Humans, Other Beings in/Relevant to the Quran, Part 25

 

151.   Khadija - 1ST WIFE OF MUHAMMAD

Khadija was a rich older widow (45 years according to Islam) who married Muhammad when he was 25 around 695 AD. It is likely she had been married at least twice, and had at least 4 children from the earlier marriages.

There are a couple of mysteries connected to Khadija. She f.x. was 45 when she married Muhammad, and then got 6 children with him, which means she was well into her 50s when she got the last one - which is highly unlikely. More likely she either was younger when they married, or she her children from earlier marriages were taken over by Muhammad (not uncommon in the old times as children meant safety, food and clothes when you grew old). Science tends to believe in the second alternative.

And then there are the number of children. Muhammad had at least 36 women - possible rape victims not included (except Rayhana bint Amr, whom he first raped and then included in his harem, and Safiyya bint Huayay, whom he first raped and later married) - 11 long time wives, 16 short time wives, 2 concubines, and 7 one does not know if he was married to or not. In spite of all these women, he only got children with 2 of them, his first wife, Khadija (likely 6) and his slave Maria (1). Muhammad either was unable or nearly unable to produce children. There are these possibilities:

  1. Muhammad was not infertile, but for some reason or other became so after Khadija died.
  2. Muhammad was infertile and Khadija married him from convenience to be able to "cultivate" a connection to an "unlawful" man. Such things happened among the rich ones in the old times, and remember that before Islam sex and alcohol were "the two delightful things" among Arabs.
  3. As for Maria's child - Ibrahim - Muhammad perhaps was not 100% infertile, and one lucky time was able to make a child.
  4. Or Maria perhaps visited a more attractive man one - or more - dark night(s). Also a slave may have longings and feelings.

But if Fatima - the only claimed child of Muhammad to get descendants for the later times - was not a child of Khadija and Muhammad, none of the present claimed descendants of Muhammad, are his descendants. And the Shi'ia Muslims are wrong in their basic demand about that Muhammad's descendants should rule Islam.

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

001 29/48b: (A29/46): "It is historically established that Muhammad, the "unlettered prophet", could neither read nor write (not correct - science for several reasons believe this is not true, but an alibi Muhammad used against the ones who claimed he made up things himself - his statement was that as he could not read or write, he could not make up a book. Wrong logic because it is the brain, not the pen which makes up stories, but it worked*), and could not, therefore, have derived his extensive knowledge of the contents of earlier revelations from the Bible or other scriptures: which - as the Quran points out - ought to convince any unprejudiced person that this knowledge must have come to him through divine revelation".

###This is helpless kindergarten nonsense. For one thing Muhammad had no extensive knowledge of the Bible or the Jewish scriptures - most of his tales in the Quran were taken not from there, but from apocryphal (made up) tales, legends, fairy tales, etc. told in lazy evenings and other times for pastime in Arabia like in all primitive and not so primitive societies. The sources for his stories in the Quran mostly are known, so there is no doubt about this - except that he afterwards claimed that his fancy stories were the true ones from the Bible, and that the Bible and the other scriptures were falsified, and that was why they did not agree with his "revelations".

But this aside, and even if he in addition could not read: There was no problem for a well off businessman with a rich wife to pay someone a little for reading for him.

There is, however, another fact which also "kills" this argument: Most of the "Biblical" tales in the Quran as said are not from the Bible, but from verbal old legends, folklore, apocryphal tales, and even fairy tales. Muhammad did not need to know how to read to take material from such sources.

Finally, but not least there is the fact that science doubts that the claim that Muhammad could not read and write is true - much is wrong in the Quran, and science believe that is one of the wrong points. F.x. Muhammad was from a good family - it is unlikely he was not taught how to write and read. Further he was a businessman and businessmen need to know both letters and numbers - and Muhammad was intelligent and could easily pick up such things. Also it is highly unlikely his rich first wife, Khadija, would let an analphabetic person run her quite big business - and not least: There are points in Islamic texts indicating or proving that he was not analphabetic. F.x. when he was dying, he asked for a pen, because he wanted to write down something.

"Arguments" like this tell a lot about Islam and about Muslim scholars - not to mention about lack of real arguments. We could tell what we mean about this level of argumentation, but we do not like to use words like "rubbish", etc.

002 66/11e: "- - - the Wife of Pharaoh (indicated by the context that it was she who found Moses, and thus of the family of Pharaoh Ramses II*) - - -". 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.

003 108/3d: (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. If one believed in higher forces one might believe he was punished for something through is children. (The lists we have seen for his children with Khadija, vary from 5 to 8).

There also is a slight possibility that he had one or two more son(s) - Tahir and/or Tayyab - but also he/they in case died very young. It also may have been other names for Qasim and/or Abdullah.

3 + 4967 = 4970 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


152.   KHALID IBN AL-WALID

A military leader in the Quraysh tribe and opponent to Muhammad. Changed side some time after the Battle of the Trench, and became a Muslim military leader. Took Damascus in 635 AD, and led the Muslims in the Battle of Jarmouk in 636 AD, where the East Roman Empire was beaten and lost most of the area around the inner Mediterranean Sea. He died in 642 AD in Syria.

0 + 4970 = 4970 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

153.   al-KHIDR (= THE GREEN ONE)

Al-Khidr was a travel mate of Moses, the Quran claims (though it does not name al-Khidr - the name is from Arab folklore). The tale is not from the Bible, but from an old religious legend.

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

001 18/65a: "- - - one of Our (Allah's*) servants - - -". This man is not named in the Quran, but according to Muslim tradition his name was al-Khidr (al-Khidr means "the green one"). He is a wise man from old Arab folk tales and fairy tales.

002 18/74a: Al-Khidr's slaying of the young boy and Moses' reaction to it: See 18/80 below.

##003 18/80a: Moses and a wise man who in Islam (not in the Quran) is named al-Kadir or Al-Khidr ("the green one") are in a known legend retold in the Quran on a long walk. They meet a young man whom the wise man without being provoked slays (18/74). Later he explains that the reason was that “we feared that he would grieve” his good Muslim parents. If that is enough to kill their son, it is no doubt that Muslims – his parents – were much better than non-Muslims, and perhaps that apostates – at least bad ones, deserve to be killed? No matter: That it is better to kill even their children than to perhaps - perhaps - meet problems, tells much about ethic and moral in Islam. And does it tell something about Muhammad and the Quran that they use legends for true stories in the "holy" book?

004 18/81a: "So we (al-Khidr*) desired that their Lord (Allah*) would give them (a claimed Muslim couple at the time of Moses = 2000 years before Muhammad*) a (better son*) - - -". The parent's affection for their son and the son's wish to live was of no interest.

0005 20/9a: "Has the story of Moses reached thee (people*)?" The story of Moses in the Quran is a lot different from the one in the Bible - especially the details, not to mention the story concerning the wise man al-Khidr, which does not exist in the Bible at all. From where did Muhammad get the additional information (not from a god - too much is wrong in the Quran far a god to have been involved).

5 + 4970 = 4975 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

154.   AL-LAH - THE REAL OR CLAIMED GOD OF MUHAMMAD AND OF ISLAM

The first science knows about Allah, he was the main god Il further east. He then became the moon god in Arabia, at least in the southern part - perhaps brought to Arabia by the people who drifted into the peninsula from all around, and little by little became the mixed group named Arabs. Also his name drifted - from Il to al-Ilah, and later to the simpler to pronounce al-Lah and later sometimes to Allah, the name adopted by Muhammad. At the time of Muhammad al-Lah had become the main god in Arabia, but with hundreds of lesser gods around him, the most known of which were the female gods al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat.

In the old Mecca there also was another main and moon god, Hubal (also written f.x. Ha'baal or Haba'al). This god came from the north, and may have had connection to the Baal religions mentioned in the Bible - also his name may - may - indicate this (HuBal). Hubal was represented by a statue in the shape of a human in the Kabah. The idol likely was made from red agate and with a right hand made from gold. According to f.x. Karen Armstrong the Kabah (a temple - later mosque - which seems to have been built in the 4. or 5. century AD, and not by Abraham 2000-1800 BC) was dedicated to Hubal. At the time of Muhammad it seems, however, like al-Lah may have outcompeted or melted together with Hubal. It f.x. is told that people stood beside the idol of Hubal and prayed to al-Lah/Allah. (There was no separate idol of al-Lah/Allah in the temple.)

This pagan god Muhammad did choose and claimed he was the only god and a real god - but like always Muhammad was unable to prove even one single of his central claims. He further claimed - like normal without one single proof - that Allah just was another name for the Jewish and Christian god Yahweh, this in spite of that the two gods - especially like you meet Yahweh in NT - are nearly as different as it is possible for gods to be. Muhammad explained away - still without one single proof - the differences by claiming that the Bible was falsified - - - a claim both science and Islam strongly have proved is wrong by being unable to find even one proved falsification in the Bible or in the some 45ooo relevant manuscripts or fragment older than 610 AD (When Muhammad started his preaching). For comparison: There exists not one single fragment of a book like the Quran - or a god like Allah or a religion like Isla - older than 610 AD.

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

The known names used for this god were Il (main god), then al-Ilah (moon god), then al-Lah (main god), now Allah (claimed only god - but very different from Yahweh in the Bible).

For more about Il/al-Ilah/al-Lah/Allah see our Book F2.

0 + 4975 = 4975 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

155.   abu LAHAB IBN ABDUL-MUTTALIB

Muhammad's uncle and enemy. Surah 111 in the Quran is about him - really stuff for an omniscient god to revere in his heaven + how could this have been written before the world was created, if man has even a smithereens of free will? Abu Lahab died shortly after the Battle of Badr in 624 AD.

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

001 "In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful". Please read the surahs from Medina, the immoral parts of the Muslim moral code, the unjust/immoral parts of sharia, and the Quran's rules for lying, thieving/looting, enslaving, raids and wars, plus the rules for treatment of girls and women - free and captives - and see if you agree. Always when there is a distance between words and corresponding demands and deeds, we personally believe in the demands and deeds. Glorious words are cheap, demands and deeds are reliable. Glorifying words and claims are too cheap for anyone to use and disuse - when you read, judge from realities, not from propaganda.

002 111/1: "- - - the Father of Flame - - -". This is about an uncle of Muhammad, Abu Lahab. His name was 'Abd al-'Uzza, but as he had a bit reddish complexion, he got the nick-name Abu Lahab - literal meaning "he of flames", "everyday" meaning "Father of Flames". He strongly opposed Muhammad's new religion, and there were some rows, to say the least of it - - - and it seems that Allah had to help Muhammad, like in other of Muhammad's family quarrels. (Even most Muslim scholars agree that this surah does not belong in a holy(?) book).

003 111/1-5: "Perish the hands of the Father of Flames! Perish he! No profit to him from all his wealth, and all his gains! Burnt soon will he be in a Fire of blazing Flame! His wife shall carry the (crackling) wood - as fuel! - A twisted rope of palm-leaf fiber round her (own) neck." This is said against Muhammad's uncle Abu Lahab, called Father of Flame because of reddish skin.(See 111/1 just above) The scholars say that for one thing a surah like this does not belong in a holy book, and for another is not worthy of a god, and consequently must be wrong. (Also f.x. some verses concerning Muhammad's private affairs have a doubtful reputation among some scholars.) Many Muslim scholars as said say that this surah is not from Allah, which in case means it is Muhammad who is speaking.

By the way: Islam claims that the Quran is a copy from "the Mother of the Book" in Heaven, revered by Allah. Are you able to visualize an omniscient god able to revere texts like this?

004 111/3: "- - - a Fire of blazing Flame!" Hell.

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

4 + 4975 = 4979 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

156.   AL-LAT - ONE OF THE 3 MAIN GODDESSES IN OLD ARABIA

The old Mecca had hundreds of gods (actually between 1ooo and 2ooo), with al-Lah the main one, but quite closely followed by his claimed 3 daughters, al-Lah, al Uzza, and Manat.

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

001 6/100c: "- - - they (non-Muslims*) - - - attribute to Him sons and daughters." In the old pagan religion al-Lah/Allah (the name means "the god" - not "God" but "the god" - Muhammad used the name Allah only) was the main god and often said to be the moon god (he used to be the moon god at least in south Arabia - ###it is no co-incidence that the crescent moon is the symbol for him). Many Arabs thought the other gods were his children, with three of his daughters, al-Lat, al-Uzza, and Manat, as the three main ones - the 3 Muhammad accepted in the famous "Satanic Verses" (but later changed his mind).

002 16/57a: "And they (pagan Arabs at the time of Muhammad*) assign daughters for Allah!" Many believed angels were daughters of Allah, but more central is that the three main goddesses - just below the main god al-Lah or sometimes named Allah - al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat, officially were his daughters in the old pagan Arab religion from where Muhammad took his god".

003 17/40a: "Has then your Lord (O Pagans!) preferred for you sons, and taken for Himself (al-Lah/Allah*) daughters - - -?" The angels and the central goddesses al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat, were reckoned to be the daughters of al-Lah/Allah (by Muhammad only named Allah) in the old Arabia. In a strictly masculine society Muhammad obviously thought it was a heavy and killing argument that as all men wanted sons and not daughters, it was unthinkable that a god should want daughters! Any god had known that in many cultures the religion you would meet "mother" goddesses and there this argument was laughable or at least invalid, and used universal arguments instead - at least if he wanted the religion to be universal.

004 17/74a: "And had We (Allah*) not given thee (Muhammad*) strength, thou wouldst nearly have inclined to them (non-Muslims*) a little". This is a reference to the "Satanic Verses" - Muhammad gave in to the leaders of Mecca and "received" verses accepting and promoting the 3 goddesses al-Lat, al Uzza, and Manat in addition to al-Lah/Allah as the price for acceptance and perhaps power in Mecca. But shortly after he regretted and retracted the text - and blamed the Devil. And not to forget: "Proved" that it was normal for all prophets to be tempted - "ergo" he still was a normal prophet - - - even though he claimed to be the greatest.

*005 17/111b: “- - - Allah, Who begets no son - - -”. Well, Jesus called Yahweh “father” many times (the word "father" for the relationship Yahweh/Jesus is used at least 204 times in the Bible, and the word "son" at least 89 times - frequently by Jesus, who also the Quran says was reliable - and remember: The Bible is proved not falsified). Besides it is funny to read the Quran scolding Arabs to believe Allah had daughters - al-Lat, al-Uzza and (al-) Manat - because it is plain stupidity to believe a god who wanted family, would choose to have daughters. He was sure to choose sons. That "imbecility" was enough proof in the man-centered old Arabia, to “prove” that the very idea had to be wrong. But when Yahweh may be wanted some company - a son - that is an utter impossibility in spite of this. Even more funny because the Quran, Muhammad, Islam and Muslims tell it is impossible for mere humans to understand a god - - - but everyone seems to be sure that a god wants to be alone, and neither do they ask if a god perhaps has a reason (that we may or may not understand) for having a son, nor ask if he just wants company. Who knows a god's wishes?

006 21/26a: “And they say ‘(Allah) Most Glorious has begotten offspring’. Glory to Him! They are (but) servants raised to honor“. We do not know what is the truth about al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat - the daughters of al-Lah/Allah in the old Arab religion. But Jesus at least told many times that Yahweh was his father according to the Bible.

007 22/52b: “Never did We (Allah*) send a messenger or a prophet before thee (Muhammad*), but, when he framed a desire, Satan threw some (vanity) into his desire: but Allah will cancel anything (vain) that Satan throws in, and Allah will confirm (and establish) His Signs - - -”. (from the middle of the Mecca period mainly - ca. 614 - 617 AD (perhaps 616 AD) and shortly after the infamous “Satanic Verses” Muhammad quoted in 53/19-22 in a situation where he had much to gain from becoming friends with the rulers and ruling class in Mecca: “Have ye seen al-Lat, al-Uzza, And another, the third (goddess), Manat (the three daughters of the main god in Mecca at that time, al-Lah*)? These are exalted idols whose intercession is hoped”. Muhammad afterwards changed the 4 short verses to: “Have ye seen al-Lat, al-Uzza, And another, the third (goddess) Manat? What! For you male sex, and for Him, the female (for children*)! Behold, such would be indeed most unfair!” (Muhammad was an Arab and was sure a god would look down on women as much as Arabs did*). This episode made a lot of “noise”, and it was most convenient for him to receive(?) a verse like this telling all prophets had had experiences like that, and that he was not to be blamed).

It may be ok to abrogate words of Satan, but how could an omniscient and omnipotent god permit Satan to do it? - something is wrong here. And how could a perfect prophet not notice that 3 goddesses was something way out of his former teachings? - - - if there was not a reason for him to do it? And how many other verses are inspired by whispering from Satan? (- the brutal verses from Medina may make one think this and that.)

008 27/24b: “I (the hoopoe - anthropomorphism*) found her (the queen of Saba/Sheba*) worshipping the sun - - -“. Saba was at the southern end of the Arabian Peninsula – approximately Yemen today. In the old times this whole peninsula had a moon religion, not a sun religion – al-Lah or sometimes Allah (whom Muhammad later dressed up) originally was a moon god (the same was Hubal, but over time Il/al-Ilah/al-Lah/Allah took his place). It is documented that also in old Saba the main god was the moon god (source; “The Lunar Passion and the Daughters of Allah”). We may add that Muslims say that even if the moon religion was the dominant, there also may have been sun worshippers. That is true, but not for the ruler of the country – the ruler has to be very strong or be a member of the official and main religion, if not there will be problems.

Besides she – the queen – could not "worship the sun besides Allah", because that name was not created yet. Perhaps the moon god al-Lah (later as mentioned renamed by Muhammad to Allah) or the old El or al-Ilah. Also see 25/18a above. But Muhammad had a tendency to claim that others had different gods "in addition to Allah". Partly because by a little twisting of the facts this could be said about Arabs - they believed in al-Lat, a name sounding nearly like Allah, even if al-Lah was a pagan, polytheistic god, and partly perhaps because it made Allah look bigger and universal.

009 43/16a: "What! Has He (Allah*) taken daughters - - -". In the pagan old Arabia the 3 main goddesses al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat and also the angels were reckoned to be the daughters of the main god, al-Lat, whom Muhammad later took for his god, renamed him Allah, and declared he was the only real god (out of some 1ooo - 2ooo in the old Arabia - there were 360 only in the Kabah until Muhammad threw out all of them except al-Lah/Allah).

####010 53/19-21: "Have ye (people/Muslims*) seen al-Lat and al 'Uzza, And another, the third (goddess) Manat?" This is the start of the famous Satanic Verses. They continued by telling that these goddesses might be good to know. Muhammad was promised a good reward from the leaders in Mecca if he accepted these goddesses - which he for a short while did. But then he got cold feet and/or changed his mind.

####011 53/19-22a: "Have ye (people/Muslims*) seen al-Lat and al 'Uzza, And another, the third (goddess) Manat? What! For you the male sex (of children*), and for Him (Allah), the female? Behold, such would be indeed a division most unfair." This was the rather lame way out, after he had blamed the Devil for having cheated him. And once more this argument that women were so little worth, that it must be wrong that a god had daughters.

#####012 53/19-22b: "Have ye (people/Muslims*) seen al-Lat and al 'Uzza, And another, the third (goddess) Manat? What! For you the male sex (of children*), and for Him (Allah), the female? Behold, such would be indeed a division most unfair." These were the "Satanic Verses" - after Muhammad had revised them. At least one of the two versions is wrong - this one or the original (where he indicated that the goddesses were real - Muhammad liked power, and at that time to indicate that might give him acceptance and power.)

##013 53/19-20: "- - - al-Lat - - - al 'Uzza - - - Manat - - -". These were the 3 main deities after the top god, al-Lah, in the old pagan Arabia. They were reckoned to be the daughters of al-Lah (also sometimes named Allah) - the god Muhammad promoted to a monotheistic god.

13 + 4979 = 4992 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

157.  LUT - THE NEPHEW OF ABRAHAM (Lot in the Bible)

Lut/Lot according to the Bible was the nephew of Abraham and accompanied him all the way from Ur of the Chaldeans in south Mesopotamia - roughly what is now south Iraq - to what is now Israel.

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

*001 2/53a: “- - - We (Allah*) gave Moses the scripture - - -”. A time anomaly (see 4/13d below).No reader or listener would understand this reference before ca. 1335 - 1330 BC when this happened (if it happened). But the books the Quran claims were sent down to Allah's prophets, all were copies of the same "Mother Book" in Heaven, which is claimed to be so old that may be it has existed since eternity, and thus all copies of it are similar, as there can be no change in the claimed "Mother Book" or in Allah's words if he made it. Thus Abraham and Lot and Noah could read about Moses and the prophets and Jesus and Muhammad if this claim is true - good and reliable (?) foretelling. But nowhere in the Quran is it told this happened. Something is wrong.

##002 2/127a: “And remember that Abraham and Ishmael raised the foundations of the House (Kabah*) (with this prayer): - - - “. Abraham never built the foundation of Kabah (and a contradiction; other verses say he built the building, not only the foundation of it) - and there are several reasons for this:

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

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

  8. Abraham simply was not involved in the building of Kabah (it seems in reality to be built originally in the 4. or 5. century AD, 2ooo+ years later), and it is highly unlikely he ever visited Mecca and even the Arab peninsula. It looks like a fairy tale made up to give weight to Kabah and to Islam. And not least to give weight to Muhammad, who 2500 years later could tell he was direct descendant from Abraham - without the slightest written paper from all those years. 2500 years of mostly an-alphabetic nomads without any written history. Believe it if you want – and if you know who were all your forefathers the year 500 BC (= ca. 2500 years ago), as after 2500 years you have, and Muhammad had, a large number of them (something like 80 generations give you quite a number of forfeiters, not only one - Abraham - like Muhammad claimed).

     

    It also is worth adding that Muslims say that Mecca was where Abraham’s (or actually Sarah’s) slave, Hagar, and his and her child Ismail (Ishmael) were sent away from Abraham’s camp, that the two lived there, and that Abraham frequently visited them later. There is no source of information for this. The OT says they lived in Negev, which is weeks by camel from Mecca - and much, much longer for large flocks of sheep, goats, and cattle (American cowboys driving flocks of cattle to the railway, made 10-12 miles – 16-20 km - a day. The nomads in the south hardly moved any faster - - - if they could find water). In addition to the long time it would take, many animals hardly would survive the long trek through the harsh Arab desert with little food and hardly any water. And there was in addition no reason for him and his family to take such a dangerous and meaningless trip with their animals to a barren and dry valley. And as he never visited Mecca, he could not have left Hagar and Ismail there (this even more so as the Bible mention that Ishmael lived near the border of Egypt and got his wife from Egypt (see below) - - - and science and Islam both have proved that the Bible is not falsified (Islam has delivered a very strong proof by being unable to find even one clear falsification among all the tens of thousands of relevant old manuscripts) - the easy way out for Muslims when the Bible mentions things they do not like). If Islam wants to insist that he ever visited Mecca, they have to produce strong proofs, as it is extremely unlikely - and “special statements demands special proofs”. It is highly likely this just is a story made up or “borrowed” from f.x. Arab folklore to give the teachings of Muhammad credence.

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

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

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

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

And see 2/125e above.

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

003 4/23a: "Prohibited for you (Muslims*) (for marriage) are - - - your - - - daughters - - -". Lot in the Quran is a prophet to Allah. All the same he got children with his 2 daughters (1. Mos. 19/31-36). (Islam "solves" the problem by claiming that it cannot be true. No proof, only claims - like normal for Muhammad.)

004 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.

005 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?

006 6/85c: "And Ishmael and Elisha, and Jonah, and Lut - - -". 4 time anomalies. See 4/13d above.

007 7/80a: "We (Allah*) also sent Lut (Lot*) - - -". Contradicted by the Bible, which tells his god was Yahweh. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

008 7/80b: "We (Allah*) also sent Lut (Lot*) - - -". In the Quran Lot is a prophet. Not so in the Bible. (And in the Bible he as mentioned is connected to Yahweh, not to al-Lah (later renamed Allah)).

009 7/80c: "We (Allah*) also sent Lut (Lot*) - - -". A time anomaly. See 4/13d above.

010 7/80d: “- - - he (Lut/Lot*) said to his people (the people in Sodom and Gomorrah*).” Wrong. The local people were not Lot’s people. Both the Bible and the Quran are unanimous: Lot was a stranger to the land and had come from Ur in Chaldea in south Iraq (together with Abraham). It also from both books is clear that he had not mingled enough with the locals to become one of them. (Muslims all the same use that for an explanation).

011 7/80f: Here is an interesting comment in (YA1049). Yusuf Ali comments on what is told in the Bible (1. Mos. 19/30-38) about Lot committing incest with his two daughters, something which is not mentioned in the Quran: "His (Lot's*) story is Biblical, but freed from some shameful features which are a blot on the Biblical narrative". The question is not if the story about the incest is true or not, but that it is a blot on the story of a claimed prophet (the Quran claims Lot was a prophet, which the Bible does not do). "A story we like is sometimes better than looking for what is the truth", someone once said.

Perhaps there is a reason why Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that "Islam is the Religion of Honesty".

012 7/82a: “And his (Lot’s*) people (the people of Sodom and Gomorrah*) gave no answer but this: they said, ‘Drive them out of your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure.’” This surah came ca. 621 AD. But may be the same year and not later than 624 AD the omniscient Allah had forgotten what he told, and now remembered it like this:

  1. 29/29: “But his (Lot’s) people gave no answer but this: they said: ‘Bring us the wrath of Allah if thou tallest the truth”. They in both tales only gave one answer - - - but quite different ones in the two narrations.

013 7/82c: “And his (Lot’s*) people (the people of Sodom and Gomorrah*) gave no answer but this: they said, ‘Drive them out of your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure.’” See 7/75b above.

014 9/70c: "- - - Abraham's people - - -". Here is a list of people and tribes who according to the Quran were destroyed because they did not accept Allah or sinned against him. But the possible sin and punishment of Abraham's people are not mentioned in the Quran. Some Muslim scholars tell it must be the Babylonians who were "Abraham's people" (Ur in Chaldea was not too far off) and the fall of the first Babylonian empire the punishment. But Abraham - if he is not fiction - lived around 1800 - 2000 BC. Babylon fell to Assyria around 1100 BC (and later to the Persians in 538 BC). The time simply is wrong by some 800 years (but then Islam too often does not care too much about the truth or not, as long as one can get a seemingly logical explanation which corresponds to the Quran, and which little educated and/or wishful believers may believe in - you meet this fact a little too often.)

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

015 9/114e: "- - - he (Abraham*) dissociated himself from his father (and left him*) - - -". This is contradicting the Bible. What the Bible tells about his father, Terah, is found in 1. Mos. 11/25-32. The text which is relevant here is 1. Mos. 11/31-32: "Terah took his son Abram (later renamed to Abraham by Yahweh - a detail not mentioned in the Quran is that his name was not at all Abraham until late in his life: 1. Mos. 17/1-5: "When Abraham was ninety-nine years old, the Lord (Yahweh*) appeared to him and said, - - - 'No longer will you be called Abram, your name will be Abraham'"*), his grandson Lot son of Haran, and his daughter-in-law Sarai (later renamed Sarah*), the wife of his son Abram, and together they set out from Ur of the Chaldeans (in what now is south Iraq*) to go to Canaan (approximately what is now Israel*). But when they came to Haran (in what now is north Iraq*), they settled there. Terah lived 205 years, and died in Haran". Nothing about Abram dissociated himself from his father - on the contrary. Later - in 1. Mos. 12/4-6 - Abram continued to Canaan. Now Abram/Abraham may have been fiction. But if he has lived, any professor - or even student - of history will say that the Bible is a more reliable source than the Quran, as it is written 1ooo years closer to what happened, and was building on strong traditions - and no serious professor believes the Quran is made by a god and thus reliable, a fact that is proved by the reality that no serious professor - or even serious student - ever use the Quran for a source for anything which happened before 610 AD, and only carefully for things which happened after that year.

016 11/69-83: The stories about Abraham and partly about Lot/Lut are closer to the Biblical story than normal for Biblical stories in the Quran, but a number of details differ - some of them serious.

F.x. the Quran claimed Abraham took his entire family and huge flocks of animals and travelled from Canaan and/or Sinai and lived in the empty, narrow, waterless desert valley where Mecca later was built until he left Hagar and his son Ishmael there.(the Mecca valley is total desert - 4.34 inches/110 mm rain A YEAR, an average temperature for a year 31+ centigrade + an average humidity for a year of miserable some 45% or less = water evaporates fast.) And later he returned there to build the big mosque Kabah for his family. But neither the Quran nor one single Muslim mentions that there are some 1200 km of mostly harsh desert - some of it pretty rugged - between Canaan and Sinai where he lived, and Mecca - or that the mentioned desert valley naturally had no food or water for his animals - or how often his family could visit the big mosque 1200 km off. Believe the story if you are able to.

Also remember that even though the camel likely was domesticated at that time, it hardly was used for riding until a lot later. Then it was a long trip - both ways. And not least: The camel was not at all introduced in Abraham's part of the world, until the Assyrians started trade with south Arabia in the 8. century.

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

017 11/70b: "- - - the people of Lut (= Lot in the Bible*)". Here it is meant the people in Sodom and Gomorrah - it is not said here, but according to the Bible - 1. Mos. 19/1 - Lot was in Sodom. (Nobody knows exactly where the two towns lay. Some traditions place them where the Dead Sea is now - an unlikely explanation as the Dead Sea is old. The Quran places them near the shore of that sea - which may be correct - - - if they ever existed. But what is clear both in the Bible and in the Quran in spite of these words, is that those people were NOT the people of Lot. He was the nephew of Abraham and born in Ur in Chaldea in South Iraq. He left Ur as a boy or youth together with his grandfather Terah (Azar in the Quran) and his Uncle Abram - later renamed Abraham - and lived for years in Haran in North Iraq until he and Abram continued to Canaan (now approximately Israel), where they settled in Negev. All this is according to the Bible (1. Mos. 11/31-32 + 12/1-8), but not contradicted by the Quran. They later split because their flocks of animals needed wide areas for grass - Abraham stayed in Canaan (now approximately Israel), whereas Lot moved further east to the valley of Jordan, which may fit well with placing Sodom and Gomorrah near the Dead Sea, as this sea is in the southern end of the Jordan Valley.

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

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

018 11/77a: “When Our (Allah’s*) Messengers (it is clear from the text they were angles (they f. ex ate no food*) came to Lut (Lot*) - - -.” But this is clearly contradicted by:

See identical comments to 11/69a above.

(8 contradictions - or more.)

019 11/77c: "He (Lot*) said: 'This is a distressful day". See 11/68c above.

#020 11/77d: "- - - (Lot*) felt himself powerless to protect them (his visitors*)". But the original Arab text says: "- - - he (Lot*) was straightened as regards the reach of his arm in their behalf". This was an Arab idiomatic phrase (meaning what is said in the first quote). There are a number of idiomatic Arab phrases in the Quran - phrases foreigners cannot understand without explanation. No omniscient god making a book for the entire world - a book he claims is easy to understand and with simple and clear language - would use obscure expressions from backward parts of the globe - phrases most people in the world would not understand unless there was an Arab from a given time in history around to explain the meaning. Then who made the Quran?

#### Muslims claim that you cannot really understand the Quran unless you read it in Arab - one of their standard last resort arguments for fleeing from difficult facts and arguments: "You do not know what you are talking about, because you have not read the Quran in Arab". But that is to turn reality upside down: No god - omniscient or not - who wanted to reach the whole world, would be so stupid as to use in his holy book a language making his book impossible for people to understand until after years of linguistic studies of a language they on top of all did not need for anything else - - - and to top even this: A primitive tribal language. We repeat: Who made the Quran?

021 11/78a: "- - - his (Lot's*) people - - -". The people of Sodom (outside which it is likely Lot lived just then) and Gomorrah were not the people of Lot. For one thing he was a foreigner from far away (Ur of the Chaldeans in what is now South Iraq, and it is likely Sodom and Gomorrah - if they are not fiction - were settled near the Dead Sea), and for another it is very clear from both the Bible and from the Quran that he was not naturalized into that culture or people. (But the Quran needs this remark to be able to claim that prophets were sent to their own people, like the Arab Muhammad to Arabs).

022 11/78b: "- - - his (Lot's*) people came rushing towards him - - -". Not Lot's people. See 11/68c above.

023 11/78d: "(Lot said*): Here are my daughters (if ye marry) - - -". Here the puritanism has got the better of the translator - the circumstances clearly tell it was not for marriages. Besides: How could Lot's 2 daughters (1. Mos. 19/30) marry one or two whole towns?

The real reason for this twist in the Quran, is likely to be that Lot according to that book was a prophet, and no prophet could be so immoral as to offer his daughters for unmarried sex. Wishful thinking seems to be more central than honest translation.

024 11/79b: "They (the people of Sodom*) said: 'Well you (Lot*) know - - -". See 11/68c above.

025 11/81a: “(The angel messengers (from Allah*)) said: O Lut (Lot*)! We are Messengers from thy Lord!” But this (that they were angles) is clearly contradicted by:

Identical comments to 11/69a above.

(8 contradictions).

026 11/81c: "- - - but thy (Lot's*) wife (will remain behind (and die*)) - - -". One more contradiction to the Bible: In the Bible nothing like this is said, but she makes the mistake to look behind and dies. In the Quran her death is a result of predestination; Allah had decided it before like so often in the Quran.

027 11/84d: "- - - Shu'ayb - - -". To place the special Arab claimed prophets chronologically, it seems that Islam claims the succession was this (YA1064): Noah (not Arab prophet, though*), Hud, Salih, Abraham (not Arab), (Lot/Lut (not Arab), and Shu'ayb. Shu'ayb is said to be 4 generations after Lot, though we do not find this specified in the Quran, which in case means also he was before Moses around 1375 - 1335 BC. Lot of course was a contemporary of Abraham - his nephew. Abraham lived - if he is not fiction - ca. 1800-2000 BC according to science, which means that Shu'ayb (if not fiction) lived about one century later or a bit more, BC. This makes impossible the Muslim claim that Shu’ayb was identical to the father-in-law of Moses, Jethro. Science tells that if the Exodus ever took place, it happened ca. 1235 BC, and if the Bible is correct Moses then was 80 years, which means he lived from ca.1315 BC to ca. 1195 BC (he became 120 years according to the Bible). There in case are some 300 - 500 years between Shu'ayb and Moses (and Jethro).

  1. Adam (and Eve) - unclear when.
  2. Noah - unclear when, likely 3ooo - 4ooo BC.
  3. Hud - unknown when, but the first of the 3 claimed Arab prophets of the old. Long before Moses.
  4. Salih - unknown when. Well before Moses.
  5. Abraham and Lot - around 2ooo - 1800 BC according to science.

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

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

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

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

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

We may add that science believe that the Bible's Midian was in Sinai, either as the land of the Midianites, or simply as a geographical name.

028 11/89a: "- - - the people of Noah or of Hud or of Salih - - - nor of Lut (Lot*) - - -". According to the Quran all these people were killed by Allah because of sins. The Bible says the same for the people of Noah and of Lot - though it makes it clear that as for Lot they were not really his people - but by Yahweh, not by Allah.

029 12/109a: “Nor did We (Allah*) send before thee (Muhammad*) (as Messengers) any but men - - -.” But this is clearly contradicted by:

  1. 3/42: “Behold the angels (plural*) said (when they came to tell Mary she was going to have the baby Jesus*)”.
  2. 6/130: “O ye assembly of Jinns and men! Came there not unto you messengers (from Us, Allah*) from amongst you - - -.” A rhetoric question demanding the answer “yes” – yes, there came Jinn messengers from Allah to the Jinns, and human messenger from Allah to the humans according to the Quran.
  3. 11/69: “There came Our (Allah’s*) Messengers to Abraham - - -“. It is clear from the following verses that these messengers were angels.
  4. 11/77: “When Our (Allah’s*) Messengers (it is clear from the text they were angles – they f. ex ate no food*) came to Lut (Lot*) - - -.”
  5. 11/81: “(The Messengers (angels from Allah*)) said: O Lut (Lot*)! We are Messengers from thy Lord!”
  6. 19/17b: “- - - We (Allah*) sent to her our angel (singular – to tell Mary she was going to have the baby Jesus*), and he appeared before her as a man in all respects.”
  7. 19/19: “He (the angel*) said: ‘Nay, I am only a messenger from thy (Mary’s*) Lord - - -“.
  8. 22//75: “Allah chooses Messengers from both angels and from men - - -“.

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

(8 contradictions).

030 14/4a: “We (Allah*) sent not a Messenger except (to teach) in the language of his (own) people - - -.” Wrong. Joseph - if he was a messenger had to speak Egyptian, not his native language. If you can call Moses a Messenger, he had to speak Egyptian in Egypt – not Hebrew. And Egyptian in Midian if he proselyted there (something the Bible does not indicate). And Lot was from Ur in Chaldea (not too far from the Persian Gulf in Iraq), not from Sodom or Gomorrah – and when the Quran says the people of Sodom and Gomorrah were his people, also that is wrong, this even more so as both the Bible and the Quran makes it very clear that not only was he a stranger, but also he was not integrated with the locals. And Jonah (a Hebrew - Jonah 1/9) was not from Nineveh, Assyria, where he had to preach. Also Abraham was a foreigner (from Ur in Chaldea) with a language foreign to the place he settled down (Canaan and Sinai) – if one reckons him to be a messenger.

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

031 14/37a: "- - - I (Abraham*) have made some of my offspring to dwell in a valley without cultivation - - -". It here is referred to Muhammad’s never documented claim that Ishmael - Abraham's son out of wedlock with the slave girl Hagar - settled in Mecca (which did not exist then, but is situated in a dry, quite narrow desert valley)". This is directly contradicted by the Bible, which clearly states that Ishmael and his descendants settled on the border of Egypt some place north of the Red Sea (1. Mos.25/18: "His (Ishmaels*) descendants settled in the area from Havilah to Shur, near the border of Egypt - - -"). And NB: This was written down at least 1ooo years before there was any reason for the writers not to give correct information. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

Another point is that the Mecca valley is so dry, that there was nothing to live from until the caravan trade started many centuries later.

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

032 14/37b: "- - - a valley without cultivation - - -". Remember this when Muslims claim Abraham lived in or near the Valley of Mecca when he sent away Hagar and Ishmael, and that they therefore ended up living in that valley and town (the town/city did not exist then, also according to the Quran - Hagar could not find people at all). This valley was a dry and rather narrow desert valley - according to the Quran not even the Zamzam well existed then. Abraham was a rich nomad with big flocks of all kinds of domesticated animals - so big that according to the Bible Lot and he had to split up because their flocks were so big that the land could not feed and water them when they stayed together (1. Mos. 13/5-9). A man with so big flocks of animals should travel with his everything deep into the desert and settle in a dry desert valley without food or water for his animals - and far from where he lived in Canaan - now ca. central Israel west of Jordan. This on top of everything else we know about Abraham and his travels.

Another fact is that there lived tens of thousands of people in Arabia at the time of Abraham. Even if Abraham and Ishmael had settled in Arabia, they had made up less than one ten-thousandths of the "Arab forefather" - and in addition this less than 0.01% was much diluted by f.x. a large import of slave women from f.x. Africa (2/3 of the slaves imported to Muslim areas were women and children for the harems, and only 1/3 men. Slaves imported to the Americas were 2/3 men for work and only 1/3 women and children - also this 1/3 mainly for work, though plenty of exceptions happened.)

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

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

Any further comments necessary?

###033 15/51b: "- - - the guests of Abraham - - -". According to the Quran these were some angels in the shape of men, who later continued to Lot. According to the Bible it was Yahweh and 2 angels - all three in the shape of men. (1. Mos. 18/1, 18/10, 18/13, 18/17, 18/20, 18/22, 18/26, 18/33 - When the word "Lord" is used like here in the Bible, it always means Yahweh - or sometimes Jesus in NT). The two angels later continued to Lot in Sodom (1. Mos. 19/1).

034 15/60a: "Except his (Lot's*) wife - - -". Here is a contradiction to the Bible - there she was not predestined to be destroyed. Another contradiction: According to the Bible Abraham tried to save Sodom and Gomorrah. This you do not find here.

035 15/68c: "- - - disgrace me (Lot*) not". To have guests harmed was - and is - a serious disgrace in such societies - see 15/68b just above.

036 15/69a: "- - - fear Allah - - -". Contradicted by the Bible, which tells that the god of Lot was Yahweh, not Allah.

037 15/70c: (YA1993): “They (the men from Sodom and Gomorrah*) said 'Did we not forbid thee (Lot*) (to speak) for all and sundry?’” – or may be the meaning is “- - - to entertain any strangers.” – the Arab text is open to both meanings. As mentioned before: Clear language in the Quran.

038 15/71a “There are my daughters (to marry)”. Here modesty has got the better of the Quran (or the translator). The men of Sodom or Gomorrah were not going for marriage - neither could a few daughters (Lot had 2 according to 1. Mos. 19/30) marry a lot of men. It is talk about sexual abuse. Most likely a dishonest translation – but in that case: How many other places in the Quran are explained dishonestly?

039 15/71b: “There are my daughters - - -". Muslim scholars refuse to believe Lot said this. According to the Quran Lot was a prophet (not so in the Bible), and a prophet simply could not say anything like that (it would in case stain the title of "prophet" and thus also Muhammad.)

####"Facts are facts only if we want to believe them - and the other way around". Some reliable religion and scholars!

040 16/43b: “And before thee (Muhammad*) also the Messengers We (Allah*) sent were but men - - -“. This is contradicted by verses in the Quran telling that angels were sent as messengers (beware: the Quran here says Messengers, not Prophets) to at least Abraham, Lot, and Mary, and that Jinns were sent as messengers to Jinns, (only men 12/109 - 21/7 - 25/20).

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

At least 4 contradictions.

In addition there are the contradictions to the Bible if Islam claims Yahweh = Allah. Also there are angels and there is the Holy Spirit all bringing messages + at least 4 female prophets (there were a few more). Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

041 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 - or that it would make nobody believe anyhow.

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?

042 19/48-49: "And I (Abram/Abraham*) will turn away from you (all) - - - etc. - - -". Strong contradiction to the Bible where he never left his father until Yahweh much later ordered him to go on to Canaan. On the contrary his father Terah, his nephew Lot whose father died, and he went together until Abraham set out for Canaan at the venerable age of 75 (1. Mos. 12/4-5). Together they went from Ur of the Chaldeans (south Iraq) to Haran (Northwest Iraq) where they lived until Abraham set out for Canaan (1. Mos. 12/4-5).

043 21/71a: "But We (Allah*) delivered him (Abraham*) and (his nephew) Lut (Lot in the Bible*) - - -". Just a reminder: According to the Bible Abraham's god was Yahweh, not Allah.

044 21/71b: "But We (Allah*) delivered him (Abraham*) and (his nephew) Lut (Lot in the Bible*) - - -". 2 time anomalies.

045 21/71c: "But We (Allah*) delivered him (Abraham*) and (his nephew) Lut (Lot in the Bible*) to the land (Canaan/Israel*) which We have blessed for the nations". According to the Bible they travelled - together with Abraham's father - from Ur of the Chaldeans where they originally lived, to Haran in North-West Mesopotamia (now roughly Iraq), not to Canaan (1. Mos. 11/31). Only long afterwards did Abraham - Abraham then 75 years and his father 145 years old if the Bible has the numbers correct (his father became 205 - 1. Mos. 11/32) - continue to Canaan, according to the Bible (1. Mos. 12/4-5).

046 21/74c: "We (Allah*) saved him (Lut/Lot*) from the town - - -". This refers to the destruction of Sodom (and Gomorrah).

047 26/160a: "The people of Lut (Lot*) - - -". Here is referred to the people of the towns Sodom and Gomorra. They were not the people of Lot, as he was from very far off (Ur of the Chaldeans in what now is south Iraq), and it is clear from both the Bible and from the Quran that he also was not naturalized into the communities - but to make good its claim that prophets were sent to their own people, Muhammad needed this way of saying it. But Lot lived in that neighborhood - likely near Sodom.

048 26/160b: "The people of Lut (Lot*) rejected the messengers" - just like Muhammad was rejected in Mecca at the start. The message: To be rejected is normal for prophets - like Muhammad - but they will be punished.

049 26/160c: "The people of Lut (Lot*) rejected the messengers". See 26/70b above.

050 26/161a: “- - - their (the people of Sodom and Gomorrah*) brother Lot - - -“. Wrong. Lot was a stranger to the two towns, and it is very clear both from the Quran and the Bible that he did not mingle well with those locals. He came - together with Abraham - from Ur in Chaldea (in south Iraq). He was no “brother” to them – not even in the figurative meaning of the word. (The word here obviously is used to make Lot and the mentioned people fit the pattern the Quran claims is universal: That the prophets come from the people they are to teach. But here that is incorrect). Also see 11/92 just above and 27/56 – it is very clear Lot was no brother of theirs - also not a naturalized "brother". (“Drive out the followers of Lut (Lot*) from our city - - -“.)

051 26/161ba: "(Lot said*): 'Will ye not fear (Allah)?" Lot - if he ever lived - lived around 2ooo - 1800 BC. You are free to believe he preached about Allah at that time if you are able to, but neither science, nor Islam has been able to find any trace at all of Islam older than ca. 610 AD - some 2500 years later.

052 26/162b: "I (Lot*) am to you a messenger (not said in the Bible*) worthy of all trust". See f.x. 26/125a above.

This part of the story about Lot is far away from the one in the Bible. From where is this information? (We remind you that the Quran is so full of errors, etc., that it is not from any god, and thus no information that way.

053 26/163: "So fear Allah and obey me (Lot*) - - -". See f.x. 26/108, 26/110 and 26/126 above.

054 26/164a: "No reward do I (Lot*) ask of you for it - - -." See f.x. 26/109a and 26/127a above.

055 26/164c: "- - - my (Lot's*) reward is only from (Allah*) - - -". Another parallel to Muhammad legitimizing Muhammad as a claimed prophet. see 26/108 above.

This part of the story about Lot is far away from the one in the Bible. From where is this information? (We remind you that the Quran is so full of errors, etc., that it is not from any god, and thus no information that way.

056 26/167b: "They (the men of Sodom and Gomorrah*) said: 'If you (Lot*) desists not - - -". See 26/70b above.

057 26/169: "O my (Lot's*) Lord (here indicated Allah*)!" Contradicted by the Bible, which tells Lot's god was Yahweh, not Allah. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

058 26/171: "- - - an old woman - - -". She cannot have been too old as she was Lot's wife according to both the Bible and the Quran.

059 27/54a: "(- - - sent) Lut (Lot*) as a messenger - - -". This is not in the Bible. There it is told he lived there (near Sodom and Gomorrah), but not that he should be a prophet for them (the Bible also does not use the word "messenger" as a title).

060 27/54c: "- - - he (Lot*) said to his people - - -". Wrong. Both the Bible and the Quran make it very clear that Lot was not of the people in Sodom and Gomorrah. For one thing he was from a distant place (Ur in Chaldea), and for another thing especially in the Quran it is made clear that he was not accepted in the community. But the Quran needs to claim this, as it normally claims that prophets (here Lot - not called a prophet in the Bible) are sent to their own people.

061 27/56c: "- - - his ("Lot's* people") gave no other answer - - -". See 27/22a above.

062 27/57b: "- - - except his (Lot's*) wife; her We (Allah*) destined to be of those who lagged behind." Clear - and for the wife serious - predestination. Remember cases like this when you meet Muslims claiming there in reality is no predestination or that there is no real predestination, or similar. (Predestination makes it very immoral for Allah to punish people for bad deeds - or lack of good ones. If a god first forces someone to do or not do something, and then punishes - or sends to Hell - this person because of the deeds, this god has a strange moral code.)

063 27/57c: "- - - except his (Lot's*) wife; her We (Allah*) destined to be of those who lagged behind." Contradiction to the Bible? - the Bible simply says "But Lot's wife looked back (which the angels had forbidden*), and she became a pillar of salt" (1. Mos. 19/26). She did not lag behind and thus was not because of that - - - but perhaps Allah had predestined her to look behind? - if he exists?

064 28/13a: "- - - the promise of Allah is true - - -". If you ask all Islam even today to show you one single proved case of a promise given by Allah which has provably been fulfilled by Allah throughout the times, they will not be able to answer you. No such case exists. Lots of claims, some co-incidences, not one proved case.

065 29/26a: "But Lut (Lot*) had faith in Him (Allah*)- - -" - and followed him. Actually the context indicates that here is referred to Abraham, not to Allah, but for Abraham Muslims would not use capital H*. According to the Bible Lot lost his father, Haran (1. Mos. 11/27-28), and Terah (Azar in the Quran) - Abram/Abraham's and Haran's father and Lot's grandfather - later moved north and simply took his son and grandson along.

066 29/26c: "I (Lot*) will leave home for the sake of my Lord - - -". Differs from the Bible. See 29/26a just above. From where did Muhammad get this information? As it is not from a god (the Quran with all its errors is from no god) and not from the Bible, there only remain apocryphal (made up) stories, legends, fairy tales or fantasy.

067 29/26d: "- - - for He (Allah*) is Exalted in Might - - -". This is about the Lord of Lot. In the Bible this was Yahweh (or El in the really old times - see 29/27a below) - a god who has proved his might several times if either the Bible or the Quran tells the truth on this point. But here in the Quran it is claimed to be Allah. Allah has never proved any power in any way (the Quran tries to claim he has proved himself, by claiming that Allah is the same god as Yahweh, but this never proved and not provable claim is wrong, as their teachings fundamentally by far are too different. And we here remind you that also Muhammad's pet claim - like normal for central points in the Quran never proved - that the "explanation" was that the Bible is falsified, also is proved wrong by science beyond any reasonable and unreasonable doubt, and even more so by Islam's inability to find even a single falsified relevant old manuscript among the many thousands which exists.

068 29/28a: “- - - Lut (Lot*); behold, he said to his people (the people of Sodom and Gomorrah*) - - -.” Wrong. Those people for one thing were not Lot’s “natural” people, as he was a stranger from very far away (Ur of the Chaldeans in what now is South Iraq, but here living near the Dead Sea), and for another both the Bible and the Quran make it very clear that he also was not a naturalized member of those communities – he was an outsider. (May be the Quran tells they were his people so as to be able to say he was a prophet to his own people, like they falsely claim every prophet was – in spite of Joseph (Egypt), Moses (Sinai(or Sudan?) 40 years), Abraham (Canaan), Lot (Dead See area), Jonah (Nineveh)).

069 29/32b: "Lut (Lot*) - - - and his wife". 2 time anomalies.

070 29/32c: "- - - we (the angels*) will certainly save him (Lot*) and his following - - - except his wife - - -". In the Quran her death was predestined, in the Bible it was caused by a mistake she did.(1. Mos. 19/26).

071 29/33a: "When Our (Allah's*) Messengers (angels*) came to Lut (Lot*) - - -". See 29/31a-c above.

072 29/33c: "- - - except thy (Lot's*) wife - - -". Similar to 29/32x above.

073 29/34: "- - - this township - - -" There actually were two according to both the Bible and the Quran. Lot seems to have lived in (the outskirts of ?) Sodom, but there also was Gomorrah.

074 30/47c: “We did indeed send, before thee (Muhammad*), messengers to their (respective) peoples - - -.” It is generally an accepted fact – among clergy and science alike, that Abraham was a stranger to Canaan, Lot (a prophet according to the Quran) a stranger to Sodom and Gomorrah, that Jonah was a stranger to Nineveh, the town to which he was sent. Joseph was a stranger in Egypt, and Moses a stranger in Sinai (or Sudan?) when he fled from Egypt. Most prophets worked among their own people, but in contradiction with the Quran, not all.

075 37/133: "- - - Lut (Lot*) - - -". The Quran is very little orderly or systematic - if Lot ever lived, he lived at the time of Abraham, which means around 1000 years before Elijah. In connection to the Quran and the claimed "Mother Book" also Lot is a time anomaly.

076 37/134: "- - - We (Allah*) delivered (here: saved) him (Lot*) and his adherents - - -". According to the Bible, it was 2 angels from Yahweh who did this, not Allah.

077 37/135: "All except an old woman - - -". Except that she for one thing according to both another place in the Quran and in the Bible she was not just an old woman, but Lot's wife, and for another it is unlikely that she was very old; she was as mentioned the wife of Lot, and Lot was one generation younger than Abraham.

078 38/4c: "- - - from among themselves - - -". Muhammad stressed that prophets came from the people among whom they should work - that was one of his "alibis" for being a prophet even though he was an Arab. For Jews it was correct - their prophets were Jews. But Jonah was not from Nineveh, Abraham not from Canaan, Lot not from Sodom or Gomorrah, Joseph not from Egypt, Moses not from Midian, to mention some of whom the Quran reckons to be prophets.

079 38/12-13: "- - - Noah - - - 'Ad - - - Pharaoh - - - the Lord of the Stakes - - - Thamud - - - - Lot - - - the People of the Wood - - - such was the Confederates". Islam will have a job proving that these were confederates, as there are perhaps 3ooo years or more between the oldest and the youngest - and spread over a wide geographical area. Especially the time of when the different ones existed, Muhammad seems to have had vague ideas about, and because of that made some funny errors in the Quran.

080 38/13b: "- - - the People of Lut (Lot*) - - -". Here are indicated the inhabitants of Sodom (and Gomorrah) were Lot's people, but this is wrong, as it for one thing is very clear both in the Bible and in the Quran, that Lot was not from there (he was from Ur of the Chaldeans in what now is south Iraq), and also from the texts in both the Bible and the Quran it is very clear he was not naturalized into the local society, even though he at that time seems to have lived in or near Sodom. But Muhammad had to say it in this way to be able to claim that prophets (himself included) were sent to their respective people - in the Quran Lot is a prophet - so as to "prove" it was correct that the Arab Muhammad was sent to Arabs.

081 46/21c: "- - - (Hud) one of 'Ad's own brethren - - -". Muhammad claimed prophets were sent to their own people (neither in the Bible, nor in the Quran this is quite correct). Even if this was not quite correct also in the Quran, you will find this claim stressed many places in the Quran - and "facts" some places "adjusted" a little to make them fit this claim (f.x. facts(?) connected to Abraham, Lot, and Moses). This fitted Muhammad's claim that naturally a prophet to Arabs had to be an Arab - like himself. If you read the Quran, you will meet this phenomenon several places.

082 50/13: “- - - the brethren of Lut (Lot*) - - -.” This refers to the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, but it is extremely clear in the books that they were not his “brethren”. For one thing he was a stranger from very far away, and for another it is very clear from both the Bible and from the Quran that he was at odds with them – the connection was nowhere like a naturalized “brother”. Simply wrong.

The only reason we can see for the use of this word, is that Muhammad wanted the situation to fit into his statement that prophets were sent to their own people – “their own brethren”. Wrong – and forgetting also about f. ex Jonah.

083 50/14a: "- - - each one (of them) (the tribes mentioned in 50/12-14*) rejected the Messengers - - -". Except for Noah, Pharaoh and Lot, none of these are mentioned in the Bible - and like so often their stories are parallels to the one of Muhammad at the time when the stories were told or before. This "told" his followers that Muhammad's problems were normal for prophets, and thus that Muhammad was an ordinary - thought extraordinary - prophet. Nice for his followers to "know" and good claims (true or not true) for Muhammad.

084 51/24a: "- - - the honored guests of Abraham - - -". Some (2 or 3 ?) angels visiting first Abraham and then Lot according to the Quran. According to the Bible it was Yahweh and 2 angels who visited him and the 2 angels afterwards went on to waist Lot (1. Mos. 18/1-33 + 19/1).

085 51/24b: "- - - the honored guests of Abraham - - -". The Quran does not here clearly tell what kind of beings they were, but other places make it clear they were angels. Worth remembering next time you read in the Quran that Muhammad "explaining" that Allah cannot prove his existence or any connection to Muhammad by sending down angels to prove it, because to send down angels meant that the Day of Doom had arrived.

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

086 51/24-37: The story about the visitors to Abraham and to Lot is a lot different from what the Bible tells even though the main stories are similar, except for that in the Quran the god was not one of the visitors.

087 51/35: "- - - Believers - - -". Muslims. Only for Muslims do the Quran use this word. See 51/36 below. In this case the Quran means Lot and his family - - - but is contradicted by the Bible, which says his god was Yahweh, not Allah. Also see 13/1g and 67/9c - 2 strong ones. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

088 51/36a: "- - - found not there (Sodom and Gomorrah*) any just (Muslim) persons - - -". This was some 2500 years before Muhammad. You are free to believe there could be Muslims in Sodom and Gomorrah, and that f.x. Lot and for that case Abraham were Muslims. But neither science nor Islam has found any traces of Allah, Muslims or Islam older than 610 AD when Muhammad started his preaching - and with the exception of the belief in Yahweh also nothing remotely similar to Islam.

089 54/33b: "The people of Lut (Lot*) - - -". It is very clear from both the Bible and the Quran that the people of Sodom and Gomorrah were not the people of Lot, even if he lived there.

090 54/33c: "The people of Lut (Lot*) rejected (his (Lot's*) Warning". See comment to 54/2x above.

091 54/36b: "- - - Lut (Lot*) did warn them (Sodom and Gomorrah*) of Our (Allah's*) Punishment, but they disputed about the Warning". This is not from the Bible.

092 66/10c: "- - - the wife of Noah and the wife of Lut (Lot*) - - - were false to their (husbands) - - -". This contradicts the Bible. There is mentioned nothing like this about the wife of Noah, and as for the death of the wife of Lot it had nothing to do with being false to her husband - she just turned to look at what happened, something the angels had warned against, but it is not indicated it was because of disobedience (when dramatic things happen, it is normal and human to react to them). Simply contradicted by the Bible by not mentioning anything like the Quran claims. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

92 + 4992 = 5084 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

158.   LUQMAN - A WISE MAN IN OLD ARAB FOLKLORE AND FAIRY TALES

- claimed to be a real person by the Quran.

The claim that Luqman was a wise man from real life for one thing is an Arabism + what does it tell about the Quran that Muhammad took persons and tales also from local fairy tales?)

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

001 3/66a: "Ye (Jews and Christians*) are those who fell to disputing (even) in matters of which ye had some knowledge!" Muhammad here refers to the fact that there were different ways of understanding words and verses in the Bible, which caused debates among Jews and among Christians. When they were able to dispute even things Muhammad claimed should be clear to them, he claims that means they are not qualified to debate things they know nothing about.

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

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

002 11/49a: "- - - stories from the Unseen - - -". All too many of the stories in the Quran are not from the unseen, but from apocryphal (made up) stories, folklore, legends, and fairy tales (f.x. the name Luqman - the title of surah 31 - is the name of a wise man from several old Arab fairy tales (a fact never mentioned by Muslims)), and then "adjusted" and sometimes - like the story of Noah - made more dramatic to fit Muhammad's new religion, where Muhammad with a straight face told is followers that this was the pure truth from his god. Also see 11/49d below. But would an omniscient god stoop to use such tales as basis for his religion? - tales which to a large degree even were not true?!! Who in reality made the Quran?

003 31/2a: “These are Verses of the Wise Book”. A book with lots and lots of mistakes and with lots and lots of unproved statements based on nothing except unproved, cheap words, is no wise book and no book “full of wisdom”. It may be symptomatic that the name of this surah, Luqman, is the name of a wise man in some Arab fairy tales, not a real one. For similar claims see the chapter "Literal language in the Quran" or f.x. 2/231- 10/1 – 10/37 – 17/99 – 28/2 – 31/20 - 32/2 – 35/25 - 36/2 – 43/4 – 54/5.

004 31/12b: "We (Allah*) bestowed (in the past) wisdom on Luqman - - -". Luqman is a wise man in some Arab fairy tales. (A fact only Arabs knew - was Allah for the whole world in 614 - 617 AD, or was that idea a later one? Luqman is one more Arabism in the Quran.) Besides: How come that Allah bestowed wisdom on a made up person from fairy tales? (One possible explanation is that Muhammad did not know that Luqman was a made up person - but what does that in case tell about Allah?) And what does it tell about the maker of the Quran, that he uses Arab fairy tales in his book?

005 31/13a: "- - - Luqman - - -". Luqman was a wise man from old Arab folklore and fairy tales. It tells something about the Quran and about Muhammad that he uses elements from fairy tales like if it were from true stories. See 31/12b above.

006 31/13b: "- - - Luqman - - -". A solid Arabism - see 4/13d above.

007 31/16a: "- - - Luqman - - -". See 31/12b and 31/13a above,

008 31/16b: "- - - Luqman - - -". Even if Luqman is from fairy tales, he in this case is a time anomaly, because once was the first time he was mentioned by a teller of tales, and to everybody living before that the name is such an anomaly - - - if it is true that there were copies - of the claimed "Mother Book" with tales about him even at that time, too. The Quran claims there have been copies of this claimed timeless book sent down to all times to the claimed prophets for Islam. You of course are free to believe this.

009 31/17a: "O my (Luqman's*) son!" See 31/16b above.

010 83/13d: "Tales of the ancients!" Nearly nothing in the Quran is original stuff - it is "borrowed" from other religions - mainly the two from the Bible, old Persian pagan religion and old Arab pagan religion (even the god is the main pagan Arab god, al-Lah/Allah, renamed to only Allah), and from old legends, folklore and even fairy tales - f.x. Luqman - but the tales were often twisted some to fit the new religion. There was good reason for the skeptics to not claim, but state that most of it just was "tales of the ancients". And strangely: All those tales were from in or around Arabia, even though the claimed god claimed to be an old god working all over the world and to all times. Even so he only found tales worthy his book in the Arab area and neighborhood.

10 + 5084 = 5094 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

159.   MADYANITES

Shu'ayb's people, the Madyanites (11/84), were destroyed somewhere around 1700 BC according to Islam (4 generations after Lot). Thus they cannot have been the Midianites of Moses - the Madyanites were destroyed some 400-500 years earlier.

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

001 11/84d: "- - - Shu'ayb - - -". To place the special claimed Arab prophets chronologically, it seems that Islam claims the succession was this (YA1064): Noah (not an Arab prophet, though*), Hud, Salih, Abraham (not Arab), Lot/Lut (not Arab), and Shu'ayb. Shu'ayb is said to be 4 generations after Lot, (though we do not find this specified in the Quran), which in case means he was long before Moses (in Midian around 1275 - 1235 BC). Lot of course was a contemporary of Abraham - his nephew. Abraham lived - if he is not fiction - ca. 1800-2000 BC according to science, which means that Shu'ayb (if not fiction) lived about one century later or a bit more - say around 1700 BC. This makes impossible the Muslim claim that Shu’ayb was identical to the father-in-law of Moses, Jethro. Science tells that if the Exodus ever took place, it happened ca. 1235 BC, and if the Bible is correct Moses then was 80 years, which means he lived from ca.1315 BC to ca. 1195 BC (he became 120 years according to the Bible). There in case are some 500 years between Shu'ayb and Moses (and Jethro). There is no reliable source for the claim that Shu'ayb did eve exist.

  1. Adam (and Eve) - unclear when. (4600 BC is a number mentioned by an Irish bishop)
  2. Noah - unclear when, likely 2ooo - 4ooo BC. (There was an enormous flood in Mesopotamia around 3200 BC - found in 1929 by the British archeologist C. Leonard Woolley (17/4/1880 - 20/2/1960) - which may explain the tales about the Big Flood.)
  3. Hud (the 'Ad people) - unknown when, but the first of the 3 claimed Arab prophets. Long before Abraham.
  4. Salih (the Thamud people) - unknown when. Well before Abraham.
  5. Abraham and Lot - around 2ooo - 1800 BC according to science.
  6. Shu'ayb (the Madyan People) - 4 generations (some 120 years) after Lot = roughly around 1700 BC. The last one of the 3 claimed Arab prophets.
  7. Moses - Exodus according to science was around 1235 BC, which means he was in Midian ca. 1275 - 1235 BC. If he was 80 when Exodus started and lived 40 years more like the Bible says, he lived from ca. 1315 BC to ca. 1195 BC. (But it is unlikely the Bible's Midian is the same as Madyan in northwest Arabia like Islam claims. The Bible's Midian most likely lay in Sinai - f.x. the Bible mentions Mt. Horeb and Mt. Sinai connected to Midian.)

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

But a serious problem here is that the information this time line is built on, do not fit the few known facts (another problem is that when you search Internet for facts about Hud/'Ad, Salih/Thamud, Shu'ayb/Madyan/People of the Wood the articles are so dominated by the intention to make the claims in the Quran sound correct, that it is difficult to see what are really facts and what are "adjusted facts" - adjusted by wishful thinking). What seems to be facts, are that if the 'Ad people ever existed, they lived in the southeast of the Arab peninsula (somewhere near where Saudi Arabia, Oman, and Yemen meet today). When is unclear, but before the Thamud. They may be mentioned in an old scripture (Claudius Ptolemy mentions the claimed capital of 'Ad, Ubar, in his "Geographos"). Likely they lived from around 1ooo BC or before, till around 300 AD.

The Thamud is said to have lived in al-Hirj, a mountainous area very roughly halfway between Damascus and Mecca. A people named Thamud are mentioned in historical sources, but the very oldest one is connected to the Assyrian king Sargon II and dated to ca. 715 BC - 500 years later than Moses. This people disappeared from historical sources around 600-400 BC. Islam wants their disappearance to have been connected to volcanic eruptions, but we have been unable to find confirmation for volcanic activity in that area around 600-400 BC. Volcanism in Arabia mainly came to an end some 400ooo years ago.

Then finally there is the last of the 3 specific Arab claimed prophets, Shuayb or Shu’ayb. He in the Quran is connected to Madyan and to "the People of the Wood". This is somewhat complicated. For one thing it is unclear if "the Midianites" and "the Madyanites" were the same people (likely not), and if "the Madyanites" and "the People of the Wood" were the same or two different people. For another it is unclear where the Bible's Midian was situated. Originally we like many others believed the Bible's Midian and the Quran's Madyan were the same place - in the north-west of the Arab peninsula. But further studies have made us correct this. There are two possible explanations for the Bible's Midian: Moses' Midian may have been to the east of Egypt or to the south of that country - it is not specified in the Bible whether Moses went east or south. If he went south (= along the Nile valley where it was easy to find a living), his Midian was in Sudan. If he went east, it was somewhere east of Egypt (as the Bible mentions Mt. Horeb (likely another name for Mt. Sinai) and Mt. Sinai (today Jabal Musa (34 degrees east, 28.5 degrees north. Roughly 70 km north northwest from Sharm-el-Sheik (Sharm el Shaykh) is far south in central Sinai. Also the Islam confirms that it was here Moses met his god and got the mission to take the Jews out from Egypt. This is far from Madyan in Arabia), it is extremely likely Moses' Midian was in Sinai. And then the question is: Was the Bible's Midian just the name of a place somewhere, or did it refer to the land of the Midianites (Midian was the 4. of Abraham's 6 sons with his second wife, Keturah - 1. Mos. 25/2). If it was just a geographical name it may have been anywhere - but like mentioned likely in Sinai. But if it referred to "the land of the Midianites", it was east of Palestine (Jewish Encyclopedia). Actually where Moses’ Midian was, is very unclear, but most likely in Sinai (because of the mentioning of mountains we know are in Sinai).

When you add up all details, it is highly likely Moses' Midian was in Sinai, and that the Muslim claim that it was in Madyan is based only on a similarity of names.

*The very strong probability: As the Bible mentions Mt. Horeb (likely another name for Mt. Sinai) and Mt. Sinai (today Jabal Musa (34 degrees east, 28.5 degrees north. Roughly 70 km north northwest from Sharm-el-Sheik (Sharm el Shaykh) far south in central Sinai. Also Islam confirms that it was here Moses met his god and got the mission to take the Jews out from Egypt. This is far from Madyan in Arabia.

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

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

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

We may add that science believe that the Bible's Midian was in Sinai.

######Another point is that as Shu'ayb's people, the Madyanites (11/84), were destroyed somewhere around 1700 BC according to Islam (4 generations after Lot), they cannot have been the Midianites of Moses - the Madyanites were destroyed some 400-500 years earlier.

002 17/59j: Just for the record: The stories about the 'Ad, Thamud, Midianite (descendants of Abraham’s 4. son with Keturah - 1. Mos. 25/2 - or people from Midian (Madyan? - highly unlikely)?), Rocky Tract, etc. tribes and the prophets Hud, Salih, and Shu'ayb are not from the Bible. That is to say, as mentioned Midianites may be mentioned, as descendants from one of Abraham's 6 sons with Keturah, Midian (1. Mos. 25/1-2), or a person from Midian (likely in Sinai, as Mt. Horeb (likely another name for Mt. Sinai) and Mt. Sinai (today Jabal Musa (34 degrees east, 28.5 degrees north), are mentioned. Roughly 70 km north northwest from Sharm-el-Sheik (Sharm el Shaykh) far south in central Sinai. Also the Islam confirms that it was here Moses met his god and got the mission to take the Jews out from Egypt. This is far from Madyan in Arabia) are mentioned in connection to them).

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

######Another point is that as Shu'ayb's people, the Madyanites (11/84), were destroyed somewhere around 1700 BC according to Islam (4 generations after Lot), they cannot have been the Midianites of Moses - the Madyanites were destroyed some 400-500 years earlier.

003 26/176a: (YA3214): “- - - the Companions (or People*) of the Wood - - -“. Who were they? Another name for the people of Madyan? A group within the Madyanites? Neighbors of the Madyanites? Or some other tribe or group? Unclear in the Quran.

004 38/13c: (YA4161): “- - - the Companions of the Wood - - -“. Who were they? Another name for the people of Madyan?. A group within the Madyanites? Neighbors of the Madyanites? Or some other tribe or group? Unclear in the Quran.

4 + 5094 = 5098 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".