Humans, Other Beings in/Relevant to the Quran, Part 40

 

221.   SAINTS

 

Here Muhammad may be right here - there is no basis for the belief in saints in the Bible. On the other hand many Muslims - the Shi'ia - believe in saints. Also all Muslims believe in one saint: Muhammad. He in reality is sanctified by Islam and by all believing Muslims, but as saints are prohibited in the Quran, they strongly deny the name "saint" for him. There is no doubt about the reality, though.

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

001 5/76b. "Will ye (Christians*) worship, besides Allah, something which hath no power either to harm or benefit you?" The word "something" here must refer to Mary and Jesus in the previous verse. When it comes to Mary and the Catholics, Muhammad here may have a point - saints are not an idea you find in the Bible. (On the other hand they do not pray to a divine Mary, only to what they believe may be a helper to reach the divine.) As for Jesus we are back to the fact that he several places told he could help - - - and to the old fact that science and Islam both clearly has shown that the Bible is not falsified, even though Islam is dependent on this never documented claim for their religion to survive. (If the Bible is not falsified it is ever so clear that then the Quran is a made up - falsified - book, as so much of what it claims the Bible tells or should tell, is not from the Bible.)

002 5/116c: “Didst thou (Jesus*) say unto men, ‘worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of Allah’?” Jesus was not involved with Allah - see 3/51a for explanation. As for a divine Jesus, that is not explicitly said in the Bible, but many places it is clearly understood that he was (f.x. if Yahweh really was his father in some way, and also all his miracles – some even confirmed by the Quran (see 5/110 above and the complete verse in the Quran) – indicates something). But when it comes to Mary, Islam is right - saints are not a part of the teaching of the Bible (on the other hand also some Muslims have saints, notably the Shiites). But the Quran also is very wrong: No Christian - not one single - prays to Mary as a god, only as a go-between. The position of Jesus is vaguer - he is divine, but no Christian believes there is more than one god.

003 9/31a: "They (Jews and Christians*) take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords (gods*)". This is a reference to saints. It is wrong that they are reckoned to be gods - they are thought to be go-betweens. But it is clear that such go-betweens are not mentioned in the Bible. You do not find them among protestants (but Shi’ia Muslims have a tendency to believe in saints).

004 9/31e : "- - - yet they (the Christians*) were commanded to worship but One God - - -". Muhammad never understood the Christian religion and thinking. According to Christians there is only one god. Then there is a figure - a helper or something (the son, Jesus) - who in reality gets his light and his power from God/Yahweh. And then there is something more diffuse and seldom seen; The messenger boy or something, named the Holy Spirit (sometimes wrongly claimed to be the arch angel Gabriel by Muslims who have never read the Bible, or who have read it with a closed mind). To use a picture: There is one sun. Then there is a moon which gets its light from the sun. And there is the seldom seen satellite somewhere around. But only one sun. And that is the complete "pantheon". To mix Mary into the Trinity (like Muhammad does at least one place in the Quran) just is one more proof for that no god made the Quran, and for that Muhammad did not understand the trinity. Mary and the other saints (only for the Catholics, and not for all of them) are not divine. In Islam some good Muslims end in the higher heavens closer to Allah. In the same way Catholics believe that some really good Christians end up closer to God in Heaven - though figuratively. And just like Muhammad claimed he can interfere for whom he like on the Last Day, Catholics believe that as these normal, but good, humans called saint can interfere with God on our behalf, as they are closer to him. But as this is not a part of the Bible, the Protestants - and the Sunni Muslims - may be right: May be there are no saints.

005 13/16e: "- - - such (false gods*) as have no power either for good or for harm to themselves". See 13/14c and 13/14d above. The troubling question is: Is Allah among these? - he only - only - comes from a book with lots of mistakes, told by a man with very doubtful moral, but with strong lust for power, money for bribes and for women. (Drop the big, glorifying words and read the rest of the Quran, and you find the real Muhammad behind the glittering propaganda - demands, introduced moral code, and deeds are far more reliable that saintly verbal portraits "painted" by a dictator himself.

006 16/100a: "His (the Devil's*) authority is over those only, who take him as patron and who joins partners with Allah." According to Islam Christians joins partners (Jesus*) with Yahweh, whom the Quran and Islam (wrongly - fundamentally too different teachings) claim is identical with Allah. They thus have Jesus in addition to Yahweh, and the Catholics have the saints (in reality not divine, but goers-between between normal humans and the god) - are they under the Devil's authority? But what about the Muslims, if the Quran is a made up book?

007 16/100a: "His (the Devil's*) authority is over those only, who take him as patron and who joins partners with Allah." According to Islam Christians joins partners (Jesus*) with Yahweh, whom the Quran and Islam (wrongly - fundamentally too different teachings) claim is identical with Allah. They thus have Jesus in addition to Yahweh, and the Catholics have the saints (in reality not divine, but goers-between between normal humans and the god) - are they under the Devil's authority? But what about the Muslims, if the Quran is a made up book?

008 17/57a: "Those (false gods, saints or similar*) whom they (non-Muslims) do desire (for themselves) means of access to their Lord (Allah*) - - -". As for saints this may or may not be true - saints are not from the Bible. But for made up gods it is wrong - made up gods in reality does not exist, and thus has no wishes at all (the Quran claims that pictures of them in wood, metal or something are given life at the Day of Doom - it is free for anybody to believe it). This also goes for Allah if he is a made up god.

009 18/102a: "Do the unbelievers think that they can take My (Allah's*) servants as protectors beside Me?" This is an attack on the Catholic belief in saints, and it may well be it is correct - the idea of saints is not found in the Bible.

010 35/14b: (A35/14 – in 2008 edition A35/13): “If you invoke them (your “homemade” gods*) they do not hear your call; and even if they could hear, they would not (be able to) respond to you. And (withal) on the Day of Resurrection they will utterly disown your having associated them with Allah.” This is a contradiction one finds several places in the Quran: The gods made from wood or stones (and saints) naturally cannot hear or react to or answer you. But all the same they talk at the Day of Doom. For the saints to talk, is one thing, for wood and stone and metal it is quite another. Muslims must feel that themselves, because the most common “explanation” is not claims of miracles or something supernatural, but that it is meant symbolically - one of the famous last ditch defenses against the unexplainable in Islam.

011 43/15a: "- - - His (Allah's*) servants - - -". This expression in the Quran may mean several things - see 42/27b above. Like the Quran says: The language in the Quran is so clear and impossible to misunderstand, that it proves the book must be made by a god. Well, in this case it seems to refer to saints or "holy" humans.

012 43/86b: “And those whom they invoke (“gods”, saints*) besides Allah have no power of intercession – only he (has*) who bears witness to the Truth (the Quran*) - - -.” If this all the same refers to Allah (see 43/86a just above), the meaning changes to one more of the many never proved claims in the Quran: Allah is the only one with power. A power he in case never has proved.

Another point: That the Quran is the truth, is just a claim, not a proved fact. Actually all the errors, etc. in the Quran prove that it is wrong.

And there remains the question about f.x. Yahweh. The Quran admits that this old Jewish and Christian god exists, but wrongly mixes him up with Allah.

013 57/27d: "- - - but the Monasticism which they invented for themselves, We (the god) did not prescribe for them - - -". In this the Quran may be right - monasticism, and for that case saints - is/are not from the Bible.

014 82/19a: “(It will be) the Day (of Doom*) when no soul shall have the power (to do) ought for another - - -.” But:

  1. 20/109: “On that Day (Day of Doom*) shall no intercession avail, except for those whom permission has been granted by (Allah) - - -.” Here it is possible if Allah permits.
  2. 34/23: “No intercession can avail in His (Allah’s*) Presence (= on the Day of Doom*), except for whom He has granted permission.” Intercession ok if Allah permits.
  3. 43/86: “And those whom they invoke (“gods”, saints*) besides Allah have no power of intercession – only he (has*) who bears witness to the Truth - - -.” The word “he” cannot refer to Allah, because the Quran always then use capital 1. letter (“He”). But according to the Quran the prophets and messengers are to be called forth “to witness to the truth”. “he” therefore must be referring to each and every prophet and messenger - - - who then according to this verse have power to intercede.

Intercession is not impossible in spite of 82/19 – it only takes permission. Hadiths also tell that Muhammad has the right of intercession.

3 contradictions.)

14 + 10.469 = 10.483 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

222.   SAMARIANS

- did not exist at the time of Moses.

Samaria and thus Samarians did not exist until under and after King Omri some 700 years after Moses - see 20/85b just below. You will meet Muslims claiming Muhammad did not say Samarians, but a word sounding rather similar, but meaning watchman - but there is little doubt what the Quran/Muhammad meant. This even more so as the word Samarian is used so many times and with such a negative "tone" in NT, that it is very possible Muhammad had heard it.

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

**001 20/85b: “- - - the Samiri had led them astray”. But the Jews still had not arrived in Samaria and there existed no Samaris (actually the name Samaria/Samirians/Samaritans as far as we can find, was not coined until 722 (?) BC under the little known king Omri who bought the land and built and named the town (1. Kings 16/24) - more than 500 years after the exodus that happened (if it happened) ca. 1235 BC). Also no Samiri is mentioned here in the Bible. Muslims try to “explain” the mistake by saying may be it is meant “shmeer” = stranger, or “shomer” = watchman = samara in Arab (irrelevant as the Jews did not speak Arab). - - - but if you cherry-pick from a whole language, it always is possible to find words that are look-alike – and that the Arab word here is a look-alike, is totally irrelevant, as these Jews of the old hardly spoke Arab as mentioned, and thus did not use the word "samarar". It also is clear that the top translator, Abdullah Yusuf Ali, meant it is a name, not a work or something - he used capital 1. letter in the name. The same goes for other translations we have. But if the Quran means some other thing than it says here – or is possible to misunderstand - how many other places in the book are there similar or worse/religious mistakes? Similar claims in 20/87 – 20/95.

It is here telling about Islam's ways of getting out of problems or mistakes, that one of the "explanations" for who this person could have been who was a Samiri (the name Samaritan is used in some translations) at the time of Moses, is that was "'a man of the Jewish clan of the Samaria', i.e. the ethnic and religious group designated in later times as the Samaritans - - -" (quoted from A20/70a). This in spite of that no such group or clan or sect existed at that time and not for another 600+ years. This "explanation" is backed by top Islamic thinkers like Tabari and Zamakhshari.

If no explanation is possible, then make up one.

002 20/96b: (A82): “He (the Samari*) replied: ‘I saw what they saw not: so I took a handful (of dust) from the footprint of the Messenger, and threw it (into the calf) - - -.” But is this literal translation correct? Muslim scholars tend to understand it more figuratively. F.x. “The Message of the Quran” (Swedish 2006): “- - - (I), therefore, took a handful of what the Messenger had left behind and threw it away - - -.” And the 2008 English edition (which seems to have made small “corrections” in dogmatic "correct" direction and are slightly less honest than Muhammad Asad himself, even though he, too, sometimes is more dogmatic than honest): “- - - so I took a handful of the Apostle’s teachings and cast it away.” What is the true interpretation? It seems that one has to learn Arab to be sure – honesty is not always part of a war religion. Especially the differences in the text between the 2006 and the 2008 edition of “The Message of the Quran” may be telling something about Muslims and about Islam.

2 + 10.483 = 10.485 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

223.   SAMIRI - AN OPPONENT OF MOSES

- not mentioned in the Bible.

"A Samiri" is another version of "a Samarian" - a person from Samaria. But neither Samaria nor Samarians existed until some 500 years after Moses.

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

##001 20/85b: “- - - the Samiri had led them astray”. But the Jews still had not arrived in Samaria and there existed no Samaris (actually the name Samaria/Samarians/Samaritans as far as we can find, was not coined until 722 (?) BC under the little known king Omri who bought the land and built and named the town (1. Kings 16/24) - more than 500 years after the exodus that happened (if it happened) ca. 1235 BC). Also no Samiri is mentioned here in the Bible. Muslims try to “explain” the mistake by saying may be it is meant “shmeer” = stranger, or “shomer” = watchman = samara in Arab (irrelevant as the Jews did not speak Arab). - - - but if you cherry-pick from a whole language, it always is possible to find words that are look-alike – and that the Arab word here is a look-alike, is totally irrelevant, as these Jews of the old hardly spoke Arab as mentioned and thus did not use the word "samarar". It also is clear that the top translator, Abdullah Yusuf Ali, meant it is a name, not a work or something - he used capital 1. letter in the name. The same goes for other translations we have. But if the Quran means some other thing than it says here – or is possible to misunderstand - how many other places in the book are there similar or worse/religious mistakes? Similar claims in 20/87 – 20/95.

It is here telling about Islam's ways of getting out of problems or mistakes, that one of the "explanations" for who this person could have been who was a Samiri (the name Samaritan is used in some translations) at the time of Moses, is that was "'a man of the Jewish clan of the Samaria', i.e. the ethnic and religious group designated in later times as the Samaritans - - -" (quoted from A20/70a). This in spite of that no such group or clan or sect existed at that time and not for another 600+ years. This "explanation" is backed by top Islamic thinkers like Tabari and Zamakhshari.

If no explanation is possible, then make up one.

002 20/85c: "- - - the Samiri - - -" is not in the Bible. See 20/57b+c above.

003 20/87a: “- - - the Samiri - - -“. See 20/85b above.

004 20/87c: "- - - the Samiri - - -" is not in the Bible. See 20/57b+c above.

005 20/95b: “- - - O Samiri - - -“. See 20/57b+c and 20/85b above. The Samiri is not in the Bible. Where has Muhammad found him?

006 20/96b: (A82): “He (the Samiri*) replied: ‘I saw what they saw not: so I took a handful (of dust) from the footprint of the Messenger, and threw it (into the calf) - - -.” But is this literal translation correct? Muslim scholars tend to understand it more figuratively. F.x. “The Message of the Quran” (Swedish 2006): “- - - (I), therefore, took a handful of what the Messenger had left behind and threw it away - - -.” And the 2008 English edition (which seems to have made small “corrections” in dogmatic "correct" direction and are slightly less honest than Muhammad Asad himself, even though he, too, sometimes is more dogmatic than honest): “- - - so I took a handful of the Apostle’s teachings and cast it away.” What is the true interpretation? It seems that one has to learn Arab to be sure – honesty is not always part of a war religion. Especially the differences in the text between the 2006 and the 2008 edition of “The Message of the Quran” may be telling something about Muslims and about Islam.

6 + 10.485 = 10.491 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

224.   SAMUEL - JEWISH PROPHET

- not named in the Quran.

Samuel was one of the central Jewis prophets - and one of the central ones in OT. He lived around 1000 BC - before and during the reigns of the kings Saul and David.

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

001 2/246c: "- - - the Prophet (that was) among them (the Jews after Moses*) - - -". Here is referred to Samuel. A time anomaly. See 4/13d below. Also note how often the Quran is vague on information - here like many other places it had been much better to give the name (here Samuel according to the very often much more concise Bible). Not good literature.

002 2/246g: “How could we refuse to fight in the cause of Allah.” The Quran pretends Jews are saying this to one of their prophets (Samuel), but it really is included as a pep talk to Muslims inspiring them to war. The text is somewhat(!) changed compared the one in the Bible, from where the story comes (1. Sam., chapter 8) - these words simply are not from the Bible.

003 2/247a: "Their (the Jews'*) Prophet - - -". In this case Samuel - the Quran often is not good on exact facts and information, note f.x. how often the book is vague on names, times, etc. Not good literature.

004 2/248a: "- - - their (the Jews'*) Prophet - - - ". Here = Samuel. One of the Qurans weaknesses as literature is that it often has vague details - like here omitting a well known name (most likely because Muhammad did not know it or forgot it when he was telling this story). Other times it has a lot of details - details there is no chance that Muhammad knew, but which were to be found in known legends, fairy tales, etc. at that time, or in wrong science, history, etc. one believed in in "the Middle East" at the time of Muhammad. Not to mention the cases where there is no known source - where did he get the information from as the Quran with all its mistakes, etc., is not from any god?

005 2/248b: "- - - their (the Jews'*) Prophet - - - ". Here = Samuel. A time anomaly - see 4/3d below.

006 2/248e: “- - - there shall come to you (the Jews) the Ark of Covenant”. Well, according to the Bible the Ark of Covenant did not come to the Jews – they built it themselves in accordance with a description they got from Yahweh. That was done around 1330 BC under Moses = some 300 years before Samuel, whom the Quran talks about. (We must add that this is a well known part of the Bible, and most Jews and Christians at once see that something is wrong. May be because of that some Muslims claim that the translation is wrong; it was not the Ark that was sent, but a heart containing mental relics from Moses and Aaron. It is not a normal explanation to meet, as it takes some twisting of the original text to find this "translation". But it is a typical Islamic case of fleeing from having to meet facts one does not like: If the mistake is too obvious, search for another meaning - if necessary by twisting the words - or call it an allegory or something). Everything said about the ark in this verse is nonsense compared to the Bible.

Also see 2/248e just below.

007 2/248i: "- - - if ye (Jews ca. 1000 BC*) indeed have faith". Beware that Muhammad claimed the old prophets were teaching Islam (but that the religion later was falsified). That Samuel preached Islam needs strong proofs to be believed, and that the Bible is falsified, simply is thoroughly proved wrong by science, and even more so by Islam who both have been unable to find one single proved falsification in all the tens of thousands (ca. 45ooo?) relevant old manuscripts.

008 2/253a: "- - - to one of them Allah spoke - - -". It here refers to Moses, but it is a clear contradiction to the Bible that the god spoke to no more than one Biblical person directly - he also spoke directly to others, f.x. Jesus (but Jesus has to be reduced so as not to compete with Muhammad), to Abraham, and some of the Jewish prophets, f.x. Samuel (1. Sam. 3/4-14).

009 4/164a: "- - - and to Moses Allah spoke direct - - -". Omitting the fact that the Quran wrongly mixes Yahweh and Allah, and that according to the Bible it was Yahweh who spoke to Moses, Yahweh also spoke directly to others - f.x. Samuel (1. Sam. 3/4-14) and Jesus. (Muhammad knew very little about the Jewish prophets, but any god had known.)

010 9/25d: "- - - the day of Hunayn - - -". This refers to a battle in 630 AD. But a sentence like this would be meaningless to everybody who did not know this - and as the Quran is a copy from the "mother book" in heaven, it is the same book as all the earlier 124ooo (according to Islam) prophets got - which all were copies of the same book. None of all those claimed 124ooo + none of their claimed followers could understand it. And there are MANY such sentences in the Quran. Just read the book and see how much Abraham or Moses or Samuel or David or Isaiah or a prophet in Siberia or Greenland or Canada or Mexico or Peru or Brazil or England or White Russia or Pakistan or China or the Philippines or Australia and many other places in the years long before Muhammad, would have understood of this. Remember that according to the Quran all communities and cultures god prophets were teaching Islam at some time - and their books were copies of the same "mother book" from which the Quran was copied - still according to the Quran. Surrealistic. (Though some Muslims try to explain things away with that it just is the core of the "mother book" which was sent to each prophet - the rest was individual. But this is not what is said in the Quran.)

##########There also is another point with the sending down of copies of "the Mother of the Book" = books similar to the Quran: All the claimed old prophets and messengers could in those books read about what at their time was the future, at least in and around Arabia, and thus should be able to talk and act and warn accordingly. There is no indication for that such a practical book existed anywhere or any time.

011 15/11: "But never came a Messenger to them (people*) to them but they mocked them." On one side this is not true - there were prophets in Israel who were not mocked (f.x. Samuel) - any god had known this, Muhammad likely not, as he at least in 621 AD hardly knew the real Jewish scriptures. But on the other hand these were good and psychologically nice words for his followers to hear in a difficult year like 621 AD; Muhammad's situation was normal for a prophet - he had to be a prophet.

012 34/34a: "Never did We (Allah*) send a warner to a population, but the wealthy ones among them said: 'We believe not in the (Message) - - -". For one thing this is wrong, there were prophets in the Bible who were believed (f.x. Samuel). But the other thing is that this hardly is information, but psychology: Mainly only poor and uneducated people accepted Muhammad the first 12-14 years (until Muhammad started to gain wealth and power), and then it was soothing for his followers to "know" this was normal for prophets (this surah is believed to be from 620 AD).

013 42/3c: “Thus doth (He (Allah*)) send inspiration to thee (Muhammad*) as He did to those (prophets*) before thee - - -.” This is directly wrong and contradicted by the Bible - but in this case we do not accuse Muhammad of lying - he did not know the Bible and most likely just said what he wanted his audience to hear, not knowing whether it was right or wrong. Bluffing to use a modern word - but also bluffs are a kind of lies. For Muhammad it was essential to impress on his audience and followers that he was a normal prophet just like the old ones in the Bible. Because of that you find that a large part of the stories are told like parallels to Muhammad's life and activity - so also here; Muhammad claimed he got most of his claimed information from Allah via inspiration, and then the old prophets had to have received it in the same way for Muhammad to be similar to them. Unluckily the Bible tells that Yahweh only used direct contact (Abraham, Moses, Samuel, Jesus, and a few more), visions, and dreams (4. Mos. 12/6-7). Sending messages to prophets by means of inspiration is nowhere mentioned in the Bible. 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.

014 42/51b: "It is not fitting for a man that Allah should speak to him (directly*)". Contradicted by the Bible, which tells that at least Yahweh on several occasions spoke directly to men f.x. Adam, Abraham, Moses and Samuel - and Jesus. Also see 13/1g and 67/9c - 2 strong ones. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

015 43/7: "And never came there a prophet to them (the people of the old*) but they mocked him". Muhammad was much mocked in Mecca, and tales like this were good for claiming his situation was normal for prophets. But it is not true. There were prophets in the old Israel/Judah who were not mocked - f.x. Samuel.

15 + 10.491 = 10.506 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

225.   SARAH - 1. WIFE OF ABRAHAM

According to the Bible her name originally was Sarai, but Yahweh later changed it to Sara (and Abraham's name originally was Abram, but later changed by Yahweh). According to the Bible she was the half-sister of Abraham - same father, different mother (often denied by Muslims, as sex/marriage with a sister is prohibited and a great sin according to the Quran - the second greatest prophet in Islam cannot be a sinner!)

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

001 2/125k: "- - - Ishmael - - -". The oldest son of Abram/Abraham. His mother was Sarai's/Sarah's slave Hagar. Muslims sometimes quote 1. Mos. 16/3: "(Sarai/Sarah*) gave her (Hagar) to her husband (Abram/Abraham*) to be his wife". Like so often Muslims cherry-pick quotes and omit what does not fit their wishes: The contents of 1. Mos. 16/2-9 and 1. Mos. 21/10 makes it very clear that this just is a polite way of describing the physical facts and that she never became his wife - she simply remained Serai's/Sarah's slave for another may be 15 years.

Also a time anomaly: Similar comment to 2/124a+c above and 4/13d below.

002 3/95g: "- - - (Abraham was*) sane in faith - - -". Faith in the Quran means Islam. So what is said here is that Abraham was a good Muslim (the same is said many other places in the Quran - but contradicted by the Bible, which tells Abraham's god was Yahweh, not Allah). Believe it whoever wants. But see 3/93a and 3/95d above.

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

Abraham also married his (half) sister, Sarah, something which is strictly forbidden in Islam. He cannot have been a good Muslim.

003 5/2h: "- - - Sacred House - - -". The Bible never mentions a sacred place in Arabia, not even in connection with Moses who may be - may be - visited the Arabian Peninsula according to the Quran (Midian/Madyan (if the Bible's Midian was not in Sudan - well, highly likely Midian was in Sinai, as Mt. Horeb is mentioned)). (That Abraham visited Arabia - and Mecca - just is wishful thinking or psychological strategy on behalf of Muhammad. The Bible gives the routes Abraham travelled, and he never was even close to that peninsula. We also may mention that the Bible tells about what Abraham built, and he never built anything but a few altars made from natural stone - not even a small chapel anywhere. Even the grave of his wife Sarah was a cave, not something built. You find all this in 1. Mos. f.x. 12/7, 12/8, 12/18. These are facts Muslims never mention, even though at least their scholars know it - it is not possible to go hunting in the Bible for tit-bits they can cherry-pick, without also seeing the information which tells that the Quran is wrong on many points.)

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

004 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.

005 11/71b: "And his (Abraham's*) wife (Sarah*) laughed - - -". See 11/68c above.

006 11/71c: "- - - she (Sarah*) laughed - - -". Muslim scholars still are debating why she laughed, because there is no clear reason. Also the Bible tells she laughed, but because the angels told such an old couple was going to have a child. In the Quran she laughed before she got this message, and one does not really understand why.

007 11/71d: "- - - We (Allah*) gave her (Sarah, the wife of Abraham*) the glad tidings of Isaac, and after him, Jacob". This is one of at least two places in the Quran where it can be understood like Muhammad believed that both Isaac and Jacob were the sons of Abraham (Jacob in reality was the son of Isaac), and you will meet persons claiming this is what the Quran says - whereas Muslims in the light of later knowledge denies this. We leave the point there - there are so many wrong points in the Quran, that it is not worth the time to use effort on a point which may be or may be not is wrong.

008 11/72b: "She (Abraham's wife Sarah*) said: 'Alas for me! - - -". See 11/68c above.

009 11/73a: "The grace of Allah and His blessing on you (Abraham and Sarah*) - - -". Contradicted by the Bible, which tells Abraham's god was Yahweh. Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

010 11/73b: "The grace of Allah and His blessing on you (Abraham and Sarah*) - - -". This may have some value if Allah exists and in addition is a god.

011 14/39b: "Praise be to Allah who granted unto me (Abraham*) in old age Ishmael and Isaac - - -". Contradicted by the Bible, which says Ishmael was a result of Sarah's wish for children in the family (1. Mos. 16/1-4), and Isaac was given by Yahweh (1. Mos. 18/10). Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs. Also see 37/103 - a serious one in this connection.

#012 19/49b: "- - - We (Allah*) bestowed on him (Abraham*) Isaac and Jacob - - -". Abraham got the son Isaac with his wife Sarah. It is strange that in 614 - 615 AD the Quran does not mention his son with Sarah's slave Hagar - Ishmael. ######Had Muhammad not yet got the Idea of claiming ancestry from Abraham (via Ishmael?) - surah 19 is from 614-615 AD = early in Muhammad's preaching. We may also mention that 1. Mos. 25/1-2 and also 1. Chron. 1/32 says that Abraham took another wife/concubine and had 6 sons with her: "The sons born to Keturah, Abraham's concubine: Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak and Shuah". Not mentioned in the Quran. Had Muhammad claimed ancestry via one of these, his claim had been stronger, because little is said about where they ended. But most likely he never knew about these sons of Abraham. (To claim to be descendants via an Ishmael living in Mecca, is hopeless if the stories in the Bible are true - and at the time when they were written down, there was no reason for the Jews not to be honest about this - because the place where it is told Abraham left Hagar, is some 1200 km from the dry, empty desert valley where Mecca later came (1. Mos. 20/14), and the place it tells Ishmael settled is even a little further off (1. Mos. 25/18). And the track from those places to the nowhere, empty, narrow desert valley of later Mecca was for large parts through harsh and forbidding hot desert - - - and without any attractions giving the least reason to go there.

013 21/32d: "- - - they (non-Muslims*) turn away from the Signs (of Allah*) which all these things (point to)!" When someone uses logically invalid arguments - like claiming not proved "signs" are indication or proof for a god - the logical reaction is to be skeptical. After all the use of false and/or invalid arguments is the hallmark of the cheat and the swindler, and Muhammad on top of this believed in al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie), Kitman (the lawful half-truth), in breaking promises and words - even sworn ones - if that gave better results, and in deceit ("War is deceit") - - - and he wanted power and riches for bribes for more power - and women (like many false prophets in and outside the Bible, but few of the real ones in the OT. Here beware that men like David and Solomon are not reckoned among prophets in the Bible. This is one more difference between Muhammad and the Biblical prophets - not one of them had a harem of any size. Even if you include men like Abraham and Jacob, they had maximum 1-2 wives and 1-2 concubines if any at all. Abraham had Sarah, Kethura (1. Mos. 25/1 - but only after Sarah was dead) and Sarah's slave Hagar, Jacob had Leah and Rachel plus the two slaves Bilhah and Zilpath (1. Mos. 35/23-26). Muhammad had 36 we know by name, included his 11 long time wives and 2 concubines/slave women - the 16 short time wives and the 7 where it is unclear if he was married to them or not, and thus if sex was a sin or not - a Muslim is only permitted to have sex with his wives and his slave women - are normally not mentioned by Muslims. That he in addition raped at least two women Rayhana bint Amr and Safiyya bint Huayay - also normally is not mentioned by Muslims).

014 21/60c: "- - - Abraham - - -". We should remind you that according to the Bible his name at this time was Abram (which means "Exalted Father" - even though he had no children). He did not get the name Abraham until 99 years old (1. Mos. 17/5) in Canaan - now roughly central Israel. (Abraham means "Father of Many" - he got 8 sons, Ishmael with Hagar (Sarah's slave woman), Isaac with Sarah, and then 6 with his second wife, Keturah (1. Mos.25/1-2), who are not mentioned in the Quran).

015 21/72b: "- - - (a grandson) - - -". This seems to be inserted by the translator. In that case in the original Arab text the sentence may easily be understood like Abraham got two sons: Isaac and Jacob. Also beware that according to the Bible "Abraham took another wife (after Sarah's death*), whose name was Keturah. She bore him the sons Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak and Shush". (1. Mos. 25/1-2). This - and these sons - is not mentioned in the Quran.

016 37/102b: Even if we omit the fact that here it is indicated that Ishmael is the boy, whereas the Bible clearly says it was Isaac (Abraham's son with his wife Sarah), this scene is told in a fundamentally different way in the Bible - more dramatic (1. Mos. 22/2-8).

017 37/112a: "- - - We (Allah*) gave him (Abraham*) the good news of Isaac - - -". Contradicted by the Bible which clearly states he got this message from Yahweh, not from Allah. (Isaac was Abraham's son with his wife Sarah. According to the Bible he was some 13 years younger than Ishmael (1. Mos. 16/15 - 17/1). Also see 67/9c below - a strong one. But of course it is ok for Islam to prove - prove - the Bible wrong and the Quran right. But as we say: Prove, not just loose claims and as loose and invalid words like the Quran always use instead of proofs.

018 51/29: "A barren old woman!" Every follower of the Bible knows this, but for the benefit of readers from Islam and other religions (we f.x. have a lot of readers in India - naturally as they have problems with Muslims and want knowledge) we mention that according to the Bible, Sarah was 90 when Isaac was born the following year (and 127 when she died - 1. Mos. 23/1).

18 + 10.506 = 10.524 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

226.   SATAN

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

See Iblis - the Quran's name for Satan.

0 + 10.524 = 10.524 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

227.   SAUDA BINT ZAMAH

Married to Muhammad some 3 months after his first wife, Khadija, died. No political activity.

3 months to the next marriage does not indicate much sorrow because of Khadija's - his first wife's - death.

0 + 10.524 = 10.524 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

228.   SAUL - TALUT INN THE QURAN

Saul was chosen for a king by the prophet Samuel. It is not known when, but he was a king for several years before David became king in perhaps 1007 BC. (This also means that Samuel lived around 1000 BC.)

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

001 2/247c: “Allah hath appointed Talut (Saul in the Bible*) king over you (Jews shortly before 1000 BC*)”. Most likely it was Yahweh (God) who did so, or what? Allah and Yahweh is not the same god no matter what Islam wants – the fundamental differences of the teachings are too big and too many. Not unless the god is mentally ill – and of course only if he exists.

002 2/247d: "Allah hath chosen him (King Talut/Saul*) above you (Jews*), and hath gifted him abundantly with knowledge and bodily prowess: Allah granteth His authority to whom He pleaseth". Except for the bodily prowess, do you see the parallels to what Muhammad claimed about himself? There are many such parallels in Muhammad's tales. It was a way to illustrate that what he - Muhammad - met in his society, was similar to what was normal for prophets to meet and experience, and thus that Muhammad was a normal prophet (though the greatest of them all).

003 2/248j: Conclusions about verse 2/248 in the Quran: It tells that Saul (wrongly called Talut in the Quran) has become a king, and that the Ark of Covenant was going to be brought to the Jews. But Saul was king shortly before 1000 BC, whereas the Ark of Covenant was made - not brought, but made - under Moses somewhere around 1330 BC (according to science the Exodus - if it is not fiction - took place ca. 1335 BC (under Pharaoh Ramses II) and the Ark was made not too long afterward). The Quran is some 300 years wrong - in addition to wrong way of "delivery". There are so clear references to the Ark in the Bible, that even if the Bible is the only source for it, Islam will have to bring strong proofs to make us believe it was brought by angels during the reign of Saul/Talut, containing relics from Moses and Aaron and their families.

004 2/249a: "When Talut (King Saul*) set forth with his armies, he said: 'Allah (more likely Yahweh*) will test you at the stream - - -". This seems to be a mix-up of two stories in the Bible: Saul's wars with the Philistines, and Gideon's earlier war with the Midianites. Gideon had an episode where he chose his soldiers according to how they drank from the Jordan river - Judges 7/7 (he was to wise a general to ask his soldiers go thirsty into battle) - about Saul you find in 1.Samuel (David vs. Goliath in 1. Sam 17/4-48). There is no similar episode involving King Saul. The Quran here has wrong man and wrong time.

005 2/249b: "When Talut (King Saul*) set forth with his armies, he said - - -". How can this be in the claimed "Mother Book" written may be billions of years before? See 2/51b above.

006 2/249c: The way the story is told in 2/249 has little to do with the Bible, and worse: For a test for whom were fit for taking part in the battle, it is meaningless, as the soldiers were told on beforehand which criteria would be used - criteria each and every one of them could fulfill. It might be a test for who wanted to come along, but not for who were fit for coming along.

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

007 2/249d: "But they (Saul's - or Gideon's? - men*) all drank of it - - -". How can this be in the claimed "Mother Book" written may be billions of years before? See 2/51b above.

008 2/249f: “How oft, by Allah’s will, hath a small force vanquished a big one? Allah is with those who steadfastly persevere.” This contradicts the Bible. According to the Bible the Jews had no "small force". They had their full army on a hill, facing the Philistine army on a neighboring hill with a valley in between (1. Sam. 17/3). This situation remained for many (40) days (1. Sam. 17/1) before the youth David happened to be sent with food to his 3 brothers in Saul's army (1. Sam. 17/17-18) and there killed the giant Goliath, who had been calling on the Jews for a duel man-to-man to decide the war (in the old times it did happen that one or a few from each army was elected to fight it out as proxies for the whole armies - much less bloodshed). A bit different from the story in the Quran.

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

009 2/251b: The Jews’ (or Israelites‘) King Saul/Talut and David beat the Philistines in battle ("routed them") and felled Goliath. But according to the Bible, there was no battle - only the duel between David and Goliath. (1. Sam. 17/45-51)

*010 3/146b: “How many of the Prophets fought (in Allah’s way), and with them fought large bands of godly men? But they never lost heart if they met with disaster in Allah’s way, nor did they weaken (in will) nor give in. And Allah loves those who are firm and steadfast.” A pep-talk to warriors of all times - never give in, never give up, retreat if you have to, but go on and you will win like the prophets, because Allah will help - - - and sooner or later the lover of religious warriors, Allah, will give you Paradise. Like in the Old Norse religion and other war religions.

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

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

**011 5/20b: “Remember Moses said to his people: - - - Allah - - - made you kings”. This is the correct literal meaning of the Arab text, but it is historically wrong. The first Jewish kings were Saul (Talut in the Quran) and then David some 200 - 300 years after Moses (around 1000 BC whereas Moses - if he was a real person - lived around 1300-1200 BC). Any - even minor - god had known this. We have heard Muslims explain that this is not what the Quran means, but that Allah made all Jews like kings. But anyone who knows a little about Jewish history and about Jews before and now, knows very well that most Jews never were or are or behave(d) like kings. It is an obvious “explanation”. To circumvent and hide the mistake you find this translation in “The Message of the Quran: “- - - and (Allah*) made you your own masters - - -.” Honesty in religion? – al-Taqiyya? - - - a language “clear and easy to understand”?

Any omniscient god knows the full history of the Jews, Muhammad did not - this is clear many places in the Quran - and believed the Jews had had kings even before Moses. Then who made the Quran?

#012 5/23b: “- - - two (of Moses’ Jews*) on whom Allah hath - - -“. Note how often the Quran is vague on details - f.x. names. Muhammad simply did not know, and thus he simply found a name (perhaps from Arab legends?) - like for the father of Abraham (Azar instead of Terah) or the first Jewish king (Talut instead of Saul), or he used vague words like here. In just this case the Bible simply tells that Joshua ben Nun and Caleb ben Jephunneh (4. Mos. 14/6) - both later leaders - wanted the Jews to enter Canaan at once. (There is no doubt which is the best piece of literature of the Bible and the Quran also in this case).

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

013 37/114a: “Again (of old) We (Allah*) bestowed Our favor on Moses and Aaron - - -“. “The Message of the Quran” is quick to add that it was not because they were progeny of Abraham, but because of their own quality. What the Quran never mentions, what Islam never mentions, what Muslims never mention, is that Israel’s (belief in a) special contact with Yahweh, is not – repeat not - that they had an ancestor named Abraham some thousands of years ago - though it does not hurt. The reason was and is the covenant that was made between Israel and Yahweh according to OT – and renewed several times through the years. It is good propaganda to bully them for believing Abraham who lived some 4ooo years ago (if he ever lived) is a part-out card to Heaven. ######But it is pretty dishonest to make this lie, and to never mention the real reason for the Jew’s belief: The covenant – broken and maltreated, but never lifted or ended. It is dishonest to hide this - in the same way as it is pretty dishonest never to mention the “new covenant” made via Jesus in NT – but then Muslims are advised to use al-Taqiyya (the lawful lie) or “Kitman” (the lawful half-truth) if necessary, when it comes to defending or promoting Islam – no matter whether Islam is a false religion or not).

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

13 + 10.524 = 10.537 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

229.   The SEVEN SLEEPERS

- borrowed from a Christian made up legend.

The story of the 7 sleepers is well known - and is just a well known fairy tale. The 7 were Christians from Ephesus in what is now Turkey, who fled to a cave during a pogrom under “Cesar” Decius, the story goes.

 

Decius had the cave walled up to kill them. Instead the 7 fell asleep, and did not wake up until in the 30.th year of the reign of the pious emperor Theodosius - that is in 448 AD. Decius reined for just over two years around/just after 250 AD. That means that if the fairy tale had been true, they had slept some 195 years (the Quran says 300 or 309 years - even in the fairy tale it is wrong). Islam has troubles explaining this story, and the “explanations” we have seen, are very “lofty” and diffuse - f.x. that it really is told about an older Jewish fairy tale - or that it derives from misunderstandings about the Esseers - the members of the Qumran society (near the Dead Sea) but without giving any sources or documentation - only speculations. Besides the age does not matter – it is as made up even if it should happen that the original is a bit older. They also tell it is an allegory - which they mostly do when they have difficulties finding “explanations” which are possible to believe. But an allegory of what? And it obviously is not meant to be an allegory - among other things the meanings of an allegory in the Quran normally are very easy to see or are explained. The Quran further normally tells when it is telling an allegory or something similar, and not least; the Quran itself stresses that it shall be understood literally if nothing else is said. The sleepers also mentioned in 18/22 – 18/25. Also see 18/13 below.

This story is not from the Bible.

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

The Quran "borrowed" stories from many places - included the one about the 7 sleepers. Here are the sources for some of them:

00A Moses and the fish - from Arabic folk tales about search for eternal life. May be originally from Babylon - the Babylonian Ugarit texts has a very similar story about the god El (a story known in and around Arabia).

00B Solomon listening to the ants - fairy tale perhaps inspired by the Bible, Sol. 6/6, but mainly from legends.

00C Jinns working for Solomon - from local fairy tales, folk tales and myths (jinns were beings in Arab folklore and old pagan religion that are incorporated in Islam). Anyone who has read f.x. 1001 Nights knows that supernatural beings sometimes worked for humans. And not least you find this "story" in the made up "2. Targum of Ester".

00D Mary working in the temple (in Jerusalem) as child/youth - from “The Proto Gospel after Jacob”, part 8,1 and 8,1b.

00E Jesus talking in the crib - from the religious legend “The Egyptian Child Gospel” perhaps via the as made up “The Arab Child Gospel” (originally from Syria) - both are fairy tales about fantastic things concerning the child Jesus. “The Arab Child Gospel” also got stories from “The Proto Gospel after Jacob” and “The Thomas’ Child Gospel” - both made up religious legends or myths.

00F Jesus making birds from clay - read the heretical Gnostic “Child Gospel after Thomas” verse 1 - 4, a very made up child gospel, and you find it there. (Actually none of the stories about Jesus in the Quran is reckoned by scientists to be true ones. Most of what is said in the Quran about Christian religion, is from apocryphal or other made up sources. Not unnatural as there f.x. were many Gnostics and other semi-Christian and semi-Jewish sects in the fringes of Christianity. Arabia definitely was in - and outside - those fringes).

00G Mary and the palm - from the made up religious fable “The Proto Gospel after Mathew”, chapter 20.

00H Muhammad’s Night Journey to Heaven - read about different such travels in Jewish Merabah mysticism or even more the Gnostic “Enoch’s Journey to Heaven” (nearly identical to Ibn Ishaq’s by Islam accepted story after Abu Said al-Chudri. And also nearly identical to what is told in Hadiths).

Islamic sources Muslims never mention, indicate that this was a trip Muhammad made one night from the mosque in al-Jirana - a village some 9 miles/15 km from Mecca - to Kabah and back to al-Jirana. Science then thinks Muslims have made up stories and Hadiths based on the unclear words in 17/1. This is a very likely explanation, #####because if the fanciful story had been true, there is no chance it had not been thoroughly and often described in the Quran + frequently used as a proof for Muhammad's connection to the god, but it is NEVER mentioned other places in the book than in the single verse 17/1, in spite of that Muhammad and Muslims often had to use fast talk and "explanations" when followers or opponents or others asked for proof.

A STRONG FACT: IF THIS HAD BEEN A REAL TRIP TO HEAVEN, THERE IS NO CHANCE AT ALL THAT IT HAD NOT BEEN FAR - VERY FAR MORE - THOROUGHLY DESCRIBED IN THE QURAN, AND ALSO AN ABSOLUTELY SURE ARGUMENT TO MEET EACH TIME SOMEONE ASKED FOR A PROOF FOR ALLAH OR FOR MUHAMMAD'S CONNECTION TO A GOD. AS IT IS MENTIONED O N L Y IN THIS ONE AND SINGLE VERSE IN THE QURAN, THERE IS NO CHANCE THAT THIS WAS A REAL AND GRAND TOUR TO JERUSALEM, THE 7 NON-EXISTING HEAVENS AND BACK. MUHAMMAD WAS FAR TOO MUCH OF A STRATEGIST NOT TO USE SUCH A TRIP FOR WHATEVER IT WAS WORTH, AND HE NEVER MENTIONED ANYTHING - NOT ONE WORD EXCEPT THE FEW AND DOWN-TO-EARTH ONES HERE IN 17/1.

00I The sleepers in the cave - the even today a well known religious fable from Ephesus, about the 7 youths who fled from emperor Decius (a real emperor reigning only 2 years around 250 AD) and went to sleep in a cave, and then woke up maximum 196 years later (the Quran says 300 or 309 years) under the more well known emperor Theodosius). Just read it - it normally even is better told than in the Quran.

00J Alexander the Great/Duh’l Quarnayn - anyone knowing the story of Alexander from history; read this part of Surah 18 and weep - or laugh. Copycatting at its most naïve. (He f.x. was no Muslim, he never went west - this we know from history - there no place in the world was enough iron blocks to close off a whole valley around 330 BC, etc., etc.). Not to mention that the sun does not rise from or settle on Earth.

We may add that Muhammad took his version from a known "coq-and-bull" story - or a "sword-and-sorcery" story written by a Syrian a century or so earlier.

00K The story about Ad (many times repeated) - copied from Arab folk tales, presumably a story from more than 2000 years before Muhammad (before Abraham (around 2ooo-1800 BC) according to the Quran), and Muhammad had no written sources. Besides all the other: How big is the chance that a folk tale is true and identical to the reality after 2ooo years? This even more so as the 'Ad tribe - it is likely they existed - in reality existed from around 1oooBC to around 300 AD = much later than the Quran tells.

00L The stories about Thamud - copied from Arab presumably 2ooo years old folk tales. See the tales about Ad just above. The Thamud Tribe is known from history from around 800 BC to around 600-400 BC.

00M The stories about Median - copied from Arab folk tales.

00N The stories about the jinns - copied from Arab folk tales and legends and not least from the old pagan Arab religion.

If you look, may be you will find more copycatting.

00P The 7 heavens. Originally from Greek and Persian wrong astronomy, but quite likely via the Zohar and/or the Hagigah.

00Q The 7 hells (7 gates to different parts - and different sinister - of Hell): Likely from the Zohar and/or the Hagigah.

00R 87/19: The books of Abraham. Taken from the made up book "Testament of Abraham". Remember that Abraham lived before man learnt how to read - he did not know how to read and had no books.

00S 91/13-14: The camel "proof". Taken from an old Arab legend well known in Arabia at the time of Muhammad: A camel came out from a cliff and became a prophet.

00T 101/6-9: The scale to weigh the good and the bad deeds. From "The Testament of Abraham" - though likely originally from religions further east.

Just a few questions:

  1. Would an omniscient god need to copy old stories?
  2. Would he in case tell them in much more boring ways than the originals?
  3. Would he in case tell them with historical wrong facts?
  4. If the Quran is only the truth and the full truth; why then is it hardly ever used as source in real science of history? And never for anything which happened before 610 AD !
  5. If Allah is a god for the entire world, why then are all the stories in his revered "mother book" - of which the Quran is claimed to be a copy - only from and Arabia and its neighborhood ("Arabisms")?
  6. Why did he send books to prophets before man learnt how to read? - f.x. to Abraham?

001 2/259c: A man died for 100 years, and when he woke up nothing of his outfit, included food and a donkey, had changed. A good proof for the power of Allah, if it had been documented or in other ways proved Allah had done this - - - but words are very cheap, and it is nearly as cheap to invent or borrow a story somewhat similar to the story about "The 7 Sleepers". One more story Islam will have to prove to make us believe. (Also see 2/259a just above and 7/158i below.)

*002 18/9a: “Or dost thou reflect that the Companions of the Cave - - -”. This is an old tale - a religious legend - that is incorporated in the Quran pretending it is a true story and even "a wonder among Our (Allah's*) Signs". The story of the 7 sleepers is well known - and is just a well known fairy tale. The 7 were Christians from Ephesus in what is now Turkey, who fled to a cave during a pogrom under “Cesar” Decius, the story goes.

Decius had the cave walled up to kill them. Instead the 7 fell asleep, and did not wake up until in the 30.th year of the reign of the pious emperor Theodosius - that is in 448 AD. Decius reined for just over two years around/just after 250 AD. That means that if the fairy tale had been true, they had slept some 195 years (the Quran says 300 or 309 years - even in the fairy tale it is wrong). Islam has troubles explaining this story, and the “explanations” we have seen, are very “lofty” and diffuse - f.x. that it really is told about an older Jewish fairy tale - or that it derives from misunderstandings about the Esseers - the members of the Qumran society (near the Dead Sea) but without giving any sources or documentation - only speculations. Besides the age does not matter – it is as made up even if it should happen that the original is a bit older. They also tell it is an allegory - which they mostly do when they have difficulties finding “explanations” which are possible to believe. But an allegory of what? And it obviously is not meant to be an allegory - among other things the meanings of an allegory in the Quran normally are very easy to see or are explained. The Quran further normally tells when it is telling an allegory or something similar, and not least; the Quran itself stresses that it shall be understood literally if nothing else is said. The sleepers also mentioned in 18/22 – 18/25. Also see 18/13 below.

This story is not from the Bible.

003 18/9c: (YA2336): “- - - and the Inscription (“raqim”) - - -.” Arab “raqim” means inscription. But it also may be the name of a dog, according to some Muslim scholars The "sleepers" had a dog according to Quran. The book does not specify and nobody knows - the famously clear and not to be misunderstood language in the Quran.

###004 18/9d: "- - - ("the 7 sleepers") - - - were wonders among Our (Allah's*) Signs - - -". To tell a made up legend - a fairy tale - is some wonder and some "Sign". But not a little of the Quran's arguments and "signs" are on this level.

This story is not from the Bible.

005 18/9f: "- - - (the story about the seven sleepers*) were wonders among Our (Allah's*) Signs (normally "Quran-speak" for "proof") - - -". It really tells something about Muhammad and about the Quran, that an old and well known made up legend is a "wonder among Our Signs".

006 18/9-26: The sleepers in the cave - the even today well known religious fable from Ephesus, about the 7 youths who fled from emperor Decius (a real emperor reigning only 2 years around 250 AD) and went to sleep in a cave, and then woke up maximum 196 years later (the Quran says 300 or 309 years) under the more well known emperor Theodosius). Just read it - it normally even is better told than in the Quran. "The 7 sleepers" is a well known Christian and perhaps Greek fable - well known also in Arabia at the time of Muhammad. Some Muslims wants it to be inspired from an even older Jewish legend, but that in case does not help the "reliability" of the Quran when it tells this is a true story - which it is not.

This story is not from the Bible.

007 18/10a: "(Allah*) Bestow on us ("the 7 sleepers"*) mercy from Thyself - - -". See 1/1a above.

008 18/10b: "- - - dispose (Allah*) of our ("the 7 sleepers") affair for us in the right way!" It is a good thing this story is a fairy tale - retold in the Quran under the pretention it is a true story - because only in fairy tales Allah can dispose of anything at all if he does not exist.

009 18/12a: "Then We (Allah*) arouse them (the "7 sleepers"*) in order to test which of the two parts was best at calculating the term of years they had tarried". A peculiar reason - and which 2 parts? (Clear language in the Quran - and a little logical reason for an omniscient god.)

#010 18/13a: “We (Allah*) relate to thee (Muhammad/Muslims*) their (the 7 sleepers) story in truth: - - -”. No omniscient god related a story like this claiming it to be true, neither to Muhammad, nor to anybody else.

##Actually this is quite a joke: A well known and made up fairy tale is the truth and a proof for Allah and his power!

011 18/13b: “We (Allah*) relate to thee (Muhammad/Muslims*) their (the 7 sleepers) story in truth: - - -”. As this is a well-known fairy tale, and as the Quran has so many other mistakes, carefully said: At best it is only partly the truth. But note that it is stressed that the story is the truth - not an allegory, not made up, but the truth.. A fairy tale = the claimed truth = irony.

012 18/14a: "Our ("the 7 sleepers"*) Lord (here intended to be Allah*) is the Lord of the heavens (plural and wrong*) and the earth - - -". Contradicted by the Bible, which says Yahweh is the real ruler. 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.

013 18/14c: "- - - if we ("the 7 sleepers"*) did (call upon another god than Allah*), we should indeed have done an enormity!" Now, they "in reality" were believers in Yahweh - the story originally most likely is Christian, but perhaps Jewish - so may be it had not been a big enormity to call on Yahweh?

014 18/16a: "- - - your ("the 7 sleepers") Lord (here claimed to be Allah*) will shower his mercies on you and dispose of your affairs - - -". Would he be able to do so if the story about the 7 sleepers was not in reality a fairy tale?

015 18/17a: “Thou wouldst have seen the sun, when it rose, declining to the right from their (the 7 sleepers‘*) Cave, and when it set, turning away from them to the left, while they lay in the open space in the midst of the Cave. Such are among the signs of Allah - - -”. Some sign; presumed sleeping men in a lightly revised fairy tale. (But the Quran have nearly no tale not known beforehand in Arabia - all are taken from older fairy tales, folk tales, fables, legends, apocryphal (made up) scriptures, the Bible, the Torah and a few from tales from countries further east, and then twisted a little to fit the Quran. It was not strange that skeptics told Muhammad and Muslims that they just told old tales.)

016 18/17b: “- - - the signs of Allah - - -.” There is not one single sign in the Quran that clearly is from Allah, and thus not one single “sign” that proves anything about Allah. Any priest in any religion can just as easy say they are signs of his god(s). Words are that cheap. And this "sign" is extra revealing, as the story ("the 7 sleepers") simply is a retold fairy tale. Some proof! ("Sign" in the Quran mostly is Quran-speak for "proof for Allah".)

017 18/19: "- - - We (Allah*) raised them ("the 7 sleepers"*) (from sleep), that they might question each other". Some reason.

018 18/21c: "- - - that they (people*) might know that the promise of Allah is true, and that there can be no doubt about the Hour of Judgment". This is said without any context in the story. There is absolutely nothing about "the Hour of Judgment" in this story about "the 7 sleepers", not to mention any proofs for it. Both the claim and the logic are invalid. No omniscient god uses invalid logic and invalid proofs - only the ones without real facts and proofs need to do that. And the Quran excellent literature??

019 18/21h: (A31 – in 2008 edition A30): “Let us (people*) surely build a place of worship over them (“the 7 sleepers”*)”. Or is the more usual translation correct? – that they should build a wall to close the cave. Who knows? - the language in the Quran is not clear, like so often.(In the original legend they were walled in and left to starve - how big chance would they have for not being molested by animals - or humans - if they were lying in an open cave for 300 or 309 years like the Quran claims?)

020 18/22a: “(Some) say they ("the 7 sleepers") were three, the dog being the fourth among them, (others) say they were five, the dog being the sixth - doubtfully guessing the unknown; (yet others) say they were seven, the dog being the eight”. If Muhammad got this story from a real story via a god, not from a well known fairy tale, the god had known their number (well, a god had known the number that was told in a legend - and that it just was a legend), but Muhammad obviously not. Also see 18/13 just above.

#021 18/22b: "Say thou (Muslim*): 'My Lord (Allah*) knoweth best their (the sleepers'*) number - - -". But the Quran claims it is just Allah who is speaking throughout this story (he is speaking in 1. person) - why then this expression and why is an omniscient god unsure about the number??

022 18/25: “So they (the 7 sleepers) stayed in their Cave three hundred years, and (some) add nine more”. See 18/13 and 18/22. (If one relies on some historical facts mentioned in the main variety of the legend, they slept some 195 years). As for the claim 300 or 309 years, it may or may not mean something that 300 natural years = 309 Muslim years (the Muslim year is an artificial construction some 11 days shorter than a natural year).

023 18/26a: "Say: 'Allah knoweth best how long they (the 7 sleepers*) stayed - - -". See 18/22b above.

024 18/26h: "They have no protector - - -". Who are "they" in this case? The 7 sleepers? - or general people? Muslim scholars do not know. Clear language in the Quran?

###025 46/8c: “Say: ’Had I (Muhammad*) forged it (the Quran*), then can ye obtain no single (blessing) for me from Allah.” What an unbeatable proof!!!

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

25 + 10.537 = 10.562 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".