Humans, Other Beings in/Relevant to the Quran, Part 41

 

230.   SHU'AYB

- the last of the claimed 3 prophets of old Arabia.

The Quran often mentions the 3 claimed prophets Hud, Salih, and Shu'ayb from the old. You never find any of them in old sources, except in the Quran and books based on the Quran or on claimed (often made up) words from Muhammad.

All the 3 - and most other "good" persons in the Quran - are copies of Muhammad's life and experiences at the time when the respective surahs and verses were published. A co-incidence?

Hadiths tells he was 4. generation after Lot, which in case means he lived(?) around 1700 BC.

######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.

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

001 7/85b: "To the Madyan people we (Allah*) sent Shu'ayb - - -". This story is not from the Bible.

002 7/85d: "To the Madyan people we (Allah*) sent Shu'ayb - - -". Shu'ayb is the third of the claimed three Arab prophets of the old according to the Quran - a claimed prophet with whom Muhammad makes yet another parallel to his own position in Mecca: What Muhammad experienced there, was indicated to be what prophets normally experienced - no reason for his few followers to be depressed even if the majority of the people did not accept his teachings. Also Shu'ayb may or may not be from folklore. Islam likes to claim he was identical with the father-in-law of Moses, Jethro (in 2. Mos. 2/18, and 4. Mos. 10/29, also called Hobab). There is no rational reason for believing this. Also YA in his comment to this, YA1054, says: "His identification with Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, has no warrant, and I reject it." The Quran f.x. tells Shu'ayb was 4. generation (= ca. 100 - 120 years) after Abraham, but there were some 500 years between Abraham and Moses (if they ever lived), which in case also makes the claim that Shu’ayb was identical to Jethro impossible.

003 7/88a: "The (non-Muslim*) leaders - - - said: "O Shu'ayb! - - - (etc.*)". One more of the many texts or quotes in the Quran which could not have been reliably written into the claimed "Mother Book" (13/39b, 43/4b+c, 85/21-22) in Heaven (of which the Quran is claimed to be a copy) eons ago, unless predestination was and is 100% like the Quran claims many places (if you look, you will find more cases than we mention - we only mention some of the obvious ones). If man has free will - even partly only (an expression some Muslims use to flee from the problem full predestination contra free will for man (and also contra that there is no meaning in praying to Allah for help, if everything already is predestined in accordance with a plan "nobody and nothing can change" - a problem which Muslims seldom mention), and an expression no Muslim we have met has ever defined) - and can change his mind, full and reliable clairvoyance about the future, not to mention the distant future, is impossible even for a god, as the man always could/can change his mind or his words once more, in spite of Islam's claims. There are at least 5 reasons - at least 3 of them unavoidable - for this:

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

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

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

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

004 7/88b: This verse is another close parallel to Muhammad's position in Mecca in 621 AD - nice for his followers to "know" that Shu'ayb was right and that in the following verses his opponents were punished. And that Shu'ayb came out the winner. Psychologically a good story for the at that time few Muslims.

005 7/89b: "- - - after Allah hath rescued us (Shu'yab*) from (polytheism*) - - -". It was a rescue only if Allah exists, is a god, and Islam a true religion. If not it just was a transfer from one superstition to another.

006 7/89f: "In Allah is our (Muslims'*) trust". But the only foundation for that trust is the Quran - or the copy of it Shu'ayb had received.

007 7/90a: "The leaders, the Unbelievers among his (Shu'ayb*) people - - -". Once more an exact copy of Muhammad's position at the time of the publishing of the surah. There are scores of such "coincidences" in the Quran, telling that Muhammad's position was the normal for prophets (and thus that Muhammad was a normal prophet - nice for his followers to "know").

008 7/90b: "The leaders - - - said: "If ye (people*) follow Shu'ayb - - -". See 7/88a above.

009 7/91: “But an earthquake took them (Shu’ayb’s people, the Madyans*), and they lay prostrate (dead*) in their homes before the morning.” Wrong. An earthquake never kills 100%. Except in low quality high-rise buildings, it takes an extreme earthquake to kill more than 30%.

010 7/92: Pep-talk, based on the claimed story about Shu'ayb.

011 7/93b: "- - - the Message for which I (Shu'ayb*) was sent by my Lord (Allah*) - - -."If the message was like the one in the Quran, like the Quran indicates, it hardly was from any god - too many mistakes, etc.

012 7/93c: "- - - how should I (the claimed prophet Shu'ayb*) lament over a people who refused to believe?" Can this be the teaching of same god who was behind the stories of the lost coin, the lost sheep/lamb, etc? Simply no. But then as mentioned this story is not from the Bible - and from no other known written source. (And as mentioned Shu'ayb, if he ever lived, he lived too early to be the father-in-law of Moses (like some Muslims claim)). He is said to be 4. generation after Lot, which means he lived around 1700 BC, which again means 2000+ years before Muhammad. The Stone Age now is roughly 2000 years behind us. What is the chance for that something which happened in the Stone Age in Scotland or France or Persia/Iran or Arabia and which only has been told by the words of mouth through the centuries - never written - is correctly told today? - and how many such after all minor catastrophes from that time are alive by the words of mouth today?

013 7/143c: “- - - I (Moses) am the first to believe.” This one is similar to f.x. 6/14, except here it is Moses instead of Muhammad. But it contradicts the Quran's telling that f.x. Adam, Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, Jacob, Joseph, Hud, Salih, Shu'ayb and others were believing Muslims before him. And Moses and all the others were making a lie out of Muhammad’s saying that he – Muhammad – was the first. A number of contradictions. (2/127-133, 3/67, 6/14, 6/163, 26/51). Muslims tells that these contradictions are not contradictions, because it is meant the first of a group, a nation, or something – but that is not what the Quran says, and it also does not explain all cases.

##014 10/47a: “To every people (was sent) a Messenger - - -.” Contradicted by:

  1. 28/46: “Yet (art thou (Muhammad*) sent) as a Mercy from thy Lord (Allah*), to give warning to a people to whom no warner had come before thee - - -.
  2. 32/3: “Nay, it is the Truth from thy (Muhammad’s*) Lord (Allah*), that thou mayest admonish to a people to whom no warner has come before thee - - -.”
  3. 34/44: “But We (Allah*) had not given them (Arabs”*) Books which they could study, nor sent messengers to them before thee (Muhammad*) - - -.”
  4. 36/6: “In order that thou (Muhammad*) mayest admonish a people (the Arabs*) whose fathers had received no admonition - - -.”

Which verse(s) is/are wrong?

(4 contradictions. Muslims may claim Muhammad was the prophet meant for these people - but in case all the people who had lived in Arabia had been without a messenger - according to the Quran - since the claimed prophets Hud, Salih, and Shu'ayb, etc. - Hud and Salih before Abraham and Shu'ayb a little later - around 1700 BC?))

015 11/84c: "- - - Shu'ayb, one of their brothers - - -". A claimed prophet claimed to have worked in Madyan. His story is very similar to those of Hud and Salih - see 11/50b and 11/61b - and other prophets in the Quran, and by coincidence(?) to the story of Muhammad up till when this surah was told (in 621 AD - the year before the flight to Medina and his start towards power and a war religion).

And like Muhammad, Shu'ayb were from the local people = Muhammad being an Arab teaching the Arabs was a normal case.

016 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. Noah - unclear when, likely 3ooo - 4ooo BC.
  2. Hud (the 'Ad people)- unknown when, but the first of the 3 claimed Arab prophets. Long before Moses (and also before Abraham/Lot as Hud was before Shu'ayb).
  3. Salih (the Thamud people) - unknown when. Well before Moses and before Abraham.
  4. Abraham and Lot - around 2ooo - 1800 BC according to science.

  5. 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.
  6. Moses - Exodus according to science was around 1335 BC, which means he was in Midian ca. 1375 - 1335 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"), and lived in case likely 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 - far later than Abraham and Moses. This people disappeared from historical sources around 600-400 BC - also this far later than Abraham and Moses. 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 (and also not around times indicated by the Quran/Islam).

Then finally there is the last of the 3 specific Arab claimed prophets, Shu'ayb. He in the Quran is connected to Madyan and to "the People of the Wood". This is somewhat complicated. For one thing it is unclear if "the Midianites" and "the People of the Wood" were the same or two different people. For another it is unclear where the Bible's Midian was situated. Originally we like many others believed the Bible's Midian and the Quran's Madyan were the same place - in the north-west of the Arab peninsula. But further studies have made us doubt this. There are two possible explanations for the Bible's Midian: Moses' Midian may have been to the east of Egypt or to the south of that country - it is not specified in the Bible whether Moses went east or south. If he went south (= along the Nile valley where it was easy to find a living), his Midian was in Sudan. If he went east, it was somewhere east of Egypt (as the Bible mentions Mt. Horeb and Mt. Sinai, 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 theoretically may have been anywhere - though likely in Sinai*. But if it referred to "the land of the Midianites", it was east of Palestine (Jewish Encyclopedia). If Moses found a Midian to the East of Egypt, Sinai 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. Actually where Moses’ Midian is very unclear, but most likely in Sinai (because of the mentioning of mountains we know is in Sinai). And what is absolutely sure is that as the Thamud according to history seems to have existed from perhaps 800 or more BG to around 600-400 BC, and the Madyanites/Midianites of the Quran lived later according to that book, it is totally impossible that Shu'ayb could be identical to Moses' father-in-law, Jethro, like many Muslims claim - Jethro lived around 1350 BC.

*The very strong probability: As the Bible mentions Mt. Horeb and Mt. Sinai connected to Midian, Midian must have been in Sinai.

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 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.

######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.

017 11/86: "But I (Shu'ayb*) am not set over you to keep watch". Just like Muhammad at this time (621 AD) - also see 11/50b, 11/61b, and 11/84b (all similar to Muhammad's story until 622 AD). But much changed - included only being a warner and not keeping watch - when Muhammad became strong enough for harsher ideas.

018 11/87b: "They (the Madyan people*) said: 'O Shu'ayb! - - - -". See 11/68c above.

019 11/88a: "- - - a Clear (sign) from my (Shu'ayb's*) Lord (Allah*) - - -". There nowhere in the Quran or other places is one single sign clearly from Allah - and with the possible exception of the "signs" borrowed from the Bible no unmistakable signs for a monotheistic god at all (but the Bible in case indicates Yahweh, not Allah - the teachings are too different to be from the same god, in spite of the Quran's never documented claims).

There also are nowhere in the world found traces from a religion like Islam, a god like Allah, or a book like the Quran older than 610 AD when Muhammad started his mission. Shu'ayb lived - if he ever lived - something like 2300 years earlier.

020 11/88b: "- - - my (Shu'ayb's*) success - - - can only come from Allah". Shu'ayb did not succeed - his people were destroyed. Does this indicate that Allah was not powerful or did not exist?

021 11/88c: "In Him (Allah*) I (Shu'ayb*) trust - - -". Risky as long as the trustwortyness is not proved. In all other aspects of life blind belief or relying on glossy words is the most sure way to be cheated - a fact which should be remembered when it comes to so serious questions as Hell contra Heaven. If you just accepts your father's or neighbor’s words for something they never have checked is reality or truth, then good luck - you deserve what future you get, in this and in a possible next life.

022 11/91b: "They (the Madyan people*) said: 'O Shu'ayb! - - -". See 11/68c above.

023 11/91c: "Were it not for thy (Shu'ayb's*) family, we should certainly have stoned thee. For thou hast amongst us no great position!" Is it possible to make a closer parallel to Muhammad's position in Mecca in 621 when this surah was released? - he had to flee shortly after, because the support from his family grew weaker. It is strange how all prophets in the Quran fit Muhammad's position at the time when the respective surahs are launched - and thus "verify" that his position is normal for prophets, and thus that he is a normal prophet. Some co-incidence!

024 11/92a: "But, verily, my (Shu'ayb's*) Lord (Allah*) encompasseth on all sides all that ye do!" We are back to the old fact: This only can be true if Allah exists (but in this case it may be true even if Allah belongs to the dark forces). It definitely is no proved verity/truth.

025 11/94a: "- - - Shu'ayb - - -". A time anomaly. See 4/13d above.

#026 11/95c: Shu'ayb - Salih - Hud. These are the 3 big non-Biblical claimed prophets in the Quran (+ Muhammad of course). All were Arabs working in Arabia. A universal god should have had a bigger choice including also other countries and continents - and perhaps also some success and/or different stories, not only parallels to Muhammad. One of the half hidden, but clear and strong Arabisms in the Quran. See 4/13d above.

027 13/38b: "We (Allah*) did send Messengers before thee (Muhammad*), and appointed for them wives and children - - -". We quote A1861: "All prophets of whom we have any detailed knowledge, except one (Jesus*), had wives and children (= Muhammad was a normal prophet also in this way - well, extra normal with 36 known women). But this claim needs a selective use of the expression "detailed knowledge". Not all prophets are known to have had wives - f.x. it is unlikely John the Baptist had a wife - and for many that situation simply is not mentioned in the Bible. Also the Quran does not mention any wives for the claimed Arab prophets Hud, Salih, and Shu'ayb. Use the expression "detailed knowledge" selectively enough, and you get the answer you want.

But more dishonest her - a Kitman (lawful half-truth) - is that one does not mention that none - not one - of the prophets in the Bible had a big harem (beware that f.x. David and Solomon are kings, but not reckoned among the prophets in the Bible). Of claimed prophets only Muhammad had - science knows the name of 35 women who for shorter or longer time belonged to his harem (in addition there was Khadijah, but she died before he got a harem). Also in this way Muhammad does not belong in the line of Yahweh's prophets in Israel.

028 16/36a: “For We (Allah*) assuredly sent amongst every people a Messenger.” Contradictions:

  1. 28/46: “Yet (art thou (Muhammad*) sent) as a Mercy from thy Lord (according to the Quran = Allah*) to give warning to a people to whom no warner (= prophet, messenger*) had come before - - -.” No messenger had they had, even though “every people” had had.
  2. 32/3: “Nay, it is the Truth from thy (Muhammad’s*) Lord (Allah*), that thou mayest admonish to a people to whom no warner has come before thee - - -.”
  3. 34/44: “But We (Allah*) had not given them (Arabs”*) Books which they could study, nor sent messengers to them before thee (Muhammad*) - - -.”
  4. 36/6: “In order that thou (Muhammad*) mayest admonish a people (the Arabs*) whose fathers had received no admonition - - -.”

Muhammad's claim here also is contradicted by reality: Neither science nor Islam has been able to find one single trace of a prophet or messenger preaching Islam before 610 AD (Muhammad and Islam claim the old Jewish prophets, included Jesus, did so, but this they will have to prove - not claim, but prove - to be believed., as they preached a very different religion.) ###There also are extremely strong circumstantial proofs for that the claim in this quote is wrong - no trace from such messengers are ever found anywhere.

Which verse(s) is/are wrong? (Also remember that the Quran many places mention at least 3 prophets (Hud, Shu'ayb and Salih + perhaps - perhaps - Moses) who worked in Arabia long before Muhammad. Well, Moses may have been in Sudan and not in Arabia - one does not know where the Bible's Midian lay (though as Mt. Hebron is mentioned, it extremely likely lay in Sinai).)

(4 contradictions or more).

######As for Moses: 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.

029 17/59d: "We (Allah*) sent the She-camel to the Thamud - - -". The Thamud was a tribe who according to Arab folklore lived in Arabia in the old times (As it is indicated they lived before Abraham, at least 2500 years before Muhammad). The camel refers to an old Arab legend about a camel who came out from a solid cliff and became a prophet (as this obviously is superstition, you meet many Muslims telling it was another camel, but no-one has a believable alternative story - a normal camel is not a sign from a god in a place where there are "millions" of camels).

Another point is that Thamud is mentioned in history around 700 BC, and disappeared from it around 600-400 BC, which means that Thamud's destruction in the Quran is something like 1500 years wrong.

030 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, Midianites may be mentioned, as descendants from one of Abraham's 6 sons with Keturah, Midian (1. Mos. 24/1-2).

Well, according to the Quran and to Islam, Shu'ayb was prophet of the people in Madyan on the northwest part of the Arab peninsula. "The People of the Wood" may be another name for the same people. As Madyan and Midian sounds rather similar, Islam claims it is the same and that the Bible's Midian = Madyan, but it is highly likely that the Bible's Midian was somewhere in Sinai (f.x. the mountains Mt. Horeb and Mt. Sinai are mentioned connected to the Bible's Midian.

######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.

031 21/85b: Idris may or may not be Enoch (Gen. 5/21-24). It also may mean Elijah or somebody else. As mentioned before, the language in the Quran often is far from exact. It may also simply be a name invented by Muhammad - and the same goes for Dhu'l-Kifl just below (and for the claimed Arab prophets Hud, Salih, and Shu'ayb may be).

032 26/142c: "Will ye (the Thamud people*) not fear (Allah)?". The claimed 3 Arab prophets mentioned in the Quran (Hud, Salih, and Shu'ayb) all are said to have operated in the time between Noah and Moses. Noah - if he ever lived - is likely to have lived several thousand years ago (5-6ooo?), and Moses around 1200-1300 BC. If you are able to believe in Muslims at that time, you are free to do so, but neither science nor Islam has found any traces of that religion anywhere earlier than 610 AD when Muhammad started his preaching.

033 26/177a: "- - - Shu'ayb - - -". Another claimed prophet in the old Arabia you only find in the Quran. There were 3 of them, and Shu'ayb was the last one. Some Muslims claim he was identical to the father-in-law of Moses, Jethro (2. Mos. 18/1) but it is clear from Islamic sources that Shu'ayb - if he ever existed - lived a few centuries earlier).

034 26/178a: "I (Shu'ayb*) am to you a messenger worthy all trust". See f.x. 26/125a above.

035 26/179: "So fear Allah and obey me (Shu'ayb*)". See f.x. 26/108, 26/110 and 26/126 above.

036 26/180a: "No reward do I (Shu'ayb*) ask of you for it - - -". See f.x. 26/160 above.

037 26/180c: "- - - my (Shu'ayb's*) reward is only from (Allah*) - - -". Another parallel to Muhammad legitimizing Muhammad as a claimed prophet. See 26/108 above.

038 26/185b: "They (the People of the Wood*) said: 'Thou (Shu'ayb*) art - - -". See 26/70b above.

039 26/185c: "Thou (Shu’ayb*) art only one of those bewitched!" See f.x. 26/153a above.

040 26/186a: "Thou (Shu'ayb*) art no more than a mortal like us (the People of the Wood*) - - -". Another parallel to Muhammad's daily life at that time - and one more "indication" for that Muhammad was a normal prophet.

041 26/189b "- - - they (the People of the Wood*) rejected him (Shu'ayb*". See 26/70b above.

042 28/46g: "- - - (you Muhammad are*) to give a warning to a people to whom no warner had come before thee - - -". According to the Quran, the Arabs had had at least these warners: Abraham (claimed to have been in Mecca), Hud, Salih, Shu’yab, and Moses - if he was in Madyan, but his Midian most likely was in Sinai (some Muslims claim the Quran tells the truth, because none of these had been in Medina, where Muhammad was just then. But when you talk about a people, you talk about a people - in this case the Arabs - unless otherwise is specified. If you make the area small enough in cases like this, you may make anything look true.)

043 29/36d: "- - - Shu'ayb - - -". A claimed prophet - a self proclaimed one - claimed working in Madyan. You find him no other places than in the Quran - - - except that a few Muslims claim he was the father-in-law of Moses (There is no rational reason for this claim, and also most serious Muslim scholars disagree to it. Moses lived in Midian (in west Arabia or in Sudan or most likely in Sinai) once upon a time, and the claimed Shu'ayb was claimed to have lived in Madyan - likely just another name for the same area if it was in Arabia - once upon a time (but likely centuries before Moses), is the only basis for this claim. But Muslims sometimes do not need more to be sure. There is a good reason for our telling that research in Muslim literature, etc. sometimes is quite a job.

Another point: According to the Quran it looks like Shu'ayb lived a few centuries before Moses - around 1700 BC, Moses around 1200 BC = the claim is impossible.

044 29/37b: "- - - they (the people of Madyan*) rejected him (Shu'ayb*) - - -". How could this end up in the claimed "Mother Book" (of which the Quran is a copy according to Muhammad) billions of years before it was said or happened? One more of the many texts or quotes in the Quran which could not have been reliably written into the claimed "Mother Book" (13/39b, 43/4b+c, 85/21-22) in Heaven (of which the Quran is claimed to be a copy) eons ago, unless predestination was and is 100% like the Quran claims many places (if you look, you will find more cases than we mention - we only mention some of the obvious ones). If man has free will - even partly only (an expression some Muslims use to flee from the problem full predestination contra any free will for man (and also contra that there is no meaning in praying to Allah for help, if everything already is predestined in accordance with a plan "nobody and nothing can change" - a problem which Muslims seldom mention), and an expression no Muslim we have met has ever defined) - and can change his mind, full and reliable clairvoyance about the future, not to mention the distant future, is impossible even for a god, as the man always could/can change his mind or his words once more, in spite of Islam's claims. There are at least 5 reasons - at least 3 of them unavoidable - for this:

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

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

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

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

Also see 3/154a, 6/149a, 7/34a, 14/22b, and not least 27/22-26 above.

045 36/6c: “- - - thou (Muhammad*) mayst admonish a people, whose fathers had received no admonition - - -.” = had had no warners/messengers before. But:

  1. 2/125-129: These verses remind Muslims about that according to the Quran both Abraham and Ishmael lived and worked in Mecca – and both were prophets and messengers, still according to the Quran. But according to science: If Abraham has ever lived, he lived some 2000 – 1800 BC – which means centuries before Moses and millennia before Muhammad. And: "It is highly unlikely Abraham ever visited Mecca".
  2. 10/47: “To every people (was sent) a messenger - - -.” Homo Sapiens – also called Modern Man – developed most likely in East Africa some 160ooo – 200ooo years ago, and crossed – and occupied – the land bridge between Africa and Asia (= the Middle East) not later than 100ooo years ago (though a few say min. 70ooo years). If every people had got Messengers, how come that Sinai/Arabia/etc. had not got one for nearly 100ooo years – not until Moses(?) some 3300 years ago? And Hud and one or two others before him. But NB: Both Moses with his 40 years in Midian (if Midian in spite of everything was in Arabia), Hud, Shu'ayb and Salih are mentioned in the Quran, in case were before Muhammad in Arabia.
  3. 16/36: “For We (Allah*) assuredly sent amongst every People a Messenger.” See 10/47 above.
  4. 35/24: “- - - and there never was a people, without a warner having lived among them (in the past).” A very clear contradiction.

The claimed prophets Hud, Shu'ayb and Salih if they are not fiction, lived some generations after Noah – and long before Moses, Hud and Salih also before Abraham.

(Min. 6 contradictions.)

*046 39/12b: (likely 615-617 AD:) “And I (Muhammad*) am commanded to be the first of those who bow to Allah in Islam.” How is that possible if the Quran is correct and lots of people had been Muslims before him, and bowed to Allah? (Though in reality it is highly likely he was right: That he was the first one ever). Muslims explain that it means the first in a community, but that is not what the Quran says. Besides both Abraham and Ishmael according to what the Quran claims, lived and of course preached in Mecca - at least for some time - and there according to the Quran also were Hud, Salih, and Shu'ayb. Also see 6/14d above.

(At least 6 contradictions).

047 87/18-19: "And this is in the Books of the earliest revelations - the Books of Abraham and Moses." But according to the Quran there always have been revelations from Allah to man. Homo Sapiens - man - developed perhaps 200ooo years ago. And he started in earnest on the road to modern man 60-70ooo (64000?) years ago. Abraham lived - if he ever did - some 3800-4000 years ago and Moses some 3300-3400 years ago - if he ever lived. How can their claimed books (see 87/19a-c below) be the earliest ones - tens and may be hundreds of thousands of years after the first humans, and thus the first prophets according to the Quran? Not to mention; how can Moses have had of the oldest ones, when there according to the Quran were earlier prophets even in Arabia? (Moses talked about them according to the Quran - not according to the Bible - so they had to be earlier). The same story tells the claim that the last of the 3 special Arab claimed prophets of the old, Shu'ayb, is claimed to be 4. generation after Lot, which in case indicates that Shu'ayb lived around 1700 BC or may be a little earlier (and the 2 others, Hud and Salih, then naturally even earlier).

#### But Abraham lived around 2ooo-1800 BC according to science = 500+ years before man learnt how to read (around 1200 BC or a little earlier - may be even a little earlier in Egypt). What could he learn from books? And what could earlier claimed prophets like Hud, Silah, Noah, and Adam learn from books? Is the Quran made by someone who did not know facts like this?

47 + 10.562 = 10.609 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

231.   SKEPTICS

Many were skeptical to Muhammad's new religion - some because they believed in other religions, some for political reasons, some for other reasons - and many because they saw things were wrong. Perhaps it was especially easy to see that Yahweh and Allah could not be the same god, and Jesus and Muhammad were not in the same religion - the old teaching and the old scriptures - and f.x. the moral codes - were too different. Muhammad tried to gloss over these differences by claiming that the old scriptures were falsified, without ever telling how all those falsifications could be possible - the falsifications had to be total, as there is only one sentence, 6-8 words, which is identical in the two books (a sentence in the Psalms (in Psalms 37/27 - Surah 21/102)). Most non-Muslims did not believe in those claims, and modern science (and even stronger Islam, as they have searched more thoroughly) has proved them right. Neither science nor Islam has been able to find one single proved case of falsification in the Bible. Lots and lots and lots of Muslim claims, but not one single case with a valid proof.

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

001 2/3a: "(Muslims*) believe in the unseen - - -". As there exists no proof for anything of any consequence in Muhammad's teaching, the Quran glorifies blind belief (and Islam ridicules wishes for real knowledge or proofs). In a question as serious as a possible next life, it takes a lot of naivety not to ask questions and to evaluate the reliability and credibility of sources. If a religion is true, this is the most essential question in life (if not it does not matter - - - unless there is a true religion somewhere else). In all other aspects of life, you are advised to use your brain and knowledge, because if not you are cheated easily - but in the claimed most essential aspect of all, Islam demands blind belief, blind acceptance and obedience, no difficult questions and no evaluation of any argument skeptical to unproved claims in the religion. This tells something about the Quran and Muhammad and Islam.

002 2/80a: "The Fire shall not touch us but for a few numbered days". Muhammad here is misquoting the catholic dogma of Purgatory. It is not a question of days to say the least of it. On the other hand he for once perhaps were right in his real or made up skepticism, as this dogma is not from the Bible (but in case he only was partly right, as you find this just in parts of Christianity).

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

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

And then of course there remains the possibility that the Quran is a pure human product, not a revelation. This in reality is the most likely explanation - strongly indicated f.x. by the fact that many of the errors are in accordance with human knowledge in Arabia and its surroundings at the time of Muhammad.)

004 2/97e: "- - - (revelation) - - -". But was it really revelations?- and in case from whom? As no god ever was involved in, not to mention revered in his own "home", a book of a quality like the Quran, this is a "no". That leaves 3 possibilities: A dark force or an illness - f.x. TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) like modern medical science suspects. As for dark forces, we personally are skeptical to this claim, even though the partly immoral moral code and some other aspects of the religion might indicate so - not even a devil would build his religion on a book as full of errors as the Quran, as he had to know he would be found out sooner or later. There is one possibility, though: The almighty and omnipotent god may have permitted the devil to lure more people into Hell, but on the condition that so much should be wrong, that any intelligent person could see the trap if he/she engaged "the small grey ones".

And of course there is the alternative that the book is completely man-made. The fact that so many of the mistakes are in accordance with what one believed to know in and around Arabia at that time, the fact that there is nothing from outside what we now call the Middle East in a religion claiming to be for the entire world, the fact that when problems happened, the claimed god's claimed comments and solutions came afterwards instead of before so as to avert the problems, and f.x. the fact that the god several times "helped" Muhammad - also Muhammad personally - (something which happens a little too often for self proclaimed "prophets"), indicate a man-made Quran.

005 2/109h: “- - - Allah hath power over all things.” Perhaps - and perhaps not. At least he has never shown his power, not even when asked several times by his followers - and by skeptics - for a proof of his existence. Muhammad glossed it over with fast words - not all of them logically even true (f.x. that a real proof of a god would make no-one believe anyhow - rubbish to be polite, a clear lie to be realistic), and Muhammad was too intelligent and knew too much about people not to know it was untrue.

006 2/177d: “- - - to believe in Allah and the last day, and the Angles, and the Book, and the Messengers (included Muhammad*) - - -“. If it is not righteousness to believe in Muhammad, Islam may fall. Everything in Islam is built on Muhammad, but Muhammad with all his doubtful moral and deeds at the same time is the weak spot in Islam (why do you think they can afford nothing negative - even the not glossed up truths - and no skeptical questions about him?)

007 3/80d: "Would he (a prophet - here likely indicated Jesus*) bid you unbelief after ye have bowed your will (to Allah in Islam)?" Even forgetting all the other "peculiarities": Who is bidding unbelief - the Quran with all its errors and clearly not from a god, or the ones skeptic to the Quran?

008 4/82a: "Do they (some skeptics*) not consider the Quran (with care)?" At least a number did - and found too much wrong and too much wanting. Those were the real reasons for a large number of skeptics - not the base reasons Muhammad accused them of./p>

##009 6/9b: “If We (Allah*) had made it (the proof*) an angel, We should have sent him as a man, and We (= our proof/angel*) should certainly have caused them confusion in a matter (religion*) which they have already covered with confusion.”

  1. There is no reason for Allah to camouflage an angel like a man. Allah is omnipotent and could send them in any shape he wanted. This argument is invalid.
  2. The arrival of an angel – no matter in what gestalt as long as it was clear it was an angel – might only confuse the most skeptical ones. All the other would become believers.

Any intelligent man understanding people would know all this. Not to mention that any god, however tiny, would be sure to know it. Muhammad knew this was fast-talk – by himself, by a helper (if the Quran was made by a helper like some rumors said), or by the dark forces if they were behind the Quran, or by Allah (if the Quran – or this piece of it – really was made by Allah). Muhammad was too intelligent and knew too much about people – he knew this was a lie – both that an angle had to look like a man, and that no unbeliever would believe if they got real proofs. Just look at the sorcerers of the pharaoh Muhammad told about.

010 6/25g: "These (the tales in the Quran*) are nothing but tales of the ancient." This skeptic's had good reason to say. None of the tales in the Quran is made by any god - and hardly any even by Muhammad. They practically without exception are histories, legends, fairy tales, etc. which were known or well known in Arabia at that time. Muhammad just "borrowed" them, twisted them some, and told he had got that version from Allah. But we honestly doubt an omniscient god was unable to tell his own tales - and if he had to borrow from Earth, why only from in and around Arabia if he wanted to be god for the whole Earth? Only if humans in Arabia made the verses and surahs that was necessary. Thus at least the stories claimed to be from the Bible, all were more or less wrong compared to the Bible and sometimes also to known history. The same goes for f.x. the story about Alexander the Great (Dhu'l Qarnayn in the Quran).

011 6/57b: "What ye (non-Muslims*) would see hastened - - -". Some skeptics asked Muhammad to make his god punish them for sins, to prove for them that Allah really existed and had power. Muhammad was unable to produce also such proofs.

012 6/104e: "- - - if any will be blind, it will be to his own (harm) - - -". Here it is symptomatic that it is the Quran which demands blindness - blind belief - whereas skepticism towards that book permits open eyes.

###013 6/111a: “Even if We (Allah*) did send unto them (non-Muslims*) angels, and the dead did speak unto them, and We gathered together all things before their very eyes, they are not the ones to believe, unless it is Allah’s plan”. This may be understood in two ways – both quite fast talk:

  1. Another and strengthen variety of no. 7/120a and others - with Muhammad lying in the Quran.
  2. Some of Muhammad’s audience questioned the obviously wrong logic and psychology in that clear proofs would not impress anybody, and needed a reason why not – and got the all-encompassing and ultimate answer to all difficult or unanswerable questions: It is Allah’s will - sometimes the fastest of all fast-talk.

#########This is one of the places in the Quran where Muhammad knew he was lying - produce some real miracles, and at least some will believe, and this even more so in old times with naive, uneducated, superstitious people, not as skeptical towards such things as people nowadays - it was easier to make people believe.

014 6/113e: "- - - let them (skeptics*) delight in it - - -". Here it is unclear whether the text refers to the Bible or to the Quran (perhaps the Quran). As mentioned before, the texts in the Quran often are unclear (in spite of Muslims' claims about it being clear and impossible to misunderstand).

###015 7/28ab: "We found our fathers doing so". The reason why Muslims keep believing in the Quran, is that their fathers - and surroundings - tell them that the Quran must be true, and then they blindly believe this (= taqlid). But it is not possible for a person with reasonable knowledge about the world and different sciences, and with a reasonable quality brain, who study the Quran honestly trying to find out; "is this true or not", not to end in skepticism or stronger.

016 7/75c: “’Know ye (believers*) indeed that Salih (a claimed prophet for the tribe or people Thamud. He according to the Quran lived sometime between Noah and Moses (according to Hadiths also before Abraham), but after the claimed prophet Hud – Moses is said to speak about him, though not in the Bible*) is a prophet from his Lord?’ They said:’ We do indeed believe in the revelation which has been sent through him.'”

Comment to 7/75 (A7/58 - 7/60 in the 2008 English edition): “The contents of this message (lit., ”that with which he has been sent”) appeared to them justification enough to accept it on its merits, without the need of any esoteric “proof” of Salih’s mission. In this subtle way this statement of faith has a meaning which goes far beyond the story of the Thamud. It is an invitation to the skeptic who is unable to believe in the divine origin of a religious message, to judge it on its intrinsic merits and not make his acceptance dependant on extraneous, and objectively impossible, proofs of its origin: for only through the contents can its truth and validity be established”.

Well, proofs – or at least documentation – is not more “objectively impossible” than that the Christians have got documentation in NT, and partly confirmed in the Quran, for that something supernatural was involved with Jesus and with Yahweh (another question is whether one wants to believe in that documentation or not). It ALWAYS is possible for a god to prove his existence (but not for a human to prove a god). What to be aware of here is that Islam has not one single proof for anything concerning the religion – not one single bit; only the word of a man with a very special mentality and morality – or amorality. Therefore they have to argue for blind belief and for that proofs are unnecessary, yes, that demands for proofs are intellectual stupidity and lack of intelligence. Which they do. And which is wrong - in all aspects of life the most sure way to be cheated now and then, is to believe blindly. Besides: If intelligence is given by a god, surely his meaning was that we should use it.

One problem here is that it is logically and intellectually impossible to know something that is not proved. One maximally can believe strongly – sometimes so strongly that one believes one knows. But not proved beliefs never are more than beliefs – strong or not. But even strong beliefs ever so often have been – and are – wrong. People “knew” the Earth was flat – and it was wrong. Then people “knew” Earth was the centre of the geocentric Universe – and it was wrong. Then people “knew” Sol or Helios (2 names for our sun) was the centre of heliocentric Universe – wrong. And then they “knew” our galaxy (“The Milky Way”) was the entire Universe – wrong once more. And in all religions – f.x. Islam - there are people that “know” they are right and that all others are wrong - - - and most of them have to be wrong (and Muslims with their somewhat special founder and everything built only on claims and with lots and lots and lots of mistakes, etc. in their holy book, in reality are in a most weak position for being among the ones – if any – who are right).

But because their total lack of proofs and even of real indicia, Islam claims and claims and strongly claims that the texts in a book with lots of mistakes and errors and wrongs, prove that a god has made it, that lack of ability to see this is your stupidity, not that the book is not perfect - and that blind belief is the ideal. Which is a main – if not the main – reason why Muslims and Islam cannot accept or see any mistake in the Quran, no matter how obvious: If there are mistakes in the Quran, it is not from a god - and then Islam is a false religion. That is a possibility too hard to face.

017 7/146e: "- - - even if they (non-Muslims*) see all the Signs (of Allah*), they will not believe in them - - -". For the very natural reason that there nowhere exists not one "sign" clearly from Allah, and when one meets made up "proofs" (which the claimed "signs" in the Quran pretend to be), one naturally grows skeptical - the use of made up or false proofs is a "flag of danger" and an indication - often a proof - of a cheat, a deceiver, a swindler.

018 7/203a: (A165): “If thou (Muhammad*) brings them (skeptics*) not a revelation, they say: ‘Why hast thou not got it (a revelation/miracle*) together (yourself*)?’”. But “The Message of the Quran” tells that the Arab words “law la ‘djtabaytaha” make troubles (this is omitted in the 2008 English edition) as it has several meanings, and they instead say a more likely meaning is: “Why doest thou (Muhammad*) not seek to obtain it (from Allah*)?” Rather a different detail – and at least two different meanings. A clear language in the Quran? And these variants naturally also are in the Arab text, as the relevant word(s) there has more than one meaning.

It also tells something that Muslims have left out some comments from the book, which are not flattering or which are disturbing - even in such a grave matter as religion it is not the truth one searches for, but confirmation of the religion - true or not true. Consequences if the Quran is made up? - does not matter, as you will not meet them in this life. And besides: "We" "know" that what our fathers told us is correct ("taqlid").

Beware that each and every abrogation normally also is a contradiction (and you will also find some of them in our list of contradictions), but a contradiction is not necessarily an abrogation. Further: Many of the mistaken facts at the same time are contradictions to reality - some of them are listed here, but you will find many more in the chapters about the mistaken facts in "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" though even there we list far from all contradictions with reality in the Quran.

To give you a visual impression of how bad the situation in the Quran regarding mistakes and errors really is, we have chosen to show "all" the abrogations for each contradicting verse/point, (and the same for internal contradictions) instead of just writing a sum - see "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran". Each and every number in that list show one verse abrogating or being abrogated by another – and if you add all together, you will see that this list contains 4556 collisions between verses. As each collision takes 2 verses, that means that in this list there are 2278 abrogations = 2278 mistakes or errors made by the god because of trying and failing or because he changed his mind now and then. AND IN REALITY THERE ARE MANY MORE. (But remember that as many of the verses are contradicted many or very many times by different verses, less than 150 verses are involved in the list – but as said: There are more, as we have found far from all. (Only 9/5 abrogates 124 milder verses according to some Muslim scholars - and may be as many as 500 verses all together in the Quran are abrogated according to some Muslim scholars).

If this book is ever printed, one will save paper and expenses by just writing the numbers - how many and which ones.

PS: We have added some abrogations just before launching this on Internet. As we will add a few more when we finish the book "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" - in 2016 or 2017 we hope, we wait with correcting the mathematics till then. (Ps: As we found "1000+ Quran-comments - skeptics’ facts and thoughts" to be more urgent than the rest of the mistakes, "1000+ Mistakes in the Quran" may not be finished until in 2016 AD or may be even 2017 AD.)

019 8/31d: "- - - these (Muhammad's tales in the Quran*) are nothing but tales of the ancients". Something the skeptics had every right to say, as the tales in the Quran may be absolutely all are taken from older tales well known in Arabia at that time - folklore, tales, legends (even seemingly Biblical stories mostly were not from the Bible, but from legends - that is the real reason why they differ so much from the Bible), and even fairy tales were given some twists and repeated by Muhammad as true stories from his god. No god would need to do this - and if he did, he would not need to take stories only from in and around Arabia.

020 10/2a: "Is it a matter of wonderment to man that We (Allah*) have sent our inspiration to a man from among themselves?" Many were skeptical to that Muhammad - a local citizen - suddenly and without any proof claimed to be a prophet.

021 10/41a: "If they (skeptics*) charge thee (Muhammad*) with falsehood - - -". Already at that time there were many who understood that something was deeply wrong in Muhammad's new religion.

022 10/43c: "- - - they (skeptics*) will not see - - -". What Muhammad means here is "they will not see things my way". There were good reasons for them not to do that - f.x. all the mistakes in his teaching/the Quran.

023 10/48a: "They (skeptics at the time of Muhammad*) say: 'When will this come to pass - - -?" How could this end up in the "Mother Book" (of which the Quran is a copy according to Muhammad) billions of years before it was said? One more of the many texts or quotes in the Quran which could not have been reliably written into the claimed "Mother Book" (13/39b, 43/4b+c, 85/21-22) in Heaven (of which the Quran is claimed to be a copy) eons ago, unless predestination was and is 100% like the Quran claims many places (if you look, you will find more cases than we mention - we only mention some of the obvious ones). If man has free will - even partly only (an expression some Muslims use to flee from the problem full predestination contra free will for man (and also contra that there is no meaning in praying to Allah for help, if everything already is predestined in accordance with a plan "nobody and nothing can change" - a problem which Muslims seldom mention), and an expression no Muslim we have met has ever defined) - and can change his mind, full and reliable clairvoyance about the future, not to mention the distant future, is impossible even for a god, as the man always could/can change his mind or his words once more, in spite of Islam's claims. There are at least 5 reasons - at least 3 of them unavoidable - for this:

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

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

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

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

024 10/50: "- - - what proportion of it (punishment*) would the Sinners wish to hasten?" Skeptics sometimes told Muhammad to ask Allah to send the punishment Muhammad declared, as a proof for that he told the truth. Muhammad never was able to prove anything, neither this way nor in any other way. He only tried to "explain" everything away.

###025 10/101b: "- - - neither Signs nor Warners profit those who believe not". It is a matter of course that when you understand that claimed "signs" are invalid, you grow skeptical, because who relays on invalid, but claimed "signs"? - the cheat, the swindler, the deceiver. And you have to be very naive or stupid or blind if you take such a person for a warner without checking his claims and words - and when it turns out that everything just are loose words, not documented loose claims, and as invalid statements - words and claims and statements anyone can use for free as long as he or she can evade any request for proofs - and when it on top of all turns out that the claimed "warner's" tales are so full of mistaken "facts" and other mistakes, contradictions, cases of unclear language, etc. that no god can be involved, it is not possible for a not brainwashed, intelligent person to believe in such stories told by a not reliable person liking power, riches of bribes - and women. You simply do not base your possible next and eternal life on obvious fairy tales made up by dark forces or humans - the only alternatives as no god ever was involved in a book of a quality like the Quran.

####026 11/13f: "- - - and call (to your (skeptics'*) aid) whomsoever you can, other than Allah - - -". Well, there always were Yahweh - he is likely to have made as well, if the old books are reliable. But that aside: Judged as literature the Quran at most is 3. class, a truth any knower of good literature who also knows the Quran can confirm. Helter-skelter placing of different topics. Repetitions, repetitions, repetitions of the same stories. Only two possible ends of stories: Either the involved become good Muslims, or they are bad people. All mentioned prophets or claimed prophets - even to a degree Jesus - are parallels to Muhammad's situation at the time of telling. Literally may be 3ooo mistakes - unbelievable in such an after all short book - of which may be unbelievable 2000 are wrong facts (we know of no other book in the entire history of literature with the possible exception of science fiction with so many mistakes), a large number (hundreds) of contradictions both to itself - and to reality - and many of them serious, some so much so that they are destroying for the central claims in the book. A large number of cases of invalid or wrong logic and the same of unclear language. As for unclear language there is so much of it, that Islam has had to make a separate rule for how to understand them: If a text is possible to understand in 2 or more ways, both/all are deemed to be correct, even if the meaning varies wildly. It is called "different ways of reading" - a more polite expression for "different varieties". Etc., etc. And not to forget: It is a boring book - f.x. most Muslims have never read the whole book (a fact which makes mullahs' and others manipulating with cherry-picked sentences and untrue claims - f.x. about miracles performed by Muhammad - easy for them).

It is an educated guess that at least 50% of all writers good enough to have books published, would have been able to write a book of better literature quality than the Quran, if they got enough information about old folklore, legends, religion, apocryphal scriptures, fairy tales, etc. The same goes for at least 80% of persons studying relevant history, etc., included the above mentioned subjects, if they are good enough at writing to have had any books published. (We here omit the question of the language itself, as the language of today's Quran is not identical to the one of the "original" Quran - the language of the Quran was polished by top scholars through some 250 years until it got its final form around 900 AD - and around that time in 14 different (or more) accepted varieties - called "different ways of reading", 2 of which are much used today (Warsh and Hafs) + 4 a little. Two facts no lay Muslim will admit, because he does not know it. But his religious leaders and scholars know it - but may resort to al-Taqiyya or Kitman or deceit or worse (all of which are permitted and even advised in Islam to use "if necessary" to defend and to promote the religion) when asked.)

027 11/51d: "- - - will ye (non-Muslims*) not then understand?". May be like the skeptics of Muhammad's stories, that was just what at least some of them did: Understood that something was very wrong.

028 11/103a: "In that (the claim that Allah punishes severely - 11/103*) is a Sign (for the existence of Allah and his power*) - - -". A not proved claim from a man who believed in dishonesty, deceit, and even broken words/oaths, is a "sign" - Quran-speak for proof - for that Allah exists. Are there anyone out there who understands why we are skeptical to the Quran - and thus to Muhammad and to Islam?

029 15/97: "We (Allah*) do indeed know how thy (Muhammad*s) heart is distressed at what they say". This is a comment to the fact that many were skeptical to Muhammad's new religion - a comment telling his followers indirectly that Muhammad is right. In a way a small pep-talk - but the contents of a pep-talk is not necessarily true.

030 16/107a: "This (that many would not believe Muhammad*) because they love the life of this world better than the Hereafter (Paradise*) - - -". This is a claim you meet many places in the Quran; the reason why the skeptics did not believe in Muhammad was that they were bad people, not that they saw things were wrong with his teaching or that they really believed in another god (or gods). Claiming that they were low quality, psychologically was a much better explanation to give his - Muhammad's - followers and others.

031 17/41d: “- - - their flight (from the Truth)!” The skeptics fled from the new religion just because too many of them saw it hardly was the truth. Too much was wrong. That the Quran is the truth, is just a claim, not a proved fact.

032 17/52c: (YA2236): Is this verse part of the answer to the skeptic in the previous verse? Or is it a separate, proud statement to Muslims. Who knows?

033 17/94f: "- - - they (the skeptics*) said, 'Has Allah sent a man (like us (Muhammad*)) to be (His) Messenger?" See 17/90b above.

034 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.)

035 20/133b: "They (the skeptics at the time of Muhammad*) say: Why does he (Muhammad*) not bring down - - -". See 20/88a above.

036 20/133c: "Why does he (Muhammad*) not bring us (people*) a Sign from his Lord (Allah*)?" This actually was and is one of the big questions - Muhammad never was able to prove anything of any consequents concerning his claims and his new religion, even though both friends and opponents asked for proofs, and even though proofs would mean much for his preaching and for the progress of Islam. He had to explain away all such questions, sometimes with lies (f.x. no intelligent man knowing a little about people believe that miracles would not make at least some skeptics Muslims).

037 21/5a: "'Nay', they (skeptics to Muhammad*) say, '(these are) medleys if dreams!" See 21/1d above.

038 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 the prophets 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 after taking them slaves - also normally is not mentioned by Muslims).

039 21/36d: "- - - they (skeptics*) treat thee (Muhammad*) not except with ridicule". Already at that time at least some saw that something was very wrong with Muhammad's teachings".

040 21/38b: "They (skeptics*) say (to Muhammad*): 'When will - - -". See 21/1d above.

041 21/41b: "- - - but their scoffers (non-Muslims/skeptics*) were hemmed in by the things (a la Islam*) they mocked". Calm down - Allah will take revenge on those bad people. Also see 3/77b above.

042 21/45b: "- - - but the deaf (skeptics*) will not hear the call (the Quran*) - - -". This psychologically is a much better way to explain his followers why so few wanted his religion, (until after he started raids for riches, so they could become rich, and after he became strong enough to force his religion on the surrounding tribes (much of Arabia just got the choice: Become Muslims or fight us and die).

043 21/46a: "If but a breath of the Wrath of thy (Muhammad's/peoples*) Lord (Allah*) do touch them (skeptics*) - - -".This can only happen if Allah exists and is something supernatural - white or black.

044 22/9a: "(Disdainfully) bending his (a skeptic's*) side - - -" = bending his facts. But was the skeptic bending any facts if he honestly and correctly told that f.x. what Muhammad claimed was told in the Bible, was not from the Bible?

045 22/9d: "- - - for him (the debating skeptic*) there is disgrace in this life (at least when Muhammad later came to power*), and on the Day of Judgment We (Allah*) shall make him taste the Penalty of burning (Fire)". See 3/77b above.

046 22/67b: "- - - let them (skeptics*) not dispute with thee (Muhammad*) - - -". A time anomaly.

047 23/24g: “- - - if Allah had wished - - - He could have sent down angels (as prophets*) - - -”. This is exactly one of the requests Muhammad got from his skeptics - he is using Noah to "show" that earlier Jewish prophets had no angels sent down, too, and thus that this is normal for prophets - and that he himself thus is a normal prophet. Muhammad uses this tactic many times in the Quran.

048 24/21b: "Follow not Satan's footsteps - - -". Just to mention it: As it is clear that no god was involved in the making the Quran, one of the theories is that Satan, dressed up like Gabriel, was the real creator of the Quran and thus of Islam. (But even though several aspects of the religion may strengthen this theory, we personally are skeptical; not even a devil would make so many mistakes, contradictions, etc. - he had to know he would be found out sooner or later. There is one possible explanation, though; that the god did not permit him to make a new religion to trap more humans for Hell, unless it was done in such a way that the victims had a good chance to understand that something was wrong).

049 24/46a: “We (Allah*) have indeed sent down signs that makes things manifest - - -“. What is claimed sent down, is the Quran. But a book with so many mistakes, etc., makes nothing manifest – except perhaps skepticism to the religion and to Muhammad.

050 25/4g: "in truth it is they (the skeptics*) who have put forward an inequity and a falsehood". All the mistakes, contradictions, etc. in the Quran indicates - or stronger - that at least some of their suspicions were true.

051 25/4i: "- - - an iniquity and a falsehood". At least the skeptics were right when they said Muhammad told old stories - more or less all stories in the Quran were stories know in the old Arabia, just twisted some to fit Muhammad's new religion. No god would have to rely on old stories, even often with wrong facts. The skeptics also were right in that there could be no god behind the religion - no god ever was behind a claimed holy book so full of mistakes, etc.

052 25/9a: "See what kind of companions they (the skeptics*) make for thee (Muhammad*)!" This refers to the - often named - helper(s) the skeptics told - right or wrong - Muhammad had.

053 25/9c: "See what kind of companions they (the skeptics*) make for thee (Muhammad*)!" See 25/4c above.

054 25/9d: "But they (skeptics*) have gone astray - - -". But they also easily may have been right - see 25/8f above.

055 25/9e: "- - - never a way (to Paradise) will they (skeptics to Muhammad*) be able to find!" If Islam is a made up religion - f.x. by Muhammad partly inspired by an illness (see 25/8b above) - the skeptics stand a better chance so find such a way if it exists, than any Muslim, Muhammad and al-Ghazali included. Because what is sure, is that the Quran with all its errors is not from any god - Allah or a baby one or any other. No omniscient god makes mistakes or contradictions, etc. and so absolutely not by the hundreds and more.

056 25/41b: "When they (skeptics*) see thee (Muhammad*), they treat thee (badly*) - - -". See 25/4c above.

057 25/55f: "- - - his (the skeptic's*) own Lord (Allah*) - - -". Only if Allah exists and is a major god, and only if the non-Muslim does not happen to believe in a real god.

058 25/60c: "- - - they (skeptics*) say (to Muhammad*) - - -". See 25/4c above.

059 26/5d: "- - - they (skeptics*) turn away therefrom (from new verses from Muhammad*)". They had good reason for this if they were among these who understood that something was very wrong in Muhammad's new religion.

060 26/5e: "- - - they (skeptics*) turn away therefrom (from new verses from Muhammad*)". See 26/3c above.

061 26/6a: "They (skeptics*) have indeed rejected (the Message (from Muhammad*) - - -". See 26/5d above.

062 26/6c: "They (skeptics*) have indeed rejected (the Message (from Muhammad*) - - -". See 26/3c above.

063 28/57b: "They (skeptics to Muhammad*) say: 'If we were to follow - - -". This could not reliably be written into the claimed "Mother Book" long time before - and later copied into the Quran - if predestination is not 100% (and then there also is no free will for man - Islam is wrong in claiming that both are possible to combine).

064 28/57c: "- - - guidance with thee (Muhammad*) - - -". Many were skeptical to this already then - may be they understood too much?

065 26/5d: "- - - they (skeptics*) turn away therefrom (from new verses from Muhammad*)". They had good reason for this if they were among these who understood that something was very wrong in Muhammad's new religion.

066 26/6c: "They (skeptics*) have indeed rejected (the Message (from Muhammad*) - - -". See 26/3c above.

067 27/72b: "- - - some of the events some of you (non-Muslims*) want to hasten - - -". Skeptics sometimes dared him to send this or that for a proof for that he was telling the truth. He never was able to - never proved anything at all.

068 28/57e: "But most of them (Skeptics*) understand not". May be that was just what they did - understood that something was wrong, and seriously wrong, with Muhammad's new religion.

069 29/51b: "And is it not enough for them (non-Muslims*) that We (Allah*) have sent down to thee (Muhammad*) the Book - - -". (For some reason or other Islam and its Muslims seldom claim that Islam is the religion of honesty.) Comment (A29/50): "I.e., 'are the contents of this revelation not enough for them (the skeptics*) to make them grasp its intrinsic truth without help of 'miraculous proofs' of its divine origin?'" This is logical nonsense on the same level as 29/48b above - and even more so when one remembers all the mistakes, etc. in the Quran.

It also tells a lot about what arguments and proofs Muslims and Islam have, when they are forced to stoop to this kind of claims/arguments - especially when you know the real quality of the Quran.

070 31/6d: "- - - without knowledge - - -". Who is without knowledge - the skeptic who asks questions, or the one who blindly believe without asking questions?

071 31/7b: "- - - he (a skeptic*) turns away in arrogance, as if he heard them (the tales about the claimed signs of Allah*) not, as if there were deafness in both his ears - - -". Psychologically a much better story for Muhammad to tell his followers, than to admit some had good reason for skepticism. The same technique is used today and has been used through all times by leaders pushing ideologies or religions.

072 31/11b: “Such is the Creation of Allah: now show Me (Allah*) what is there that others beside Him have created - - -.” Show us first if all the cheap words about everything Allah has created, are true – there only are lose and easy words anyone can use about his/her god(s), free of charge. With all the mistakes and contradictions, twisted words and logic and even some obvious lies (f.x. that miracles would not influence skeptics or proselytes) the Quran is built on, also this may be wrong.

This a typical sample of one of the Quran's techniques for debate: It put forth one or more claims without any kind of proof or documentation, pretends the claims are facts and debates from there - even though the claims often are fairy tales.

For good measure the opponents have to prove what they say (here: "Show me - - -") whereas from the Quran/Muhammad loose words and as loose claims are to be accepted - not one single claim regarding central points in the religion is proved. A lot of invalid "signs" (Quran-speak for proofs for Allah) and a few as invalid "proofs" are put forth, but that is all - not one real proof for anything essential in the entire religion).

073 31/21a: “- - - the (Revelations) - - -". Often claimed, but never proved - and even if it had been revelations: From whom or what? There is the TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) which modern medical science suspects. There are dark forces. There is Iblis - the Muslim Devil - dressed up like Gabriel (Muhammad had in case no chance to know the difference). Personally we are skeptical to the idea about Iblis - too many mistakes in the Quran even for a devil. But the possibility remains that the god did not permit him to make the Quran to waylay more humans, unless it contained so many mistakes that normally intelligent persons saw the trap. There is a cold, scheming brain - perhaps Muhammad's. The only thing which is sure, is that revelations as full of mistakes, contradictions, etc. like the Quran, is not from any god.

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

074 31/33j: "- - - deceive - - - about Allah". Who is deceived - the blind believer or the one who sees that serious things are wrong in the Quran?

075 32/2a: “(This is) the revelation of the Book (the Quran) - - -.” It is not a revelation from an omniscient god at least – too many mistakes. (But perhaps from dark forces or humans? Actually we personally are skeptical to that it is made by dark forces like Iblis/the Devil, because even a devil would not make so many mistakes - he would be found out and loose credence sooner or later. This unless the god demanded it made like that to make it easy for humans to see and evade the trap.) - or from an illness like TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) like modern medical science suspects? Or from a cold, scheming brain?)

076 32/22a: “And who does more wrong than one to whom are recited the Signs of his Lord (Allah*), and who then turns therefrom?” There is nothing wrong in being skeptical to a religion built only on a book with many mistakes and not one single valid proof, but with many “signs” and “proofs” without any value or even 100% wrong, which may have the effect of cheating uneducated or not intelligent persons - and on top of all told only by a man whose honesty normal, intelligent people would suspect because of the morality of his deeds and some of his words – when a man preaches good, but does and demands many things bad, we any day believe in his deeds and demands more than in his words.

077 32/26e: "- - - do they (skeptics*) not then listen?" They do, but they also are able to think and not just accept blindly. And using not only their ears, but also their knowledge and their brain, they see that much is wrong in the Quran and hence in Islam - and that the book cannot be from any god, as no omniscient god makes mistakes wholesale style.

078 32/27b: "Have they (skeptics*) not the vision?" On the contrary - too many skeptics have vision instead of blind belief, and see that something is seriously wrong with the Quran, and that it thus cannot have come from a god.

079 34/7d: "- - - (in ridicule) - - - (because of the claim that *) when ye (people*) are all scattered to pieces in disintegration, that ye shall (then be raised) in a New Creation - - -". The reason for their skepticism hardly was the resurrection. Perhaps it was true that the old Arabs did not believe strongly in a next life, but they in case knew that resurrection was normal for the surrounding religions, and thus nothing new or strange. What was difficult to believe, was resurrection of the body, not only of the soul. (But for Muhammad resurrection of the body was necessary, as most of the pleasures in his claimed Paradise were bodily pleasures).

In the Bible man is resurrected in soul, in the Quran he is resurrected in body - a difference so formidable that this alone definitely proves that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. If they had been, their Paradises - and resurrections - had been the same.

080 34/43a: “When Our (Allah's*) Clear Signs are rehearsed to them (skeptics*) - - -”. One more place where the word "sign" - here even strengthened with the word “clear” - is used like if the so-called signs are manifested facts. But not one single of them is a proved fact - as said before; with the possible exception of some shanghaied from the Bible, but those in case prove Yahweh/God.

There are literally hundreds of places in the Quran where the word “Sign” is misused like this. See also 2/39b and 2/99 above.

081 34/43c: "- - - they (skeptics*) say (to Muhammad*), 'This is only a man (Muhammad*) - - -". See 34/3c above.

082 36/10c: "- - - they (skeptics*) will not believe". At least for a large number of them because they already then saw that things were very wrong in Muhammad's new religion.

083 36/45d: " - - - they (skeptics to Muhammad*) turn back - - -". How could this reliably be written in the claimed "Mother Book" (of which the Quran is a copy according to Muhammad) billions of years before it was said or happened? One more of the many texts or quotes in the Quran which could not have been reliably written into the claimed "Mother Book" (13/39b, 43/4b+c, 85/21-22) in Heaven (of which the Quran is claimed to be a copy) eons ago, unless predestination was and is 100% like the Quran claims many places (if you look, you will find more cases than we mention - we only mention some of the obvious ones). If man has free will - even partly only (an expression some Muslims use to flee from the problem full predestination contra free will for man (and also contra that there is no meaning in praying to Allah for help, if everything already is predestined in accordance with a plan "nobody and nothing can change" - a problem which Muslims seldom mention), and an expression no Muslim we have met has ever defined) - and can change his mind, full and reliable clairvoyance about the future, not to mention the distant future, is impossible even for a god, as the man always could/can change his mind or his words once more, in spite of Islam's claims. There are at least 5 reasons - at least 3 of them unavoidable - for this:

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

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

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

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

Also see 3/154e, 6/149a, 7/34a, 14/22b, and not least 27/22-26 above.

084 36/46d: "- - - they (skeptics to Muhammad*) turn away therefrom". See 36/45d above.

085 36/78b: "Who can give life to (dry) bones, and decomposed ones (at that)?" Muhammad claimed that Allah gathered all the bits and molecules and fluids which had made up you, and resurrected you physically (but to a young adult). This was a bit difficult for the skeptics to believe, naturally.

086 37/14a: "And, when they (the skeptics*) see a Sign, (they*) turn it to mockery - - -". They may have had a good reason for this, as Muhammad just picked natural phenomena high and low and without proving Allah was behind them, and claimed them as "signs"/"proofs" for his god.

087 37/170e: "- - - but soon they (skeptics*) will know". Pep-talk to Muhammad's followers - the underlying meaning is that "take it easy - the skeptics will be punished!" As for knowledge see 26/83a above.

088 37/176a: "Do they (non-Muslims*) wish (indeed) to hurry on Our (Allah's*) Punishment?" Some of the skeptics provoked Muhammad to ask his god to punish them, to prove he existed. Muhammad was unable to produce also this kind of proof.

089 38/15: "These (today) only wait for a single mighty Blast - - -". As it was referred to "today" by Muhammad, "these" must be the skeptics in Mecca (this surah is from 614-615 while he still was living there). But there never came a "mighty Blast" destroying Mecca or its skeptics.

090 38/16b: "They (skeptics to Muhammad*) say: 'Our Lord! Hasten - - -". See 38/4e above.

091 38/16c: "Hasten to us (some skeptics') our sentence (even before the Day of Account". Some of the skeptics challenged Muhammad to have his god send punishment over them to prove his claims. Muhammad never was able to do so or in any other way prove anything of any consequence.

092 40/59c: "- - - therein is no doubt - - -”. In a book with so much wrong like in the Quran, there is reason for skepticism and doubt against mort things which are not proved.

##093 40/75: “- - - the Truth (the Quran*) - - -”. To repeat things:

  1. The Quran contains at least - at least - some 500 points where Islam/Muslim scholars confirm the texts are not clear or even not possible to understand surely - one has to guess.

  2. The Quran contains more than 1750 places with wrong facts. Add the ones we have overlooked (some more we have found during the work with this book will be added - perhaps 250 new ones? - 2ooo all together?) + all the other kinds of mistakes and other types of wrongs and you may have some 3000 or more places with mistaken facts, other errors, contradictions, etc. in one single book.
  3. The Quran in addition contains at least 200+ “most likely“ wrong facts.
  4. The Quran is likely to contain more mistaken facts we have not seen.
  5. The Quran contains lots of invalid “signs” claiming to be indicating or “proving” Allah/Islam. The use of invalid arguments is the hallmark of cheats.
  6. The Quran contains a number of invalid “proofs,” pretending to indicate or “prove” Allah/Islam. The use of invalid “signs” and “proofs” are strong hallmarks for cheats, swindlers, and deluders.
  7. The Quran contains a huge number of claims and statements taken from thin air or resting on other invalid claims, statements, “signs”, or “proofs”. The use of such invalid arguments and cheap words is the hallmark of cheats and deceivers.
  8. There is not one single statement, “sign” or “proof” in the Quran which really proves Allah - they without exception are logically invalid, mostly because it is not first proved that it really is Allah who is behind them. There are a few taken from the Bible that may indicate a god - not Allah, but a god. But the Bible talks about Yahweh, not about Allah (and the teachings are fundamentally so different - see 29/46 - that in spite of what the Quran and Hadith say, Allah is not the same god as the one Jesus told about - not unless he is schizophrenic.)
  9. The Arab Quran contains more than 100 linguistic mistakes according to linguists.
  10. The Quran is said to be pure Arabic. It contains a lot of non-Arabic words. We have seen different numbers, but perhaps 275 different words according to Arthur Jeffries (the word Quran is said to be one of them). For the story these are not serious, but they are mistakes compared to what the Quran says, and the Quran pretends to be perfect and without mistakes - sent down from an omniscient god. Islam has an explanation, though: Arabs has used the foreign words and made them Arab. A Negro does not become an Arab even if he moves to Arabia. A very practical way of making something look true only.
  11. The Quran contains at least ca. 400 contradictions.
  12. The Quran contains at very least 400+ places where the original Arab text is so unclear that it is impossible to be sure what is really meant.
  13. The Quran contains lots and lots and lots of places where the text is unclear - this is openly admitted also by Muslim scholar (you will find it in any reasonably thorough book explaining Quranic texts).

The Quran at best is partly true. There are very good reasons for doubt and skepticism.

It is also told that the Quran is a copy of a revered “Mother Book” in the Heaven of Allah. This has to be wrong. An omnipotent god impossibly can have revered - not kept as a funny curiosum, but revered!! - a book with that many mistakes and contradictions, that number of loose and without value claims and statements, not to mention all the invalid “signs” and “proofs”- hallmarks of an imbecile or a cheat or deceiver. Besides: The other 124ooo+ earlier prophets according to Islam received a similar copy of the Mother Book. Pretend you were the prophets Hud or Salih living at least 2000 years before Muhammad (because Moses spoke about them according to the Quran, and he lived (?) some 2000 years before Muhammad - Hud and Salih consequently must have lived before that), or that you were one of the Indian prophets in the Americas before 1492 AD – or in the Arctic or in Australia 100 years before Botany Bay – the Quran and Islam claims that all people have had prophets. Then read the Quran and see how much you would understand and how much not – even words like cows, sheep, goats, camels, ships, coats of mail, and a number of other words – what did they mean in South America or Australia? And how much is irrelevant? – f.x. Muhammad’s family problems, all the facts and happenings relevant mostly for Arabia, etc.

Would a god make or revere or use copies of such a claimed timeless and unchangeable book for his prophets through all times and all over the world? – Remember we here talk about the perfect and timeless Mother Book that the Quran and all other not falsified books sent down to the prophets all over the world from Adam to Muhammad are exact copies of. This in spite of that Islam explains that the reason for new prophets and new scriptures were that time changed, so the scriptures had to be changed a little - how to change perfect copies of the one and perfect Mother Book?

In a way worse: Man did not learn how to read and write until around or a little before 1200 BC (may be a little earlier in Egypt). How could persons like Abraham, Lot, Hud, Salih, Shu'ayb. Noah, and other claimed prophets who lived 1700 and more years BC use their copies a la the Quran sent from Heaven? Man did not learn how to read until around 1200 BC or a little before.

Read the Quran with that in your mind – and weep.

094 41/4e: "- - - most of them (non-Muslims opponents of Muhammad*) turn away, and so they hear not". The reality was that many understood a lot was wrong in Muhammad's new religion - but it was better psychology to explain the skepticism and disbelief like this.

095 42/18b: "- - - to hasten it - - -". = To hasten the arrival of the Day of Doom. Skeptics challenged Muhammad in different ways to prove his religion and his connection to a god, included challenges of bringing down punishment on them.(But Muhammad never was able to prove anything at all of any essence).

096 43/8: "- - - stronger in power than these (Muhammad's opposition*) - - -". When Muhammad tells about people he claims Allah has destroyed, you will normally find that he adds that those people were stronger and richer than the Arabs not wanting Islam - this to strengthen his tale and strengthen the impression of Allah's claimed power - and his warning towards the skeptics and the pep-talk value for his followers.

097 43/24e: "- - - we (non-Muslims*) deny that ye (prophets (here like Muhammad*)) are sent (on a mission at all)". Already at that time many were skeptical to Muhammad, and this - like here - was mirrored in his tales in the Quran; if earlier claimed prophets had met the same problems like Muhammad, this indicated that such problems were normal for prophets, and thus that Muhammad was a normal prophet. If tales like this are true or not, do not matter very much as long as the followers believe them. And little by little he grew too strong military and economically.

098 43/53: "Then why are not gold bracelets bestowed on him (Moses*), or (why) come (not) with him angels accompanying him in procession?" These were questions Muhammad got from skeptics, and it is remarkable how eager Muhammad was to project his own position in life and his own problems, into the claimed lives of earlier prophets or claimed prophets - a way of telling his followers and others that his problems were normal ones for prophets, and thus that he was a normal prophet. That the above topics are not mentioned in the Bible at all, did not matter - he got a little legitimating from it.

099 44/9: "Yet they (skeptics*) play about in doubt". Of course, as at least some of them - and a major percentage of the many Jews in the area - already then saw that something was very wrong in Muhammad's new religion.

100 44/14a: "Yet they (skeptics*) turn away from him (Muhammad*) - - -". Already then many saw that things were seriously wrong with the new religion.

101 44/14c: "Yet they (skeptics*) turn away from him (Muhammad*) and say: 'Tutored - - -'". How could this reliably be written in the claimed "Mother Book" (of which the Quran is a copy according to Muhammad) billions of years before it was said or happened? One more of the many texts or quotes in the Quran which could not have been reliably written into the claimed "Mother Book" (13/39b, 43/4b+c, 85/21-22) in Heaven (of which the Quran is claimed to be a copy) eons ago, unless predestination was and is 100% like the Quran claims many places (if you look, you will find more cases than we mention - we only mention some of the obvious ones). If man has free will - even partly only (an expression some Muslims use to flee from the problem full predestination contra free will for man (and also contra that there is no meaning in praying to Allah for help, if everything already is predestined in accordance with a plan "nobody and nothing can change" - a problem which Muslims seldom mention), and an expression no Muslim we have met has ever defined) - and can change his mind, full and reliable clairvoyance about the future, not to mention the distant future, is impossible even for a god, as the man always could/can change his mind or his words once more, in spite of Islam's claims. There are at least 5 reasons - at least 3 of them unavoidable - for this:

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

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

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

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

Also see 3/154e, 6/149a, 7/34a, 14/22b, and not least 27/22-26 above.

102 44/39c: "- - - most of them (the skeptics*) do not understand". Perhaps that was just what they did - understood that something was wrong with this new religion.

103 45/8c: "- - - he (the skeptic*) is obstinate and lofty, as if he had not heard them (Allah's "signs") - - -". Psychologically this was a much better "explanation" for Muhammad to give his followers and others, than to admit the plain truth: That many saw that something was seriously wrong in the new religion. There may have been other reasons, too, but f.x. for the majority of the Jews, this was the main reason.

104 45/10a: "In front of them (skeptics*) is Hell - - -". Not true unless for one thing Islam is a true religion and correctly described in the Quran, and for another thing the skeptic's religion is untrue. And if it should happen that Islam is a made up religion - like all the errors in the Quran may indicate - and another religion - f.x. Yahweh's - is real, the quote is extra wrong.

###Also the big differences between what the Bible's and the Quran's tells 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.

105 45/25d: "Bring back our (skeptics'*) forefathers, if what ye (Muhammad*) say is true!" Already then Muhammad and Islam had questions for proof - they never were able to prove any - not one - of their central claims.

106 46/8e: "He (Allah*) knows best that whereof ye (skeptics of Muhammad*) talk - - -". Allah knows everything according to the Quran, but why then 2/233h above?

107 46/22d: "Then bring upon us (skeptics*) the (calamity) with which thou (Hud*) dost threaten us (skeptics*) with". A new exact parallel to Muhammad's position: Requests for proofs Muhammad never was able to deliver. See 46/22c just above.

108 51/14b: "This is what ye (non-Muslims*) used to ask for - - -". Skeptics used to dare Muhammad to send punishment on them to prove his tales. He never was able to.

109 51/59d: "- - - the let them (non-Muslims*) not ask Me (Allah*) to hasten (that portion)!" Skeptics asked Muhammad to bring punishment on them as proofs for his tales. He never was able to do so.

110 52/15: "Is it (Hell*) then a fake - - -". Skeptics accused Muhammad to teach a faked religion (and all facts indicate they were right - the Quran not only indicates, but proves that the book is from no god), and here Muhammad is trying to take a revenge on them - he even succeeded among naive and/or strong believers and wishful thinkers, then and till this day.

The fact is that Muhammad was unable to prove also Hell - it may well be a fake, especially as so much else is wrong in the Quran.

111 52/33b: "Nay, they (skeptics to Muhammad's teachings*) have no faith". Wrong. Many of them had deep and honest fait, but not in Muhammad and his claimed Allah. (But the Quran claims that only Muslims have faith).

#112 52/34b: This verse also is another sample of one of Muhammad's techniques of debating: Any opposition or skeptical ones are demanded to prove their words, whereas Muhammad never proves anything of any essence - he just put forth words and claims and never - never - documents anything essential. This even though his demands for proofs from all others, prove that he finds proofs essential and of value.

Well, the Quran and Islam sometimes claim that this and this are proofs for Allah or Islam, but not one of those "proofs" is logically valid - normally because they do not first prove that it really is Allah who causes what they claim is a proof.

###113 52/38c: "Then let (such a) listener (a skeptic*) of theirs (non-Muslims'*) produce a manifest proof". As mentioned before: Every opponent to Muhammad has to produce proofs - confirming that Muhammad found proofs of value. But Muhammad himself never proved anything central in his new religion - never. This in spite of that his repeated demands for proofs shows that he reckoned proofs to be both of essence and of value.

*114 53/2b: “Your Champion is neither astray nor being misled.” Many skeptics thought this about Muhammad. All the mistakes, etc. proved that he at least was somewhat - or more - astray. Though all the hallmarks of a cheat, deceiver and swindler may indicate that may be he was not misled - that those last 3 words may be true, as may be he was misleading. There also is the question of TLE (Temporal Lobe Epilepsy) which in case will explain much.

115 56/66: "((The skeptics of Muhammad*) saying), 'We are indeed left - - -". See 54/2c above.

116 56/81a: "Is it such a Message that ye (skeptics*) hold in light esteem?" Yes, that is the only intelligent thing to do with tales so full of mistakes and other errors and even some lies, at least until at least a minimum is proved.

##117 56/82: "And have ye (skeptics*) made it your livelihood that ye should declare it (the Quran*) false?" Absolutely not necessary, as the Quran itself by means of all its errors, etc. proves 100% and more that something is seriously wrong with the book - and thus also with Muhammad and with Islam. The only strange and curious thing is that so many are able not to see the mistakes, etc. in the book, and the inevitable meaning and consequence of them. Human brainwashing and conditioning and "the belief of your fathers" - taqlid - are strange psychological facts.

#118 57/14f: "- - - the Deceiver - - -". The Devil. (One impolite, but relevant comment here, is that one of the theories for who really created the Quran, is that it was Iblis/the Devil, who then dressed up like Gabriel and gave it to Muhammad. Muhammad would not have had the slightest chance to see the difference. The inhuman parts of the Quran may indicate this, but personally we are skeptical, as not even a devil would make up a book where so much is wrong - not unless this was a condition from the god to permit such a hoax: Lots of mistakes etc. to enable thinking persons to evade the trap.

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

119 58/8f: "Why does not Allah punish us (skeptics*) for our words". One of the many requests for a proof for Allah and for Muhammad’s connection to a god. Muhammad never was able to prove anything at all concerning central parts of his religion.

120 58/8g: "Enough for them (skeptics*) is Hell - - -". See 3/77b above.

###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.

121 60/13g: "- - - the unbelievers are in despair about those (buried) in the grave". A complicated way of saying they do not believe in resurrection from the graves. But this is an Arabism. The old Arabs did not think much about a next life, and could be skeptical to its existence, but in the rest of the world most people believed in a next life. Would a universal god use Arabisms in his claimed universal and holy book?

###122 62/2m: (A62/1) "The designation of the Prophet (Muhammad') as a man 'from among themselves' is meant, in this context, to stress the fact that he, too, was unlettered (ummi) in the primary sense (= had not learnt how to read and write - a claim science is skeptical to*) of this word, and could not, therefore, have 'invented' the message of the Quran or 'derived' its ideas from earlier scriptures". This is wrong at least to the 2. power and dishonesty at least to the 3. There is no connection between knowing how to read and write, and the ability to make up tales. Tellers of tales made up good stories, legends, fairy tales, etc., etc., for perhaps a million years before writing was even invented. Similar goes for the claim that as he could not read, he could not have got his "information" and ideas from the Bible, but has to have got it directly from Allah. You do not have to be able to read yourself to get information about religions and other things - a lot of what anybody even today get of information, is verbal. And this was even more so the case in the old times when telling of tales, histories, legends, fairy tales, etc. was a popular pastime in long evenings - in Arabia like in most primitive cultures. The argument and the claim is even more stupid as the tales in the Quran mostly are not even from the Bible, but from tales and legends and folklore (that is why they are different from the Bible - not falsifications of the Bible like Muhammad claimed, but the use of verbal tales based on, but different from the Bible).

And not to forget: Muhammad married rich, and would have no problem to pay somebody to read stories which interested him. (This in addition to that several things points to that he knew both how to read and write.)

The mildest word possible to use for claims and arguments used here - and often used by Muslims in other connections - is rubbish. This even more so as the facts we have pointed to here, are so well known, that there is no chance at all for that Muslim scholars do not know them, and all the same they use the claims and arguments - - - and uneducated or lower intelligent (or wishful) believers even believe them!

The only thing the use of such claims and "arguments" proves, is that Muslims have no real arguments. If they had had, they would not have to use stupidity like this for "proofs".

123 70/1-3: If we unwind the somewhat complicated structure of this sentence, it is one of the cases where a skeptic - perhaps Nadr ibn-Harith (see 70/1a above) - dared Muhammad to send punishment from Allah to prove Allah's existence and Muhammad's connection to the god. Like always Muhammad was unable to prove anything at all, and had to resort to fast words.

124 72/4b: "- - - extravagant lies against Allah". But if the skeptics are right on one or more or many points, that means the claimed "extravagant lies" are extravagant truths. And as so much is wrong in the Quran, this seems to be the reality.

#125 72/7a: "And they (Jinns*) (came to) think as ye thought, that Allah would not raise up any one (to Judgment)". Here like so many places in the Quran what is said in the Quran is treated as facts, and thus that skeptics are improbably stupid and wrong - some places things like this even is said, not only indicated. This in spite of that not one single central letter in the entire Quran is anything but belief - nothing is proved and thus nothing is real knowledge, only belief, and worse; blind belief.

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

126 72/24b: "- - - when they (non-Muslims*) see (with their own eyes) - - - then they will know - - -". This - and a number of similar points in the Quran - kills Muhammad's "explanations" saying that the reason why Allah did not send proofs for his existence, power, or contact with Muhammad, was that proofs would not make skeptics believe anyhow.

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

127 75/16: "Move not thy tongue concerning the (Quran) to make haste therewith". The meaning of this sentence is unclear. It may be so simple as telling the persons who are to end in the position described in 75/13-15 not to wish to hasten the arrival of the Day of Doom (skeptics frequently dared Muhammad to make Allah punish them as a proof for Allah's existence and for Muhammad's claimed connection to a god). But most Muslim scholars think this verse just is put in here out of context and talks about Muhammad and his teaching the Quran - their explanations only are speculations, though.

128 83/12a: "- - - none can deny it (the Day of Doom*) - - -". As it is outside the human sphere of living, denial is not possible, even though skepticism may be strong as to if the Quran's description is correct. But also no proof for it has ever been produced, and as proof would be easy for a god and very efficient for getting more followers (in spite of the Quran's claims about this), this is strange.

129 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, renamed to 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.

130 83/13c: "- - - he (a skeptic*) says (to Muhammad*), 'Tales of the - - -". How could this reliably be written in the claimed "Mother Book" (of which the Quran is a copy according to Muhammad) billions of years before it was said or happened? One more of the many texts or quotes in the Quran which could not have been reliably written into the claimed "Mother Book" (13/39b, 43/4b+c, 85/21-22) in Heaven (of which the Quran is claimed to be a copy) eons ago, unless predestination was and is 100% like the Quran claims many places (if you look, you will find more cases than we mention - we only mention some of the obvious ones). If man has free will - even partly only (an expression some Muslims use to flee from the problem full predestination contra free will for man (and also contra that there is no meaning in praying to Allah for help, if everything already is predestined in accordance with a plan "nobody and nothing can change" - a problem which Muslims seldom mention), and an expression no Muslim we have met has ever defined) - and can change his mind, full and reliable clairvoyance about the future, not to mention the distant future, is impossible even for a god, as the man always could/can change his mind or his words once more, in spite of Islam's claims. There are at least 5 reasons - at least 3 of them unavoidable - for this:

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

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

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

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

Also see 3/154e, 6/149a, 7/34a, 14/22b, and not least 27/22-26 above.

This demand for regular prayers - 5 times a day - was so essential for Allah (he even wanted more often according to Hadiths) that it became one of the 5 "pillars" of Islam. For Yahweh such formalism was so totally without any interest, that no similar rule - not even the idea - at all is mentioned in the entire Bible: Pray when there is a reason or a need or a wish. One of the 100% proofs for that Yahweh and Allah are not the same god. Also see 23/9b above.

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

130 + 10.609 = 10.739 comments (+ basic comments/introductions).


 

232.   SLANDERERS

Muhammad and the Quran was/is strongly negative to slander - at least to slandering of Muslims. All the same you meet much slander from Muslims debating non-Muslims. (Does this tell something?) And you meet a lot of slander against non-Muslims - and against the Bible (never documented - and today proved wrong - claims about falsification, etc.) - also in the Quran. (Does this tell something?)

Some samples of slander in the Quran:

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

001 5/81i: "- - - most of them (non-Muslims*) are rebellious wrongdoers". "Wrongdoers" is one of several not very sympathetic names Muhammad used for "non-Muslims" - here in a strengthened form. It is not strange that Muslims are reluctant to accept non-Muslims or to be integrated in non-Muslim societies. Pretty distaste - and stronger - inducing.

002 16/75a: “Allah set forth the Parable (of two men: one) a slave (here aka "infidel") under the dominion of the other - - - and (the other) a man (= Muslim*) on whom We (Allah*) have bestowed goodly favors from Ourselves, and he spends thereof (freely), privately and publicly: are the two equal?” A rhetoric question with only one answer – of course "we" are better than those who are slaves under pagan gods. (Though it is an open question who really were/are blind slaves under their religion – the Pagans/People of the Book or the Muslims? In intense and extreme sects the followers frequently are informal slaves of the leaders – not of the god(s) but of the leader(s)).

Plus there is the lingering question: There is no god behind a book of a quality like the Quran - And what are then the Muslims?

003 19/38e: "But the unjust (= non-Muslims*) today are in error manifest!" If Allah and Islam are made up, the immoral parts of the Muslim moral and ethical codes plus the immoral and/or unjust parts of the sharia laws makes Muslims belong to this group.

004 23/40: "In but a little while, they (non-Muslims*) are sure to be sorry!" See 3/77b above.

005 23/56b: "- - - they do not understand". One of Muhammad's standard "explanations" for why many did not believe in him. It still is one of the standard Muslim "explanations" for why many see things are very wrong in the Quran. This even though the real fact often is that "they" really understand.

006 23/63: "But their (non-Muslims'*) hearts are in confused ignorance of this - - -". To claim things about an opponent without checking if it is true, is as far as we know called "3. degree of insincerity" - - - but in debates and in propaganda it often works. Muhammad uses this technique frequently - just look for it and you will find it.

007 29/4c: "Evil is their (evildoers*) judgment". When used for real evildoers - included jihadists (whom Islam never include) - this may be correct. When used simply for non-Muslims, it is a very loaded accusation - one of Muhammad's many distaste-producing names for non-Muslims.

008 30/53a: "Nor canst thou (Muhammad*) lead the blind (the ones refusing to believe in Muhammad*) back from their straying (and to Islam*)". Non-Muslims = blind. But who is most blind; the one able to see, but who is accused of being blind, or the one refusing to see?

009 33/64e: "- - - (Allah has*) prepared for them (non-Muslims*) a Blazing Fire - - -". Hell. See 3/77b above.

010 34/33c: “We (Allah*) shall put yokes on the necks of the Unbelievers: it would only be a requital for their (ill) Deeds.” That is what those bad people deserve. They are not better.

011 53/52d: "- - - insolent transgressors - - -". One of the many distaste inducing names Muhammad used for non-Muslims.

012 58/15c: "- - - evil indeed are their (non-Muslims*) deeds". Beware that when the Quran uses expressions like this, it is in accordance with its own partly immoral moral code and partly as immoral and unethical ethical code - compare with the gold standard: "Do onto others what you want others do onto you" and weep - or shiver in disgust.

013 59/13e: "- - - devoid of understanding". Who has the least understanding: The one unable to understand that something is seriously wrong with the Quran, or the one able to understand it?

13 + 10.739 = 10.752 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".