    4. It - the order "Say" - was in the "mother book" and neither Allah nor Gabriel forgot – but Muhammad did. But then – if he forgot something, how much more did he forget which should have been in the Quran?
    5. Muhammad or someone made up the Quran or at least this surah, and forgot to pretend it was from Allah.

     

    Pick your choice.

    There are similar contradictions - Muhammad speaking - with the claim that it is all from Allah, at least in these verses: 2/286, 6/104, 6/114, 11/2b, 19/36b, 27/91a, 42/10a and 51/50-51a. In addition there as mentioned above, is at least one place where it is clear that angels are speaking (41/30-32) - which makes it impossible that the book can be from eternity, as at least some of the angels had to be created before the book (if not angels could not speak in the book (and as they spoke to humans, the book could not be made before there were humans) - and actually the similar goes for Muhammad - he could not speak in the Quran before he was born.

    002 2/30-35: The story of the creation of Adam and Eve (her name is not mentioned in the Quran, only in the Bible) is roughly like in the Bible, but in nearly all details different from the story in the Bible. Normally the Bible would be reckoned to be a more reliable source, partly because it is much older and thus nearer to what may be happened, partly because it is built on strong traditions, whereas the Quran only builds on Muhammad's words - and the historical Muhammad in addition was not a most reliable man, as we have mentioned other places. But in this case it is likely both are wrong - Adam and Eve most likely have never existed, but are just legends (may be borrowed from Persia (via the Jews?))

    003 2/31a: "And He (Allah*) taught Adam the nature of all things - - -". Not from the Bible.

    004 2/31b: "And He (Allah*) taught Adam the nature of all things - - -". There are more than 12 million just of different living beings in the fauna in the world. Then there is the flora, and there are all the "dead" things in the world. Allah far from thought Adam "the nature of all things" - Adam's brain simply did not have the capacity for this. This is one of the very many points Islam is busy "explaining" - though there are many other points which are more difficult and more essential to explain away.

    005 2/31+33: "- - - then He (Allah*) placed them (all things*) before the angels - - - (and shortly after said): "O Adam! Tell them (the angels*) their (the things'*) natures". Not from the Bible. See 2/31b above.

    006 2/33a: "O Adam! Tell them (the angels*) their natures". See 2/31 above.

    007 2/33b: "O Adam! Tell them (the angels*) their natures". Not from the Bible.

    008 2/34b: "Bow down to Adam", and they (the angels*) bowed down (to Adam*) - - -". Not from the Bible.

    009 2/34c: "- - - they (the angels*) bowed down (to Adam*) - - -". This means they accepted him/man as being superior to them.

    ###010 2/34e: (A2/26) “- - - they (the angels*) all prostrated themselves, save Iblis (the future Devil*) - - - and thus he became one of those who deny the truth”. There is an added mystery here: It is indicated here that Iblis was an angel, but angles were created from light, whereas it many places in the Quran is said that Iblis was created from fire = Iblis was a Jinn. Also the fact that he was able to refuse Allah’s order makes Islamic scholars question his being an angel, because angels are totally obedient. That aside:

    #####(It is) “absolutely clear that at the time of that command he (Iblis*) was indeed one of the heavenly host. Hence we must assume that his “rebellion” has a purely symbolic significance and is, in reality, the outcome of a specific function assigned to him by Allah. (This is what many Muslim scholars believe, as Allah has absolute power, and nothing happens unless according to his plan.) If this is true, and Allah is behind also the Devil and Hell - where then is the good and benevolent god?”

    This is a touchy point for some Muslims: If Iblis was able to refuse to obey, Allah is not omnipotent. If on the other hand Hell is part of Allah’s design, Allah far from is a pure and good and benevolent god. Muhammad Asad:"The Message of the Quran", tends to believe it is part of Allah’s design – the omnipotence is more essential than benevolence – but we have never seen a clear answer to the enigma. The real significance of this scene thus is unclear.

    Also very different from the Bible.

    011 2/35: (A2/27): “O Adam, dwell thou and thy wife in this garden - - -.” Exact translation: “the garden”. “There is a considerable difference of opinion among the commentators as to what is the meaning here by ‘garden’: a garden in the earthly sense, or the paradise that awaits the righteous in the life to come, or some special garden in the heavenly regions?” The text is not specific, and the meaning unclear. This unclear text is combined with 2/36 which talks about that Adam had to go down from the Garden of Eden (this name is from the Bible) to indicate something more heavenly - - - and conveniently "forget" that in 2/30 it is unmistakably stated that Adam was to be a "vice regent on earth" - ergo he was placed on Earth, ergo the Garden of Eden had to be on Earth. (Many scientists believe the Garden of Eden - if it existed - lay in the wetlands in what today is southeast Iraq.) There is a little (an understatement) too much of such dishonest "logic" in Muslim "information".

    2/36aa "Then did Satan make them (Adam and Eve*) slip from the garden (of Eden - likely in the lush and water rich parts of south Iraq*) - - -". Similar to the Bible, though details differ.

    012 2/36b: "- - - with enmity between yourselves (humans*)". Contradiction to the Bible. The Bible says enmity between humans and the snake (who was the partner(?) of the devil in making Eve take fruits from the forbidden tree). If Islam claims there only were 2 persons, this means there were enmity between Adam and Eve - no source indicates this - - - and there hardly had been children if the two were enemies.

    013 2/36c: (A2/30): “- - - on earth you shall have your abode and your livelihood for a while!” We quote from “The Message of the Quran”: “With this sentence the address changes from the hitherto-observed dual form (a grammatical form for plural that exists in some languages, included Arab, which means the subjects are 2*) to the plural (in Arab = minimum 3): A further indication that the moral of the story relates to the human race as a whole.” An indication - mainly because this is the only explanation Islam has for this - but not clear language. Another comment: Muhammad Asad has the same tendency like many Muslims explaining or promoting their religion: This sentence is an order to Adam and perhaps to his descendants that they will have to live on Earth for some time. If you want to include a moral aspect in Allah’s words, this in case is an interpretation that may be right or wrong, but which is not part of what is said.

    014 2/37a: “Then learnt Adam from his Lord (Allah*) words of inspiration - - -“. Muhammad had his messages from Allah in the same way he claimed Adam got them - Muhammad's way of getting information must be normal? - after some time it at least might seem so for his followers, as all "messengers" got messages that way, at least according to Muhammad.

    015 2/37b: “Then learnt Adam from his Lord (Allah*) words of inspiration - - -“. Not from the Bible - the word "inspiration" is never used in such a connection in the Bible - it is hardly used at all.

    016 2/37c: "- - - his (Adam's*) Lord (Allah*) turned towards him; for He is Oft-Forgiving". This indicates that Allah forgave him (Eve is forgotten here), which has as a result that Islam do not have the dogma about inherited sin.

    As for forgiving from Allah: See 2/187d below. (The same facts and logic go for f.x. punishment, reward, and any other deed which include changes in Allah's predestined and unchangeable Plan, like f.x. forgiving.

    017 2/51b: "- - - in his (Moses'*) absence ye (the Jews*) took the calf (for worship), and did grievous wrong". How come that this could be written in the claimed "Mother Book"? Muslims do not quite agree on how old the claimed "Mother Book" is - either it is made by Allah before man was even created, or it has existed since eternity and is never made. In both cases it in case is older than Adam, and unchangeable - the word of Allah is unchangeable. And in both cases it is claimed written long before the time when the different stories in the Quran took place and long before the persons were even born.

    But to tell a story where people are involved, millennia’s and more before it happens or to quote persons eons before something is said, only - only - is possible if Allah really predestines everything in absolutely all details - just like the Quran claims many places. Not the most miniscule detail can be changed from what he predestines, because if even the smallest detail is changed, the laws of chaos will throw the foreseen act or words wide off the track. This in case is a 100% proof for that in Islam man has no free will - if he had, he could always change his mind once more about whatever it was - - - and what Allah foresaw or predestined suddenly was wrong. Man just is a puppet on a string.

    Even Islam admits that it is not possible to understand how Allah can predestine everything, and man at the same time has free will. We quote Muhammad Asad, "The message of the Quran (A6/141 - in the English 2008 edition A6/143): "- - - the real relationship between Allah's knowledge of the future (and, therefore, the ineluctability of what is to happen in the future) on one side, and man's free will, on the other - two propositions which, on the face of it, seem to contradict one another - is beyond man's comprehension - - -" (but the book continues lamely that all the same it has to be true, because Allah says so in the Quran - the brain giving in to blind belief). Actually predestination contra man's free will is a version of the "time travel paradox" - a paradox which is proved unsolvable. And actually in the non-material realms of life there are things impossible also for an omniscient and omnipotent god. The perhaps easiest way to show this, is to make a god add one mathematical 1 with another mathematical 1. The only possible answer even for a god is 2. Predestination versus free will of man is another such non-material unsolvable case - unsolvable even for a god. Therefore, if Allah predestines everything, man has no free will, no matter what the Quran claims - just one more of the many mistakes in that book - or what Islam and its Muslims want to believe.

    But if man has no free will, Allah has no moral right to punish - or reward - him/her for what he or she does. We again quote from the same remark from "The Message of the Quran": "- - - the very concept of morality and moral responsibility presupposes free will on man's part". Which means that if Allah predestines everything and man thus has no free will, it is immoral for Allah to punish man for his/her deeds or words which he/she/they has/have been forced to act by Allah's predestination. (Muhammad needed predestination to make his warriors believe war was not dangerous, and he needed free will of man to make his followers believe Allah was fair when threatening with Hell.)

    Then we finally are back to the quote from the Quran at the start of this remark: For this quote to be correct in a book claimed to be thousands and millions and even billions of years old, there only is one possible explanation: Allah predestines absolutely every detail in the world and in your life. If what the Quran here tells is correct, this means full predestination and no free will for man. There is no alternative to this.

    Which means Allah is an extremely unjust god rewarding some of his marionettes and damning others to Hell because he has forced them to do bad things.

    Another effect of the predestined texts in the Quran - written long before things happened, and copies sent down to all the many (124ooo?) claimed prophets and messengers for Islam, is that those prophets plainly could read about future persons and stories - though in many cases with references they could not understand. This is an inevitable effect of the "fact" that the claimed "Mother Book" naturally was/is unchangeable, and so was and is the words of Muhammad in the Quran, and of the fact that all books claimed sent down by Allah, was copies of the Mother Book (and copies of one book naturally are identical - here = the Quran, which was and is claimed to be such a copy). Noah could read about Abraham and Jacob and Joseph, Abraham could read about what he himself was going to do, what battles he was going to win, etc., and about f.x. Moses and Jesus - and Muhammad. Etc., etc., etc. There is no indication about such an effect in the Quran, though, and also Islam and Muslims never mention it.

    Perhaps Muhammad and Allah did not think about this inevitable result from giving prophets of the very old, copies of the claimed "Mother Book" - similar to the Quran?

    (Muslims will here claim that the Quran tells the different prophets got different books, as the Quran tells they were sent new books. That the Quran says new books were sent down, is correct. But as it also implies that those books were copies of the claimed "Mother Book", an unchangeable book from a god whose word was/is unchangeable, this only can mean new copies of the same book - and copies of one and the same book are similar, and in this case similar to the Quran, as also the Quran is claimed to be a copy of that book.) One more and big contradiction in the Quran.

    The point quoted on top of this comment is one of the many in the Quran which impossibly could have been written into the claimed "Mother Book" (13/39b, 43/4b, 85/21-22 below) in the far distant past, unless Allah predestines everything 100%. We will point to a number of other such points, but far from all - only some of the most obvious ones. All incidents and quotes where humans are involved and could have changed something, is a case which could not have been written into the claimed "Mother Book" a really long time ago if Allah did not predestine absolutely everything. Just go looking and you will find - but you will find no real explanation from Islam or its Muslims.

    One final point: Islam tells that Allah (and his angels) reveres the claimed "Mother Book" in his Heaven. It is highly unlikely Allah would revere his own work - only Pagans revere things they have made themselves. Which means that the other claimed explanation for the existence of the Quran must be the true one: The Quran is never made, but has existed since eternity. But in that case it is even more impossible to have in the Quran things which was to happen or to be said much later, unless the predestination is absolute - With a much larger time-scale, the chances for that things might happen or be said which would change the future is much larger.

    018 2/134: "They (the forefathers*) shall reap the fruits of what they did, and ye of what ye do!" Islam does not have the concept of "the inherited sin" - Adam and Eve fell from grace, but all the same were forgiven, according to the Quran.

    Another point is that to forgive means for Allah to change his Plan considering you, something which according to the Quran is impossible.

    019 3/33aa: "Allah did choose - - - Adam (and some others*) - - - above all people". According to science Adam never existed in a version even remotely similar to the story in the Quran.

    Another difference between the Bible and the Quran: In the Bible Adam is something special, but not reckoned among the prophets. In Islam he is a prophet.

    020 3/59a: “The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam - - -”. That is to say in “Quran-speak”: "He was a prophet, but but for that an ordinary human". Well, Jesus called God/Yahweh “father”, which Adam could not - not in the same way at least. Also Adam is no prophet in the Bible, only in the Quran (A real prophet hardly had acted like Adam. Besides: For whom could Adam be a prophet?). And according to science, Adam never existed - man developed from earlier primates.

    *021 3/59b: “He (Allah*) created him (Adam (and Jesus)*) from dust, - - -”. The Quran tells about many ways man was created - 13 different if you are strict, 5 - 7 if you are less strict. Only 1 can be true, as man (Adam) was created only once. Actually according to science all of them are wrong, as man developed from earlier primates.

    Some Muslims take pride in that archaeologists has found that the human race has passed through so-called bottlenecks, and that all now may have one “mother” in common - the archaeological Eve - and one common “father” - the less known archaeological Adam. "Hurray! Here is the PROOF!", you may hear - "here is Eve and Adam!". What not a single of them has ever mentioned as far as we have heard, is the fact that this “Eve” lived some 160ooo to 200ooo (195ooo?) years ago, whereas the corresponding “Adam” lived much later - may be as late as 60ooo - 70ooo (64ooo?) years ago, Eve in Africa, Adam most likely in Asia (perhaps near the Caspian Sea). Not a couple exactly! (And once more; actually the Adam from the Bible and the Quran most likely never existed - man developed from a primate, he was not created into sudden existence). See also 6/2b below.

    022 3/59c: (Allah said:) "'Be' and he (Adam/Jesus?*) was". This is in strict contradiction to the verse claiming the god could not have a son, because he had no woman. But according to this and other points Allah could say "Be a son" and Jesus was. (In addition to that in the really old Hebrew religion there may have been a female god - Yahweh's Amat (source New Scientist and others).

    *023 3/96b: “The first House (of worship) appointed for man was that at Bakkah. Wrong. Even if we should accept that Abraham “made the foundations” of the Kabah in Mecca, he lived (if he is not fiction) around 2000-1800 BC. At that time the first temples, etc. in f.x. Egypt and Mesopotamia were old. Today it is possible to find the real age of many things. It is symptomatic that as far as we know, Islam has not tried to see if it is possible to find the real age of the oldest parts of the Kabah. Wagging tongues insinuates that may be the reason is that they are afraid it is younger than 3800 years. - what if it turns out it is built around 100 BC - or AD - f.x? - or even later?

    Islam also has one problem concerning measuring the age of the Kabah: They will have to use qualified western experts. If they use Muslim experts - who may be well qualified to do it - and find that it f.x. is 5630 years old, not one single soul will believe them unconditionally, because of "al-Taqiyya" - the lawful lie - which Muslims not only are permitted to use, but are advised to use "if necessary", when it comes to promoting or defending Islam. But non-Muslims are not permitted to visit Kabah. We may also add that it is further said that Abraham built on the even older ruins of a temple made by Adam - of course Adam like Abraham went all the way to the desert proto-Mecca and built a big temple he never could visit from his home a thousand kilometers off (Adam - and his Paradise - real of fiction, mostly are believed to have been placed somewhere in the rich wetlands in what is now South Iraq), but then Adam's temple was destroyed at the time of Noah - but as often before Muslims only claim, seldom/never prove, so believe it who wants.

    (We may add that some Muslims have corrected this verse to that the Quran is talking about the first house of worship for a monotheistic god, but that is not what the Quran says. Besides: If the Quran or the Hadiths are correct and there have been prophets to all times and every people – 124ooo the Hadith says – Islam will have a tough time to prove that not one single all those prophets or their followers in the very early time before Abraham, have never built even a small "house for worship". Also see 2/127a above.

    One extra small detail: The foundations/temple the Quran claims Abraham built for his small family in Mecca - at the time of Abraham a desert and an empty valley - was so big that when the rich Mecca rebuilt it around 600 AD they could not afford to rebuild to the same size according to Hadiths. Any comments necessary?

    By the way: The oldest known temple - building for revering one or more gods - is in Turkey, not in Arabia, and definitely not for Allah. Gobekli Tepe was built around 9ooo BC - some 7ooo years before Abraham and perhaps 5ooo years before Noah. Actually before even the costal Arabia was settled some 7ooo BC or a little earlier

    And not least: The Kabah temple was built as a temple for the pagan god al-Lah (or Hubal), not for the monotheistic claimed god Allah.

    And a small thought: Did not even one of the other 124ooo prophets of the old build a temple for Allah? Not one trace from such a temple was ever found. Only Adam - a man with absolutely no experience of any kind of work and no helper (except Eve) - and Abraham - a Bedouin able to build stone altars and tents. But both did very well - building far too big temples for their need hundreds of miles and more in km away from home - across forbidding terrain. Well, Abraham surely had horses - not camels, but at least horses - but Adam had to walk on foot all the way, and back home the many years it took to build a big temple, and each time he wanted to visit this temple later, say 3 weeks walk each way carrying all the food and water he needed through the desert. Abraham surely could do it in half that time - if his horses found food and water.

    Believe that Adam and/or Abraham built the Kabah if you are able to.

    (To specify a little concerning the settlement of humans in Arabia: Modern humans may have entered the coastal area, river areas, etc. as early as 75ooo-50ooo years ago. The Neolithic period started around 6500 BC with a likely expansion of the population because of some agriculture, expansion of the use of domesticated animals, and trade. The interior of Arabia except for some oasis, etc. were settled much later and not until well after the camel was domesticated and more widely used. It is unclear where and when it was domesticated, but likely in south of the peninsula (Oman?) something like 2ooo BC (the number varies some), but it did not come into wide use until the 9. or 10. century BC.)

    024 5/27c: "- - - the two sons of Adam - - -". Like so very often the Quran is vague on relevant details, like here the names - Muhammad simply did not know them. Not good literature. (You find them in the Bible: Cain and Abel - 1. Mos. 4/4-16). 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.

    025 4/1c: “- - - created you from a single person - - -“. Man could not come from a single person, there had to be at least 2 – male and female. But even if there was a couple, that would be too little – the DNA variety would be too small for the “tribe” to be viable. Man simply developed little by little – like the Quran – from earlier primates (as for the archaeological Eve and the archaeological Adam whom science talks about, and whom some Muslims disuse trying to “prove” something: See the chapter: “Some wrong arguments – and their answers” in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran".)

    026 4/1d: (A4/1): ”- - - created you from a single Person (”nafs”) - - -.” Is this the correct meaning? Or f.x. ”- - - from humankind - - -” (Muhammad ’Abdu)? Or ”- - - from a soul - - -.” Or “- - - from a spirit - - -”? Or ”- - - from a living entity - - -.”? Or ”- - - from a vital principle - - -”? Or “- - - from self - - -.”? Etc. The word ”nafs” is very vague and has many meanings – far from the clear language Muslims claim. At least 7 possible varieties of meaning - "ways of reading". Is this a sample of a god's clear speech?

    027 5/27a: "- - - the truth of the stories of the two sons of Adam (Cain and Abel*)". Well is it the truth? The murder is from the Bible, but the dialogue between the two just before the murder is borrowed from the made up scripture the Targum of Jerusalem (better known as pseudo-Jonathan).

    Did an omniscient and omnipotent god really have to borrow from made up texts and then call it "the truth"?

    028 5/58a: "- - - that is because they (non-Muslims*) are a people without understanding - - -". Just this sample of pep-talk is older than Adam in many religions, and will never become too old in many religions - there always will be lots of naive people falling for it - "we intelligent ones know, those stupid do not know" - - - and it is just the least intelligent and least learned ones who most easily are duped, by many religions, by this worn out claim. Besides: Who is the one without understanding? - the one who believes anything told to him, or the one who is able to think things over? - in this case the one blindly believing the Quran, or the one able to see at least some of all the errors, etc. in that book, and able to understand what they mean?

    029 6/2b: “He (Allah*) is it who created you from clay - - -“. But how man was created, is complicated in the Quran; the one and first man - Adam - was made in no less than 13 different ways (or 5-6-7 if you say that some of them were different names for the same raw material). This even though one man cannot be created in more than one way. The Quran says he was made:

    From clay: 6/2 7/12 17/61 32/7 38/71 38/76.
    From sounding clay: 15/26 15/28 15/33.
    From ringing clay: 55/64
    From sticky clay: 37/11
    From essence of clay: 23/12
    From mud: 15/26 15/28 15/33.
    From dust: 3/59 22/5 35/11 40/67.
    From earth: 20/55
    From a clot of congealed blood: 96/2
    From semen:# 16/4 75/37 76/2 80/19.
    From nothing: 19/9 19/67.
    From water: 21/30 24/45 25/54.
    From base material: 70/39.

     

    One of these may be from the Bible, the other 12 not.

    #(It is not told where the semen came from).##

    ## Mostly when the book talks about semen, it is in connection with (making) children. But also children are not made from semen - it only is 50% of the truth. A child is made from semen + an egg cell, but an egg cell is so small, that Muhammad did not know about it - human eggs can hardly be seen in the blood and gore in a carcass or a slaughtered animal. Actually at the time of Muhammad one did not know how conception happened - one theory was that semen was a seed that grew when placed in a woman - though far from each time. Strangely this is how the Quran explains it. Any god had known better.

    Strictly speaking all the different ways of creating man/Adam, means that the Quran tells that man/Adam was created in 13 different ways, even if Adam was created only once (in reality he never was created and never existed – man developed from earlier primates). If one lump similar “creations” together, there still remains at least 5-7 different creations. Only one can even according to the Quran be right (as Adam was created only once even according to the Quran and to the Bible) - and the irony is that science long since has shown that all alternatives are wrong, as man as said evolved from a prehistoric primate.

    ###030 6/2c: “He (Allah*) it is Who created you from clay - - -”. This is one of the many ways man (Adam) was created according to the Quran - even if Adam was created only once, according to that book. See 6/2b and 21/56c.

    031 6/89b: "These were the men (the ones mentioned in verses 6/83 through 6/87*) to whom We (Allah*) gave the Book". The Bible does not mention any book connected to f.x. Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Ishmael, let alone something like OT or the Quran which is meant here - this also according to science, as no trace of anything similar to the Quran older than 610 AD (when Muhammad started his mission) has ever been found - compared to some 45ooo relevant scriptures and fragments + other traces older than 610 AD from the Bible).

    Another point is that no god ever made a book of a quality like the Quran with all its mistakes, etc.

    And yet another point is that nomads of those times hardly knew how to read. It is not impossible that Joseph, son of Jacob, learnt how to read and write in Egypt, but but for him it is likely that the first of the central persons in the Bible who knew how to read and write, was Moses.

    032 6/98b: “It is He (Allah*) Who hath produced you (man*) from a single person (Adam*) - - -”. According to science it takes two to make a baby. But that aside: Where is the proof for that any god - not to mention Allah - is involved at all? One thing is that Adam never existed – man developed from earlier primates according to science. Another thing is that 1 person – even 1 pair of persons – would give too little DNA-variety to make man as a viable race. One more invalid sign.

    033 7/11b: “- - - We (Allah*) bade the angels bow down to Adam, and they bowed down; not so Iblis (the future Devil) - - -.” But was Iblis an angel, like it is indicated here? It is said several places in the Quran that he was created from fire (f.x. 7/12), which means he was a jinn (angles are created from light, according to the Quran). An unclear point in Islam, but most scholars mean he was a jinn. (Jinns are beings "borrowed" from old Arab pagan religion, legends and fairy tales.

    #034 7/11 - 18: The story about Iblis/the Devil and Adam is not from the Bible. There also is nothing similar, except that the Devil cheated them, and they had to leave the Garden of Eden (according to science likely in the water-rich lands in what now is south Iraq - if it ever existed). From where did he get it? - not from a god, as too much is wrong in the Quran to be from a god, and not from a devil, as a devil would not give negative information about himself. The only remaining alternative is from man.

    035 7/12c: “Thou (Allah*) didst create - - - him (Adam*) from clay.” This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 which tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 which tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 which tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, which tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 which tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5,35/11, 40/67, which tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 which tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 which tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, which tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 which tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 which tells man/Adam was made from “base material”, and not to mention the greatest contradiction in this case: 19/9 and 19/67 which both tell that man/Adam was created from nothing. (Also see verse 6/2a and 6/2b.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 25 other verses. But minimum 10 contradictions. Not to mention the real contradiction: Man was not created - Adam never was, at least not like told in the Quran. Man developed from earlier primates.)

    036 7/18 - 25: The story about Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden is roughly similar to the one in the Bible - though the Bible is better as literature also here - but details differ, and also many details lack in the Quran compared to in the Bible. There are two marked differences, though: For one thing (not mentioned here) the sin in Eden did not result in the "inherited sin" in Islam like in the Bible. And the other is the quote from 6/24 just below.

    ##037 7/24: "Get ye (Adam and Eve*) down, with enmity between yourself". May be Islam has comments on this, but we have never seen one. The message is clear: There will be enmity between man and woman. And when you see the status and the treatment of women in Islam, that may well be the case in Islam - with the man as the winner and the woman as the suppressed vanquished loser.

    On this point the Bible has another story. In the Bible it was the snake who made Eve pick the forbidden fruit, and because of that Yahweh said there should be enmity between man and snake - and that is quite something different from enmity between man and woman.

    A possible explanation for the story in the Quran is that Muhammad did not know the Bible well - this is a well known fact - and misunderstood the story (especially before he came to Medina where there lived many Jews, in 622 AD, he had very superficial knowledge of the Bible, and this surah is from 621 AD).

    038 7/26a: "- - - Children of Adam - - -". Man.

    039 7/31a: "- - - Children of Adam - - -". Man.

    040 7/33f: “The things my (Muhammad’s or Muslims’*) Lord (Allah*) hath indeed forbidden are: - - - trespasses against - - - reason - - -". There are many things in the Quran trespassing reason - f.x. all the (wrong) ways Adam is created, the astronomy and geography, not to mention some of the laws and parts of the moral code.

    041 7/35a: "- - - Children of Adam - - -". Man.

    042 7/143c: “- - - I (Moses) am the first to believe.” This one is similar to f.x. 6/14, except here it is Moses instead of Muhammad. But it contradicts the Quran's telling that f.x. Adam, Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, Joseph, Hud, Salih, Shu'ayb and others were believing Muslims before him. And Moses and all the others were making a lie out of Muhammad’s saying that he – Muhammad – was the first. A number of contradictions. (2/127-133, 3/67, 6/14, 6/163, 26/51). Muslims tells that these contradictions are not contradictions, because it is meant the first of a group, a nation, or something – but that is not what the Quran says, and it also does not explain all cases.

    Though as neither science nor Islam has been able to find traces from neither a religion like Islam, nor a god like Allah, nor a book like the Quran older than 610 AD, Muhammad in reality may have been the first believer in Islam - if he really was a believer (scientists analyzing the Quran tend to believe he believed in the start, but became more of a dictator and less of a believer over the years - using his religion to gain power, like so many a self proclaimed "prophet".

    ###043 7/172a: "When thy (mans'*) Lord drew forth (= caused to be born*) from the Children of Adam - from their loins - their descendants, and made them testify - - -". YA1146 here has an interesting comment - we quote: "This passage has led to differences of opinion (because of unclear language*) in interpretation. According to the dominant opinion of commentators, each individual in the posterity of Adam (= after Adam*) had a separate existence from the time of Adam (= he or she in some way existed since the time of Adam*) and a Covenant was taken from all of them, which is binding accordingly on each individual". To use a simpler language: Each and every human being in some way existed at the time of Adam, and when Adam made his claimed covenant with Allah, also all human beings through all times at the same time made a similar covenant with the claimed god - a covenant which thus is binding for each and every human being who have existed or will exist. No comment - except this to us sounds not like religion, but like mysticism or like a fairy tale. And one more fact: At the time of Adam's claimed covenant, only Adam and Eve (her name not mentioned in the Quran), existed. The rest of what is speculated here just is "ad hoc" speculation.

    044 7/172b: "- - - the Children of Adam - - -". = All humanity.

    045 7/189: “It is He (Allah*) who created you (man*) from a single person (Adam*) - - -“. Wrong. Adam never existed, as man developed from earlier primates. And even if it had started with Adam and Eve (her name is never mentioned in the Quran), the DNA pool had been too small to make the race viable.

    046 9/114d: “- - - he (Abraham - said by Islam to be a Muslim*) dissociated himself from him (Abraham’s claimed pagan father*)” Beware that everybody of any positive consequence whom the Quran “borrows” from the Bible, is transformed to be a Muslim in the Quran - anyone, even Jesus and Adam and Noah and Joseph, and Moses and all the prophets - and Abraham.

    Be no friend even with your parents if they are not Muslims! (This is a quite normal demand in extreme religious sects - the leaders want full control.)

    This is one of the rather sad points of the Quran - even a central point: Islam shall mean so much to you, that if even your closest family - children or parents - do not obey you and become Muslims: Leave them and forget them. Fanaticism shall be the norm in Islam. Similar things are said more places in the Quran - Noah (the 5. of the most central 5 claimed Muslim prophets in Islam - Muhammad, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Noah) should f.x. let his son drown, because the son was no Muslim (which Noah was said to be!!). A nice and benevolent and human religion.

    Only Islam really can be your closest friend. Nothing and nobody else - except Muhammad - counts.

    The irony here is that according to the Bible (1. Mos. 11/31-32) the two stayed together for many, many years. (And any honest scientist will tell you that according to normal rules, the Bible will be reckoned to be more reliable than the Quran.)

    *047 10/19a: “Mankind was but one nation - - -”. Mankind never was but one nation. Perhaps once one tribe or a few small tribes, but never one nation, as some Muslims try to explain - and that in case was some 160ooo - 200ooo years ago (there seems to have been a “bottle neck” when man nearly died out at that time, according to DNA-studies). You also sometimes meet Muslims telling in triumph that science has proved the Quran, because now they have found the prehistoric Eve and the prehistoric Adam - - - without mentioning that the prehistoric so-called “Eve” lived the above mentioned some 160ooo - 200ooo years ago (the number varies some) in Africa, whereas the prehistoric “Adam” lived some 60ooo - 70ooo (64ooo?) years ago only, and not unlikely south of the Caspian Sea in Asia. With “Eve” dead 100ooo years before “Adam” was born - and a long distance off - it is difficult to see how they can be the “parents” of man, and thus prove the Quran. (You meet "scientific" "proofs" of this quality from Muslims and even from Islam (Muslim scholars and leaders) sometimes).

    048 11/61e: "- - - it is He (Allah*) Who hath produced you from the earth." This is one of the may be 13 different ways man - Adam - is created according to the Quran. See chapter about the creation of man in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" - http://www.1000mistakes.com . Even if you are a creationist, Adam could not be created in more than one way, and evolutionists believe all the 13 ways the Quran claims he was created, are wrong, as man was not created, but developed from earlier primates. Even in modern Islamic litterateur you find that man was created, most often from clay.

    049 11/68b: "For the Thamud rejected their Lord (Allah*) - - -". According to old Arab folklore and pre-history, the Thamud tribe was the successor of the 'Ad tribe and often called "the second 'Ad", and according to the Quran both tribes were eradicated by Allah because they refused to accept Allah - the one and mighty god which was preached about all the time since Adam and Noah by prophets, at least according to Islam - but never a trace of any kind of monotheism found by science - and neither by Islam - that early. In this - and most other cases in the Quran - the prophets experienced parallel stories to what Muhammad had experienced up to the time of the verses he told, according to what Muhammad told or retold in the Quran - which of course told Muhammad's followers that he was a normal prophet and also that the bad and non-intelligent "infidels" would be punished. There also was a number of scattered ruins of houses, hamlets, and towns (a still famous one is Petra in Jordan) in and around Arabia - Muhammad told they all were empty because the people had sinned against Allah and been punished, though science knows a number of other reasons for empty ruins, especially in warlike desert areas.

    050 14/37ba "- - - the Sacred House - - -". This refers to the Kabah Mosque in Mecca. To take its history according to Islam:

    It was originally built by Adam. Now, science and for that kind religion, believe that if Eden ever existed, it was in the wetlands of what is now South Iraq. All the same Adam went all the way from his home in or outside Eden, to this dry desert valley some months grueling march to the west - some 800 miles/1300 km of mostly forbidding and grueling hot Arab Desert - and built a big mosque there - what for we have never heard any Muslim explain.

    But during the Big Flood (7/64c+d) and during the millennia the mosque was destroyed. Some say that Noah repaired it, but that time passed and wore it down. When Ishmael grew old enough to be a helper - it is not said how old - Abraham, therefore, rebuilt the big mosque. No Muslim have ever explained us why he built it so big for just his own after all small family, or why he built it 700-800 miles from where he lived - and thus a place where he and his family never could use it, and in a place where still nearly no-one lived.

    We also points to the fact that neither Adam, nor Noah, nor Abraham had the camel. How did they then travel those long and many miles through the horrible Arabian Desert? No Muslim have ever been able to explain us this - but then most Muslims are not aware of the problem, as "the Religion of the Truth" f.x. never tells its followers that Abraham did not have camels. Also: From where did those 3 learn the technology to build big stone constructions? F.x. the largest "buildings" Abraham according to the Bible made, were a few altars. And what about the time used? - to build one of the big stone churches in Europe easily took 20-30 years for highly qualified and sizeable work force. The two amateur stonemasons Abraham and Ishmael on the other hand seems to have built the Kabah in some weeks during one or a few of Abraham's claimed visits to see his son in that desert valley.

    But new millennia took its toll. Some years before Muhammad became a Muslim, the Kabah was rebuilt. But the now rich merchant city could not afford to use the foundations of Abraham - that big he had built his far of and far into the wilderness mosque for his family. The rich Mecca had to build smaller.

    There are times one starts wonder what brainwashing - included religious such - does to a man's brain and his ability to use his brain.

    The very plain story is that neither Adam, nor Noah, nor Abraham, nor any other Biblical person ever was in the Mecca Valley, not to mentioned built anything on a mosque there. But it is good propaganda as long as anyone believes it. Also see 2/127a above.

    051 14/37c: "- - - Sacred House - - -". The Kabah in Mecca. Muhammad claimed its original foundation was made by Adam, and its next one by Abraham and Ishmael = some 3800 - 4ooo years old. In addition to all the other improbabilities here which deny this, it today is possible to find out how old the oldest parts of Kabah are. As far as we know, Islam has not tried to find out - their own belief in the Quran is not strong enough to run the risk of finding an age of f.x. 1900 years.

    Besides they have a problem: They will have to use a non-Muslim expert to find out. Because of al-Taqiyya no-one will really believe any Muslim claiming he has found an age of f.x. 3850 years for Abraham's stones (f.x. the one with his claimed foot-marks), and f.x. some 5700 for Noah's part if he was involved, not to mention if they found an age compatible to Adam's life.

    052 15/26b: “We (Allah*) created man from sounding clay - - -.” But: This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 55/64 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5,35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”, and not to mention the greatest contradiction in this case: 19/9 and 19/67 which both tell that man/Adam was created from nothing. (Also see verse 6/2 in the chapters about the 1000+ mistakes in the Quran.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 28 other verses. But minimum 15 contradictions.)

    053 15/26c: “We (Allah*) created man - - - from mud molded into shape - - -.” But:

    This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5,35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”, and not to mention the greatest contradiction in this case: 19/9 and 19/67 which both tell that man/Adam was created from nothing. (Also see verse 6/2b in the chapters about the 1000+ mistakes in the Quran.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 28 other verses. But minimum 11 contradictions.)

    054 15/28a: “I (Allah*) am about to create man, from sounding clay, - - -.” Wrong - and identical to 15/26a. This is contradicted by 6/2 (see this), 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 55/64 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tells man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5,35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tells man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”, and not to mention the greatest contradiction in this case: 19/9 and 19/67 which both tell that man/Adam was created from nothing. (Also see verse 6/2b above.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 28 other verses. But minimum 15 contradictions.)

    055 15/28b: “I (Allah*) am about to create man, from - - - mud - - -”. Wrong - and identical to 15/26b. This is contradicted by 6/2 (see this), 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5,35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”, and not to mention the greatest contradiction in this case: 19/9 and 19/67 which both tell that man/Adam was created from nothing. (Also see verse 6/2 in the chapters about the 1000+ mistakes in the Quran.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 28 other verses. But minimum 11 contradictions.)

    056 15/28c: “I (Allah*) am about to create man, from - - -". It is somewhat thought provoking that an omnipotent god needed anything at all to create man from - this even more so as his raw material was rather primitive and inorganic anyhow. After all the Quran at least two places states that Allah can only say "Be", and it is.

    57 15/29a: "- - - fall ye (angels*) down in obeisance unto him (Adam*)". This is not from the Bible, and you find nothing even remotely similar in that book.

     

    057 15/29b: "- - - fall ye (angels*) down in obeisance unto him (Adam*)". Here we have yet another fundamental difference between Yahweh's religious establishment and the one of Allah. That the angels should prostrate themselves for and pay obeisance man, proves that man is high above the angels in the Quran. The relative position between man and angels is not specified in the Bible, but there is no doubt that they are of a higher standing than an earthbound man.

    ##058 15/30a: "So the angels prostrated themselves (for Adam) - - -". Proving that man is something much higher than Allah's angels. And on background of that in the Bible angels are something of high esteem - not specified, but clearly higher than man - it at the same time is proving that there is a marked difference between the Biblical angels of Yahweh and Allah's angels - a clear proof for that the two gods and their divine spheres are not the same, as their angels are of different value and standard compared to man - Allah's ones clearly much lower than Yahweh's, as Allah's are lower than man.

    059 15/30b: "So the angels prostrated themselves (for Adam) - - -". Just for the record: You find nothing like this in the Bible - there the angels belong to a higher sphere than man.

    060 16/4a: “He (Allah*) has created man (the word “man” used like this, means the human race = in this case Adam*) from a sperm-drop - - -”. Wrong. Even if it should really mean not Adam, but men generally speaking, it is wrong. A sperm-drop is just half the explanation - also an egg cell is necessary. But Muhammad did not know that. (Human egg cells are too small to be seen with only eyes when it is lying in human tissue, blood and gore). But any god had known. Also see 6/2.

    061 16/4b: “He (Allah*) has created man (Adam*) from a sperm-drop - - -.” But: This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5,35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, (75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came)), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”, and not to mention the greatest contradiction in this case: 19/9 and 19/67 which both tell that man/Adam was created from nothing. (Also see verse 6/2 in the chapters about the 1000+ mistakes in the Quran.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 27 other verses. But minimum 12 contradictions.) Ps: It also is not told from where the sperm came in case.

    062 16/4c: “He (Allah*) has created man (Adam*) from a sperm-drop - - -.” If he created man from a sperm drop; from where did that sperm drop come?.

    063 16/44b: "- - - Clear Signs - - -". Allah never has sent one single unmistakable sign for his existence - never since Adam till today. As Muslims claim that Allah = Yahweh, they may refer to the signs in the Bible. But as the abyss between the basic ideas in those two religions by far is too big to have come from the same god, also this never proved claim from the Quran is wrong - the miracles in the Bible in case they are right, only document Yahweh.

    064 17/61a: "Behold We (Allah*) said to the angels: 'Bow down to Adam'". This is not from the Bible, and there is nothing even remotely similar there.

    065 17/61b: "Behold We (Allah*) said to the angels: 'Bow down to Adam'". This is one of the many clear proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god: In the Quran man is superior to angels. In the Bible the situation is not as clearly told as in the Quran, but angels clearly are "higher" than man. Which shows that Yahweh's angels are not the same as Allah's, and thus also that the Paradises are different (angels are an integrated part of Yahweh's Paradise, but are not mentioned in Allah's except that they exist) are different. With marked different angels and very marked different Paradises, the two are not the same god.

    066 17/61c: “- - - one (Adam*) whom Thou (Allah*) didst create from clay.” Wrong simply and plainly: One thing is that man was not created, but developed from earlier primates. But even if one is creationist, Adam could not be created in more than one way, and in the Quran you find no less the 13 different ways - or 5 - 7 if you lump some of them together. Solid contradictions. This claim also is contradicted by 6/2b (see this one), 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tell man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5,35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tells man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”: “But does not man call to mind that We (Allah*) created him out of nothing?” This contradicts all the other places in the Quran where it is told about the creation of man, and that tell that man/Adam was created out of some material or other, and not to mention the greatest contradiction in this case: 19/9 and 19/67 which both tell that man/Adam was created from nothing.

    067 17/70a: "- - - sons of Adam - - -". All humanity.

    ##068 18/50a: "- - - We (Allah*) said to the angels. 'Bow down to Adam.'". This is not from the Bible, and it is one of the more than 100% roofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. In Allah's paradise, man clearly has measurably higher standing than angels. In Yahweh's the lines are not as clearly told, but it is very clear that angels are of higher standing than man. Add this to man's life in the paradises: Allah's offer resurrection in body, top earthly luxury and plenty of women - and no mental activity. In Yahweh's the resurrected souls becomes like angels. There are nearly no similarities at all, and the differences are formidable. Not the same paradise = not the same god.

    069 18/50b: (A18/53 – omitted in 2008): “Behold, We (Allah*) said to the angels,’ Bow down to Adam’: they bowed down except Iblis. He was one of the Jinns - - -.” But here is a clear mistake – or more likely; A. Yusuf Ali’s religion and al-Taqiyya may have suppressed his honesty: The original Arab text here do not say he was a jinn: It says something like (translated from Swedish): “He (Iblis*) belonged to the multitude of invisible beings” - and also angels are invisible. The text here honestly and clearly indicates that he was an angel before he became the Devil - "We said to the angels" are words clearly including Iblis. On the other hand the Quran other places tells he was made from fire, which in case means he according to this book in reality was a jinn. This is one more place where the Muslim scholars agree that the text in the Quran is wrong (though they never say this in clear words) as it here clearly is indicated that Iblis was an angel.

    070 19/9d: “I (Allah*) did indeed create thee (man or Zakariyya?*) before, when thou hadst been nothing! (from nothing*).” But:

    This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tell man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5, 35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”, and not to mention the greatest contradiction in this case: 19/9 and 19/67 which both tell that man/Adam was created from nothing. (Also see verse 6/2 in the chapter about the 1000+ mistakes in the Quran.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 29 other verses. But minimum 15 contradictions.) (NB: In just this case a Muslim can say Allah created Zachariah, not “man” (Adam) - but not even Zakariyya was made from nothing. But later in the same chapter it is made clear that Allah talked about he had made man from nothing – in the very worst case he at least has said this one place, so the contradiction stands. But for any case we do not count the extra contradictions here.)

    This with Allah and creation also is an interesting claim, because neither Allah nor Muhammad was ever able to prove he had power for neither creation, nor recreation - whereas Yahweh several times proved he at least had the power of recreating, if the old books tell the truth (and also for creation according to the Quran - remember the clay bird from which he/Jesus created a live bird).

    071 19/67b: “But does not man call to mind that We (Allah*) created him out of nothing?” This contradicts all the other places in the Quran where it is told about the creation of man, and that tell that man/Adam was created out of some material or other.

    This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tells man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5, 35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tells man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”. (Also see verse 6/2 in the chapter about the 1000+ mistakes in the Quran.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 29 other verses. But minimum 15 contradictions.)

    072 20/55a: “From the (earth) did We (Allah*) create you (man*) - - -.” But: This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tell man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5, 35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”. (Also see verse 6/2 in the chapters about the 1000+ mistakes in the Quran.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 30 other verses. But minimum 11 contradictions.)

    073 20/115: "We (Allah*) had already, beforehand, taken a covenant with Adam - - -". Once more a contradiction with the Bible, which says Adam's god was Yahweh, not Allah.

    074 20/116a: “Prostrate yourself to Adam”. Wrong, as Adam did never exist - man according to science developed from an earlier primate. We debated with some Muslims some time ago about this, and they triumphantly told us we were wrong, for now science had found that there had been an Eve and an Adam. This is quite true. But what they did not mention, was that this “Eve” lived about 160ooo - 200ooo (195ooo?) years ago in the Rift Valley in East Africa, and represented a so called “bottleneck” - a time when the human race nearly died out - and only Eve had girl children, or the DNA of the other girl children died out later (this result is from tests of mitochondria DNA - mDNA - and mDNA only tells about the female side of the story, as mitochondria only goes from parents to child via the egg cell = from the mother – carrying only the feminine DNA). Then around 60ooo+ (64ooo?) years ago, something happened to Homo Sapiens (may be in the area south of the Caspian Sea). He still was Homo sapiens, but something – science does not know what - happened that started him on the road to technical and other developments. And there was another bottleneck - something similar to what happened to the “archaeological Eve” - happened once more. But this time it is readable in the Y chromosome, which only men – here named Adam - have, and consequently only shows the masculine side. This shows that all men living today, has a common “father” (by archaeologists not by coincidence named “the archaeological Adam” or just “Adam”) - a single man that lived 140ooo (some say 100ooo) years later than Eve. That archaeologists named them Adam and Eve, in a way is quite logical. But they have nothing to do with the Adam and Eve in the Bible or with “Adam and his wife” in the Quran - how could they f.x. be man and wife when they lived 100ooo - 140ooo years apart, and one in Africa, the other may be in Asia? Not to mention essential facts like this when they talk of the archaeological Adam and Eve and use this as a religious proof for creation, we find dishonest. And at least the scholars in Islam – the ones that teach their students and congregations and are interviewed and write and speak in the media – do know this. It is a well known scientific fact among learned people.

    ###075 20/116b: “Prostrate yourself to Adam”. This is one of the revealing differences which make it impossible that Yahweh and Allah can be the same god: The differences between the paradises - here the differences between the angels. In Allah's paradise the angels indisputably is of a much lower standing than humans - if not they did not have to prostrate themselves to the humans. In Yahweh's paradise it is not so directly said, but angels clearly are of higher standing than man. (In addition there f.x. are the enormous differences between how humans live in the two paradises). If Yahweh and Allah had been the same god, they had had the same paradise. To use the understatement of the century: That is not the case.

    This is one of the at least 100% proofs for that also this of Muhammad's claims is wrong.

    humans live in the two paradises). If Yahweh and Allah had been the same god, they had had the same paradise. To use the understatement of the century: That is not the case.

     

    This is one of the at least 100% proofs for that also this of Muhammad's claims is wrong.

    076 20/116c: "When We (Allah*) said to the angels, 'Prostrate yourselves to Adam', they prostrated themselves, but not Iblis (later the Devil in Islam*) - - -".

    Note that Allah only spoke to the angels, and when he then reacted to that Iblis did not obey, it must mean Iblis was an angel. If Iblis was something else, there was no reason for Allah to react, as he had not ordered Iblis to do anything. This represents a problem for Islam: Was Iblis an angel? But angels according to the Quran are created from light, whereas it is clear that Iblis was created from fire, and thus should be a jinn. The question is not settled yet. Clear language in the Quran?

    Note that Allah only spoke to the angels, and when he then reacted to that Iblis did not obey, it must mean Iblis was an angel. If Iblis was something else, there was no reason for Allah to react, as he had not ordered Iblis to do anything.

    077 20/120: "- - - kingdom - - -". Kingdoms could for natural reasons not exist in the claimed lifetime of Adam. He would not even know what the word meant.

    078 20/122a: "But his (Adam's*) Lord (Allah*) chose him (for His Grace): He turned to him and gave him Guidance". Even if Allah punished Adam, he forgave him. This means there is no "inherited sin" in Islam like in Christianity.

    079 20/123a: "- - - with enmity one to another - - -". Does it here mean enmity between Adam and Eve? (The name Eve is not mentioned in the Quran, only in the Bible.) - or between the snake and humans? - or - - -? (The Bible says between the snake and humans).

    080 21/30e: "We (Allah*) made from water (NB: “from water”, not “in water”*) every living thing.” There does not exist one single living thing which is created from water or made from water. There are beings which are some 98% water, but that is maximum. The normal may vary around 70%, but the margins are wide. Besides: This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5, 35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”. (Also see verse 6/2 in the chapter about the 1000+ mistakes in the Quran.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 28 other verses. And here minimum 28 contradictions.)

    ##081 21/56e: “- - - He (Allah*) Who created them (man*) (from nothing): and I (Abraham) am a witness to this (truth)”. Wrong even according to the Quran, as the Quran tells Man - Adam - was created from this and that (see 6/2b above). And on top of that: – man was made from something, though not created, as he developed from earlier primates. This really is an unintended joke: It is told that Allah did something that is not true - and Abraham witnesses that it is the truth, and this even if he lived millions of years later! (Some 6 million years or a bit more after the first humanoid, and may be 200ooo after the first Homo Sapiens). Some proof for Allah! Is it possible that Allah himself has sent down this mistaken "proof"? But it does tell something about proofs in the Quran – and from Muslims.

    082 22/5d: “- - - We (Allah*) created you (man*) out of dust, then out of sperm - - -“. Allah created man/Adam out of dust and later humans out of sperm (+ an egg cell each – which Muhammad did not know anything about – but a god had known). But even omitting the fact that Adam never was, as man developed from earlier primates, there are a number of contradictions in the Quran about his creation: This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tell man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”. (Also see verse 6/2.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 27 other verses. But minimum 11 contradictions.)

    083 23/12: “Man We (Allah*) did create from a quintessence (of clay)”. We have never understood what a quintessence of clay is, but it is absolutely sure it is wrong: For one thing man was not created - according to science he developed from earlier primates. For another thing - even if one had accepted Islam’s statement that man is created, Adam in no way could have been created in many ways - see 6/2. And for a third thing: Man is not created from only one or a few minerals like in clay. Besides: This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5, 35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”. (Also see verse 6/2b in the chapters about the 1000+ mistakes in the Quran.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 29 other verses. But minimum 11 contradictions.)

     

    084 24/45b: “Allah has created every animal (also man is an animal*) from (not in, but from*) water - - -.” To say it with small letters and no laughing: No comments. But this is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5, 35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”. (Also see verse 6/2 in the chapters about the 1000+ mistakes in the Quran.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 28 other verses. And here minimum 28 contradictions.) Simply and obviously wrong.

    Some Muslims try to say that science has proved this verse (+ two others - 21/30 and 24/54) as science has shown that life started in water. But there is an enormous difference between “from” water and “in” water. No place in the Quran there is even a whisper about that life was created in water, only from. We also mention that in the Quran nothing is said about how the plants were created, even though the plants are the basis for all life on Earth. Perhaps from water like the animals? Wrong simply.

    #085 30/20a: “Among His (Allah’s*) Signs is this, that He created you from dust - - -”. Wrong. Man was not created from dust - really he was not created at all according to science. See 6/2b above. There is an extra irony in the fact that the Quran uses a piece of wrong information to “prove” Allah. Contradiction of reality - and of the Quran, as the book also tells Adam was created many different ways. Also: Muhammad claims most things for the glory of his god - but he never has anything but words and claims. And see 21/56c above.

    086 32/9a: "But He (Allah*) fashioned him (Adam*) in due proportions - - -". See 11/7a and 21/56c above.

    087 32/9b: "But He (Allah*) fashioned him (Adam*) in due proportions, and breathed into him something of His spirit (= life*)." A bit different from what natural science says.

    088 32/9d: "- - - little thanks do ye (people*) give". Because of a very good reason: The way the beginning of man is described in the Quran cannot be true - at least not all the different ways it is claimed to have happened. (There is claimed to have been just one Adam, but there are given a dozen different explanations of how he was created.)

    089 37/11b: “Them (it here has to be man, as jinns according to the Quran is made from fire*) have We (Allah*) created out of sticky clay.” But: For one thing science says man is not created, but evolved from earlier primates, and in addition: This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 whish tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5, 35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”, and not to mention the greatest contradiction in this case: 19/9 and 19/67 which both tell that man/Adam was created from nothing. (Also see verse 6/2 in the chapters about the 1000+ mistakes in the Quran.) (Strictly speaking this contradicts 30 different verses, but minimum 12 sure contradictions.)

    090 38/71: “I (Allah*) am about to create man from clay”. Quite similar to 37/11 above. This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5, 35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”, and not to mention the greatest contradiction in this case: 19/9 and 19/67 which both tell that man/Adam was created from nothing. (Also see verse 6/2 in "1000+ mistakes in the Quran".) (Strictly speaking this contradicts some 30 different verses, but minimum 12 sure contradictions.) Also see 11/7a above.

    In addition: Man according to science was not created, but developed from earlier primates - and not created from clay.

    091 38/71-85: This is not from the Bible - like so much other "Biblical" text in the Quran.

    092 38/72: "- - - fall ye (angels*) down in obeisance to him (Adam*)". Also this is not from the Bible.

    #093 38/73: "So the angels prostrated themselves (for Adam*), all of them together (quite a number - there must be millions and billions according to some places in the Quran and in Hadiths*) - - -". This proves that in the Quran, humans are high above angels as beings. In the Bible this is not clearly defined anywhere, but all the same it is very clear that angels are beings superior to humans. One more clear proof for that that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god - also their heavens are too different.

    094 38/75: “- - - one (man*) whom I (Allah*) have created with my hands - - -.” See 6/2b, 11/7a, and 38/71 above.

    095 38/75-82: The same story as in 15/33-39 above (Muhammad had a strong tendency to repeat himself – not god for literature quality), but with the addition of why Iblis did not want to prostrate himself for Adam: “I am better than he: Thou createdst me from fire, and him Thou createdst from clay.” Iblis was haughty or - if he was in cohorts with Allah in a game for having a reason for creating Hell – he played haughty.

    Nothing like this in the Bible.

    096 38/76b: “- - - him (man/Adam*) thou (Allah*) createdst from clay.” Quite similar to 37/11 and 38/71 above. This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5, 35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”, and not to mention the greatest contradiction in this case: 19/9 and 19/67 which both tell that man/Adam was created from nothing. (Also see verse 6/2 in the chapters about the 1000+ mistakes in the Quran.) (Strictly speaking this contradicts 30 different verses, but minimum 12 sure contradictions.)

    097 39/6b: "He (Allah*) created you (all) from a single person (Adam*) - - -". Wrong. According to science, man developed from earlier primates. Also: If there were only one couple, the DNA-pool would be too small for survival of the race (this actually is a problem for the tale about the animals and the ark, too.

    098 39/6c: "- - - then (Allah*) created, of like nature, his (Adam's*) mate (Eve - the name is nowhere given in the Quran, only in the Bible*) - - -". One more never proved claim in the Quran. But see 39/6b just above.

    099 42/51b: "It is not fitting for a man that Allah should speak to him (directly*)". Contradicted by the Bible, which tells that at least Yahweh on several occasions spoke directly to men f.x. Adam, Abraham, Moses and Samuel and not to forget Jesus. Also see 13/1g and 67/9c - 2 strong ones. 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.

    **100 43/6: “But how many were the prophets We (Allah*) sent amongst the people of the old?” Well, Hadith says 124ooo - and it is not true, because so many had had to leave some traces, but there is not one.

    Besides: With so many different people so many different places in the world - why was there no other prophet any place in the world at the time of Muhammad - yes, none at all for centuries before Muhammad? According to the time scale of Genesis and the Torah and the Bible which the Quran does not correct (6ooo - 7ooo (ca. 6600?) years) since Adam, and 124ooo prophets, it should mean hundreds or a few thousands prophets for each generation. Even if we recon the age of Homo Sapience - Modern Man - which is between 160ooo and 200ooo years, it should mean some 20 prophets for Islam each generation through all those times. Not one is known.

    And: Islam’s explanation for why Allah wanted new holy books on Earth now and then, is that the world changes, and then some details in the holy book needs adjusting. Why then is Muhammad said to be the last one? – and the Quran to be the last book, a book that is too inhuman, too primitive on justice, and too outdated on warfare (too destructive) for modern societies, just to mention 3 subjects. The world has changed MUCH more between Muhammad and now, than between Adam and Muhammad, and man needs new instruction for a less inhuman world - and an omniscient god had known that on beforehand. Besides: If the claimed "Mother Book" is from long before the origin of man, and timeless and eternal - how can exact copies from it vary?

    101 49/13a: “- - - We (Allah*) created you (man*) from a single (pair) of male and female - - -”. Adam and Eve never were, according to science. Besides if everything had started with just one pair, the DNA-variety had been too small to make the group viable in the long run = man had died out after some generations. (Actually science says that to have enough DNA variety + have a reasonable safety margin against dangerous illnesses, a group of animals (or humans) should consist of minimum some 2000 members – and spread around some to reduce the impact of contagious illnesses – to be sure to be viable in the long run.) Also see 6/2b, 6/98 – 7/189 – 39/6 Above.

    102 52/35a: “Were they (people*) created of nothing - - - ?” A rhetoric question here stating that man was created from nothing – 19/67 says the same. But: This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5, 35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material" (Also see verse 6/2 in the chapters about the 1000+ mistakes in the Quran.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 29 other verses. And in this case minimum 29 contradictions.)

    103 55/14b: “He (Allah*) created man from ringing clay (= burnt clay*) like unto pottery”. But:

    This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5, 35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”, and not to mention the greatest contradiction in this case: 19/9 and 19/67 which both tell that man/Adam was created from nothing.

    (Also see verse 6/2 in the chapter about the 1000+ mistakes in the Quran.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 30 other verses. But minimum 11 contradictions.)

    A man and a book not knowing more than this about how man evolved - is the rest they tell any more reliable? The nature seems to know the correct story much better. As said before: It may be cheats and deceivers not knowing to choose true “proofs” for their story behind it all.

    104 64/2a: “- - - it is He (Allah*) Who has created you - - -”. According to science man was not created, but evolved from an earlier primate. At least man cannot have been created in any of the 13 different ways in which the Quran tells the single person Adam was created - see 6/2 + 38/75 + 55/3 and more. Finally: Islam and the Quran only offers a claim that any religion and any person can make for any god they like, as long as they have to prove nothing. Lose claims without proofs can be the basis for belief - even for strong belief - but they are without value as basis for knowledge as long as they are not proved. This especially is so as it is an extremely serious matter if there really is a god somewhere, and this god is not Allah. If the god is not Allah, and at the same time Muslims have been denied the possibility to search for this possible god, by blind belief forced on them by unproved claims anyone can use free of charge about their imagining god(s) and by glorification of blind belief - well, then they are in for a rude waking up if there is a next life.

    105 70/39a: “For We (Allah*) have created them (man) out of the (base matter), they know.” But:

    This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5, 35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), and not to mention the greatest contradiction in this case: 19/9 and 19/67 which both tell that man/Adam was created from nothing.

    (Also see verse 6/2b in the chapters about the 1000+ mistakes in the Quran.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 30 other verses. But minimum 3 contradictions, as base matter can be said to be anything except nothing, blood and semen.)

    106 76/2b: “Verily, We (Allah*) created man (used like this, it is clear that “man” represents the human race, Adam*) from a drop with mingled sperm, so We gave him (the gifts) of Hearing and Sight”. It is not said from where the sperm came, and the author obviously does not know about the egg call, but that aside:

    This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5, 35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 16/4, 96/2 that tell man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”, and not to mention the greatest contradiction in this case: 19/9 and 19/67 which both tell that man/Adam was created from nothing. (Also see verse 6/2 in the chapters about the 1000+ mistakes in the Quran.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 27 other verses. And in this case also minimum 27 contradictions.)

    107 80/17-19: “Woe to man! What hath made him reject Allah? (Used like this it is clear that the word “man” here means the human race/Adam*.) From what stuff hath He (Allah*) created him? From a sperm-drop He hath created him - - -.” But:

    This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5, 35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”, and not to mention the greatest contradiction in this case: 19/9 and 19/67 which both tell that man/Adam was created from nothing.

    Even if here had been meant a man and not Adam, this is wrong. A person is not made from a sperm drop, but from one sperm cell + one egg cell. But Muhammad did not know about the egg cell and exactly what happened. He believed the sperm was seed which could start to grow when planted in a woman. Any god had known better.

    (Also see verse 6/2b above.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 27 other verses. And actually here are minimum 27 contradictions.)

    108 80/17-19: “Woe to man! What hath made him reject Allah? (Used like this it is clear that the word “man” here means the human race/Adam*.) From what stuff hath He (Allah*) created him? From a sperm-drop He hath created him - - -.” But:

    This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5, 35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 96/2 that tells man/Adam was made from a clot of congealed blood, 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”, and not to mention the greatest contradiction in this case: 19/9 and 19/67 which both tell that man/Adam was created from nothing.

    Even if here had been meant a man and not Adam, this is wrong. A person is not made from a sperm drop, but from one sperm cell + one egg cell. But Muhammad did not know about the egg cell and exactly what happened. He believed the sperm was seed which could start to grow when planted in a woman. Any god had known better.

    (Also see verse 6/2b above.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 27 other verses. And actually here are minimum 27 contradictions.)

    **109 96/2a: “(Allah*) Created man, out of a (mere) clot of congealed blood - - -”. Neither man (see 6/2) nor a man (see 75/37) was made out of blood - congealed or not – even though some of the old Greeks believed so, and from whom Muhammad may have stolen this idea. But the start of a human or an animal - the sperm cell and the egg cell and then the zygote - is so small that it is not to be seen with your eyes only, in the blood and gore in a carcass or in a slaughtered animal. Muhammad believed that the semen was a seed which planted in a woman grew into a clot of blood that grew into a fetus. It may be worth mentioning that the statement in this verse, is like Aristotle’s theory. But any god had known better. Who composed the Quran? And why do Muslims never mention that so many of the “facts” in the Quran are in accordance with Greek and Persian (wrong) science at that time? And also:

    This is contradicted by 6/2, 7/12, 17/61, 32/7, 38/71, and 38/76 that tell man/Adam was made from clay, 15/26, 15/26, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from sounding clay, 55/14 that tells man/Adam was made from ringing clay, 37/11 that tells man/Adam was made from sticky clay, 23/12, that tells man/Adam was made from essence of clay, 15/26, 15/28, and 15/33 that tell man/Adam was made from mud, 3/59, 22/5, 35/11, 40/67, that tell man/Adam was made from dust, 20/55 that tells man/Adam was made from earth, 16/4, 75/37, 76/2, 80/19, that tell man/Adam was made from semen (without explaining from where the semen came), 21/30, 24/45, and 25/54 that tell man/Adam was made from water (NB! NB! Not in water, but from water!), 70/39 that tells man/Adam was made from “base material”, and not to mention the greatest contradiction in this case: 19/9 and 19/67 which both tell that man/Adam was created from nothing.

    (Also see verse 6/2 in the chapter about the 1000+ mistakes in the Quran.) (Strictly reckoned this contradicts 30 other verses. And in this case also minimum 30 contradictions.)

    109 + 477 = 586 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


     

    15. Aisha - MUHAMMAD'S CHILD WIFE

    Daughter of abu Bakr. Married to Muhammad 6 years old, likely in 619 AD. Muhammad then was around 50. Sex according to Islam started when she was 9 (there is no lower limit for sex with girl children in Islam, but because of Aisha's age, it is "clear" that sex with girl children at least is morally and judicially ok from the girl is 9, this in spite of that no child is sexually mature at 9). She was Muhammad's favorite wife till Muhammad died in 632 (she likely then was some 19 years old - and was forbidden by Muhammad to remarry (like all the other long time wives of Muhammad). She became politically active during the reign of Uthman (644 - 656 AD), and was one of the leaders for the revolt against the next caliph, Ali (656 - 661 AD), but the revolt was smashed in the "Battle of the Camels" outside Basrah. She died in 678 AD.

    Aisha's marriage is a sore spot for many Muslims. Pedophile is not morally good, to use an understatement. Aisha was the daughter of his closest co-worker, abu Badr. Likely born in 613 AD. She was married to Muhammad when she was 6, likely in 619, and sex started when she was 9 (= in 622 AD just after the flight to Medina, according to one source). If Muhammad was born in 570 AD (he may have been born 1-2 years earlier), this means he was 52 years old by then - and she like said 9 - and in a way worse: Through the rest of his life this child, later youth, was his favorite wife.

    Today you will meet Muslims who claim that Muhammad had no pedophilic sex: For this and this and this reason the information about Aisha's age is wrong in the history books, in Hadiths, etc., and she was much older - 17 years is a claim you may meet. Such claims are wrong. It is very clear from all central old Islamic literature that she was 6 at marriage and 9 when sex started - and that she for the rest of his life was his favorite wife.

    It also is very clear - though never mentioned by Muslims or Islam - that Muhammad liked his women young. Except for his first wife - the rich widow Khadija - all of his 12 long time wives were from 20 to 36 years younger than him, topped by Aisha who was more than 40 years his junior.

    Other Muslims claim that ok she was just a child, but this was quite common in those days, and thus Muhammad cannot be blamed for doing like many others. This might have been true in a twisted way - twisted because anybody know and knew that a 9-year-old is not sexually mature - if Muhammad had been an ordinary man. But Muhammad at least pretended to be the representative of a good and benevolent and wise god. Pedophile is not what you expect to be inside such a representative's moral code. Also this Islamic claim thus is invalid.

    After Muhammad's and a little later also abu Bakr's death, Aisha became involved in the power struggle about the leadership in Islam, included the first civil war in Islam, but she was on the losing side.

    There is not much said about Aisha in the Quran, but a lot more in the Hadiths. In the Quran there mainly is mentioned one story about her - one more case where Allah saved the day in Muhammad's private life.

    But how could an incident be told in a book claimed to be written not millions but billions of years before it happened, unless Allah's predestination is total? And if Allah's predestination is total and according to his Plan which nobody and nothing can change, how can one then explain the morality behind punishing or rewarding humans for what they do? - and for that case: If everything is predestined and according to a divine Plan which nobody and nothing can change, what is then the value of prayers? - they naturally can change nothing if the situation and the future are fully predestined.

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

    001 24/11b: The background for this verse was that Muhammad's wife Aisha - his child wife - in one occasion spent several hours alone in the wilderness together with a young man, and there were a lot of rumors because of this. According to our point of view it is highly unlikely that anything happened between them, but the only "proof" for that it was so, was that Muhammad some weeks later claimed he received verses from Allah saying she was not guilty - hardly a strong proof as it came from a man with Muhammad's morality and reliability. An extra point here is that this child - around 626 AD - was Muhammad's favorite wife, and he could hardly keep her if her reputation was tarnished, so he had a strong motif for getting (?) such verses. This was one of the not few times Allah(?) was a nice helper for Muhammad. But remember that when Muslims say Aisha was proved not guilty, it is not true - neither the Quran nor Muhammad is reliable witnesses/proofs. It is likely she/they told the truth, but nothing was ever proved. Also see 24/11-16 below. It also is very clear from Hadiths that Muhammad himself suspected her - his behavior the first weeks clearly shows that. So when he scolds others for suspecting immoral things had happened, it was double moral form his side. Not a very sympathetic side of human nature.

    Another point: The Quran claims it is a copy of the "mother book" in Heaven - revered by Allah and made before the Earth was created. How come that this insignificant episode in the then distant future could be noted down in such a book some billion years before it happened? - especially so if man has free will, so Allah could know nothing for sure? And how much did the 124ooo (according to Hadiths) earlier prophets understand from these verses in their copies of the "mother book"/Quran?

    002 24/11-16: This refers to the incident with Aisha - Muhammad’s child wife - and a young man. The slander afterwards was not an obvious lie like Muhammad later liked to claim. That it was not obvious - something also his own initial reaction clearly demonstrated - was and is so obvious that it is clear an intelligent man like Muhammad knew he was not telling the truth when he said it was obvious. (He used many days to decide to believe her.) Also they were not really proved innocent - there only were some convenient verses in the Quran some weeks later, and the Quran far from is reliable. (But there is a fair chance that the two told the truth). Also see 24/11b above.

    Muhammad in this case definitely did not behave like a gentleman, and it is very unlikely that his behavior did not "put wood to the fire" and provoke more and/or stronger slander. Not the right man to blame others for bad conduct.

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

    003 24/12b: "Why did not the Believers - men and women - when ye heard of the affair (see 24/11a and 24/11-16 above) - - - say, 'This (charge) is an obvious lie'?" Because 1): It was not obvious it was a lie. 2): Muhammad himself needed a long time to decide what to believe - why then blame the others? - and what conclusions could others draw from his suspicion and silence?

    004 24/12d: "This (charge against Aisha) is an obvious lie". It might have been a lie, but it was not an obvious lie, something Muhammad's own reaction very clearly prove - so clearly that an intelligent person like Muhammad understood he was lying when he used the word "obvious" - and it is not the only time he lies in the Quran. He also was intelligent enough to know that as it far from was an obvious lie, he here was slandering those he talked to.

    005 24/13b: "Why did they (the ones talking about Aisha*) not bring four witnesses - - -?" For the very obvious reason that no witnesses existed - this is a rhetoric and hypocritical question where Muhammad knew the answer very well on beforehand. A dishonest way of augmenting, and a dishonest way to move the focus away from Aisha to others. Psychologically may be a wise sentence - but dishonest. This question was nonsense from the moment it was asked.

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

    ####006 24/13c: "Why did they (see 24/13f just above*) not bring the (4*) witnesses, such men, in the sight of Allah (stand forth) themselves as liars". This is one of the really black spots on Islam, and one of the 100% proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god: The lack of witnesses does not only make the ones speaking suspect, but it is a proof for that they are liars - if they speak the truth or not, does not matter. (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.) If they do not have the witnesses, it is a proof for that they are lying. If this was lying for men, this was bad enough. #######But it is a valid proof for Allah!!: "- - - in the sight of Allah, (stand forth) themselves as liars!". ########This in spite of that if they spoke the truth, an omnipotent god would know they spoke the truth!. And all the same, without the witnesses they were liars to Allah!

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

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

    ###007 24/15c: "- - - it (this refers to the hours his child wife Aisha spent alone in the desert with a young man, and the - probably wrong - slander this caused*) was most serious in the sight of Allah". Slander may be a serious, but not a most serious sin - that word you have to reserve for robbery, rape, dishonesty, slave taking, torture, terrorism, murder, mass murder, etc. - and if you are religious; for the gravest sins against the god(s) like f.x. making up competing gods and/or disusing a god/gods for personal gains like riches for keeping or for use (f.x. for bribes), respect and power.

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

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

    008 24/16a: "And why did ye (see 24/11b above*) not, when ye heard it, say - - -". Among other reasons because it was very clear from Muhammad's reactions according to Hadiths that he did not trust her, and neither did he defend her. Muhammad's double morality here is not very sympathetic.

    8 + 586 = 594 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


    >>> 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".