Humans, Other Beings in/Relevant to the Quran, Part 15


 

97.   FATIMA - DAUGHTER OF MUHAMMAD

Muhammad had 4 daughters (Zainab, Raqqyyah, Umm Kulthum, and Fatima), but how many sons he had, is unclear. It is clear he had the son Qasim with his first wife, Khadija. It is likely Qasim died in 605 AD, and he was less than 2 years old when he died. Then there is Abdullah (or Abd-Allah). You do not find him in all lists of Muhammad's children, but it is likely he existed, but died as a baby or early infant. Further it is clear he had the son Ibrahim with his concubine Marieh. Also Ibrahim died as an infant - likely some 16 months old. These are sure or nearly sure.

Then there are the names Tahir and Tayyab. These are unclear. They may have been children, but they also may have been extra names for Abdullah. If they were children, they in case died very young.

A Muslim list (there are controversies on if all really were Muhammad's children):

  • Quasim born ? died 605 AD
  • Abdullah born ? died 615 AD
  • Zaynab born ? died 630 AD
  • Raqqyyah born ? died 624 AD
  • Umm Kulthum born ? died 631 AD
  • Fatima born 605 or 615 died 632 AD (after Muhammad)
  • Ibrahim born 630 died 632 AD (before Muhammad)
  • For the names Tahir and Tayyab we have found no information.
  •  

    Another point is the question if the official children really were Muhammad's? Khadija was 40 years old when she married Muhammad (who was 25 - but Khadija was rich and Muhammad poor).That a woman gets 4 daughters and 2 to 4 sons after she was 40, was and is highly unlikely -. Not to forget that Muhammad got no (or perhaps 1) children with his at least 35 other wives and women, and thus had very low (or no?) fertility.

    One possible explanation is that some or all of Khadija's children were from an earlier marriage (it seems that she had been married twice before, and there are indications for at least 4 children from those marriages), but "taken over" by Muhammad.

    There also is the possibility that some of the children's' mother was the sister of Khadija, Halah, who died early. Many Shi’ia Muslims believe this.

    Another is that someone more fertile than Muhammad was the real father. Remember here that in the old times it happened that rich women "bought" herself a husband - often a poor man - to have an alibi when "cultivating" an interesting, but forbidden man. Also remember here that in those times in Arabia, alcohol and sex were "the two delightful things".

    A 4. possibility is that Muhammad was fertile, but lost his fertility completely or nearly completely - f.x. through some illness.

    As for his only other child - Ibrahim, mother the concubine Marieh - Marieh was a slave and had far from chosen the much older Muhammad herself. She may have "visited" an "interesting" man one or more dark night(s).

    What is absolutely sure is that a man who is told to be very active sexually, and has a large harem he uses + at least a few rapes, is either sterile or nearly sterile, if he gets (nearly?) no children. (Islam and its Muslims never mention or debate this fact.) And there is the mystery of a woman who marries 40 years old and over years gets at least 6 - may be 8 - children.

    A serious point if there exists a god: The fact that all Muhammad's children died young or very young, was that a punishment for bad or wrong things Muhammad had done? It in case must have been very bad and very serious things to deserve such a heavy punishment.

    Fatima was the youngest of Muhammad's daughters. She also was his only child who survived him - - - by half a year. And she was the only one of his children who got children who lived up. Fatimah married Ali, later the 4. caliph, and had 2 sons Hasan - died 670 AD - and Husayn - died 680 AD. All Arabs claiming to be descendants of Muhammad (rightly or wrongly) claim to be descendants through her. It is unclear when Fatima was born - we have seen the years ca. 605 AD and ca. 615 AD. She died in 633 AD, half a year after Muhammad. (In that half year she strongly quarreled with Caliph Abu Bakr to get her considerable inheritance from her father, Muhammad, but Abu Bakr claimed it for the religion.)

    A small point: If Muhammad was born ca. 570 AD, Khadija must have been born ca. 555 AD. This means that if Fatima was born 610 AD, Khadija was 55 when she got Fatima. Highly unlikely. This even more so as peoples' health detoriated faster in the old times than today - for several reasons. One "grew old earlier". Even if Fatima was born in 605 AD and Khadija 50 years old, this stretches credibility. (Science thinks she was born sometime between 605 and 610 AD.)

    Muslims believe Fatima was one of 4 Ahl al-Bayt - perfect women.

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

    *001 2/79a: “Then woe to those who write the Book (here the Bible?*) with their own hands - - -.” See 2/75b, 2/76b and 2/77a above and especially 2/130a and 7/157e below. (And as no god made a book with so many mistaken facts and other mistakes like you find in the Quran: What if it is a falsification, only said to be from Allah? - is it then "Woe to" Muhammad? - he f.x. got nearly no (7?) children with all his wives and other women (at least 36) and lost nearly all (6?) the few children he got - only one daughter (Fatima survived him, and only by a short time. "Woe to Muhammad"? And also there is no proof for whether he ended in Hell or Paradise - if such ones exist.)

    002 2/140k: "Who is more unjust than those who conceal the testimony they have from Allah". Here is one more reference to Muhammad's claim that the reason for divergences between his teachings and the Bible, was that the Bible was falsified - the only way he had to explain away those differences, which in reality were caused by his believing in the apocryphal (made up) stories, legends, fairy tales. etc. which flourished in and around Arabia. And to repeat it: Science has long since proved that the claim is wrong - there may be mistakes in the Bible, but not falsifications: The some 300 copies or fragments of the Gospels, some 13ooo from the rest of the Bible, and some 32ooo quotes from the Bible in other manuscripts older than 610 AD (when Muhammad started) all are in full accordance with the present Bible - IF NOT ISLAM HAD SCREAMED ABOUT IT. Also none of them have marks modern science can find from being falsified - and modern science is very good at finding falsifications, as it is a common crime today. But maybe there is an answer to the question: If someone twists the religion of a (perhaps) existing god to make a new religion giving the twister power, riches and perhaps women - well, perhaps that hypothetical god would think this was more unjust - - - perhaps showing it by making him sterile, and letting all the children who at least officially were his, die in a young age (even the last one and the only one who survived him - Fatime - only survived him by half a year)? Who knows?

    And even if science have proved that the Bible is not falsified, Islam has delivered an even stronger proof for this, by being unable to document even one single clear falsification among all those tens of thousands of relevant manuscripts - if there had existed even one such falsification, Islam had found it and as said above screamed about it. Islam’s deep silence on this point is an even stronger proof than the one from science for that there are no falsifications - mistakes perhaps, but no falsifications.

    003 2/180b: "It is prescribed, when death approaches any of you, if he leave any goods, that he make a bequest - - -." But why? - Muhammad did not do so himself, and in spite of popular Muslim tales - and some Hadiths - he left considerable values when he died (estates in Medina, Khaybar and Fadaq among other things) - - - which made some strife between Muhammad's daughter Fatime, who wanted her inheritance, and the new caliph Abu Bakr, who told that as Muhammad had said what he owned should follow the caliphate, he would not give it to her. The same he told her husband Ali after she died.

    004 5/106b: "When death approaches any of you (Muslims*),(take) witnesses among yourselves when making bequests - - -." Make a will not later than when you feel death is coming to you. Muhammad himself broke this rule, which made considerable troubles. For one thing: Who was to inherit his considerable wealth? (Muslims like to tell that Muhammad died very poor. It simply is not true - and many of them know it, as it is clearly told in Hadiths. He had estates in Medina, Khaybar and Fadak. But he had said - not willed, but at least said - that this was to be given to the religion, and therefore the caliph, Abu Bakr, confiscated it, much to the anger of Muhammad's only living child, Fatima, who wanted the inheritance from her father. But he neither had made rules for his own inheritors, nor for transfer of power or for succession of leaders of Islam, which resulted in that Fatima did not get her inheritance - and that of the 11 first caliphs only one (Abu Bakr) died a natural death - the line of transfer of power was unclear and many wanted that power. The religion of peace!

    005 7/57e: "- - - thus shall We (Allah*) rise up the dead - - -". Interesting claim, because neither Allah nor Muhammad has ever showed they have this power - Muhammad could not even help his own dying children (he lost all his children except Fatima, and she died shortly after him - was some god punishing him for something?) - there only are lofty words. Whereas if either the Bible or the Quran (f.x. 5/110a) tells the truth on this point, Jesus and Yahweh - and for that case even Elisha (1. Kings 17/22) and Paul (Acts 20/9-12) - proved so thoroughly, and thus showed they were closer to a god and thus greater prophets than Muhammad (if he at all was a prophet - no person unable to make prophesies is a prophet).

    006 13/30k: "On Him (Allah*) is my (Muhammad's*) trust, and to Him do I turn!" A bit risky as there never was a proof for his existence and never any kind of sure manifestation. May be the trust in Allah was the reason for why he lost all his children - included the sons Qasim, Abdullah, and Ibrahim - except Fatima, and she died shortly after him? And may be that was why he died in a ways which made lasting rumors of poisoning? - in line with the fact that of the next 11 caliphs, only Abu Bakr died a natural death, and he after just a short reign?

    007 23/72b: "Or is it that thou (Muhammad*) asks them for some recompense?" Hypocrisy. Muhammad liked to claim and to pretend he demanded nothing from his followers, and it tells volumes about man's ability not to see what he does not want to see, that many a Muslim honestly believe him. It is incredible, but in their blind belief they also are blind to facts like he demanded huge sum of money and valuables - mainly for waging war and for "gifts"/bribes to attract or keep followers - lots of women, and nearly unlimited power and full dictatorship over his followers. And in spite of Muslims tales of how poor he was when he died, at that time he had estates in Medina, in Khaybar, and in Fadaq (but he had said that his riches should be inherited by Islam, so that his daughter, Fatima - his only remaining living child - and his wives inherited nearly nothing, and this is the fact Muslims have twisted to a fantasy claim about how poor he was when he died).

    008 33/28-33a: This about Muhammad's wives and rules to make them stay quiet and satisfied - double punishment and double reward, etc., and other places in the Quran forbidden to remarry, ordered to talk from behind a curtain, his daughter Fatime promised a top position in Heaven, etc. contradicts the Bible in that such rules were not given to any of the Biblical prophets. The same god would give at least somewhat similar rules to all his representatives - which he did to all the Biblical prophets, but not to Muhammad. Muhammad even had permission to rape women (f.x. Rayhana bint Amr and Safiyya bint Huayay), an absolutely NO for all other prophets. Very clear indications for that Muhammad did not belong to the same line of prophets as the Biblical prophets, and did not get his claimed revelations from the same god. Too different rules.

    009 33/40a: "Muhammad is not the farther of any of your men - - -". Muhammad had no son who lived (and only one daughter, Fatima, who survived him, and just by half a year (some ones have asked if this was a punishment for his sins)).

    010 34/47c: "- - - my (Muhammad's*) reward is only due from Allah - - -". Hypocrisy. When he grew in power, he lived a good life - not really rich, but reasonably well off (and with enough riches to feed all his women). You will meet Muslims telling how poor he was when he died - it is a Kitman (a lawful half-truth). When he died he had estates in Mecca, Fadang and Khaybar. The false rumor about his poverty emerged from the fact that he had decided that his riches should follow the religious establishment. Because of that there exists a short list over some personal belongings, which many Muslims claim - and often honestly believe - was everything left after him. (They even forget the fact you also Islamic literature mentions, that his daughter Fatima for the rest of her short life (and her husband Ali afterwards) quarreled with the first caliph, Abu Bakr, because she demanded the inheritance after her father).

    011 66/11e: "- - - the Wife of Pharaoh (indicated by the context that it was she who found Moses, and thus likely Mutnodjmet*) - - -". Comment (YA5549): "Traditionally, she is known as 'Asiyah, one of four perfect women, the other three being Mary, mother of Jesus, Khadijah the wife of the prophet, and Fatima his daughter. (There is not one proof for that any of them were perfect, but they were central persons for the religion, and thus ought to be perfect to make the religion look better.)

    1. In the Bible it was a daughter of the pharaoh who found Moses, not a wife of him. The Bible also gives no other information about her, than that she was the daughter of the pharaoh, and that she found Moses. From where did Muhammad get the claimed information about her? As the Quran is not from a god, the only possible source is the Bible - and there the information about this is partly different and partly not existing.
    2. As for Mary we refrain from commenting.

    3. As for Khadijah only the positive sides of her are ever mentioned by Islam - a correct picture is impossible to make. But a woman finding a 15 year younger husband not very often is a perfect human being.

    4. Also for Fatimah Islam tries only to tell the positive sides. But no perfect woman would fight the caliph so as she should get the inheritance after Muhammad instead of Islam, like she did. A perfect woman also would not be angry and upset for the rest of her life for this (though admittedly she lived only half a year after Muhammad's death) because she did not get that inheritance instead of Islam.

     

    If the pharaoh was Horemheb, his wife when Moses was found, was Mutnodjmet, simply because his first wife, Amenia, died before Horemheb became pharaoh.

    012 74/6a: "Nor expect, in giving, any increase for thyself (Muhammad*)!" This is an easy claim, and a claim followed up by Islam, telling how poorly Muhammad lived and how little his family inherited after him. They normally never mention that the reason why his family inherited so little, was that he had said that what he owned should go to the religion, not to his family. He at least had 3 estates (in Medina, Fadaq, and Khaybar), and each of his long time wives had her own house (though possibly small ones) according to Hadiths. His daughter Fatima fought the first caliph, Abu Bakr, the rest of her short life to get the inheritance after her father - also never mentioned by Muslims. It also takes a good increase in wealth to run a family with 10 longtime wives (1 - Khadijah - was dead) + concubines + short time wives + others (one knows the name of 11 short time wives, 16 short time wives, 2 concubines and 7 where one does not know whether was married to him or not = 36 all together - see the chapter about Muhammad and his women in http://www.1000mistakes.com .)

    But the real increase was his increase in power - parts of it built on rich bribes he gave - stolen from the surroundings.

    013 108/3d: (A108/2 - omitted in the English 2008 edition): "The Prophet Muhammad got at least two sons - - -". (YA6288) tells he had 2 sons with Khadijah, and then there was the son Ibrahim he had with his colored slave girl Maria. Two are sporadically mentioned in Islamic literature, as they died very young - Qasim and Ibrahim. The third (Abdullah) hardly is mentioned at all. He also had four daughters (all with his first wife, Khadijah), but only one of them - Fatima - survived him, and just by half a year. Then there are the boy names Tabir and Tayyab - nobody knows if they were other sons, or if they were extra names for Qasim and/or Abdullah. If one believed in higher forces, one might believe he was punished for something through is children.

    13 + 2719 = 2732 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


     

    97.  GABRIEL

    According to the Bible Gabriel is one of the arch angels - leading angels - of Yahweh. In the Quran it only is said that he was an angel, but an angel bringing messages from Allah to Muhammad.

    In Islam it is normal to claim that Gabriel just is another name for the Holy Spirit. There is no indication for such a claim in the Quran, and in the Bible it is very clear that the Holy Spirit is something special and something much more than a mere arch angel.

    The rationale(?) behind this Islamic claim is that even though Mohammad received most of his claimed messages "by inspiration", the angel Gabriel is claimed to have brought him some. The Quran further tells a couple of times that also the Holy Spirit brought messages to Muhammad. Islam's deduction: As both Gabriel and the Holy Spirit brought Mohammad messages, the two had to be the same being. It should not be necessary to point to that such a conclusion on such a basis, is logically invalid.

    We may also remind you that Mohammad's claim that Yahweh and Allah are the same god, also is wrong - their teachings are by far too different and too deeply different. (And before you accept Islam's standard "explanation" for these differences - the never documented claim that the Bible is falsified - remember that both Science and Islam strongly have proved that there are no falsifications in the Bible. Some errors, but no falsifications.)

    As for Gabriel there is a strange fact in the Quran: He is never named in the surahs from Mecca. There is a deliverer, but he is not named - 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?

    There also is another point when it comes to Gabriel: Even if Muhammad got such visits, there is no proof for that it really was the angel Gabriel - arch angel of Yahweh - who came. Actually the fact that the Quran is so full of errors, that it proves the book is not from any god, makes it highly unlikely that arch angel Gabriel was involved. If Iblis or someone else from the dark forces (if dark forces exist) dressed up like Gabriel, Muhammad would have no chance to see the difference. Very many points in the Quran indicate that this is the explanation - - - if supernatural forces were involved.

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

    001 1/7c: "- - - (Muslims*) go not astray". Not if Allah exists, has sent down the Quran, and the Quran in addition tells the full truth and only the truth. But if the Quran is a made up book - not to mention if it is from dark forces pretending to be Allah and Gabriel (Muhammad would be unable to see the difference) - where will then Muslims end if there is a second life? - remember that a book with so many mistakes, etc. like the Quran is not from a god. (It is heresy and slander and an insult to blame a god for a quality like the Quran). (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.)

    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?

    002 2/87g: "- - - the Holy Spirit." This is one of the few places the Holy Spirit is clearly mentioned in the Quran (at least here and in 2/253, 5/110, 16/102, 17/85, and 26/193 - the last one not 100% sure, though). All the same Muhammad believed the trinity consisted of God/Yahweh, Jesus and Mary!! (A good laugh for anyone who has ever read the Bible.)

    Also beware that many Muslims who has not read the Bible, believe the Holy Spirit = the arch angel Gabriel (Gabriel was said to bring Muhammad messages, the Holy Spirit was said a few times to bring Muhammad messages - ergo the Spirit = Gabriel. You also other places in Islamic literature will see that not all Muslims have studied the laws of logic.) Anyone who reads the Bible with an open mind, will see that the Holy Spirit is something special.

    003 2/90d: "- - - (the revelation) - - -". Were they really revelations, and in case from whom? As no god would be involved in a book of that quality, only 2-3 possibilities in case remain: From a dark force or a fictive one from an illness (f.x. TLE - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy - like modern medical science suspects). It of course also can have come from a cold, scheming brain, but in that case it was no revelation.

    As for Iblis - the Devil - being behind the revelations(?) we personally are skeptical to that, even though the very special "moral" code, etc. in the Quran may indicate this. The reason is that not even a devil would use a book with that much wrong contents as the basis for his teachings - he had to know he would be found out sooner or later. There is a possibility, though, if the god only permitted the devil to launch his book on the condition that there should be so many mistakes, etc., that man should have a reasonable chance to see the trap if he used his "small grey ones". As for the delivery that would make no problem - Muhammad would have no chance to see the difference between the real Gabriel which he in this case never met, and the Devil dressed up like Gabriel.

    And then of course there remains the possibility that the Quran is a pure human product. This in reality is the most likely explanation - strongly indicated f.x. by the fact that many of the errors are in accordance with human knowledge in Arabia and its surroundings at the time of Muhammad.)

    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?

    004 2/97a: "- - - an enemy to Gabriel - - -" = Jews, as it was said that it often was Gabriel who brought them bad news. (But as Gabriel was the one who brought Muhammad Quranic texts, it also may mean "enemies of the Quran/Islam").

    005 2/97b: “Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel – for he brings down the (revelation (= the Quran*)) (at least what is not brought by “inspiration”*) - - -“. Contradicted by other points in the Quran telling he also got many in dreams or during fits - Gabriel at least was not the only source.

    006 2/97c: “- - - he (Gabriel*) brings down the (revelation (the Quran*)) to thy heart by Allah’s will - - -“. No omniscient god sends down a book with that many mistakes and contradictions and that much invalid logic, etc.

    007 2/97d: “- - - he (Gabriel*) brings down the (revelation (the Quran*)) to thy heart by Allah’s will - - -“. Not from the Bible - there Gabriel did not have a totally special position when it came to bringing messages, like he has in the Quran. In the Bible he is one of the arch angles, and that is it.

    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?

    008 2/136a: “- - - the revelations (the Quran*) - - -". Was it really a revelation? - and in case from whom? A book of a quality like the Quran is not from any god - too much is wrong. Then remain dark forces or an illness or a cold human brain.

    As for dark forces Muhammad would not have one chance to see the difference between the angel Gabriel and the Devil dressed up like Gabriel. Also the partly immoral moral code, the war religion, etc. might indicate an explanation like this. But we personally are reluctant to believe this, because not even a devil would use a book with so many errors as his "holy" book - he had to know he would be found out sooner or later and loose credence. There is one possibility, though: If the god permitted him to try to lure or cheat more humans to Hell - say the god f.x. wanted fewer of the stupid ones in his Paradise - but on the condition that so much should be wrong, that any intelligent person should be able to see the trap and evade it. Well, it is a possibility.

    When it comes to illness, the one modern medical science suspects, is TLE - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. (See f.x. BBC, Thursday, 20 March 2003 - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2865009.stm - broadcast 17 April 2003 on BBC Two)). This illness can give just the kind of "religious experiences", "religious visions" - or hallucinations - etc. and the physical fits and seizures it is claimed Muhammad had.

    And of course it is possible it all came just from a cold brain wanting power, riches for bribes, and women - but then it was no revelation. This has been the case for many a self proclaimed "prophet" - there have been many of them through the times. Actually this is the most likely explanation in the case Muhammad, because so many of the mistakes were what one believed in in Arabia at the time of Muhammad, because even though the Quran claims Allah is a universal god, everything was about Arabia and neighboring areas, because when there were problems or something, the comments came afterward - a god could have commented on it before to tell them the right thing to do or to avoid the problems, because Allah so often helped Muhammad also in family trouble and other private problems - typical for many false "prophets", and not to forget because of all the mistakes which were in accordance with (wrong) science there at the time of Muhammad. If this was combined with TLE, Muhammad might at least partly believe in his religion himself.

    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?

    009 2/253f: "- - - the holy spirit - - -" This is one of the few times the Spirit - also named the Holy Spirit, the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of Truth, the Spirit of God/Yahweh, the Spirit of the Lord, etc. - like Allah and like Muhammad it has several names) - is mentioned in the Quran (you also find it in 2/87, 5/110, 16/102, 17/75 likely in 26/193). Muhammad had very vague ideas about it and f.x. believed the Trinity consisted of Yahweh, Jesus and Mary (!). Muslims often claim it is another name for the angel Gabriel - and idea no-one who ever read the Bible with an open mind would get. And in addition to everything else which makes the claim ridicules, the old Jews knew well the difference between angels and spirits, and in the entire Bible there is not one single case where the two are mixed or mistaken. (But never think that a religious person will believe facts if they do not fit his belief).

    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 agument 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?

    010 3/42c: “Behold the angels (plural*) said (when they came to tell Mary she was going to have the baby Jesus*)”. According to the Bible there only was one angel - Gabriel (Luke 1/26).

    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?

    011 3/45b: “Behold the angels (plural*) said (when they came to tell Mary she was going to have the baby Jesus*)”. According to the Bible there only was one angel - Gabriel (Luke 1/26).

    012 3/72c: "- - - what (the Quran*) is revealed - - -". Was the Quran really revealed? And in case by whom?. As all the mistakes etc. prove that no god was involved, there remain 3 alternatives: Dark forces - Muhammad had no chance to detect the deception if f.x. the Devil dressed up like Gabriel and pretended giving him verses from Allah - the partly immoral moral code and partly unjust sharia laws may point to this explanation. Or a mental illness like TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) like modern medical science suspects - which also may have made Muhammad honestly believe in parts of what he told. Or by a cold human brain - perhaps Muhammad’s own - the mistakes which were correct science or knowledge at the time of Muhammad, may point to this explanation.

    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?

    013 3/80a: "Nor would he (a true prophet*) instruct you to take angels - - - for Lords and Patrons". No Christian would understand this sentence unless he/she also knew the Quran and some more of Islam: There is no place in the NT where one is instructed to take one or more angels "for Lord and Patron" - not even a place in the Bible where the text is possible to misunderstand like that.

    But then there is the claim that The Holy Spirit just is another name for the angel Gabriel. Gabriel brought messages to Muhammad, but the Quran also a couple of times mention that the Holy Spirit also did so: Logical shortcut - and like some other places in the Quran a logically invalid one: The Holy Spirit = the angel Gabriel. But no-one who has ever read the Bible with an open mind, would ever get the idea that the Holy Spirit is an angel - whatever it is, it clearly is something very special and very different from an angel. Also the Quran does not say that Gabriel = the Holy Spirit - the claim started somewhere outside the Quran.

    As for prophets as "Lord and Patron", there remains the question of saints - though they normally never were prophets originally. Here the Quran may have a point, as saints is not something from the Bible.

    And finally there remains the question of Jesus. Here it is no doubt that the NT unmistakeingly indicates that Jesus is divine - and Islam has till date never proved this wrong - lots of claims, but only claims. Also see 3/80b just below.

    014 3/164c: “- - - He (Allah) sent among them (Muslims*) a Messenger (Muhammad*) from among themselves - - -“. The Quran and all the mistakes and wrong logic, etc. there, makes it clear that Muhammad was not sent by any omniscient or omnipotent god. But there is a small possibility that he was contacted by a minor god, and a larger possibility that what he believed was Gabriel, in reality was the Devil/a devil in disguise (Muhammad’s inhuman behavior and the inhuman religion he introduced – stealing/robbing, raping, enslaving, torture, murder, mass murder, hate, discrimination, and war – may indicate this). Finally there is an even larger possibility that it was all man-made (f.x. all the mistakes which were "correct knowledge" in Arabia at the time of Muhammad, indicates this - no god and hardly any devil would use wrong facts in a "holy" book).

    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?

    015 4/119d: "Whoever, forsaking Allah, takes Satan for a friend - - -". The one does not necessarily implicate the other, especially if Allah just is a dressed up, non-existing pagan god (al-Lah/Allah - simply was the main Arab pagan god at that time), not to mention if Allah is from the dark forces (if. f.x. "Gabriel" was not Gabriel, but f.x. a dressed up Iblis). And especially not if there exist other real gods - f.x. Yahweh.

    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?

    016 5/59e: “- - - the revelation (the Quran*) that hath come to us (Muhammad*) (from Allah*)- - -“. Well, one of the central questions about Islam is if there really were revelations (with that many mistaken facts, etc.) – and if there were: From whom. There are these alternatives:

    1. Revelations from a god – which the Quran proves is not the case, as no god, omniscient or not, had made so many mistaken facts and other mistakes, contradictions, and so much wrong logic, etc.
    2. Or revelations from an impostor – f.x. the Devil – pretending to be Gabriel. The inhuman and on some points highly immoral war religion Muhammad founded, may indicate that this really is a possibility.
    3. r something working on Muhammad’s brain (an illness like TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) which easily would explain everything – see BBC “God on the Brain”, 20. March 2003) – and the inhuman and on some points highly immoral religion the highway-man and later warlord Muhammad founded, may indicate that also this really is a possibility. A sick brain. All the mistakes which were in accordance with what one believed was correct science in Arabia is compatible to this alternative.
    4. Or it is all a “scenario” made by a cold and scheming brain – and Muhammad’s inhuman ruthlessness and easily recognized lust for power (see f.x. how he glues himself to Allah) may indicate this. His obvious lust for power may explain the making up of a religion - many a self proclaimed "prophet" with lust for power or money or women has done so through the times (Muhammad at least liked power and women - and riches to attract and keep followers by means of "gifts" or bribes). Even more so all the mistakes which are in accordance with what one believed was correct science in and around Arabia at that time, may indicate this - humans would believe they used facts, supernatural beings of some class had known it was wrong.

     

    A combination of some of the 3 possible points also is possible.

    Also see 2/136a+c, 4/47c and 13/1f.

    017 5/73b: “They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity - - -.” Muhammad said Yahweh = Allah, and he never understood the trinity - he even believed it consisted of Yahweh, Jesus, and Mary, a mistake no god - agreeing or not agreeing to the Trinity - would have made. But for once there is a possibility that the Quran has a point; the Trinity is formally not a part of the Bible. On the other hand those are the three special ones: Yahweh, Jesus and the Holy Spirit - we may think of them as God, his co-worker and representative, and his errand boy/messenger boy and helper. Trinity or not - those three have a special status according to both the Bible and the Quran (even though the Quran does not agree to which status - it even say the Holy Spirit = the angel Gabriel, which makes anyone really knowing the Bible laugh.) There also is the fact that according to the Bible, Jesus said that he and his father was one - but figuratively meant. Also see 5/73a just above.

    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?

    ##018 5/87b: "Make not unlawful the good things which Allah hath made lawful for you (Muslims, people*) - - -". Do not make additional rules making lawful things difficult for you - or prohibiting them (- like the Jews had a tendency to do). In just this case Muhammad talks about food - quite an abrupt jump from belief in Allah and paradise, but the Quran often makes such jumps. Not god literature technique.

    #####But as the Quran and all its mistakes are not from any god, who was it in reality who made things lawful or unlawful? There only are these alternatives:

    1. The dark forces making Muhammad believe Gabriel visiting him.
    2. A mentally sick brain - f.x. TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) like modern medical science strongly suspects.
    3. A cold brain - f.x. Muhammad's.
    4. A combination of these - modern science f.x. says that it is possible Muhammad believed in the beginning, but became professionally scheming later, which may indicate that Muhammad in the beginning was cheated by f.x. the Devil or by TLE, but then over some time discovered that things were wrong, but that he by then was caught by the situation and/or liked the power too well, and "played the game".

     

    019 5/110d: "- - - the holy spirit - - -". The Spirit is mentioned a few times in the Quran, even though Muhammad did not understand it properly. Muslims today often claim that this is just another name for the angel Gabriel, even though this is not said in the Quran - perhaps because Muhammad used to claim it was Gabriel who brought him many of his claimed revelation (though other times he dreamt them), and once it is mentioned that the Holy Spirit brought him some revelations; viola! - the Holy Spirit = Gabriel. The logic is invalid (the most you can say logically, is: "perhaps the Holy Spirit is Gabriel" - there is a long distance from "perhaps" to "is", but you will often see Muslims doing this kind of logically invalid "jumps" to get answers they wish or want. Just keep an eye open and you will see such logically invalid "conclusions" here and there.) No-one who knows the Bible would get that idea, as the Holy Spirit clearly is something special (and also the old Jews knew the difference between an angel and a spirit) - but Islam like normal just claims without any documentation.

    *020 5/116d: Mohammad believed the Trinity consisted of God/Yahweh, Jesus and Mary. Wrong. Both Muhammad and the Quran were wrong in the extreme when he/they thus believed Mary was part of the Trinity. (It consists (?) of God/Yahweh, Jesus and the Holy Spirit – also called the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of Truth, the Spirit of God, or only the Spirit, the Spirit of the Lord, and a few other names). Muhammad never understood the trinity and he never understood the Holy Spirit, even though he used the Spirit a few times in the Quran – and some Muslims refer to the Holy Spirit in the Quran as another name for the arch angel Gabriel(!) as it is “known” that Gabriel brought surahs and verses, but it is also said in the Quran that the Spirit brought some. A logical short-circuit. (No knower of the Bible would ever get this idea).

    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?

    021 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.

    There was not one single reason why Allah could not use one of the myriads of angles he daily and frequently sends down, as a proof for Muhammad.

    On the contrary: There were all reasons for Allah to prove himself and his claimed messenger - in stark contradiction to Muhammad's claim, it had given lots of followers. Proofs: 1) Human psychology. 2) The Pharaoh's sorcerers all became Muslims because Moses made a miracle (a story which proves Muhammad knew he was lying when he said miracles would convince no-one. The same goes for Ramses II becoming a Muslim in 10/90 because he saw a miracle of a made flooding. 3) Jesus made miracles and got many followers from this, which Muhammad knew.

    A very obvious bluff and a piece of fast-talk - and wrong even according to other points in the Quran.

    022 6/9c: “If We (Allah*) had made it (the proof*) an angel, We should have sent him as a man, and We (= our proof/angel*) should certainly have caused them confusion in a matter (religion*) which they have already covered with confusion.” Actually this is contradicted by Hadiths, which tell that Muhammad saw Gabriel - an angel - and he had 600 wings. Not much like a man. (But we man add that you nowhere in the Bible find angels described with wings - seraphs, yes, cherubs, yes, angels, no. Angels in Christian art got wings around 300 AD, simply because it was the only way of flying the artists at that time knew - but Muhammad gave his angel Gabriel 600 wings (which aerodynamically is hopeless for flying,))

    And anyhow: To claim Allah had to send an angel in the shape of a man is wrong for any omnipotent 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?

    ###023 6/43b: "- - - their hearts became hardened, and Satan made their (sinful) acts seem alluring to them". This is an interesting sentence, as it is clear that the Quran with all its mistakes is not from a god, but that one of the few real possibilities is that it came from a devil dressed up like the angel Gabriel. A number of immoral and even horrible things seem alluring to Muslims, and one has to have a much hardened heart to be able to do some of the things Muslims have done through the times, and some still do.

    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?

    024 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. But 6/8 says no angel can be sent down because then everything will be over. A clear contradiction.

    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?

    025 6/91e: “- - - ye (Jews*) conceal much (of its (the Torah’s = first part of the OT*) contents - - -)“. The old and never proved claim from Muhammad that the Bible is falsified - his only possible defense against the fact that the Bible says a lot of things differently from what he claimed it said. Science has ever so clearly - and Islam even more clearly - showed that this Islamic claim is wrong: Many really old documents (the numbers vary some, but some 300 copies or fragments of the Gospels, some 13ooo of other parts of the bible + some 32ooo other manuscripts with quotations from the Bible) have showed that the texts of today are like the really old ones. Not even Islam has found a proved falsification!! Islam will have to bring real proofs for this repeated claims in the Quran and elsewhere – till now they only have produced claims; unfunded claims and loose words, and we are back to the old fact: If Islam had found one single hard fact showing that the Bible in any way was falsified, the world had been told quickly and with large letters. This because Islam does not have one single real proof for the existence of Allah, for Gabriel as a messenger to Muhammad, for Muhammad’s connection to a god or anything at all – everything rests only – only – on what Muhammad told, and the historical Muhammad (in contradiction to the Islamic glossy picture) was a man that would not have been accepted in any serious court as a reliable witness. A proof for falsification of the Bible would be an indication for that the Quran was correct at least on this one point, and thus very welcome. But in 1400 hundred years no real proof has been found – only claims and words. Therefore a real proof for a falsified Bible had been big news in all Muslim media and for all Muslims debating religion forever after. No such proof has ever been produced by Islam or anyone else.

    Also see 3/24, 5/13, 5/14, 5/15. Similar claims in 2/42 – 5/14 – 5/15. As for more about the differences between the Bible and the Quran, see our separate book "The Bible and the Quran" - Book E.

    026 6/93c: "- - - inspiration - - -". Muhammad claimed he got most of his claimed information from his god by means of inspiration - a very convenient way, especially if some things in reality are made up, as it is impossible for others to check if it is true, and also easy for a claimed prophet to add or subtract or simply to make up. Remember here that all the mistakes etc. in the Quran prove at least 110% that it is not from a god, and someone or someone(s) has/have to have made it. In this verse two things are the subject: Prevent that others got the idea to make (competing?) inspirations", and to stress the claim that his own "inspirations" were reliable. We may here remind you that the word "inspiration" never is used in such connection in the Bible - 4. Mos. 12/6-8 tells that Yahweh speaks to his prophets directly, in visions or in dreams - inspiration is not an alternative. Muhammad also never tells how he sees the difference between Allah's inspirations and his own - all humans have inspirations now and then. Neither does he mention how he can be sure the ones not his own, are from a god and not from a sick brain (remember TLE) or from a dressed up member of the dark forces (Muhammad would have no chance to see the difference if it was f.x. a dressed up Iblis (the Muslim devil) posing as Gabriel).

    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?

    027 7/40e: "- - - such (Hell*) is Our (Allah's) reward for those who sin". If Allah exists and is a god - and if he is correctly described in the Quran - Muhammad f.x. may have mixed inspirations from Gabriel/Allah with his own inspiration (all humans have inspirations sometimes).

    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?

    028 8/74g: "- - - for them (Muslims) is the forgiveness of sins - - -". Allah only can forgive if he exists and in addition is a god (not f.x. someone from dark forces dressed up like a god or like Gabriel - Muhammad would not have a chance to see the difference).

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

    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?

    029 9/31e : "- - - yet they (the Christians*) were commanded to worship but One God - - -". Muhammad never understood the Christian religion and thinking. According to Christians there is only one god. Then there is a figure - a helper or something (the son, Jesus) - who in reality gets his light and his power from God/Yahweh. And finally there is something more diffuse and seldom seen; The messenger boy or something named the Holy Spirit (sometimes wrongly claimed to be the arch angel Gabriel by Muslims who have never read the Bible, or who have read it with a closed mind). To use a picture: There is one sun. Then there is a moon which gets its light from the sun. And there is the seldom seen satellite somewhere around. But only one sun. And that is the complete "pantheon". To mix Mary into the Trinity (like Muhammad does at least one place in the Quran) just is one more proof for that no god made the Quran, and for that Muhammad did not understand the trinity. Mary and the other saints (only for the Catholics, and not for all of them) are not divine. In Islam some good Muslims end in the higher heavens closer to Allah. In the same way Catholics believe that some really good Christians end up closer to God in Heaven - though figuratively. And just like Muhammad claimed he can interfere for whom he like on the Last Day, Catholics believe that as these normal, but good, humans called saint can interfere with God on our behalf, as they are closer to him. But as this is not a part of the Bible, the Protestants - and the Sunni Muslims - may be right: May be there are no saints.

    ##030 9/33a: “It is He (Allah*) Who hath sent his Messenger (Muhammad*) - - -“. That is one of the really big questions: Was he really sent? There are too many indications for that the Quran is not made by an omniscient god – actually it is 100% sure that no such god would make that many mistakes, contradictions, etc. And if he all the same is sent, the some 22-24 surahs from Medina makes it as 100% sure that he was not sent by a good or benevolent god – the religion as it is painted especially in that part the Quran is by far too inhuman, immoral, and diabolic for that. In case he was sent, the surahs from Medina prove he in case was sent by some dark forces. May be by the Devil pretending to be Gabriel - Muhammad would have no chance to see the difference. Another alternative that it is sent by a sick brain – f.x. TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) like parts of modern medical science believe? Or perhaps just by a cold brain wanting power - f.x. Muhammad himself?

    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?

    031 9/74e: "- - - they (hypocrites*) uttered blasphemy (disbelief in Muhammad and the Quran*), and they did it after accepting Islam - - -". It is not possible to utter blasphemy by disbelieving in Allah or Muhammad, unless Allah really exists an in addition is a god (not f.x. something from the dark forces - Muhammad would not have a chance to see the difference f.x. between a dressed up devil and the angel Gabriel).

    032 9/99a: "- - - some of the desert Arabs (nomads*) believe in Allah and the Last Day, and look on their payments (tax/zakat*) as pious gifts bringing them nearer to Allah - - -. Aye, and indeed they (and perhaps Muhammad's prayers*) bring them nearer (to Him (Allah*))". No comments except: A nice reward - - - if Allah exists and is a god (quite a surprise to some Muslims if he turns out to be someone from the dark forces who sometimes dressed up like the angel Gabriel to meet Muhammad - a possibility which the f.x. immoral parts of the Quran's moral code may point to.

    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.)

    #033 10/17a: "Who doth more wrong than such as forge a lie against Allah - - -". Well, for Muhammad's sake we can hope he did not make lies (which he did) in the Quran - that it f.x. was all TLE (the illness Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) or something dressed up as Gabriel who cheated him. On the other hand if Allah did/does not exist, Muhammad's lies were without consequence - - - if there did/does not exist some other god who disliked lies.

    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?

    034 12/3d: "- - - reveal - - -". Was it really revealed, and in case by whom or what? It was not from a god - too much is wrong in the book. Then the alternatives are: Dark forces (f.x. Iblis/the Devil dressed up like Gabriel (Muhammad would not have a chance to see the difference), an illness (f.x. TLE - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy - like modern medical science suspects), or one or more cold human brain(s) (f.x. Muhammad's own).

    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?

    ##035 13/1f: “- - - the Book: that which hath been revealed unto thee (Muhammad*) from thy Lord (Allah*) - - - “. That is the question, to quote Hamlet: Did a god really produce and reveal a book with that many mistakes, contradictions, and invalid “proofs“? No. And when no god revealed it, he also did not reveal it to Muhammad.

    An alternative is that the Devil impersonated Gabriel and in other cases told Muhammad “by inspiration”, and that it thus was revealed to him, but from dark forces. Another alternative is that it all stems from a sick brain – TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) + lust for power may easily explain everything. Yet another alternative is that it was not revealed, but made up – the fact that many of the mistakes which are in accordance with the wrong science of the time and area of Muhammad, and also the fact that Muhammad was not stupid enough to believe everything that is said in the Quran, may indicate that it is made up. (As for the last argument: F.x. the claim that miracles would not make some people believe, Muhammad was too intelligent and knew too much about people to believe himself – and f.x. Jesus was a good proof of the opposite: A lot did not believe in spite of everything, but quite a number came to believe because of what they saw and heard and witnessed. The same was the conclusion of the story that Muhammad himself told about the magicians of Pharaoh Ramses II and Moses: They came (according to Muhammad’s own words) to believe after a small miracle.) For similar also see 2/231 – 3/3 – 4/136 – 5/48 – 5/59 - 5/64 – 5/67 – 6/7 – 7/2 – 7/3 – 10/2 – 13/19 – 16/89 – 18/1 - 16/102 – 25/33 – 27/6 – 33/2 – 34/6 – 35/24 – 35/31 – 39/2 - 47/2.

    Thus to repeat:

    An alternative is that the f.x. the Devil impersonated Gabriel and in other cases told Muhammad “by inspiration” what thus was "revealed" to him. The inhumanity of the religion would then be explained. Personally we doubt this explanation, if for no other reason, then because even a devil would not make so many mistakes, contradictions, etc. in the Quran - he simply would not want to be found out by his victims sooner or later. There is one possibility, though: If Iblis - the Islamic Devil - got permission from Allah for trying to lure more humans to Hell only on the condition that the trap should be one which was easy for thinking persons to see, then all the mistakes may be explained. To be flippant: May be the god did not want too many too stupid humans into his Paradise?

    Another alternative is that it all stems from a sick brain – TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) + lust for power may easily explain everything. In this case Muhammad may have believed at least partly in his own tales and religion.

    Yet another alternative is that it was not revealed, but made up in cold blood. The fact that many of the mistakes are in accordance with the wrong science of the time and area of Muhammad, and also the fact that Muhammad was not stupid enough to believe everything that is said in the Quran, may indicate that it is made up. In this case it may have been made up of one (or more) helper like many of his contemporaries suspected, or by himself - the last is most likely, at least for parts of it.

    As for the last argument: F.x. that miracles would not make some people believe, Muhammad was too intelligent and knew too much about people to believe himself – f.x. Jesus was a good proof of the opposite: A lot did not believe in spite of everything, but quite a number came to believe because of what they saw and witnessed. The same was the conclusion of the story that Muhammad himself told about the magicians and Moses: They came (according to Muhammad’s own words) to believe after a small miracle.

    No book of a quality like the Quran is from any god - not even from a newborn dwarf god.

    036 15/1c: “These are the ayat of Revelation - - -“. Well, is the Quran a revelation? – and in case by whom? There theoretically are 5 possibilities:

    1. A god – but the Quran proves that is not the case; too many mistakes, etc.
    2. Some dark forces, f.x. the Devil – perhaps in disguise. Muhammad had not one chance to see the difference between Gabriel and the Devil dressed up like Gabriel. The inhuman religion of war may point in this direction.
    3. A mental illness. Modern medical science suspects he had TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy). This illness can give religious "experiences" and fits just like Muhammad is claimed to have had.
    4. Humans at the time of Muhammad, included Muhammad. The fact that many of the mistakes in the book are in accordance with wrong science in the Middle East at that time, may point in this direction.
    5. Muhammad himself. Muhammad’s lust for power - and women - may point this way. It also easily will explain point 4. Add his lack of ethics and moral and it also may explain point 2.
    6. The clear conclusion is that it at least was not revealed by a god, like the Quran claims - too much is wrong in the book. Points 3 and 5 may be the most likely ones - may be combined.

     

    037 16/2d: “He (Allah*) doth send down His angels with inspiration (“ruh”) - - -.” But the Arab word “ruh” used here does not really mean inspiration – it means spirit or the Spirit (or the Holy Spirit) or the breath of life. We may add that Muslims often claims that the Holy Spirit just is another name for the angel Gabriel (an idea no-one who reads the Bible with an open mind would get). But here it is clear that the (Holy) Spirit – “ruh” – is not included among the angels (the angels transported the "ruh"). (Actually Muhammad never quite understood what the Holy Spirit – one of it’s at least 8-10 names – was). Also see f.x. 70/4a, 78/38 and 97/4c where the same word – “ruh” – is used (it is used 21 times in the Quran).

    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?

    038 16/35a: "The worshippers of false gods - - -". An interesting point here is that Muhammad reckoned Christians to believe Jesus was/is such a false god - Muhammad never understood the Gospels and the rest of NT on points like this. The Bible do not say Jesus is a god, only that he is divine - a prince is not a king, even if he belongs to the royal family (and in this case he also never will become a king, as the king - Yahweh - is eternal). Muhammad also never understood the Trinity dogma, and believed it consisted of Yahweh, Jesus and Mary instead of Yahweh, Jesus and the Holy Spirit (though he may be right that the Trinity dogma is not correct - the three may perhaps not be one - that dogma is manmade and may be wrong, as this is not said in the Bible. It is a Christian dogma from the 4. century, and it got its present form from the so-called Cappadocian Fathers (Gregory of Nyassa (332-395), Basil the Great (320-79), Gregory of Nazeanzus (329-389)). The nearest you come in the Bible is that Jesus said that he and his father, Yahweh, were one.)). And to finish the Trinity: The Holy Spirit is a kind of messenger or ambassador for Yahweh - one hardly with any will of its own. And just to mention it: Many Muslims claim the Holy Spirit just is another name for the archangel Gabriel. No-one who really knows the Bible would ever get that idea - the claim was not even worth a comment if it was not because many Muslims do not know any better and believe in it. It also is not said in the Quran.

    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?

    039 16/98b: "- - - Satan the Rejected One". Quite an ironic end of the verse if there is anything in the theory that the real maker of the Quran was Satan, dressed up like Gabriel to cheat Muhammad.

    The claim also is ironic if Islam's own theory is correct: Allah is all-powerful. This means that Iblis cannot run Hell except if permitted by Allah. Allah would not permit a Hell unless he had a good reason. This means that Hell is part of Allah's all-including Plan, and thus that Iblis is not an enemy or a rejected one, but a co-worker of Allah. As Allah is all-powerful and also predestines everything, this according to Muslim scholars is the only possible explanation.

    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?

    040 16/102a: “- - - the Holy Spirit has brought the revelation (= the Quran*) from thy Lord (Allah*) - - -.”

    1. 2/97: “Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel – for he brings down the (revelation (= the Quran*)) (at least what is not brought by “inspiration”*) - - -“. Muslims sometimes say that Gabriel brought the most of those who were not sent by “inspiration”, but that the Holy Spirit brought some, and they might have got away with it - - - if it was not because other Muslims say that this is one of the proofs for that the Holt Spirit = Gabriel (sic!!).

     

    In a way a contradiction. But the main effect is that as the Quran says the Holy Spirit brought down some verses, many Muslims as said believe the Holy Spirit just is another name for Gabriel. No-one who has read the Bible with an open mind would get such an idea (and it is neither said, nor hinted in the Quran).

    041 16/102a: “- - - the Holy Spirit has brought the revelation (= the Quran*) from thy Lord (Allah*) - - -.”

    1. 2/97: “Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel – for he brings down the (revelation (= the Quran*)) (at least what is not brought by “inspiration”*) - - -“. Muslims sometimes say that Gabriel brought the most of those who were not sent by “inspiration”, but that the Holy Spirit brought some, and they might have got away with it - - - if it was not because other Muslims say that this is one of the proofs for that the Holt Spirit = Gabriel (sic!!).

     

    In a way a contradiction. But the main effect is that as the Quran says the Holy Spirit brought down some verses, many Muslims as said believe the Holy Spirit just is another name for Gabriel. No-one who has read the Bible with an open mind would get such an idea (and it is neither said, nor hinted in the Quran).

    042 16/102b: “- - - the Holy Spirit has brought the revelation - - -“. Muhammad Azad: “The Message of the Quran” tells that the Arab word “ruh al-qudus” (= the Holy Spirit) is used 3 times in the Quran (2/87, 5/110 – both connected to Jesus – and here), and that here it means the angel Gabriel. The Holy Spirit in Arab = Gabriel? That in case means that in 2/87 and 5/110 Jesus is strengthened with the angel Gabriel - a bit far from what the Bible tells. (It is likely Islam sets the Holy Spirit = Gabriel because the Quran tells that Gabriel brought large parts of the Quran (other parts came to him in dreams, by "inspiration", etc.), so that when it says that the Holy Spirit brought him verses, that must mean that the book is talking about Gabriel - not 100% logical to say the least of it. (But Muslims often are quick to go from "this may be so" to "this is so" and sometimes even to "this is a proof"). Also see 2/97. (There are texts in the Bible making this impossible - f.x. that the disciples of Jesus each got a part of the Spirit, whereas angels do not split into pieces. Besides the Bible very well knows the difference between angels and spirits. And not to forget: It is nowhere said in the Quran that Gabriel = the Holy Spirit.)

    043 16/102c: (YA2141): "- - - the Holy Spirit - - -". YA's comment: = The title of the Angel Gabriel - - -". This is a claim you sometimes meet from Muslims. But no-one who ever read the Bible with an open mind, would ever get such an idea (and even the Quran does not say so) - the Holy Spirit clearly is something special in the Bible, and something much more and much more essential than even an arch angel. Besides the Bible knows very well the difference between a spirit and an angel - and in the Bible Gabriel is not even an ordinary angel, but an arch-angel. And: When the Holy Spirit came to the disciples of Jesus after he had left them, it split or splintered off something and took part in each of them. No angel could be split in 11 (Judas Iscariot was not there naturally) or more. Some spirits can.

    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?

    044 17/85a: "- - - the Spirit - - -". Most Muslim scholars mean this is a reference to the Holy Spirit (mentioned 3-4 times in the Quran), though other explanations are possible - like Islam claims, the Quran has a very distinct language, easy to understand and impossible to misunderstand(?). But many of the scholars mix the Holy Spirit with the arch angel Gabriel - Gabriel brought messages to Muhammad according to the Quran, and the Holy Spirit a few times did the same - "ergo" the Holy Spirit must be Gabriel, Q.E.D. No comments except that no really knower of the Bible - Christian, Jewish, or something else - would ever get that idea if the book is read with an open mind. This claim is not from the Quran.

    045 17/90c: “They (non-Muslims*) say: ‘We shall not believe in thee (Muhammad*), until thou cause a spring to gush forth for us from the earth (or give us some other proof*)”. Strong requests - and a positive answer would have had effect. But there never was any proof for anything - not for Allah, not for Gabriel, not for being a prophet, not for Islam.

    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?

    046 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 med - 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?

    047 21/106b: "Verily (thought it definitely is no proved verity/truth*) in this (Quran) is a Message for people who would (truly) worship Allah". That may well be, but if the Quran is a made up book - by men or dark forces as no god is involved in a book with so much wrong - also the message is a made up one, and then the god may also be a made up one. (May be we should hope he is made up, as he at points is very immoral, unfair, bloody and harsh. As we have said before: When a man or a god says something, but demands and does something very differently, we any day believe in his demands and his deeds, not his words - words are too cheap.)

    And what if "Allah's" representative "Gabriel" in reality was a dressed up Iblis/the Devil? Muhammad had had no chance to see the difference, and a number - many - points and parts of the moral code in the Quran would be in accordance with such an explanation.

    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 agument 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?

    048 22/34e: "- - - submit then your (Muslim's*) will to Him (Allah*) (in Islam) - - -". A bit risky without first checking if Allah exists and is a god, and if Islam is reality or made up - too many facts are wrong for the ones not blinded by belief. Not to mention: What if the theory that Gabriel in reality was someone from the dark forces in disguise?

    Was it a coincident that Muhammad never was able to prove that he represented a 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 agument 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?

    049 22/49a: "I (Muhammad*) am (sent) - - -". Was Muhammad really sent? What is sure is that no god ever sent a message containing so many errors like the Quran - and then it is highly unlikely they sent a messenger without a god's message. The possibility remains, though, that he was send by someone else - if f.x. Iblis (the Devil) dressed up like Gabriel, Muhammad had no chance to see the difference. Read 1/1a above, and you will see that this is a possible explanation.

    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 agument 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?

    ##050 22/62a: “- - - Allah - He is reality - - -”. Well, that is one of the big point which neither the Quran nor Hadith nor Islam’s learned men have been able to give the slightest proof for. Even some Muslim intellectuals admit so. This in spite of all the “signs” and “proofs” that say so in the Quran - they have one thing in common: NOT ONE OF THEM GIVES ONE SINGLE VALID PROOF OF ALLAH - they all are claims or statements built on air or on not proved “facts” or other claims or statements that are not proved. A fact that “smells”. Gabriel may be dark forces in disguise, or simply a result of a sick brain (modern medical science suspects Muhammad had TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) - which can give such religious "experiences" like it is said Muhammad had) or something made up in the imagination of a Muhammad pretending Allah to be an avatar of - or identical to - Yahweh. The last is not possible, though, as the essences of the two teachings are too different, but Muhammad did pretend so. And: Cheating is the hallmark of cheaters.

    #####Unless Islam can show real proofs for the existence of Allah, there are so many circumstantial and empirical proofs for that Allah is a made up god, that they put together is a proof of mathematical strength for that Allah does not exist, and just is a mental, pagan idol.

    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 agument 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?

    051 24/21b: "Follow not Satan's footsteps - - -". Just to mention it: As it is clear that no god was involved in the making the Quran, one of the theories is that Satan, dressed up like Gabriel, was the real creator of the Quran and thus of Islam. (But even though several aspects of the religion may strengthen this theory, we personally are skeptical; not even a devil would make so many mistakes, contradictions, etc. - he had to know he would be found out sooner or later. There is one possible explanation, though; that the god did not permit him to make a new religion to trap more humans for Hell, unless it was done in such a way that the victims had a good chance to understand that something was wrong).

    052 25/11e: "We (Allah*) have prepared a Blazing Fire for such (non-Muslims*) - - -". If he exists and in addition is either a god or a devil (dressed up like Gabriel, Muhammad would not have a chance to see the difference between the dressed up Iblis/the Devil and Gabriel - this even more so as he had never seen Gabriel in case.

    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 agument 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?

    *053 26/193a: “With it (the Quran*) came the Spirit of Faith and Truth”. If truth came down with the Quran, it must have been mutilated later. (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.) NB: This is one of the places where Quran mentions "the Holy Spirit", (though the Arab "Al ruh al Amin" normally refers to the archangel Gabriel - but Muslims often mix the two, and many do not even know the difference and believe they are the same. This even though Muslim top scholars know the Bible, and no-one really knowing the Bible would mix the two; for one thing it indirectly, but very clear is told in the texts that the two are two different beings, and for another the writers of the Bible knew the difference between angels and spirits.)

    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 agument 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?

    054 31/21a: “- - - the (Revelations) - - -". Often claimed, but never proved - and even if it had been revelations: From whom or what? There is the TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) which modern medical science suspects. There are dark forces. There is Iblis - the Muslim Devil - dressed up like Gabriel (Muhammad had in case no chance to know the difference). Personally we are skeptical to the idea about Iblis - too many mistakes in the Quran even for a devil. But the possibility remains that the god did not permit him to make the Quran to waylay more humans, unless it contained so many mistakes that normally intelligent persons saw the trap. There is a cold, scheming brain - perhaps Muhammad's. The only thing which is sure, is that revelations as full of mistakes, contradictions, etc. like the Quran, is not from any 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 agument 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?

    055 34/18a: "- - - the Cities - - -". Muslims want these to be Mecca and Jerusalem and perhaps Medina. But the trade routes went to Egypt and Syria, and from Syria on to Persia and The East Roman Empire - none of them went via Jerusalem (and it f.x. is not known that the caravan tradesman Muhammad ever visited Jerusalem - except during the likely made up "night journey" based on a short comment in 17/1 not mentioning Jerusalem or Gabriel or Heaven or Allah or anything told about in Hadiths and tales).

    It is possible the cities meant here were Mecca and Ta'if - a town east from Mecca.

    056 35/1f: "- - - angels, messengers with wings - two or three or four pairs - - -". Highly unlikely - there is a reason why all birds have just one pair of wings (there once existed with 2 pairs of wings, but they were outcompeted), as many extra pairs of wings just would mean turbulence and drag, not lift or speed (to give Gabriel 600 wings like Muhammad does one place, aerodynamically is nonsense). Any god had known, but Muhammad of course knew nothing about aerodynamics. Then who made the Quran?

    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 agument 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?

    *057 35/5e: “- - - (not) let the Chief Deceiver deceive you about Allah.” The Quran here talks about the Devil. But one question: Muhammad is the absolute and unquestioned chief of the Muslims. If Islam is a false religion – is Muhammad then the Chief Deceiver? The question is not ridiculous – it is sure the Quran is neither made by an omniscient god (too much is wrong in the Quran), nor by a good god (too much dishonesty, discrimination, inhumanity, hate, blood and war), and then the alternatives are: Made by man? – rational or ill (f.x. TLE - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy - will explain much). Or made by some dark forces? – f.x. the Devil dressed up like Gabriel.

    058 35/8d: “Is he, then, to whom the evil of his conduct is made alluring (non-Muslims*) - - - (equal to one who is rightly guided*)?” There is a serious question here: In the Quran there are a number of central rules and demands which are obviously bad - compare them to "do to others like you want others do to you". But they are made look like good and alluring by the texts in the book. Is he who believes in theses verses which well may be made by a devil, to be reckoned among the evil ones? (these evil rules in the Quran are the reason why we cannot drop the possibility that the real originator is a devil - f.x. dressed up like Gabriel. This even though it is difficult for us to see how even a devil would make so many mistakes, etc. in an after all small book. He had to know he would be found out sooner or later.

    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 agument 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?

    059 36/5b: “It (the Quran*) is a revelation - - -". Is the Quran really a revelation? - and in case from whom or what, as no god ever was involved in a book of that quality? There are these alternatives: Dark forces - Muhammad would not have a chance to see the difference between the angel Gabriel and a dressed up Iblis/Devil. A sick brain - modern medical science strongly suspects that Muhammad had TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy), an illness which can give just the symptoms and religious illusions Muhammad is said to have experienced. Or a cold brain - f.x. Muhammad's. Also see 36/5a just above.

    #########060 39/32c: "- - - utters a lie concerning Allah - - -". There is no bigger lie against Allah than the Quran, this whether he exists or not. Why we can say this so 100% sure and definitely, is that the book is so full of mistakes, contradictions, etc. that no god has been involved in it, not to mention a claimed omniscient god. It is not possible to say who made it, though there are good reasons for to suspect Muhammad, partly because one recognize the methods used by false prophets, partly because many of the mistakes are things one believed was correct science at his time in that area, partly because it is clear from f.x. Arabisms that it was made in or near Arabia, partly because of all the times Allah helped him with family and other personal problems, partly because he was the main benefactor, partly because it was his platform of power, and not least because the religion changed when Muhammad needed or wanted changes.

    If he was mentally ill like modern medical science suspects, he can however partly have believed in his tales and preaching himself. But he was too intelligent and knew too much about people not to know that he was lying some times, even in surahs and verses in the Quran. Some things there is not possible for an intelligent person knowing people to believe.

    But if one believes in supernatural beings, there also is the possibility that the Quran is from the dark forces. If f.x. the Devil dressed up like the angel Gabriel no human - included - Muhammad would have no chance to know the difference. The partly immoral moral code, the partly unethical ethical code, the partly unjust judicial code, the permission of stealing/robbing, raping, suppressing, enslaving, murdering, etc., etc., may point in this direction.

    What do these facts mean for the religion?

    Also see 34/8b above.

    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 agument 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?

    ##061 40/53a: “We (Allah*) did aforetime give Moses the (Book of) Guidance - - -”. Wrong. According to science those books were written centuries after Moses was dead. (According to the Bible, Moses only got the 10 Commandments in writing. In addition he was told the law (parts of what now is the Books of Moses), which he then wrote down himself later - this sometimes was called "the Book of Covenant"). Now, Islam has a tendency to tell that the Bible is falsified - and strangely: - always in ways which happen to omit points that would under build Islam if it had not been falsified, never the other way around, even though the claimed falsifications even according to Islam were made long before Muhammad, and thus before one had to falsify him and his teaching out of the religion. Also they frequently tell that scriptures have disappeared - always the scriptures that are said to be like the Quran and not the others, and not only that: All such texts have by a strange coincidence happened to get lost. Further: Science has over the years accumulated some 13ooo texts or fragments relevant to the Bible plus some 32ooo with references to or quotes from the Bible. All have been in accordance with the Bible or have been easy to understand with relevance to the Bible – and none have been “unsanctified” with texts Islam claims should be there, but which simply does not exist among all the ones found - some have even given deeper insight, so it has been possible to correct details in translations.

    Finally: There are also found a number of old scriptures relying to, or copies of, the Quran. But anything which is not like the texts of today is obscured by the Muslims. The star example of this is the “Quran grave” - resting place for worn out Quran scrolls - found in Yemen in 1972. Scientists and scientific methods from the West made it possible to read them, but when it turned out that there were "small, but significant" divergences from the texts of today, further access to the scrolls were denied, except for some selected not “dangerous” parts. This even if anyone who knows the history of the Quran knows that the statement: “The Quran of today is to the last letter and the last comma identical with what Gabriel told Muhammad” is not true.

    Honesty?

    062 42/10c: "In Him (Allah*) I (Muhammad*) trust, and to Him I return". Three possible comments: If Allah does not exist and Muhammad knew it: Muhammad cheated his followers to get power, etc. If Allah do not exist, but Muhammad believed so (f.x. because of his possible illness - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy, TLE). Or if Allah existed in the dark forces, but had cheated Muhammad to believe he was a god - f.x. by impersonating Gabriel: Poor Muhammad if there is a next life. The possibility that Allah exists and is a god in reality is not possible if he is behind the Quran - no god is involved in a claimed holy book of that quality.

    063 43/62: "Let not Satan hinder you (to reach the god*) - - -". Again we are touching this impolite, but - if supernatural beings exist - not impossible theory: Are the dark forces/Satan the real creator of the Quran? Parts of f.x its moral, ethical, war, and judicial codes after all may indicate this. And if Iblis/the Devil dressed up like Gabriel, Muhammad had not the slightest chance to see the difference.

    ###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 agument 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?

    064 44/5-6: "For We (Allah*) (ever) send (revelations), as a Mercy from thy (Muhammad's? Muslims'? People's?) Lord (Allah*) - - -". But a number of the claimed revelations are wrong and cannot be from an omniscient god. Also the contents of some of them looks like sent from dark forces and not from a good and benevolent god, a fact which gives food to the suspicion that Muhammad did not meet Gabriel, but someone from the dark forces dressed up like Gabriel - a mere human would not have a chance to see the difference.

    065 53/5b: “- - - one Mighty in Power (Allah - by means of the angel Gabriel*) - - -.” But is Allah mighty in power? – there is not one single proof for that. Lots and lots of words – even big words – but not one single proof. NB: It also may be that "one mighty in power" here means the angel Gabriel himself, not Allah.

    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 agument 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?

    ###066 46/8c: “Say: ’Had I (Muhammad*) forged it (the Quran*), then can ye obtain no single (blessing) for me from Allah.” What an unbeatable proof!!!

    Actually Muhammad is said to have "proved" that he was a prophet, by answering 3 cryptic questions brought by Uqbab Abu Mu’ayt from Jewish rabbis in Medina - he got the answers from Allah via Gabriel. The first one concerned the “seven sleepers”. Any god had known the story is made up - a Christian legend (some Muslims say it is copied from an older Jewish legend, but it is as wrong anyhow) - but Muhammad did not know this. The second concerned Alexander the Great (Dhu’l Quarnayn - an Arab name for him) - and Muhammad answered fairy tales any god had known were wrong. The third concerned the Holy Spirit - and Muhammad had no real answer. But the conclusion after the fiasco (it was not documented then that it was a big fiasco) was clear: The story was taken to be an unmistakable proof for that Muhammad was a prophet. Worse: EVEN TODAY WHEN WE EASILY SEE WHAT IS WRONG, MUSLIMS REFUSES TO ADMIT THE OBVIOUS AND TRY TO EXPLAIN THE ERRORS AWAY - AND RECKON THE WRONG INFORMATION AS SURE PROOF OF HIS BEING A REAL PROPHET, IN SPITE OF THAT NO GOD HAD GIVEN HIM ANSWERS SO FAR FROM THE REALITY. It should be a matter of doubt for any thinking person - but then Muslims are not taught how to think, but only to accept and obey. This really is an interesting “proof”.

    Besides: The criteria for really being a prophet, are:

    1. Have the gift of and close enough connection to a god for making prophesies.
    2. Makes prophesies which always or at least mostly come true.
    3. Makes so frequent and/or essential prophesies, that it is a clear part of his mission.

     

    A few things Muhammad said, came true – like it has to do for a person saying many things through many years – and most of what he said which did not come true, was forgotten (also this is what normally happens if it is nothing spectacular). But he did not see the future correctly often - actually he statistically and according to the laws of probability should have "hit the mark" far more often by sheer chance than he did - there just are a few cases where Muslims will claim he foretold something correctly, and few if any of them are "perfect hits". But then the Quran makes it pretty clear that even though he was intelligent, he had little fantasy and that he also was nearly unable to make innovative thinking (nearly all his tales and his ideas in reality were "borrowed" ones - though often twisted to fit his new religion).

    The main things here are that Muhammad never indicated that anything of what he said was meant as prophesies, that he never indicated, not to mention claimed, that he had the gift of prophesying, that it nowhere is documented that all/most of what he said about the future came true (point 2 above), and finally that both he and Islam said and says that there were no miracles connected to Muhammad “except the Quran”; prophesying is a kind of miracle -seeing what has not yet happened). (This fact that Islam admits there were no miracle connected to Muhammad also is a solid proof for that all the miracles connected to Muhammad mentioned in the Hadiths, are made up stories). Also see 30/40a and 30/46a, and we also should add that his favorite wife (and infamous child wife) Aisha according to Hadiths (f. x. Al-Bukhari) states that anyone saying Muhammad could foresee things, were wrong.

    Verse 7/188b also is very relevant here: "If I (Muhammad*) had knowledge of the Unseen (= what is hidden and what has not happened yet*), I should have - - -". IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT MUHAMMAD DID NOT HAVE THE PROPHETS' ABILITY TO SEE "THE UNSEEN" - he was no real prophet.

    Also relevant here is that the original title of the Jewish prophets was not "prophet" but "seer" - one who saw at least parts of the unseen. (F. x. 1. Sam. 9/9, 1. Chr. 26/28, 1.Chr.29/29, Amos 7/12, Mic. 3/7 - some places the two titles even are used side by side). Muhammad so definitely was no seer - prophet - even according to his own words; he had no "knowledge of the unseen".

    Many liked the title prophet, and there have been made other definitions for the name - the most common of these are "one who brings messages from a god", or "one who represents a god", or "one who acts/talks on behalf of a god". But the fact remains: Without being able to prophesy, he or she is no real prophet. A messenger for someone or something - ok. An apostle - ok. But not a real prophet.

    ###And this is a fact no Muslim will admit: Muhammad in reality simply was no real prophet or seer. Perhaps a messenger for someone or something or for himself – or perhaps an apostle – but not a real prophet. He only “borrowed” that impressive and imposing title. It is up to anyone to guess why.

    Also see 30/40 and 30/46.

    067 47/2c: "- - - (Revelation) - - -". Was it really revelation? - or was it an illness, like TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) like modern medical science believes? - or was it all made up by Muhammad or some? - or a mixture of this, f.x. some TLE and some made up? And if it was revelation, then from whom? All the mistakes prohibit a god. The partly horrible moral codes, laws and rules for waging war and parts of the sharia laws may indicate dark forces - and Muhammad would not have a chance recognizing Iblis - the Devil - dressed up like the Arch Angel Gabriel. But would even a devil make a book with so much wring facts, etc.? - he had to know that sooner or later he would be looked through. There also are all the mistakes which are correct compared to wrong knowledge one had at the time of Muhammad, and all the tales, etc. taken from in and around Arabia at that time, which both cry: Made by man at the time of Muhammad - perhaps by Muhammad himself.

    What is sure is that no book as full of errors, etc. as the Quran, is from no omniscient god.

    068 53/5b: “- - - one Mighty in Power (Allah - by means of the angel Gabriel*) - - -.” But is Allah mighty in power? – there is not one single proof for that. Lots and lots of words – even big words – but not one single proof. NB: It also may be that "one mighty in power" here means the angel Gabriel himself, not Allah.

    ####069 53/6-9: "he" in these 4 verses is the angel Gabriel. It may be noteworthy that even as often as Gabriel is mentioned as the one giving Muhammad his claimed messages, Muslim scholars say Muhammad saw him "in his real shape" only 2 times - once early during Muhammad's claimed mission, and once during Muhammad's claimed trip to the 7 heavens. (A trip which most likely was a dream or made up (little known Islamic scriptures + the lack of elaboration in the Quran strongly indicate that is a story made up after the death of Muhammad - f.x. his pet wife and famous child wife Aisha, told that he never left her bed that night, according to Hadiths. Or even more likely it is a made up legend based on 17/1 and nothing else - a verse which likely talks about a trip Muhammad made from the mosque in a neighboring town with a mosque (al-Jirana some 9 miles/15 km from Mecca) to Kabah in Mecca - and definitely nothing about any ascension to the 7 heavens or meeting with Biblical prophets. Old Muslim scriptures indicate this - a fact Muslims NEVER mention. What is for sure is that if it had been real and even distantly as essential as claimed, it had been thoroughly described in the Quran - it had been a real proof (though without witnesses) for contact with a god.)

    ####It also might be noteworthy that there nowhere in the Quran is indicated that Gabriel = The Holy Spirit. This is a claim made up by later Muslims.)

    ####And then there is the curious fact that Muhammad never mention the name Gabriel until after he came to Medina. One may wonder why. It is psychologically impossible that he did not mention him to his surroundings if he really met Gabriel - it had been such a strong argument, and this even more so as he was strongly pressed for documentation for connection to a god. Yes, even if he was cheated by f.x. a mental disorder, but honestly believed he had met Gabriel, there is no chance he had not told about it - at that time he really needed all arguments he could find.

    One possible explanation is that he did not get the idea of introducing Gabriel before.

    070 53/13b: "For indeed he (Muhammad*) saw him (the angel Gabriel*) at a second descent". What the Quran here says, is that Muhammad saw Gabriel coming down for a second time. But some scholars claim that what it really means (f. x. A53/9 - in the English 2008 edition 53/10 and changed explanation) is that Muhammad saw Gabriel in his real shape for the second time - like so often it seems that Allah was unable to express himself clearly and correctly, and has to be corrected by humans. As for "second descent" - see 53/6-9 above.

    071 54/13c: "For indeed he (Muhammad*) saw him (Gabriel*) at a second descent - - -". This was at the start of Muhammad's claimed or dreamed trip to the 7 (not existing) heavens, according to many Muslim scholars. But see 53/6-9 above.

    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 agument 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?

    #072 57/14f: "- - - the Deceiver - - -". The Devil. (One impolite, but relevant comment here, is that one of the theories for who really created the Quran, is that it was Iblis/the Devil, who then dressed up like Gabriel and gave it to Muhammad. Muhammad would not have had the slightest chance to see the difference. The inhuman parts of the Quran may indicate this, but personally we are skeptical, as not even a devil would make up a book where so much is wrong - not unless this was a condition from the god to permit such a hoax: Lots of mistakes etc. to enable thinking persons to evade the trap.

    ####073 63/5a: "- - - the Messenger of Allah - - -". Here something is wrong if Allah is a god. No omniscient god ever sent a messenger with so much wrong information, so many contradictions, so many cases of invalid logic, so many cases of unclear language, etc. like Muhammad and his Quran. And no good and benevolent god ever sent a messenger with such a bloody, inhuman, dishonest (al-Taqiyya, Kitman, Hilah, deceive, break your oaths, betray, etc.), lying even in the Quran (f.x. "miracles will make no-one believe anyhow"), steal-and-rob, suppress others, and partly (highly) immoral teaching like the one of Muhammad and his Quran. If Allah sent him as a messenger, then Allah is neither an omniscient, nor a good and benevolent god, but something from the dark forces pretending to be a god and sending something pretending to be an angel to tell Muhammad this and that ###(if Gabriel was not a later good idea and a made up claim - Muhammad did not name him in the Quran until after he fled to Medina, something which sounds extremely unlikely if Muhammad really had met him). (As it is possible Allah is real, but from dark forces, we classify Muhammad's claim to be his messenger not as obviously wrong (it only is obviously wrong that he is the messenger of an omniscient and good/benevolent god) but as likely wrong, as Muhammad may have been the representative of a dark Allah - though even this is unlikely, as even not a dark Allah would make so many mistakes, etc. in his "holy" book, as the mistakes, etc. would be found out sooner or later and his credibility destroyed, except perhaps if the low quality was a condition from the god for permitting him trying to deceive humans).

    074 66/4c: "- - - truly Allah is his (Muhammad's*) Protector - - -". The same old fact: Only if Allah exists and is something supernatural. The same goes for Gabriel, who is not necessarily (unlikely) Yahweh's arch angel Gabriel, even if the name is the same. This will especially be the case if Muhammad's Gabriel in reality was someone from the dark forces, dressed up like Gabriel.

    075 66/4d: "- - - truly Allah is his (Muhammad's*) Protector, and Gabriel, and (every) righteous one among those who believe - and furthermore, the angels will back him up". Muhammad had a formidable protection and help against his wives and others!

    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 agument 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?

    076 67/9b: "- - - (message (the Quran*)) - - -". If it is a message, then from whom? No god ever was involved in a book that full of errors. Then remain: Dark forces (f.x. the Devil dressed up like the angel Gabriel - Muhammad would have no chance to see the difference). A sick brain (f.x. TLE - Temporal Lobe Epilepsy - like modern medical science suspects, which can give illusions and symptoms like Muhammad is said to have experienced. Or one or more cold and scheming brain(s) liking power - f.x. Muhammad's own. Those are the alternatives.

    077 70/4a: “The angels and the Spirit (“ruh” in the Arab text) - - -.” The word “ruh” is used a few times in the Arab text – at least in 16/2, 78/38, 97/4c and here. It likely means “the Spirit” or “the Holy Spirit”, but is f.x. in 16/2 given another translation (“inspiration”). A number of Muslims wants it to be another name for the angel Gabriel (simply because it was he who was said to bring down the surahs to Muhammad, and it is said a couple of places that the “ruh” – the Spirit or Holy Spirit – brought down such ones, “ergo” the Holy Spirit = the angel Gabriel). But the logic is not correct – by means of the rules of logical deductions it is possible only to say they may be the same. And here is another piece of information which makes that deduction unlikely or impossible: The “ruh” – the Holy Spirit” - is not included among the angels. Neither is it the other places – which makes it highly unlikely logically that the Holy Spirit is an angel - the angel Gabriel. (In the Bible it is clear they are not the same).

    ####078 74/11c: (YA5784): "The question of Justice and Punishment to men is for Allah alone. For man at his best (also Muslims*) can see only one side of the truth, and only Allah is All-Knowing". Muslims - f.x. Muhammad and judges or terrorists - should remember this. They also should remember that this is even more true if the claimed Truth in the Quran is not true or if Allah is a made up god, not to mention if he is something real, but something from dark forces dressed up like Gabriel or a god, like parts of the Quran and parts of its moral code may indicate.

    This point should have had impact on the moral code in Islam, but is overlooked by all militant Muslims.

    079 78/38b: "That Day shall the Spirit and the angels stand forth - - -". It is unclear what the Spirit her is. You will find it translated as the souls (of the people), but more common it to believe it is the Holy Spirit from the Bible (it is mentioned a very few times in the Quran). Some go one step further and say that it must be the angel Gabriel, as he is the Holy Spirit. This is a claim - as always from Islam not proved - you often meet from Muslims, at least from lower educated ones, ####even though it is not from the Quran. Our short comment is that no-one who really has read the Bible, would ever get such an idea - not unless he had decided if before he started reading and skipped reading what did not fit his idea. How could f.x. an angel split (parts of) himself in 12 at Pentecost (Acts 2/3-4)? A spirit can split itself, but not an angel.

    ##########Besides this verse kills the claim that Gabriel was another name for the Holy Spirit. Gabriel was an angel according to both the Bible and to the Quran. Here the Quran says "the Spirit and the angels" = the spirit is not an angel. Thus according to the Quran and this verse, Gabriel cannot be the Holy Spirit.

    080 78/38c: (YA5911): "Some(!*) Commentators understand by 'the Spirit' the angel Gabriel, as he is charged specially with bringing Messages to human prophets". An interesting piece of information, as this is neither from the Quran nor from the Bible, and arch angel Gabriel also hardly is mentioned as a messenger boy in connection with Biblical prophets. (But the claim of course makes Muhammad look like a prophet at this point as he claimed he god his messages via Gabriel.) Also see 78/38b just above.

    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 agument 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?

    081 81/19c: “Verily, this is the word of a most honorable Messenger - - -". As the text - like so often in the Quran - is not quite specific, this Messenger also might mean Gabriel (or perhaps someone or something dressed up like Gabriel? - Muhammad would not have a chance to see the difference, and parts of the Quran and also of its moral code are pretty devilish*) or someone else, but the Quran is not the words of the Gabriel from the Bible.

    082 81/19ca: "- - - a most honorable messenger - - -". Who is this? The glorious words indicate Muhammad. Many Muslims claim it is Gabriel - but no name is mentioned and no indication given. And it might have been any other "honorable messenger" - an omnipotent god has many messengers. Clear speech in the Quran?

    083 81/19-20: "- - - a most honorable Messenger (Muhammad?*), Endued with Power - - -". If it here is indicated any supernatural power, this is wrong. (If Gabriel is meant, it may be ok.) It is very clear from the Quran that Muhammad had no supernatural power (and that consequently f.x. the miracles he performed according to Hadiths are fairy tales). It may refer to that he is promised the power of interceding for others on the Day of Doom. But also see 81/19c above - if this refers to Gabriel, the words about power may be easier to explain. As mentioned before: The language in the Quran often is unclear, in spite of that Islam claims the clearness of its language is so extreme, that it is a proof for that it is made by a god (what does then the reality of hundreds of points so unclear that even Muslim scholars do not understand what it means, or disagree on the meaning or have to say that all possible logical meanings of a point or a sentence or a verse are right, even if the possible meanings vary wildly - what does this fact then prove?)

    Another point is that it is unclear who this messenger is. The two logical possibilities are Muhammad or Gabriel, but also others are possible, but an omniscient god had been able to specify.

    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?

    084 81/20a: "- - - with rank before the Lord of the Throne". = With a rank over the others at the Day of Doom. One of the many, many claims Muhammad was unable to prove - but for the ones who believed him, this gave him status and authority. True or not - what often counts more than the truth, is what people believe. (But it is possible here is not meant Muhammad, but Gabriel or someone - see 81/19c above).

    085 81/21a: "(Muhammad*) With authority there (in Heaven*)". Another place in the Quran Muhammad tells he has permission to speak on the Day of Doom. Believe such things if you want, but first see 81/20 just above.

    But perhaps here is meant Gabriel or someone, not Muhammad - not clear language.

    086 81/21b: "(Muhammad is*) faithful to his trust - - -". See 81/19b above.

    But perhaps here is meant Gabriel or someone, not Muhammad - not clear language.

    087 81/23b: "- - - without doubt he (Muhammad*) saw him (Gabriel?*) on the horizon". This likely refers to Muhammad's claim that he ones saw the angel Gabriel with his 600 wings on the horizon. 600 wings may sound impressive for uneducated people only knowing how fast birds can go with just 2 wings. But 600 wings would create so much turbulence that Gabriel in case would fall like a sack of meat - there is a good reason why both birds and planes only have 2 wings. Any god would know this, but Muhammad not. Then who made the Quran?

    Another small point here is that you will not find one single place in the Bible where angels are described with wings. Seraphs yes. Cherubs yes. Ordinary angels no - and Gabriel was an angel both according to the Bible and to the Quran. (The wings of the angels were created by artists in the 3. and 4. century AD, simply because it was the only means those artists knew for flying - it is not from the Bible). If angels are spiritual beings or souls, they may not need wings for flying. One more difference between the Quran and the Bible?

    088 92/17a: "But those most devoted to Allah shall be far removed from it (hell*) - - -". If Allah exists, and if he is a good and benevolent god (and nor f.x. Iblis/the Devil dressed up like the arch angel Gabriel).

    089 97/4e: (YA6219): "The Spirit: Usually understood to be the angel Gabriel, the Spirit of Inspiration". Quite another meaning than the one(s) in 97/4b above.

    And in addition: No-one who has ever read the Bible with an open mind, has ever got the idea the Spirit (= the Holy Spirit) was another name for the arch angel Gabriel - to find such a meaning in the Bible, you have to have strong and fixes ideas before you start reading. For one thing it is clear from all contexts that the Holy Spirit is something different from everything else and something special. For another the functions are different - how could f.x. an angel split himself in 12 at Pentecost - or be part of many disciples (the helper Jesus promised them before he left them). And not least: It is very clear that the Bible knows the difference between angles and spirits - there never is a mix-up of those two (also hardly in the Quran - but Muslim scholars have found a "good" idea anyhow, even though it is neither in the Bible, nor in the Quran). #####The Holy Spirit = Gabriel is not found neither in the Bible nor in the Quran - and is anti-thesis to the contexts and the texts in the Bible. For good measure see 94/4f just below.

    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 agument 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?

    #####090 97/4f: "Therein came down the angels and the Spirit - - -". The (Holy*) Spirit - here like in the Bible - is not an angel, and thus has to be mentioned separately. A verification in the Quran for that the Holy Spirit is not the angel Gabriel. Remember here that it also nowhere in the Quran is said or indicated that the Holy Spirit = Gabriel - this never documented claim is a later invention made by Muslims, and only based on the fact that the Quran tells Gabriel brought Muhammad messages, but also that the Holy Spirit a few times did so - - - which according to Muslims/Islam "must" mean the Holy Spirit = Gabriel. This deduction is far outside all rules for logically correct deductions.

    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 agument 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?

    90 + 2732 = 2822 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


     

    98.  AL-GHAZALI - A CENTRAL LATER MUSLIM SCHOLAR

    For very natural reasons al-Ghazali - full name Abu Hamed Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Ghazali (1058 AD - Des. 1111 AD) - is not mentioned in the Quran. But as he is so central for Islam, he all the same is relevant here.

    Al-Ghazali is by Islam called the greatest Muslim after Muhammad. He was a scholar and his most famous book, "On the Incoherence of the Philosophers" over some time killed the Islamic culture's search for new knowledge. Among other effects this for one thing was one of the facts which made the Islamic culture stagnate, and for another thus gave Europe time to catch up and then take over the leadership in the world.

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

    001 1/7b: (A1/4): “- - - those whose (portion) is not (Allah’s*) wrath - - -.” To whom does “those” who gets the wrath refer to here? f.x. Al- Ghazali and Muhammad Abduh mean it is those that have left Islam. Others have other definitions - often sinners or non-Muslims. It is still debated after 1400 years. Clear speech? (An extra point: You meet claims that no-one leaves Islam. Here it is confirmed by Islam that it does happen - and especially Al-Ghazali was and is a real heavy-weight in Islam, "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad". He must be speaking the truth. It also is a reality that many leave Islam today (just look at Internet), even though it may be dangerous - Muhammad ordered that such persons were to be killed, and it still happens, as there "is no compulsion in religion" or in Islam. (correct quotation: "Let there be no contradiction in religion" - an order or a wish, not a fact.)

    #002 2/7b: “Allah hath set seal on their (non-Muslims*) hearts and on their hearing, and on their eyes a veil; great is the penalty they (incur).” Do they really incur it when it is according to Allah’s plan (see 6/107)? - and when Allah destroys their possibilities for seeing that they are wrong (if they are wrong)? Some Muslims (f.x. A2/7) even claim - like mostly without documentation - that "it is a natural law instituted by Allah" that if you lie, after some time you lose the ability to see the truth (thought-provoking for Islam and it's al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), Hilah (the lawful pretending/circumventing), deceits, and Muhammad's advices in the Quran about breaking even your oaths if that gives a better result?), which is untrue, as it only becomes easier to resort to lies. What kind of god is this? One more Muslim loose claim (f.x. Azad: If you reject Allah, "the result (is*) that the spiritual faculties become dead - - -". Some claim from a culture and a religion which brought forth not one single new idea benefiting humanity at least 850 years from 1095 AD and "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad; al-Ghazali and his killing of philosophy/new thinking - use of spiritual faculties - (by means of his book "On the Incoherence of the Philosophers"). (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.)

    Well, on thinking it over, it may be true anyhow: "- - - that if you lie, after some time you lose the ability to see the truth, (thought-provoking for Islam and it's al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), Hilah (the lawful pretending/circumventing), deceits, and Muhammad's advices in the Quran about breaking even your oaths if that gives a better result?)- - -". Thought provoking.

    003 2/171b: "- - - those who reject Faith are as if one was deaf, dumb, and blind, they are void of all wisdom". Here it may be relevant to think of what happened in the religious Muslim middle ages: All knowledge not related to religion little by little were frozen out or forbidden. From 1095 AD on (partly because of the book "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" by "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad", Al-Ghazali) there did not come one single new idea or thought which could benefit humanity for some 800 years from central and eastern Muslim area (in the western area the freeze came ca. 100 years later). No more comment.

    A ps. about al-Ghazali: Full name Abu Hamed Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Ghazali (1058 AD - Des. 1111 AD). To be very short he vehemently rejected science and philosophy (thinking), partly because persons like Aristotle, Socrates, etc. were non-Muslims, and their ideas thus could corrupt Islam. It instead was Allah who made everything happen. Not strange that no new ideas came for the better part of a millennium from Muslim area.

    004 3/18c: "- - - those endued with knowledge - - -". = good Muslims. As non-religious knowledge had little value, it was the religious knowledge - Islam - which counted. And this so strictly that intellectual activity outside Islam and related subjects became more or less prohibited, with the final closed down in 1095 AD with the book "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" by "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad", al-Ghazali. (It took some 100 years more in the far west.) Also see 13/3j below.

    005 3/21e: "- - - those - - - who slay the prophets, and slay those who teach just dealing with mankind - - -" = non-Muslims, may be especially Jews (Christians should go free here, as the known prophets lived before this religion started, except for Jesus, and he was not killed by Christians). This with slaying the prophets is an often repeated black spot, but if you read the Bible, you will see that in reality few of the known prophets were slain. But it is a very good and heavy argument when speaking to people not knowing this. And as for "teaching just dealing with mankind" - was the Muslim "dealing with mankind" through history "just"? - only the ones who do not know history - or Muslims - can answer "yes" to this question - and Muslims only because most of them only have been told a very colored story about how heroic their heroes have been and how Muslims have won and have been rich and mighty and how "just and good" everything have been - totally without empathy with the victims or giving even one thought to how life - or death - became for the victims, not to mention total destruction of whole cultures, and the slowness of the rebuilding of culture and civilization in spite of Islam and its struggle against all knowledge not related to religion - cfr. fanatics like al-Ghazali. A rebuilding which finally had to take place in the West - outside the old area of culture from the eastern Mediterranean to India (China stagnated for other reasons). The old cultural center in what we call the Middle East simply was destroyed as a center for knowledge, and a new one had to be built from scratch in Europe. One may wonder what had happened to the world, if f.x. Persia and other cultural centers in the region had not been destroyed, and later again had its science, philosophy and knowledge suppressed around 1100 AD after a partial rebuilding. From the Muslim area there came not one single new idea or thought which could benefit humanity after ca. 1100 AD - a little later in the western Muslim area.

    006 3/22b: "They (non-Muslims*) are those whose work will bear no fruit in this world and in the Hereafter - - -." Wrong. At least in this world history has shown the Quran very wrong on this point - all real progress for mankind in this world for hundreds of years have come from outside the Muslim area. As for the possible next world, we have no real knowledge - beliefs and even strong beliefs and beliefs in many directions and religions included Islam, yes, but no real knowledge. It must also be mentioned that "knowledge" is a very weighty word which everybody wants connected to themselves. You see this in the obvious way also the Quran and Islam try to high-jack the word: If they have no real knowledge based on discovered facts, they try to tell that strong ideas, strong beliefs, strong wishful thinking = knowledge. Because somebody you believe in have told you so, you call things "knowledge" - without checking if it is true, they claim "instinctive 'knowledge'" (= thoughts or conclusions corresponding with your own ideas - much stressed by f.x. Islam), and also other names of non-scientific "knowledge". You even frequently meet the claim that this kind of "knowledge" is the real knowledge, and that scientific knowledge is something suspect - a point of view often peddled by f.x. religious groups where science shows they are on thin ice or wrong on some or many points - like Islam. Muslims is one of the groups who pooh-pooh fact based science, because such science often shows Islam to be wrong (cfr. all the mistakes, etc. in the Quran, or f.x. al-Ghazali's ideas of a good intellectual culture) - a pose it is not too difficult to defend because in the forefront of science there always will emerge theories which later turns out to be wrong - science checks and corrects and goes on, but the ones who cling to their own ideas, picks up the discarded wrong theories: "This was wrong and this was wrong and this was wrong - that means all was and is wrong, but our never checked ideas or wishful thinking are right!"

    They NEVER mention the simple fact that a scientist simply is a person knowing much about what he is talking about, and that mostly he, therefore, is right.

    007 3/164h: "- - - Wisdom - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it normally means religious wisdom (= Islam). All sciences not related to Islam, in reality were disliked or stronger by Muslim leaders, who fought against such "foreign knowledge" - and finally won that war in 1095 AD with the book "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" by "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad", al-Ghazali. (It took another some 100 years in the far west).

    008 9/17d: "The work of such (non-Muslims*) bear no fruit - - -". For one thing it is the work of non-Muslims which has caused most of the progress for man in this world, and for another Yahweh and the Bible disagree strongly when it comes to persons who believe in the Bible.

    It is a fact that in the period from ca. 610 AD to ca. 1900 AD hardly any thought or idea which could benefit humanity came from Muslims. In the period 800 AD - or really from around 820 AD till 1095 AD and the book "On the incoherence of the Philosophers" by "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad", al Ghazali, there came some, but nearly all of it just translated from Greek and Persian, but after all some from Muslim thinkers. From 1095 AD till into the 1300s-1400s there still came some - still a lot translated from mainly Greek and Persian, but some also from the Muslim area, BUT FROM NON-MUSLIMS - OFTEN JEWS - LIVING THERE, BUT AS THEY WROTE IN ARAB, MUSLIMS OF TODAY GIVE ISLAM THE HONOUR FOR IT. Later there was nothing. The plain reality is that in the time from 1095 AD and far into the 1900s there did not come one idea or thought of any essence which could benefit humanity from a Muslim. That is the fruit of the Muslim society through 1400 years.

    If Muslims had set the pace, the world today had lived in the 12. century if the Muslims had access to old Greek, Persian, and Indian (f.x. "Arab numbers in reality are from India), etc. If not we had lived around the 8. or 9. century today. So much for the fruit of Muslim new thoughts, ideas, inventions, etc.

    009 9/122c: "- - - studies in religion - - -". This is typical for Islam: What counts of knowledge is the religion and things that can strengthen the religion - f.x. astronomy (necessary to place the religious days in the Islamic drifting year) etc. The Muslim area - not Islam, but the Muslim area - had a period from ca. 820 AD till 1095 AD (ca. 1198 in Muslim Spain) when science flourished, but it mostly was in spite of Islam, not because of. Islam split sciences in two: Islamic sciences - the Quran + sciences with relevance to the religion or to the study of the Quran. All other sciences - unbelievably also medicine - were "foreign sciences" and were fought against. Islam won the final battle in that war with a book against philosophy in 1095 AD "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" - by "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad", al-Ghazali - though in Muslim Spain the end did not come until ca. 1198 AD. After that there did not come on single new thought or idea which could benefit humanity from all the Islamic area until far into the 20th century. Literally speaking not a single one. You meet Muslims boasting about Islam's golden time of science. It is mainly untrue, as mostly it was against Islam's will and at times very strong opposition, not because of the religion. Even today a demand is - we quote from (A9/163) (translated from Swedish):"The duty for the believer is to 'make his knowledge deeper in the religion'".

    010 13/43h: "- - - knowledge - - -". Beware that when the Quran uses words like this, it nearly always mean religious knowledge about the Quran and Islam - knowledge not related to Islam, was "foreign knowledge" and disliked or worse, and was after long and ruthless fights and persecutions more or less finished from 1095 AD on (the book "On the Incoherence of the Philosophers" by "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad", al-Ghazali. (It took ca. 100 more years to kill science and philosophy in Muslim Spain and that area.)

    011 17/26a: One of the good points in Islam - for after all there are a few good points, too - is the insistence on helping the poor. There are some very telling aspects to this side of Islam, though:

    1. The one and only reason given for such kindness to others, is to gain merit with Allah. In many other religions the main point is empathy with the ones in difficulties - and the merit in Heaven is just a welcome extra plus. In the Quran "I" - my gaining of merit - am/is the central person/thing and the one moral reason. In f.x. the NT the care for and empathy with fellow humans is in the center for the moral behind your act, and the merit with Yahweh just a good, but after all secondary reason. You do not have to be much of a philosopher to see there is quite a difference here - but then all philosophy in Islam finally died in 1095 AD with the famous and infamous book against philosophy - thinking new thoughts - "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" by "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad", al-Ghazali, after a long starvation (well, it lingered on for about 100 more years in the far west - but from then on there came not one single new idea or new thought which could benefit man until far into the 20th century from the entire Islamic world). To say the least of it: There is a moral difference between: "I help others because I benefit from it", and: "I help others because I feel empathy with them".

    012 22/54c: "- - - knowledge - - -". Beware that when the Quran speaks about knowledge and similar words, it normally always means religious knowledge. Islam as a religion always have been in opposition to non-religious knowledge (called "foreign knowledge" as opposed to "Islamic knowledge" which means the religion itself + topics which can help in the understanding or practicing of the religion - like Arab, astronomy (to pin down religious dates in their moving year), etc.). Arab/Muslim culture had a period of some 300 years from ca. 820 AD till 1095 AD (ca. 100 years more in the far vest) when science flowered - but mainly in spite of Islam, not because of Islam. And the religion won the final battle over science and knowledge in 1095 with a book by "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad" - al-Ghazali).

    013 25/9e: "- - - never a way (to Paradise) will they (skeptics to Muhammad*) be able to find!" If Islam is a made up religion - f.x. by Muhammad partly inspired by an illness (see 25/8b above) - the skeptics stand a better chance so find such a way if it exists, than any Muslim, Muhammad and al-Ghazali included. Because what is sure, is that the Quran with all its errors is not from any god - Allah or a baby one or any other. No omniscient god makes mistakes or contradictions, etc. and so absolutely not by the hundreds and more.

    014 26/83a: "- - - wisdom - - -". Beware that when the Quran talks about wisdom, knowledge or similar, it nearly always is about knowledge about the Quran and Islam + a few sciences which were helpful to the religion, like Arab (to understand the Quran) or astronomy (to keep track of religious days in Islam's moving year - it is some 11 days shorter than the natural year so that 100 natural years = ca. 103 Muslim years). This was "Islamic knowledge".

    All other sciences - included even medicine - were "foreign knowledge" and thus an enemy to the religion. The Muslim area had a period from around 820 AD to 1095 AD (ca. 100 years more in the far west) when sciences at times flowered, but it was in spite of Islam, not because of Islam, and Islam finally won and killed all scientific thinking not related to the Muslim religion. The final battle was won by the book "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" in 1095 by "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad" according to Islam, al-Ghazali. For some 800-900 years there did not come one single new idea or thought which could benefit humanity from all the Islamic area (even today nearly all new ideas, new thoughts, new inventions, new products in the Islamic world are imported ones - many of them strictly against Islam's wishes). In spite of these facts Islam grabs all glory for saving the old knowledge from the old Greece, Persia, etc. - - - this even though the plain story is that this happened against Islam's wishes and even strong opposition and at times bloody persecution - it is like giving the Inquisition the honor for the Renaissance in Europe. And also remember that old knowledge also came from Constantinople before it was conquered and massacred by the invading Muslim Turks - a fact no Muslim mentions.

    If Islam gains the upper hand in the world, one must be prepared for a similar stagnant existence - conservative Islam still fights all "foreign knowledge".

    But then what do you need f.x. medicine for, if Allah already has predestined your future or death? - you only insult Him by using medicine by trying to disturb his Plan.

    015 29/49e: "- - - those endowed with knowledge - - -". Comment YA3479: "'Knowledge' ('ilm) means both power of judgment in discerning the value of truth and acquaintance with previous revelations." As we have mentioned several places, words like knowledge in Islam only means knowledge related to religion and the Quran/Islam. Other knowledge was "foreign knowledge" and unwanted (and more or less came to an end in Muslim area in 1095 AD - a century later in the far vest - with the book "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" by "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad", al-Ghazali.

    Besides YA here is wrong: "Knowledge" represents the facts. The rest - the ability to evaluate the knowledge - is "wisdom".

    016 33/62b: “Such (to kill non-Muslims not living according to Islam’s laws of suppression of non-Muslims*) was the practice (approved) of Allah among the ones that lived aforetime: ####no change wilt thou find in the practice (approved) of Allah (now or in the future*)”. If Islam/Muslims grow strong enough some time, this is what to expect, according to their holy book - "no change" of course. How had the world looked today, if the industrial revolution with its superior weapons, ships and economic and military superiority had happened in the Muslim area? - Islam has no moral, ethical, empathetically, ideological or philosophical ideas against suppressing other people - on the contrary it is a religious duty. Actually Islam has no moral or ethical philosophy at all - that was decided once and for all before 1100 AD by the religion, with al Ghazali - "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad" - as the grave digger with his book "The Incoherence of the Philosophers". (There were a few thinkers for some more time - about 100 more years - in Spain, but they got little influence on the mainstream Islam).

    017 35/8a: “Is he, then, to whom the evil of his conduct is made alluring (non-Muslims*) - - - (equal to one who is 'rightly guided'*)?” Of course not - Muslims are much better, of course. This even though the famous Muslim al-Ghazali (1058 - 1111 AD) - "the greatest Muslim after Muhammad", according to Islam - marked the end of any new thinking in any science not helpful for Islam, in the eastern and central Muslim world with his book "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" against philosophy in 1095 AD. For more than (800 years there did not come one single new thought or idea bringing humanity forward in any kind of science, "humanoria" included, from the entire Muslim world, Maghreb/Spain excluded. (There the ability and freedom to think yourself lasted another ca. 100 years - the death of Ibn Rushd (Averroes) in 1198 can arbitrarily be said to mark the end there). Not one single new thought or new idea in over 800 years!!! Among now some 1.6 BILLION people!!! Yes, it has really to be said: It is difficult to match Muslims and Islam.

    Actually new ideas some places for long times meant punishment or even death penalty, though after some time it was agreed on that new ideas building on the Quran and the Hadiths could be accepted, but all other ideas were “Bad new thoughts” and negative or even punishable.

    Quite another point is that much of what the Quran makes alluring, good deeds, morally right, etc. collide head on with the essence of the fundamental moral code: "Do to others like you want others do to you". Compare the Quran's moral code - and the sharia laws - to this, and you will understand why some believe the real maker of the Quran, is the dark forces.

    018 45/21b: “What! Do those who seek after evil ways (non-Muslims*) think We (Allah*) shall hold them equal with those who believe (Muslims*) and do righteous deeds - - -?” Except for that there is a question whether it is a righteous deed, f.x. for a thousand years to give their believers education only in Muslim sciences - all knowledge that was needed to study Islam, mainly religion and Arab and related knowledge - but block as many believers as possible from all “foreign sciences” = all other knowledge, which was the case at least from al-Ghazali ("The Incoherence of the Philosophers") at the end of the 11th century (in Spain about 100 years later) - except for things like that, may be the Quran is right: Muslims are the top of qualities.

    18 + 2822 = 2840 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


     

    99.  GIDEON

    - not mentioned by name in the Quran, but likely mixed up with Saul/Talut.

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

    ###001 2/246h: "But when they were commanded to fight, they (Jews*) turned back, except a small band among them". It is unclear what this refers to - if it is not made up. It is not from the Bible (though it may - may - be a misunderstood reference to Gideon). But Muhammad Azad has an interesting comment: "- - - (it is*) a reminder to the believers (= Muslims*) of all times that "fighting in Allah's cause" (as defined in the Quran(!*)) is an act of faith". Is it possible to give terrorists and others a better "carte blanche"? And who will after such a clear statement deny that even today Islam is a religion of war?

    1253 2/249a: "When Talut (King Saul*) set forth with his armies, he said: 'Allah (more likely Yahweh*) will test you at the stream - - -'". This seems to be a mix-up of two stories in the Bible: Saul's wars with the Philistines, and Gideon's earlier war with the Midianites. Gideon had an episode where he chose his soldiers according to how they drank from the Jordan river - Judges 7/7 (he was to wise a general to ask his soldiers go thirsty into battle) - about Saul you find in 1.Samuel (David vs. Goliath in 1. Sam. 17/4-48). There is no similar episode involving King Saul. The Quran here has wrong man and wrong time.

    002 2/249c: The way the story is told in 2/249 has little to do with the Bible, and worse: For a test for whom were fit for taking part in the battle, it is meaningless, as the soldiers were told on beforehand which criteria would be used - criteria each and every one of them could fulfill. It might be a test for who wanted to come along, but not for who were fit for coming along.

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

    003 2/249d: "But they (Saul's - or Gideon's? - men*) all drank of it - - -". How can this be in the claimed "Mother Book" written may be billions of years before? Impossible - at least if man has the least grain of free will. See 2/51b.

    004 2/249f: “How oft, by Allah’s will, hath a small force vanquished a big one? Allah is with those who steadfastly persevere.” This contradicts the Bible. According to the Bible the Jews had no "small force". They had their full army on a hill, facing the Philistine army on a neighboring hill with a valley in between (1. Sam. 17/3). This situation remained for many (40) days (1. Sam. 17/1) before the youth David happened to be sent with food to his 3 brothers in Saul's army (1. Sam. 17/17-18) and there killed the giant Goliath, who had been calling on the Jews for a duel man-to-man to decide the war (in the old times it did happen that one or a few from each army was elected to fight it out as proxies for the whole armies - much less bloodshed). A bit different from the story in the Quran.

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

    4 + 2840 = 2844 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".